HomeMy WebLinkAbout851467.tiff RESOLUTION
RE: APPROVE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION OF
BRIDGE 2/25 AND AUTHORIZE CHAIRMAN TO SIGN
WHEREAS , the Board of County Commissioners of Weld County,
Colorado, pursuant to Colorado statute and the Weld County Home
Rule Charter, is vested with the authority of administering the
affairs of Weld County, Colorado, and
WHEREAS , Bridge 2/25 , located on Baseline Road between Weld
and Adams Counties, has been nominated to the National Register of
Historic Places, and
WHEREAS, the Board has now been presented with a Memorandum
of Agreement concerning the historic preservation of Bridge 2/25 ,
with the stipulations concerning said bridge being as stated in
the Agreement, a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference, and
WHEREAS , after review, the Board deems it advisable to
approve said Memorandum of Agreement, and authorize the Chairman
to sign same.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County
Commissioners of Weld County, Colorado, that the Memorandum of
Agreement regarding the historic preservation of Bridge 2/25 be ,
and hereby is, approved.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Board that the Chairman be, and
hereby is, authorized to sign said Memorandum.
The above and foregoing Resolution was, on motion duly made
and seconded, adopted by the following vote on the 13th day of
November, A.D. , 1985 .
BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
ATTEST: WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Weld County Clerk and Recorder , _
and Clerk to the Board J cq ne Joh s n, Chairman
BY:_� uiTiiY� c¢i �� Gene R. r tither, Pro-Tem
Deputy County lerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM: C.W. Ki
Go dc?
( i
county Attorney /,
Frank Ya guchi _
851467
• QrL.A rAc :, v, 0..,_, q 1, ':
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has
determined that Project BRO 0012(1) , Baseline Road - Adams/Weld
County Line, will have an effect upon a property eligible for
inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places and has
requested the comments of the Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation (Council) pursuant to Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470) and its implementing
regulations, "Protection of Historic and Cultural Properties" (36
CFR Part 800) ,
NOW THEREFORE, FHWA, the Colorado State Historic Preservation
Officer (SHPO) , Adams County, Weld County and the Council agree that
the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the
following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of
the undertaking on the historic property.
STIPULATIONS
BASELINE BRIDGE
FHWA will ensure the following measures are carried out:
1. The Baseline Bridge will be recorded prior to its removal so
that there will be a permanent record of its present appearance
and history. The Historic American Engineering Record (HAER)
(National Park Service, Katherine H. Cole, Division of Cultural
Resources Programs (PR), National Park Service, Rocky Mountain
Region, P.O. Box 25287, Denver, CO 80225) will first be
contacted to determine what documentation is required. All
documentation must be accepted by the National Park Service
prior to the transfer or demolition. Should the Colorado SHPO
so desire, copies of the documentation will be provided to the
Colorado SHPO and to a local archive designated by the Colorado
SHPO.
2. In consultation with the SHPO, the Baseline Bridge shall be
marketed as follows:
a. An information package on the property, containing
structural data, photographs, location map, information on
its historic significance, estimated cost for relocation,
availability of grants and requirements regarding
relocation, rehabilitation, and maintenance. The package
shall also include the relevant sections of The Secretary
of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and
Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings.
Respondents expressing an interest in acquiring the bridge
shall be required to submit a relocation and reuse plan and
specifics regarding site location.
b. A grant to somewhat defray the costs of disassembly and
relocation, equal to the estimated cost of demolition of
the bridge, shall be offered to any recipient(s) who will
abide by the Preservation Covenants.
c. An advertising plan: A notice will be published in the
Colorado Department of Highways newsletter (green sheet)
advertising the availability of the Baseline Bridge. The
article will appear twice in a 60-day advertising period,
the reprinted version to be published after 30 days of the
first. Notification of prior contacts shall also be
completed. In addition, an article advertising the
availabliity of the bridge will be published in the
Colorado Heritage News.
d. The Baseline Bridge will be offered for relocation with
preference to recipients who agree to abide by the
Preservation Covenants The format of these Preservation
Covenants and a procedure for conveyance of the bridge with
the Covenants will be agreed to by the FHWA, the SHPO, and
the Council prior to advertisement. The terms of the
agreed-upon Preservation Covenants will be equivalent to
those in the attached Exhibit A. The notices shall state
that offers will be reviewed in the following order of
preference:
1) First preference shall be given to offers that would
relocate all three spans of the bridge together and
preserve its present appearance.
