5B - Consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct a 3435 sq. ft. house and 440 sqMEMORANDUM
February 7~h, 2007
TO: L~ndmarks Preservation Advisory Board
FRQM: Susan Richstone, Acting Long Range Manager
Chris Meschuk, Historic Preservation Planner
Alice Gilbertson, Historic Preservation Intern
James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner
SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a landmark alteration certificate
to construct a 3435 square foot house and 440 square foot free
standing garage 1710 Hillside Avenue in the Hillside Historic
District (HIS2007-00007).
STATISTICS:
Site: ~
2. Zoning:
3. Owner/Applicant:
4. Lat Size:
5. Proposed construction:
STAFF RECOMMFNDATION:
1710 Hillside Road
RL-2 (Residential - Low 2)
Dave Heuston
11,913 sq. ft.
3,435 sq. ft house, 440 sq. ft. garage.
Staff recommends the Board approve the requested construction of a 3,435 sq. ft. house
and 440 sq. ft. free-standing garage as to siting, mass, scale, and general detailing with
the followi~g conditions:
1. That details regarding cementitious stucco, doors, windows, and roofing
material for the house and garage be submitted for review and approval;
2. That designs for the east and west elevations of the garage be submitted for
review and approval;
3. That details regarding hardscaping on the property including retaining walls,
pathways, and driveways be submitted for review and approval;
Auenda item #SR Paae #1
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
4. That the requested informatian as listed above be reviewed and approved by
the Landmarks design review committee prior to the issuance of a landmark
alteradon certificate.
This recommendation is based upon staff's opinion that with the c~nditions listed above,
the proposed new construction will be generally consistent with Sections 6.3, 6.5, & 7.2 of
the General Design Guidelines and the conditions as specified in Section 9-11-
18(a)&(b)(1-4) of the Boulder Revised Code.
SUMMARY:
^ This item has been referred to the full Board as per Section 9-11-14(b) of
the B.R.C., Pi~blic Heczring Reqcrired for• New Constricction.
^ An application for the construction of a two-story, 5142 sq. ft. house with
attached garage on this site was denied by the Board in November of 2002.
^ Subsequently the property changed ownership and in August of 2006 the
new owner requested pre-application comments from Planning Land Use
staff.
^ StaEf considers that the mass, scale, and orientation of the proposed house
and garage will be generally consistent with Sections 6.3, 6.5, & 7.2 of the
General Design Guidelincs ~nd Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1-4) of the Boulder
Revised Code.
^ Staff considers conditional approval of the proposal is appropriate as
specified in the staff recommendation.
Figure 1. Lot at 1710 I-Iillside Iload.
A~enc~a_Item_#SS_I'a~e_#2
Memo to the landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
BACKGROUND:
An application for the construction of a 5142 sq. ft. two-story house on the lot was
reviewed and denied by the Board at their November 6'h, 2002 meeting on the basis that
in terms of size, scale, and orientation of the proposed building was not compatible with
the character of the Hillside Historic District. Subsequently the property changed
ownership and in August of 2006 the new owner requested pre-application comments
from Planning staff. (see Attachment B).
DISTRICT HISTOIZY:
The 11,913 sq. ft. subject property is located in the Hillside Historic District, which was
designated as a local historic district by the City Council in Apri12001. The district
includes 15 parcels of various sizes and configurarions with 12 houses and four
accessary buildings. All of the houses are considered contributing to the district, with
the exception of 1810 Hillside, which is recognized as a significant newer building.
Three of the four accessory buildings are considered contributing.
The Hillside Historic District is considered to be significant for its association with the
growth and development of the city of Boulder with the majority of houses in the district
having been constructed in the years between 1905 and 1938, and reflecting building
modes, materials and techniques prevalent in the first half of the twentieth century.
Most houses are variations of the Tudor Revival, featuring steep roofs, stone
foundations, half-timbering with stucco, massive chimneys, and narrow vertical
windows with multi-pane glazing. The district also contains elements of Craftsman
Bungalow and Shingle architectural design.
