HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNIVERSITY CENTER FOR THE ARTS - SITE PLAN ADVISORY REVIEW - 34-02 - CORRESPONDENCE - MEMO / P & Z BOARDproject. Most of the projects at CSU have been done beautifully. This is "such an
important building to the City of Fort Collins," and she really felt that a lot of people
have gone through the process with the University trying to make some kinds of
compromises and trying to talk about different things that can be done. With each
comment made it came back as "nothing can be done, there will be no changes." It
seems to her that before this got out into the public, it was decided how it was going
to be done and there really was not any listening to the importance of this building to
the Fort Collins. She understands that there are budget constraints; every "private"
developer has budget constraints. Every "private" developer could put more money
in their pocket if they do it "just the way they want to do it." The Secretary of Interior
Standards were put in place to "allow" adaptive reuse. This is a wonderful adaptive
reuse. It is too bad that it is going to leave such a "sour taste" in everybody's mouth
instead of it being something that the whole community is really behind and
appreciates and enjoys. It is going to instead be "the wart" that ruined Fort Collins
High School. She hates to put it that bluntly, but and she encouraged CSU to go
back and take another look and see if there was not "some way" that they could
make some changes that would, particularly with respect to location, not "destroy" the
facade of a "really important" building. She hoped the University would come to a
different decision and try to be a little more cooperative with the community.
Member Torgerson agreed with everything that was said by the audience and fellow
board members. It is hard for him to imagine that anything could be done
architecturally that could mitigate the "terrible disservice" that putting the building in
front of the old historic facade is doing. He agreed that this is the improper siting of
this addition. It seems like in a site with so much green space around that there is a
unique opportunity to properly add on to this building. That is unique in an urban
setting that there is all that extra room. He urged CSU to look at the other two
options that he thought would be "well supported" by everyone speaking against
CSU tonight. The Secretary of Interior Standards was developed with "broad
support" from people all around the United States. All their regulations were
developed with "broad support" from our community. Just because CSU can violate
those things, does not mean they should. The fact that they are allowed to by statute
does not mean they should. It is clearly "flying in the face of all those that had an
interest and developed those standards. He would like to see the Board of
Governors give that "serious consideration," and CSU team to give that "serious
consideration" and work on what is a major historical resource. He would be
supporting the motion for disapproval.
The motion for disapproval was approved 4-0.
0 Page 8
Carol Tunner, city staff for the Landmark Preservation Commission, and in charge of
design review for designated properties, confirmed that Fort Collins High School was
placed on the National Register as a contributing building in 1977. The building is
listed in the national register book in Washington D.C. That would put it as a
contributing building in the Laurel School National Register District. In 1994, there
was a State Register passed that said that if you are in the National Registry, you are
on the State Register too. The building was locally landmarked in 1994, which is an
even stronger designation because it controls any changes to the exterior of the
building. It is our local designation set up by the people of Fort Collins to "protect
their' landmarks.
There was discussion about the storm drainage on the property. Basil Hamdan,
Stormwater Utility Department stated that the applicant had not prepared a full
drainage report. What staff reviewed was a utility plan that shows a potential location
for stormwater detention and a potential outfall. There is a storm drainage system
that is on the northeast corner of the site that they propose to discharge into. That
system eventually drains into Spring Creek. Mr. Hamdan was fairly confident that
they can get enough detention and the problems could be worked out. At this time
staff has not seen enough detail to say the problems have been fully dealt with at this
point.
Member Carpenter moved to disapprove the CSU Center for the Performing
Arts Site Plan Advisory review on the basis of the location is unacceptable, the
character is incompatible, partly because of the location which so effects the
character of the whole building. There could be no change in the architecture
that would make it acceptable.
Member Craig seconded the motion.
Chairperson Gavaldon commented that he would support the motion for disapproval.
Fundamentally the addition should be on the eastside of the building. He felt that the
architecture of 1953 is very important to post World War II. The private sector would
have a hard time doing what CSU is doing tonight. He felt that we needed to hold up
our processes and our standards. He would support the motion for disapproval
based on the location and character. He felt that the architect and CSU needed to
really work hard on the architecture to really show what it is going to be because
there are perceptions. He felt that CSU has a real opportunity to establish a good
partnership with the community, City of Fort Collins and the historical groups.
