Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout6B - Landmark alteration certificate to construct a 2,958 sq. ft. one and one half story house withMEMORANDUM October 4'h, 2006 TO: Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Acting Long Range Planning Manager James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner Chris Meschuk, Historic Preservation Planner Alice Gilbertson, Historic Preservation Intem SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a landmark alteration certificate to construct a 2,958 sq. ft., one-and-one half story house with rooftop photo-voltaic panels at 429 Spruce Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District (HIS2006-00180). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 429 Spruce Street 2. Zoning: RL-1 (Residential-Low 1) 3. Owner: Bruce and Cody Oreck 4. Applicant: Jim Logan, architect 5. Site Area: 9,050 sq. ft. 7. Prop. Const. 2,958 sq. ft. 8. Prop. Ht. 27' STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff finds the mass, scale, height, locatior. and orientation of the proposed house to be generally consistent with the both the General Design Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines. Furthermore, staff recommends that the Board approve the installation of the integrated solar collectors in that their installation will not directly unpact a designated historic resource and that the relatively inconspicuous nature of this form of solar technology is consistent with the Sections 8.2 & 8.3 of the Guidelines and Sections 10.13.1(C) and 10-13-18 of the Boulder Revised Code. AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 1 As such staff recommends that the Landmarks Board conditionally approve the request for new construction at 429 Spruce Street based on the findings outlined below. The recommended conditions of approval are: 1. That fenestration on the house be redesigned to make it more in keeping with traditional proportions of glazed area to wall area and scale of windows more in keeping with those found on historic houses; 2. That the roof and extending eave over the garage on the south elevation be redesigned to reflect a more traditional form. 3. That details regarding conditions (1-2 above) in addition to details relating to windows, doors, roofing, siding material, and colour be submitted to the design review committee for review and approval prior to the issuance of a landmark alteration certificate. 4. That, if necessary, variances from the required setbacks be granted by the Farmer's Ditch Association and the Board of Zoning Adjustment. SUMMARY: - The demolition of the existing c.1895 house on the property was approved by the full Landmarks Board in August of 2003. - The application to construct a house at the property at 429 Spruce Street was preluninarily reviewed by the design review committee at their August 2^d, 2006 meeting. Because the application calls for free-standing construction of more than 340 sq. ft. the proposal requires review by the full Board in a public hearing. - The application calls for the installation of °integrated" photo-voltaic panels between the ribbing of standing seam roofing on the street facing side of the proposed roof. - Staff considers the mass, scale, height, location and orientation of the proposed house to be generally consistent with the both the General Design Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines. Staff recommends that the Board approve the installation of the integrated solar collectors in that they will not directly impact a designated historic resource and that the relatively inconspicuous nature of this form of solar technology is consistent with the Sections 8.2 & 8.3 of the Guidelines and Sections 10.13.1(C) and 10-13-18 of the Boulder Revised Code. Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board conditionally approve the request for new construction at 429 Spruce Street based on the findings outlined below. T'he recommended conditions of approval are: AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 2 1. That fenestration on the house be redesigned to make it more in keeping with traditional proportions of glazed area to wall area and scale of windows more in keeping with those found on historic houses; 2. That the roof and extending eave over the garage on the south elevation be redesigned to reflect a more traditional form. 3. That details regarding conditions (1-2 above) in addition to details relating to windows, doors, roofing, siding material, and colour be submitted to the design review committee for review and approval prior to the issuance of a landmark alteration certificate. 4. T'hat, if necessary, variances from the required setbacks be granted by the Farmer's Ditch Association and the Board of Zoning Adjustment. BACKGROUND: In August 2003, the Landmarks Board approved the demolition of the c.1895 frame house and adjacent garage on the property at 429 Spruce Street. Figure 1. House at 429 Sprnce Street prior to demolition, August, 2003 AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 3 On August 2^d, 2006, the Design Review Committee reviewed preliminary plans for the construction of a one and one-half story brick house on the vacant lot. PROPERTY HISTORY: The no longer extant house at 429 Spruce was originally constructed in the 1890s as part of the Mapleton Terrace addition to the city, which was platted in 1890 by W.H. Thompson, Harold D. Thompson, and Isaac C. Dennett. In 1895, the property was purchased by Mattie Thompson for $275. In 1897, Thompson sold the property to Agnes Evans for $450. The increase in property value indicates that the house was probably constructed between 1895 and 1897. In 2003, the small vernacular frame house on the property was demolished. The property has changed hands 18 times over the last century, and has served as rental housing for most of its existence. _ ~ ~ N i ~eo Figure 2. 429 Spruce Street site map showing footprints of demolished buildings PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: The property 429 Spruce is a vacant non-conforming, triangular- shaped lot between Spruce Street and Mountain View Drive. The Farmer's Ditch runs across the rear portion of the lot, adjacent to Mountain View Drive. A 25' wide alley across the rear of the alley was vacated several years ago, increasing the overall size of the lot. Development on the vacated alley portion of the lot is AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 4 not allowed. The site includes a significant amount of grade change, sloping more than 15 feet from the Mountain View edge to the Spruce Street edge. REQUEST FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION: The applicant proposes the construction of a new, one and one-half story brick and frame house with attached one-car garage at the southwest corner of the lot. Because of required setbacks in~luding those from the farmer's ditch at the rear of the property, the location and size of the building envelope are limited. A site plan indicates a south facing porch at the west end of the house to be set back approximately 14' from the Spruce Street right-of-way and a second porch at the east end of the south face being setback roughly 25'. The proposed garage is shown to be located at the east end of the house set back approximately 37' from the street. The garage is shown to be accessed via an existing curb cut which served the original garage. The proposed new construction is shown to have two separate entrances facing onto Spruce Street. In elevation, the proposed house is shown to be designed in a gable roof dominated, neo-traditional manner with large extending dormers and simplified-classical inspired elements. The house is shown to be 27' in height from the lowest point on grade to the ridge of the gable. The south elevation features a front gable extending from the main side gable roof form and a dormer from the east portion of the house. This gable AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 5 rigure 3. rroposea new construcaon at 4~y 5pruce a~reec, lsoum eievanonJ features modified king-post work on the underside of the eave. A smaller dormer is planned to extend east from the south gable. The house is shown to be fenestrated with a single, paired, and a triple bank of one over one, double-hung