2) Second preference shall be given to offers that would
relocate two of the spans together.
3) Third preference shall be given to offers that would
relocate the spans individually.
e. A schedule for receiving and reviewing offers: Offers
shall be received throughout the previously mentioned
60-day advertising period and reviewed for a 30-day period
thereafter. All offers shall be reviewed in consultation
with the SHPO prior to acceptance.
3. If there is no acceptable offer which will conform to the
requirements of relocation, rehabilitation and maintenance, the
FHWA with the approval of the SHPO may permit transfer of all or
part of the bridge without the Preservation Covenants. The
grant mentioned under 2(b) above would not apply.
4. If applicable, the Preservation Covenants shall be included in
the bridge bill of sale or transfer involving the SHPO as a
party in interest. Such Preservation Covenants will be recorded
in the offices of the Clerk and Recorder of the county in which
the bridge is relocated. The terms of the Covenants are
attached as Exhibit A and incorporated by reference.
5. Adams County and Weld County shall abide by the attached Interim
Maintenance Plan to ensure that the bridge is maintained in
satisfactory condition prior to transfer. Such Maintenance Plan
is attached as Exhibit B and incorporated by reference.
6. If a new owner can be found to relocate the structure, the FHWA
shall ensure that the SHPO is afforded 30 days to review and
comment on the new site for the property. The FHWA shall take
the SHPO's comments into account. Within 90 days following the
move, the SHPO shall re-evaluate the property on its new site
and make a recommendation to the Secretary of the Interior as to
its continued eligibility to the National Register.
7. If no new owner can be found to relocate the structure, the
structure shall remain the property of Adams and Weld Counties,
and may be disposed of or demolished as they see fit.
8. If a dispute arises regarding implementation of this MOA, the
FHWA will consult with the objecting party to resolve the
dispute. If any consulting party determines that the dispute
cannot be resolved, FHWA shall request the further comments of
the Council pursuant to 36 CFR 800.6(b) .
9. Failure to carry out the terms of this Agreement requires that
FHWA again request the Council's comments in accordance with 36
CFR Part 800. If FHWA cannot carry out the terms of the
Agreement, it will not take or sanction any action or make an
irreversible commitment that would result in an adverse effect
with respect to the eligible property covered by the Agreement
or would foreclose the Council's considerations of modifications
or alternatives that could avoid or mitigate the adverse effect
on the property until the commenting process has been completed.
10. If any of the signatories to this Agreement determine that the
terms of the Agreement cannot be met or believe a change is
necessary, that signatory will immediately request the
consulting parties to consider an amendment or addendum which
will be executed in the same manner as the original Agreement.
Within 90 days after carrying out the terms of the Agreement,
the FHWA shall report to all signatories on the actions taken.
Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement evidences that FHWA
has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on
Project BRO 0012(1) , Baseline Road - Adams/Weld County Line, and its
effects on historic properties and that FHWA has taken into account
the effects of its undertaking on historic properties.
Division Administrator (date)
Federal Highway Administration
Colorado State Historic (date)
Preservation Officer
Executive Director (date)
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation
Chairman (date)
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation
I Concur:
Chairman (date)
Adams Board of County Commissioners
Chairman (date)
Weld Board of County Commissioners
Exhibit A to the Baseline Bridge Memorandum of Agreement
The structure above described is hereby conveyed subject to the
conditions, restrictions, and limitations hereinafter set forth that
shall be considered as covenants running with the structure that the
grantee, his heirs, and assigns covenant and agree, in the event
that premises are sold or otherwise disposed of, will be inserted in
the instrument of conveyance.
