Item 5A - 3131 7th St
Agenda Item # 5A Page 1
M E M O R A N D U M
August 2, 2017
TO: Landmarks Board
FROM: David Gehr, Interim Planning Director
Lesli Ellis, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Debra Kalish, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Marcy Cameron, Historic Preservation Planner
James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner
Anthony Wiese, Historic Preservation Intern
SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a motion to adopt a resolution
to initiate the process for the designation of the property at 3131 7th
St. (on which a stay-of-demolition was imposed on April 5, 2017), as
an individual landmark pursuant to Section 9-11-3, B.R.C. 1981
(HIS2016-00325).
STATISTICS:
1. Site: 3131 7th St.
2. Date of Construction: 1922
3. Zoning: RL-1 (Residential Low)
4. Lot Size: 9,453 sq. ft. (approx.)
5. Owner/Applicant: Margaret Freund/Ed Byrne
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Landmarks Board not initiate landmark designation for the
property at 3131 7th St. and that it direct staff to issue a demolition permit for the following
reasons:
The applicant has considered alternatives to the demolition of the house and
accessory building, as suggested in § 9-11-23(h), B.R.C. 1981, including consensual
landmark designation and incorporation of the house into redevelopment plans,
but given the condition of the house and stated desires for the property, does not
consider preservation of the house to be feasible.
The initiation of landmark designation over an owner’s objection by the
Landmarks Board has historically been used very rarely.
The property possesses a moderate level of architectural integrity, marginal
significance for its association with past residents, and is not located in an
identified potential historic district.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 2
There has been little community interest in the proposed demolition during the
stay of demolition.
MOTION:
I move that the Landmarks Board approve the application for demolition, finding that due its
moderate level of architectural integrity, its marginal significance for its association with past
residents, the fact that it is not located in an identified potential historic district, and the fact that
there has been little public interest in the preservation of the buildings, initiating landmark
designation over the owner’s objection would not draw a reasonable balance between private
property rights and the public interest in preserving the city’s cultural, historic and architectural
heritage, and that the Landmarks Board adopt the staff memorandum dated August 2, 2017, as
the findings of the board. As a condition of approval, prior to issuance of the demolition permit,
the applicant shall submit to PH&S staff for review, approval, and recording with Carnegie
Library:
1. A site plan showing the location of all existing improvements on the subject property;
2. Measured elevation drawings of all faces of the building depicting existing conditions,
fully annotated with architectural details and materials indicated on the plans; and
3. Medium format archival quality color photographs of all exterior elevations.
SUMMARY
The purpose of this hearing is for the Board to determine whether it is appropriate to
initiate local landmark designation for the property at 3131 7th St.
On Oct. 13, 2016, the Historic Preservation program received a demolition permit
application for the 1922 house and accessory building at 3131 7th St.
On Oct. 19, 2016, the Landmarks design review committee (Ldrc) referred the
application to the Landmarks Board for a public hearing, finding there was “probable
cause to believe that the property may be eligible for designation as an individual
landmark.”
At the owner’s request, the city and the applicant entered into a Tolling Agreement to
adjust the time requirements in Section 9-11-23(g) and (h) B.R.C. 1981.
On April 5, 2017 staff recommended and the Landmarks Board imposed a stay-of-
demolition for a period of up to 180 days, in order to seek alternatives to the
demolition finding that the house may be eligible for individual Landmark
designation. See Attachment C: Demolition Memo.
The 180-day stay period will expire on August 13, 2017.
On April 25, 2017 staff and representatives of the Landmarks Board and Historic
Boulder, Inc. met with the applicant and owner’s representative to discuss
alternatives to the demolitions, including landmark designation, rehabilitation, and
Agenda Item # 5A Page 3
the possibility of constructing an addition to the main house. As stated in the analysis
section of this memo, none of these options are considered feasible by the property
owner.
On July 5, 2017, the Landmarks Board voted to schedule a hearing to consider
whether to initiate landmark designation for the property at 3131 7th St.
With the exception of Historic Boulder’s participation in the exploration of
alternatives to the removal of the house, no public interest in the preservation of the
house has been demonstrated. Since the July 5 hearing, the PH&S department has
received 4 letters supporting the demolition of the house. See Attachment B: Letters
from the Public.
In addition to the lack of community support for the preservation of the house, the
property is not located in an identified potential historic district and the buildings
possess only moderate architectural significance and no demonstrable historic or
environmental significance. For these reasons, in this case, staff considers initiation of
landmark designation over the owner’s objection is not appropriate in that it would
not represent a balance of private property rights and the public interest.
Staff recommends the board not initiate landmark designation and that the
demolition permit be issued.
