Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutREMINGTON ANNEX - MOD. OF STANDARDS - MOD120002 - DECISION - CORRESPONDENCE-HEARINGLandmark Preservation Commission January 11, 2012 - 5 - when it is moved, the integrity of location is gone. The integrity of settting, feeling, association, and location would have all been diminished, if not entirely wiped out by the move. A question was asked if a building is nonnally moved and then a determination is made. Ms. McWilliams stated that in the past a lot more information has been provided which allowed the Commission to identify integrity aspects and determine whether or not the building would have sufficient integrity in its new location prior to approval of the move. She reiterated that the Commission would have to identify what additional information is necessary. Discussion ensued regarding the progress of the Planning and Zoning review. Mr. Larson stated they have had the Conceptual Review and the official POP submittal. They have conducted a neighborhood outreach meeting and submitted a request for Modification of Standards. There is another submittal scheduled for January 191h Ms. McWilliams reviewed the seven aspects of integrity that the Commission needs to consider in order to approve a motion to relocate the building: integrity of location; of design; of setting; of materials; of workmanship; of feeling; and of setting. There was discussion regarding the loss of integrity to the Button House if the move is approved. Mr. Sladek stated that he was not comfortable with making a decision about the integrity until the house is at its future site. It will lose integrity when it is moved, and the integrity at the new location is yet to be determined. The Commission needs to find that the relocation of the building to whatever site it agrees upon retains the building's individual eligibility. Otherwise, it does not meet the code requirements. A question was posed about whether designation within the Laurel School District protects the house from demolition. Ms. McWilliams replied that listing on the National Registered does not protect a building from demolition. After discussion regarding a possible postponement or taking the matter to City Council, Mr. Larson stated they could provide a boundary drawing that shows the Button House would meet setback requirements on the proposed property. It was also suggested that they provide elevation photos from all angles. Mr. Sladek moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission rind that the proposed move of the Button House at 711 Remington Street does not meet the criteria contained in Section 14-72 of the Municipal Code. Mr. Johnson seconded the motion. (Motion passed. 5-3). The applicants were informed that they needed to continue through the Demolition Alteration Review process and through the Planning and Zoning process that's required for building development. The applicants stated that they respect the process and appreciated the efforts of the Commission. A short break was taken at 7:45 p.m. The meeting resumed at 7:55 p.m. OTHER BUSINESS: LPC 2012 Work Plan — Strategies for Meeting Goals Mr. Ernest moved that the discussion of the Landmark Preservation Commission 2012 Work Plan be postponed until the next meeting. Ms. Tvede seconded the motion. Motion passed. (8-0). Meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m. Landmark Preservation Commission January 11, 2012 - 4 - Corner Barn. She clarified that eligibility does not require all seven aspects of integrity; if an aspect of integrity is lost, i.e., in this case, location, you could potentially make up the loss in one area with the other integrity aspects. PUBLIC INPUT: Mr. Carl Patton stated that he lives at 515 Remington Street. He stated there is a vacant lot between his house and the dentist office to the south. It is currently a parking lot. He asked if the owners had explored the possibility of moving the house to that location. He questioned whether the two locations proposed by the applicant do justice to this historic property. While the locations are in the East Side district, that is not a historic district. He doesn't know if the house would be eligible for historic designation. Jeanne Patton, a member of the audience, asked if there could be a discussion about where cars will be parked if the house is put back there at 901 E. Laurel. She asked about what the future of the road is to get cars into that home. Mr. Frick informed her that the Commission does not have that purview over the Poudre School District. Mr. Larson replied that they would need to speak to the property owner next to 515 Remington Street to see if that is a possibility. He added that the Bachelets feel fortunate that Mr. Angell contacted them about the Button House. He suggested that the Commission look at the setting at 901 E. Laurel. Ms. Bachelet stated that the house will either be moved or they will start the process of demolition. Mr. Bachelet questioned why it is necessary to have a hearing with the Landmark Preservation Commission, stating that a staff review that took place in January of 2009 stated that all the properties were an intrusion, and that they could work directly with the Planning and Zoning Commission. Ms. McWilliams clarified the timeline and staff's comments. She reiterated that the building's eligibility was determined by the CONS Director and the Chair of the Landmark Preservation Commission or his designee. If Mr. and Mrs. Bachelet have additional information and would like to revisit the building's eligibility, they can do so, but it needs to be done through the correct process. The role of the Landmark Preservation Commission here is to discuss options that would preserve the building's character and its historic eligibility. Mr. Ernest made a motion that the Landmark Preservation Commission rind that the proposed demolition of the Button House at 711 Remington Street does not meet the criteria contained in Section 14-72(B)(1)(b) of the Municipal Code, and that this application proceed to Final Hearing, such hearing to be scheduled within 45 days of the receipt of submittal requirements. Ms. Tvede seconded the motion. Motion passed. (8-0). Mr. Frick stated that the second question before the Commission