I. The structure will be rehabilitated and maintained in accordance
with the recommended approaches in The Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitation of
Historic Buildings (Attachment A) .
II. The above restrictions shall be binding on the parties hereto,
their heirs, successors, and assigns until 2015 A.D. ; however, the
Colorado State Historic Preservation Officer may, for good cause,
modify or cancel any or all of the foregoing restrictions upon
written application of the grantee, his heirs or assigns.
The acceptance of the delivery of this document shall constitute
conclusive evidence of the agreement of the grantee to be bound by
the conditions, restrictions, and limitations and to perform the
obligations herein set forth.
Exhibit B to the Baseline Bridge Memorandum of Agreement
Interim Maintenance Plan: Baseline Bridge
The structure will be preserved and maintained in accordance with
the recommended approaches of The Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating
Historic Buildings (relevant sections attached) . Maintenance
required to preserve the bridge will include any repairs needed to
prevent the deterioration of the bridge.
PLEASE NOTE:
The attached Secretary of the Interior's Standards for
Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic
Buildings does not recommend the use of sandblasting for
historic buildings. This guideline, however, does not
apply to historic metal bridges, which generally require
sandblasting to remove rust.
5
THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR'S STANDARDS FOR REHABILITATION
•
The Secretary of the Interior is responsible for establishing standards for all
programs under Departmental authority and for advising Federal agencies on the
preservation of historic properies listed or eligible for listing in the National
Register of Historic Places. In partial fulfillment of this responsibility, the
Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Historic Preservation Projects have been
developed to direct work undertaken on historic buildings.
Initially used by the Secretary of the Interior in determining the applicability of
proposed project work on registered properties within the Historic Preservation Fund
grant-in-aid program, the Standards for Historic Preservation Projects have received
extensive testing over the years—more than 6,000 acquisition and development
projects were approved for a variety of work treatments. In addition, the Standards
have been used by Federal agencies in carrying out their historic preservation
responsibilities for properties in Federal ownership or control; and by State and local
officials in the review of both Federal and nonfederal rehabilitation proposals. They
have also been adopted by a number of historic district and planning commissions
across the country.
The Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR 67) comprise that section of the overall
historic preservation project standards addressing the most prevalent treatment
today: Rehabilitation. "Rehabilitation" is defined as the process of returning a
property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an
efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the
property which are significant to its historic, architectural, and cultural values.
The Standards for Rehabilitation are as follows:
1. Every reasonable effort shall be made to provide a compatible use for a property
which requires minimal alteration of the building, structure, or site and its
environment, or to use a property for its originally intended purpose.
2. The distinguishing original qualities or character of a building, structure, or site
and its environment shall not be destroyed. The removal or alteration of any historic
material or distinctive architectural features should be avoided when possible.
3. All buildings, structures, and sites shall be recognized as products of their own
time. Alterations that have no historical basis and which seek to create an earlier
appearance shall be discouraged.
4. Changes which may have taken place in the course of time are evidence of the
•
history and development of a building, structure, or site and its environment. These
changes may have acquired significance in their own right, and this significance shall
be recognized and respected.
4
5. Distinctive stylistic features or examples of skilled craftsmanship which
characterize a building, structure, or site shall be treated with sensitivity.
6. Deteriorated architectural features shall be repaired rather than replaced,
wherever possible. In the event replacement is necessary, the new material should
match the material being replaced in composition, design, color, texture, and other
visual qualities. Repair or replacement of missing architectural features should be
based on accurate duplications of features, substantiated by historic, physical, or
pictorial evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different
architectural elements from other buildings or structures.
7. The surface cleaning of structures shall be undertaken with the gentlest means
possible. Sandblasting and other cleaning methods that will damage the historic
building materials shall not be undertaken.