ANALYSIS:
The Historic Preservation Ordinance, Chapter 9-11-3, B.R.C. 1981, provides that the
Landmarks Board may hold a public hearing to consider initiating landmark designation
of a property if the Board finds that the building may be eligible for landmark
designation pursuant to Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981. At the July 5, 2017
Landmarks Board meeting, the Board voted (3-2, R. Pelusio and E. Budd opposed) to
hold a hearing to consider whether initiation of landmark designation is appropriate in
advance of the August 13, 2017 expiration of the stay-of-demolition.
Purpose of Stays of Demolition
The stated purposes of a stay-of-demolition are “to prevent the loss of buildings that
may have historic or architectural significance” and “to provide the time necessary to
initiate designation as an individual landmark or to consider alternatives.” Section 9-11-
23(a), Purpose, B.R.C. 1981. During the course of a stay, the Board may consider a variety
of options to this end, one of which is the designation of the property. The initiation of
landmark designation over an owner’s objection by the Landmarks Board has
historically been used only on very rare occasions.
In the past 10 years, approximately 60 stays-of-demolition have been imposed by the
Board. Only three times during that period has the Board initiated and recommended
landmark designation of a property over the owner’s objection. However, many stays
during this same period have resulted in the avoidance of demolition through
Agenda Item # 5A Page 4
reconsideration of projects and the subsequent preservation of buildings. Recent
examples in which stays of demolition have resulted in the applicant filing an
application for landmark designation include: 1936 Mapleton (2008); 900 Pearl Street
(2009); 2003 Pine Street (2014); and 1922 20th Street (2014). Likewise, there are many
examples of stays that have been allowed to expire (or demolition permits issued prior
the stay expiring) by the Board when reasonable alternatives to demolition have not
been found.
Initiation by Board
Pursuant to Section 9-11-3, B.R.C. 1981, the decision to initiate the designation of an
individual landmark pursuant to Section 9-11-1, Legislative Intent, and Section 9-11-2,
City Council May Designate or Amend Landmarks and Historic Districts, B.R.C. 1981, is
legislative in nature.
Compliance with Section 9-11-1(a)
Section 9-11-1(a) reads as follows:
9-11-1, Purpose and Legislative Intent
a. The purpose of this chapter is to promote the public health, safety, and welfare
by protecting, enhancing, and perpetuating buildings, sites, and areas of the city
reminiscent of past eras, events, and persons in local, state, or national history or
providing significant examples of architectural styles of the past. It is also the
purpose of this chapter to develop and maintain appropriate settings and
environments for such buildings, sites, and areas to enhance property values,
stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge
of the City’s living heritage.
Architecture
Constructed in 1922, the one-story house at 3131 7th St. is a relatively well-preserved
example vernacular wood frame residential construction common in Boulder during the
1910s and 1920s. The front-gabled building features a shed-roof porch with simple,
square posts and a low, bead board railing. The window openings have surrounds that
are slightly tapered. The windows are one-over-one double-hung sash. An interior
chimney is located toward the rear of the house and a shed-roof addition is located at the
rear of the house. It is believed this portion was a rear porch that was enclosed. The
house remains largely intact, retaining its original form and massing, and materiality,
with the exception of the application of aluminum siding in 1961.
The Historic Building Inventory Form (1995) identified the house as representing a type,
period, or method of construction, noting that, “this house, although somewhat altered,
is representative of the vernacular dwellings erected in Boulder before World War II, as
Agenda Item # 5A Page 5
reflected in the gabled roof with overhanging eaves and exposed rafters, the prominent
porch, and the double-hung windows.”
While staff agrees with the assessment that building is representative of vernacular
houses constructed during this period, staff does not consider the building to be of
exceptional architectural significance.
A small wood frame garage, also constructed in 1922, is located along the west property
line. The simple, 12 ft. by 18 ft. frame garage has a gable roof, with a single opening on
the east elevation. The building is clad in shiplap siding with corner boards and is roofed
with asphalt shingles.
Persons Associated with the Property
W. O. Lieser owned the property when the house was constructed. He sold it a year
later. Floyd D. and Mable Pumphfrey were the residents from 1924-26, and retained
ownership until 1934, while renting it out. The Pumphfreys sold the house to Harry
Hamm in 1934, who in turn sold it to Kate and Sidney Dawe. Sidney Dawe worked as a
mine foreman and groundskeeper for the University of Colorado, while Kate worked as
a cook for Memorial Hospital and the Seventh Day Adventist School. The Dawes lived at
3131 7th until 1960, when the sold the property to Raymond and Mildred Benshoof.
Raymond served in the United States Air Force and worked as a telecommunications
installer for AT&T. The Benshoofs lived at the property for over 50 years before
Raymond’s death in 2015.
While interesting, none of the owners or residents appear to have made significant
contributions to the community on the local, state or national level.
Geographic Importance
This property is representative of houses constructed in the Newlands area during the
first half of the twentieth century as it gradually transitioned from agricultural in
character to a residential neighborhood. In the early twentieth century, the area
consisted primarily of farms, orchards and ranches; by the 1940s, residential
development had begun in earnest. Many of residents in the houses constructed from
1920 to 1940 were working-class laborers, carpenters, shopkeepers, and people working
for companies such as the Mountain States and Telephone Company. While the area has
changed dramatically from its pre-WW II rural character, this section of 7th St. still retains
several intact houses from the first half of the twentieth century interspersed among
larger houses remodeled or constructed in the in the last twenty-five years.
