HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOUNCIL - AGENDA ITEM - 02/19/2019 - ITEMS RELATING TO REVISIONS TO MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPAgenda Item 21
Item # 21 Page 1
AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY February 19, 2019
City Council
STAFF
Karen McWilliams, Historic Preservation Planner
Tom Leeson, Director, Comm Dev & Neighborhood Svrs
Brad Yatabe, Legal
SUBJECT
Items Relating to Revisions to Municipal Code Chapter 14 (Landmark Preservation) and to Land Use Code
Section 3.4.7 (Historic and Cultural Resources).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
A. First Reading of Ordinance No. 034, 2019, Amending Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins
Regarding Landmark Preservation.
B. First Reading of Ordinance No. 035, 2019, Amending Land Use Code Sections 3.4.7 and 5.1.2 Pertaining
to Historic and Cultural Resources.
The purpose of this item is to present proposed revisions to the Municipal Code and Land Use Code to
implement recommendations for improvements to codes that apply to historic buildings, sites, structures or
objects (“historic resources”). These revisions are a result of the 2017-2018 Historic Preservation Codes and
Processes Review. The objectives of this review were to provide greater clarity and predictability in all
regulations governing historic resources and to improve standards for reviewing the design compatibility of
new construction with historic resources.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinances on First Reading.
BACKGROUND / DISCUSSION
The Historic Preservation Division has recently completed a thorough, two-year review of Codes and
processes to identify changes that promote clarity, effectiveness and predictability in the regulations governing
older and designated historic resources. These changes address the review of proposed development
affecting historic resources; address the compatibility of new development with its surrounding context; limit
the number and types of 50-year old properties subject to review; and improve the involuntary landmark
designation process. This review builds upon extensive work undertaken in 2012-2014 to align the City’s
historic preservation programs with Council’s policies and strategic outcomes.
To assist with the Code and process review, the City hired Clarion Associates, a national land-use consulting
firm. Clarion undertook a comprehensive examination of best practices around the state and nation and
conducted a comparative analysis of the Fort Collins Codes and processes with those in over a dozen peer
communities. For each topic researched, Clarion prepared a report that summarized the current conditions
related to the topic; discussed the issues, highlighted various approaches used throughout the country; and
provided conclusions and recommendations for improvements tailored to Fort Collins. (Attachment 5)
Agenda Item 21
Item # 21 Page 2
Each report was then reviewed by a Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC), the Landmark Preservation
Commission (LPC), and City staff. The sixteen-member CAC was comprised of a variety of stakeholders,
including historic preservationists, architects, real estate developers and realtors, local land attorneys, property
owners, and history group members. (A list of CAC members is provided on page 4 of this AIS.) The CAC
convened for twenty meetings and spent over 400 hours over the course of the two years to review Clarion’s
recommendations, provide input and add their own recommendations. Each of Clarion’s reports and the work
of the CAC was subsequently presented to the LPC for additional discussion. Community outreach included
two seminars with architects and design professionals; two community workshops; numerous presentations to
key boards and organizations; questionnaires, including one of Old Town neighbors on the effectiveness of the
historic review of single-family dwellings; and a mailing on proposed changes to all owners of National and
State Register designated properties. A full list of community outreach activities is offered on page 4 of this
Agenda Item Summary.
Based upon direction received at Council’s April 24, 2018, Work Session (Attachment 1), staff is bringing
forward revisions to both the Municipal Code and Land Use Code for Council’s consideration.
Key Changes to Municipal Code Chapter 14, Landmark Preservation
Articles I through IV are being repealed and replaced in their entirety due to the extensive changes proposed.
1. Improved organization, usability, and clarity of Chapter 14, “Landmark Preservation.”
Currently, related information is scattered throughout the Chapter making it difficult to understand the
applicable regulations and processes. The reorganization groups together relevant information more
effectively and enhances the understanding of the chapter’s standards and related review processes.
2. Emphasis on professional historic resource survey to determine eligibility for Fort Collins
landmark status.
Current staffing and time limitations mean that the evaluation of a property’s eligibility for Landmark status
is typically based only on the most readily available information provided by the applicant and basic
research conducted by staff. This often lacks the in-depth information provided by the gold standard in
historic preservation: a professional historic property survey.
Two improvements will correct this problem in the future. The 2019-2020 funding for a contractual historic
preservation survey professional will allow staff to gather historic property surveys proactively; and the
proposed Code requirement to use a professional survey as the basis for determinations of eligibility will
improve confidence in the process and eliminate errors. Any non-consensual landmark designation would
require a full, intensive-level historic resource survey. For development proposals, resources located on a
proposed development site will also require an intensive-level historic resource survey to determine
landmark eligibility. Historic resources on nearby parcels within the 200-foot area of adjacency will require
a simpler architectural-level historic property survey, to identify key architectural features that may
influence compatible design.
A more comprehensive and thorough approach to historic property survey, supported by the enhancement
funding for 2019-2020, will allow City staff to identify historic resources that should be on the community’s
radar because they are both historically significant and more likely to be threatened by neglect or
redevelopment.
3. Far fewer residential properties will be subject to the 50-year threshold for determining eligibility.
Currently, every non-designated property 50 years of age or older for which a building or development
permit is sought is subject to an evaluation of landmark eligibility. Fort Collins contains 13,838 properties
50 years of age or older. Over the next ten years, this number will more than double to 30,413.
Elimination of the demolition/alteration review of non-designated single-family residences, as proposed in
these changes, would significantly limit the properties subject to landmark eligibility evaluation and the
Agenda Item 21
Item # 21 Page 3
review of exterior alterations. Multi-family and commercial properties would continue to be reviewed, as
would single-family residential structures slated for demolition or change of use that are located on a
development site. All other non-designated single family detached dwellings would no longer be evaluated
for potential landmark designation prior to their demolition or alteration. A single-family detached dwelling
that is 50 years or older that applies for a demolition or major alteration would still be posted with a
“Historic Review” sign, to provide the community an opportunity to request historic designation of the
property.
4. Meet federal Certified Local Government (CLG) requirements for the review of proposed alterations
to National and State Register properties.
The review of alterations or demolition of designated buildings that are 50 years old and older is a
requirement for CLG status. Analysis of the existing process identified that, while the Code already
contains the requirement for review, the processes are not currently in compliance.
Changes would ensure alignment between the Codes and processes and provide the process for the
review of exterior alterations to National and State Register properties. Work found to comply with the
review standards would receive a certificate of appropriateness, qualifying the work for potential local,
state and federal financial incentives; a report would be issued to the applicant and the State Historic
Preservation Office would be notified of work to National and State Register properties that does not
comply with the standards; the report would explain why the work does not meet the standards and how it
could be made compliant if desired.
5. Involuntary Landmark Designation process shortened and simplified; 180-day hold may be
extended.
While intentionally designed to provide sufficient time to find solutions to the potential loss of a historic
resource, the current procedure for an involuntary landmark designation is repetitive, cumbersome and
unclear. Currently, applications meeting the minimum submittal requirements are obligated to be
forwarded to the LPC for consideration, even if the resources would not qualify for designation, adding to
the time for final resolution. The 180-day hold on demolition permits in place while the designation is under
consideration by the LPC and Council can expire through delays that the process does not currently
account for, providing a loophole in the process.
Eliminating one of the required hearings and shortening the time required for seeking owner consent for
designation has reduced the process by 35 days, from 139 days to 104 days. Additionally, a requirement
to process the application as quickly as feasible has been added to the Code, to prevent unnecessary
delay. The ability for the Director to extend the 180-day hold due to extenuating circumstances prevents
circumvention of the process. Further changes add the ability for staff to reject applications where a
minimum of 50% percent of the properties in a proposed landmark district do not meet the designation
standards, saving additional time.
6. Remedying of dangerous conditions definition added to Building Code
The Chief Building Official, City Attorney’s Office (CAO) and Historic Preservation staff have identified
improvements to the building codes to address dangerous buildings and clarify at what point a dangerous
building becomes imminently dangerous. These amendments to Chapter 5, Article II, Division 3 of the
City’s building codes were adopted by Council by Ordinance No. 154, 2018, on December 18, 2018.
Agenda Item 21
Item # 21 Page 4
Key Changes to Land Use Code Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources
Section 3.4.7 is repealed and replaced in its entirety due to the extensive changes proposed.
7. At the earliest stage of development review, establish a consistent and predictable 200-foot limit
for identifying historic resources that will be used as the basis for design compatibility of new
development. Currently there is no consistent formula for defining an area of adjacency within which
historic resources will be identified near infill development sites. Clearly defining the maximum boundary
as 200 feet from the perimeter of the development parcel provides predictability to the community and
staff. A 200-foot area of adjacency boundary closely approximates one half of a block in downtown Fort
Collins, where lots typically measure 400’ by 400’. In addition, any resources on the development site are
evaluated and categorized in one of three categories: designated historic resources (Fort Collins
landmarks or State and National Register); eligible for landmark designation; or not eligible for historic
designation (lacking historic significance and/or loss of historic architectural integrity). Designated or
eligible historic resources on the development site are also included in the area of adjacency, and any
alterations proposed to those eligible or designated resources will go through the LPC design review
process in order to receive a recommendation to the decision maker.
8. Design compatibility standards for new construction that differentiate between development that
directly abuts a historic property and development that does not directly abut any historic
resources in its area of adjacency. The new design standards are simplified, clarified, and crafted to
provide more flexibility for applicants and to allow for creative building forms and site design options.
Developments that abut (touch) a historic property are required to have a higher level of design
compatibility, meeting six standards, while those developments at least one parcel or more away from the
historic resource are required to comply with two standards. Several of the standards provide a menu of
choices for compliance, allowing for greater creativity.
CITY FINANCIAL IMPACTS
In general, there are no Citywide financial impacts expected with the adoption of these Ordinances.
Triple Bottom Line Scan
The Triple Bottom Line Scan (TBLS) Team conducted a scan of these code and process changes on October
10, 2018. The results demonstrate that these recommended changes are expected to have a positive impact in
all three areas, with a strong level of confidence. (Attachment 6)
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
The Landmark Preservation Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the amendments to Land
Use Code Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources, at its December 19, 2018 meeting.
The Landmark Preservation Commission unanimously recommended adoption of the amendments to
Municipal Code Chapter 14, Landmark Preservation, at its January 16, 2019 Meeting.
The Planning and Zoning Board unanimously recommend adoption of the amendments to Land Use Code
Section 3.4.7, Historic and Cultural Resources, at its December 20, 2018 and January 17, 2019 meetings.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Historic Preservation policy direction underpinning the Code review project was gathered through numerous
community engagement activities, including presentations to boards and commissions, meetings with
stakeholder groups, surveys, open houses and workshops, listening sessions, and website updates. These
events and meetings informed staff on the level of support each of the proposed Code updates.
Agenda Item 21
Item # 21 Page 5
City Boards and Commissions
• Landmark Preservation Commission: 26 presentations and discussions over the course of two years
• Planning and Zoning Board: 3 presentations and discussions
Citizen Advisory Committee (CAC)
A sixteen-member committee with representation from all major stakeholder groups discussed and provided
recommendations on all proposed changes. The CAC members devoted over 400 hours, meeting twenty times
over the course of two years, with additional review via email. Committee members consisted of:
• Matt Robenalt, Executive Director, Downtown Development Authority;
• Sherry Albertson-Clark, Planning and Development Consultant;
• Steve Schroyer, Development Consultant
• Chris Aronson, Architect, Vaught Frye Larson Aronson Associates
• David Dixon, Local History Interest Groups Representative
• Leslie Williams, Old Town Homeowner
• Jennifer Carpenter, Planning and Zoning Board Representative and Realtor
• Lucia Liley, Attorney
• Janelle Kechter, Legal Assistant
• Brian Cooke, Business Writer and Editor, Visit Fort Collins Ambassador, and Owner of a Landmark
Residence
• Brian Dunbar, Institute for the Built Environment
• Meg Dunn, Landmark Preservation Commission Chair, and Owner of a Landmark Residence
• Per Hogestad, Architect and Owner of a Residence in a Landmark District
• James MacDowell, Realtor and Owner of a Landmark Income-Producing Property
• Anita Rehner, Old Town Homeowner
• Dr. Sarah Payne, Colorado State University History Faculty
Community Organizations
• Downtown Development Authority (DDA) Board of Directors: April 12, 2018; September 13, 2018.
• Development Review Advisory Committee November 14, 2017; February 13, 2018.
• Protect Our Old Town Neighborhoods (POOTH) Board: February 23, 2018; December 5, 2018.
• Chamber of Commerce’s Local Legislature Affairs Committee (LLAC): November 30, 2017; February
22, 2018; and July 20, 2018.
• American Institute of Architects (AIA) Colorado North Chapter: Community Workshops on Architecture
and Design Standards for Infill and Historic Districts. These workshops were well-attended by
members of the design and development community and featured keynotes by highly-regarded
national and regional design experts: October 19, 2017; November 2, 2017.
• Government Affairs Committee of the Board of Realtors: March 13, 2018.
• Northern Colorado Commercial Association of Realtors: March 5, 2018.
