Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5A - 11.05.14 Memo for 711 Pine St M E M O R A N D U M November 5, 2014 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: Lesli Ellis, Comprehensive Planning Manager James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Marcy Cameron, Historic Preservation Planner Angela Smelker, Historic Preservation Intern SUBJECT: Continuation of a public hearing and consideration of an application for a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct a 1,282 sq. ft. addition to the main house, to relocate an existing garage on the property, and to construct a 330 sq. ft. one-car garage at 711 Pine St. in the Mapleton Hill Historic District, per section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981 (HIS2014-00172). STATISTICS: 1.Site: 711 Pine St. 2.Zoning: RL-1 (Residential-Low 1) 3.Lot size: 10,323 sq. ft. 4.Existing House: 990 sq. ft. 5.Proposed Addition: 1,282 sq. ft. 6.Existing Garage: 245 sq. ft. 7.Proposed Garage: 330 sq. ft. 8.Applicant/Owner: David Waugh, Kevin Deighan 9.Date of Construction: 1939 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: If the applicant complies with the conditions listed below, staff considers the proposed construction of an addition, relocating the existing garage and constructing a new one-car garage on the property will be generally consistent General Design with the conditions specified in Section 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, the Guidelines, Mapleton Hill Design Guidelines. and the Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following motion: I move that the Landmarks Board adopt the staff memorandum dated Nov. 5, 2014, as the findings of the board and approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate for the proposed Agenda Item # 5A Page 1 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. construction and relocation shown on plans dated Sept. 22, 2014, finding that they generally meet the standards for issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant shall be responsible for constructing the house, relocating the garage and constructing a new one-car garage in compliance with the approved plans dated Sept. 22, 2014, except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2.Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance of the Landmark Alteration Certificate, the applicant shall provide details on the rehabilitation of the existing house including, but not limited to, removal of vinyl siding and shutters, as well as details on the move and rehabilitation of the existing garage. 3.Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance of the Landmark Alteration Certificate, the applicant shall submit the following, which shall be subject to the final review and approval of the Landmarks design review committee: window and door details, wall material details, siding material details, paint colors, roofing material details and details regarding any hardscaping on the property to ensure that the approval is General Design Guidelines Mapleton Hill Historic consistent with the and the District Guidelines and the intent of this approval. SUMMARY: On May 29, 2014, the applicant submitted a completed Landmark Alteration th Certificate to add to the house, relocate the garage and construct a new 330 sq. ft. garage on the property at 711 Pine Street. On July 2, 2014, the Landmarks Board reviewed the application in a public nd hearing. In response to comments from the board that the proposed addition should significantly be reduced in mass and scale and the design simplified, the applicant withdrew the application for redesign. On Sept. 3, 2014, the Landmarks Board reviewed a revised design in a public hearing. In response to comments from the board that the proposed addition should be reduced in mass and scale, the applicant withdrew the application for redesign. Because the proposal calls for the relocation of a building in a historic district, review by the full Board is required. Agenda Item # 5A Page 2 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Since the Sept 3 meeting, the applicant has reduced the square footage of the rd proposed addition by 177 sq. ft. from 1,459 sq. ft. to 1,282 sq. ft. and has reduced and simplified the overall mass and scale of the proposed addition, proposing a one-story addition rather than a two-story addition. This memorandum reflects the revised design. Staff considers that the 1939 house and garage, constructed within the 1865- 1946 period-of-significance for the Mapleton Hill Historic District and retaining a high degree of integrity, are contributing buildings. Staff finds the proposed new construction to be generally consistent with the criteria for a Landmark Alteration Certificate as per 9-11-18(a) & (b)(1)-(4) General Design Guidelines Mapleton Hill Design B.R.C. 1981, the and the Guidelines. This recommendation is based upon the understanding that, pursuant to the conditions of approval, the stated conditions will be reviewed and approved by the Landmarks Design Review Committee (LDRC) prior to the issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate. PROPERTY HISTORY: Figure 1. 711 Pine St. Tax Assessor Card photograph 1952. Photograph Courtesy the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History. The one-story Minimalist Traditional house at 711 Pine St. was constructed in 1939 and is indicative of houses of that type built between 1935 and 1950 with its intermediate roof pitch, façade gable and minimal ornamentation. Agenda Item # 5A Page 3 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Early residents of 711 Pine included the Cooley family who occupied the home from 1951 to 1959. Leonard Cooley and his wife Mildred were originally from Kansas. Leonard was a farmer in Pawnee County, Kansas. The Cooleys moved to Boulder in 1948 and continued to maintain their wheat farm in Kansas. Mildred died in 1976, and Leonard died in 1989. They were survived by a daughter, Nadine Nan Earnshaw of Boulder. After the Cooleys, Russell and Elsie Kelley resided in 711 Pine from 1960 to 1971. Russell was born in Nebraska in 1896 and married Elsie Mae Demmon, a native of Boulder, in 1922. Both Russell and Elsie were graduates of the University of Colorado in the early 1920s. Russell and Elsie moved to Washington D.C. when Russell took a position in the U.S. Office of Education. Russell also held similar jobs in Kansas, Oklahoma, Oregon, and Minnesota before retiring to Boulder with Elsie and taking up residence at 711 Pine. After the Kelleys, Elsyee and Hanford