Member Craig felt that the location is not there so why would we worry about fixing
the architecture because they have already said that they are not going to move the
building.
Member Carpenter commented that if this was a private developer they would not be
before the board tonight and would not have gotten past the door in the Planning
Department with this kind of proposal. She is very disappointed in CSU in this
0 Page 7
Ms. Watress referred to a conversation with Mr. Chase on June 7, 2002. She
understood that certain wealthy unnamed benefactors are donating funds for this
project. Philanthropy for the arts is most certainly to be encouraged, however, in this
country we live under a system of laws designed to apply to "all alike," whether rich or
poor. Colorado State University apparently plans to take advantage of a "loop hole"
in the state statutes exempting them from local ordinances. She is sure that the
Planning and Zoning Board like the Landmark Preservation Commission endeavors
to treat "all" applicants in a fait and evenhanded manner. Not to do so invites public
scandal. She asked the board to not allow the local, state and national designation of
this historic site to be put in "jeopardy" by this project. She asked the board to
disapprove this project as presented.
Elizabeth Lechlightner, owns two properties in the neighborhood and is an alumnus
of Fort Collins High School was delighted that the school was going to be preserved
and put to such a good use as a performance facility. However, she echoed
everything that she has heard this evening, she thought, and it would be a shame to
not be consistent with the historic preservation of the building. She also opposed the
current proposal.
Martin Landers, 1418 Whedbee Street agreed with all the comments he has heard
tonight as well. The neighborhood is an incredibly beautiful neighborhood and the
structure is an "icon" in the neighborhood. The historic character is incredibly
important to the intent of the neighborhood conservation zoning district. It would
seem to him to be a "great shame," especially when there are two other excellent
options, Option B and Option C to put forward a completely acceptable architectural
option. As the Planning Commission, it is a very difficult task in making decisions that
will affect this community for a great while. In this particular case, this decision may
be seen as one of the board's greatest legacies. This particular buildings addition will
be there, because it is such a prominent part of the community, people will be driving
by twenty years from now and say, "why did they put that addition onto the front of
the building?" Mr. Landers supports the comments made by staff and by the rest of
the audience tonight and urged the board to make, if not deny, a recommendation for
Option B or Option C to the applicant for advice on this plan.
Board Discussion, Comments and Decision:
Member Torgerson felt that the board did not have enough information on the
architecture of the building to make a decision on the character criteria. He also
questioned why the architecture was not more developed before CSU brought the
design in for approval. Member Torgerson commented that the board was more
accustomed to seeing applications with fully developed site plans, engineering, and
architecture. For the board to make a judgement about location, character and
extent they would need to have more information on character and extent. He felt
that the board could make a decision about location tonight.
0 Page 6
Ms. Dix stated that old Fort Collins High School was designated a historic landmark
at the local, state and national level. Buildings with this designation are governed by
standards set by the Secretary of the Interior. There are 10 standards set forth by
the Secretary of Interior for the rehabilitation of such buildings. Even by the most
generous interpretation of those standards, the Universities plan for the High School
will "violate' six of those standards.
Ms. Dix brought to the attention of the board Standard Nine, "new additions, exterior
alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features
and spatial relationships that characterize the property." The planned addition to the
High School overwhelms the original building and it "diminishes' rather than
"enhances." It neither "refers to" nor "respects" the original structure and fabric. She
was certain that if this proposed plan was put forth by a "private developer" that the
University would be among the first to oppose it. She knows that CSU has the
resources and the vision to create a plan that "enhances" both the community and
the University and "respects" its history. It is incumbent upon us to insist that the
University meet their "responsibilities" and this challenge. She strongly urged the
University to reevaluate and redesign the plans so they are in compliance with the
"spirit" and the "character" of the Secretary Standards. It would be a "tragedy" for the
city of Fort Collins to "lose this treasure" at the hands of the University.