• Historic Larimer County: March 25, 2018.
Property Owners and Residents
• Mailing to more than 2,000 primarily Old Town Neighborhoods property owners informing them of
proposed changes and directing them to additional online information.
• Online questionnaire for owners of older (50+ years of age) residential properties and Old Town
neighbors about effectiveness of current demolition/alteration review process (164 responses).
• Mailing informing 700 property owners of National and State Register properties in Fort Collins about
proposed changes.
• Community Open Houses on February 28, 2018 and on July 25, 2018
• Staff continues to meet with property owners and stakeholders to understand any issues or concerns
with the proposed regulations.
Agenda Item 21
Item # 21 Page 6
ATTACHMENTS
1. Council Work Session Summary April 24, 2018 (PDF)
2. Memorandums to Council on Code Review (PDF)
3. Landmark Preservation Commission minutes (PDF)
4. Planning and Zoning Board minutes (PDF)
5. Consolidated Recommendations (PDF)
6. Triple Bottom Line Scan Summary (PDF)
7. Powerpoint presentation (PDF)
ATTACHMENT 1
ATTACHMENT 2
ATTACHMENT 3
ATTACHMENT 4
Consolidated Report Summary:
Clarion Associates Recommendations with Citizen Advisory
Committee (CAC) and Landmark Preservation Commission (LPC)
Comments
Topic 1: Landmark Designation, Municipal Code Chapter 14, Articles 1 and 2
Designation
Process
Clarion: Reevaluate interim control provision and potentially allow design
review applications during the designation process [Clarion Consolidated Code
Review Report, p. 11; Municipal Code Section 14-30.]
• CAC: Supports. LPC should be able to approve alterations if appropriate
during the interim control period. (Ch. 14-30)
• LPC: Supports. Agrees with Clarion and CAC. Work needs LPC approval
Designation
Criteria
Clarion: Better integrate the criteria for designation with the decision-making
process for designation [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 14;
Municipal Code Sections 14-1 and 14-5.]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Consider including a criterion that qualifies properties listed or
eligible for the National or State Register for local landmark designation (p.
14)
• CAC: Majority not in favor; if implemented, could result in treating
some properties differently than others; if retroactive, should require
appropriate public process.
• LPC: Does not support. Concern that this borders on a non-consensual
designation.
Owner Consent
to Designation
Clarion: Consider the inclusion of additional criteria for decision-makers to use
when reviewing a nonconsensual designation [Clarion Consolidated Code
Review Report, p. 18; Municipal Code Section 14-21 through 14-26.]
• CAC:
- Review length of process; look for process improvements that
would fulfill goals while simplifying the process
- Spell out in the code the steps taken to investigate a property’s
eligibility for designation. [Ch. 14-21]
- Clarify what the phrase “benefits to the City” means [Ch. 14-21].
- Add sustainability as a benefit.
ATTACHMENT 5
- Signatures of three residents on application initiating consideration
of non-consensual designation is appropriate number; do not
change. Note: Clarion did not recommend raising the number.
- No fee should be charged.
- Application does not designate a property; it brings to attention of
the LPC and Council.
• LPC: Agrees with CAC on all the above
Alternative Types
of Designation
Clarion: Consider additional types of designation such as conservation
districts or structures of merit [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p.
20.]
• CAC: Investigate conservation districts further. Also consider if there
should be separate processes for commercial vs. residential properties;
for single property designation vs. district designation.
• LPC: Not worth investigating now. Structures of Merit-type program
would add significantly to staff workload and impact financial programs.
Linking Zoning &
Preservation
Clarion: Consider historic overlay zoning as a way to better integrate
preservation and zoning [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 23.]
• CAC: Investigate. Provides more flexibility while providing options for
maintaining character. Creates predictability. Would like more
information.
• LPC: Interesting idea. Investigate. Preserves overall character with less
regulation. Would like Clarion to study.
Clarion: Provide searchable map of landmarks and districts for development
review applicants to check early on whether their property is landmarked
[Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 23.]
• CAC: Supports. Strongly noted need for additional survey and staff.
• LPC: Supports. Need for additional survey and staff.
Commission
Membership
Clarion: Consider more specific requirements for commission members
[Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 26; Municipal Code Section 2-
277.]
• CAC: Requirements are sufficient (are federal CLG requirements) but
should be repeated or referenced in Chapter 14.
• LPC: Same. CLG requirements; are more rigorous that other City boards.
Need to publicize better.
Historic Surveys
Clarion: Specify that one of the duties of the Landmark Preservation
Commission is to direct historic surveys to be completed and regularly
updated [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 29.]
• CAC: Supports. Strongly notes need for additional survey. Far behind.
• LPC: Supports. Critical need for funding for on-going survey
Clarion: Develop partnership with other organizations to develop a program
for regularly surveying historic properties [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 29.]
• CAC: Supports
• LPC: Supports
Clarion: Prioritize the completion of survey work and regular updating of
existing surveys [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 29.]
• CAC: Supports. Survey should be highest priority. Requires consistent
on-going funding and support in City budget.
• LPC: Supports. Survey is highest priority. Foundation of all other work.
Need for on-going funding.
Topic 2: Designated Resources: Processes & Standards for Review
Design Review
Generally
Clarion: Rename the design review process as a “certificate of appropriateness”
process [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 35.]
• CAC: Prefers “Certificate of Approval” and “Landmark Alteration Review”
• LPC: Prefers “Certificate of Appropriateness” and “Landmark Alteration
Review,” for consistency with other programs across country.
Clarion: Develop a decision matrix to increase predictability of required review
processes [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 35.]
• CAC: Agrees. Also develop decision matrices for paint and for murals.
Paint colors should be part of both decision matrices; approval on case-
by-case basis; reversibility and historic material preservation key points
• LPC: Agrees. Need to investigate a better way of determining minor
work from major work, rather than using aspects of integrity.
Commission
Review
Clarion: Make conceptual review an optional step [Clarion Consolidated Code
Review Report, p. 38; Municipal Code Section 14-46(b)(1)]
• CAC: Supports.
- Also offer multiple conceptual reviews, rather than one. All
conceptual review comments should be presented at LPC Final
Review
- Add the ability for LPC to make conditional approvals like P&Z does
- Offer Design Review Subcommittee meetings as alternate option;
LPC members who participate in Design Review Subcommittee
should be allowed to participate in Final Review, as done with DDA
- LPC: Supports. Add the ability for LPC to make conditional
approvals like P&Z does
- Offer Design Review Subcommittee meetings as alternate option;
LPC members who participate in Design Review Subcommittee
should be allowed to participate in Final Review, as done with DDA
- Works in conjunction with clearer standards; focus on specificity of
what is required for approval.
- Add more information on what would likely be supported or
denied.
Clarion: Consider establishing a time limit for final review [Clarion Consolidated
Code Review Report, p. 38; Municipal Code Section 14-46(b)(2)]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees. Adds predictability; strengthens process.
Clarion: Consider more specific requirements for appellants [Clarion
Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 11; Municipal Code Section 14-49(c)]
• CAC: Agrees, but not sure what these would be.
• LPC: Does not agree. This is not an issue; no change necessary. Why
make it harder for owner to appeal the LPC’s decision?
Administrative
Review
Clarion: Adopt guiding document that identifies specific types of work that can
be delegated to staff for review. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p.
42; Municipal Code Section 14-49.]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees.
- Develop matrices of review processes, identifying routine, minor and
major work.
- Need to investigate a better way of determining minor work from major
work, rather than using aspects of integrity
Review
Standards
Generally
Clarion: Establish mandatory approval criteria rather than “considerations”
[Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 46; Municipal Code Section 14-
48(b)]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees. Change language that LPC “shall consider” to “shall use.” Make
clear in code what criteria are.
Clarion: Add specificity to the “standards of the City” reference in the criteria
for approval [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 46; Municipal Code
Section 14-48(b)(5)]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees. Clarify in codes what standards the City has adopted, by name,
and reference in codes whenever applicable
Review
Standards for
Demolition
Clarion: Consider additional criteria for the approval of demolition proposals
[Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 49; Municipal Code Section 14-
48.]
• CAC: Add criteria to code. The answer to all proposals to demolish landmark
designated properties should be no, except in cases of non-contributing
buildings in districts; non-contributing reviewed same as infill in district
• LPC: Change codes to reflect that site cannot sit fallow following demolition.
Clarify in code when a Landmark may be demolished; add standards for
acceptable new construction consistent with Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards & Guidelines. Revisit hardship standards to make sure they are
appropriate
Review
Standards for
Compatible Infill
Clarion: Consider codifying general compatibility standards for new
construction [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p.53.]
• CAC: Agrees. Code should better reference Secretary of Interior Standards and
Guidelines for examples of how to apply. Make both Ch. 14 and LUC 3.4.7 clear
that literal replication is not desired, same with great divergence; what is
desired is invention within a style and abstract reference to context.
• LPC: Agrees. Adopt standards for compatible new construction consistent with
2017 Secretary of Interior’s Standards & Guidelines update.
Clarion: Clarify the role of the adopted design guidelines and standards [Clarion
Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 53.]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Develop design guidelines for additional districts or general design
guidelines [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 53.]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees. Develop district-specific design standards and guidelines for each
new and existing historic district.
Topic 3: Development Review and Historic Resources: Processes & Standards for
Review
Development
Review Process
Clarion: Clarify the purpose and intent of the historic resources component
of the Development Review process [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 63; Land Use Code Section 3.4.7(A) and (B)]
• CAC: Agrees. Area of adjacency identifies significant historic properties that
could be affected by new development. These resources provide the
context. New development different but compatible.
• LPC: Agrees. Review serves dual goals: 1. Retains eligibility of historic
resources; 2. Promotes compatibility with existing character.
Clarify the procedural requirements to obtain a recommendation from the
LPC. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 63, Land Use Code Section
3.4.7]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Use new terminology, such as “Historic Resource Compatibility
Review,” instead of “Development Review.” [Clarion Consolidated Code
Review Report, p. 63]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees.
Applicability of
Process
Clarion: Establish a consistent and predictable geographic limit for the
review, such a Historic Resource Compatibility Review matrix. [Clarion
Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 67.]
• CAC: No difference in treatment of designated and eligible properties.
Supports set radius, regardless of height. More review criteria for abutting
development. Discussed radius ranging from abutting only to 500+ feet.
• LPC: No difference in treatment of designated and eligible properties.
Supports set radius, regardless of height. More review criteria for abutting
development. Support for 200-foot radius – ½ typical block.
Clarion: Develop context-based standards that are not based on eligibility to
ensure compatibility in certain areas of the city. [Clarion Consolidated Code
Review Report, p. 70.]
• CAC: Agrees. Building’s status does not change importance to community.
Treating both equally recognizes contribution to character, offers more
predictability, simplifies review.
• LPC: Agrees with Clarion and with CAC. Also develop standards & guidelines
for different areas in town based on areas’ character
Clarion: Consider reviewing impact on eligible resources only if they are on-
site or abutting a development project. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 70.]
• CAC: Disagrees. Retention of context important. Development can be
different but should still be good neighbor.
• LPC: Disagrees. Would not promote context - Sense of Place. Development
can be different but should still be reviewed to ensure good neighbor.
Clarion: Focus on survey work to develop an inventory of eligible historic
resources. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 70.]
• CAC: Agrees. Should ne highest priority. This will not work unless surveys and
contexts are getting funding. Need City commitment of on-going funding
• LPC: Agrees. Foundation of all other work. Need funding, staff to manage.
Clarity and
Organization
Clarion: Redraft Section 3.4.7 for clarity and to improve the organization,
clarifying the purpose, applicability, and standards of the process. [Clarion
Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 74.]
• CAC: Agrees.
• LPC: Agrees.
Topic 4: Demo/Alt Review, Demolition by Neglect, Dangerous Buildings
Demolition/Alteration
Review Process
Clarion: Clarify the role of the Design Review Subcommittee (DRS).
[Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 85; Municipal Code Section
14-72(b) and 14-72(d)]
CAC: Agrees. LPC members participating in DRS should still be able to
participate in later LPC hearings on item, like DDA does.
LPC: Agrees. LPC members participating in DRS should be able to participate
in later hearings on item. DRS should be utilized more, offered as
alternative to conceptual design review of changes to landmarks and for
preliminary reviews of new development.
Clarion: Consider using a decision matrix to more clearly differentiate
between minor and major alterations. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 85.]
CAC: Agrees.
LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Reevaluate the criteria for approval and potentially add an
economic hardship determination. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 85; Municipal Code Section 14-72(b), 14-72(f)(7) and 14-7]
CAC: Disagrees with Clarion. Does not support adding economic hardship as
a criterion. Very difficult, adds complexity. Potentially unfair; different
results between savvy investors with large portfolios, lawyers and
accountants, vs Mom and Pop owners.
- Develop intermediate options for LPC between must approve or non-
consensual landmark designation.
LPC: Disagrees with Clarion. Does not support adding economic hardship as
a criterion. Noted that this is Council policy, affects all city codes.
- Agrees with CAC on intermediate options between two extremes.
