HomeMy WebLinkAbout6A - Landmark alteration certificate to move a contributing shed/garage on the property converting iMEMORANDUM
Octobex 4'n, 2006
TO: Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board
FROM: Susan Richstone, Acting Long Range Planning Manager
Chris Meschuk, Historic Preservation Planner
Alice Gilbertson, Historic Preservation Intern
James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner
SUBJECT: Pubiic hearing and consideration of a landmark alteration
certificate to move a contributing shed/garage on the
property, converting it into a studio, and in its place to
construct a new 441 sq. ft. two-car garage at 2529 6"' Street in
the Mapleton Hill Historic District (HI52006-00169).
STATISTICS:
1. Site: 2529 6'h Street
2. Historic District: Mapleton Hill
3. Zoning: RL-1 (Residential Low - 1)
4. Owner/Applicant: Penny Normann(Scott Coburn
5. Date of Construction: House, c.1900, shed/garage constructed bet.
1922-31)
6. Proposed New Const. Two car garage, 441 sq. ft.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Based upon the findings outlined below, staff recommends that the
Landmarks Board approve the request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate to
relocate and rehabilitate the shed/garage and to construct the proposed two-car
garage. Although deteriorated, the existing garage/shed is a contributing
resource to the district and that its on-site relocation and rehabilitation will not
have an adverse effect on the property, the alleyway, or the historic district. The
proposed treatment of the contributing shed/garage building will be consistent
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 1
10/04/061andmarks Board Memo re. 2529 6" Street
with the conditions as specified in Section 10-13-18(a)&(b)(1-4) of the historic
preservation ordinance. Further, staff considers the proposed new garage is
generally consistent with the General Design Guidelines and Mapleton Hill Historic
District Guidelines for New Construction and its massing and placement will not
detract from the historic character of the property and alleyscape.
This recommendation is based upon the condition that the applicant
provides details relating to the proposed two-leaf garage doors, two-panel
exterior door, and double-hung windows and color samples for the proposed
garage in addition to detailed plans and a timeline for how the shed will be
moved and rehabilitated on the proposed site for staff review and approval.
SUMMARY:
• This application calls for moving and rehabilitating a contributing
shed/garage and in its place constructing of a free-standing garage more
than 340 sq. ft. in size. As such, a pubiic hearing is required (10.13.14(3)(b)
of the Boulder Revised Code).
• On July 26~'', 2006, the design review committee reviewed preliminary
plans for additions to the contributing main house on the property. At
that meeting the applicant was informed that demolition of the
shed/garage, as then envisioned by the applicant, and new free-standing
construction would require the full Board's review.
• The Board was expected to hear the application on September 6, 2006 but
the action item was postponed until the October meeting, due to the
applicanYs illness. During that time, the project has been reconfigured to
preserve the contributing shed/garage, moving and rotating it 90° and
rehabilitating it to function as a siudio with a new foundation.
• The shed/garage proposed for moving and rehabilitating was constructed
sometime between 1922 and 1931 and was identified as being contributing
during the 2665 survey of accessory buildings in the Mapleton Hill
historic district.
• Staff considers the proposed new construction consistent with the
criteria for a landmark alteration certificate as per Section 10.13.18
(b) of the Boulder Revised Code, Sections 7.1 and 7.2 of the General
Design Guidelines, and Sections D and P of the Mapleton Hill Historic
District Design Guidelines.
Staff conditionally recommends that the Landmarks Board approve the
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 2
] 0!(li/OG L,andmarks Board Memo re: 2529 G'" Street
request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate to relocate the shed/garage and to
construct the proposed two-car garage. This recommendation is based upon the
condition that the applicant provides details relating to the proposed two-leaf
garage doors, two-panel exterior door, and double-hung windows and color
samples for the proposed garage in addition to detailed plans and a timeline for
howT the shed will be moved and rehabilitated on the proposed site for staff
review and approval.
Figure 1. 2529 6th Street Location Map
PROPERTY HISTORY:
The trame house at 2529 6~h Street appears on the 1906 Sanborn Fire
Insurance Map and the 1993 historic building inventory form estimates the date
of construction to be 1900. In 1913, the city directory listed Joseph and Elizabeth
Lloyd as living at the property. Sanborn maps indicate that the frame shed
located at the west side of the property was conscructed between 1922 and 1931
with a carport addition at the east of the building having been constructed
sometime after 1960. The lot is 6,750 sq. ft in size.
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 3
]0/(~7/(Xi landmarks Board h1emo re: 2~29 6~ 5veet
Figure 2. Main house 2529 6~h Street, August, 2006.