Mym Wattress, past President of the Fort Collins Historical Society and a 50 year
plus alumni of Fort Collins High School stated she was a member of the city of Fort
Collins Landmark Preservation Commission and was speaking as a private citizen
tonight. She stated that in 1994 the then owner of the property of 1400 Remington
was brought forward by Poudre R-1 School District for local landmark designation.
The designation was granted by the Landmark Preservation Commission
unanimously at a public hearing July 26, 1994. On November 14, 2001, the current
owner of 1400 Remington, Colorado State University came to the Landmark
Preservation Commission for a conceptual schematic of the proposed concert hall
addition. According to Fort Collins Code, the Landmark Preservation Commission
must review and approve any proposed exterior changes to local landmarks before a
building permit can be issued. The Secretary of Interior Standards was used for
review criteria. This particular project violates six of the ten applicable standards.
Ms. Watress pointed out that one of the buildings architects suggested that the
Commission Members violate those standards in making their decision. If the
Commission Members have violated those standards, as well as city code, the site
would lose its historic designation and the Commission Members would be in a world
of trouble. Lacking approval, it was suggested that CSU Facilities and the architects
"rethink" the placement of the concert hall, perhaps placing it to the north or to the
east of the historic building and return to the Landmark Preservation Commission at
a later date. They have not done so: The plan that they are presenting tonight is not
the same design presented to the Landmark Preservation Commission. In fact it
seems to have enlarged a bit from 25,000 s.f. to 28,000 s.f. The materials to be used
are still vague and the placement is the same.
0 Page 5
Mark Figi, Associate Professor of History at Colorado State University offered his
support of everything that has been said this far, especially in terms of supporting the
Secretary of the Interior Standards. He that that it was our "moral" and "ethical"
obligation to respect the integrity of our public monuments. He felt that the proposed
addition does not do that. He agreed that we are living in a time of rapid change and
living in a time that we need to "reaffirm" to ourselves who we are as a people. He
thought we have an obligation to "respect" the historic character of our public
monuments.
Rheba Massey, 1400 Freedom Lane spoke to the board. She stated that in 1976,
the National Government passed the National Historic Preservation Act and in the
late 1970's a group of architects, urban planners and historians met in Washington to
write the Secretary of Interior Standards for Rehabilitation. They realized they had a
very daunting task because they had many different viewpoints. One of the things
they wanted to do was to allow the use of historic buildings for modern purposes.
Yet, on the other hand they wanted to protect the most historic features. They
realized that in order to do that, if you were going to restore or rehabilitate a historic
building that one of the major things that you needed to protect was the primary
fagade of the building that the people would see. Certainly, additions could be added
to the back of the building, to the side of the building using hyphens or anything that
would keep clear what the original building was.
Ms. Massey stated that she worked for the State of Wyoming and she worked for
their State Historic Preservation Office for seven years reviewing all projects at the
state, federal and local level that have an impact on the "character" of historic
buildings. During that time, she went to many different conferences that discussed
projects like this. She said that "in all her discussions, she has not seen one architect
that would have said that this proposal met the Secretary of Interior Standards." First
, there is a "complete intrusion" on the primary facade of the building. When looking
at the building you don't think that it is a colonial revival building if you are looking at
this modem structure "pasted" on the front of it.
Ms. Massey explained that the purpose of the National Historic Preservation Act was
to "preserve" the historic character of our communities. This is a "primary landmark"
that shows the "historic character" of Fort Collins. Ms. Massey hoped that the board
would support the Landmark Preservation Ordinance and "stand" for preserving that
character.
Agnes Dix, member of the Landmark Preservation Commission, speaking tonight as
a private citizen and a 35 year resident of Fort Collins. Ms. Dix was deeply
committed to this city for both its past and its future. As part of her interest in
architectural history, she has been fortunate to take several of the many courses the
University offers in preservation. She was especially sad to be here tonight because
she has considered CSU a "strong" advocate for preservation in Fort Collins. It was
easy enough to "advocate preservation," we want to see the University implement
those preservation standards it has long advocated.
0 Page 4
our "sense of place" by fundamentally transforming the exterior of old Fort Collins
High School with a big addition to the front.