Clarion: Consider increasing the amount of time that the LPC can delay a
decision in order to find alternatives to demolition. [Clarion Consolidated
Code Review Report, p. 85)
CAC: Agrees. Concern that easy to miss deadline, such as by a meeting
cancelled for weather or lack of quorum. Make sure timing is adequate.
LPC: Agrees. Staff needs to address as part of review of overall timing.
Determinations of
Eligibility
Clarion: Focus on completing survey work to proactively identify eligible
resources. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 91.]
CAC: Strongly agrees. Notes that each of Clarion’s reports states need for
far more survey.
LPC: Strongly agrees. Would greatly benefit predictability; aid developers
and property owners.
Clarion: Create an inventory of eligible historic resources. [Clarion
Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 91.]
CAC: Agrees.
LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Reconsider the five-year period of validity. Consider a process for
property owners to obtain a certificate of ineligibility with a five-year limit
on validity. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 91; Municipal
Code 14-6(a)]
CAC: Clarify. Clarion appears to say that all buildings are eligible until
determined not to be. Not sure how this would help. Request more
information.
LPC: Currently no presumption of a building’s eligibility. More information
needed to understand why Clarion recommends this change.
Demolition by Neglect
Clarion: Specify the types of repairs that are required to prevent
demolition by neglect. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 96;
Municipal Code 14-8 and 14-73]
CAC: Agrees. Proactive enforcement before they become imminently
dangerous. Neglected/dangerous buildings should have to go through city’s
processes, not be able to circumvent.
LPC: Agrees with CAC. Noted that how repairs are done could damage
integrity of building.
Clarion: Increase penalties for properties undergoing demolition by
neglect. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 96.]
CAC: Agrees. Way to circumvent City processes. Penalties within certain
time frame should also be cumulative rather than treated as separate
incidents.
LPC: Agrees with CAC. Used as way to circumvent City processes.
Clarion: If an inventory of eligible resources is created, extend
maintenance requirements to eligible structures on the inventory. [Clarion
Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 96.]
CAC: Agrees.
LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Incorporate preservation-related requirements in the general
property maintenance standards. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 96.]
CAC: Agrees.
LPC: Agrees.
Clarion: Develop additional financial incentives to assist with required
property maintenance. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review Report, p. 96.]
CAC: Agrees. Bigger carrots to incentivize rehabilitation.
LPC: Agrees. Also use to address energy efficiency.
Public Safety
Exclusions
Clarion: Clarify the requirement to fix dangerous conditions when deemed
repairable by the building official. [Clarion Consolidated Code Review
Report, p. 100.]
CAC: Agrees. City should have distinction between dangerous and
imminently dangerous.
LPC: Agrees with Clarion and CAC.
Clarion: Review relevant building code definitions. [Clarion Consolidated
Code Review Report, p. 100.]
CAC: Need definition of dangerous and imminently dangerous; reference in
all relevant codes. City Attorney’s Office will prepare definition.
LPC: Agrees with Clarion and CAC. CAO crafting definition good; defensible.
Clarion: Improve coordination between the LPC/preservation staff and the
building official in regards to dangerous buildings. [Clarion Consolidated
Code Review Report, p. 100.]
CAC: Agrees.
LPC: Agrees. More coordination helpful in both preventing and resolving
issues.
Historic Preservation Process Review and Code Revisions
These comprehensive historic preservation code revisions affect designated landmark properties, properties 50
years and older that are not designated landmarks, and development review. Key changes include: revision of the
Land Use Code 3.4.7 requirements that guide treatment of historic resources on development sites and
architectural compatibility of new construction near historic resources; the elimination of ineffective historic review
of non-designated single-family dwellings; and efficiency and qualitative improvements to the landmark
designation process for involuntary designation requests.
Positive
• Env 7: Impacts the City’s air-quality by
incentivizing the appropriate retrofitting
of historic buildings
• Env 8: Impacts the City’s zero-waste
goals by reducing construction &
demolition waste through the retention
of existing buildings.
• Env 9: Impacts opportunities for
education and support of environmental
stewardship principles (improving
energy performance of buildings while
preserving historic character).
Negative
• None
Positive
• Econ 1: Impacts economic health of
business community by allowing
businesses to expand in available space
and attract and retain talent.
• Econ 1: Provides financial assistance to
owners and tenants of historic
commercial and residential buildings for
renovations and maintenance.
• Econ 8: Impacts the city’s local culture
by maintaining the unique community
character of Fort Collins and our
collective sense of history and identity.
• Econ 9: Has a positive effect on infill
and redevelopment by creating more
compatible architecture in a way that will
not hamper design creativity and high-
quality modern architecture.
• Econ 4: Some positive impact on job
wages by providing opportunities for
highly skilled building tradespeople.
Negative
• None
Positive
• SS 3: Promotes welcoming and diverse
community through funding for ADA
retrofitting of historic buildings.
• SS 4: Impacts sense of belonging in
underrepresented populations.
• SS 5: Providing new incentive programs
targeted at underrepresented
populations improves ability to
participate and influence City programs.
• SS 6: Providing new funding
opportunities to recognize and retrofit
existing businesses is positive economic
impact on underrepresented
populations.
Results from the Scan highlight that the impacts of the code and process review and revisions is
overwhelmingly positive or neutral. Considering the triple-bottom line impacts of the revised historic
preservation codes and related programs was a helpful step in the two year study, informing the final
analysis and proposed revisions. While ongoing questions of social, environmental, and economic
sustainability are embedded in the dialogue about the role of historic preservation in our community,
looking at the entire picture in a systematic way to see the overall TBL impact confirms that the revisions
to the program are moving exactly in the direction we intend. As a component contributor to many City-
wide goals noted in this analysis, the results show that the existing built environment is critical in many
areas and deserves the careful attention these programs and codes provide.
Environmental
Economic
Social
Negative Impact Positive Impact
High Confidence
Low Confidence
City Council 2.19.19
HISTORIC PRESERVATION CODE CHANGES
ATTACHMENT 7
Code and Process Review
2
Goals:
• Clarity
• Predictability
• Effective processes
• Realign program priorities
• Secure the support of Council
and community
Citizen Advisory Committee
Matt Robenalt
Sherry Albertson-Clark
Chris Aronson
Dr. Brian Dunbar
Jennifer Carpenter
Janelle Kechter
Per Hogestad
Leslie Williams
Lucia Liley
Dr. Sarah Payne
James MacDowell
Anita Rehner
Meg Dunn
David Dixon
Brian Cooke
Steve Schroyer
3
Infill Development & Historic Resources
Timeliness and certainty:
• 200-foot area of adjacency
• Historic buildings identified at
beginning of project
Inviting design excellence:
• Unique, harmonious buildings
Flexibility: Multiple options
4
5
Uncommon
302 South College Avenue
Locations of historic buildings
for design compatibility:
Before and after 200-foot limit
Case Study
Involuntary Landmark Designation
Process was lengthy and confusing
• Timeline shortened by 35 days
• Eliminated one redundant hearing
• Shortened time for owner consent
• Minimum 50% buildings must
be historically important
• Director may extend time if needed
6
Reviews of Single-Family Dwellings
No longer review most single-
family dwellings
Focus review on Landmarks,
State/National Register
properties & development
review
Continue to post demolitions &
major alterations
7
Additional Changes
8
• More options for quick approval
• Reformatted code for clarity
• Graphics, definitions and
references
• Interactive map of surveyed
buildings
• Webpages, handouts, flow charts
9
Triple Bottom Line Scan (TBL-S) Results
Key TBL-S Results
• Maintains unique community character
• Improves energy performance of
historic buildings
• Positive impact on climate action goals
• More opportunities for compatible infill
development
• Financial incentives for rehabilitation
• Impacts sense of belonging in
underrepresented populations
• Improves housing options
Environmental
Economic Social
High
Confidence
Positive
Impact
Negative
Impact
Low
Confidence
Rehab Right: Preservation at Its Best
10
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 034, 2019
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING CHAPTER 14 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS REGARDING LANDMARK PRESERVATION
WHEREAS, the protection, enhancement and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects
and districts of historic, architectural, archeological, or geographic significance, located within
the City, are a public necessity and are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and
general welfare of the people; and
WHEREAS, City Code Chapter 14, Landmark Preservation, contains regulations adopted
to preserve, protect, and enhance the City’s historic heritage; and
WHEREAS, City historic preservation staff has completed a two-year review to identify
changes to the City’s historic preservation regulations that will promote greater clarity,
effectiveness, and predictability in the administration of historic preservation within the City;
and
WHEREAS, as a result of the review, City staff is recommending changes to City Code
Chapter 14 to City Council; and
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2019, the Landmark Preservation Commission unanimously
recommended that City Council adopt the proposed changes to City Code Chapter 14; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the recommended changes to City
Code Chapter 14 are in the best interests of the City and its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and
findings contained in the recitals set forth above.
Section 2. That Articles I through IV of Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort
Collins are hereby repealed in their entirety and reenacted to read as follows:
ARTICLE I.
IN GENERAL
Sec. 14-1. Declaration of policy.
(a) It is hereby declared as a matter of public policy that the protection, enhancement
and perpetuation of sites, structures, objects and districts of historic, architectural,
archeological, or geographic significance, located within the City, are a public necessity and
are required in the interest of the prosperity, civic pride and general welfare of the people.
-2-
(b) It is the opinion of the City Council that the economic, cultural and aesthetic
standing of this City cannot be maintained or enhanced by disregarding the historical,
architectural, archeological and geographical heritage of the City and by ignoring the
destruction or defacement of such cultural assets.
Sec. 14-2. Purpose.
The purposes of this Chapter are to:
(a) Survey, identify, designate, preserve, protect, enhance and perpetuate those sites,
structures, objects and districts which reflect important elements of the City's cultural,
artistic, social, economic, political, architectural, archeological, or other heritage;
(b) Foster civic pride in the beauty and accomplishments of the past;
(c) Stabilize or improve aesthetic and economic vitality and values of such sites,
structures, objects and districts;
(d) Protect and enhance the City's attraction to tourists and visitors;
(e) Promote the use of important historical, archeological, or architectural sites,
structures, objects and districts for the education, stimulation and welfare of the people of the
City;
(f) Promote good urban design;
(g) Promote and encourage continued private ownership and utilization of such sites,
structures, objects or districts now so owned and used, to the extent that the objectives listed
above can be attained under such a policy; and
(h) Promote economic, social, and environmental sustainability through the ongoing
survey and inventory, use, maintenance, and rehabilitation of existing buildings.
Sec. 14-3. Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this Chapter, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this Section:
Accessory building shall mean a building detached from a principal building and customarily
used with, and clearly incidental and subordinate to, the principal, and located on the same lot,
lots, or area of property upon which the principal building is located.
Accessory structure shall mean a structure detached from a principal building and customarily
used with, and clearly incidental and subordinate to, the principal building, and ordinarily
located on the same lot, lots, or area of property upon which the principal building is located.
-3-
Adverse effect shall mean that a project or undertaking may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the
characteristics that qualify a property for designation in a manner that would diminish the
property's integrity. Adverse effects may include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the
undertaking that may occur later in time, be removed in distance, or be cumulative.
Alteration shall mean any act or process, including relocation, reconstruction, restoration,
rehabilitation, or the erection of a new improvement, which changes one (1) or more of the
physical characteristics of a historic resource. The term alteration shall include the partial or
complete demolition of a historic resource.
CDNS shall mean the Community Development and Neighborhoods Services Department, or the
successor department in which City Historic Preservation staff operate.
Characteristics shall mean the visible and tangible attributes of a site, structure, object or district,
including, but not limited to, the architectural design, style, general arrangement and components
of all the outer surfaces of a site, object, structure or improvement, including, but not limited to,
the color, texture, materials, type and style of all windows, doors, lights, signs and other fixtures
appurtenant to said site, object, structure or improvement.
Commission shall mean the Landmark Preservation Commission created in § 2-276.
Contributing shall mean a site, structure or object eligible for designation, or formally
designated, that has significance and that retains enough integrity to contribute to the character of
a district even though its exterior may have been altered.
Demolition shall mean any act or process that destroys partially or in its entirety an eligible or
designated site, structure or object, or a site, structure or object within an eligible or designated
district.
Designated resource shall mean (1) designated Fort Collins landmarks; (2) sites, structures, or
objects designated on the Colorado State Register of Historic Places or the National Register of
Historic Places; or (3) contributing resources to a designated Fort Collins or Colorado State or
National historic district.
Determination of eligibility shall mean a determination pursuant to this Chapter that a site,
structure, object or district meets the standards for designation as a Fort Collins landmark or
landmark district. The determination of eligibility for the National and/or State Register of
Historic Places shall be according to the processes and procedures of the Colorado State Historic
Preservation Office.
Director shall mean the Director of Community Development and Neighborhood Services or his
or her designee.
District shall mean a geographically definable area possessing a concentration, linkage or
continuity of sites, structures or objects and their surrounding environs united by past events or
-4-
aesthetically by plan or physical development. A district may also comprise individual elements
separated geographically but linked by association or history.
Dwelling shall mean a building used exclusively for residential occupancy and for permitted
accessory uses.