BUILDING DESCRIPTION:
T`he shed/garage at 2529 6t'' Street is a one-story, shed-roof building of
simple, two-by-four frame construction sheathed with unfinished vertical ~lank
siding. A non-histori~ shed roof, lean-to addition carport addition extends from
the east elevation of the building. The shed/garage is in deteriorating condition
with visible bowing and deflection observed in the walls.
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 4
Figure 3. Shed/garage 2529 6~h Street (south-west comer), August, 2006
10/04/(Xi Landmarks Board Memo m: '_~Z9 6`" 5treet
ANALYSIS OF HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE:
The modest shed/garage at 2529 6~' Street was constructed sometime
between 1922 and 1931, presumably to house an automobile and provide storage
space. With the exception of the addition of the post 1961 east facing carport
additions and a recent enameled steel roof, few alterations appear to have been
made to the building.
The 1993 historic building survey identifies the house as being a good
example of vernacular wood frame architecture with its hip roof, shed dormer,
gable end decorative shingles, and its contribution to the Mapleton Hill historic
district as a whole (see Attachr~zet~t A). The building proposed for relocation is
identified as a garage on the survey form. In 2005, the building was inventoried
as part of the survey of accessory buildings in the Mapleton Hill historic district
and identified as an "early shed roofed wood storage building and garage" and
contributing to the Mapleton Hill historic district (see Attrrchmerrt B).
t ~ ,
~~~ , , ~. ~
'!~
. <
t. •
~: ~: + ~ ,
~
~'
' .
•;
, ~
~
- , ,.. ,
~
~ •
.~?~ ~
. ~
~
, ' ~ ~'~ ~ r
~'....
_ ~'.r r+~~M~~~~~~K
~.i-„r,_v~ ~.;,r <~~
~ ~
. N '{~ 1 1
~`~ ~`
. ~ ~ . j. .
h
wr
~
i~
~
`
-r.
~t ..,~
tt
S
;:
.
_ y
<
?':
~
- `
-, ~
'~
t,
~ A~"
.
°~ Wy
~
.!l s' ., i~4y ~ ~
r
^
~~
• ~~
Il'I
p ~
.' ~.. . ~~
y .
y, e,~1
~ ~~
•.
~
~
3 ~ ~~ ~~
~ i .
~t ~
,-
l4~_~
si ~.1
~1~, ~L~~_
, l~Irl~l, ~ .
,
.
'~" ~ .
~
~~~
~
~ Y
y ~
q
.
/ ~
'.~. .5 _ ~'~" ~~
~
~
~
_ . _ . . _' 'LT+
' ~
„~
" ~
~
~ `'"'
'
~~
{ _
:... - - _
~
1
~
,~
F -
y' ~
,
$F ~
~_~r~ ~~~,..
~.w
g
t
~ ~ ~~
~ t K .
~ ~
y ~ -
. .
Figure 4. Shed/garage, 2524 6~h Street (east elevation), August, 2006
Architecturally, the shed/garage is a modest (and currently deteriorating)
example of vernacular accessory architecture. The building is a visible aspect of
the alley between Concord and Maxwell Avenues and visible from 6t'' Street.
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 5
10/li~il(?G L~n~m:irks Board ~temu re: 'S'_9 G~' Sveet
Staff is of the opinion that the shed/garage is contributing as defined in the
Gerteral Desig~r Giiidelirie~ and Mapletorz Historic District Desigrt Gttideli~ies. While
simple and utilitarian in nature, staff considers the building a good example of
earl~~ tw~entieth century accessory building construction and that it contribtites to
the historic character of the Mapleton Hill historic district.
REQUEST FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AND ON-SITE RELOCATION:
relative to other accessory buildings on the block.
AGENDA ITE~i # 6A PAGE# 6
Figure 5. Shed/garage '~29 6'h Street (west elevation), August, 2006
Figure 6. Plan showing existing location of shed/garage building
10/04/06 landmarks Board Memo re. 2529 6" Street
Currently, the shed/garage is set back 10' from both the alley and the west
property line. The majority of the accessory buildings on the block are more
closely aligned with the alley as shown in Figure 6.
~s~swc rouse
~.: ,'........ __ _- _ _ _
~' eaorosEO cwa+cE ~
~_ ~ ,_..us>-.~. _
.\ .
~"
Figure 7. Site plan of proposed new garage and relocation of existing shed/
garage at 2529 6'" Street.
In the place of the existing building, the applicant prbposes the
construction of a new one-story, two-car garage with a footprint of 441 sq. ft.
Drawings show the proposed frame building to be erected on the location of the
existing shed/garage with two vehicular doors facing south onto the alley.