The property is not located within an identified potential historic district and the area
has lost much of its historic agricultural character.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 6
Given its moderate level of architectural integrity, lack of significance of past residents,
and the fact that it is not located in an identified potential historic district, staff considers
that in this case, initiation over the owner’s objection is inappropriate.
Compliance with Section 9-11-1(b)
Section 9-11-1(b) reads as follows:
b. “The city council does not intend by this chapter to preserve every old building
in the city, but instead to draw a reasonable balance between private property
rights and the public interest in preserving the city’s cultural, historic, and
architectural heritage by ensuring that demolition of buildings and structures
important to that heritage will be carefully weighed with other alternatives . . . .”
Staff considers the initiation of landmark designation of this property inappropriate given
efforts that have been made to explore alternatives to the demolition during the stay. A
stay-of-demolition is issued to provide time to “explore alternatives” that might prevent
the demolition of significant historic resources. Staff considers that time has been taken
and efforts have been made to explore alternatives including looking at rehabilitation costs
using tax credits and other financial incentives. Due to the deteriorated condition and
estimated cost of repair, the applicants consider rehabilitation of the building to be
unreasonable and impractical.
During the course of the stay-of-demolition, there has been limited community support
for the proposed designation. At the April 5, 2017 meeting, Historic Boulder, Inc. spoke in
support of imposing a stay on the property to explore alternatives to the demolition. Staff
has not received correspondence regarding the property since the demolition application
was received in October of 2016.
Staff considers that the moderate level of architectural integrity, lack of significance of
past residents, the fact that it is not located in an identified potential historic district, and
the limited public support during the stay of demolition, makes initiation over the
owner’s objection an unreasonable balance of private property rights and the public
good.
Compliance with Section 9-11-2
Section 9-11-2 provides:
(a) Pursuant to the procedures in this chapter the city council may by ordinance:
(1) Designate as a landmark an individual building or other feature or an
integrated group of structures or features on a single lot or site having
Agenda Item # 5A Page 7
a special character and historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or
value and designate a landmark site for each landmark.
Staff considers that while the property might meet the standard for designation as an
individual landmark per Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C., 1981, in this case, it would be
inappropriate to designate the property at 3131 7th St. as a local landmark over the
owner’s objection due to its moderate level of architectural integrity, lack of significance
of past residents, the fact that it is not located in an identified potential historic district,
and the limited public support during the stay of demolition.
DECISION OF THE BOARD:
If the Board chooses not to initiate landmark designation of the property and allows the
stay of demolition to expire, the city manager will issue a demolition permit for the
house and accessory building on August 13, 2017.
If the Board chooses to initiate the designation process, it must do so by resolution. A
draft resolution is included in Attachment A. If initiated, the application shall be heard
by the Landmarks Board within 60 to 120 days in order to determine whether the
proposed designation conforms with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1,
Legislative Intent, and 9-11-2, City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts,
B.R.C. 1981. The owner must obtain a Landmark Alteration Certificate prior to the
submission of building permit applications for the property if they choose to proceed
while the application is pending, or they may choose to wait until the application
process is complete.
Board Options:
1. Initiate designation of the property as an individual landmark by adopting the
resolution under Attachment A.
2. Take no action and permit the stay of demolition, originally imposed on April 5,
2017, to expire on August 13, 2017.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Draft resolution to initiate landmark designation of the property at
3131 7th St.
Attachment B: Letters from the Public
Attachment C: Feb. 3, 2016 Demolition Memo
Agenda Item # 5A Page 8
Attachment A: Draft Resolution
RESOLUTION NO. _______
A RESOLUTION OF THE LANDMARKS BOARD INITIATING
THE DESIGNATION OF 3131 7TH ST. AS AN INDIVIDUAL
LANDMARK.
WHEREAS, on July 5, 2017 the Landmarks Board voted to schedule an initiation hearing
for the property at 3131 7th St.; and
WHEREAS, on August 2, 2017, the Landmarks Board held an initiation hearing for the
property at 3131 7th St. and determined that the property meets the standards for initiation;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LANDMARKS BOARD OF THE CITY OF
BOULDER, COLORADO:
The City of Boulder Landmarks Board hereby initiates the designation of 3131 7th St. as an
individual landmark, and will schedule a designation hearing in accordance with the historic
preservation ordinance no fewer than sixty days and no greater than one hundred-twenty days from
the date of this resolution.
ADOPTED this 2nd day of August 2017.
This resolution is signed by the chair of the Landmarks Board on August 5, 2017.