8. Every reasonable effort shall be made to protect and preserve archeological
resources affected by, or adjacent to any project.
9. Contemporary design for alterations and additions to existing properties shall not
be discouraged when such alterations and additions do not destroy significant
historical, architectural or cultural material, and such design is compatible with the
size, scale, color, material, and character of the property, neighborhood or
environment.
10. Wherever possible, new additions or alterations to structures shall be done in
such a manner that if such additions or alterations were to be removed in the future,
the essential form and integrity of the structure would be unimpaired.
In the past several years, the most frequent use of the Secretary's "Standards for
Rehabilitation" has been to determine if a rehabilitation project qualifies as a
"certified rehabilitation" pursuant to the Tax Reform Act of 1976, the Revenue Act
of 1978, and the Economic Recovery Tax Act of 1981, as amended. The Secretary is
required by law to certify rehabilitations that are "consistent with the historic
character of the structure or the district in which it is located." The Standards are
used to evaluate whether the historic character of a building is preserved in the
process of rehabilitation. Between 1976 and 1982 over 5,000 projects were reviewed
and approved under the Preservation Tax Incentives program.
As stated in the definition, the treatment "Rehabilitation" assumes that at least
some repair or alteration of the historic building will need to take place in order to
provide for an efficient contemporary use; however these repairs and alterations
must not damage or destroy the materials and features—including their finishes—that
are important in defining the building's historic character.
7
In terms of specific project work, preservation of the building and its historic
character is based on the assumption that (1) the historic materials and features and
their unique craftsmanship are of primary importance and that (2), in consequence
they will be retained, protected, and repaired in the process of rehabilitation to the
greatest extent possible, not removed and replaced with materials and features
which appear to be historic, but which are--in fact--new.
To best achieve these preservation goals, a two-part evaluation needs to be applied
by qualified historic preservation professionals for each project as follows: first, a
particular property's materials and features which are important in defining its
historic character should be identified. Examples may include a building's walls,
cornice, window sash and frames and roof; rooms, hallways, stairs, and mantels; or a
site's walkways, fences, and gardens. The second part of the evaluation should
consist of assessing the potential impact of the work necessary to make possible an
efficient contemporary use. A basic assumption in this process is that the historic
character of each property is unique and therefore proposed rehabilitation work will
necessarily have a different effect on each property; in other words, what may be
acceptable for one project may be unacceptable for another. However, the
requirement set forth in the definition of "Rehabilitation" is always the same for
every project: those portions and features of the property which are significant to
its historic, architectural, and cultural values must be preserved in the process of
rehabilitation. To accomplish this, all ten of the Secretary of the Interior's
"Standards for Rehabilitation" must be met.
19
Architectural metal features--such as cast-iron
Architectural Metals: Cast facades, porches, and steps; sheet metal cornices,
iron, steel, pressed tin, roofs, roof cresting and storefronts; and cast or rolled
copper, aluminum, and zinc metal doors, window sash, entablatures, and
hardware--are often highly decorative and may be
important in defining the overall historic character of
the building. Their retention, protection, and repair
should be a prime consideration in rehabilitation
projects. For specific guidance, consult "Metals in
America's Historic Buildings." (See Reading List and
Ordering Information on pg. 58.)
Recommended Not Recommended
Identifying, retaining, and preserving Removing or radically changing
architectural metal features such as architectural metal features which are
columns, capitals, window hoods, or important in defining the overall historic
stairways that are important in defining character of the building so that, as a
the overall historic character of the result, the character is diminished.
building; and their finishes and colors.
Removing a major portion of the historic
architectural metal from a facade
instead of repairing or replacing only the
deteriorated metal, then reconstructing
the facade with new material in order to
create a uniform, or "improved"
appearance.
Radically changing the type of finish or
its historic color or accent scheme.