The existing shed/garage as shown in Figure 7 on the site plan is to be
rotated 90° and oriented facing south onto the existing alley. The placement of
the shedJgarage would be approximately 17' east and 10' south of its existing
location. The covered patio/ carport, built sometime after 1960, is to be removed
prior to the garage/shed relocation. The rehabilitation of the shed/garage is to
include a new foundation, insulated walls, electrical, and floor. The existing
window and doors would be preserved as to exterior appearance.
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 7
10/04/06 laodmazks Board Memo re~ 2529 6'" Sveet
F%ISi1NG ShED
~qEtDLAiEO)
. ~ -~~.~~.~~~~_-~__ ~ -r
_`~_ ""_r..--_ _.~ 1 ~ 1. ~ -~
~ ~ ~~ ~, F+ ~~ ~ 4
-,. _
~~ {'~. ~fi'~~~ ~~ ~ j i~ ~,~ ~ ~i ' _ ~ C~ i
~,
~; ;'; ,. -. ' ~-~~ ;: ~,
- .-I_.~,. ~
~ SOUTH ELEVATION :t~ratw
. . S(R.L 18. _ .. ~.
Figure 8. South elevation of proposed new gazage and relocated shed/garage at 25Z9 6°" street.
Elevations show the proposed building to feature a simple gable roof with
a 3/12 pitch reflective of that of the existing shed/garage. The south face of the
garage is shown to feature two, two-leaf garage doors each with externally and
diagonally braced panels.
. ,z - - - ,
~~
_.- i
I -
~~ ~. N
I • ~~ _ . J ~ _ ~ ~ ' ~
I ` ~
~ ~
NOFTH ELEVATION
scF:E ~ s - •..r
Figure 9. North elevation of proposed new garage and relocated shea/garage at zbzy b~^ ~treet.
On the north elevation, drawings show the east end of the wall punctuated with
a two-panel, single light door. The walls of the building are shown to be
sheathed in board and batten siding. The roof is shown to be clad in asphalt
composition shingles to match the existing house.
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# S
] 0/04/06 l~ndmarks Board Memo re: 2529 6'" Sveet
. ~.. ~ j^.T y ~ , ~.
I 1 { J
~ ~ i ,I ~X , 0 4~ ~ Y;
~~ . i , .~' q i i~ N,
. I r '_r i, ' ~
i {I ~~ ~ ~
~ ~
i_ _~_ :
ensr~v~norv
Figure 10. East elevaHon of proposed new garage and relocated shed/garage at 2529 6~h Street.
On the east elevation, drawings show the shed(garage wall to feature a simple
two-leaf door. The roof of the proposed garage is shown to project 2'- 6" above
the height of the existing shed/garage, which is shown as 10'. The proposed
garage is shown to feature a one over one, double hung window on the north
end of the east elevation.
No details were submitted regarding the materials to be used for the twaleaf
garage doors, two-panel exterior door, double hung windows, and paint color
for the proposed building.
THE 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 conditions 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 architectural features of the landmark or
the subject property within an historic district;
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 9
10/04lW Landmarks Board Memo re. 2529 6" Street
(2) The proposed work does not adversely affect the special character or
special historical, architeciural, or aesthetic interest or value of the
landmark and its site or the district;
(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 building in an historic district, the
proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of
para~raphs (bl(21 and ~ of this section
The following is an analysis of the proposal's compliance with the applicabie
design guidelines:
General Design Guidelines
7. GARAGES & OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTCTRES
7.1 Existing Historic Accessory Structures
A primary concern of the Landmarks Board in reviewing proposed changes in historic districts
is the protection of existing historic accessary structures and the character of the site and
district.
GUIDELINES: ANALYSIS: CONFORMS
.1 Retain and preserve garages and The existing shed/garage will be YES
accessory buildings that contirbute to retained.
the overall character of the site or
district.
.2 Retain and preserve the character- The materials, features, and details YES
defining materials, features, and of the existing shed/garage will be
details of historic garages and retained.
accessory buildings, including roofs,
materials, windows, and doors.
7.2 New Accessory Buildings
New accessory buildings should follow the character and pattern of historic accessory
structures. While they should be take design clues from the primary structure, they musf be
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 10
10/04/Ob landmarks Board Memo re: 2529 6" Street
subordinate to the primary structure in size, massing and detailing. Alley buildings should
maintain a scale that is yleasant to walk along and comfortable for pedestrians.
GUIDELINES: ANALYSIS: CONFORMS
.1 It is inappropriate to introduce a new Construction of the new garage will YES
garage or accessory building if doing require moving the existing shedj
so will detract from the overall historic garage on site but will not require
character of the principal building and its demolition.
the site, or if it will require the removal
of a significant historic building
element or site feature, such as a
mature tree.