_____________________________________
Chair, Landmarks Board
ATTEST:
_________________________________
Secretary to the Board
Agenda Item # 5A Page 9
Attachment B: Letters from the Public
Agenda Item # 5A Page 10
Agenda Item # 5A Page 11
Agenda Item # 5A Page 12
Agenda Item # 5A Page 13
Attachment C: April 5, 2017 Demolition Memo
M E M O R A N D U M
April 5, 2017
TO: Landmarks Board
FROM: Lesli Ellis, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Debra Kalish, Senior Assistant City Attorney
Marcy Cameron, Historic Preservation Planner
James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner
William Barnum, Historic Preservation Intern
SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a permit for the demolition of
the house and garage at 3131 7th St., non-landmarked buildings over
50 years old, pursuant to per Section 9-11-23 of the Boulder Revised
Code 1981 (HIS2016-00325).
STATISTICS:
6. Site: 3131 7th St.
7. Date of Construction: 1922
8. Zoning: RL-1 (Residential Low)
9. Lot Size: 9,453 sq. ft. (approx.)
10. Owner/Applicant: Margaret Freund/Ed Byrne
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning, Housing and Sustainability Department (PH&S) recommends that the
Landmarks Board adopt the following motion:
I move that the Landmarks Board issue a stay of demolition for the house and accessory building
located at 3131 7th St., for a period not to exceed 180 days from the day the permit application was
accepted by the city manager, as adjusted by the Tolling Agreement, adopting the staff
memorandum and the findings listed below, in order to explore alternatives to demolition.
Staff encourages the applicant to consider landmark designation of the house and/or
incorporation into future redevelopment plans for the site. A 180-day stay period would
expire on August 13, 2017.
SUMMARY:
On Oct. 13, 2016, the Planning, Housing and Sustainability Department (PH&S) received
an application to demolish the house and garage at 3131 7th St. On Oct. 19, 2016, the
Agenda Item # 5A Page 14
Landmarks design review committee (Ldrc) reviewed the application and referred the
application to the Landmarks Board for a public hearing, finding there was “probable
cause to consider that the property may be eligible for designation as an individual
landmark.” The buildings are not in a designated historic district or locally landmarked,
but are over 50 years old and the proposed work meets the criteria for demolition
(historic) as defined in Section 9-16-1, of the Boulder Revised Code 1981.
PURPOSE OF THE BOARD’S REVIEW:
Pursuant to Section 9-11-23(d)(2), B.R.C. 1981, demolition requests for all buildings built
prior to 1940 require review by the Landmarks design review committee (Ldrc). The
Ldrc is comprised of two members of the Landmarks Board and a staff member. If,
during the course of its review, the Ldrc determines that there is probable cause to find
that the building may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark, the issuance
of the permit is stayed for up to 60 days from the date a completed application was
accepted and the permit is referred to the board for a public hearing.
If the Landmarks Board finds that the buildings proposed for demolition may have
significance under the criteria in subsection (f) of Section 9-11-23, B.R.C. 1981, the
application shall be suspended for a period not to exceed 180 days from the date it was
accepted as complete, in order to provide the time necessary to consider alternatives to
the building demolition. If imposed, a 180-day stay period would start when the
completed application was accepted (Oct. 19, 2016, when the Landmarks Board fee was
paid) and expire on August 13, 2017. Section 9-11-23 (g) and (h), B.R.C. 1981. At the
owner’s request, the city and the applicant entered into a Tolling Agreement to adjust
the time requirements in Section 9-11-23(g) and (h) B.R.C. 1981. The time was tolled,
pursuant to a Tolling Agreement, from the Dec. 7, 2016 Landmarks Board meeting, the
date the item would have been heard, until Feb. 1, 2017, when the applicant was
available. A second Tolling Agreement extended the tolled period another 63 days. The
additional 118 days has adjusted the expiration of the potential stay-of-demolition to
August 13, 2017.
DESCRIPTION
The property is located on the west side of 7th Street in Boulder, between Forest and
Evergreen avenues. It is not located in a designated or potential historic district.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 15
Figure 1. Location Map showing 3131 7th St.
Figure 2. Southeast Corner, 3131 7th St., 2017.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 16
The one-story, 816 sq. ft. front gable wood frame house, is located on the northern
portion of the 9,453 sq. ft. lot facing onto 7th Street with setback similar to other houses
on the block. A shed roof porch supported by simple, square posts and a low, bead
board railing is located on the façade and provides access to a slightly off-center door
flanked by two, double hung windows. The front door has a multi-light door and a
contemporary storm door. Permit records indicate that in 1961 the original wood
clapboard siding was covered with aluminum siding. A portion of the original siding is
visible at the east and west gables where attic vents have been added.
Figure 3. Northeast Corner, 3131 7th St., 2017.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 17
Figure 4. South Elevation, 3131 7th St., 2017.