Protecting and maintaining architectural Failing to identify, evaluate, and treat
metals from corrosion by providing the causes of corrosion, such as moisture
proper drainage so that water does not from leaking roofs or gutters.
stand on flat, horizontal surfaces or
accumulate in curved, decorative Placing incompatible metals together
features. without providing a reliable separation
material. Such incompatibility can
result in galvanic corrosion of the less
noble metal, e.g., copper will corrode •
cast iron, steel, tin, and aluminum.
Cleaning architectural .metals, when Exposing metals which were intended to
necessary, to remove corrosion prior to be protected from the environment.
repainting or applying other appropriate
protective coatings. Applying paint or other coatings to
metals such as copper, bronze, or
stainless steel that were meant to be
exposed.
Architectural Metals (continued) 20
Recommended Not Recommended
Identifying the particular type of metal Using cleaning methods which alter or
prior to any cleaning procedure and then damage the historic color, texture, and
testing to assure that the gentlest finish of the metal; or cleaning when it is
cleaning method possible is selected or inappropriate for the metal.
determining that cleaning is
inappropriate for the particular metal. Removing the patina of historic metal.
The patina may be a protective coating
on some metals, such as bronze or
copper, as well as a significant historic
finish.
Cleaning soft metals such as lead, tin, Cleaning soft metals such as lead, tin,
copper, terneplate, and zinc with copper, terneplate, and zinc with grit
appropriate chemical methods because blasting which will abrade the surface of
their finishes can be easily abraded by the metal.
blasting methods.
Using the gentlest cleaning methods for Failing to employ gentler methods prior
cast iron, wrought iron, and steel--hard to abrasively cleaning cast iron, wrought
metals--in order to remove paint buildup iron or steel; or using high pressure grit
and corrosion. If handscraping and wire blasting.
brushing have proven ineffective, low
pressure dry grit blasting may be used as
long as it does not abrade or damage the
surface.
Applying appropriate paint or other Failing to re-apply protective coating
coating systems after cleaning in order systems to metals or alloys that require
to decrease the corrosion rate of metals them after cleaning so that accelerated
or alloys.
corrosion occurs.
Repainting with colors that are Using new colors that are inappropriate
appropriate to the historic building or to the historic building or district.
district.
Applying an appropriate protective Failing to assess pedestrian use or new
coating such as lacquer to an access patterns so that architectural
architectural metal feature such as a metal features are subject to damage by
bronze door which is subject to heavy use or inappropriate maintenance such as
pedestrian use. salting adjacent sidewalks.
Evaluating the overall condition of the Failing to undertake adequate measures
architectural metals to determine to assure the preservation of
whether more than protection and architectural metal features.
maintenance are required, that is, if
repairs to features will be necessary.
Architectural Metals (continued) 21
Recommended Not Recommended
Repairing architectural metal features Replacing an entire architectural metal
by patching, splicing, or otherwise feature such as a column or a balustrade
reinforcing the metal following when repair of the metal and limited
recognized preservation methods. replacement of deteriorated or missing
Repairs may also include the limited parts are appropriate.
replacement in kind--or with a
compatible substitute material--of those Using a substitute material for the
extensively deteriorated or missing parts replacement part that does not convey
of features when there are surviving the visual appearance of the surviving
prototypes such as porch balusters, parts of the architectural metal feature
column capitals or bases; or porch or is that physically or chemically
cresting. incompatible.
Replacing in kind an entire architectural Removing an architectural metal feature
metal feature that is too deteriorated to that is unrepairable and not replacing it;
repair--if the overall form and detailing or replacing it with a new architectural
are still evident--using the physical metal feature that does not convey the
evidence to guide the new work. same visual appearance.
Examples could include cast iron porch
steps or steel sash windows. If using the
same kind of material is not technically
or economically feasible, then a
compatible substitute material may be
considered.
The following work is highlighted to indicate that it represents the particularly
complex technical or design aspects of rehabilitation projects and should only be
considered after the preservation concerns listed above have been addressed.