.2 New garages and accessory buildings The building location is consistent YES
should generally be located at the rear with historic patterns of garages
of the lot, respecting the traditional facing onto the alley on this block.
relatioruhip of such buildings to the
primary structure and the site.
.3 Maintain adequate spacing between Distance between south wall of YES
accessory buildings so alleys do not proposed building and buildings
evolve into tunnel-like passageways. across alley approx. 30'. Distance
between proposed garage and
relocated shed/garage is 3' and
distance between relocated
shed/garage and east property line
is 70'.
.4 Preserve a backyard area between the The move and rotation of the YES
house and the accessory buildings, existing shed/garage encroaches
maintaining the general proportion of upon garden space, with a net
built mass to open space found within reduction in open space of
the area. approximately 244 sq. ft, but
proportion of built mass to open
space is generally consistent with
immediate area.
.5 New accessory structures should take The new buIlding is generally YES
design cues from the primary compatible with the primary
structure on the site, but be building in terms of architectural
subordinate to it in terms of size and details and materials and is
massing. secondary to it in mass, scale and
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 11
1 N04/06 Landmarks Board Memo re: 2529 6" So-eet
height.
.6 New garages for single family Proposed one story 12' - 6" high YES
residences should generally be one building to shelter two-cars.
story tall and shelter no more than two
cars. In some cases, a two-car garage
may be inappropriate.
.7 Roaf form and pitch should be The form and pitch of roof YES
complimentary to the primary complimentary with the exisring
structure. shed/garage.
.8 Accessory structures should be simpler The proposed garage is simpler YES
in design and detail than the primary than house in scale and detail.
building.
.9 Materials for new garages and Materials as proposed, including MAYBE
accessory structures should be wood board and batten siding, and
compatible with those found on the roof are appropriate. Need
primary structure and in the district. addirional information regarding
I Vinyl siding and prefabricated materials proposed for doors and
structures are inappropriate. windows.
.10 Windows, like all elements of accessory The proportions and design YES
structures, should be simpler in proposed are generally consistent
detailing and smaller in scale than with guidelines.
similar elements on primary
structures.
.11 If consistent with the architectural Not applicable N/A
style and appropriately sized and
located, dormers may be an
appropriate way to increase storage
space in garages.
.12 Garage doors should be consistent Need additionai information
with the historic scale and materials of regarding materials proposed for MAYBE
traditional accessory structures. garage doors.
Woad is the most appropriate material
and two smaller doors may be more
appropriate than one large door.
.13 It is inappropriate to introduce Penetrarions into existing
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 12
10/04/06 Landmarks Board Memo re. 2529 6'" Sveet
features or detials to a garage or an shed/garage do not create a false yES
accessory building in an attempt to historical appearance.
create a false historical appearance.
.14 Carports are inappropirate in districts Carport added to shed/garage in the
where their form has no historic 1960's wIll be removed. YES
precedent.
Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines.
D. ALLEYS, EASEMENTS and ACCESSWAYS
Alleys are a strong visual element of the district, and have much variety of scale and detail. They
play an imyortant role in the developmenf patterns that give the more visible areas their character.
Alleys provide access to rear parking and garages. They have a varied edge quality, with buildings
both on the property lines and set back. The size and quality of these accessory buildings varies
considerably. Careful consideration should be given to changes in traditional uses.
Guideiines: Anal sis: CONFORNIS?
1. The use of alleys to provide The proposed garage will provide vehicular
access to the rear of access from the alley. YES
qroperties should be
reserved.
2. Efforts should be made to Nearly every property along the alley
protect the variety of shape, contains an accessory building, with sizes YES
size and alignment of ranging from small one-story storage sheds
buildings along the alleys. to larger two-car, one-and-a-half-story
Alleys should maintain a garages. The existing shed/garage and
human scale and be sensitive proposed garage are similar in scale,
to pedestrians. massing, and placement to others foLmd in
the alleyscape. The configuration of the two
structures retains an adequate amount of
open frontage along the alley, with
approximately 70' between the shed/garage
and the east ro er line.
3. Buildings such as garages, The proposed rehabilitation to the existing
sheds, etc. which contribute shed/garage is in keeping with the original YES .
to this variety should be character of the structure.
retained in their original
orm whenever ossibte.
5. E orts should be made to The ro osed relocation of the ara e/shed
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 13
10/04/06landmarks Board Memo re~ 2529 6" Sveet
maintain the character of the to make way for the proposed garage dces YES
alleys in the District. not significantly alter the character of the
alle .
P. GARAGES, ANALYSLS: CONFORMS?
GUIDELINES:
1. If an existing structure is to The proposed rehabilitaHon to the exisring
~'ES
be used as a garage the shed/garage is in keeping with the original
historic character of the character of the structure.
building should be respected.