Ralph Olson, resident of Old Town stated that over the years he has restored three
old houses downtown. He presently lives in a historically designated property, which
carries with it "certain responsibilities." If he as a citizen wants to make a change to
the fagade of his building, he has to pass through a review process. The review
process is intended to assure the "architectural integrity" of the historic fabric of the
neighborhood. He endorses that whole heartily. Mr. Olson wondered why the
University would not be held to the same standard in as much as they are citizens
and residents of this community.
Mr. Olson stated that they have a watchword in the preservation effort that one would
not want to do anything to the properties that one is in that could not be undone.
There is a sense of "stewardship" that comes along with temporarily owning a piece
of property. Nothing is forever. An addition like this with a seven million dollar
investment should be the "very best" it should not be a "make due" with the budget
that we have now. If there are not sufficient funds, wait and do it right the first time.
Mr. Olson felt that the present configuration 'was not in keeping with the rest of the
building."
Bud Frick, member of the Landmark Preservation Commission and citizen of Fort
Collins concurred with and the previous speakers on their comments. He questioned
why the applicants did not bring a model. Mr. Frick wondered what happened to our
"Landmark Ordinance?" The structure was designated and that included the 1953
addition. Why all of a sudden can someone come along who believes they have a
"higher" and "better" purpose and obliterate it and say it is not worth it. Mr. Frick
thought that the materials, articulation, style, spacing and proportions were all great.
Just take the thing and move it around to the north side of the existing gym.
Mr. Frick thought that if fundraising was a problem and they have a budget
constraint, why don't they just go and do more fundraising and make up the
difference. Mr. Frick referred to a presentation made at the Landmark Preservation
Commission in which there was a lot of mention about "stopping the train," in other
words putting this building addition in front of the 1953 addition to "stop the train"
from going down the street (i.e. 1924 building, 1953 building, etc). He stated that
there was not much mention of additional parking north and east of the current
building and now he sees a lot of additional parking there. What happened to the
argument that all the parking would go across the street. His children went to Fort
Collins High School and they parked as close as they could. He would do the same
if he were going to a Performing Arts Center. He would not park across the street
walk through an underpass to get to the Performing Arts Center, he would find local
street parking. Mr. Frick stated that they would like to "continue the train" and put the
addition on the north side.
0 Page 3
addition and the original building were locally landmarked. It was locally landmarked
when CSU acquired the property. The preservation community feels that the
University was acquiring that landmark designation when they acquired the building.
That building was designated in order to protect it. The University owes it to the city
and the citizens of Fort Collins to respect that designation. In so doing, they should
follow the Secretary of the Interior Standards.
Janet Orr, Architectural Historian and teacher of Architectural History at CSU stated
that overall she supported the idea of the Center for the Arts going into the old Fort
Collins High School. She does have "grave" considerations about the addition to the
front and requested that the Planning and Zoning Board withhold its approval and not
recommend to the State Board of Agriculture the addition onto the front that is
proposed. Ms. Orr gave reasons to not recommend approval:
• This addition to the front of the building violates a basic fundamental principal of
historic preservation. That is that additions to historic buildings should not detract
from the historic building itself. Any kind of monolithic structure on the front of this
building is going to obscure and detract from the original building built in 1924.
No way should we allow a magnificent building, which is such an important
landmark for Fort Collins to be diminished by an addition to the front of it.
• This addition is going to "destroy" the 1953 addition to the original building. That
addition in itself is historic and unique in its own right. It is not just an ancillary
feature that can readily be withdrawn and destroyed. It is historic in its own right
architecturally. It is on the National Register so its been recognized for its
significance. Following any kind of preservation guidelines, its historic fabric
should not be destroyed.
Ms. Orr felt that in her view as an architectural historian "the 1953 addition is a really
great example of a modernist interpretation of classicism that very nicely
complements the original neo-classicism of the 1924 building." She felt that it was
very important that the current addition take its lead from the 1953 addition and be
subordinate and respectful to the original 1924 classicism.
Ms. Orr thought that the 1953 addition in itself was a "perfect" and "great" example of
a trend in modernism after World War II called "new formalism" where they turn to
classical ideas of symmetry and interpreted them in a modernist sense. She did not
think that we should lose that part of our history as well. The building is historic and
we do not want to "lose" our 1950's build environment as well.