Dwelling, single-family shall mean a dwelling containing no more than one (1) dwelling unit.
Dwelling, single-family detached shall mean a single-family dwelling that is not attached to any
other dwelling or building by any means, including mobile homes and manufactured housing
situated on a permanent foundation.
Dwelling unit shall mean one (1) or more rooms and a single kitchen and at least one (1)
bathroom, designed, occupied or intended for occupancy as separate quarters for the exclusive
use of a single family for living, cooking, and sanitary purposes.
Eligibility shall mean a resource's ability to meet one (1) or more of the criteria for significance
as a Fort Collins landmark, or the criteria for significance on the National Register of Historic
Places and/or State Register of Historic Properties, and that possesses exterior integrity.
Historic resource shall mean a site, structure, or object that is located on a lot, lots, or area of
property and is (1) designated as a Fort Collins landmark; (2) a contributing resource to a
designated Fort Collins landmark district; (3) designated on the State Register of Historic
Properties or National Register of Historic Places; or (4) has been determined to be eligible for
designation as a Fort Collins landmark.
Improvement shall mean any building, structure, place, work of art or other object constituting a
physical betterment of real property or any part of such betterment, including improvements on
public property.
Landmark shall mean any site, structure, object or improvement and its surrounding environs
officially designated as a Fort Collins landmark pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.
Landmark district shall mean a district that has been officially designated as a Fort Collins
landmark district pursuant to the provisions of this Chapter.
Non-contributing/not eligible shall mean a site, structure or object that does not possess
sufficient significance and/or integrity for designation, and is considered non-contributing to a
district, or not eligible to be designated as a landmark.
Object shall mean a material thing of functional, aesthetic, cultural, historical or scientific value
that may be, by nature or design, movable.
Owner shall mean the owner of fee simple title as shown in the records of the County Assessor.
-5-
Repair and maintenance shall mean work done on a site, structure or object in order to correct
any deterioration, decay or damage to any part thereof in order to restore the same as nearly as
practical to its condition prior to such deterioration, decay or damage.
Resource shall mean any site, structure or object that is part of or constitutes a property.
Site shall mean the location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity
or a structure or object whether standing, ruined or vanished, where the location itself maintains
historical or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure.
Staff shall mean City Historic Preservation Division staff members meeting the professional
requirements contained in Title 36, Part 61 of the Code of Federal Regulations.
Structure shall mean that which is built or constructed, an edifice or building of any kind or any
piece of work artificially built up or composed of parts joined together in some definite manner.
Sec. 14-4. Commission Secretary and Liaison.
The Director, or his or her designee, shall act as secretary and liaison to the Commission. The
secretary shall be the custodian of the records of the Commission, shall handle official
correspondence and shall generally supervise the clerical and technical work of the Commission.
Sec. 14-5. Waiver of conditions.
(a) Upon a showing of substantial hardship or to protect against an arbitrary result,
and following notice as provided in § 14-34 of this Chapter, the Commission may waive such
conditions and requirements as are set forth in this Chapter provided the Commission finds
that the spirit and purpose of the Chapter are not substantially eroded and that the requested
waiver meets one (1) or both of the following criteria:
(1) The requested waiver is the minimum necessary to accommodate exceptional physical
conditions or other extraordinary and exceptional situations unique to the affected
property, which may include, but are not limited to, physical conditions such as
exceptional narrowness, shallowness or topography, and such difficulties or hardship are
not caused by the act or omission of the applicant; and/or
(2) The requested waiver as submitted will not diverge from the conditions and requirements
of this Chapter except in nominal and inconsequential ways, and will continue to advance
the purposes of this Chapter.
(b) Any finding made under Paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2) above shall be supported by
specific findings showing how the proposal, as submitted, meets the requirements and criteria
of said Paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2).
Sec. 14-6. Offenses against historic resources and potentially eligible resources.
-6-
(a) Except as may be authorized pursuant to this Chapter or the provisions of the
Land Use Code, no person shall damage, deface, destroy, or otherwise cause any alteration to
be made to any site, structure or object that is: (1) Fifty (50) years of age or older that is not
a single-family detached dwelling; (2) An accessory building or structure fifty (50) years of
age or older that is not directly associated with a single-family detached dwelling; (3) A
historic resource; or (4) Undergoing any of the processes provided for in this Chapter.
(b) Except in response to a bona fide determination of imminent danger under § 14-8
of this Article, no person shall deviate from or fail to comply with any approved plan of
protection for any historic resource that is required under this Chapter or the Land Use Code.
Sec. 14-7. Minimum maintenance requirements for designated resources.
(a) All designated resources shall be maintained in such fashion as to meet the
requirements of the International Property Maintenance Code or the International Existing
Building Code, as adopted and amended by the City. The owner of such designated
resource(s) shall also keep in good repair all structural elements thereof which, if not so
maintained, may cause or tend to cause the exterior portions of such designated resources to
deteriorate, decay or become damaged or otherwise to fall into a state of disrepair which
would have an adverse effect upon such designated resources.
(b) The Commission may request that the Director require correction of defects or
repairs to any designated resource(s) regulated by this Section.
Sec. 14-8. Remedying of dangerous conditions.
In any case where a properly authorized public official or employee orders the demolition of any
historic resource for the purpose of remedying conditions determined by that official or
employee to constitute an imminent danger, as such term is defined in the version of the
International Property Maintenance Code adopted and amended by the City, to life, health or
property, nothing contained herein shall be construed as making it unlawful for any person to
comply with such order. Such official or employee shall take immediate steps to notify the
Commission of the proposed issuance of such order and may include in the order any timely
received requirements or recommendations of the Commission or staff. In the event that such
official or employee has determined that the historic resource, with the exception of single-
family detached dwellings, and accessory buildings or structures associated with single-family
detached dwellings, that are non-designated, is capable of being made safe by repairs and need
not be demolished, the historic resource shall be repaired, or demolished, in accordance with the
provisions of this Article.
Sec. 14-9. Appeal of decisions.
Final decisions of the Commission shall be subject to the right of appeal to the City Council as
set forth in § 2-46 et seq., unless otherwise provided. Any action taken in reliance upon any
decision of the Commission that is subject to appeal under the provisions of this Chapter shall be
-7-
at the sole risk of the person(s) taking such action, and the City shall not be liable for any
damages arising from any such action taken during said period of time.
Sec. 14-10. Violations and penalties.
Any person violating any provision of this Chapter shall be subject to the penalty provisions in §
1-15 of this Code. If any improvement is erected, constructed, reconstructed, altered, added to or
demolished, or any land surface changed, in violation of this Chapter, the City may institute an
appropriate action or proceeding to prevent or address such unlawful action. The imposition of
any penalty hereunder shall not preclude the City from instituting any proper action or
proceeding to require compliance with the provisions of this Chapter and with administrative
orders and determinations made hereunder.
Sec. 14-11. Severability.
It is hereby declared to be the legislative intent of the City Council that the provisions of this
Chapter shall be severable in accordance with the provisions set forth below:
(a) If any provision of this Chapter is declared to be invalid by a decision of any court
of competent jurisdiction, the effect of such judicial decision shall be limited to that
provision which is expressly stated in the decision to be invalid. Such decision shall not
affect, impair or nullify this Chapter as a whole or any other part, and the rest of this Chapter
shall continue in full force and effect.
(b) If the application of any provision of this Chapter to any lot, resource, historic or
otherwise, or other improvement or tract of land is declared to be invalid by a decision of any
court of competent jurisdiction, the effect of such judicial decision shall be limited to that lot,
resource, historic or otherwise, or other improvement or tract of land immediately involved
in the controversy, action or proceeding in which the judgment or decree of invalidity was
rendered. Such decision shall not affect, impair or nullify this Chapter as a whole or the
application of any provision to any other lot, structure or other improvement or tract of land.
ARTICLE II.
DESIGNATION PROCEDURE
Sec. 14-21. Purpose.
The standards and procedures in this Article apply in whole or in part to determine the eligibility
of resources for designation as landmarks or landmark districts for (1) landmark or landmark
district designation pursuant to Article III, (2) the analysis of proposed development pursuant to
Land Use Code § 3.4.7, and (3) property owner information.
Sec. 14-22. Standards for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and
districts for designation as landmarks or landmark districts.
-8-
A determination of eligibility for landmark designation typically applies to the entire lot, lots, or
area of property upon which the landmark is located and may include structures, objects, or
landscape features not eligible for landmark designation located on such lot, lots, or area of
property. In order for a district to be eligible for landmark district designation, at least fifty (50)
percent of the properties contained within the proposed landmark district must qualify as
contributing to the district. Resources eligible for landmark designation or eligible to contribute
to a landmark district must possess both significance and integrity as follows:
(a) Significance is the importance of a site, structure, object, or district to the history,
architecture, archeology, engineering or culture of our community, State or Nation.
Significance is achieved through meeting one (1) or more of four (4) standards recognized by
the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park Service. These standards define how resources
are significant for their association with events or persons, in design or construction, or for
their information potential. The criteria for determining significance are as follows:
(1) Events. Resources may be determined to be significant if they are associated with
events that have made a recognizable contribution to the broad patterns of the history of
the community, State or Nation. A resource can be associated with either, or both, of two
(2) types of events:
a. A specific event marking an important moment in Fort Collins prehistory
or history; and/or
b. A pattern of events or a historic trend that made a recognizable
contribution to the development of the community, State or Nation.
(2) Persons/Groups. Resources may be determined to be significant if
they are associated with the lives of persons or groups of persons recognizable in the
history of the community, State or Nation whose specific contributions to that history can
be identified and documented.
(3) Design/Construction. Resources may be determined to be
significant if they embody the identifiable characteristics of a type, period or method of
construction; represent the work of a craftsman or architect whose work is distinguishable
from others by its characteristic style and quality; possess high artistic values or design
concepts; or are part of a recognizable and distinguishable group of resources. This
standard applies to such disciplines as formal and vernacular architecture, landscape
architecture, engineering and artwork, by either an individual or a group. A resource can
be significant not only for the way it was originally constructed or crafted, but also for
the way it was adapted at a later period, or for the way it illustrates changing tastes,
attitudes, and/or uses over a period of time. Examples are residential buildings which
represent the socioeconomic classes within a community, but which frequently are
vernacular in nature and do not have high artistic values.
-9-
(4) Information potential. Resources may be determined to be
significant if they have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in
prehistory or history.
(b) Integrity is the ability of a site, structure, object, or district to be able to convey its
significance. The integrity of a resource is based on the degree to which it retains all or some
of seven (7) aspects or qualities established by the U.S. Department of Interior, National Park
Service: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association. All seven
(7) qualities do not need to be present for a site, structure, object, or district to be eligible as
long as the overall sense of past time and place is evident. The criteria for determining
integrity are as follows:
(1) Location is the place where the resource was constructed or the place where the historic
or prehistoric event occurred.
(2) Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan space, structure and style
of a resource.
(3) Setting is the physical environment of a resource. Whereas location refers to the specific
place where a resource was built or an event occurred, setting refers to the character of
the place in which the resource played its historic or prehistoric role. It involves how, not
just where, the resource is situated and its relationship to the surrounding features and
open space.
(4) Materials are the physical elements that form a resource.
(5) Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people
during any given period in history or prehistory. It is the evidence of artisans' labor and
skill in constructing or altering a building, structure or site.
(6) Feeling is a resource’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period
of time. It results from the presence of physical features that, taken together, convey the
resource’s historic or prehistoric character.
(7) Association is the direct link between an important event or person and a historic or
prehistoric resource. A resource retains association if it is the place where the event or
activity occurred and is sufficiently intact to convey that relationship to an observer. Like
feeling, association requires the presence of physical features that convey a resource’s
historic or prehistoric character.
Sec. 14-23. Process for determining the eligibility of sites, structures, objects and
districts for designation as Fort Collins landmarks or landmark districts.
(a) Application. An application for determining the eligibility of a resource or district
for designation as a Fort Collins landmark or Fort Collins landmark district may be made by
the owner(s) of the resource(s). A non-binding eligibility determination may be made by a
-10-
development review applicant pursuant to Land Use Code § 3.4.7(C)(2). Said application
shall be filed with the Director. Staff may require a current intensive-level Colorado Cultural
Resource Survey Form for each resource contained in an application. The applicant shall
reimburse the City for the cost of having such a survey generated by a third-party expert
selected by the City. Within fifteen (15) days of the filing of such application, and receipt of
the intensive-level survey if required, staff shall determine whether the property or properties
containing or comprising the site, structure, object or district is eligible for designation as a
Fort Collins landmark or landmark district based on the information contained in the
application and any additional information that may be provided by others. A determination
of eligibility shall be valid for five (5) years unless (1) the Director determines that
significantly changed circumstances require a reevaluation of the prior eligibility
determination, or (2) the site, structure, object or district is undergoing designation
proceedings pursuant to Article 3 of this Chapter in which case, new determinations of
eligibility shall occur pursuant to such Article. Staff shall promptly publish the determination
in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and cause a sign to be posted on or near the
property containing the resource under review stating that the property is undergoing historic
review. Said sign shall be readable from a point of public access and shall state that more
information may be obtained from staff.
