HomeMy WebLinkAbout5 - Request to grant Landmark Alteration Certificate for demolition of existing garage and constructMamo to the Lendmerka Preservatlon Advleory Boartl
Re. Request for Landmark Alteratlon Certiflcata for 663 Concord
MEMORANDUM
May 7, 2003
TO: Landmarks Preservahon Advisory Board
FROM: Ruth McHeyser, Director of Long Range Planning
Neil Holthouser, Planner
SUBJECT: Request to grant a Landmark Alteration Certificate for demolition of an existmg
gazage and construction of a new detached, two-car garage for the property at 663
Concord Avenue, within the Mapleton Hill Historic District.
Applicant: Knsd Neff
STATISTICS:
1. Site: 663 Concord
2. Zomng: LR-E (Low-Density Residential> Established)
3. Owner: Kristi Neff
4. Applicant: Kristi Neff
BACKGROUND:
In September 1998, the Landmarks Board held a public hearing in consideration of a request to
demolish an existing garage and construct a new detached, two-car, one-and-a-half-story gazage for
the property at 663 Concord. The Board condrtionally approved the request; the I,andmazks design
review committee issued a Landmark Alterahon Certificate on March 10, 1999. After receiving a
Landmark Alteration Certificate, however, the applicant did not apply for a building pernut. The
existing garage still stands, and the new garage was never constructed. The Landmark Alteration
Certificate expired in September, 1999.
In March 2003, the applicant contacted staff to renew the Landmark Alteration Certificate for
demolition of an existing gazage and construction of a new detached, two-car, one-and-a-half-story
garage. Staff informed the applicant that the previous Landmark Alteration Certificate issued in
1999 had expired, and that a new applicahon would be required in order to demolish the existing
garage and construct a new one. Staff also informed the applicant that demolition of an existing
structure and construction of a new two-car garage would require a public heazing before the full
Landmarks Board, as required by the Historic Preservation Code.
On March 21, 2003, the applicant met with the Landmazks design review committee to review the
plans previously approved in 1999. The committee informed the applicant that it would not support
the previous design in terms of its height, size (footprint) and dormer design. The committee noted
that the Mapleton Hill Design Guidelines recommend that new gazages should be plain and
utilitarian in appearance, should be small in scale and mass, and should be clearly secondary in
importance to the primary structure. The committee made the following recommendations, based on
the plans previously approved in 1999:
Memo to the Landmarks Preservafion Advisory Board
Re• Request for Landmark Alteration Certlflcate for 663 Concord
1. Reduce the overall length, width and height of the proposed new garage.
2. Eliminate the shed dormers.
3. Lower the plate height.
4. Use wood garage doors that incorporate glazing.
On April 17, 2003, the applicant submitted a new applicadon with revised plans for a Landmazk
Alteration Certificate to demolish an existing gazage and construct a new detached, two-car, one-
story garage for the property at 663 Concord. (See AttachmentA: Application and Proposed Plans.)
The revised plans generally comply with the design review committee's recommendadons to reduce
t6e overall length, width and height of the building, elimmate the shed dormers, lower the plate
height, and incorporate glazing in the garage doors. (See Attachment B: Design Review Committee
comments.)
REQUEST:
The applicant proposes to demolish the existing garage and construct a new detached, two-caz gazage
measurmg 22' wide, 30' deep, and 18'3" ta11. The new garage would accommodate two vehicle
parlung spaces, with storage space above, and a small workshop azea to the reaz of the vehicle bays.
An interior folding stair is proposed to allow access to the upper storage space. The new garage will
be located at the rear of the lot, with vehicular access from the alley.