As few changes as possible
should be made.
2. 4Vhen garage doors are The applicant intends to incorporate two,
MAYBE
added to a building they two-leaf garage doors on the alley elevation
should be wood. Different of the proposed garage. The existing
types will be appropriate for shed/garage is shown with one two-leaf
different buildings. Two east-facing garage door and two extant
smaller doors may be more windows facing the alley. Need additional
appropriate than one large information regarding materials proposed
door. for doors.
3. If a new structure is to be The proposed garage design is reflective of
YES
constructed, design ideas the existing shed/garage.
might be found in existing
historic accessory buildings
located nearb .
4. The new building should be Staff considers that the proposed garage is
YES
secondary in nature to the secondary in nature to the main house.
main house and smaller in
scale.
5. Accessory buildings should Staff considers that the proposed 441 sq. ft. yES
be small in scale and mass, garage is in keepin€ with the scale and mass
and constructed in a manner of the exisring garage/shed and the
which is complimentary to alleyscape as a whole.
the character of the house
and alley. They are clearly
secondary in importance to
the primary structure.
Typically, prefabricated
sheds are discoura ed.
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 14
10/04/06 landmarks Board Memo re: 2529 6'" Sveet
FINDINGS:
The Landmarks Board finds that the application for the relocation of the
shed/garage and new construction at 2529 6'h Street meets the requirements set
forth in the Boulder Revised Code for a landmark alteration certificate, based
upon the evidence presented to it at its October 4th, 2006 meeting. Specifically,
the Board finds:
The application is consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic
Preservation Ordinance as set forth in 10-13-1, B.R.C. 1981
The proposed project is consistent with the Standards for Landmark Alteration
Certificate as set forth in 10-13-18, B.R.C., including but not limited to the
following:
1. The proposed work preserves, enhances, or restores and does not
damage or destroy architectural features of 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 district;
3. The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, and materials
used on existing and proposed structures are compatible with the
character of the existing historic district.
4. The request is consistent with Sections 7.1 and 7.2. of the General
Design Guidelines and Sections D and P of the Mapleton Hill Historic
District Guidelines.
ATTACHMENTS:
A: Historic Building Inventory Form
B: Sanbom Map Analysis
C: Photographs, Site Plan, Elevations
D: Cover Letter
S:~PLAMdataVongraogVilS'ML7'CERTSViistoric Dutric¢U~lapkton Fiill~6th.2529U0.04.06 memo.doc
AGENDA ITEM # 6A PAGE# 15
Attachment A ,ddress: 2529 6TH ST
Boulder. Coloredo
COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY
Cultural Resource Re-evaluation Form: Accessory Building Survey
1. Resource Number: SBL4073
2. Temp. Resource Number:
3. Attachments: 4. Offical determination:
(Check as many as apply) OAHP USE ONLY
[ i Determined Eligible
~~ Photographs ~ Determined Not Eligible
~~: Site sketch map ~ Need Data
, U.S.G.S. map photocopy ~] Nominated
% Other 1931 Sanbom C Listed
` Other ~ Contributing to N.R. District
^ Not Contributing to N.R. District
5. Resource Name of Primary Building
6. Purpose of this current site visit: Resurvey
7. Previous Recordings: Front Range Research Assoc. Apr. 1996
8a. Description of Accessory Building:
Early shed roofed wood storoge building and garage with corrugated Outbuilding Type:
metal roofing: unfinished vertical wide board sheathing. Twelve-light Shed
fixed window, and a square opening with screening on west side; two Outbuilding Material:
side-hinged vertical board double doors on south side; slightly pitched
shed rooi (looks like a carport) that shelters area adjoining building on ~Nood Frame
east side. Outbuilding Covering
Wood Siding
Outbuilding Roof Materia
Metal
8b. Date of Construction: pre 1931
8c. Date of Construction Source:
1931 Sanbom Map: building appears on maD• Thi$ building and the accixsory building tor 2547 6th St were lowted togefher
on one large tot of combined lols 4, 5 whieh nn north - south through the block. TAe lots hare been reconfigured si~ce then.