(b) Appeal of determination. Any determination made by staff regarding eligibility
may be appealed to the Commission by the applicant, any resident of the City, or owner of
property in the City. Such appeal shall be set forth in writing and filed with the Director
within fourteen (14) days of the date of the staff's determination. The appeal shall include an
intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form for each resource that is subject to
appeal, prepared by an expert in historic preservation acceptable to the Director and the
appellant, with the completion cost of such intensive-level survey to be paid by the appellant.
Such survey need not be filed with the appeal but must be filed at least fourteen (14) days
prior to the hearing of the appeal. The Director shall schedule a date for hearing the appeal
before the Commission as expeditiously as possible. Not less than fourteen (14) days prior to
the date of the hearing, the Director shall: (1) Provide the appellant and any owner of any
resource at issue with written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing of the appeal
by first class mail; (2) Publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in
the City; and (3) Cause a sign readable from a public point of access to be posted on or near
the property containing the resource under review stating how additional information may be
obtained.
ARTICLE III.
LANDMARK DESIGNATION PROCEDURE
Sec. 14-31. Initiation of designation procedure.
(a) The Fort Collins landmark or Fort Collins landmark district designation process may be
initiated at the written request of any Councilmember, by motion of the Commission, upon
application of the owner(s) of the resource(s) to be designated, or of any three (3) or more
residents of the City. Any Council or Commission member who initiated the designation
-11-
process shall not be required to refrain from making any determination pursuant to this
Article solely because such member initiated the process.
(1) All applications for designation submitted by the owner(s) or City residents shall include:
(1) A comprehensive architectural or archeological description of each resource proposed
for designation or as contributing to a proposed district; (2) A detailed statement of how
each resource or district meets the criteria for eligibility for designation in § 14-22; and
(3) An explanation why the boundaries of each resource or district proposed for
designation should be determined as described in the application. Staff shall reject
incomplete applications and provide a description of the information necessary to
complete such application and any such rejection is not subject to appeal. Upon receipt
of a complete application, staff may require a current intensive-level Colorado Cultural
Resource Survey Form. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the cost of having
such a survey generated by a third-party expert selected by the City.
a. Staff shall review applications for Fort Collins landmark designation to determine
whether the listed resource(s) satisfies the eligibility criteria contained in § 14-22. If
any resource(s) listed in the application satisfies such criteria, staff shall forward the
application to the Commission for its review pursuant to § 14-33. Such Commission
review shall be limited to the resource(s) staff determined as having satisfied the
eligibility criteria. A landmark designation typically applies to the entire lot, lots, or
area of property upon which the landmark is located and may include structures,
objects, or landscape features not eligible for landmark designation located on such
lot, lots, or area of property.
b. Staff shall review applications for Fort Collins landmark district designation to
determine whether at least fifty (50) percent of the properties contained within the
proposed district qualify as contributing to the district pursuant to the eligibility
criteria contained in § 14-22. If staff determines that fifty (50) percent or more of the
properties are contributing, staff shall forward the application to the Commission for
its review pursuant to § 14-33.
c. If staff determines that any resource listed in an application does not satisfy the
eligibility criteria contained in § 14-22, or less than fifty (50) percent of the properties
in a proposed district are contributing, staff shall deny the portion of the application
relating to such resource(s), or the entire application in the case of a district, and
inform the applicant(s) and any owner of any resource(s) at issue in writing of the
denial via first class mail. Notwithstanding, a landmark designation typically applies
to the entire lot, lots, or area of property upon which the landmark is located and may
include structures, objects, or landscape features not eligible for landmark designation
located on such lot, lots, or area of property. Any denial may be appealed to the
Commission by the applicant(s) by submitting in writing to the Director a request for
Commission review of the staff decision within fourteen (14) days of the date the
written notification of the denial was mailed. Such appeal shall only review whether
staff correctly determined the eligibility of the resource(s) or district for landmark
designation. The appeal shall include an intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource
-12-
Survey Form, prepared by an expert in historic preservation acceptable to the Director
and the appellant, with the completion cost of such survey to be paid by the appellant.
Such survey need not be filed with the appeal but must be filed at least fourteen (14)
days prior to the hearing of the appeal. Upon receiving a timely appeal request, the
Director shall schedule a Commission hearing date for the appeal. Not less than
fourteen (14) days prior to the date of the hearing, the Director shall: (1) Provide the
appellant and any owner of any resource at issue with written notice of the date, time
and place of the hearing of the appeal by first class mail; (2) Publish notice of the
hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; and (3) Cause a sign
readable from a public point of access to be posted on or near the property containing
the resource under review stating how additional information may be obtained.
(2) For designation processes initiated by any Councilmember or by motion of the
Commission, staff shall prepare an application conforming to the requirements in above
Subsection (a)(1).
a. If the application is for Fort Collins landmark designation, staff shall determine
whether the listed resource(s) satisfies the eligibility criteria contained in § 14-22. If
any resource(s) listed in the application satisfies such criteria, staff shall forward the
application to the Commission for its review pursuant to § 14-33. Such Commission
review shall be limited to the resource(s) staff determined as having satisfied the
eligibility criteria.
b. If the application is for Fort Collins landmark district designation, staff shall
determine whether at least fifty (50) percent of the properties contained within the
proposed district qualify as contributing to the district pursuant to the eligibility
criteria contained in § 14-22. If staff determines that fifty (50) percent or more of the
properties are contributing, staff shall forward the application to the Commission for
its review pursuant to § 14-33.
c. If staff determines that any resource listed in the initiation request does not meet
the eligibility criteria contained in § 14-22, or less than fifty (50) percent of the
properties in a proposed district are contributing, staff shall deny the portion of the
application relating to such resource(s), or the entire application in the case of a
district, and inform the applicant(s) and any owner of the resource(s) at issue in
writing of the denial via first class mail. Notwithstanding, a landmark designation
typically applies to the entire lot, lots, or area of property upon which the landmark is
located and may include structures, objects, or landscape features not eligible for
landmark designation located on such lot, lots, or area of property. Any denial may
be appealed to the Commission by the Councilmember who initiated the designation
or by any Commission member who voted in favor of initiating designation by
submitting in writing to the Director a request for Commission review of the staff
decision within fourteen (14) days of the date the written notification of the denial
was mailed. Such appeal shall only review whether staff correctly determined the
eligibility of the resource(s) or district for landmark designation. Staff shall obtain an
intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form, prepared by an expert in
-13-
historic preservation and provide such survey to the Commission for its consideration
at the appeal hearing. Upon receiving a timely appeal, the Director shall schedule a
Commission hearing date. Not less than fourteen (14) days prior to the date of the
hearing, the Director shall: (1) Provide the appellant and any owner of any resource
at issue with written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing of the appeal by
first class mail; (2) Publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation
in the City; and (3) Cause a sign readable from a public point of access to be posted
on or near the property containing the resource under review stating how additional
information may be obtained.
(b) If the owner(s) is not initiating the designation, the Director shall contact the
owner(s) of the proposed landmark or landmark district outlining the reasons and effects of
designation as a landmark and, if possible, shall secure the owner or owners’ consent to such
designation. If the Director is unable to personally contact such owner(s), it shall be
sufficient to send a written request for the consent to designation of the resource(s) by first
class mail addressed to the owner(s) as shown on the most recent records of the County
Assessor at the address shown on such records. Such written request for consent shall be
deemed as having been received for purposes of § 14-33(b) upon the passage of five (5) days
from the date of mailing of the request for consent.
Sec. 14-32. Interim control of permit issuance.
CDNS shall not issue any permit for the alteration or demolition of any resource(s) on a property
or properties under consideration for designation as a Fort Collins landmark or Fort Collins
landmark district from the date of the receipt of an application, a Councilmember written request,
or a Commission motion initiating designation, all pursuant to § 14-31, until staff rejection of an
application as incomplete pursuant to § 14-31 if the rejected application is not resubmitted with
all staff identified deficiencies corrected within fourteen (14) days of the rejection, staff denial of
an application in its entirety pursuant to § 14-31, Commission termination of the designation
process pursuant to § 14-32, or final disposition of the designation by the City Council, unless
such alteration or demolition is authorized by written resolution of the Commission as not
causing an adverse effect on the eligibility of the resource(s) for designation, or by written
resolution of the City Council as necessary for public health, welfare or safety. Furthermore,
CDNS shall not issue any permit during the period in which a staff denial pursuant to § 14-31, or
a Commission authorization pursuant to this Section that no adverse effect will occur, may be
appealed and until a final decision on the appeal is rendered should a notice of appeal be filed.
This stay on the issuance of permits shall include any period for filing a notice of appeal to City
Council from a Commission decision on an appeal of a staff determination or until City Council
has made a final decision in such an appeal should a notice of appeal be filed. This Section shall
not be construed as waiving any other applicable requirements for the issuance of a permit under
the Fort Collins Municipal or Land Use Code. No delay on the issuance of permits pursuant to
this Section shall exceed one-hundred eighty (180) days unless the Director determines that the
City has followed the designation process set forth in this Article without unnecessary delay and
more time is needed to complete the designation process.
Sec. 14-33. Commission designation review.
-14-
(a) If all owners of the resource(s) or properties to be designated consent in writing to
such designation, the Commission may adopt a written resolution after holding a hearing
recommending to the City Council the designation of the landmark or landmark district
without the necessity of the notice pursuant to § 14-34 or Commission hearings described in
below Subsections (b) and (c).
(1) Written notice of the date, place, and time of the hearing shall be mailed first class to the
owners of the resource(s) at least seven (7) days prior to such hearing.
(2) At the hearing, the Commission shall determine whether the following two (2) criteria are
satisfied: (1) the proposed resource(s) is eligible for designation or that fifty (50) percent
or more of the properties within a proposed landmark district are contributing pursuant to
§ 14-22, and (2) the requested designation will advance the policies stated in § 14-1 and
the purposes stated in § 14-2 in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested
designation. If the Commission determines that both of the aforementioned criteria have
been satisfied, it shall adopt a written resolution recommending to the City Council the
designation of the landmark or landmark district and City Council shall review the
proposed designation pursuant to § 14-35. If a portion of the proposed resources in a
landmark designation application are determined to be eligible, the Commission shall
only forward a recommendation regarding the eligible resource(s) and City Council shall
only review such resource(s).
(3) If the Commission determines that the proposed resource(s) does not satisfy either, or
both, of the two (2) criteria in above Subsection (2), the Commission shall adopt a written
resolution detailing why the proposed resource(s) or properties are not eligible for
designation and the designation process shall be terminated. Such termination is
considered a final decision.
(b) If all owners of the resource(s) to be designated do not consent to designation
within ten (10) days from the date of receipt of the request for consent to designation, the
Commission shall hold a hearing at a specified time, date and place, following the giving of
notice as described in § 14-34 below. The ten (10) day period may be waived with the
agreement of all non-consenting owners of the resource(s).
(1) The purpose of said hearing shall be to determine whether pursuant to § 14-22, the
resource(s) is eligible for landmark designation or, for a landmark district application,
whether fifty (50) percent or more of the properties are contributing. CDNS shall provide
all information related to any application to demolish or alter the resource(s) or properties
that are the subject of the application and, in the Director’s discretion, a Colorado
Cultural Resource Survey Form for the resource(s) or properties. The Commission shall
adopt a written resolution stating whether the resource(s) is eligible for landmark
designation or whether fifty (50) percent or more of the properties within a proposed
landmark district are contributing and the reasons why. As part of the resolution, the
Commission may recommend modification of any proposed designation, but no proposal
may be extended beyond the boundaries of the land described in the application unless
-15-
the initiation and hearing procedures are repeated for the enlarged boundaries. If the
Commission determines that the proposed resource(s) is eligible for designation or that
fifty (50) percent or more of the properties within a proposed landmark district are
contributing, a second hearing as described in below Subsection (c) shall be scheduled. If
a portion of the proposed resources in a landmark designation application are determined
to be eligible, the Commission shall only review those resources determined to be eligible
at the second hearing.
(2) In the event the Commission determines that no resource in a landmark designation
application is eligible for landmark designation or that less than fifty (50) percent of the
properties within a proposed landmark district application are contributing, the
designation procedure shall be terminated. A Commission determination that no resource
in a landmark designation application is eligible for landmark designation or that less
than fifty (50) percent of the properties within a proposed landmark district application
are contributing is considered a final decision. Commission adoption of a written
resolution that any resource is eligible for designation or that fifty (50) percent or more of
the properties in a proposed district are contributing at the first hearing is not considered
a final decision.
(c) Upon determination by the Commission under Subsection (b)(1) that it should
further consider the designation of the resource(s) or properties and following the giving of
notice as described in § 14-34 below, the Commission shall hold a second hearing. The
purpose of this hearing shall be to determine whether the requested designation will advance
the policies stated in § 14-1 and the purposes stated in § 14-2 in a manner and extent
sufficient to justify the requested designation without the consent of one (1) or more owners
of the resource(s) or properties under review. Upon the affirmative vote of at least six (6) of
its members at the hearing, the Commission may adopt a written resolution recommending
that the City Council designate the resource(s) or properties at issue without the consent of
all of the owners because such designation is justified by the manner and extent to which the
requested designation would advance the policies stated in § 14-1 and the purposes stated in
§ 14-2. If the Commission adopts a resolution, it shall be forwarded to the City Council
pursuant to below Subsection (d) to and City Council shall decide whether to designate the
resource(s) or properties. If more than one (1) resource or property is involved in the
requested designation, the Commission may determine that designation is justified for some
or all of the resources or properties involved and City Council consideration for designation
shall be limited to the resources or properties for which such justification was found to exist.