windows. Two shed roof porches are shown to extend from the south elevation; each supported by simple wood columns. The south elevation of the garage is shown to feature a pair of two-half wide, wood plank doors above which is an extended eave. Plans show the house to have a standing seam metal roof with flexible, thin panel, "integrated" photo-voltaic material fit between the seams. This roof material is intended to make the house energy independent. The applicant proposes the east elevation of the house to Z~e dominated by the main gable end and first-story, shed roof porches. AGENDA ITE11I # 6B PAGE# 6 1-igure 4. 1'roposed new construction at 429 5pruce 5treet, (east elevation) Figure 5. Yroposed new construction at 429 5pruce Street, (west elevationl Plans call for the west face of the house to be feature a clipped gable end dormer, a cantilevered eave, and brick wall expanses punctuated by square casement windows and a single one over one, double-hung sash. BOARD'S DECISION The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifies that a Landmark Alteration Certificate 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; (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, 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 paraeravhs (bl(2) and ~ of this section. (c) In determining whether to approve a landmark alteration certificate, the landmarks board shall consider the economic feasibility of ~ altematives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled. AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 7 ANALYSIS: The following is an analysis of the proposal's compliance with the applicable design guidelines. General Design Guidelines for New Construction, 6.0. 61 `ITistincE-on fiom FIistoric Buildin ~ ~ f ` r ' _ - The replication of historic architecture in new construction is inappropriate, as it can create a false historic context and blur the distinction between old and new buildings. While new structures must 6e com atible with the historic cantext, th must also be reco nizable as new construction. .1 Buildings should be of their own time The proposed design can be YES creating contemporary interpretations described as neo-traditional of historic elements. referencing the form, massing, and de[ailing of houses in the area in a contem ora fashion. .2 Interpretations of historic styles may be Drawings show the proposed house YES appropriate if they are distinguishable to interpxet some of the historic as new. forms and styles found in the Mapleton Hill historic district in a manner that will be clearly distin ishable from the historic. 6.2 Site and Settin Neu~ buildings should be designed and located so that sigraficant site features, rncluding matuTe trees, are not lost or obscured. The size of the new buildings should not overpower the site or dramatically alter its historic character. Buildings within historic districts generally display a consistency in setback, orientahon, spacing and distance between adjacent buildings. Therefore, the compatibflity of proposed new construction will be reviewed to ensure that these elements are maintained. 1 Conform to the design guidelines found Although a non-conforming lot, the yES m Section 2.0 Site Design, regarding proposed b~ailding location on the site and setting in dweloying a site and oiientation is generally in qroposed site plan. keeping with the neighborhood. The primary elevaHon's orientation is to Spruce and 5~h Streets. OrientaHon of proposed house consistent with that of the ori 'nal house. 2 Design new construction so that the Some cutting into the grade will be yES overnll character of the site, site necessary, however exisHng tapograyhy, character-defining site topography and trees on the eatures and trees are retained. ro er will be lar el reserved. AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 8 3 Site new construction to be compatible The proposed house will be located yES with surrounding buildings that at roughly the same location as the contribute to the overall character of the original house. The front setback is historic district in terms of setback, consistent with the historic pattem orientation, spacing, and distance from for the neighborhood. ad'acent buildin s. 4 Nezu construction should not be The lot coverage for the proposed yES significantly different from contributing house is within the average for the historic buildings in the district in historic pattern of the azea. terms of the qroportion of built mass to open space on the individual site. See Guideline 2.1.1. 