The south (side) elevation features four window openings with one-over-one, double-
hung sash, two of which are paired in the middle portion of this wall, with a smaller
(kitchen) window located at the west end of the elevation. Two basement windows are
located near the east end of the elevation. An interior chimney is located near the rear of
the house and a shed-roof addition is located at the rear of the house. The 1929 Tax
Assessor Card identifies this portion of the building as a porch. The windows and doors
appear to date from the original 1922 construction. This portion of the building is visible
in the c1929 tax assessor photograph and appears to be enclosed. A pedestrian door and
five casement windows are located on the west elevation. The roof is clad in asphalt
shingles and the building rests on a concrete foundation.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 18
Figure 5. View of garage, 3131 7th St., 2016.
A garage, also constructed in 1922, is located along the west property line. The simple, 12
ft. by 18 ft. frame garage has a gable roof, with a single opening on the east elevation.
The building is clad in shiplap siding with corner boards and is roofed with asphalt
shingles.
ALTERATIONS
Figure 6. Tax Assessor Card photo, 3131 7th St., c1929.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 19
With the exception of the gable ends of the house, the original wood siding has been
covered with aluminum siding, and the original porch stairs replaced with concrete
steps. (The 1929 Assessor photographs shows the parch steps to be wood.) Louvered
vents in the gable ends appear to have been added at the time the aluminum siding was
applied. The doors and double-hung windows all appear to be original. No alterations
appear to have been made to the one-car garage which appears not to have been
maintained for many years.
NEIGHBORHOOD HISTORY1
Prior to World War-II, North Boulder was predominately agricultural, consisting of
cropland and cattle grazing. “Truck gardens,” orchards, and fruit cultivation were
undertaken in small parcels of twenty acres and less. Well-known, large farms and
ranches were located in this area of Boulder in the early 1900s, such as the Maxwell
ranch near Linden Ave., where cattle were raised, and the Wolff farm to the southeast
where wheat, dairy cattle and fruit trees were raised.
In the late 1800s and early 1900s, most land in this area of Boulder was owned by James
P. Maxwell, who had purchased the land from the U.S. Government in 1880. At that
time, Maxwell acquired several thousand acres west of Broadway and north of what is
now Hawthorn. These lands were primarily irrigated by Silver Lake Ditch (1888), which
was constructed by Maxwell to water 1,000 acres of land in north Boulder. By the early
1900s, Maxwell began selling off the level land in small tracts of one to five acres; many
of these tracts were sold with water rights to Silver Lake Ditch. Since these tracts were
well outside of the city limits, there was no restriction as to the use of the land; many of
the owners planted orchards and truck gardens and continued this usage until the
beginning of the building boom after World War II. See Attachment G: North Boulder
Historical Background
PROPERTY HISTORY
The 1929 Tax Assessor Card records the date of construction of the house as 1922 with a
12 ft. by 18 ft. frame garage located on the property. W. O. Lieser owned the property
when the house was constructed in 1922, and it passed to William Ross and then to
Edythe Thoesen in 1923 and 1924. Floyd D. Pumphrey owned the house from 1924 until
1934, and resided there with his wife, Mabel, until 1926. Pumphrey worked as an auto
mechanic. The house was rented to Joseph DeRusha, a pipefitter, and his wife, Bessie in
1928. The property passed to Harry Hamm in 1934, who in turn sold it to Sidney and
Kate Dawe in 1938.
1 North Boulder Historic Overview, 1994.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 20
Sidney E. Dawe was born Oct. 29, 1889 in Blossberg New Mexico, one of thirteen
children of Thomas and Elizabeth Dawe. Kate Yeaurack Dawe was born Sept. 14, 1894 in
Coaltown, Illinois. The Dawes were married in 1912 and had three children, Elizabeth,
Thomas and Kathryn. The 1930 US Census listed the Dawes at the Pictou Coal Mining
Camp in Huerfano County, where Sidney was the foreman at the coal mine. The family
moved to Boulder from Canon City and North Park in 1935. Mr. Dawe is listed as the
foreman of a mine in the 1940 US Census, and later worked as the “Building and
Grounds Man” for the University of Colorado and as the custodian for the Seventh Day
Adventist School. Mrs. Dawe worked as a cook for Memorial Hospital and the Seventh
Day Adventist School. She was also member of the Corcas Society and the family were
members of the Seventh Day Adventist Church. The Dawes resided at 3131 7th St. from
1938 until 1960, when they sold it to Raymond and Mildred Benshoof.
Raymond Benshoof was born Dec. 18, 1935 in Boulder. 2 He joined the United States Air
Force in 1954, serving in Georgia, Wyoming and Germany. He and Mildred married in
1959 and Raymond worked as a telecommunications installer for AT&T until his
retirement in 1995. He was also a volunteer with the Boy Scouts of America. He passed
away in 2015. The Benshoofs resided at 3131 7th St. for over 50 years. The current owner,
Margaret Freund, purchased the property in 2016. See Attachment E: Deed and Directory
Research
CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD’S DECISION:
Section 9-11-23(f), B.R.C. 1981, provides that the Landmarks Board “shall consider and
base its decision upon any of the following criteria:
“(1) The eligibility of the building for designation as an individual landmark
consistent with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2,
B.R.C. 1981;
“(2) The relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an
established and definable area;
“(3) The reasonable condition of the building; and
“(4) The reasonable projected cost of restoration or repair.