9. Condition: Deteriorating
10a. Changes to Location or Size Information:
10b. UTM Coordinates:
/ ~i~~
AGENDA ITEM # U! PAGE_1!L
Cultural Resource Re-evaluation Form:
Accessory Building Survey
page 2 of 2 Address: 2529 6TH ST
Boulder, Coloredo
Temp. Resource Number
11. Current Ownership SCHELLING ANDREW UND 55 PCT INT &
2529 6TH ST
BOULDER
CO
80304
12. Other Changes, Additions or Observations:
13. Eligibiliry Assesment:
Individual
National Register: NIA
Local Landmark: WA
Locally Designated Property: NO
District
National Register: Contributing
Local: Contributing
14. Management Recommendations: N/A
15. Photograph Types and Numbers:
Type. B&W Roll No: 3 Frame No: 23, 24
16. Artifact and Field Documentation Storage Location N/A
17. Report Title: Aecessory Building Survey
18: Recorder(s): Kathryn Howes BaRh, AIA; Lara Ramsey 19: Date(s). Feb. 2005
20: Recorder A~liation: Kathryn Howes Barth, AIA; Ramsey Planning and Preservation
Colorado Historical Society, OKce o( Arc~aeology and Historic Preservation
1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203
----------- -- -- -- -- - A(3ENDA ITEM ~ ~~ PAGE ~ /
ATTACHMENT B: Sanborn Map Analysis
1922 Sanborn Map
e~
. "v \ ~
~ `E
+ ~ ' ~ ' ~ ~
~ ,
i
~ti ' I ~, i
"1 . ~
.Y/S w~
_e.~ vr,___""
c R i1f
,4 I \
61,~ ~ x 3 ~~
9 ~v a y ~ c~ '~ y~~~
I
v r
~ ~
~ ~ ~X ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~O
~
b ~~
: ~C
~ ~
~ a
~S ~
~ ~ .
d
~
"' "_s cs__~. a
1931 Sanborn Map
~^ Mse y~! ytd
i'
}
J
~
/ D "_
~
'/~ o`
'~ .J
F~~'
t r--: ~ - I '1
D I
'~ i
^ D j
.
~~ '~
r.> J~ lA '
e '
_
M T J
~
/ ~
L .. 1
9 J L
•-~l"._1
;~
1 I
i,
~i Z
~ p ~
i
~
~ 10
, ,.
;
~ n - ie n
~ ~ P M
1r t[
~ 0
~
1 ly
x
..,_
D
,J
Y' _ re
~"
~
f ^
r~ x
,
q
tl• ,
'
n Jp
..
D
___' ~ . 7
I
.c_.J I
_
.... .,,~ .,. ~ .~.a +v> >.
____g=~~rec~== MAXW~LL
. ~
~ ~~, -~~~, y ~ C
~ ~ a .~"
L ' 8 y
,S
~ ~ I g : R
y b ~
~~ ~
A23 GJ3 t
;~MAXWEIL
r ~ z ~
~ D D
~ ~ l
~.C .. c.
~ A
M ~ j ~ ? n ao )
w
rti ~ ~ ~
L q
) P
L
$
•r .~' n is ' rc
__ ~~ n
r ~ ~
't- ~~__~
AV.
4GENDA ITEM# ~~ PAGE /~
ATTACHMENT C: Photographs, Site Plans, Elevations
r .w y ..
p t~~'~
~~. ti
.~ ..~ ~•
-~GFNDA !TEM # ~T` PAGE ~~
Shed/garage, 2529 6t'' Street (east elevation), August, 2006
Shed/garage 2529 6t'' Street (south-west corner), August, 2006
Shed/garage 2529 6th Street (south elevation), August, 2006
a~=~NDA ITE(M # ~pAGE ~
Shed/garage 2529 6th Street (west elevation), August, 20~6
_ _ w. . _.. . .. . . _. - ~ ~
, = - ._ . __. .= -=_.._ .~.._ -. ---- ' - -- . , _ . ...__. _...__
- -- i
~
~ ~ ~ - EXISTING HOUSE ~~
..._ _ ae_' -~...... _ _" " _' _ ___-_ _ '
"' 's _
i . :.-f"'_ _ -_ '
; I PROPQSED GARAGE --'---'-- " -'--J ~
j '_ '_ '_' , _ _"_ I ~
I ~ ervsrn~csnco
' i EW UJGTW+1
. . . . . . . . . . _ __. __ _ ~..~ . . . . . . . .~...~... . . . ._
Proposed site plan, 2529 6"' Street new garage and rehabilitated shed/garage
~ ;
1 i ~
~
1 i ~
'_' .........~ ,._ i'__ .._.'
;"_'.,.,- ..'_;"..,i" "
t ~! ~„ ~ ' ~ %8; `, .
i f ~~ / 'r; V. . ~
i~*t ~ i' .~ ; ,.:' ~: ~t .
~
~'_~ ~( 1:_,,,. i t ' f' Fi~ c.,
_-y-..-.- • •-~•=-+'--
. . ~ ~~f . , .. , ~.
~ ~ - ,...~ ~,:r ~ i.