Langstroth lived at 711 Pine. Little is known of them other than their appearance in the City of Boulder directory as owning the residence until the early 2000s. The 1994 Historic Building Survey for the property did not find the house to be a contributing element to the Mapleton Hill Historic District since, at that time, it was built after the period-of-significance for the district. However, the 2002 amendment extending the Mapleton Hill Historic District period of significance to 1946 makes it its 1939 construction date potentially contributing. Figure 2. Photograph of Russell and Elsie Kelley from the University of Colorado While the Minimalist-Traditional manner of design is Annual, 1923. relatively infrequent in Mapleton Hill, this form does represent architectural design during a period of significant growth in Boulder. Historic Context and The Minimal-Traditional house type is recognized in the 2010 Survey of Post-World War II Residential Architecture as featuring a medium-pitched roof and little or no ornamentation. Porches, if present, are often integrated into the façade, and attached garages or carports are common to this housing type. The Minimal Tradition was the most common housing type in Boulder from 1935s to 1950. Agenda Item # 5A Page 4 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Figure 1 shows the Tax Assessor photograph of the house in 1952. Few changes appear to have occurred since that time with the exception of the application of vinyl siding and shutters. The owner represents that the original wood siding is below the vinyl. A one-car garage located immediately west of the main house appears to have been constructed around the same time, and is mentioned on the 1952 Tax Assessment for the property. In their letter, the applicant and owner consider the house and garage to be of little architectural merit and request that the buildings be considered non- contributing. Staff acknowledges that the buildings are much less grand than many earlier examples on Pine St, however, staff considers these buildings contributing because construction occurred within the 1865 to 1946 period-of- significance for the Mapleton Hill Historic District. The house and garage exist in comparatively original condition and are relatively intact. They clearly contribute to the historic significance of the district. DESCRIPTION: The property is located on the north side of Pine St. between 6 and 8 Street, in thth the West Boulder addition to the city, which was platted in 1874. The approximately 990 sq. ft. house is located on a 10,323 sq. ft. lot. Figure 3. Location Map, 711 Pine St. Agenda Item # 5A Page 5 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. The one story house was constructed around 1939, features a hipped roof with a projecting front gable, and is clad in horizontal lap siding with corner boards. An asymmetrical uncovered porch on the façade has a concrete base and a wrought iron balustrade and railing. The entrance features an off-center slab door, double- hung and plate glass windows. . Figure 4. South (front) elevation of 711 Pine St., 2014 . Figure 5. West elevation of 711 Pine St., 2014 Agenda Item # 5A Page 6 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. PROPOSED ADDITION Drawings show a one-story, 1,282 sq. ft. addition to be constructed at the rear of the existing 990 sq. ft. house. The garage currently takes access from the street as the property does not border an alley. This condition is proposed to be maintained with the relocation of the existing garage and construction of a new garage at the west side of the property. The proposed floor area of the house is calculated to be approximately 2,246 sq. ft. on the 10,323 sq. ft. lot. The application states with the existing and proposed garage, the total floor area (FAR) for the proposal to be 2,816 sq. ft. where the maximum floor area for this property is 4,180 sq. ft Figure 7. Proposed Site Plan. Not to scale. Agenda Item # 5A Page 7 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Figure 8. Existing South Elevation (façade) Plans show the revised one-story addition to feature low hipped roof that references the existing house and reduces visibility of the mass from the street. A portion of the addition will be visible to the east side of the existing house; however, it is set back approximately 50 feet from the street. The addition is shown to be sided in narrow wood clapboard siding. Details on windows, doors, roofing and treatment of exterior materials on the existing house were not specified in the application. Figure 10. Existing East Elevation Figure 11. Proposed East Elevation The east elevation of the house shows the addition to have been lowered to a single story that takes design cues from the simple character of the existing house. This face of the house is shown to be fenestrated with double-hung windows that match the asymmetry of the existing house. The portion of the addition that connects the main mass of the addition to the existing house is inset to clearly delineate between old and new. Agenda Item # 5A Page 8 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Figure 14. Existing(left) and Proposed (right) North Elevations (Rear). The north (rear) elevation is proposed to feature two sets of French doors with steps leading to the rear yard. The doors on the west side of the elevation are show to be flanked by two side light windows. Figure 16. Existing West Elevation Figure 17. Proposed West Elevation The west elevation of the addition is shown to be set approximately 20 ft. from the north-west corner of the existing house, retaining the existing rear ell of the house. Like the east elevation, this face of the house, the mass and form of this face of the house has been significantly reduced in mass and scale and the forms simplified. This face of the addition is shown to be fenestrated by double hung windows that reflect the asymmetry of the existing house. Agenda Item # 5A Page 9 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. PROPOSED RELOCATION OF EXISTING GARAGE AND CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ONE-CAR GARAGE Plans call for the existing 245 sq. ft. garage to be relocated from the west side of the lot to the east side and to be used as a studio. The current proposal shows the garage turned at a 90 degree angle so the existing garage would face west. Other than relocation, no changes are shown to be made to the existing garage. A new one car garage of 330 sq. ft. is shown be located behind the house by the west property line. Due to the slope of