The rural character and natural landscape of the district is a result of its location on a
high bluff overlooking Boulder Creek, with steep slopes and excellent views of the
downtown to the north and the mountains to the west. Hillside Road takes the form of a
meandering lane winding along the contours of the hillside. Lots are laid out in
irregular shapes and sizes, with varying front yard setbacks and generous spacing
between houses. Native stone is found throughout the district, both as a building
material and in landscaping treatments (such a retaining wall is in evidence on the
subject property). Significant landscape features of the district include the historic road,
stone terrace walls, stone fence pillars, and mahxre vegetation.
Aeenda Item #SB Pa¢e #3
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
REQUEST FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION:
The applicant proposes the construction of a 3435 sq. ft. house with a footprint that is
roughly rectangular in shape. The lot slopes steeply from the south where the property
abuts the University of Colorado campus. A site plan shows the north wall of house to
be constructed approximately 20' back from the property which runs down the center of
Hillside Road, a private right-of-way. Set parallel to Hillside Road, the fa~ade of the
house is shown to be approximately 76' in length and 28' in height (when measured
from the lowest point on the foundation to the highest point on the roof~. Because of the
dramatic change in grade on the property, the house will be dug into the slope so that
the lower floor level will be partially recessed below grade. A partially buried, 22' x 20'
flat roofed garage is shown to be located at the northeast corner of the property and to be
approximately 14' in height at its north face. The site plan shows the exisring stone
retaining wall on the property (running parallel to Hillside Road) to be retained.
In elevation, the house is shown to be designed in a neo-Arts and Crafts Bungalow with
low horizontal massing, broad overhanging eaves supported by brackets, upper-story
shingie siding and stucco finish battered walls on the lower level. The building's
primary (north) elevation is shown to be fenestrated with banks of three and four, single-
light casement windows, a three-panel door fitted with six lights, and a single-light patio
door. A stuccoed chimney with exterior and interior fireplace is shown to project from
the north elevation of the house.
Aeenda Item #SB Paee #4
Figure 2. Hillside Historic District with location of proposed new construction
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
Figure 3. Proposed house and garage, north elevation
Fi~ure 4. Proposed house, east elevation.
The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the stanciards the Landmarks Board must
apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate and the Board has
adopted the Generc~! Design Gttidelines to help interpret the Ordinance. The following is
an analysis of the submitted proposal with respect to relevant guidelines. It is important
to emphasize that design guidelines are intended to be used as an aid to appropriate
design, and not as a checklist of items for compliance.
A~encla Item #SB P~~e #5
ri~;ure ~. rru~~5eu we~i eieva«u~~
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
The following is an analysis of the proposal's compliance with the applicable design
guidelines:
GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION, 6.0.
6.1 DistinMion from Historic Buildin s
.1 Buildings should be of their oiun time creating Neo-traditional in design, the proposed YES
contemporan~ irtterpretations of historic house references Greene & Greene Arts
elements. & Crafts architecture of California.
While this variant not found in Boulder,
the applicant also references the form,
massing, and detailing of houses in the
district.
.2 Interpretations of historic st~les may be Drawings show the houses to generally YES
appropriate if they nre distinguishable as new. interpret historic architectural elements
found in the Hillside historic district in
a manner that will be distinguishable
from the historic.
6.2 Site and Settin
New buiidings should be designed nnd located sa that signifi'cant site features, includir~g mature trees, nre not
lost or obscured. The size of the neza structures should not overpower the site or dramaticnlly alter its historic
character. Buildings ¢oithin historic districts genernlly display a consistency in setback, orientation, spacing
nnd distattce 6etxoeen adjncent buildings. Therefore, the compatibilit~ of proposed necu construction zoill 6e
reviezued to ensure that these elements are maintnined.
1 Conform to the design guidelines found in Building location on the site and yES
Section 2.0 Site Design, regarding site and orientation is not typical for the
setting in developing n proposed site plan. neighborhood. The facade's 76'
orientation to Hillside Road is not
typical for the District. However, siting
of building on property and attempt to
break up masses will mitigate this
effect.
Z Design new construction so that the averall Construction oE new house will require yES
character of the site, site topography, significant cutting into the bank and
character-clefiniiag site features nnd trees nre removal of some vegetation. Site will be
retained. re-ve etated with native lants.
