01.06.16 LB Minutes CITY OF BOULDER
LANDMARKSBOARD
January 6,2016
1777 Broadway,Council Chambers Room
6:00 p.m.
The following are the action minutes of the January 6,2016 City of Boulder Landmarks Board meeting.
A digital recording and a permanent set of these minutes(maintained for a period of seven years)are
retained in Central Records(telephone: 303-441-3043). You may also listen to the recording on-line at:
www.bouldMIandevelgp.net.
BOARD MEMBERS:
Kate Remley,Chair
George Clements,Vice Chair
Fran Sheets
Deborah Yin
*John Gerstle *Planning Board representative without a vote
Briana Butler, (Absent)
STAFF MEMBERS:
David Gehr,Deputy City Attorney
James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner
Marcy Cameron,Historic Preservation Planner
Lesli Ellis,Comprehensive Planning Manager
Holly Opansky, Landmarks Board Secretary
1. CALL TO ORDER
The roll having been called, Chair K.Remley declared a quorum at 6:01 p.m. and the following
business was conducted.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On a motion by K.Remley,seconded by G. Clements,the Landmarks Board approved(4-0)the
minutes as amended of the December 2,2015 board meeting.
3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA
Dan Corson, 757 8th Street,former Landmarks Board member,inquired about the status of two
topics that came up at the December 2015 retreat: 1)Chautauqua matter regarding lighting and the
Baseline sidewalk and if it will be reviewed at the Landmarks Board,despite that fact that it is a bond,
and 2)Initiation of 14th Street historic district matter,especially,because of the applicant's history.
J.Hewat,replied that 1)the Chautauqua matter is on the February 3,2016 Landmark Board agenda
noting that the boundary of the Baseline sidewalk and retaining wall portions of the matter are outside
of the Historic District,but the rest of the issue goes onto Kinnikinic Road; and that 2)the Ldre
approved the relocation of a building on Ie Street and Euclid to the north. M. Cameron, added that
individual landmark designation applications were received for all the buildings on that block,
possibly five buildings,and that they are presently on hold.
4. DISCUSSION OF LANDMARK ALTERATION AND DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS
ISSUED AND PENDING
0 Statistical Report
5. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate application to demolish an
existing house built in 1957 and, in its place, construct a new 2,384 sq. ft. house at 2110 4th
Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District,per section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code
(HIS2015-00254). Owner/Applicant: Katrina H.Anastas Revocable Trust/Angela Feddersen
Ex-carte contacts
K.Remley,F. Sheets,D.Yin,G. Clements, and J.Gerstle made site visits.
Staff Presentation
J. Hewat,presented the case to the board,with the staff recommendation that the Landmarks
Board conditionally approved the request.
Applicant's Presentation
Angela Feddersen, 522 Humboldt Street,Denver,architect, spoke in support of Landmark
Alteration Certificate offering the inspiration and intended use,as well as the specific design
details, then answered questions from the board and the public.
Public Hearing
Cindy Carlisle,411 Spruce Street, expressed concern about of the height and massing of the
building and access to off street parking via the alley.
Justin Gold,409 Spruce Street, expressed concern about access to the alley and privacy for the
adjacent properties,his included—in particular,does the back of the house allow the residences to
look into on the adjacent properties.He also supported the applicant remodeling the house.
Board Discussion
Since her work in the field of science and in particular at National Institute for Science&
Technology,K.Remley, shared that she immediately recognized Dr. Robert Beatty's name,
because he invented a calibration mechanism that measured microwave attenuation and became
that field standard for a long time. She bought and shared the mechanism with attendees.
After being presented with several options by D.Gehr,the applicant,A.Feddersen,requested
that the application and public hearing process be continued and heard on the March 2,2016
Landmarks Board meeting,allowing the 9.11.15c to shift the typical timeline of receiving an
answer in 45 days.
Motion
On a motion by K.Remley and seconded by D.Yin,voted and approved(4-0)to continue this
item and public hearing at the March 2,2016 Landmarks Board meeting. They detailed their
areas of concern to be addressed:
AREAS OF CONCERN:
1. Window-wall proportion: Revise design so that the north,and west elevations have a
traditional window to wall proportion(avoid large blank walls); consider revisions to reduce
amount of blank wall on the fagade(west).K.Remley referenced, Section U.8 of the
Mapleton Hill District Design Guidelines.
2. Windows: Ensure that all windows are traditionally proportioned, scaled and profile,and that
there are fewer types(shapes)of windows used(including redesign of redesign of the
clerestory windows at the north and south). Consider reducing amount of glass at east face.
3. Use of stone: Revise application,massing, and type of stone.Consider application of ashlar
stone at the foundation and a rustic stone on the main mass of the building with the wing
similar to the frame.Brick construction on main body of house may also be appropriate.
4. Use of metal: Eliminate metal accents(standing seam roof on the porch and bronze fascia
detail).
5. Height: Explore ways to reduce the overall height of the house(reduce ceiling heights,plate
heights,etc.), especially because a nicer part of this design is that the massing is relatively
simple(implied attractive/desirable).
6. Front porch supports: Eliminate the use of steel supports and consider open railing as
opposed to masonry wall at porch.
7. Rear porch: Consider the use of a single door at the deck rather than two new openings.
8. North deck: Further integration of the deck into the roof structure of the addition.
9. Skylights: Eliminate the use of skylights toward the front of the building(reduce visibility).
10. Alley: Minimize the impact of the new house on the historic context of the north driveway
(lane).
11. Additional detail: Submit drawings of rear accessory building and all proposed hardscaping
including impact to existing as well as proposed retaining wall and patio areas.
12. Documentation of existing house: Prepare archival quality photographs and measured
drawings of each elevation of the existing house prior to issuance of a building permit.
6. MATTERS FROM THE LANDMARKS BOARD, PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND CITY
ATTORNEY
A. Update Memo
B. Subcommittee Update
C. Design Guidelines and Code Revisions
D. Outreach and Engagement
E. Potential Resources
7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.
Approved on 1,/3 2016
Respectfully submitted,
Chairperson