the lot, the simple gable end building is shown to be bermed into the ground at the north. Fenestration consists of a simple wood garage door at the south with a man door and single light casement window on the east face of the building. Plans call for the new building to be sheathed in wood clapboard siding to match the proposed addition. Figure 22. Proposed new garage and relocated garage/studio. Agenda Item # 5A Page 10 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Figure 23. South and East Elevations of proposed garage. . Figure 24: North and West Elevations of proposed garage. Subsection 9-11-18(b) and (c), B.R.C. 1981, sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate. (b) Neither the Landmarks Board nor the City Council shall approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate unless it meets the following conditions: (1)The proposed work preserves, enhances, or restores and does not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within an historic district; (2)The proposed work does not adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site or the district; Agenda Item # 5A Page 11 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. (3)The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed constructions are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its site or the historic district; (4)With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in an historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) above. (c)In determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate, the Landmarks Board shall consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled. ANALYSIS 1. Does the proposed application preserve, enhance, or restore and not damage or destroy ǰ the exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within an historic district? Constructed in 1939, staff considers the modest Minimal-Traditional building contributing to the historic character of the Mapleton Hill Historic District. Staff finds that, provided the listed conditions are met, the proposed alterations to the property including an addition to the house, relocation of the existing garage, and construction of a new one-car garage will preserve the historic character of General the property and the immediate streetscape and be consistent with the Design GuidelinesMapleton Hill Historic District Guidelines and the (see Design Guidelines Analysis section). 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the district? Staff finds that, provided the listed conditions are met, the proposed application will not adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark property as it will be generally General Design GuidelinesMapleton Hill Design compatible with the and the Guidelines in terms of mass, scale, height, design and color (see Design ) Guidelines Analysis section. 3. Is the architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures compatible with the character of the historic district? Agenda Item # 5A Page 12 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Staff finds that, provided the listed conditions are met, the proposed addition, relocation of the existing garage, and construction of a new one-car garage will be generally compatible with the architectural form, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on the proposed building and will be generally compatible with the character of the historic district in terms of mass, ) scale, height, setback, and design (see Design Guidelines Analysis section. 4. Does the proposal to demolish the building within the Mapleton Hill Historic District and the proposed new construction to replace the proposed demolished building meet the requirements of paragraphs 9-11-18(b)(2), 9-11-18(b)(3) and 9-11-18(b)(4) of this section? Not applicable. DESIGN GUIDELINES ANALYSIS: The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration General Design Guidelines Certificate. The Board has adopted the to help interpret the historic preservation ordinance. The following is an analysis of the proposed new construction with respect to relevant guidelines. Design guidelines are intended to be used as an aid to appropriate design and not as a checklist of items for compliance. General Design Guidelines. sections of the GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES -ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS, 4.0. 4.1 Protection of Historic Structures and Sites The primary concern of the Landmarks Board in reviewing additions to historic structures is the protection of the existing structure and the character of the site and district. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? Construct new additions so that Addition is proposed at rear of .1 Yes there is a least possible loss of contributing house and incorporates historic fabric and so that the the existing ell at the back of the character-defining features of the house as a clear connection between Agenda Item # 5A Page 13 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. historic building are not destroyed, old and new. damaged or destroyed New additions should be The design utilizes the existing ell at .2 Yes constructed so that they may be the rear of the house; addition could removed in the future without be removed with minimal damage to damaging the historic structure. the existing structure. It is not appropriate to construct The proposed design reflects the .3 Yes an addition that will detract from modest character of the existing the overall historic character of the house, and will not detract from its principal building and/or the site, historic character. Publicly visibility or if it will require the removal of from alley on north side of the significant building elements or Ditch due to distance and site features. mature vegetation. 4.2 Distinction from Historic Structures All additions should be discernible from the historic structure. When the original design is duplicated the historic evolution of the building becomes unclear. Instead, additional should be compatible with the historic architecture but clearly recognizable as new construction. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? Distinguish an addition from the Proposed addition takes design cues .1 Yes historic structure, but maintain from the existing house, creating a visual continuity between the two. visual continuity between the two One common method is to step the through simple forms and detailing. addition back and/or set it in Inset connection between the addition slightly from the historic and existing house will help structure. differentiate between old and new, and subtle change in materiality will help distinguish between the two sections of the house. Review details at Ldrc. Do not directly copy historic In form, the addition respects the .2 Yes elements. Instead, interpret historic house, and does not seek to historic elements in simpler ways replicate historic elements. Steps have in the addition. been taken to further develop a visual continuity between the existing house by simplifying form, fenestration, and refining materiality. Review details at Ldrc. Agenda Item # 5A Page 14 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Additions should be simpler in Existing house is very simple in form .3 Yes detail than the original structure. and detailing; Steps have been taken An addition that exhibits a more to simplify forms and reduce overall ornate style or implies an earlier mass and scale, fenestration, and period of architecture than that of refining materiality. Review details at the original is inappropriate. Ldrc. The architectural styles of Proposed addition is generally .4 Yes additions should not imitate the complementary to the style of the historic style but must be historic building but does not seek to compatible with it. Contemporary replicate it. style additions are possible, but require the utmost attention to these guidelines to be successful. The use of two distinct historic styles, such as adding Tudor-style half-timbering to a Classic Cottage, is inappropriate. 4.3 Compatibility with Historic Buildings Introducing new construction that contrasts sharply with an existing historic structure or site detracts from the visual continuity that marks our historic districts. While additions should be distinguishable from the historic structure, they must not contrast so sharply as to detract from the original building and/or the site. Additions should never overwhelm historic structures or the site, in mass, scale or detailing. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? An addition should be Though it will be visible from the .1 Yes subordinate to the historic public right of way, the proposed one- building, limited in size and scale story addition does not diminish or so that it does not diminish or overpower the existing building. visually overpower the building. Design an addition to be Relationship of solids to voids on the .2 Yes compatible with the historic east and west elevations of the building in mass, scale, materials proposed addition are compatible and color. For elevations visible with those found on the existing from public streets, the house. relationship of solids to voids in the exterior walls should also be compatible. Agenda Item # 5A Page 15 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Reflect the original symmetry or Symmetry of original house is .4 Yes asymmetry of the historic reflected in fenestration south face. building . Fenestration on east and west elevations has been simplified to follow same relationship. Preserve the vertical and The horizontal form of house will .5 Yes horizontal proportion of a remain. Steps have been taken to building's mass. reduce the mass and scale of the addition since the July 2 and Sept. nd 3 reviews. rd 4.4 Compatibility with Historic Site and Setting Additions should be designed and located so that significant site features, including mature trees, are not lost or obscured. The size of the addition should not overpower the site or dramatically alter its historic character. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? Design new additions so that the Character of the long, narrow site .1 Yes overall character of the site, site will be maintained, and significant topography, character-defining site site features are not proposed for features and trees are retained. removal. Locate new additions on an Addition is at the rear of the .2 inconspicuous elevation of the historic house but will be visible to Yes historic building, generally the rear the public along Pine Street, but one. Locating an addition to the will not visually overpower the front of a structure is inappropriate existing house. The addition is because it obscures the historic proposed at the rear, the only face facade of a building. of the building practical to construct an addition. Respect the established orientation Addition does not affect historic .3 Yes of the original building and typical orientation and alignments of the alignments in the area. building along the streetscape. Preserve a backyard area between Proposed construction of a one car .4 Yes the house and the garage, garage will take the place of the maintaining the general proportion existing garage which is to be of built mass to open space found relocated to the opposite side of the within the area. See Guideline property; addition and new garage 2.1.1. will not significantly affect the general proportion of built mass to open space. Agenda Item # 5A Page 16 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. 4.5 Key Building Elements Roofs, porches, dormers, windows and doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of any building. As such, they require extra attention to assure that they compliment the historic architecture. In addition to the guidelines below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related suggestions. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? Maintain the dominant Roofline of addition will be relatively low .1 Yes roofline and orientation of the massed and separated by a connector with roof form to the street. a roof lower than the existing house and addition. Hip roof on addition will be set back approximately 70 ft. from south (front) property line and will have minimal visibility when viewed from Pine St. Rooflines on additions should Roofline of addition is shown to be slightly .2 Yes be lower than and secondary to lower than roof of existing house, and will the roofline of the original be secondary to the roofline of the original building. house. The existing roof form, pitch, The proposed roof proportions and .3 Yes eave depth, and materials materials are generally compatible with should be used for all the historic house. additions . Maintain the proportion, Fenestration on east and west elevations .5 Yes general style, and symmetry or has been simplified and maintains the asymmetry of the existing patterns of the existing house. window patterns. Use window shapes that are Fenestration on east and west elevations .6 Yes found on the historic building. has been simplified to follow same Do not introduce odd-shaped relationship in terms of placement and windows such as octagonal, proportion. triangular, or diamond-shaped Agenda Item # 5A Page 17 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. MAPLETON HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES MAJOR EXTERIOR RENOVATION, ADDITIONS AND SECOND STORIES, T. F. Massing While the specific details of the historic architectural styles of Mapleton Hill vary considerably, the most significant and identifiable feature of a building is its massing. Buildings of Italianate styling are square and vertical. Bungalows are low and rectangular, while Queen Anne styling is asymmetrical with many projections and details. Replication of stylistic detailing is not encouraged or necessary, however, the form which defines the building, should be respected. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? Any addition to a building should The proposed addition will generally 1. Yes preserve the existing symmetry or not impact the asymmetry of the main asymmetry. house when viewed from Pine Street. The vertical or horizontal The addition will not impact the 2. Yes horizontal proportion of the Minimal should be preserved. Traditional when viewed from Pine St. T. Major Exterior Renovation, Additions and Second Stories. Large additions and additional stories to a building frequently change the character of the structure. The diversity that characterizes the historic district is a result of the variety in the sizes of buildings and the differing architectural styles. A design response that respects this diversity is most appropriate. Meets Guideline Analysis Guideline? New additions should be designed Addition proposed at rear of historic .4 Yes and constructed so that the building; no character defining character-defining features of the features of existing house will be historic building are not radically affected. changed, obscured, damaged or destroyed in the process of rehabilitation. New design and construction Proposed addition is distinct from .5 Yes should always be differentiated house in form, detailing and from older portions of a building; materiality. Reduction of mass, scale however, the addition should and height from July 2 and Sept. 3 ndrd respect the existing roof forms, and schemes much more compatible with building scale and massing. existing house. Agenda Item # 5A Page 18 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. General Design Guidelines 7. GARAGES & OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES 7.1 Existing Historic Accessory Structures A primary concern of the Landmarks Board in reviewing proposed changes in historic districts is the protection of existing historic accessory structures and the character of the site and district. : : GUIDELINESANALYSISCONFORMS Retain and preserve garages and .1 The existing garage is proposed to Yes accessory buildings that contribute to be retained and relocated to the the overall character of the site or northeast corner of the lot. district. Retain and preserve the character- .2 No exterior changes to the Yes defining materials, features, and existing garage are shown. details of historic garages and accessory buildings, including roofs, materials, windows, and doors. Mapleton Hill Historic District Guidelines ALLEYS, EASEMENTS and ACCESSWAYS D. Alleys are a strong visual element of the district, and have much variety of scale and detail. They play an important role in the development patterns that give the more visible areas their character. Alleys provide access to rear parking and garages. They have a varied edge quality, with buildings both on the property lines and set back. The size and quality of these accessory buildings varies considerably. Careful consideration should be given to changes in traditional uses. Guidelines: Analysis: CONFORMS? The use of alleys to provide access to the 1. Access to garage appears to rear of properties should be preserved. have been historically taken N/A from Pine St. Garage will no longer take access from alley. Steps might be taken to provide grass wheel path from garage door to sidewalk. Resolve at Ldrc. Generally maintains character of Buildings such as garages, sheds, etc. 3. Yes building in terms of orientation Agenda Item # 5A Page 19 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. which contribute to this variety should and location. be retained in their original form whenever possible. GARAGES, CARPORTS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES P A variety of accessory buildings has been adapted for use as garages in the Mapleton Hill Historic District. Whether carriage houses or sheds, these structures have certain similarities. They are plain and utilitarian and are located at the rear of the property on the alley. Materials and building elements are varied. Guideline: Consistency: If an existing structure is to be used as No exterior changes to the Yes .1 a garage the historic character of the existing garage are shown. building should be respected. As few changes as possible should be made. 7.2 New Accessory Buildings New accessory buildings should follow the character and pattern of historic accessory buildings. While they should take design cues from the primary buildings, they must be subordinate in size, massing, and detailing. Alley buildings should maintain a scale that is pleasant to walk along and comfortable for pedestrians. Location and Orientation It is inappropriate to introduce a new garage or accessory building if doing so The proposed construction of a new will detract from the overall historic garage is in keeping with the design character of the principal building, and .1 of the main house and existing Yes the site, or if it will require removal of a garage and will not impact the significant historic building element or character of the principal building. site feature, such as a mature tree. New garages and accessory buildings should generally be located at the rear of The property takes access from Pine the lot, respecting the traditional .2 St. Location of new garage behind Yes relationship of such buildings to the house is appropriate. primary structure and the site. Preserve a backyard area between the Construction of proposed one-car house and the accessory buildings, garage will not affect general maintaining the general proportion of .4 Yes proportion of built mass to open built mass to open space found within space of the property or streetscape. the area. Agenda Item # 5A Page 20 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Mass and Scale New accessory buildings