~
_._1..._''. ~._ -=~F__.'J,__:_;:.~
SOUTH ELEVATION ai~vv~e,v
s::n.E ~ n~ = i~o~
Proposed south elevations, 2529 6'h Street new garage and rehabilitated shed/garage
ASPNAI.T CAAIPOSIT70N
SMINGIES TO MATCN
~snrw Mouse
ROOF PITCN TO MATCH
EXI3TING $MED~AIIN. 9.12 %TCM
'tP STYLE GURER
/, is8 FPSCIA ~FFID
~ - ' - " - " - ixBBOAPOS
~t . i~ ~
Y + i It ~
~ ~ ~i ~ , ~ . , . ~ ~
li ;' .N '' ~ ~
'
f
~
~ e ~I 1 ~ i ~' f~ $ ;~
'I ~
~t'_ ~
i 1tQ B~TTS
. ;~ e ~
~~ t
i'
'' .
i;
.i
' ~; 4
,: I 1 :
i~;
~
~
'
1
'
~
i ~
~ !.
~~~ iz4TNiM
;
.!~
;j',~~;~
" ~
~
~It ~ll
.~
~
i
(li~ ~:k; ~:,;lj;
I j ~ J'~ i i. ~~ir i,j~~
~
WO00 SIDINCi 8 TAIM
~ f
y ': ' ~ ~ . ~
. ii ~~~t ±i ,.I'': iis "i ~~.' ° ~~ i{,~~ ~ "I{tk _ ~
~ i~l ~~~"' {~'!~',i` ~ ;~~ ~1' i'~~~'' i; ~ ~~
~ p~ '~~' F
Ili~u~ ~I'''~i~i~11i;'i~~'!'~!ii,' i`''';~'i~@'1I I'
WEST & EAST ELEVATION
scuE ,re~ - r a
Proposed east and west elevations, 2529 6"' Street new garage
~
~z
6
E70ST7NG SHED
(RELOCATEDi
_.-.-__- i _'-_-r-~
-t-
t
' '
~. ' _' ~ T~ i
' I '
'
i
I
:N
ii '
y__~~~! .
4GENDA Il'EM # ~PAGE ~
' Attachmeut D
~_
SCOTT COBURN
& ASSOCl~TES
4RCHITE~7>
~/la/o~
Landmaxks Board
Citc of Boutder
RE: Norxnann Residence
2529 6'~ Sc.
Deaz Staff and Boaxd,
The original application fox a Landmaik Altezation Certificate was to demolish the e~usung
shed, which is pxobably about 80 yeais old, poorly constructed, modified in the 70's and 90's
and in serious dis-cepait. The ptoposal was to constcuct a new one-s[ory 2-caz gatage and
attached studio of 190 s.f. at the SW comer of the lot.
Upon further discussions with Planning Staff, we have be.:. advised that the e~cisdng shed is
considered a"contributing" structure in the historic dismct and that it is the staff
recommendauon to pxeseroe it on the site.
Staff offezed the option to move it to an appropriate location and still propose a new garage.
This ::cised applicadon proposes:
1. To pzeserve the shed and move it to the pzoperty line on the alle}*, tumed 90 degTees.
This location would make the shed mote visible and more functional.
2. The shed would be re-built inside to function as the previously proposed studio,
with new foundaaon, insulated walls, electrical, floor. The e~usang window and
doors would be pxeserved as to extenot appearance.
Note: it has not been detennined how best ro move the shed:
a. brace inside, move whole
b. panelize inside, move in sections
c. take apart, move piece-by piece.
3. The proposed new garage remains, but height reduced from 18' to 12.5' and roof pitch
from 9/12 to 3/12 to become comparible with the shed instead of the house.
4. This site acrangement makes for a much more functional and pnvate back yard.
5. Site coverage (house and shed) is currendy 20%. (not included carport)
Site covetage proposed would be 27°l0.
Thank You foz youz time and considezation, Scott C~um and Penm• Nomzann
~
2100 Pe ~a~ Sraier SurE B Bo~~~rR, CO 8Q30? 303 443.75~NDA ITEM #(Jf ~a..PH(~L' ~~
8l2/0 (~ LA~iDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFIC~,TE APPLICATION
Date Submitted: `7// O Rev/'s~ roperty Address: 2SZ 9 l0~' ~S~`'.
Q~ ~`
District: /~/R,p~efDv1 ~~~ Landmark name: ~/~.¢
/ Office
Applicaot name: SCOTr ~f~LIY~'1 Phcne: 30,3 ~/~/3• yS57
~Iobile Phooe: ~ 3•~/~•O~/`) Fas: 30~• ~{3 • p/5!3
Rel'ltionshiptoprojeM(e~..architeat.contractorl: //~C~/T~CT
~pplicant's!~IailingAddress: Z~OD /~ear/ 'rJ~'. 5ui~'e ,8
Propertyowner'sname:~Cprt /~lOrHlat~ Day-TimePhone: 303•y~13•~~OZ/7
Property owner's full address: :252 `J lo~+ cS7~'• ,,~oy~qBi^~ C0. 803p y
This above information is required in order to fully process this application.