The following is a comparison of the proposed new garage with plans previously approved in 1999
(See Attachment C: Plans previously approved in 1999):
on
PRESERVATION ORDINANCE:
Since this request involves the demolition of a building within a designated historic district and
replacement with new construction, the following standards apply for issuance of a Landmazk
Alteration Certificate:
Neither the landmarks board nor city council shall approve a landmark alterat~on 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 sub~ect property within an historic d~strict, •
2) The proposed work does not adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural,
or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site or the district,
Memo to the Lantlmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re Request for Landmark Alteration Certlficate for 663 Concord
3) The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on
existing and proposed structures are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its
site or the historic district, and
4) With respect to a proposal to demolish a bwlding m a historic distnct, the proposed new construction
to replace the bwlding meets the requ~rements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section
c) In determining whether to approve a landmark alteration certificate, the landmarks board shall consider
the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporating energy-efficient design, and enhanced access forthe
disabled
KEY ISSUES:
The applicant has requested both demolition of the existing gazage and construction of a new
detached, two-car gazage as part of the same Landmuk Alteration Certificate apphcation. In this
case, construction of the new garage would not necessazily require demolition of the existing garage,
smce they are located on different portions of the site
In considering the demolition request, the Board must first deternune if the existmg garage
contributes to the chazacter of the historic district. If the Landmarks Board fmds that the exishng
garage is a contributing buildmg withm the Mapleton Hill Historic Distnct, then demolition would
not meet Sea 10-13-18 (b)(2) of the Historic Preservation Code, smce rt would have an adverse
effect on the special character and special historical, architectural, and aesthehc mterest and value of
the district If contributmg, demolition could only be approved under Sea 10-13-18 (c), based on a
finding that rehabilitation is not economically feasible.
If the Landmarks Boazd finds that the exishng gazage does not contnbute to the Mapleton Hill
Histonc District, then demohtion would meet Sec. 10-13-18 (b)(2) of the Historic Preservahon Code,
smce it would not have an adverse effect on the special character or special historical, architectural,
and aesthetic mterest or value of the district.
In reviewing the request for new construction, the Landmarks Board must find that the proposed new
garage meets the critena for appropriateness set forth in Sec. 10-13-18 (b)(2) and (3) If the existmg
garage is to be retazned, the Board should consider how the new gazage would relate to the existmg
garage, house and site. The Board has adopted the Mapleton Hill Design Guidelmes to help interpret
the standards set forth in the Histonc Preservation Code.
The Landmarks Board may approve or deny all or part of the application for a Landmark Alteration
Certificate. The Board may attach conditions to any approval, remandmg to the Landmarks design
review committee for final review and approval. The Board may also continue the application, with
the owner's consent, and require that it be brought back to the full Board with revisions.
ANALYSIS:
Demolition:
The existing garage was constructed in 1938. The garage features simple wood-frame wnstruction
with horizontal wood lap siding and a front-gabled roof form. The garage features two pairs of side-
hinged wood panel garage doors on the 7`h Street elevarion. A single double-hung window is located
on the north elevarion, while the south elevation features a window and door. The garage is located
3
Memo to the landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re Request for Landmark Alteration Cartificate for 663 Concord
in the middle of the lot, approximately 50 feet from the alley, with curb-cut access from 7`h Street.
(See Attachment E: Photographs of Existcng Garage. )
When reviewing the demohtion request m September 1998, the Landmarks Board deternuned that
demolition of the exishng garage would not have an adverse impact on the special character of the
Mapleton Hill Historic District. At the time, the Boazd considered the period of sigmficance for
Mapleton Hill to range from the late 1800s through the 1930s, with no specific ternunarion date.
With the expansion of the Mapleton Hill Historic District m 2002, the Board revised the period of
sigmficance for the district to extend through World War II(1945.) The exishng garage, built in
1938, fa11s within the penod of sigruficance for Mapleton Hill.
Tn considermg whether an accessory structure contributes to the district, staff believes that the Boazd
must flrst consider the buildmg's association with its site and its relat~onskup to the pnmary structure
In this case, the primary structure, which was onginally constructed in 1902, m not recognized as
contribuhng to the district due to extensive alterations and additions (See Attachment D: His[orec
Bu~lding Inventory Record.) Staff believes that, due to the extent of alterations and additions to the
house, the exisring garage has lost IIs integrity m terms of its association wrth the primary structure.
Although the garage is mtact and remains in relatively origmal condition, staff does not believe it is
mdividually significant m terms of architectural style or detathng.
Staff further believes that the garage is not representative of the tradihonal pattern of placement for
accessory structures m the Mapleton Hill Histonc District. The garage is located in the middle of the
rear yard, approximately 50' from the alley, with curb-cut access from 7ih Street. Traditional
development patterns placed accessory structures at the rear of the lot with access from the alley. If a
new garage is approved at the alley, as recommended by the Mapleton Hill Design Gwdehnes, staff
believes that the existing gazage would disrupt the traditional patterns of buildmg placement wrthm
the district and would consume too much reaz yard space.
Based on the above analysis, staff believes that the existmg garage does not contribute to the
Mapleton Hill Historic District for the following reasons:
1. The garage, though constructed during the district's period of significance, does not reflect the
traditional pattern of placement of accessory structures at the rear of the lot, with access from
the alley.