should take Proposed design relates to existing design cues from the primary building .5 house and garage; size and massing Yes on the property, but be subordinate to it are appropriate. in terms of size and massing. New garages for single-family residences Proposed one-car garage is one- should generally be one story tall and story tall. Massing proportionate to shelter no more than two cars. In some .6 Yes built mass and open space on cases, a two-car garage may be property. inappropriate. Roof form and pitch should be Roof form is complementary to the .7 Yes complementary to the primary structure. main house. Materials and Detailing Accessory structures should be simpler As shown, garage is simpler than in design and detail than the primary .8 main house in design, material, and Yes building. detailing. Materials for new garages and Proposed materials (wood siding, accessory structures should be windows, and doors) will be compatible with those found on the .9 compatible with character of Maybe primary structure and in the district. historic district. Review details at Vinyl siding and prefabricated Ldrc. structures are inappropriate. Proposed design of windows on Windows, like all elements of accessory east and elevation appears to be structures, should be simpler in .10 compatible in terms of window Yes detailing and smaller in scale than type, size and detailing with similar similar elements on primary structures. elements on the primary building. Garage doors should be consistent with the historic scale and materials of Garage doors appear to be traditional accessory structures. Wood consistent in terms of scale and .12 Maybe is the most appropriate material and materials. Review final details at two smaller doors may be more Ldrc. appropriate than one large door. It is inappropriate to introduce features Proposed design does not attempt or details to a garage or an accessory .13 to recreate a false historic Yes building in an attempt to create a false appearance. historical appearance. Agenda Item # 5A Page 21 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Constructed in 1939, the Minimalist Traditional house at 711 Pine Street was built within the period-of-significance for the Mapleton Hill Historic District and retains a high degree of historic integrity and, as such, staff considers it to be contributing. Staff also acknowledges the modest, mid-century character of the house. Its diminutive scale makes it challenging to construct an addition that provides meaningful and useful space. The roughly 10,000 sq. ft. property is located mid-block and does not back on to an alley. These circumstances provide for the ability to construct an addition of mass and scale than might otherwise be possible. Staff considers that significant steps have been taken to ensure that the mass and scale be reduced to the extent possible to mitigate the visual impact on the main house when viewed from Pine St. Scale, height, massing, fenestration and detailing of the addition as proposed will be compatible with the character of the main house and the streetscape as a whole. Pending the review of some design details by the Landmark Design Review Committee, staff considers the proposed construction of an addition to be generally consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, Section 4 of the General Design Guidelines Mapleton Hill Design and Sections F and T of the Guidelines. Staff considers issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate for the proposed addition to the contributing house, relocation of the contributing garage and construction of a new one-car garage to be consistent with the Historic General Design GuidelinesMapleton Hill Preservation Ordinance, the , and the Historic District Guidelines . As such, staff finds the application consistent with General Design Guidelines Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1)-(4) B.R.C., the , and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines , provided the listed conditions are met. FINDINGS: Provided the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation are met, staff recommends that the Landmarks Board approve the application and adopt the following findings: 1.The proposed new construction will meet the standards in Section 9- 11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981. 2.The proposed construction will not have an adverse effect on the value Agenda Item # 5A Page 22 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. of the landmark property, as it will be generally compatible in terms of mass, scale, or orientation with other buildings in the district. 3.In terms of mass, scale, and orientation, the proposal will be generally General consistent with Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1)-(4) B.R.C.1981, the Design GuidelinesMapleton Hill Historic District Design , and the Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS: A: Tax Assessors Card B: Photographs C: D: Plans, Elevations and Massing Model E: Proposed July 2 and Sept. 3 Schemes ndrd Agenda Item # 5A Page 23 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Attachment A: Tax Assessors Card Agenda Item # 5A Page 24 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Agenda Item # 5A Page 25 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Attachment B: Current Photographs Agenda Item # 5A Page 26 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. 711 Pine St., view of south (front) elevation, 2014. 711 Pine St., view of west elevation, 2014. Agenda Item # 5A Page 27 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. 711 Pine St., view of east elevation, 2014. 711 Pine St., view of south east corner, 2014. Agenda Item # 5A Page 28 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. 711 Pine St., view of South elevation with 703 Pine St. on the left, 2014. 