As part of the resolution, the Commission may recommend modification of any proposed
designation, but no proposal may be extended beyond the boundaries of the land described
during the initiation of the designation process unless the initiation and hearing procedures
are repeated for the enlarged boundaries.
(1) If fewer than six (6) Commission members are able to participate in the second hearing
due to the filing of conflict of interest disclosures by all absent members, the hearing may
proceed with a minimum of four (4) members. In such a situation, the affirmative vote of
all four members shall be required to adopt a written resolution to the City Council.
-16-
(2) If at least six (6) Commission members are not present at the scheduled hearing, the
members present shall continue the hearing to another date within two (2) weeks. If at
least six (6) members are not present at the subsequent date, the hearing shall be
cancelled and the designation procedure terminated. Such termination is not considered a
final decision.
(3) If the Commission does not adopt a resolution at a hearing where at least six (6) members
are present, or four (4) members as described in above Subsection (1), the designation
procedure shall be terminated. Such termination is not considered a final decision.
(d) Should the Commission adopt a written resolution pursuant to above Subsections
(a) or (c), it shall transmit such resolution to the City Council within fifteen (15) days after
adoption. The resolution adopted in above Subsection (b)(1) shall be transmitted along with
any resolution adopted pursuant to Subsection (c).
(e) Reasonable opportunity shall be provided for all interested parties to express their
opinions at the foregoing hearings regarding the proposed designation. However, nothing
contained herein shall be construed to prevent the Commission from establishing reasonable
rules to govern the proceedings of the hearings or from establishing reasonable limits on the
length of individual presentations. The hearings shall be recorded and minutes provided to
each City Councilmember. If any hearing is continued, the time, date and place of the
continuation shall be established and announced to those present at such time as the new
time, date, and place is established. Such information shall be promptly forwarded, by first
class mail, to the owners of record as established and addressed pursuant to § 14-34.
Sec. 14-34. Notice of hearings.
Notice of the hearings referenced in § 14-33(b), § 14-33(c), and § 14-35 for hearings where not
all of the owners consent to designation shall be given as follows:
(a) Written notice of the time, date, place and subject of the hearing shall be sent by
first class mail not less than thirty (30) days prior to the hearing to all owners of record on the
date of the application who own the resource(s) being proposed for designation as a landmark
or landmark district. Such notice shall be deemed delivered upon the passage of five (5) days
from the date of mailing of the notice.
(b) Signs indicating that landmark designation is being considered by the
Commission shall be posted by staff for a period of not less than fifteen (15) days
immediately preceding the applicable hearing on all properties containing resources(s)
proposed for Fort Collins landmark designation or on the boundaries of all areas proposed for
Fort Collins landmark district designations. Such signs shall be prominently displayed and
easily readable from abutting public ways.
(c) A legal notice indicating the nature of the hearings, the resource(s) involved and
the time, date and place of the scheduled public hearing shall be published in a local
newspaper of general circulation one (1) time at least fifteen (15) days prior to the hearing.
-17-
(d) Notice indicating the nature of the hearings, resource(s) involved and the time,
date and place of the scheduled public hearing shall be placed on the City’s website.
Sec. 14-35. City Council action.
Upon receipt of any recommendation regarding a proposed designation transmitted by the
Commission pursuant to § 14-33(a)(1) or § 14-33(c), the City Council shall schedule a hearing to
consider the designation on a date as early as reasonably practicable but no more than seventy-
five (75) calendar days after receipt of the recommendation. Such seventy-five (75) day period
may be extended upon majority vote of the City Council members present at the time the vote is
taken.
(a) The hearing is considered quasi-judicial in nature and the City Council may
receive new evidence and argument not presented to the Commission. At the hearing, the
City Council shall determine whether the following two (2) criteria are satisfied: (1) the
proposed resource(s) is eligible for designation or that fifty (50) percent or more of the
properties within a proposed landmark district are contributing pursuant to § 14-22, and (2)
the requested designation will advance the policies stated in § 14-1 and the purposes stated in
§ 14-2 in a manner and extent sufficient to justify the requested designation.
(b) In making its decision on the designation, the City Council shall give due
consideration to the views of owners of affected resource(s) and the Commission’s
resolutions and recommendation. If the City Council determines that the two (2) criteria in
above Subsection (a) have been satisfied, it shall designate the resource(s) or properties as a
Fort Collins landmark or landmark district by ordinance.
(c) For recommendations received pursuant to § 14-33(a)(1) where all owners
consent to designation, the City Council may approve a designation by adopting an ordinance
on the consent agenda in lieu of a hearing provided such ordinance contains detailed findings
that satisfy the standards for designation set forth in this Section.
Sec. 14-36. Recording with County Clerk.
Within fifteen (15) days of the effective date of an ordinance designating a resource(s) or
properties as a Fort Collins landmark or Fort Collins landmark district, the City shall record
among the real estate records of the County Clerk and Recorder a certified copy of the ordinance
designating the specified resource(s) or properties.
Sec. 14-37. Final notification to owner.
Within fifteen (15) days of the effective date of an ordinance designating a resource(s) or
properties as a Fort Collins landmark or Fort Collins landmark district, the Director shall send to
the owner of each resource or property so designated a letter outlining the reasons for such
designation and the obligations and restrictions created by such designation. Such letter shall also
contain a request that the owner or his or her successors or assigns notify the Director prior to the
-18-
preparation of plans for the alteration, relocation, or demolition of improvements on such
resource(s) or properties.
Sec 14-38. Limitation on resubmission and reconsideration of proposed designation.
For one (1) year, no person or persons shall submit an application for designation pursuant to §
14-31 that is the same or substantially the same as a proposal for which:
(a) Staff determined that the resource(s) or properties contained in an application for
designation were not eligible for designation pursuant to § 14-31;
(b) The designation process was terminated pursuant to § 14-33; or
(c) City Council decided to not designate pursuant to §14-35
The one (1) year time period shall be measured from the latter of the date of the occurrence of
any of the above three (3) events or the date a final decision is rendered in any appeal to the
Commission or Council for events (1) or (2). The one (1) year prohibition on submitting the
same or substantially the same application may be waived by the Director upon a showing of
changed circumstances that demonstrate the need for designation of the resource(s) or district.
Sec. 14-39. Amendment or rescission of designation.
A Fort Collins landmark and Fort Collins landmark district designation may be amended or
rescinded in the same manner as the original designation was made.
Sec. 14-40. Notification of state or national designation.
The Director shall promptly notify the Commission of any known national or state designations
which occur within the City.
ARTICLE IV.
DESIGN REVIEW OF PROPOSED ALTERATIONS TO DESIGNATED RESOURCES
Sec. 14-51. Alterations to designated resources requiring a certificate of appropriateness
or report.
(a) Except as provided in § 14-8, no person shall make, or otherwise cause to be
made, any alteration described in Subsection (b) to any designated resource described in this
Subsection (a) unless such person has first obtained a certificate of appropriateness or the
Commission has issued a report to the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer as
follows:
(1) Fort Collins landmarks or contributing or non-contributing resources within Fort Collins
landmark districts, whether designated on the Colorado State Register of Historic
-19-
Properties or the National Register of Historic Places, require a certificate of
appropriateness issued pursuant to the requirements of this Article.
(2) Resources designated on the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties or the
National Register of Historic Places, and that are not Fort Collins landmarks or within
Fort Collins landmark districts, require a report to the Colorado State Historic
Preservation Officer issued pursuant to the requirements of this Article.
(b) The following proposed alterations to the designated resources listed in above
Subsection (a) require a certificate of appropriateness or Commission report:
(1) Alteration of any land surface, including the addition or removal of any improvement to
or from any land surface, that is within or part of any designated resource listed in above
Subsection (a).
(2) Exterior alterations, including windows or siding replacement, or partial or total
demolition of any designated resource listed in above Subsection (a).
(3) Alteration of any interior space of a designated resource listed above in Subsection (a)
that is readily visible from any public street, alley, park or other public place.
(c) Any person proposing any alteration to a designated resource that requires a
certificate of appropriateness or report pursuant to this Section shall submit an application
pursuant to § 14-52.
(d) If any alteration is made without first obtaining a certificate of appropriateness,
the City may issue a stop work order for any permits issued for the property upon which the
designated resource is located, refuse to finalize any issued permits, refuse to issue a
certificate of occupancy, refuse to issue additional City permits, and take any other available
action, or any combination of the aforementioned, until the applicant has applied for and
received approval for the alteration. If the alteration is not approved, the property owner
shall restore the site, structure, or object to its original condition prior to any alteration
occurring.
(e) In the design review process, the staff and Commission consider the unique
circumstances of each proposed alteration. Therefore, previous approval of a specific
alteration of a designated resource in one setting and set of circumstances does not
necessarily set a precedent for the approval of future proposed alterations that may appear to
be similar but actually present their own unique circumstances.
Sec. 14-52. Stay on Issuance of City Permits.
Except as provided in § 14-8, no City permit shall be issued to allow any alteration to a
designated resource described in § 14-51 until a certificate of appropriateness or report has been
issued pursuant to this Article and, for certificates of appropriateness, the period for filing a
notice of appeal has passed or until a final decision on an appeal is rendered should a notice be
-20-
filed. This stay on the issuance of permits shall include any period for filing a notice of appeal to
City Council from a Commission decision on an appeal of a staff determination or until City
Council has made a final decision in such an appeal should a notice of appeal be filed.
Sec. 14-53. – Applications and staff design review and issuance of reports.
(a) To request a certificate of appropriateness or report to the Colorado State Historic
Preservation Officer, the applicant shall submit a design review application on forms
provided by staff with additional documents as staff may require in order to fully evaluate the
request. Such additional documents may include, but are not limited to, photographs,
illustrations, proposed building materials, and plans. Plans may include, without limitation, a
plan of protection showing how the applicant will ensure that no damage will occur to any
historic resource on or adjacent to the site. Staff may require a current intensive-level
Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form. The applicant shall reimburse the City for the
cost of having such a survey generated by a third-party expert selected by the City. Upon
receipt of a complete application, staff may refer any application to the Commission for
review pursuant to § 14-54. If staff retains the application for review, staff shall determine
whether the proposed alteration meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the
Treatment of Historic Properties and any applicable City standards adopted by ordinance for
historic resources (the “Standards”). Staff review of applications for certificates of
appropriateness is addressed in below Subsection (b) and staff review of applications for
issuance of reports is addressed in below Subsection (c).
(b) Staff Design Review of Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness.
(1) Alterations Meeting the Standards. If staff determines that a proposed alteration to a Fort
Collins landmark or resource(s) within a Fort Collins landmark district, contributing or
non-contributing, meets the Standards, staff shall approve the application and issue a
certificate of appropriateness. A certificate of appropriateness shall include, but not be
limited to, a statement that the requested alterations have been approved pursuant to this
Article, the date of approval, a copy of the design review application and the plans and
specifications being approved.
a. Staff shall promptly send the applicant a copy of the certificate of appropriateness
by first class mail.
b. The proposed alteration shall not be commenced until staff has issued the
certificate of appropriateness and the applicant has obtained all applicable permits,
subject to §14-52. Alterations shall conform to the plans and specifications that staff
approved in connection with issuance of the certificate of appropriateness or the
report and deviations from such plans and specifications shall not occur unless such
changes are first submitted to and approved by staff in the same manner as the
original application. If non-conforming alterations are made, the City may issue a
stop work order, refuse to finalize any issued permit, refuse to issue a certificate of
occupancy, refuse to issue additional City permits, and take any other available
action, or any combination of the aforementioned, until the applicant has applied for
-21-
and received approval for the non-conforming alteration. If the non-conforming
alteration is not approved, the applicant shall restore the site, structure, or object to
conform with the approved plans and specifications or the original condition of the
site, structure, or object prior to any alteration occurring.
c. A certificate of appropriateness shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of
issuance and, thereafter, may be extended for one (1) additional year provided staff
determines that the proposed alteration continues to comply with the Standards. To
be eligible for such extension, staff must receive an extension request on forms
provided by staff accompanied by all required information at least thirty (30) days
prior to the expiration of the certificate of appropriateness.
(2) Alterations Not Meeting the Standards. If staff determines that a proposed alteration to a
Fort Collins landmark or resource(s) within a Fort Collins landmark district, contributing
or non-contributing, does not meet the Standards, staff shall deny the application and
inform the applicant in writing sent by first class mail of the specific reasons for such
denial.
a. Upon denial of the application, the Director shall deny the application for a
building or other permit associated with the proposed alterations and shall inform the
applicant of such denial.
b. No application shall be resubmitted pursuant to this Section under the original
plans and specifications denied by staff except upon a showing of changed
circumstances sufficient to justify the resubmittal.