“In considering the condition of the building and the projected cost of restoration
or repair as set forth in paragraphs (f)(3) and (f)(4) …, the board may not consider
deterioration caused by unreasonable neglect.”
As detailed below, staff considers this property may be eligible for designation as an
individual landmark.
2 Raymond Walter Benshoof. Darrell Howe Mortuary. http://www.darrellhowemortuary.com/node/666. Accessed 19
Jan. 2017.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 21
CRITERION 1: INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK ELIGIBILITY
The following is a result of staff's research of the property relative to the significance
criteria for individual landmarks, as adopted by the Landmarks Board on Sept. 17, 1975.
See Attachment E: Individual Landmark Significance Criteria
HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE:
Summary: The house and garage located at 3131 7th St. meet historic significance under criteria
1, 3 and 4.
1. Date of Construction: 1922
Elaboration: The tax assessor card identifies the date of construction as 1922.
2. Association with Persons or Events: None observed
Elaboration: W. O. Lieser owned the property when the house was constructed. He
sold it a year later. Floyd D. and Mable Pumphfrey were the residents from 1924-26,
and retained ownership until 1934, while renting it out. The Pumphfreys sold the
house to Harry Hamm in 1934, who in turn sold it to Kate and Sidney Dawe. Sidney
Dawe worked as a mine foreman and groundskeeper for the University of Colorado,
while Kate worked as a cook for Memorial Hospital and the Seventh Day Adventist
School. The Dawes lived at 3131 7th until 1960, when the sold the property to
Raymond and Mildred Benshoof. Raymond served in the United States Air Force and
worked as a telecommunications installer for AT&T. The Benshoofs lived at the
property for over 50 years, before Raymond’s death in 2015.
While interesting, none of the owners or residents appear to have made significant
contributions to the community on the local, state or national level.
3. Distinction in the Development of the Community:
Elaboration: Constructed in 1922, the buildings represent the early period of
development of the Newlands subdivision. The area was largely rural until
annexation into the city of Boulder in the 1950s. The area is comprised of an eclectic
mix of residential styles.
4. Recognition by Authorities: Front Range Research Associates, Inc.
Elaboration: The 1995 architectural survey identifies the house as representing a
type, period, or method of construction, noting that, “this house, although somewhat
altered, is representative of the vernacular dwellings erected in Boulder before World
War II, as reflected in the gabled roof with overhanging eaves and exposed rafters,
the prominent porch, and the double-hung windows.”
Agenda Item # 5A Page 22
ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE:
Summary: The house and garage located at 3131 7th St. meet architectural significance under
criterion 1.
1. Recognized Period or Style: Vernacular, Craftsman Bungalow elements
Elaboration: The house is a relatively well-preserved example vernacular wood
frame house construction common in Boulder during the 1910s and 1920s. The house
remains largely intact, retaining its original form and massing, and materiality, with
the exception of the application of aluminum siding.
2. Architect or Builder of Prominence: None known
3. Artistic Merit: None observed
4. Example of the Uncommon: None observed
5. Indigenous Qualities: None observed
ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE:
Summary: The house and garage located at 3131 7th St. meet environmental significance under
criteria 1.
1. Site Characteristics: The residential lot features an open lot with a few mature trees.
2. Compatibility with Site: The Newlands neighborhood has changed dramatically in
the last two decades and much of the area’s original context has been lost.
3. Geographic Importance: None observed.
4. Environmental Appropriateness: None observed
5. Area Integrity: The area as a whole has lost much of its historic context, character
and is not considered to be potentially eligible for historic district designation.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 23
CRITERION 2: RELATIONSHIP TO THE CHARACTER OF THE
NEIGHBORHOOD:
This property is representative of houses constructed in the Newlands area during the
first half of the twentieth century as it gradually transitioned from agricultural in
character to a residential neighborhood. In the early twentieth century, the area
consisted primarily of farms, orchards and ranches; by the 1940s, residential
development had begun in earnest. Many of residents in the houses constructed from
1920 to 1940 were working-class laborers, carpenters, shopkeepers, and people working
for companies such as the Mountain States and Telephone Company. While the area has
changed dramatically from its pre-WW II rural character, this section of 7th St. still retains
several intact houses from the first half of the twentieth century interspersed among
larger houses remodeled or constructed in the in the last twenty-five years.
CRITERION 3: CONDITION OF THE BUILDING
The property owner has submitted information on the condition of the building, noting
that the building is in poor condition due to water infiltration. Tim Ryan of Ault Park
Development inspected the property, and identified several deficiencies making the
house unsafe for occupancy in its current state.
