Loading...
7 - Update MemoApri14`h, 2007 TO: Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board I'ROM: James Hewat, Chris Meschuk SUBJECT: Update Memo Work Plan Staff will be giving an update on this year's work plan Historic Yreservation Month and Awards The Preservation Roundtable is currently coordinating this year's preservation month events with the national them "Making Historic Preservation Work". The Square Nail, City, and County preservation awards ceremony taking place in the Community House at the Chautauqua on May 14. Union Pacific/Jaycees Depot relocation update (sent to City Council) City staff and representatives from Regency Centers, the owner of the Crossroad Commons shopping center, are continuing preparations for the relocation of the historic Depot building in accordance with the direction for the move provided by City Council in June 2006. A shift in Regency's submission of the revised site review application for the property has changed the anticipated move date from this spring to approximately August 1. Over the next few months, asbestos will be removed from the building, some interior demolition will be completed and the mover will complete non-structural preparation work. The building will be moved intact to a secure, temporary location on the city-owned parcel at 30`h and Pearl Streets. The specific location will be south of Goose Creek, immediately east of the Pollard Motors site. Placing and restoring the building at a permanent location in the Transit Village area will be a key implementation measure of the impending Transit Village Area Plan. NOTE: This work will be reviewed throu~h a Laridrriark Alteration Certificate Applicatio~t Historic survey of' the Teahouse (sent to City Council) At its March meeting, the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board requested that staff investigate the eligibility of the Boulder Dushanbe Teahouse for local landmark designation. Using funds the city collects for review of state income tax credit applications, staff will hire a consultant to analyze the building against adopted significance criteria, which also will be reviewed by the Colorado ~listorical Society. A building newer than 50 years of age may be deemed eligible for designation if it exhibits a high degree of significance. For example, it may be deemed eligible for artistic merit or architectural significance. The survey is expected to be completed sometime mid-summer, and the results will be shared with City Council and the Landmarks Board. Depending on the survey results, the Landmarks Board may be interested in discussing landmark designation of the building with City Council. For more information contact Chris Meschuk, historic preservation planner, at (303) 441-4293. New and Pending I.and Use Review Applications New comments are included in this memo. / ARTICLES AND 1M~ ORMATION: Boulder County Historic Preservation Advisory Board (HPAB) agenda April 5, 2007 & March 1, 2007 Minutes. (Note item re: Valmont Mill) Paglia, Michael. Extinct? The Hilltop neighborhood and DeBoers property prove that historic preservation is threate~ted. Westword March 22, 2007. Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board Stay of Demolition Status Summary, April4~h, 2007 ._._ _ _- ---- - ---- Date Date of Stay Date of Address Construction Imposed Expiration Current Status 2127-2135 14 Street 1902 2/7/2007 6/17/2007 No progress to report Staff inet with the owner on March 23~d, and discussed landmarking the property and possible ways to 1621 16tn construct an addition. The Street 1938 3/7/2007 8/13/2007 owner is not interested in Landmarking, but will consider looking into an addition. He has expressed his interest in waiting the sta out to ex iration. No progress to report. Staff 3780 23~d has been in contact with the Street 1956 3/7/2007 8/20/2007 architect for the owners, but have been unable to set up a meeting at this time. ~ P~~St UIIiCr R,~~ d I. Roul:lec S:,+IanJo RU?Qh Land Use Department Courthouse Anncx 2Q=+'; 13 ~:;trr;r,i . 13" & Spruce Streets . Boulder. Colorado 80302 .(303) 441-3930 http://www.bouldercounty.us/lu/ HISTORIC PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD Thursday, April S, 2007 - 6:00 p.m. Third Floor Conference Room Boulder County Courthouse AGENDA 1. Citizen participation for items not otherwise on the agenda. 2. Approval of rninutes from prcvious meeting. 