To assist us in reviewing your project, please provide a project description in the space provided below.
Include all of the exterior alterations proposed for the property. Please submit the completed
application, along with any supporting information, prior to your first design review meeting. If you
have questions, or to schedule an aQpointment for review, please contact Bohdy Hedscock at (303) 441-
4293.
We look jorward to warking with you on your proposal!
PROJECT DESCRIPTION Please list all eacterior alterations proposed for the property.
/. /~reserve aCor~yTV(>u7yp `j%57~1/'iG ~~ s/~e~~ ~7`urh 90°~ ~a~ oh sife,
2. ~dd neur ~~na!l Z~~ar ~c~r~e.
3. fiemove~~SO' sec~5'ori o7`1 ~'lrea/98'Os cecfar 7~hce
~I~'PE OF ALTERATION Please check all that apply.
_New Addition _Roof Repair
X New Garage** _Deck
_Demolition** _Dormer(s)
_Window(s) _Skylight(s)
_Door _Paiat
_Fence _Porch
_New Roof
Other (please specify): X -~ouG S~'Jec;
**Requires a public hesring
Reauired:
Lot size (in square feet) 67~~ S.T,
~J72. Total eaisting square feet-S~tCd
~~_Proposed additional square feet- kr~
~C~~Ezistingheig6t- SFI~eI
~2.5 ~Proposed 6eight -~a/'aqL°
~J
10.Q2-LACappl
.4C?f.NDAITEM#~~ pqpE~
.~l
,
; ,~ ~k~,~,s
.~, .,~ , .
~
It~l f 1lil 'ry
~I~I''I'~I ~ ~~
E 1~'1 ~PY~I`~if
~ I~t~~~''~~le~f !~
, f ! ~iljl~i ~
~ ~i~~~~,;~ ~ I~ ~
~ii~llilli~i~t;,~~
~
H
N
~
~~
~~
~~
~~
~~
c n
c •
sE ~
G ~
Z
s~~ -
~
D
~
:
~
p
m
~
SITE PLAN
SCALE 1" = 10'-0"
NI)fliM
~ A1
~
i-_ ______ "~~0 -~
YP ~'d`
~e t T il
L F~
~AI
I ~ ~1
I I„I
1NOfM I ~ -t
Mf1I{{E I ~.
I ~
~ I
~ I
~,
~ ;~
~
~n ~~~ ~ I;
~ ~:
~„
------~- ---- - ' ~'
' _' ra =4~_-_ f3_~~' 34 i
I
~__.
GARAGE PL4N ~
SCPtiH ~V
II ~
I I
I~ ~
I
r.~ i! ii Illli ~
i
I
~I
~~ JII
I ~ -
~ ~-T i I ! ' ~
I yl' i ~'
~~ ~ ~ I ~ ~I~ , , ~~ ~ I
I ~ I I i
i
[I91 EIEV~IpN KE9i ELEVI.1pN
E.,~~:
SMEO ELEVATIONS
,~.u a i ~~
' I I I ~
I
, ~I , ~If .' / ` -: II
pl~~~ ~ f . I,I
I ~ `'
-~-+.-~-+.~i
~ ~~~~ ~ _ ~~ ~~
~
3] 4 _
~
En9ixq WE~
~PELWiEO~
-T T-,r _
; i_1 ~, ~.ttr~
~ ~oure E~avnnorv
~
D
m
~
\
I ~
f- ~ -'
8
I
~ ~~R%tdl II
; ~.~~~~~
ROOFPLAN ~ ~y,~~~.c~y~
~ swr~s *o ~~*a
EAS1MlGN]119E
/ / ~~i.VLI~MIIO
~. ~
~~a,..
~ ~
i, iwrw
'~ ~ ~~.i I~~ ~~"'~~ ~~
il ,
f
~ eaaoanHS~.wu
WEST 6
EASi ELEVATION
suuie iv
~M~
r i ~I I ~, ~q II'
i II
~ I ', I sa i I', ' I,
i, I,
'" _
NOµRTH~ ELEVATION
Y
s ;~
~~
~o
~ ~
[ tl
E ~
Z ~
Z
Ij i i i;i F.7
Ailj;~l;~~~~~~~ ~
i~~~~ I ~ '
~~.U ~ill~l;~
. ~ 1~~i~I~ : 1
~' ~Ill.~l ~ II'~
il(~~I{~~f~l~li li~
~Y
~AS~
~