Design for Missing Historic Features
Designing and installing a new Creating a false historic appearance
architectural metal feature such as a because the replaced architectural metal
sheet metal cornice or cast iron capital feature is based on insufficient
when the historic feature is completely historical, pictorial, and physical
missing. It may be an accurate documentation.
restoration using historical, pictorial,
and physical documentation; or be a new Introducing a new architectural metal
design that is compatible with the size, . feature that is incompatible in size,
scale, material, and color of the historic scale, material, and color.
building.
. r.
Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement evidences that FHWA
has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on
Project BRO 0012(1) , Baseline Road - Adams/Weld County Line, and its
effects on historic properties and that FHWA has taken into account
the effects of its undertaking on historic properties.
Division Administrator (date)
Federal Highway Administration
Colorado State Historic (date)
Preservation Officer
Executive Director (date)
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation
Chairman (date)
Advisory Council on Historic
Preservation
I Concur:
Chairman (date)
Adams Board of County Commissioners
bhMeti\t-WiNaLf/(date)rs
Weld Board of County Commissioners
ELY of917
J y 111'70:2:2:1:984"'".."-"
CT 221984 l �
m Dighton
ItY
October 15 , 1984
Historical Society of Colorado
Heritage Plaza
1300 Broadway
Denver, CO 80203
Attn: Gloria Mills
Re: Baseline Bridge over the South Platte River
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed nomination
of the Baseline Bridge to the National Register.
The City of Brighton vigorously opposes the nomination and requests
that the State Review Board reject the proposal .
We believe in the preservation of representative structures historically
significant to the people of this community, the state and the nation.
Our own 1886 Church , City Hall and railroad depot demonstrate this be-
lief. Our position in this matter is therefore based upon serious
consideration of the merits of the bridge's preservation "in situ"
compared with its impact upon the safety of the travelling public
and upon properties located along the South Platte River.
In its 58-year life the bridge has served an ever-increasing demand
by larger and heavier vehicles . Today the two narrow (9' wide) moving
lanes pose a restrictive and very hazardous obstacle to traffic. Be-
cause 168th Avenue will soon be the only direct link between the 1-76
interchange , U.S. 85 and the I-25 interchange in the region , its im-
portance will grow. Even now Regional Transportation Plans call for
widening and upgrading to regional arterial status (while State High-
way 7 is to be downgraded) .
eec 9i
I/
22 south 4th avenue, brighton,co. 80601 (303) 659-4050
Historical Society ui Colorado
October 15 , 1984
Page Two
Baseline bridge also poses a continuing hazard to riverside properties .
Its three spans sit low in relation to the South Platte River; this
condition and the. multiple supports in place result in restricted flow
of water and entrapment of debris . We are informed of numerous occasions
when flood waters backed up behind the bridge damaging properties up-
stream; we also know that county crews have been called out to clear
large debris that threatened to move one or more spans off of its
footings .
Because of these conditions Adams and Weld Counties have planned for
several years to replace the bridge. The replacement is designed, •
each County has budgeted 10% of the $1 .2 Million cost and the State
Highway Department is passing through over $900,000 in construction
funds . Because of the proposed nomination we understand that the state
funds are frozen and the project is at a standstill . We are concerned
also that the funds from the state may be used elsewhere if this issue
is not resolved in a timely manner.
The City of Brighton believes that the above described public health
and safety issues weigh substantially against design significance;
the Baseline Bridge must be removed from its location and replaced.
Sincerely,
CITY OF BRIGHTON
Gay . Gilpin , Mayor
STATE OF COLORADO
SS
COUNTY OF att,,,✓ )
The fore ing instrument was subscribed and sworn to before
me this /G/ 4 day o _a , , 1981/, by:
Witness my hand and official seal .
My commission expires: � ,•,,,,,san
otary. Pub is
Ana
� hu e Address coca ,A,The
Ww/
Hello