(c) Staff Review of Applications for Reports. Staff shall issue a report to the Colorado
State Historic Preservation Officer for applications to alter any resource that is not a Fort
Collins landmark or within a Fort Collins landmark district but is designated on the Colorado
State Register of Historic Properties or the National Register of Historic Places. Such report
shall include, but not be limited to, a determination whether the proposed alterations meet the
Standards, the date of report issuance, and a copy of the design review application and the
plans and specifications reviewed. Staff issued reports are not subject to appeal.
Sec. 14-54. Commission design review and issuance of reports.
This Section sets forth the procedure for a Commission design review hearing upon staff referral
of an application to the Commission for design review pursuant to § 14-53(a).
(a) Commission Design Review of Applications for Certificates of Appropriateness.
(1) Hearing Notice. Notice for a Commission design review hearing shall be
provided as follows:
-22-
a. Not less than thirty (30) days prior to the hearing, the applicant shall be notified of
the hearing and staff shall post the date, place, time, and subject of the hearing to the
City’s website.
b. At least fourteen (14) days prior to the hearing, staff shall post a sign on or near
the property containing the resource undergoing Commission design review stating
that such resource is under review. Said sign shall be readable from a point of public
access and shall remain posted until the Commission has concluded its review of the
application.
(2) Hearing Procedure. The Commission shall conduct the hearing in two (2) phases
as follows:
a. Conceptual review. Conceptual review is the first phase of the hearing and is an
opportunity for the applicant to discuss requirements, standards, design issues and
policies that apply to designated resources. Problems can be identified and solved
prior to final review of the application. Conceptual review of any proposed alteration
may be limited to certain portions of the work as deemed appropriate by the
Commission. The applicant may waive the conceptual review and proceed directly to
a final review.
b. Final review. Each application may be finally reviewed and decided upon by the
Commission at the same meeting as the Commission's conceptual review of the
application, if any, or at a subsequent meeting of the Commission. During final
review, the Commission shall consider the application and any changes made by the
applicant since conceptual review as set forth in this Subsection.
(3) Alterations to Fort Collins Landmarks Meeting the Standards. If the Commission
determines that a proposed alteration to a Fort Collins landmark or resource(s) within a
Fort Collins landmark district, contributing or non-contributing, meets the Standards, the
Commission shall approve the application and issue a certificate of appropriateness. A
certificate of appropriateness shall include, but not be limited to, a statement that the
requested alterations have been approved pursuant to this Article, the date of approval, a
copy of the design review application and the plans and specifications being approved.
a. The proposed alteration shall not commence until the Commission has issued the
certificate of appropriateness and the applicant has obtained all applicable permits,
subject to §14-52. Alterations shall conform to the plans and specifications that the
Commission approved in connection with issuance of the certificate of
appropriateness or the report and deviations from such plans and specifications shall
not occur unless such changes are first submitted to and approved by the Commission
in the same manner as the original application. If non-conforming alterations are
made, the City may issue a stop work order, refuse to finalize any issued permit,
refuse to issue a certificate of occupancy, refuse to issue additional City permits, and
take any other available action, or any combination of the aforementioned, until the
applicant has applied for and received approval for the non-conforming alteration. If
-23-
the non-conforming alteration is not approved, the applicant shall restore the site,
structure, or object to conform with the approved plans and specifications or to the
original condition of the site, structure, or object prior to any alteration occurring.
b. A certificate of appropriateness shall be valid for one (1) year from the date of
issuance and, thereafter, may be extended for one (1) additional year provided the
Commission determines that the proposed alteration continues to comply with the
Standards. To be eligible for such extension, the Commission must receive an
extension request on forms provided by staff accompanied by all required information
at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the certificate of appropriateness.
(4) Alterations to Local Landmarks Not Meeting the Standards. If the Commission
determines that a proposed alteration to a Fort Collins landmark or resource(s) within a
Fort Collins landmark district, contributing or non-contributing, does not meet the
Standards, the Commission shall deny the application and inform the applicant in writing
of the specific reasons for such denial.
a. Upon denial of the application, the Director shall deny the application for a
building or other permit associated with the proposed alterations and shall inform the
applicant of such denial.
b. No application shall be resubmitted pursuant to this Section under the original
plans and specifications denied by the Commission except upon a showing of change
circumstances sufficient to justify the resubmittal.
(b) Commission Review of Applications for Reports. The Commission shall issue a
report to the Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer for applications to alter any
resource that is not a Fort Collins landmark or within a Fort Collins landmark district but is
designated on the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties or the National Register of
Historic Places. Such report shall include, but not be limited to, a determination whether the
proposed alterations meet the standards, the date of report issuance, and a copy of the design
review application and the plans and specifications reviewed. Commission issued reports are
not subject to appeal.
Sec. 14-55. Appeal of certificate of appropriateness decisions.
Staff denial of a certificate of appropriateness pursuant to § 14-53 may be appealed to the
Commission by the applicant. A notice of appeal shall be in writing and filed with the Director
within fourteen (14) days of the date of mailing by staff of the reasons for denial. The appeal
shall include an intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form, prepared by an expert
in historic preservation acceptable to the Director and the appellant, with the completion cost of
such survey to be paid by the appellant. Such survey need not be filed with the appeal but must
be filed at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing of the appeal. The Commission shall schedule
a date for hearing the appeal as expeditiously as possible. Not less than fourteen (14) days prior
to the date of the hearing, the Director shall: (1) Provide the appellant and any owner of any
resource at issue with written notice of the date, time and place of the hearing of the appeal by
-24-
first class mail; (2) Publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper of general circulation in the
City; and (3) Cause a sign readable from a public point of access to be posted on or near the
property containing the resource under review stating how additional information may be
obtained. Commission final decisions are subject to appeal pursuant to the appeal provisions
contained in Fort Collins Municipal Code Chapter 2, Article 2, Division 3. Staff or Commission
issuance of reports pursuant to § 14-53(c) or § 14-54(b) is not subject to appeal.
Sec. 14-56. Normal repair and maintenance.
Nothing in this Article shall be construed to prohibit the alteration of any designated resource
necessary as a part of normal repair and maintenance when such alteration will not change the
exterior appearance or materials or the interior support structure of such designated resource,
including the character or appearance of the land itself. Normal repair and maintenance shall not
include the replacement of windows or siding to the extent such replacement is governed by §
14-51.
Section 3. That Article V of Chapter 14 of the Code of the City of Fort Collins is
hereby amended to read as follows:
ARTICLE V.
LANDMARK REHABILITATION LOAN PROGRAM
Sec. 14-81. Purpose.
The City Council hereby establishes a landmark rehabilitation loan program and finds that the
program promotes a valid public purpose of increasing the quality, exterior integrity and
permanence of the City's stock of historic landmarks for the enjoyment and benefit of present
and future generations of citizens of the City by making available a source of funding for
rehabilitation of such structures to the owners of designated Fort Collins landmarks or
contributing structures in designated Fort Collins landmark districtsa source of funding for
exterior rehabilitation of such structures.
Sec. 14-82. Establishment; funding.
The City Manager shall administer the program for awarding zero-interest loans for the
rehabilitation of Fort Collins landmark structures and/or contributing structures in Fort Collins
landmark districts. The City Manager may promulgate procedural rules and regulations for the
efficient administration of the program. No such loan shall exceed the sum of seven thousand
five hundred dollars ($7,500.00) unless the City Council, by ordinance or resolution, authorizes a
larger loan. All loans shall be funded solely from those funds held by the City for financial
support of the program and appropriated for such use in the General Fund, and all loans shall be
expressly contingent upon the availability of sufficient funds to support the loan. Loan recipients
shall, as a condition of obtaining the loan, agree to repay the loan in full upon sale or transfer of
the property. All loan repayments shall be returned to the landmark rehabilitation loan program.
-25-
Sec. 14-83. - Criteria.
No landmark rehabilitation loan shall be awarded unless the following criteria and requirements
have been met:
(1) The subject structure must have been designated as a Fort Collins landmark or be
a contributing structure in a Fort Collins landmark district pursuant to this Chapter
before the landmark rehabilitation loan can be awarded.
(2) All loan recipients shall provide matching funds in an amount equal to or greater
than the amount of the loan.
(3) The matching funds provided by the loan recipient may be utilized only for
exterior rehabilitation of the subject property and/or the stabilization of the
structure, the rehabilitation of electrical, heating or plumbing systems, and/or the
rehabilitation or installation of fire sprinkling systems in commercial structures.
Neither the loan nor the matching funds shall be used for the installation of nor
rehabilitation of signage or interior rehabilitation or decoration, nor the
installation of building additions or the addition of architectural or decorative
elements which are not part of the landmarked structure.
(4) Loan funds may be expended only for rehabilitation of the exterior of a
designated Fort Collins landmark structure or contributing structure in a Fort
Collins landmark district or for work that improves the energy efficiency and
performance of any such structure. No interior improvements other than those that
improve energy efficiency and performance while meeting the requirements in
below Subsection (5) may be purchasedaccomplished utilizing City loan funds.
(5) The standards and/or guidelines of the City and the United States Secretary of the
Interior for the preservation, reconstruction, restoration or rehabilitation of
historic resources then in effect shall serve as the standards by which all
rehabilitation work must be performed.
(6) No loan funds shall be disbursed until after the recipient has completed the work,
the work has been physically inspected by the City and has been approved by the
City Manager, and the loan recipient has documented the cost of the work by
submitting to the City copies of all bills, invoices, work orders and/or such other
documentation showing, to the satisfaction of the City, that the funds requested
have been spent on eligible work, are reasonable, and are supported by actual
proof of expense.
(7) Loan recipients shall, as a condition of the loan, prominently place a sign upon the
property being rehabilitated stating that such rehabilitation has been funded, in
part, through the City's landmark rehabilitation loan program.
-26-
(8) Property owners who have previously received loans shall be eligible for
subsequent loans.
(9) All rehabilitation work shall be completed within one (1) year from the date upon
which the loan was awarded; provided, however, that upon application and a
showing of good cause as to why the project cannot be timely completed, the
Commission may authorize an extension of up to one (1) additional year for
completion of the work.
(10) No landmark rehabilitation loan shall be awarded unless the Commission (or in
cases of loans exceeding the maximum amounts established herein, the City
Council) first determines that:
a. The applicant has demonstrated an effort to return the structure to its
original appearance;
b. It is in the best interests of the public welfare that the structure proposed to
be rehabilitated be preserved for future generations; and
c. The amount proposed to be spent on exteriorthe rehabilitation is
reasonable under the circumstances.
(11) No landmark rehabilitation loan shall be awarded unless the loan recipient has, as
a condition of obtaining the loan, agreed to repay the loan in full upon sale or
transfer of the property.
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of
February, A.D. 2019, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of March, A.D. 2019.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
-27-
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of March, A.D. 2019.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
-1-
ORDINANCE NO. 035, 2019
OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FORT COLLINS
AMENDING LAND USE CODE SECTIONS 3.4.7 AND 5.1.2
PERTAINING TO HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES
WHEREAS, on December 2, 1997, by its adoption of Ordinance No. 190, 1997, the City
Council enacted the Fort Collins Land Use Code (the "Land Use Code"); and
WHEREAS, at the time of the adoption of the Land Use Code, it was the understanding
of staff and the City Council that the Land Use Code would most likely be subject to future
amendments, not only for the purpose of clarification and correction of errors, but also for the
purpose of ensuring that the Land Use Code remains a dynamic document capable of responding
to issues identified by staff, other land use professionals and citizens of the City; and
WHEREAS, City historic preservation staff has completed a two-year review to identify
changes to the City’s historic preservation regulations that will promote greater clarity,
effectiveness, and predictability in the administration of historic preservation within the City;
and
WHEREAS, as a result of the review, City staff is recommending changes to Land Use
Code Section 3.4.7 to City Council; and
WHEREAS, on December 20, 2018, and January 17, 2019, the Planning and Zoning
Board unanimously recommended that City Council adopt the proposed changes to Land Use
Code Section 3.4.7; and
WHEREAS, on December 19, 2018, the Landmark Preservation Commission
unanimously recommended that City Council adopt the proposed changes to Land Use Code
Section 3.4.7; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that the recommended Land Use Code
amendments are in the best interests of the City and its citizens.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF FORT COLLINS as follows:
Section 1. That the City Council hereby makes and adopts the determinations and
findings contained in the recitals set forth above.
Section 2. That Section 3.4.7 of the Land Use Code is hereby repealed in its entirety
and reenacted as follows:
3.4.7 Historic and Cultural Resources
(A) Purpose.
-2-
(1) The purpose of this Section is to ensure that proposed development is compatible
with and protects historic resources by ensuring that:
(a) Historic resources on a development site are preserved, adaptively reused,
and incorporated into the proposed development;
(b) Development does not adversely affect the integrity of historic resources
on nearby property within the area of adjacency surrounding a
development site; and
(c) The design of new structures and site plans are compatible with and
protect the integrity of historic resources located within a development site
and within the area of adjacency surrounding a development site.