711 Pine St., view of South elevation with 727 Pine St. on the right, 2014. Agenda Item # 5A Page 29 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. View of 700 block of Pine St. looking east, 2014. View of 700 block of Pine St. looking west, 2014. Agenda Item # 5A Page 30 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Attachment B: th For Nov. 5 Review This letter is to request a new review for a Landmarks Board Alteration Certificate for a new addition to be added onto an existing bungalow, and located at 711 Pine St. The home is located in the Mapleton Hill Historic District. The 961 square foot bungalow was constructed in 1939, and still retains all of its existing construction character, although it has been altered by the application of vinyl siding and plastic shutters. The residence is a very modest one story structure located on a street that has several large, elegant, historic mansions. Due to the historical significance of the time period in which it was built, we are proposing to The proposed addition is now a one story structure that we have significantly downsized and simplified. We believe it meets the design guidelines for an appropriate addition in the Mapleton Historic District. We have tried to complement the existing bungalow by simplifying and downsizing the addition and providing a definite demarcation between new and old. This is accomplished by a four foot recess on one side, and a recessed courtyard on the other side, thus creating a stand alone effect for the bungalow, and highlighting its modest shape and preserving all existing roof lines. We have designed the new addition to have a flatter roof pitch to further lower the new roof and to accentuate the simplicity of the existing one story roof. The massing of the proposed low pitched roof is very simple, yet complimentary to the steeper pitched roof on the bungalow. The materials proposed on the addition are neighborhood appropriate the widely gapped horizontal siding on the front house and existing garage. The lot that we are working with is very large at 10,659 square feet, with a gentle slope up to the rear of the property and a drainage ditch running across the back lot line. The lot has no access to the existing alley, due to the drainage canal. The property has a single car one story garage that is deemed historic based on its age, but too narrow for an actual car. We are proposing to keep the garage but relocate it to the other side of the property and refurbish it into a studio, keeping it entirely intact. We are proposing a larger, new, one car garage to be built at the end of an extended driveway, similar to what previously existed. It would be sided with materials similar to the new addition, with tightly lapped horizontal siding. In conclusion, we respectfully ask for the boards approval to construct the proposed addition and new garage in accordance with the Mapleton Hill Historic Guidelines, that is size appropriate for the oversized lot, and complementary to the existing bungalow residence. Agenda Item # 5A Page 31 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. 711 PINE STREET LANDMARKS BOARD November 5, 2014        PREPARED BY: WAUGH AND ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS/PLANNERS 71 BOWEN LONGMONT, COLORADO 720-494-7602 Agenda Item # 5A Page 32 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES - ADDITIONS TO HISTORIC BUILDINGS 4.1 Protection of Historic Structures and Sites The primary concern of the Landmarks Board in reviewing additions to historic structures is the protection of the existing structure and the character of the site and district. - The proposed new addition totally preserves the existing historic fabric by not removing any of the existing front and side facades. The attachment at the rear wall is recessed 4 feet on one side, and on the other side, exposes the entire alcove with the use of a courtyard, thus preserving additional existing structure, that is visible from the rear elevation. The only connecting link to the existing residence is 12 feet wide. - The mass and scale have been reduced significantly by going to a single story design that blends very well with the modest residence. Considerable effort has been made to articulate both walls and roof forms to mitigate their size and scale. 4.2 Distinction from Historic Structures All additions should be discernible from the historic structure. When the original design is duplicated the historic evolution becomes unclear. Instead, additions should be compatible with the historic architecture but clearly recognizable as new construction. - The proposed addition is clearly distinguished from the existing residence by the recessing of the attaching walls and the use of different siding materials. Siding would be a tight horizontal lap siding as opposed to the widely gapped existing horizontal siding. The change in materials, as well as the main level court yard, and the one story design helps to reduce the mass of the addition and distinguish the new from the old. - The use of a shallower roof pitch than the existing roof further helps to distinguish the new from the old. Agenda Item # 5A Page 33 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. - Exterior detailing has been kept to a minimum to simplify the new addition. The exterior style of the existing residence is totally nonexistent, so the ability to go simpler is not possible. The best that we can do is to be as simplistic as possible yet remain distinctly different. 4.3 Compatibility with Historic Buildings Introducing new construction that contrasts sharply with an existing historic structure or site detracts from the visual continuity that marks our historic districts. While additions should be distinguishable from the historic structure, they must not contrast so sharply as to distract from the original building and/or site. Additions should never overwhelm historic structures or the site, in mass, scale or detailing. We have tried to minimize the size of the addition through the use of a more compact, simplified one story design. We have substantially reduced the square footage in size and complexity to keep the massing simple. The relationship of solids and voids is handled with wall articulation and fenestration of a more modest style which will be both simple in design and consistent with the simple style of the existing residence. With the one story design, and the stepping back of each of the progressive structural elements from the Pine Street elevation, as well as the open courtyard, the addition is much less visible from an eye level street view. 4.4 Compatibility with Historic Site and Setting Additions should be designed and located so that significant site features, including mature trees, are not lost or obscured. The size of the addition should not overpower the site or dramatically alter its historic character. This lot is 10,659 sq. ft. and totally dwarfs the existing residence. There will be no significant changes to the site except to move the existing garage to the other side and rear of the property, to be used as a studio. With the new addition and detached garage at the rear , Agenda Item # 5A Page 34 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. the new residence will have a much greater access to the rear of the oversized