3. Landmark Dockcts: a. Docket HP-07-006: McLellan Cabin Request: Boulder County Historic Landmark Designation Location: The property is located at 310 Main Street in the Goldhill townsite, in Section 12, Township 1N, Range 72W of the 6th Principal Meridian. Zoning: 1-Iistoric (H) Owner/Applicant: Marjorie McLellan b. Docket HP-07-007: Brvan Cabin Request: Bouldcr County Historic Landmark Designation Location: The property is located at 603 Klondyke in the Eldora townsite area, in Section 20, Township 1S, Range 73W of the 6th Principal Meridian. Zoning: Forestry (F) Owner/Applicant: Steven & Suellen Bryan 4. Grant Applications: a. Danoels Homestcad 5. Building Pemlit Review for Structures 50 Years of Age and Older 6. Referrals 7. Election of officers 8. Other Business: a. How to Determine Landmark Eligibility b. Update on Parks and Open Space Projects l'„ni \Li}cr Itru Pcnrlm,ui 11i11'fnnr ('ntmn~ ~ ~~nn,~is~~i,v,~; r ou•n•, ( ~~mnu,~-i~snci ~'~,.~;i,l'. ~imuni;>i„ I1CI ~ i'u>t Uffi~:r Ru+: -t ~ 1• H~iuldcr. Caliuado gOi(~h Lal~d Use Depa~tment Courthouse Annex 2045 13 ~' Street . 13"' & Spruce Streets . Boulder, Coiorado 8c~302 .(303} 441-3930 ~i ~tp:r?tivww.bUU!ilefcounty.us%lu; BOl1LDER COUNTY HISTOI2IC PRESERVATION ADVISORY ROARD MINUTES March 1, 2007 6:00 PM Hearing Room, Third Floor, County Courthouse, Boulder DR.AFT. DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT On Thursday, March 1, 2007, the Boulder County Historic Preservation Advisory Board held a regular meeting, convening at 6:09 p.m. and adjourning at approximately 8:08 p.m. Board Members Present: Karen Hagler, Scott Bruntjen, Silvia Pettem, David Transue (arrived late) Board Members Excused: Neal Deridder, Sharron Rosall, Peter Brady Staff Present: Denise Grimm, Dale Case, Bonnie Gracia, and Meredith Lanning, Land Use Carol Beam, Parks and Open Space Interested Others: Approximately l0 The BOARI7 addressed agenda items that did not require a quorum while awaiting a board members arrival. Also, approval of the minutes was tabled until after the landmark applications were przsented. Carol Affleck, speaking on behalf of Rural Historic Valmont, presents an update on Valmont Butte Mill. Carol asks that the BOARD consider supporting a landmarking of the entire cultural site and the mill complex. She asks that the BOARD write a letter to the City of Boulder to request that the city landmark the property prior to selling. The BOARD requests more background information prior to writing a letter. ~~~ni -Tln~ci ISeu Pi;n9m:~n tbili Toor ~~nuri;~ ( ~~mnn,.ii~u~:i ~';=unr:~ ( ,~I;tt'ii,.•;n~irr i~ iqms~.~ ~'innrnie;innei Z. MIi`'UTES Approval of the Januarv 4, 2007 Historic Preservation Advisory Board Minutes: (Approval of the Minutes was tabled until approximately 8:07pm.) MOTION: Scott Bruntjen MOVED to approve the January 4, 2007 minutes as submitted. SECOND: Sih~ia Pettem. VOTE: Motion PASSED Unanimously. '~ 3. LAND:~IARK APPLICATIONS a. Docket HP-07-002: Aspenola Cabin Denise Grimm presents the STAFF report. Staff recommends BOARD's approval and BOCC approval of the application for landmarking Aspenola Cabin under criteria l, 4, and 8 subject to the two standard conditions, requiring a certificate of appropriateness for exterior alterations. PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Matt Phillips, friend of owner, gives overview of owners plans for future renovations. BOARD MEMBER, Scott Bruntjen clarifies that the intent is to landmark the structure as it exists and any future modification would require a certificate of appropriateness. Also, requesting that building plans of such extent come back to the full BOARD. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSEU BOARD DISCUSSION The BOAR.D discusses landmarking the Aspenola Cabin as it currently exists. MOTION: David Transue MOVES to approve the Aspenola Cabin (Docket HP-07-002) for landmarking under criteria 1, 4, and 8, subject to conditions. SECOND: Silvia Pettem. DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION ~ The BOARD discusses that any future modification would be subject to the usual process for a Certificate of Appropriateness and would be reserved for the full HPAB BOARD and not a sub- committee. VOTE: MOTION PASSES Unanimously. b. HP-07-003 Cruthers' Homestead Denise Grimm presents the STAFF report. Staff recommends BOARD's approval and BOCC approval of the application for landmarking Cruthers' Homestead under criteria 1 and 4, subject to the two standard conditions. PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Janet Chu, Chairperson for the Pilot Trust, describes uses of the Cruthers' Homestead and urges the BOARDS support for landmarking. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED BOARD No comments or concerns CLOSE BOARD DISCUSSION MOTION: David Transue MOVES to approve the Cruthers' Homestead (Docket HP-07- 003) for landmarking under criteria 1 and 4, subject to the two standard conditions. SECOND: Silvia Pettem. VOTE: MOTION PASSES Unanimously. c. HP-07-004: Rockwall Lodge Denise Grimm presents the STAFF report. Staff recommends BOARD's approval and BOCC approval of the application for landmarking Rockwail Lodge under criteria l, 4, and 8, subject to the two standard conditions. PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Matt Phillips, questions what was approved for the previous owners of this property relative to this project. . STAFF MEMBER, Denise Grimm clarifies that the property came to the BOARD as a referral and the then went to the Board of Adjustment after the HPAB BOARD made comments. PUBLIC COMML'NT CLOSED BOARD DiSSCUSSION C~/ BOARD MEMBER, Scott Bruntjen states that the property as it exists is worthy of landmarking. He wants to be sure that the new owner understands that the property will go through a higher level of review after landmarking than it would as it stands currently. Also, Scott wants any future additions to go to the BOARD rather than a sub-committee. CLOSE BOARD DISCUSSION MOTION: David Transue MOVES to approve the Rockwall Lodge (Docket HP-07- 004) for landmarking under criteria l, 4, and 8, subject to conditions. SECOND: Scott Bruntjen MOVES to approve; requesting that in addition to the two standard conditions be added that the current owners understand any additions to the property will go through the full BOAR.D for a Certificate of Appropriateness. VOTE: MOTION PASSES Unanimously d. HP-07-005: Valmont School Denise Grimm presents the STAFF report. Staff recommends BOARD's approval and BOCC approval of the application for landmarking Valmont School under criteria 1 and 4, subject to the two standard conditions. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BOARD MEMBER, Scott Bruntjen asks if the School and accessory structures are all on one lot. STAFF, Denise Grimm responds that the property currently has two uses and the current owners will need to apply for a subdivision exemption in the future. The intent is to find an adaptive reuse to classify the school as a museum. Other adaptive reuses may be possible. CLOSE STAFF COMMENTS PUBLIC COMMENT OPENED Robert Von Eschen, owner's representative, explains the project and what the intensions are for the property. The BOARD asks the STAFF if the landinarking would be conditional upon other Land Use processes heing a~proved. STAFF explains that all processes will be applied for concurrently and go to BOCC at the same time. The BOARD will be kept up to date with the plans as they progress and all information will be submitted to BOCC as one package. Therefore, if the project is not approved as a whole the owners would hold off on landmarking until they could find a project that would be approved. Carol Affleck, speaking on behalf of Rural Historic Valmont, recommends that the ash pit, privies, and pony barn be landmarked in addition to the school. 7 Barbara Butterfield, former student at Valmont school, reflects on good memories. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED OPEN BOARD DISCUSSION BOARD MEMBER, David Transue asks if the foundation was restored or replaced at sometime. STAFF has no indication that it was changed. Carol Affleck, Rural Historic Valmont, believes that the fouiidation is original. MOTION: Scott Bruntjen MOVES to approve the Valmont School (Docket HP-07- 005) for landmarking under criteria 1 and 4 subject the standard conditions. He suggests that the owner try and find a way to incorporate the pony barn, two privies, and ash pit onto the historic site. SECOND: Silvia Pettem VOTE: MOTION PASSES Unanimously 4. GRANT AI'PLICATIONS None. None. None. 7. OTHER BUSINESS a. Carol Beam, Parks and Open Space, introduces Barbara Darden from Scheuber+Darden Architects who introduces Cindy Howell from Norris Design. Barbara and Cindy give a presentation on thc update for the Harney-Lastoka project. b. BOARD Member Karen Hagler mentions that the County Forum went well and thanks those ~ who participated. c. Denise presents the B~ARD with tee shirts, from the Pinnacle awards, for their joint effort with the Goodhue Farm House project. d. Denise updates the BOARD on the BOCC's approval regarding the code amendment for an adaptive reuse. S. ADJOURNED The Boulder County Historic Preservation Advisory Board meeting was adjourned at 8:08 p.m. G:\HISTORIC PRESERVATIONVv11NUTESIHPABMAR07Tcmplatel.doc The official record of dris meeting is on DAT m:d cassette tape. Detailed information regardi-:g tlie docket items, including maps and legal descriptions are availahle for public use at tlte Land Use Department, 13th arid Spruce, Boulder, CO 303-441-3930. ~ Page 1 of 4 Extinct? The Hilltop neighborhood and DeBoers property prove that historic preservation is threatened. By Michael Paglia