3 Site new construcYion to be compntible eoith Due to topography, district exhibits yES
surrounding buildings thnt contribute to the variety of conditions in terms of setback
oaerall charaeter of the historic distriet in orientation, spacing and distance kom -
terms of setback, orientation, spacing, and adjacent buildings. Location of
distance from adjacent buildings. proposed building is generally
compatible with adjacent buildings and
character with the district.
Aeenda Item #SB Pa~e #6
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
4 New construction should not be significantly T'he lot coverage for the proposed house yES
different from contributing historic buildings and garage appears average for the
in the district in terms of the proportion of historic pattem of the area.
built mass to open spnce on the indivirlual
site. See Guideline 2.1.1.
5 New priman~ buildings should serve as n While flat roofed, simplicity of design yES
guide for new accessory structures on the site. including stucco finish is compatible
Conform to the design guidelines found in with proposed low-pitch roofed main
Section 7.0 New Garages and Other house.
Accessor Structures.
6.3 Mass and Scale
bi ronsidering the overall compatibility of nezo construction, its height, form, massing, size and scale will all be
reviewed. The overall proportion of the building's front fa~nde is especially important to consider since it will
have the most impact on the streetscape. While new construction tends to be larger thnn histaric buildings,
reflecting the needs and desires of the modern homeowner, ne~u structures should not be so out-of-scale zuith the
surroamdin buildin s as to loom over them.
1 Design riew buildings to be compntible At 76', the proposed (north) street- yES
zuith surrounding buildings that facing elevation is somewhat longer
contribute to the overnll chnracter of the than contributing houses in the
historic district in terms of height, size, district. However, siting of building
scale, massing, and proportions. on property and attempt to break up
masses will miti ate this effect.
z The mass and scale of neio construction Plans and elevations indicate the yES
should respect neighboring buildings and scale, massing, and orientation of the
the streetscape as a whole. proposed house will be general(y
compatible with neighboring
buildin s.
3 Nistoric heights and widths as well ns The proportions of the proposed yE5
their rntios should be maintained. The elevation addressing Hillside Road
proportions of the front fa~nde are are somewhat longer than those of
particularl~ important and should be contributing single family houses on
rompatible to those of surrounding that street. However, location and
historic buildings. articulation of mass and proportion
will miti ate this effect.
4 A new house canstructed behind an N/A N/A
existing historic house should be of lesser
mass and scnle than the ori inal structure.
6.4 Materials
Mnterials should be similar in scale, Plans call for the upper story
1
proportion, texture, finish, and color walls of the house to be sheathed
to those found on nearb~ historic buildings. with stained cedar shingle and
the lower wall areas finished with
elastomeric stucco, and the roof
with a com osite as halt shin le. YES/NO
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
The narrow and vertically
proportioned casement windows
specified are compatible with
those of historic buildings in the
vicinity. Stucco should be
cementitious and not elastomeric
to ensure visual compatibility
with historic houses in district.
z Maintain a humnn scale by nvoiding large, Plans for the house show varied, yES
fentureless surfaces and by using forms, and details found on
traditionally sized buil~iing components and historic buildings in this area of
materials. the historic district.
6.5 Ke Buildin Elements
Roofs, porches, dormers, zuindows and doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of an~
building. As such, the~ require extra atterition to nssure that they complimenf the historic nrchitecture. In
nddition to the uidelines below, re er also ta Section 3.0 Alterntions or relnted su estions.
1 Design the spacing, placement, scale, Fenestration on house shown in yES
orientntion, proportion, nnd size of zoindom submitted elevations is generally
and door apenings in nezu structures to be compatible with historic
compntible eoith the surrounding buildings buildings in the streetscape.
that contribute ta the historic district, zuhile
refieeting the uiaderlying design of the new
buildin .
Z Select windows and doors for necv buildings Specified narrow and vertically yES
that nre compatible in proportioned single-light
material, subdivision, proporUon, pattern nnd casement sash are compatible
detail zoith the euindows nnd doors of with windows on the historic
surrounding buildings that contribute to the houses in the neighborhood.
historic district. Multi pane glass on front and
above patio doors also
com atible.