lot, as well as landscape improvements to the irrigation canal that runs the width of the rear of the lot. With a total building coverage of 2,813 square feet, the resulting open space will be 7,846, larger than most lots in the city of Boulder. The open space is 73.61 % of the overall lot. 4.5 Key Building Elements Roofs, porches, dormers, windows and doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of any building. As such, they require extra attention to assure that they compliment the historic architecture. In addition to the guidelines below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related suggestions. The existing hipped roof will be the predominant roof seen from Pine St. as the new addition starts with a low pitched roof and then steps back 40 feet from the existing ridge, and does not exceed the existing roof height. Windows are simple rectangular shapes to further the simplicity of the existing home. MAPLETON HILL DESIGN GUIDELINES - MAJOR EXTERIOR RENOVATION - ADDITIONS AND SECOND STORIES Massing While the specific details of the historic architectural styles of Mapleton Hill vary considerably, the most significant and identifiable feature is its massing. Buildings of Italianate styling are square and vertical. Bungalows are low and rectangular, while Queen Anne styling is asymmetrical with many projections and details. Replication of stylistic detailing Agenda Item # 5A Page 35 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. is not encouraged or necessary, however, the form which defines the building, should be respected. The new addition will not change the asymmetry of the existing residence. With the new one story addition and recessed courtyard, it is stepped back in length far enough to be virtually unseen from Pine Street. Major Exterior Renovation, Additions and Second Stories Large additions and additional stories to a building frequently change the character of the structure. The diversity that characterizes the historic district is a result of the variety in the sizes of buildings and the differing architectural styles. A design response that respects this diversity is most appropriate. The proposed addition is at the rear of the house, so no existing character defining features will be changed. The new addition is distinctly different from the existing, yet respects the existing hipped roof forms. The addition will add some variety to the existing plainness, as well as add footage to the very small bungalow. Even with the new addition, the house will be undersized in relation to most of the other homes on the block. The existing character is totally defined and preserved. Garages, Carports and Accessory Structures A variety of accessory buildings have been adapted for use as garages in the Mapleton Hill Historic District. Whether carriage houses or sheds, these structures have certain similarities. They are plain and utilitarian and are located at the rear of the property or alley. Materials and building elements are varied. The existing garage will be saved and moved to be used as a studio, as it is too small to be used as a garage. When moved all existing elements will be preserved. The building has been rotated 90 Agenda Item # 5A Page 36 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. degrees since the existing side wall has been buried and will need a shorter exposed wall, which works with the new existing contours by the rotation. GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Garages and other Accessory Structures A primary concern of the Landmarks Board in reviewing proposed changes In the historic districts is the protection of existing historic accessory structures and the character of the site and district. Existing garage will be retained and moved within the site to allow room for a new one car garage. New Accessory Buildings New accessory buildings should follow the character and pattern of historic accessory buildings, they must be subordinate in size, massing, and detailing. The proposed new 1 car garage will be similar in design to the new addition and will not impact the character of the original building. As the historic drive access has always been from Pine Street, this access will be preserved. The mass and scale will be appropriate with the new addition and existing residence. Materials will match the new addition and will not attempt to create a historic look. Agenda Item # 5A Page 37 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. PLANS AND ELEVATIONS NOV. 5, 2014 Proposed Site Plan for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 38 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Existing Elevations for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 39 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Proposed South and West Elevations for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 40 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Proposed North and East Elevations for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 41 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Proposed Floor Plan for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 42 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Existing Garage Elevations for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 43 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. Proposed Garage Elevations for Nov. 5 Review th Agenda Item # 5A Page 44 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. NDRD PREVIOUS SCHEMES : JULY 2 AND SEPT. 3 SITE PLAN Figure 7. July 2, 2014 (left) and Sept. 3 Site Plans (right). Not to scale. ndrd Agenda Item # 5A Page 45 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. SOUTH ELEVATION Figure 8. Existing South Elevation (façade) Figure 9. July 2, 2014 South Elevation (façade) nd Figure 10. Sept. 3, 2014 South Elevation (façade) rd Agenda Item # 5A Page 46 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. EAST ELEVATION Figure 11. Existing East Elevation Figure 12. July 2, 2014 proposal, East Elevation nd Figure 13. Sept. 3 proposal, East Elevation rd Agenda Item # 5A Page 47 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. NORTH ELEVATION Figure 14. Existing North Elevation Figure 15. July 2 Proposal, North Elevation (rear) nd Figure 16. Sept. 3, 2014, North Elevation (rear) rd Agenda Item # 5A Page 48 Memo to the Landmarks Board Re: Landmark Alteration Certificate for 711 Pine St. WEST ELEVATION Figure 17. Existing West Elevation Figure 18. July 2 Proposal, West Elevation nd Figure 19. Sept. 3, 2014, West Elevation rd Agenda Item # 5A Page 49