6.3 ~ - ~ _ ; < ra. ~ . . ~' . ~ ~''r~~, '"*~`.s~,a - -.-~. . Mass and Scale In considering the overall compatibility of new construction, its height, form, massing, size and scale will all be reviewed. The overall proportion of the building's front fa~ade is especially important to consider since it will have the most impact on the streetscape. While new construction tends to be larger than historic buildings, reflecting the needs and desires of the modern homeowner, new strucfures should not be so out-of-scale wrth the surrounding buildings as to loom over them. Design new buildings to be compatible Exposure of fa~ade to street is yES 1 with surrounding buildings that greater than those found on the contribute to the overall character of street. This is a result of non- the historic district in terms of height, conforming lot and limited building size, scale, massing, and proportions. envelope. In other respects, the house is generally consistent with those found in the immediate streetscape in terms of height, scale, massin and ro orrion. Z The mass and scale of new construction Plans and elevations indicate the yES should respect neighboring buildings scale, massing and placement of the and the streetscape as a whole. house will respect neighboring buildings and the streetscapes as a whole. Historic heights and widths as well as Exposure of fa~ade to street is yES 3 their ratios should be maintained. The greater than those found on the proportions of the front fa~ade are street. Otherwise, proportions of the particularly important and should be proposed house are generally compatible to those of surrounding comparible with those of adjacent historic buildings. historic buildings on both Highland Avenue and 5'h Street. AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 9 6.4 r ~ ~- . Materials ~ = ~ ~ ~ ~'°_ 1 Materials should be similar in scale, I' ans call for the walis of the houst MAYBE proportion, texture, finish, and color t be brick, the upper story sided i to those found on nearby historic ~. ith decorarive wood shingle. The buildings. roof is specified to be standing seam metal, a blue-black "integrated" photo-voltaic cell material to be installed onto the metal panels on the street-facing (south) facing roof areas. Windows and doors specified to be metal clad. 2 Maintain a human scale by avoiding Plans for the house show vazied yES ~ large, featureless surfaces and by using shapes, forms, and sizes found on traditionally sized building historic buildings in this area of the com onents and matrrials. Ma leton Hill Historic District. 6.5 Ke Buildin Elements Roofs, porches, dormers, windows and doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of any building. As such, they require extra attention to assure that they compliment the historic archrr;~cture. In addition to the guidelmes below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related su escions. 1 Design the spacing, plarement, scale, Fenestration shown in submitted NO orientation, proportion, and size of elevations is not compatible with windaw and dom openings in new historic buildings in the immediate structures to be compatible with the streetscape i.e. over-scaled windows surrounding buildings that contribute and areas of too much glazing on to the historic district, white reflecting south elevaHon. Revisions required. the underlying design of the new buildin . 2 Select windows and doors for new Specified 1/1, double hung wood NO buildings that are compatible in and casement sash are compatible material, subdivision, proportion, and reflecHve of early rivenNeth- pattern and detail with the windows century windows and characteristic and doors of surrounding yuildings that of the historic houses in the I contribute to the historic district. neighborhood. However, proporrion of glazed areas on south elevation too large. Bank of three windows on dormer should be reduced. 