3 Nezv buildings should use a roaf form found The proposed low hip roof form yES
in the district or on the landmark site. is not characteristic of historic
buildings in the district.
However, height restrictions and
grade necessitate lower roof
height. Pitch of roof on proposed
Neo-Arts and Crafts house will
be compatible with other houses
in district given location and
articulation of overall mass.
4 Porches should be compatible in massing nnd The proposed porch on the east yES
details to historic qorches in the district, and end of the house is like that
should be a ropriate to the st le o the found on at least one other
Aeenda Item #SB Paee #8
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
house. historic house in the district.
Proposed front patio area is also
consistent with historic houses
in the district.
5 Dormers should be secondnr~ to the mnin roof Proposed cross-gable dqrmer is yE5
and should be loauer than the roofline. secondary and lower than the
Oversized dormers nre inappropriate. ridge line of the roof.
7.2 New Accessory Buildings
Ne~o accessory buildings should follow the charncter and pattern of histaric acressory stractures. YVhile the~
should be take design clues from the primnr~ structure, the~ must be subordinate to the primary structure in
size, massing and detailing. Alley buildings should maintnin n scale that is pleasant to zualk along nnd
comfortable for pedestrians.
1 It is inappropriate to introduce a new garage Construction of the new garage will not YES
or accessory building if doing so zuill detract necessitate demolition of an existing
from the overall historic chnracter of the building, and will not detTact fxom the
principnl building nnd the site, or if it mill historic character of the property.
require the removal of a significant historic
building element or site feature, such as a
mature tree.
2 Necu garages and nccessor~ buildings should The building location is generally YES
generall~ be located at the renr of the lot, consistent with historic patterns of
respecting the traditional relntionship of such garages facing onto this street in the
buildings to the primary structure and the Hillside historic district.
site.
.3 Maintain adequate spacing behueen accesson~ Not applicable - no alley. N/A
builAings so aUeys do not eaolve into tunnel-
like passagezuays.
.4 Preserve a backyard area between the house The new garage does eneroach upon YES
and the necessor~ buildings, maintaining the garden space - proportion of built mass
general proportion of built mass to open space to open space will be consistent with
found zvithin the area. immediate area.
.5 Nero accessory structures should take design The new structure is compatible with YES
cues from the primary structure on the site, the primary structure in terms of
but be subordinnte to it in terms of size and architectural details and materials but is
massing. secondary to it in mass, scale and
height. Proposed flat roof will lessen
impact of garage on the streetscape.
Aaenda Item #SB Paee #9
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hiilside Road
.6 Netv garnges for single fnmily residences The new one story building shelters YES
should genernlly be orae story tnll and shelter two cars.
r1o more thnn teuo cnrs. In some cases, a huo-
car gnrnge may be innppropriate.
.7 Roof form and pitch should be complimentary The form of and finish of the proposed YES
to the primar~ structure. garage complimentary with the main
house. Flat roof is a result of significant
amount of proposed garage being
banked into slope.
.8 Accesson~ structures should be simpler in The proposed garage is simpler than YES
design nnd detail than the primary building. house in scale and detail.
.9 Materials for necu gnrages and acressory Elastomeric stucco as proposed is NO
structures should be compntible with those inappropriate - cementitous material
found on the primnr~ structure and in the should be used.
district. Vinyl siding nnd prefabricnted
shuctures are inapprapriate.
.10 Windozvs, like all elements of accessory No windows shown - drawings for east NO
structures, shouid be simpler in detailing nnd and west elevations - need to be
smnller in scale than similar elements on provided.
primary structares.
11 If cansistent with the architectural style nnd N/A N/A
approprintel~ sized and locnted, darmers mn~
be an approqriate way to inerease stornge
spnee in garages.
.12 Garnge doors should be consistent zvith the Proposed paneled overhead wood door
historic scnle nnd mnterials of traditional specified. Owner should consider MAYBE
nccessor~ structures. Wood is the most glazing in upper panels.
approprinte material and Kuo smnller doors
may be more npproprinte than one Inrge door.