2 Alterations and additions to the existing house have destroyed any historic relationship
between the gazage, the house, and its site.
3. The garage is not representative of a recogmzed azchitectural style.
4. The garage is not assoc~ated with a contributmg house.
Staff beheves that demolmon of the exisring garage is consistent with Sec. 10-13-18 (c), B.R.C.
1981, in that the building does not contribute to the Mapleton Hill Historic District, and that
demolition would therefore not adversely affect the special character of the distnct.
Pronosed New Garaee:
If the Board agrees with staff that demolihon is appropriate under Sea 10-13-18 (c), B.R.C. 1981,
then the Boazd must also consider the appropriateness of the proposed new construction. The
following is an analysis of the proposed new garage based on the Mapleton Hili Design Guidelmes:
Memo to ihe Landmarks Preservation Adwsory Board
Re Request for Landmark Alteration CeAdicate for 663 Concord
GARAGES,CARPORTSandACCESSORYSTRUCTURES
A vanety of accessory buildmgs has been adapted for use as gazages m the Mapleton Htll Histonc
Distnct Whether carnage houses or sheds, these stmctures have certam similanties They aze plam and
util~tanan and aze located at the rear of the property on the alley Matenats and bu~ldmg elements are
vaned.
Large, two-story garages m the h~stonc distnct are razely appropnate; they are typically only seen on
large lots with lazge houses. New gazages should be sensitrve to both the lot size and the s~ze of the
house, and should be clearly secondary m importance to the pnmary structure Gazages that are one to
one-and-a-half stones aze generally more appropnate
Gu~delmes (Gazaees) Anal~Sts:
2 When garage doors are added to a The applicant's plans do not specifically call-out that the
bu:lding they should be wood garage doars will be wood. Staff recommands that, if
Defferent rypes will be approprtate for appYOVed, the Board regulre that the doors be made of
different bu~ldtngs Two smaller wpqd andinclude an upper row of glazed panels as a
doors may be more approprtate than condlUOn of ap~roval.
one large door
3 If a new structure es to be constructed, The proposed garage will feature wood-frame consttvction,
design ideas m~ght be found an a front•gabied roof form> and horizontal wood lap siding,
existang h~storic accessory buildings aU of which ate consistent with exisking historic aecessoty
located nearby. stnlctures found throu$hout the district.
4. The new butldtng should be secondary The hause af 663 ConcoXd does no[ cantrtbute to the
en nature to the matn house and Mapleton Hill Historio Aistric~ The proposed ga~ge is
smaller in scale smaller than the house and is alearly secondary in nature.
5. Accessory buddengs should be small
~n scale and mass, and constructed ~n
a manner whteh is eomplamentary to
the charaeter of the house and alley
They are clearty secondary m
tmportance to the pnmary structure
Typically, prefabricated sheds are
discouraged
Staff balieves that the proposed garage is small in scale and
mass and is cleazly secondary to the primary structure. The
gara$e wlll measure 22' wide alang its a11ey elevanon,
which is consistent with other two-car garages found
throughout the distriat. The garage will measure 30' in
length, whieh is somewhak longer than traditional
accessory structures m the district The massing, however,
is broken by a front-gabled vehicle bay at the northwest
corner of the buildmg, and a small workshop addiUOn to
the reaz of the gazage. $taff believes that the overall length
af the garage is compatibla with the site, which at 168'
deep ~s langer than the typical lot in Mapleton Hill. 'The
proppsed gazage, cougled with the demolition of the
existing garage, wlll allow for a generous rear yard with
more than 50' of separation between the new garage and
Memo to ihe Landmarks Preservatlon Advlsory Board
Re Request tor Landmark Alteration CerUficate for 663 Concord
D. ALLEYS, EASEMENTS and ACCESSWAYS
Alleys are a strong visual element of the distric[, and have much vanety of scale and detvl. They play
an ~mportant role m the development patterns that give the mare visible azeas their chazacter Alleys
provide access to reaz pazkmg and gazages. They have a vaned edge quahty, with biuldmgs both on the
property lmes and set back. The size and quahty of these accessory buildmgs vanes considerable
Cazeful considerahon should be given to changes m trad~tional uses.