3 New buildings should use a roof forr,: The proposed cross-gable roof form NO found in the district or on the landmark is chazacteristic of the historic site. buildings in the district. Roof form over the garage should be revised to reflect those found on historic buildin s in the district. 4 Porches should be comqatible in The proposed shed-roof porches on yES AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 10 rnnssirzg and details to historic porches the south elevation in mass and in the district, and should be detail is characteristic of many tum- appropriate to the styfe af the house. of-the century houses in the district. Simplified-classical inspired detailing on porch reflective of such elements found on many historic houses in the nei hborhood 5 Dormers should be secondary to the Proposed cross-gable and shed YES rnnin roof and should be lower than tlte dormers are secondary and lower roofiinc. Oversized dormers are than the ridge line of the roof. ina ro riate. 8.2 Energy conservation is a growing concern for property owners today. In the historic districts it is imporfant to ensure fhat such coricerns are addressed tn wnys that do not dnmage or diminish the historic character of the vuildin~, site, or district. ___ Retairi and preserve the inherent energy-coiTSen~ing features ineluding shrrde trees, porches and operable windows, trnnsoms, shutters, and Ufrnds. .L .4 Insta!! exterior rnechanicai equipment i~z tl~e rnost incorispicuous nrea ..., usually along a building's rear elevation. It is iiot appropriate to install venti(ators, solar collectors, antennas, skylights . . . in locations that compromise character-defining roofs, or on roof slopes thaf are prominently aisible from the street. The proposed design includes a number of energy-conserving features including operable windows and porches. Design also includes roof mounted pvc panels to be installed on the south face of the roof. Proposed integrated pvc panels are to be flush mounted on standing seam metal roof on the south (street) face of the roof. Associated mechanical equipment will be housed in coping along ridge of roof. Other solar panels wil] be mounted on roof area that will not be visible from the street. Proposed solar collectors are to be installed on street facing area of roof MAYBE MAYBE MAYBE Staff considers the mass, scale, height, and orientation of the proposed house at 42.9 Spruce Street appropriate to the modest character of historic houses in the immediate area. While the presentation of the house to the street is significantly wider than average on the block at approximately 57', this exposure AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE#, ll is a result of a non-conforming lot constrained by a very limited building envelope. Steps have been taken to mitigate the impact of the south elevation by stepping back areas of the fa~ade from the central projecting gable element. The design generally integrates forms and elements of historic types of architecture found in the district; most notably Stick and simplified Queen Anne. However, details concerning proposed fenestration should be addressed to ensure that proportion of size and proportion of window to wall area is more in keeping with that found on historic architecture in the district. Additionally, staff considers that the cantilevered roof over the proposed garage should be redesigned to express a more traditional form. In his cover letter, the applicant acknowledges the request to construct a house w~ith solar panels mounted on a conspicuous elevation of a building is inconsistent with Section 8.3.2 of the Gerteral Desigri Gicidelines. Section 8.3.4 of the Gt~ideliries goes on to state that such roof-top appurtenances should not "compromise character-defining roofs, or on roof slopes that are prominently visible from the street". The review of this element of the project represents consideration of a technology not viable in 2003 when the Gtsidelines were adopted. The applicant will bring a sample