In terms of mass, scale, and orientaHon the proposed new construction at 1710 Hillside
Road complies with the General Design Guidelines. While contriburing houses in the
Hillside Historic District generally feature compact footprints with narrow, street facing
elevations - typically less than 50 feet - the locarion and articulation of the design will
miHgate the effect of the proposed 76' long facade. The proposed design will be in
keeping with the Hillside historic district's character of rustic architecture, large gardens,
and generous spacing between houses.
Aeenda Item #SB Paee #10
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
Staff considers that the mass, scale, and orientation of the proposed house and garage
are in keeping with the existing patterns of building footprints, widths and orientation of
like buildings in this district.
BOARD'S DECISION:
The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifies that a Landmark Alteration Permit may
not be approved by the Board or City Council unless it meets the condiHons specified in
Section 10-13-18 B.R.C. Specifically:
(a) The landmarks board and the city council shall not approve an application for
a landmark alteration certificate unless each such agency finds that the proposed
work is consistent with the purposes of this chapter.
(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 architechzral 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
historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site
or the district;
(3) The architectural style, arrangement, texiure, 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
FINDINGS:
Provided the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation are met, staff recommends
that the Landmarks Board adopt the following findings:
1. The proposed house and garage will not have an adverse effect on the special
character and special historical, architectural and aesthetic interest and value of
the district, as they will be compatible in terms of mass, scale, or orientarion with
other buildings in the district.
Memo to the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
Re: 1710 Hillside Road
2. The proposed design will not have an adverse effect on the special character and
special historic, architectural and aesthetic interest and value of the district.
3. In terms of mass, scale, and orientation the proposed house and garage complies
with Sections 6.3(1-3), 6.5(1-4), and 7.2 of the General Design Guidelines for
Landmarks and Historic Districts.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: Location Map
Attachment B: Photographs
Attachment C: 08/17/06 Pre-Application Meeting Summary
Attachment D: Correspondence
AEtachment E: Plans and Elevations
.
Aeenda Item #SB Pa¢e #12
~
~
_~
~
.~ ~
~
~
_~
~ ~
~
I 4 I ~
E
^
~~
~
~
~
~
~ ~
~
^ ~
~
~
~
~
ATTACHMENT B
Lot at 1710 Hillside Road
~r_;~~~~, ~~'~~ ~ ~~~~A~~!~-..
1709 Hillside Road
~;~:~~c~a~ t~~n~ ~ ~~ti~~~~ ~./~
1708 Hillside Road
M:. .
a~E~~a ~~r~~~ Y.S~_~ta~~ ~~b
1707 Hillside Road
~... „ . . ... ,. .
1C01 Hillsidc Road
~~,~~~~~r~~ ~~~~-~ :~ ~~ ~~~~.._,~~
1600 Hillside Road
Attachment C
I'I2~-APPLIC~1`['[ON l~~IEE~.TIN(: SUIVIi~1ARY
Date of Summary:
Location of Requcst:
Zoning:
A~plicant / Contact:
Case Manager:
Uepartmental Staff':
Development Proposal:
08/ 17/06
1710 Hillside Road
.28 Acres (12,032 square fect)
LR-D (Low Density Residential - Developing)
David Heuston
603 Cascade
Bouldcr, CO 80309
Charles Fen-o, Planner Phone: (303) 441-4012
Steve Buckbee, Civil Engineer
Steve Durian, Transportation Engineer
Charles Ferro, Planner
Cindy Peiropan, Housin~ Planncr
James Hewatt, Historic Preservation Planner
3,400 square foot, two story single-I~amily detached home with a
500 sc~uare foot detached garage
Applicant (~uestions:
1). Is the front setback of 20' taken from the property line (within the private Hillside Road) as
previously submitted to the City by the seller of the property, Architect L,eftcourt? A second local
architect has indicated that this should be the case.
'The front setback should be taken from the northern property line (adjacent to Hillside
Urive).
2). If it is determined the front setback is 20' from the road, c~n a front yard setback reduction be
requested? Code 9-3.2-13(a) discusses this. Accordin~ to your maps, two of the four homes on
the street indeed encroach into the road. One has a zero setback. It appears that little setback is
this district's norm. Three structures on west Hillside Road have little or no front setbacks. What
would a reasonable reduction, in terms of feet, be according ro this code?