Gmdelines Anal sis; •
1. The use of alleys to prov~de access ro The proposed gazage would have access from the alley.
the rear of propert~es should be
reserved
2. Efforts should be made to protect the StBff bcheves that the proposed garage wiil maintain a
vartety of shape, stze and alignment of ped~Steia~ scale 81ong the alley through [he broken
buildings along the alleys. Alleys massipg oF its a11ey elevadon and We use of glazed uppec
should maantacn a human scale and ~anel&'in thC gazage doors.
be sensitive to edestrians. ' ~
5. Efforts should be made to maintain The itlley represents the nortktern boundary of the
the character of the alleys in the Mapleton E3i11 FIistoric AietriaC; p[operties located on the
Dcstnct. south sitle of fhe alley ue ineluded withm the distnct, ,
~~
whi~eMthq~eYn tHe north~fall bqtside th~ district; In recent'
years; th~ ~ch~ractar of the all$y has been changed through
th0 cOnstnic`tipp of lacg0 ~ew accessory structures along
the noct~;¢ide of the alley, 3taff beLeves that the pxoposed
gaxa~e wilXf'setve as a Yisaal gateway into the district along
7`~ 5treeC; end ~svill rein€tirce the edga of the aliey in a ~
manu~r that is cousisCenk wit~ the his Wric character of '
alle 's Foumd throu hout the distnct.
10 Leghting in alleys should be low Th~,grppASA1 does not call for extenor lighdng. If
watrage and focused downward ~p~iicived,°Staff reoott~meuds that tlae $oazd refar the issue
qf lighting to th~ Landararka design review committee ~s a
oondiHon of a roval. '
FINDINGS:
Staff recommends that the Boazd adopt the followmg findings•
The existmg garage does not contnbute to the Mapleton Hill Historic District for the
following reasons:
a. The garage, though constructed during the districYs period of sigmficance, dces not
reflect the traditional pattern of placement of accessory structures at the rear of the
lot, with access from the alley.
b Alterarions and addrtions to the existing house have destroyed any historic
relatronship between the garage, the house, and its site.
c The garage is not representative of a recogmzed azchitectural style.
d. The gazage is not associated with a contributing house.
Demolition of the existing garage is consistent with the Historic Preservation Code, m that
6
Memo to the Landmerks Preservation Advisory Board
Re Request for Landmark Alteration Certitlcate for 6fi3 Concord
the gazage does not contribute to the Mapleton Hill Historic DistricY, and that demolihon
would therefore not have an adverse ~mpact on the special character of the distnct
The proposed new garage is compahble with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, smce
would not adversely affect the special character of the district, and the azchitectural style,
texture and matenals are compahble wrth the character of the district
PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION:
The Plannmg Department recommends that the Landmarks Board conditionally approve the request
for a Landmark Alteration Certificate for demohtion of an existmg gazage and construchon of a new
detached, two-car guage for the property at 663 Concord, adopting the staff inemorandum as
findings of the Board, and subject to the followmg conditions:
1. The applicant shall submit black and whtte photographs of the existing garage prior to
issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate.
2. The applicant shall be required to close the curb cut along 7`~ Street ~
3. The applicant shall submit final plans, includmg a site plan and all buildmg elevations at one-
quarter inch scale, callmg out all details and materials, to the Landmarks design review
committee for final review and approval
4 The garage doors shall be wood and shall contain an upper row of glazed panels.
5. The design review committee shall review final paint colors, dnveway plan, landscapmg, and
hghting
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Apphcation and Proposed Plans
Attachment B. Design Review Committee comments
Attachment C: Plans previously approved m 1999
Attachment D: Historic Buildmg Inventory Record
Attachment E: Photographs of Exishng Garage
7
ATTACHMENT B
Date: 3. 2 I , 2003
Landmark Alteration Certificate / or Demolition / Moving
Address of Property: ~0 ~ 3 ~~ GO~
Owner'sName: IG-lLfSY( I~CEF~
DRC Members: 1zo¢'ti' ~Sh~.w~~ ~,~~D ~~-Uc~'F~ ~•(E/L. /-~e'~7N~5E{'L-
Remarks:
~~~cutGF~ P2W~o~5~Y ~PP2u~.+~0 l3y LP~ inL l99 3~ ~r~T
A-PPRov/rC- N1~5 s~rL~~ ~xPil~A .
- M~l`r rl4.i.U R~4.Q~~ST' v~oU~.,O /u.y~u~/L(~ PuP~~l~- N~/L//~y B~Fol~_
~~~li ~.An~DMiM~~S gafM-/~ •
- i rC ~j Etl ~`1't- , liP~ r-N c o02.9'~9l~ ciAn-9*-, r~S Tv 8 ti
snv~-'u 5~.~.Pt/c L~ v~7~~ )~~ ~i, c. 4~~,E S sn~~~''~
~ . .