of the proposed standing seam roof with integrated photovoltaic material between the seams to the Landmarks Board public hearing. At their April 26t'', 2006 joint meeting with the EAB, the Board passed a motion that stated that, "Solar collectors and skylights should be placed on inconspicuous locations, however, as new solar collector technologies emerge AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 12 Figure 6. Example of integrated phato-voltaic panels proposed. with less noticeable collectors, more flexibility should be given to solar collector placemenY'. While the location of the collectors is on the publicly visible street side of the roof, the low profile and colour of the panels may render them relatively inconspicuous and not compromising the character defining roof form of the proposed house. Staff considers that the Board should also consider that the proposed installation of "integrated" solar collectors is proposed for new construction and thus will not damage a historic property. FINDINGS: With the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation, the request for a landmark alteration certificate to construct a house at 429 Spruce Street, will be compatible with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, in that: 1. The proposed work will not damage or destroy exterior architectural features of the subject property within an historic district. 2. The proposed work will 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, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its site or the historic district. 4. The request is generally consistent with adopted design guidelines from the General Design Guidelines, including Sections 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4 and 6.5. 5. The request to install the integrated photo-voltaic cells is consistent with Section 10-13-1(C) of the Boulder Revised Code. ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Building Inventory Form B: Cover Letter C: Site Plans and Elevations of proposed construction S:~PLAN~dataUongrang~I-IIST1t1LTCERTS~I-Iistoric Districts~Ivlapleton Hill\Spruce.429~2006 review\10.04.06 429 Spruce memo.doc AGENDA ITEM # 6B PAGE# 13 Attachment A COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY NOT FOR FIELD USE Office of Archaeology ar.9 Historic Preservation ELIGIBLE 1300 Broadway, Denver, Colozado DET NOT ELIG HISTORIC BUILDING INVENTORY RECORD NOMINATED CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO Boulder County CERTIFIED REHAB DATE PROJECT NAME: BOULDER HISTORTC PLACES State ID#: 5BL2349 Building Name: '~Building Address: 429 SPRUCE STREET BOULDER, COLORADO 80302 Building Owner: GEORGE POORPIAN Owner Address: 429 SPRUCE STREET BOULDER, COLORADO 80302 USGS Quad: BDULDER Quad Year: 1466 (REV.1979) Legal: Tnsp 1N Range 71W Section 25 1/4, 1/4 H15toT1c Nane: ROSEBOOM HOUSE Aistrict Name: NOT APPLICABLE Block: 4 Lot: 1 Addition: tfAPLETON TERRACE Year of Addition: 1890 lm Roll By: ROGER WHITACRE Film Number: BL-17 :mber of Negatives: 23 Negative Location: BOULDER Construction Date: ESTIt4ATE: 1690'S Source: ASSESSOR/1898 CITY DIRECT Present Use: RESIDENCE Historic Use: RESIDENCE Condition: FAIR Extent of Alterations: FfINOR Description: ALUMINUM WINDOW FRA~IES; ADDITION ON REAR; NEW LATTICE UNDER PORCH. ORIGINAL If Moved, Date(s): Style: VERNACULAR WOOD FRAPIE, SIDE GABLE {QUEEN ANNE) Stories: 1 Materials: WOOD Square Footage: 1330 Field Assessment: NOT ELIGIBLE District Potential: NO Local Landmark Designation?: NO Name: Date: Associated Buildings7: YES Type: GARAGE/BARN & DUGOUT If Inventoried, List Id Numbers: Architect: UNKNOWN Source: '•~ilder/Contractor: UNKN047td Source: `ginal Owner: POSSIBLY GEORGE W. & EP1t1A ROSEBOOP7 Source: BOULDER CITY DIRECTORY, 1898 ;§GENDA 17EI12 # ~J PAGE /~ 429 Spruce Street :n Shape: . . . . . . . . . . Theme(s): The Urban Frontier (1860-1920). Page 2 Architectural Description: Side gable roofed hoUSe with clapboard siding. Shed roofed porch supported by t~rned wood spindles with lace-like brackets. Wood porch base and steps. Original paneled and glazed front door, flanked by tall, narrow, double-hung windows. Architrave window