dealt with moving the Button House. Ms. McWilliams stated that the question is, based on the information in front of the Commission at this time, would either or both of these two locations, 901 E. Laurel or 424 Stover, retain the historic building's eligibility and significance and therefore keep the building's individual Landmark eligibility. There was discussion about the need for formal plans that would ensure that the building at the new location would meet building codes, a so be able to be moved there. Mr. Eckman stated that if the Commission wanted to condition the approval on the receipt of more information, the applicant should be told what information should be provided. Ms. Bachelet stated that the process of having approved plans is exceedingly expensive; therefore, an indication from the Commission that the move would be approved contingent upon receiving approved plans from Building and Zoning would be appreciated. Ms. McWilliams reiterated the three alternatives that might occur: (1) the house is moved; (2) the house is demolished; or (3) the house is retained in its current setting. Discussion ensued regarding the issuance of a determination of eligibility before the house is at a new location. The building is individually eligible in its current location, but r' Landmark Preservation Commission January 11, 2012 - 3 - contained in Section 14-72(B)(1)(b) of the Municipal Code and that the Commission make a motion that this application proceed to Final Hearing, such hearing to be scheduled within 45 days of the receipt of the submittal requirements. As to the proposed relocation of the Button House to either of two possible locations proposed by the applicant, she stated that staff is having difficulty formulating a recommendation based on the limited amount of information currently presented. In making a recommendation on relocation, it will be critical to determine if the Button House's current eligibility as an individual Fort Collins Landmark will be retained. Specifically, will the building's significance and integrity as defined in Section 14(1) and 14(5) of the Municipal Code sufficiently exist in the different location for the building to still be able to be designated as a Landmark? Staff is requesting additional information to evaluate the proposed relocation, including plans and photographic and graphic images accurately depicting the Button House in relation to the existing house at the proposed new locabon(s), and in relation to the adjacent buildings and structures. These will be needed to evaluate the Button House's integrity of setting, feeling, and association. Mr. Larson spoke on behalf of the applicants. He stated the goal at tonight's meeting is twofold: (1) to follow up on questions and comments that came out of the earlier presentation that asked for further context and delineation along the street edge; and (2) to discuss the potential opportunities to relocate the duplex. Mr. Larson presented slides of the block face of Remington, the current character, and what is being proposed. He then discussed the two potential sites for the proposed relocation of the Button House. The two sites proposed were 901 E. Laurel and 424 Stover. Mr. Larson reviewed both locations, stating that the 901 E. Laurel property has an almost park -like setting and a pedestrian street face. Those two items, coupled with the adjacent scale of the neighborhood, make it a good fit for the potential relocation. 424 Stover is on a paved alleyway, and the setting is more commercial. Mr. Larson introduced Lea Angell, the potential new owner of the 711 Remington house. Mr. Angell stated that he and his wife would love to have the home on their lot. They like smaller houses and like the Button House because it is more in line with the character of the home they would like to have. They would probably use their existing home as a rental. He also believes that by bringing the house into that neighborhood, they would make an improvement to that end of Laurel Street, and it could encourage other neighbors to come up to that level. The Commission asked questions about the 901 E. Laurel location. The street is a private drive that leads into Laurel Elementary School, and it is open to traffic only for individuals to drop off their children and school bus entry. Access to the drive is closed off a good part of the time. The East Side Neighborhood Park is on the south side of the fence. The Button House would be located in the back portion of the lot, behind the existing house, not at the front of the lot. The Commission asked questions about moving the house. Mr. Larson stated a structural engineer had looked at the house. Moving a wood frame house like the Button House is feasible. The stone veneer would have to be reconstructed. Mr. Bachelet passed around photos of the neighborhood by 901 East Laurel and some pictures of the 1960 addition to the Button House. He added the Commission was very helpful with the design of the Remington Annex Project, and they have incorporated some of those suggestions into the design. They want to preserve the original house by giving it to Mr. Angell. Mr. Sladek clarified that it is not a matter of deciding whether the relocation would be a good idea, but whether the relocation of the building will impact the significance and integrity of the building. He stated that he believes that either location will result in a loss of integrity and significance because the move itself would render the building not eligible for individual designation. Discussion ensued regarding if other buildings had been moved. Ms. McWilliams noted that some buildings had previously been moved, such as the Cunningham Landmark Preservatlan Commission January 11, 2012 - 2 - Mr. Nate Hoffman, the owner, stated the roof is over 100 years old, is very dilapidated, and needs to be replaced. He plans to get married, raise a family, and live in this house the rest of his life. Ms. McWilliams noted that the property has been posted, and letters were sent out to all neighbors within the appropriate area. To date, no neighborhood comments have been received regarding the property. A gentleman from the audience requested to speak. PUBLIC INPUT: Carl Denton stated he is a life member of the community. He