Ms. On's last point was that right now Fort Collins and the rest of the Front Range
has been going through a time of rampant growth. When that happens, our "built
landscape" undergoes tremendous change and we are in danger of losing our own
unique "sense of place." The old Fort Collins High School is "crucial" to understand
the unique heritage and history of Fort Collins and it is "crucial" that we don't diminish
0 Page 2
Commui. -y Planning and Environmental vices
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
Memo
To: Board of Governors for Colorado State University
From: Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board
Cameron Gloss, Director of Current Plannin 'y
Thru: Greg Byrne, Director of Community Planning and Environmental Services
Date: 08/14/02
Re: Summary of Hearing August 1, 2002 for the University Performing Arts Center
Site Plan Advisory Review.
On Thursday, August 1, 2002 the Planning and Zoning Board heard the University
Performing Arts Center Site Plan Advisory Review. The board voted 4-0 for denial
of the proposal. Enclosed are the summary minutes of that hearing highlighting the
public input and board discussion and comments.
Public Input:
Alison McGee, President of Historic Fort Collins Development Corporation stated that
the public does support the concept of the project, especially the fact that it is a
historic school and will continue to be used for educational purposes. She felt it was
important to understand that putting a large addition on the front of a historic building
very clearly violates the Secretary of the Interior Standards for Historic Preservation,
which are standards that have been adopted nationwide for historic buildings and
how they should be treated. The Secretary of the Interior Standards states that "new
additions will not destroy historic features and special relationships that characterize
a property." Putting an addition in front of that post World War II gymnasium addition
"clearly" destroys those historic features.
Ms. McGee went on to say that because the gymnasium, although it was added to
the original building, has acquired a significance of its own. Not only because of its
age, because of the fact that it was the site of so many important events for people
who went to that high school over the years. The entire building, the gymnasium
• Page 1
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020
Proposed addition ruins the spatial
relationship between the building and
street established under the original
design
a 1. I 1. i I, 1 ..
, , " V . . , I" I I I I r I .. k I. 1. I 1
1
a�.
■ t w f i� � if N 1! 1 % V A L b li t T 8
I tt1 C 1111'1it c r%iin t':111111t 1111l♦+ 1141.61,11 LOO 4111-I. L1I1i it y 4 t $ 1 8 1 It 111'4: 71. H/ 1: 1. 11 t 0. 11111+
LI
a '
Ilk
a $ -e
4 Pam
ll
Li
40
a
,..rv.a
' 4
9 �
,�.a y
J.
r
•I'
' Ii 4 :�L� ,i
�S
t
f 1..
liyw
r
Colorado Example of the City Beatiful
Movement: The Denver Civic Center -a ±.� n �W ; ' • •, -q, -,,,;�*
well -planned balance of buildings and.
open, green spaces. Itl `'-Y�-
'-`_`,v_—,��,✓'''"''d'y�' � •r+" ° -' � Tea, �4.. ",�t^{•, - I ' ---.�. Y „�,�r`y ''�" " I � r : .`/ '-r r 12 ('
�--`+ � j�'_;r� "{ •*�.� r". (^� .. ,. �u I F ., n � � 1 4.i,y,t t.-C p,r- �• /.'����� I r `- t �f�•
,i.: ° ;III-r ./f :I+�r I� r��"�4r,r'�r•. _;�t'�•.'"47{
I
♦ ! /
.._..�—� � "��%�f"tli�tl9���s
1111Yfn . t 11 Ffet r� ` Stltltl1) rr J ,I
"' r'.%U' i .. ♦ t I �-� �.f-Pr F a yF 1 x' I •�� �' ! + _..u: ..<�j;.' +,LI _ �e
5 (a:
s�tlr.i
1 `
4M ,
IT
'
_. .� y,,
err � � ` •
ki
f�. ' ' 'r� � ear./ !3 F*�':`►r n:�nf�•'{ d
} R (� � wy •w �i.`• 1 •I�,�• R 1 h � VPm, �• 7^7
to
w.. sj4' R i � . z p R. .. 91. �`�• `h
IL
�f It
*Mff,
'4 @i�R •R �M`R !"