surrounds on,some windows. Stone foundation. Large addition on rear. Construction History: Historical Background: In 1898, this house was occupied by George W. and Emma H. Roseboom. ~eboom was a bricklayer. In 1901, C.E. and Dora Walker lived in the house. Walker was a driver. In 1913, Harry and Mary Ptetcalf lived here with their son, Henry, who was a student. Architectural Significance: Represents the work of a master. Possesses high artistic values. _~_ Represents a type, period or method of construction. Historical Significance: _ Associated with significant persons. _ Associated with significant events and/or patterns. Contributes to an historic district. Statement of Significance: This small frame house retains much of its original detail and is associated with working class families of early twentieth century Boulder. References: Boulder County Assessor's Records Sanborn Insurance Maps eoulder City Directories, 1901-1902 and 1913-1914 "~irveyed by Whitacre/Simmons Affiliation: Front Range Research Date: June 1988 ~rENDa iTE1V+s:~~__PAGE? ~ Attachment B ~ ---- JIM LOGAN ~ _A R C H I T E C T 5 ~ September 14~'• 2006 Landmark Application for a new residence at 429 Spruce Street, Boulder, Colorado T'he owners, Bruce and Cody Oreck, propose to construct a new single family residence £or their daughter and her family on the lot they have purchased at 429 Spruce Street. They believe that changes to thaplanet from human induced earbon dioxide pose a huge problem for future generations. As the City ofBoulder moves forward in establishing a climate action plan, we intend to build a home that does not co~tribute to carbon dio~tide emissions and in fact is a demonstration of how to build for the future. We have focused on integrating these technological considerations into the historic character of the Mapleton neighborhood in a sensitive and thoughtfiel manuer. This house, with 2627 sq. ft. above ground and a 331 sq. ft. garage and 1148 sq. ft. basement, will get ali of its energy needs from the sun. It will export enough eleotricity fo the grid to repay the carbon debt of its initial construction over the life of the building. In accordance with the Mapleton Hill Design guidelines, we believe that this design incorporates the mass, scate, and proportions that charaoterize the existing homes in the district. Due to the nanow and wide shape of the lot, the building is wider than some of the houses on the block. However, the forward elements of gable and porch present a nanow facade to the immediate experience of sidewalk and street. The garage is deeply cecessed at the side along the lot line, and as a one.car garage, provides the minimum off street pazking required. The exterior of the building will be brick with a 1/8~' inch mortar joint to match the historic pattem. The roof forms incorporate a rear ga6le that will be largely hidden.to provide a place for flat plate_thermal solaz collectors, mounted flat on the roof, that will provide heat and hot water. The roof surfaces facing the street will be black standing seam metal with a fihin film photovoltaic material placed in between the ribs. This black surface will generate electricity for the home. A sample of this material and photo of an instailation is provided. We feel that the forms, materials, colors and detailing of thas building all respect the integcity of the historic district. Guideline V.4 states that solar panels mounted so they are visible from the street are inappropriate. These solar panels are visible from the street, however t6ey are it~tegrated into the roof in such a manner as to.be~attractive and look }ike the material of the roof Guideline U3 states that new construction shoµld be an expression of its own time. . We feel that the changes to our world from global wazming are serious enough that it is time that renewable euergy should be out and proud and not hidden away. This building is intended to be an attractive, appropriate demonstration of a carbon neutral building that can show the way forwar.d as the city prepares its carbon action plan. ~GENDA 1TEM # c~n PAQE ~ 1455 VARMOUTH AVE STE 114 • BOULUER, C:O 80J04 iel )0) 449 )274 •(aa )0) 417 1781 ~ L/ ac~va /ij~n W311 VaN~1b°; •u ~ ^ ^ ~ ~; . , ^ ^ ; •: ^ ^ ~ - N O . C ~ ~ --- ~ ~ ~ :; . ^ ~ o D n~ ~ ~ o Z ^ ~ D ~ ~ ~ oate: 429 SPRUCE I~6E rirmautL ~w. Bt~ 11{ B°°"°' `° ~e ~ t 09.12.06 - _ - 7~[ IAGAN °080t h~~~~3~"M ~ BOULDER COlAMDO 8f1302 W aoa.aw.