The applicant also retained the services of Glenn Frank, P. E., of Glenn Frank
Engineering to perform an assessment of the structure. He identified cracking and
bowing of the foundation walls and water infiltration. The head height of the basement
is just over six feet, and windows do meet standards for egress. In one section of the
basement, a wood framed wall is retaining earth and basement stairs do not meet
current code. Wall cracks and evidence of earlier repairs led Frank to observe that the
foundation of the building is settling, the floor joists are sagging, and water is infiltrating
the main level. He found the foundation of the rear patio to be poorly constructed, and
the grading to be flawed, leaving the house vulnerable to further water infiltration. He
noted the front porch’s foundation and structure has settled and sagged, making the
porch uneven. See Attachment A: Applicant Materials.
CRITERION 4: PROJECTED COST OF RESTORATION OR REPAIR:
Specific information regarding the projected cost of restoration or repair has not been
submitted. The Glenn Frank Engineering Report states that “costs [to rehabilitate the
building] would be prohibitive and would approach the cost of total replacement with a
new structure.” The report concludes by recommending replacement, rather than
renovation, of the structure. See Attachment A: Applicant Materials.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 24
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENT:
Staff has received no comment to date from the public on this matter.
THE BOARD’S DECISION:
If the Landmarks Board finds that the buildings to be demolished do not have
significance under the criteria set forth in section 9-11-23(f), B.R.C. 1981, the city manager
shall issue a demolition permit.
If the Landmarks Board finds that the buildings to be demolished may have significance
under the criteria set forth above, the application shall be suspended for a period not to
exceed 180 days from the date the permit application was accepted by the city manager
as complete, and adjusted by the Tolling Agreements, in order to provide the time
necessary to consider alternatives to the demolition of the building (section 9-11-23(h),
B.R.C. 1981). A 180-day stay period would expire on August 13, 2017.
FINDINGS:
Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following findings:
A stay of demolition for the house at 1321 9th St. is appropriate based on the criteria set
forth in Section 9-11-23(f), B.R.C. 1981 in that:
1. The property may be eligible for individual landmark designation based upon its
historic and architectural significance;
2. The property contributes to the character of the neighborhood as an intact
representative of the area’s past;
3. Additional time is merited to assess whether rehabilitation of the building is
impractical or economically unfeasible.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Current Photographs
Attachment B: Applicant’s Materials
Attachment C: Historic Building Inventory Form
Attachment D: Boulder County Tax Assessor Card c. 1929
Attachment E: Deed and Directory Research
Attachment F: Significance Criteria for Individual Landmarks
Attachment G: North Boulder Historical Background
Agenda Item # 5A Page 25
Attachment A: Current Photographs
3131 7th St., Northeast Corner, 2017.
3131 7th St., Southwest Corner, 2017.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 26
3131 7th St., Southwest Corner, 2017.
3131 7th St., South Elevation, 2017.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 27
3131 7th St., Porch at East Elevation, 2017.
3131 7th St., Accessory Building, 2017.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 28
Attachment B: Applicant Materials
Agenda Item # 5A Page 29
Agenda Item # 5A Page 30
Agenda Item # 5A Page 31
Agenda Item # 5A Page 32
Agenda Item # 5A Page 33
Agenda Item # 5A Page 34
Agenda Item # 5A Page 35
Agenda Item # 5A Page 36
Agenda Item # 5A Page 37
Agenda Item # 5A Page 38
Agenda Item # 5A Page 39
Agenda Item # 5A Page 40
Agenda Item # 5A Page 41
Agenda Item # 5A Page 42
Agenda Item # 5A Page 43
Agenda Item # 5A Page 44
Agenda Item # 5A Page 45
Agenda Item # 5A Page 46
Agenda Item # 5A Page 47
Agenda Item # 5A Page 48
Agenda Item # 5A Page 49
Agenda Item # 5A Page 50
Agenda Item # 5A Page 51
Agenda Item # 5A Page 52
Agenda Item # 5A Page 53
Agenda Item # 5A Page 54
Agenda Item # 5A Page 55
Agenda Item # 5A Page 56
Agenda Item # 5A Page 57
Agenda Item # 5A Page 58
Agenda Item # 5A Page 59
Agenda Item # 5A Page 60
Agenda Item # 5A Page 61
Attachment C: Historic Building Inventory Form
Agenda Item # 5A Page 62
Agenda Item # 5A Page 63
3131 7th St., Survey Photograph, 1995.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 64
Attachment D: Boulder County Tax Assessor Card
Agenda Item # 5A Page 65
Agenda Item # 5A Page 66
Tax Assessor Photograph, 3131 7th St., c.1929
Agenda Item # 5A Page 67
Attachment E: Deed and Directory Research
Deed and Directory Research – 3131 7th St.