Published: March 22, 200~ Historic preservation in Denver is really in trouble right now, despite its many successes. The easy-to- understand community benefits of landmark protection are all over the central part of the city -- lower downtown, Country Club, Seventh Avenue Parkway, Potter-Highland, Montclair, Larimer Square and on and on -- and they make the Mile High City what it is. Without official protection by landmark ordinances, these neighborhoods would have been lost long ago. So what's the problem for preservation? Greed. A vacant lot on Cranmer Park, where a Victor Hornbein masterpiece once stood. Developers would like nothing better than to see preservation go under the wrecking ball. Conveniently for them, a set of phony talking points have been floating around, meant to undermine the city's landmark-protection process. So many different people are spouting these ideas -- newspaper writers, lawyers, members of the Denver City Council, members of the Denver Planning Board -- it's hard for me to believe it's a coincidence and not a conspiracy. The talking points I'm referring to are patently false on their faces. 'I'he failed attempt to create a Hilltop historic district and the compromise involving the S.R. De Soer compound illustrate how they've been used to the city's detriment. The first talking point is that neither Hilltop nor DeSoer's propei-ty was good enough to be discussed by the Denver Landmark Preservation Commission. The benefit of spreading this idea is that it gets properties away from requirements for conscientious oversight and makes them easier to demolish. Even though Hilltop and DeBoer did eventually go before the group, in the future they will be used as "bad" examples to help abort other potential districts, like Park Hill, from showing up before the commission. 1'hough clearly false, this talking point has repeatedly appeared in editorials in both of the dailies expressing opposition to historical designation of Hilltop and the DeBoer properties; it's even turned up in news stories penned by the Post's George Merritt -- which is really bad. Far ld rage ~ or 4 from being poor fits for the landmark commission's mandate, Hilltop and DeBoer are exactly the kind of situations the process was created to deal with: sites of historic value that are endangered by insensitive owners. Let's look at Hilltop, which was developed in the i93os but really took off in the i95os. The neighborhood features a variety of fine examples of architecture in styles current at the time, such as Tudors, colonials, Spanish mission re-creations and, most important, mid-century modernist works. Many of these residences were custom-built, with several being the work of the most important Denver architects of the day. Then there's the whole Jewish cultural context. When most of Hilltop was built, Denver's better neighborhoods, like the first phase of Crestmoor, had covenants requiring that all residents be Christian, meaning Jewish people couldn't live there. Hilltop, on the other hand, had no such covenants, and therefore attracted Jews. The neighborhood includes one of the city's most important Jewish institutions, Temple Emanuel, and a host of others, notably. the Jewish Community Center, which was set up because Jews couldn't join country clubs then, either. Also -- and here's something that ties the cultural and architectural history of Hilltop -- Jews tended to be among the greatest supporters of modernism. In fact, the late Joseph Marlow, an important modernist architect who designed several Hilltop houses, once told me that nearly all of his clients were Jewish. So in Hilltop, there's architecture at the junction of cultural history, and all of it dates back a half to three-quarters of a century. How is it again that Hilltop was not an appropriate candidate for landmark consideration? After a fierce conflict, the application for landmark protection for Hilltop was withdrawn. We didn't have to wait long to see the result: A few months later, the i949 Lewin House, at 255 Dexter Street on Cranmer Park, an out-of-this-world Usonian-style masterpiece by the late, great Victor Hornbein, was scraped. (Imagine the swine that would see this pearl as a building site, then imagine the monstrosity such philistines will put in its place.) The DeBoer property makes an even clearer case for landmarking, since the structures located on the land feature architectural and cultural history from the early twentieth century and are directly associated with two important figures in the history of Denver: Saco DeBoer and John Edward Thompson. DeBoer was a renowned landscape designer who did many of the city's parks and parkways; Thompson was a University