Urow ~~ ~ ~i~-, ~S ~
-' GaMM~7trrx` ~o~~ Nv~ S~PPoR-7- /99$ O~cS~~i/`~ ~9-3"
~S T1M~ ~ ~rt~£D on1 SI ~, H4.~t~/-hT Qa2n~,GS .
- ~zx~M~o ~~N~ ~orw~r~s, r~o~~r~y oJ~r~9-u,
wi o~, ~itN~r-r!~ ~- y~~~ ` H'a'~4 r/~"
~
~n4s~o`+z M~X. uJiDi(-t ~F ~° ZZ • Uw41L-
,
P~ l~4 ~ f-/zoM 9 j~ ~~ 7-0 ~ ~~ .
~
~.p ~ r-rc v v~.4~r,c- ~7-~' y n`" ~°'k 'u ' '~-~
,. , ~
Next steps: ~ ~ 8 /' l~~D f~/~j /~l ~! ~"f y~'- rrtoNT'
p4~4~-Tr.. ~~ 3vn~.l~ r~T ~~. ~.E. ~lA/fA~fl~ 0~5
s~++~ ~ ~b~. ~ N s ~~ P~.r~.tJ
- ~oN~~~2 ,N~o~~~y ~~~~„~y ~N ~,,~-~i~- od~s.
~ vo/t.s s ~f~ /M ~//c wo v,D
Public hearing:~Y N
S•~PLAN~data\Comdev\HIS'1~GENWLTCERTSU,AC-app,etc\CommentsPage2 doc
~~
~
D
1
m
m
n
~
~
~
~
Z
~
~
L
m
r
m
<
D
~
~
L
~
N}'I
~i~ I
W
6
-~ ~
1~
N
-i
m
m
<
n
~
~ ~
~ ~
N
g
-i
2
m
~
m
<
D
~
~
J L~
~
~
~
J
July 13, 1998 NEFF Cs,4RAGE ADVANTACsE DESIGN
Elevatlons 663 GONGORD AVENUE Boulder, Colorado
DUXa A3
I
~
~
~~
GOLORADO
BOULDER 303-442-1493
p
_8
_m
~ ,
303 ~is4-~'c-9~ ~
b6bl ' ~r~a~ ~.-~s~~,n~a sr.r~~d
~ .L~i~Y~IH~d.L.Ld
'
ATTACHMENT D
~pLpRA00 NISTORIGL SOCIETI' NpT F011 F1ELD 118E
Of}iu of Areh~eolo0y rd Ntator~a Vraoerv~t~on
lypp BroeAisY, Dem'er, Colorsdo e020S _ Eliptble _ No~lrrted
pet, Mot Elipi6le _ CertiHcd RMab.
HtST01tIL BUILDING IMVEMTORY RECdID Wte
PROJECT N~ME: Boulder blrvey of Hiator~c Ft~cee, COUMTY: CITT: 6TATE ID MO.: SBL3069
7qqs Boulder Baulder
TEMpORARY NO.: 1{61•25'7•07•001
CURRENT BUIIDING NAME. OWER: NEFi KRISTI T
663 CdICORD AVE
BOULDER CO M1304
ADORESS. 663 CONCORD AV
BOULDER CO 80304
TO~MSHIP 1N RANGE 71H
SECTIdI 25 SY 1/4 ME 1/4
HISTORIC NAME: U.S.G.S. OUAD N11ME: Boulder, Coto.
YEAR: 1966 <PR1979) X 7.5~ 15~
BLOCK: 7 LOT(S): tp
DISTRICT NAMEc.Napleton Hlll ADD1T10N: Prillips
t YR. OF A{1U1T70N: 1882
_ _ ,
_ ,_
DATE OF LONSTRUCTIdI:
ESTIMIITE: ~~TU11L: lYU2
SOURCE:
Boul4r CantY Acceccor
.~
~~
' ~'~' °la
`r
• . r~, -s,-~p
ai
~ ..~
E%TENT OF ALTEMTIpIS:
MINOR MODfRATE X MIIJOR
DESCRIBE:
Seead-ctory add~tio~; rear add~tion
wtth deck.