Setbacks are measured from property lines, not from the street. Under Section 9-3.2-13(a),
it may be possible to vary the front setback in establisJied districts, since the subject
property is zoned LR-D (low density developing), a variance would be reyuired to amend
the front yarcl setback requirement.
3). To what extent can entry steps/stairways encroach into front setbacks?
Stairs under 30 inches above grade can encroach into setbacks, ho~vever, front porches
may encroach into front setbacks if the criteria of Section 9-3.2-15 are satis~ed.
4). Per Code 9-3.2-23 ~ccessory Builcfin~s, c~in an accessory huilding c~f less than 500 sq. feet be
'=.l1'~~lt)~ -~~~h~' -:, ~~,~'61.~~~; __ /U
placed 3-5 feet into the lot from the Hillside Road? (i.e. 13' to 16' set back from indicated north
lot line). A district map has been provided which demonstrates that many setbacks for both
garages and houses are quite minimal in the area. Accessory buildings in the LR-D zoning
district must be setback 55 feet from the front property line. Per Section 9-3.2-13(e),
garages and open parking areas may be located in compliance with the principal front yard
setback for the LR-D zoning district of 20 feet.
5). As the property owner, may I go ahead and have Excel move the existing service pole to the
northwest corner of the property between road edge and existing rock wall? Yes, as long as the
neighbor's service line crossing the applicant's property is located within a utility
easement, no new service poles are added and the retocated pole is not within Hillside drive
and/or right-of-way.
6). Are the items ouUined regarding Water and Sewer hookups with the City, in the letter of
November 4, 2005, still valid? Yes, the letter is still valid.
7). Are the items noted by Public Warks and the Fire Department in the letter of Mazch 14~',
2000 still valid? Yes, the letter is still valid.
8). It is my understanding that this project should be exempt from a City sales tax assessment for
building materials because this property is to be built in the historic hillside district. Is this
correct? No. This provision only applies to contributing or land marked structures.
9). As the property owner, can I clear the small brush on the property (i.e. small shrubbery with
trunk dimensions of less than 3") from the property prior to submitting a building permit
application? Yes, a property owner is allowed to clear brush and small trees on their
property without a building permit. Different regulations apply to city trees located within
city right-of-way.
These comments reflect staff's understanding of the questions. Please contact Charles Ferro at
(303) 441-4012 for further discussion, if required.
Additional Information:
Historic Preservation:
The property at 1710 Hillside Road is located in the Hillside local historic district. As such, any
proposal for new construction on the property will need to be consistent with the historic
preservation ardinance and the General Design Guidelines (attached). Free-standing construction
on the property over 340 sq. ft. in size will require review by the Landmarks Preservation
Advisory Board for a landmark alteration certificate in a public hearing per the ordinance. More
information regarding this process can be accessed on our website at:
http://www.bouldercolorado.eov/index.php?option=com content&task=view&id=1429&It
emid=531.
The majority of Contributing houses in the Hillside Historic District feature compact footprints
with narrow street facing elevations - typically less than 50 feet. The only exception to this
~.i3~Ed1aA i°C~~ ~ `_-~ ~41~a~ ~-`
pattem is found at 1810 Hillside Road, which is considered a significant newer boilding.
Hillside Road is further chazacterized by large yards and generous spacing between houses. New
construction on the property should be compatible with the historic character of buildings in the
area and in keeping with character of the district as a whole
Please contact James Hewat at 303.441.3207 or hewatj @bouldercolorado.~ov if you have
questions about this property ar the landmark alteration certificate review process.
Heieht and Slope:
Due to the slope of the property, staff recommends reviewing the section Section 9-3.2-3, B.R.C.,
1981 related to building height calculation:
Please note that the City's development code is available on-line at www.bouldercolorado.QOv
Inclusionarv ZoninQ:
Please refer to Section 9-6.5 for information regarding affordable housing requirements. For
additional information, please contact Cindy Pieropan at 303-441-4252.