of Denver art professor and one of the most important painters in Colorado's history. The group of buildings includes, among others, DeBoer's office, a rambling 193os brick cottage with its signature bell tower, and Thompson's hacienda-style studio. The landmark process involves an objective finding of fact, and these facts prove that a strong case for saving the DeBoer place was easy to make. But lies in the form of those talking points were told about the DeBoer cycle as they had been about Hilltop. In fact, the planning board actually based its recommendation on the false idea that the DeBoer property wasn't good enough for landmark oversight -- even though the landmark coinmission agreed that it was. Vince Carroll at the Rocky Mountain News piled on, ending a particularly ignorant piece by writing that "Denverites should stop abusing the preservation process to frustrate development they don't like." Say what? Or how about this dumb observation in an unsigned editorial in the Denver Post: "Despite the claims of a few ~~ Yage .3 ot 4 zealots, the property is of questionable historic value." Let's put this one in the pure bullshit category, shall we? From an objective standpoint, the DeBoer estate is a slam-dunk nomination -- a no-brainer. (Maybe that's the problem with the planning board and the editorial writers at the dailies: no brains.) The bogus notion that neither Hilltop nor the DeBoer complex qualified as being historic was routinely connected to another nonsensical talking point: that landmarking without the permission of property owners was "unprecedented." Just because a majority of Hilltop residents and the DeBoer heirs opposed preservation, that makes those places rubbish? No. In fact, the official landmarking process only requires owner notification, not consent. Bravo to Councilwoman Jeanne Robb for pointing out, during the DeSoer public hearing on March i2, that back in the '8os, the Mayan Theatre was landmarked by the City over the objections of its owners, who wanted to tear it down. She also said that preservation had been born in Denver in the i97os when the Moffat Mansion was destroyed, thus outraging the community and leading to the passage of the first landmark ordinance and the founding of Historic Denver, the city's preeminent preservation advocacy group. Now, what was that about hostile preservation struggles being "unprecedented"? The standard is contention; everybody knows that. Everyone, that is, except those dim-bulb city councilmembers Jeanne Faatz and Charlie Brown, who really acted out at the hearing. First there was Faatz, who looked wild-eyed and completely demented. She petulantly addressed the crowd, which was overwhelmingly made up of supporters of preservation, and then likened them to a mugger. That was an interesting analogy, because I thought it was she who had mugged the audience, using the blunt object of her mindless rhetoric to do it. Not to be upstaged, Brown was just about foaming at the mouth as he made his remarks. He tried to crucify Everett Shigeta, the Denver Community Planning and Development staffer for the landmarks commission, but whatever the issue Brown was trying to use as a"gotcha" -- and which was obviously written on the piece of paper he was handling -- must have turned out to be spurious, because he dropped the matter clumsily. (Shades of Joseph McCarthy!) If you've never seen Brown at full tilt, it's a sight to behold. It's as though a movie studio asked central casting to send over a pompous gas bag. That night he was chewing up the scenery and pushing around ordinary citizens. To back up his opinions, he regurgitated the two talking points. And at one point, he forced the author of the landmark nomination, Dave Burrell, to apologize for a factual error in his Your Hub piece. Hey, I demand an apology from Brown for mouthing the falsehoods! Before that meeting, after months of pitched battles, the Wright Trust, which controls the property for DeBoer's heirs, had agreed to a compromise brokered by Historic Denver that allows parts of the parcel to be preserved. I point this out so you understand that Faatz and Brown made their stupid remarks after both sides had agreed to a solution, but before the city council voted on it.1'he new district, which is much smaller than the one approved by the landmark commission, was subsequently approved by the city council, with Faatz and Brown dissenting. Denver's historic places are part of the equity shared by all Denverites. We cannot let ~d Yage 4 oT 4 developers, with the planning board and the dailies in their pockets, use false talking points to take away our heritage just because the only thing they value is the almighry dollar. l3