•
r
WSW • • Y
},
• t -' ' AA
A •�
1 Al
j yyy1� rx,
.ry+�
y( �
• + 1 M IA T
j
�•_
� k
, ur•�Y'�'a'R � � � � SF i
IMMLLLLI
No Text
k 4t
!,'•�+ y �'d' f* •`'-.? d ♦• '♦Ih+� L Y. •gf r'1t '' .+, .. ' ,+('P'�y
Pow
i. 1ll i y ! 0 f R<..n . u''ti w f'M ia' � ,.. +f � 4 t` •�
+.. ` # ��'�' }.AA' J J �i a� � . t'+4 � ♦ y/i �`y y.,'.. .. +.�'G�t'fii <. t.. t y " n�i•
t i'_ a I p y�y 1' _'d a� •rY+�7• r
del+ I -p +mow � ' �Y yX fl+ �•�-�a ' _ r:!�t"l _• y.Y -.
�Y •!�' • -, /` j i y4, •{ S �w w + id '� r fi: • j '* 1" d.Y "f e ti x .. +♦Y' +•_ �.
�'A:, • �,. St i ",' A ;.� r... Tfr+� + - f ii y�', + r k�' f4 r� � - �`r�♦ _.aJJw �� ^ �'�''' Y � .a
let Us
Ar
"r ,'• _• .r3�,. _' R�/`j �' ♦
IV
ILI
AV
10
oom fill
r .
r
x
1
x _
-
r
ONO
y _ U
'�{ W�Y �.. �. i •b.'r .• "�v'a4 e4 ice_ ��yr..
d. L
ro
v i, .vT${A- .
♦+ :.a
.,4 r �� a /rv�
y-, n
original 1924 construction -William N. Bowman,
..
... 'L a�.�a --- . =1� .: •`' Architect
Exemplifies the City Beautiful Movement that
I ;
�,•a' �,,� „� was characterized by monumental Neoclassical
•�"' _ buildings within spacious landscaping
RAW
AA
Vt—
J
4 ; �r" �.:D br+., K'" M1•... .a .a.;._�, w_:.r��tw. .rh L gflY
r �
su
♦. eye .: ,. � � 'C ' y� � _.._. ',
iP
u
i
We will also available at the meeting to answer any questions regarding the Planning and
Zoning Board's position on this item.
Sincerely,
Jerry Gavaldon
Chairman
City of Fort Collins Planning Board
John Fischbach
Greg Byrne
Cameron Gloss
Enc.
Mikal Torgerson
Vice -Chairman
City of Fort Collins Planning Board
Commu; f Planning and Environmental f
Current Planning
City of Fort Collins
August 13, 2002
Mr. Reginald Washington
President
Board of Governors
Colorado State University System
110 16`h Street, Suite 640
Denver, CO 80202
Dear President Washington and Members of the Board:
vices
The City of Fort Collins Planning and Zoning Board respectfully requests to address the
Board of Governors at its August 28, 2002 meeting regarding the proposed University
Center for the Performing Arts project.
At its August 1, 2002 public hearing, the Planning and Zoning Board disapproved
Colorado State University's request to construct a 28,380 square foot addition to the front
of the historic, Fort Collins High School building based upon the statutory requirements
of 31-23-209 C.R.S. While the Planning and Zoning Board fully supports the concept of
converting the building into a performing arts center, it found that the location of the
building addition, and its resulting negative impacts, is inconsistent with the historic
character of the site and building. The addition clearly fails to respect the overall spatial
relationship between the park, front lawn, streetscape context, and the site, created under
the original design.
The old Fort Collins High School building is one of our community's most historically
significant buildings, being listed on the National Register of Historic Places, as well as a
local and State landmark. Old Fort Collins High School is the sole remaining example of
the City Beautiful Movement in the community, beyond the traditional boundaries of the
CSU campus.
Attached is a summary of information reviewed at the Planning and Zoning Board public
hearing, including portions of the staff presentation, summary meeting minutes that
include all public testimony, as well as the Board's discussion and final vote.
281 North College Avenue • P.O. Box 580 • Fort Collins, CO 80522-0580 • (970) 221-6750 • FAX (970) 416-2020