LOTS 31-33 BLK 29 NEWLANDS
Owner (Deeds) Date Occupant(s)/Directory
House constructed (tax assessor card) – 1922
Edythe Thoesen
1923-1924 1923 Rental
Floyd Pumphrey
1924-1934
1924 Rental
1926 Floyd D. and Mabel Pumphrey, mechanic
1928 Joseph A. and Bessie C. DeRusha, pipefitter
Harry Hamm
1934-1938
1934 Rental
1936 Rental
Sidney and Kate
Dawe
1938-1962
1943 Dawe Sidney E (Kate) miner h3131 7th
Dawe Kathryn opr MST&TCo r3131 7th
1949 Dawe Sidney E (Kate) lab UofC h3131 7th
Dawe Kathryn ofc wkr r3131 7th
1956 Sidney E (Kate) store clerk UofC h3131 7th
1960 Dawe Sidney E (Katy Y) h3131 7th
Raymond and
Mildred Benshoof
1962-2016
1964
Mildred and Raymond Benshoof
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
Margaret Freund 2016
Agenda Item # 5A Page 68
Attachment F: Significance Criteria for Individual Landmarks
SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Individual Landmark
September 1975
On September 6, 1975, the City Council adopted Ordinance #4000 providing procedures for the
designation of Landmarks and Historic Districts in the City of Boulder. The purpose of the
ordinance is the preservation of the City’s permitted cultural, historic, and architectural heritage.
The Landmarks Board is permitted by the ordinance to adopt rules and regulations as it deems
necessary for its own organization and procedures. The following Significance Criteria have been
adopted by the board to help evaluate each potential designation in a consistent and equitable
manner.
Historic Significance
The place (building, site, area) should show character, interest or value as part of the
development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the community, state or nation; be the site of a
historic, or prehistoric event that had an effect upon society; or exemplify the cultural, political,
economic, or social heritage of the community.
Date of Construction: This area of consideration places particular importance on the age of the
structure.
Association with Historical Persons or Events: This association could be national, state, or local.
Distinction in the Development of the Community of Boulder: This is most applicable to an
institution (religious, educational, civic, etc) or business structure, though in some cases
residences might qualify. It stresses the importance of preserving those places which demonstrate
the growth during different time spans in the history of Boulder, in order to maintain an
awareness of our cultural, economic, social or political heritage.
Recognition by Authorities: If it is recognized by Historic Boulder, Inc. the Boulder Historical
Society, local historians (Barker, Crossen, Frink, Gladden, Paddock, Schooland, etc), State
Historical Society, The Improvement of Boulder, Colorado by F.L. Olmsted, or others in
published form as having historic interest and value.
Other, if applicable.
Architectural Significance
The place should embody those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type specimen, a
good example of the common; be the work of an architect or master builder, known nationally,
state-wide, or locally, and perhaps whose work has influenced later development; contain
elements of architectural design, detail, materials or craftsmanship which represent a significant
innovation; or be a fine example of the uncommon.
Recognized Period/Style: It should exemplify specific elements of an architectural period/style,
i.e.: Victorian, Revival styles, such as described by Historic American Building Survey Criteria,
Gingerbread Age (Maass), 76 Boulder Homes (Barker), The History of Architectural Style
Agenda Item # 5A Page 69
(Marcus/Wiffin), Architecture in San Francisco (Gebhard et al), History of Architecture
(Fletcher), Architecture/Colorado, and any other published source of universal or local analysis of
a style.
Architect or Builder of Prominence: A good example of the work of an architect or builder who is
recognized for expertise in his field nationally, state-wide, or locally.
Artistic Merit: A skillful integration of design, material, and color which is of excellent visual
quality and/or demonstrates superior craftsmanship.
Example of the Uncommon: Elements of architectural design, details, or craftsmanship that are
representative of a significant innovation.
Indigenous Qualities: A style or material that is particularly associated with the Boulder area.
Other, if applicable.
Environmental Significance
The place should enhance the variety, interest, and sense of identity of the community by the
protection of the unique natural and man-made environment.
Site Characteristics: It should be of high quality in terms of planned or natural vegetation.
Compatibility with Site: Consideration will be given to scale, massing placement, or other
qualities of design with respect to its site.
Geographic Importance: Due to its unique location or singular physical characteristics, it
represents an established and familiar visual feature of the community.
Environmental Appropriateness: The surroundings are complementary and/or it is situated in a
manner particularly suited to its function.
Area Integrity: Places which provide historical, architectural, or environmental importance and
continuity of an existing condition, although taken singularly or out of context might not qualify
under other criteria.
Agenda Item # 5A Page 70
Attachment G: North Boulder Historical Background
Agenda Item # 5A Page 71
Agenda Item # 5A Page 72
Agenda Item # 5A Page 73
Agenda Item # 5A Page 74
Agenda Item # 5A Page 75
Agenda Item # 5A Page 76
Agenda Item # 5A Page 77
Agenda Item # 5A Page 78
Agenda Item # 5A Page 79