understood the City was going to stop these changes in Old Town, but that City Council voted it out. The quaintness of Old Town will disappear. Pretty soon it will be called "scrape town" because all the old houses will be torn down. Allison Knapp stated that she supports the change because it increases the value of her home. She also feels that old town needs people that want to live there permanently — notjust college students. If there are only rental properties, the value of the community decreases. Individuals will want to stay in their homes and enjoy them if they can make improvements. Mr. Sladek moved that the Landmark Preservation Commission approve the application for alteration to the house at 604 West Magnolia Street without conditions. Ms. Tvede seconded the motion. Motion passed: (7-1). DEMOUTION/ALTERATION REVIEW, CONTINUED PRELIMINARY HEARING — 711 REMINGTON STREET — JUSTIN LARSON, VFL ARCHITECTS, CHRISTIAN AND ROBIN BACHELET, OWNERS: Ms. McWilliams noted that, pursuant to Section 14-72 of the Municipal Code, this hearing is a continuation of the Preliminary Hearing held on October 12, 2011 on the proposed demolition or relocation of the Button House, 711 Remington Street. The Bachelets, owners of the subject property, are proposing to demolish or relocate the buildings and structures at 705, 711, and 715 Remington Street to construct the Remington Annex Multifamily Housing Project. The October 12, 2011 Preliminary Hearing ended with no resolution. The applicants are now returning to the Commission to complete the Preliminary Hearing process. Ms. McWilliams noted that at its October 12, 2011 meeting, the Commission made several recommendations for how the Remington Annex Project could be designed to incorporate the historic Button House and to help ensure that new construction would be compatible with both the Button House and with the ten other National Register and Fort Collins Landmark buildings in this block. As currently proposed, the applicants' plans do not incorporate the Button House into the development Ms_ McWilliams also reviewed the history of the house. Circa 1980, student researchers noted that, while they felt that there was little historical significance associated with the building, "the house also provides a unique architectural flavour to the block." The property was re -recorded in January 1998, as part of the Eastside Neighborhood Survey re- evaluation of the National Register district. Jason Marmor, principal of the professional historic preservation consulting firm Retrospect, noted that this property had a "very unusual and attractive vernacular house design combining symmetry and rustic qualities," and felt that the property was possibly eligible for individual recognition on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as being clearly eligible as a contributing structure to the National Register district UPC member Ron Sladek, a professional historic preservationist, served as the LPC Chair's designee when the house was evaluated for Fort Collins Landmark eligibility in August, 2011. In his determination, Mr. Sladek stated that the building is both an excellent and a rare example of the Craftsman Cottage style in Fort Collins. Ms. McWilliams stated that staff recommends that the Commission find that the proposed demolition of the Button House at 711 Remington Street does not meet the criteria LANDMARK PRESERVATION COMMISSION Regular Meeting January 11, 2012 Minutes Council Liaison: Mr. Wade Troxell (219-8940) Staff Liaison: Mr. Steve Dush (221-6765) Commission Chairperson: Bud Frick SUMMARY OF MEETING: The Commission held a Demolition/Alteration Review, Final Hearing for 604 W. Magnolia Street, and approved the application for alteration to the house. A Demolition/Alteration Review, Continued Preliminary Hearing was held for 711 Remington Street. The minutes of the December 14, 2011 meeting were approved as corrected. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL: Commission was called to order by Chairman Frick with a quorum present at 5:40 p.m. at 281 N, College Ave., Fort Collins, Colorado. Bud Frick, John Albright, Sondra Carson, Doug Ernest, Jerome Johnson, Ron Sladek, Mark Serour, and Pat Tvede were present. Laura Hax was excused. Karen McWilliams and Josh Weinberg, Historic Preservation Planners, represented city staff. AGENDA REVIEW: Ms. Williams stated there were no changes to the posted agenda. STAFF REPORTS: Ms. McWilliams noted that members were provided with an updated list of Commission member information. Mr. Sladek asked that the Commission be advised of term expirations of existing Commission members, and information about new Commission members. He also suggested that staff changes be brought to the Commission's attention. Ms. McWilliams informed the Commission that Steve Dush, Community Development and Neighborhood Services Director, is leaving the city for a position in Georgia. She also introduced Josh Weinberg, the city's new hourly Preservation Planner. Ms. McWilliams then introduced Mark Serour, the Commission's newest member. Mr. Serour discussed his background and his desire to stay aligned with the history field. COMMISSION MEMBER'S REPORTS: None. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Mr. Albright made a motion to approve the December 14, 2011 minutes as corrected. Mr. Ernest seconded the motion. Motion passed: (8-0). PUBLIC INPUT: None. DEMOLITION/ALTERATION REVIEW, FINAL HEARING — 604 WEST MAGNOLIA STREET — NATE HOFFMAN, OWNER: Mr. Weinberg reviewed the staff report. This home was reviewed in September, 2011 under Section 14-72 of the Municipal Code and was determined to be eligible for individual Landmark designation, and that the proposed demolition would impact this eligibility. The applicant is proposing to add a full second story. Mr. Weinberg stated that a Preliminary Hearing for alterations was conducted on October 12, 2011. The Landmark Preservation Commission and the applicant were not able to reach an agreement that retained the building's individual landmark eligibility, and the Commission found that the application should proceed to a Final Hearing. Staff recommends approving the application for alterations to the house at 604 West Magnolia, Fort Collins, Colorado, without conditions.