(2) To accomplish its purpose, this Section provides:
(a) The requirements for the treatment of historic resources located on a
development site; and
(b) The standards for design compatibility between proposed development
and historic resources on a development site and within the delineated area
of adjacency surrounding a development site.
(c) This Section is intended to work in conjunction with the standards for the
treatment of historic resources set forth in Chapter 14 of the Fort Collins
Municipal Code and any relevant adopted standards for historic resources.
(B) Historic Resources on the Development Site and within the Area of Adjacency.
(1) As used in this Section, the area of adjacency shall mean an area, the outer
boundary of which is two hundred (200) feet in all directions from the perimeter
of the development site. Any lot or parcel of property shall be considered within
the area of adjacency if any portion of such lot or parcel is within the two hundred
(200) foot outer boundary.
(2) Historic preservation staff shall identify as expeditiously as possible the historic
resources on the development site and within the area of adjacency to be used for
application of the design standards contained in below Subsection (E), Design
Requirements for a Proposed Development, and provide a list of such resources to
the applicant. The procedure for identifying the relevant historic resources shall
be as follows:
(a) The location of the following shall be identified within the area of
adjacency:
1. Any historic resource; and
-3-
2. Any building, site, structure, and object that requires evaluation as
to whether it is eligible for Fort Collins landmark designation and,
therefore, qualifies as a historic resource.
(b) All historic resources on the development site shall be identified and the
procedure in below Subsection (C)(1) shall be completed if necessary.
(c) Any building, site, structure, or object requiring evaluation shall be
reviewed for eligibility for Fort Collins landmark designation pursuant to
below Subsection (C)(2).
(d) Any historic resource identified in above steps (a), (b), or (c) shall be the
historic resources utilized as the basis for applying Subsection (E).
Identified historic resources on the development site and within the area of
adjacency shall be classified as follows for purposes of applying the
design standards set forth in the below Subsection (E):
1. Historic resources on the development site, or abutting or on the
other side of a side alley that abuts the development site; and
2. All other historic resources.
(e) The historic comparison boundary shall be established at two hundred
(200) feet in all directions from the perimeter of each identified historic
resource except those located on the development site. The historic
influence area formed by the overlapping area between the outer boundary
of the development site and the historic comparison boundary is the area
within which the standards in below Subsection (E) apply to any new
construction proposed within such area.
(f) The historic influence area for any historic resource located on the
development site shall be the entire development site.
-4-
Example of Area of Adjacency, Historic Comparison Boundary, and Historic Influence
Area
(3) The historic preservation staff determination pursuant to this Section of the
historic resources relevant to the application of the design standards set forth in
below Subsection (E) is not subject to appeal. Notwithstanding, eligibility
determinations pursuant to below Subsection (C)(1) are subject to appeal pursuant
to Fort Collins Municipal Code Section 14-23.
(C) Determination of Eligibility for Designation as Fort Collins Landmark.
The review of proposed development pursuant to this Section may require the
determination of the eligibility of buildings, sites, structures, and objects located both on
the development site and in the area of adjacency for designation as Fort Collins
landmarks. The determination of eligibility for designation as a Fort Collins landmark
shall be made pursuant to the standards and procedures set forth in Sections 14-22 and
14-23 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code except as varied in below Subsections (C)(1)
and (2).
(1) Buildings, Sites, Structure, and Objects on a Development Site. If any buildings,
sites, structures, or objects on a development site are fifty (50) years of age or
older and lack an official determination of eligibility for Fort Collins landmark
designation made within the last five (5) years, the applicant must request an
official eligibility determination for each such building, site, structure, or object
pursuant to Sections 14-22 and 14-23 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. A
current intensive-level Colorado Cultural Resource Survey Form is required for
each building, site, structure, and object and the applicant is responsible for
reimbursing the City for the cost of having such a property survey generated by a
third-party expert selected by the City.
-5-
(2) Buildings, Sites, Structures, and Objects Within the Area of Adjacency. If any
buildings, sites, structures, or objects outside of a development site but within the
area of adjacency are fifty (50) years of age or older and lack an official
determination of eligibility for Fort Collins landmark designation established
within the last five (5) years, the applicant must request a non-binding
determination of eligibility for each such building, site, structure, or object
pursuant to Sections 14-22 and 14-23 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code.
Notwithstanding Sections 14-22 and 14-23, any such eligibility determination
shall not be appealable pursuant to Section 14-23 and shall not be valid for any
purpose other than the evaluation of the proposed development pursuant to this
Section. A current architectural-level property survey is required for each
building, site, structure, and object and the applicant is responsible for
reimbursing the City for the cost of having such a property survey generated by a
third-party expert selected by the City. The Director, in consultation with historic
preservation staff, may waive the required eligibility determination for any
building, site, structure, or object if the Director determines that such eligibility
determination would be unnecessarily duplicative of information provided by
existing historic resources or would not provide relevant information.
(D) Treatment of Historic Resources on Development Sites – Design Review.
(1) Proposed alterations, as such alterations are described in Fort Collins Municipal
Code Chapter 14, Article III, to any Fort Collins landmark on a development site
or to any portion of the development site located within a Fort Collins historic
district must comply with the design review requirements in Chapter 14, Article
III, of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. The applicant must obtain a certificate of
appropriateness for all proposed alterations pursuant to Chapter 14 before
receiving a Landmark Preservation Commission recommendation pursuant to
below Subsection (F).
(2) Proposed alterations to any building, site, structure, or object located on the
development site that is not a Fort Collins landmark but is designated on the
Colorado State Register of Historic Properties, either individually or contributing
to a district, or the National Register of Historic Places, either individually or
contributing to a district, must comply with the design review requirements in
Chapter 14, Article III, of the Fort Collins Municipal Code. The applicant must
obtain a report pursuant to Chapter 14 regarding all proposed alterations before
receiving a Landmark Preservation Commission recommendation pursuant to
below Subsection (F). Additionally, to the maximum extent feasible, the
development plan and building design shall provide for the preservation and
adaptive use of any such building, site, structure, or object.
(3) To the maximum extent feasible, the development plan and building design shall
provide for the preservation and adaptive use pursuant to the Secretary of the
Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties of any building, site,
-6-
structure, or object located on the development site and determined to be eligible
for Fort Collins landmark designation either through a binding or non-binding
determination pursuant to Land Use Code Section 3.4.7(C). This requirement
shall apply to development applications including building permit applications for
partial or total demolition of, or work that may have an adverse effect on, any
building, site, structure, or object located on the development site and determined
to be eligible for Fort Collins landmark designation.
(E) Design Requirements for a Proposed Development.
(1) Design Compatibility. Proposed development may represent the architecture and
construction standards of its own time but must also convey a standard of quality
and durability appropriate for infill in a historic context and protect and
complement the historic character of historic resources both on the development
site and within the area of adjacency. The design of development on development
sites containing historic resources or with historic resources located within the
area of adjacency shall meet the requirements in below Table 1 in addition to
applicable Land Use Code requirements. The Table 1 requirements shall apply to
the development of buildings or structures, other than those addressed in above
Subsection (D), on the development site located within a historic influence area,
as such term is defined in above Subsection (B)(4), as follows:
(a) If one (1) or more historic influence areas exist that are associated with
historic resource(s) on the development site, or which abut or are on the
other side of a side alley that abuts the development site, then all historic
influence areas shall be considered to be associated with such historic
resource(s) and the standards set forth in Table 1, Column A, shall apply.
If two (2) or more historic influence areas exist that are associated with
historic resources on the development site, or which abut or are on the
other side of a side alley that abuts the development site, the applicant may
satisfy the standards set forth in Table 1, Column A, by choosing
characteristics from one (1) or more of such historic resources.
(b) If no historic influence areas exist that are associated with historic
resources on the development site, or which abut or are on the other side
of a side alley that abuts the development site, the standards set forth in
Table 1, Column B, shall apply to all historic influence areas.
-7-
-8-
(2) Old Town Historic District. Proposed development within the Old Town Historic
District shall comply with the Old Town Historic District Standards adopted by
Ordinance 094, 2014, Chapter 14 of the Fort Collins Municipal Code, and the
U.S. Secretary of the Interior Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties in
lieu of the requirements set forth in this Section except Subsections (D) and (F).
(3) Plan of Protection. A plan of protection shall be submitted prior to the Landmark
Preservation Commission providing a recommendation pursuant to below
Subsection (F) that details the particular considerations and protective measures
that will be employed to prevent short-term and long-term material damage and
avoidable impact to identified historic resources on the development site and
within the area of adjacency from demolition, new construction, and operational
activities.
(F) Landmark Preservation Commission Recommendation.
Recommendation to Decision Maker for Development Proposal. The Landmark Preservation
Commission shall provide a written recommendation to the decision maker for development sites
containing or adjacent to historic resources, or both. The written recommendation shall address
compliance of the proposed development with this Section and applicable Municipal Code
Chapter 14, Article III requirements and the decision maker shall consider such recommendation
in making its final decision. Notwithstanding, the Director may waive the requirement for a
Landmark Preservation Commission recommendation if the Director, after considering the
recommendation of historic preservation staff, has issued a written determination that the
development plan would not have an adverse effect on any historic resource on the development
site or within the proposed development’s area of adjacency and that the development plan is
compatible with the existing character of such historic resources. A recommendation made
under this Subsection is not appealable to the City Council under Chapter 2 of the Fort Collins
Municipal Code.
Section 3. That Section 5.1.2 of the Land Use Code is hereby amended by the
addition of the following definitions:
Adverse effect, for purposes of Section 3.4.7 only, shall mean that a project or undertaking may
alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics that qualify a property for designation in a
manner that would diminish the property's integrity. Adverse effects may include reasonably
foreseeable effects caused by the undertaking that may occur later in time, be removed in
distance, or be cumulative.
Development site shall mean the real property, whether consisting of one (1) or more lots or
areas of land, that is the subject of any application allowed under the Land Use Code.
-9-
Historic comparison boundary shall mean the two hundred (200) foot boundary measured in all
directions from the perimeter of each historic resource identified in Section 3.4.7(B)(2)(a), (b), or
(c).
Historic influence area shall mean the overlapping area formed when the outer boundary of a
development site and a historic comparison boundary overlap.
Historic preservation staff shall mean City Historic Preservation Division staff who meet the
professional qualification standards provided in Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61.
Historic resource shall mean a building, site, structure, or object that is located on a lot, lots, or
area of property and is (1) designated as a Fort Collins landmark or is contributing to a Fort
Collins landmark district; (2) designated on the Colorado State Register of Historic Properties,
either individually or contributing to a district, or the National Register of Historic Places, either
individually or contributing to a district; or (3) determined to be eligible for designation as a Fort
Collins landmark either through a binding or non-binding determination pursuant to Land Use
Code Section 3.4.7(C).
Massing shall refer to the perception of the overall shape, form, and size of a building.
Object, for purposes of Section 3.4.7 only, shall mean a material thing of functional, aesthetic,
cultural, historical or scientific value that may be, by nature or design, movable.
Side alley, for purposes of Section 3.4.7 only, shall mean a minor way used primarily for
vehicular or pedestrian access to the side, rather than the rear, of a historic resource. On a corner
where a historic resource and a development site are divided by a single alley that serves as a
side alley for the historic resource and a rear alley for the development site, the alley shall be
considered a side alley.
Site, for purposes of Section 3.4.7 only, shall mean the location of a significant event, a
prehistoric or historic occupation or activity or a structure or object whether standing, ruined or
vanished, where the location itself maintains historical or archeological value regardless of the
value of any existing structure.
Solid-to-void pattern shall mean the area of the façade covered by openings divided by the area
of the solid wall, as a measure of the proportion of the area of fenestrations to that of the wall.
-10-
Introduced, considered favorably on first reading, and ordered published this 19th day of
February, A.D. 2019, and to be presented for final passage on the 5th day of March, A.D. 2019.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
Passed and adopted on final reading on the 5th day of March, A.D. 2019.
__________________________________
Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________________
City Clerk
• SS 8: Impacts goals to support self-
sufficiency by addressing safety,
accessibility, housing assistance.
• SS 9: Retrofitting existing building stock
improves housing opportunities.
• SS 10: Retrofitting homes can address
home health needs.
Negative
• None
Tradeoffs
• Retention of our unique community character and adaptive reuse of historic buildings is always working in balance with infill
development, increasing density, and improved accessibility and affordability. Many precedents in this and other communities
demonstrate this can be successfully done when creativity and compromise are brought to bear to achieve multiple positive outcomes.
Mitigations
• Programs that address targeted needs for property owners and occupants at all income levels
• Programs that combine improved energy-performance with retention of historic architectural character and building stabilization.
Key Alignment:
• EH 3.4: Foster infill and redevelopment that enhances the community;
• NLSH 1.5: Guide development through community planning, historic preservation, and efficient and effective development review;
• ENV 4.1: Achieve Climate Action Plan (CAP) 2020 goals and continue progress toward the 2030 goals
• ENV 4.4: Achieve 2020 Energy Policy goals and work toward long-term net zero energy.
ATTACHMENT 6