S:~PLAN~data\cur~PREAPPS\1710 Hillside.CF.doc
~~i~`d[7A I°C~H~"_~'~ .'~Afs'~. ~
Attachment D
"PLEASE READ AT MEETING FEBRUAR~' 7TH"
January 30, 2007 ,_ ~~_~ ~~~~
REF: Landmark Alteration Certificate
1710 Hillside Avenue
Ladies and Gentlemen:
As an abutting resident at 1810 Hillside, I request the Board
give careful consideration to this request. ~'he en~rance and
egress of Hillside Avenue (private road) is v~ry m~nimal and
if construction of this nature is allov~~ed, the
owners/contractors should be required to present a plan
showing in detail how neighbors and guest~ will ~be able to
access their adjacent properties with constru~;tion ~quipment
and vehicles, etc. blocking the road.
In addition, we believe the size and scale of~ this ~roposal is
excessive for the site and will nGt be in confc~~rman~;e with the
Historic District guidelines.
Thank you.
Stephen P. Cherner
1810 Hillside Resident
.~:~~~~~a;~ ~`~°~~~, ,. ~ ~ .~~~.~~~~ ~~
',
25'
,
a _ 4~
`.1
•,:;, .
~" ,;M1~~
S ~ KR' $,
it ~•4
~1
Fw ~
~i..~a, ... x~: r,%:a~fi .~ . , ....rr ~
Solar Shadow Analysis--12/07/2006
Compute~-generated model using 3D
survey topography from civil engineer
and actual shadow lengths for
Boulder, CO.
View from Southwest at 2:00 PM on
December, 21 st
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
i CRO55-SECTION
r~ ~ -_-- - ~ ~,.. - ~I • ~ i
~ ;Y.~ I
_~ ' ~,*,•
~
g _
~
N
~ y
~ ~~ q
~. ~
E
~ v m. C>AF/Ao
. ,
, I ~-
_____?~
4 - _ r ,
~ m ,
- ---
r ~
- - ~i
~ ~ .,~ ~ .
,
~
~ ,
~
, . .
~ ra~°
_ _._ ~---- --~:
.
'
'~, ~ r ~
~ --
i
__
r.vui _ ~ usel - :~S . ~ ~
~
~ . _ .A. r M... ' i
4
.
~ I
'..~.a ~,..
' .i
~ _'
' ~ "_' ._,.
' _"__'__ ___~_'_'Y
'____ ~ ..~..e
" _ _____" '
.1'.~. . ,~ .
, . , ~~. ~»w~. !~ ~
. . . . ~ ...
R
i ~~.~ ~' w.~...m-- wA.. . ,
, '~ ~ ! I
~\ ~~ `` _ ,~.a~,E.
. .s ~ ,~~\~_I~~i.- _ - . _ _ -
.
,
.
..,-~~,.,.x.a.,.
~ rrE v:.w ..._
_
. ~.,.._......_.....
_ N
/il
~ .~a w
1.
.•nRnic u
o.'~ .u
N4T F9R
C9NSTR4CTI4N
W
z
LLI
~ O ..i
d d0
m
~' ~ V
W J ~
~
Q 0 7
O n m
~
a
0
SfTE CLAN - SE"fBAIX
AND SECT10N5
m~ LI.OI
i ~AR-0AGE SECfIOPJ
~4. ~~~~
° ^µLy
LJ
~
~ ~ K i
`~: ~y'~@e u
Tk'b ± ;._ .
"~"
_,.. ~
. .
w
.,~~,w:i
~
__
. .
~f~~~ _
.. _ .
~
~~, .
, ~ ~ .;~-
~~" : ~ ~~
_
~ F. 5'P F • ~.+T'.9N
-
. . , . .
~
~" ~~': . - '~
N, ~~ WE57 ELEVAT:PIV
`1 .. .i~.
y
~. i
. nrd,icoCCs
- F, `=
NPT F4R
C9N5-~R~CT19N
w
Z
w
~ ~ N
`L d O
Z w °°
~ %] o
F' J~ V
w J d
_ _ ~
d o~
~ m'
0
>
d
~
ExTERIOR ELCVnTIONS
N'__'~_, V_-'__'-
A1.01