. :~ ~
CONTINUED YES X NO
STYLE: Vernaeuler Yood Freme ~ STORIES: dtIGiNAL SITE % MOVED
Z DATE(S) OF IIOJE:
IUTERIALS: 4ood, Stone S0. FOOTAGE: NRTIq1AL REGISTEN ELIG18IL1TY
2027
INDIVIIXIAL: YES % NO
ARCNITECTURAL OESCRIPTlON:
7wo•story wood-frsne A+elltn9 ~ ctone fou~datian ~ith clapboard extenor. CONTRIBUTiNG TO DISTRICT:
ed h s eheU-roofed addit~m YES X NO _
USE:
PRESEMT:
Restdentisl
NISTORTC:
Recidentinl
CONDITIOM:
E%CELLENT X GOOD
FAIR DETERIORAiING
OripineL h~pped roof ~ith overhenpinp, box ewea na+ e
dwve. Proleeting front poreh s~orted by turned wood posts; off•cmter door,
paneled and plezed, with trensan. Doublrh~np ~indous an or~pmet port~m;
casement/f~xed on new perte. Metal chim~ey.
LOG1L LANOMIIRK DES1GNl1Tiq1: Yee
NI111E: C1ty of Boul., ND82•1
DATE: 10-7•1982
CONTIMUED7 YES % MO
11SSOCIATED B1IILDINGS? X TES
TYPE:
Gerape
IF INVENTORIED, LIST !0 MOS.:
NO
ADDITIONAL PAGES: YES % NO
pLAN SIUPE:
~~x~~ct:
tYYttn~n
SOURCE:
BUIL~R/COMTRACTOR:
UrJnw~n
SOURCE:
sr~~ to wo.: seuvsv
ORIGIMILL OYtlER:
SQIRCE:
THEIff<S):
Urban Residential Neiphhorhoads
1E58•prleent
' CONSTRUCTION X15TORY (DESCRIPTION~ NAMES, DATES, E1C., NEUTING TO M11JOR ALTERATIdIS TO ORIGINAL STRUCTURE):
~
~
~
~ CONTINUEO YES X I
NISTdtICAL BACKGRQIND (DISCUSS INPORTANT PERSONS AND EVENTS ASSOCIATfD WITH TH1S SiRUCTURE):
~ The 1913 Baulder City D~rectory licte Jasec M. ard Nell~e Cl~y ~c w~erc. Clry, an 1lfrien-Amencan, w~c born m HrriiMl,
Misawri, end eeme to eaulder ~n 1883 to serve es peator of the Afrtcen Methodiat Church. He then apereted e eerpet eleenii
husiness on Arapahce. A severe inlury to hic hand at his olwp eaused the stroke which lad to hie death. The Claya had a
dauphter, Eve.
CONTfNUED YES %
SIGNIFICANCE (CNECK APVROPRUTE CATEGORIES AND BRIEFLY JUSTIFY BELOY)NiSTOR1GL SIGNIFICJINCE:
ARCHITECTURAL SICNIFIWNCE:
REPRESEMTS TNE WORK OF A II~STER ASSOCIATED 41TX SIGNIfIGNT PERSONS
POSSESSES NIGH 11RTISTIC VALUES 11SSOCIATED W1TN SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OR FAT7ERNE
~ REPRESENTS 11 TYPE~ PERI00, OR METNOU OF CONSTRUCTipI CdITRIBUTES 70 NI HiSTORiC DISTRICT
STATEMEMT OF SIGNIFIGNCE:
~tterat~ons have d~min~shed the hlstorte inteBrity of this ctructure. The house is notable for hrv~np once been the home
of James Clay, pestor of the Afr uan Methadist Chureh m Boulder. At ane time, Cley also lived in the Niphlend Lern
neiphborhood, thus dencnctrating that rat all of Boulder~c African-Nner uan citizenc ltved on Wcs Street.
CONTINUED YES X
~
~
REFERENCES (BE SPECiFIC):
Boulder Canty Aaeeseor infoimatim; Bouldar Carnegie Librery, Baulder CantY Aeeesaor collection; Cannorwealth Lend Tftl
Ins. Lo. reeordc; 8oulder City Director ws; Baulder Datly Ceners biographual files.
Lp11TINUED YES X
SURVEYED BY: C. Sher McLeuphltn AFF11111T10M: iront Renpe Reaeareh Assoc~stes, lne. I OATE: Jen. 1993
~
~
ATTACHMENT E: Photographs of Existing Garage
ATTACHMENT E: ~'hotographs of Existing Garage
ATTACHMENT E: Photographs of Existing Garage