~89a A R C X I T E C T S hi ]OS{19.19l1 e~ `~~~~ ! E Attachment C ~ Tocr•cn•cac •v c • o a i i H o a v zocoe ftic~Mrcx ln OOW0~0~ M3Q71108 ~~ ~•^~~~,~~~[=p ,°~° `~'~0'1Qr ~ 3~nads szf B~~~~lf~f O~ '~VNa9 1TT ~16 'M~ Ql*^~l 9TI 90'Zl'60 :9{DQ Z ~ ~ W J W ~ ~ Q W O M ~o~o ~ `~ ~ A~ENDA 17'EM -rb~-~~va-~ ^ ^ ~ ~ z o ~ ~ ~ ~ _ ~ rn r ; D ^ n ~ ~ ~ ' 0 Z D ~ C,~ o t RUCE ~ I{66 Y~emoutD ~n. 9t~ 11{ ~°"°°. `° ~~ ~J~ s ° E i ~ ~ a e: 09.12.06 429 SP BOUIDER COLORADO 80302 °°'°` ~_ ,~ ~~ ~ ~~~~ • n c H i r c c r s [u ~oD.H~.t~et "a~s i !~ ~~ ~°~ ~ ~ ~ ~ rx ~% ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ m ~ ~ ~ ~ m r m ~ D ii ~ _ i O 0 Z ~ ~ o uee r..mo~m .... sa ~u ~ 1 ~ ~ ~~ oate: 09.12.06 429 SPRUCE ~°°'"°'' `° jl1( ],QG~'i eoaa w ~ ~ ~~ Y R°~~ ~ ~~ i~M ~ BOULDER COLORADO 80302 • • A R C M I T E C T 5 hi 90DA19.1901 ~ ~ t ~ 6~ ~ ~;~Y~1 n~} # Uq~ll VGN~:~ 'A % ..,~. ^;-; - ...•. .: : {,..... l{~~. ~~Y• ~: >f~ 'f J. i' :~< \ . ~~R~ ~. }' ~ ~~'/..•1~f. ~~` ~ : s:r:ii ,•u '~ J :' .;{' >;yvns... ,r'~ a;' -r. ::'.1.'i.~ ~.F,~'..K:': ~ ,:~.y.; .~,',<<:.:. •~SS.'j~. ~ j rr .~ ~i. t~ ..'C,.j':'.e f'1:~ Y:. ~ tt:•r'.'',';.'~. l~ ~ ;=,.~f,,:,i..; ^ ' . °y'. , , .S. M1:.: .,t.Y: ~:'w't~`,.~1.'~ y.s. C.': -i' 'i I. . a• r i ^ ~ ~ <.IJ 1~~~ ~j~. ~~ ~~{.M ~•:~. ,' r: r ~: ~. . ~. . t~:. { y^,:S ~ '.y:;y:4 ~. ~,~,°i:~a .'r,:;f:'.,.~ ~ !. e -(: .. ' r.'! . ~ . ..R^~ ~.~ , ~iaf.~f~`~:~t ii'y '' ;.~. .'~~..P^':.:,~ '.~,'~~t'~;~a:o- ,.i., ;:. ' ~ :...,:. ',~.. ~, ~.:~''=i~~:: : ~..: .~ ,„ ' . ~ .. ~z:.'~': `.' :a L' .~j~~ ~! •`~'k>nl•~~~ ' i:.`. . tr ~~~ .;l : .a ~ v.Y:i:>'.t. a~•'"~ '.o•.~:~ ~~)r..~ ~'~~~t\iy. .~ .. , y... ~'.Y. 'Afs 1.,J~~ ~.=t+.` ..'`1~ •~.:,+Y.:"~iil•.*li• " '~'i •'). ~ ~• ~I.' ~i1*~y~fllf~ n~~fe.r n]r. jj~ne~/l~n.s~ y+ ~~'~ :1 k;. ~ ~}~'.~; (7 C D D , '3.'~ ~:'.'!; •: :i.. ~ .;,,:•: ~ 02~~ .. ~ ~ ~m :..;;..;:.:x~y:..:;;. .•:'~.s:~ ~ ~ N X D '.:~:• a:•'.:!y y.~+;' ,:: ;f: {:;,r.~ O ~~;~ :=.~;'r~:i';•:~?%~= -f,•.:i:~=?: -~ pD~D rt.• • •.P' y:~;. .._..~. Z ~= i. !~!°~:5:.'~~'! ;z ,nXr.y,• ~ ~ ~ D 'v`.i.'., ...2:''t:..::":•"f '; r.~ '.:~"'::. A ~l OD ~ C= m C) :~"' ^~.'1.'!'. t:: e i.• n ~.r•,~ •Y~ .. Q r ~~ r x .,.:. ..° .._. > D .z~lo x .;..-;'.<`:....;.~, ~~~ --~1 ~ g Z mOZN OD~ DO N~~ D ~ ~ O ~ D ~ ~ ~G 14.76 Y~rmeuN ~n. Ste Il{ oata: 429 SPRUCE B°~°~~ ~° ~~ E 09.12.06 ~OL LOQ~ eaaos hr o' A~~ ~ BOUL~ER COLORA00 tel 00.t.4lY387~ ~ ~~ ~ 8~302 A R C N 1 T E C T 3 fai ~09.419.1OB1 ~ ~ ~ ~ -: ~ t „~, 9 ~ ~ ~ ~ u ~ t a ; ~ 6 ~ ~ ~ n ~ie ~~~ sE W ~as 44.66' ~ ~, ~`-'"qa.,~Me ! ~ 0 ~ F ~ r '~# ,`~ N r ~ 50.7)' `°• - + s i ~ ~ , b zo' ~ a ~ - ~ r ~1 1 ~"' S 79ai3s" E < , N ~ ~. ,.~ 2s~.s• ~ . 7735 \ ~ ~ H 1 DITCX 1 ~ FARYER'f a9' ~' ~ Vq~A7ED » `~g. i J ~~n ~~ ~ ,,-'~'' ~~NO a~ssy N ~5~~p6 E ~ e ~ ' ~ , - ~ ~ PARCEL D ~.~1 ~ 94 ~, VACATED SPRUCE STREET ~ ; i ', y 1 ~ FlUA 1104 RN 383213 L1.~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ u° (~ N ~s, ~ ~ ° ~ 1 1 ~~ ~/ ~a ~/ °m I ~ 1 , ~EL 2 ~ ° _ ~ ~ ~ ~ (n ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~,~ o ~ a o ~ ~ - ' / ~S~ ~fi N m ~ a ~ ~ ~ ,r pOR~H 25g45 Q • ~ ~~ 69 Q 1•5 ~ . Q C~aB~pAM t ~~~0 N~~ ~~,y sw ~ 5 P •~ YP ~ 0 _n~ M e t . `~ ~ / ,o N ~5ro~ p6 E 5 t r e ~~ II c e u 5 4 r SITE PLAN S ~ SCALf: 1• ~ 2Q• /~ ~ ^ «,CFCJL?A ITEM tk 1'AG~. ~ Spruce Street Elevation !~~ :Ti ~ Materials: D ~ Roof- Berridge stanc~ing seam incta] roof, "matte black" with uni-solar building integraYed photovoltaic panels ~ Brick- Recycled red brick with 1/8" liine mortar joints ~ Trim- Benjarrun Moore "timid white" 2148-GO ~ Parch Columns and Rails- Benjamin Moore "timid white" 2148-60 ~ Shingles-Benjainin ivloore "greenbrier beige" HC-79 ~ Clad Ibletal Windows- Loewen "cranberry" ~~ Stone Sills and Lintels- Buff sandstone ~ 429 Spruce Street Proposed Materials Palettc ~ ]un Logan Architects TITLE ~~ ~ - :~.._,~ . - "'~ i ~ ~ `~ _ ` '~~ 'r' . ~ .t ;,~ , ~' , S'~~: .~ ~ '~ 4 ~ l t ~~ ~#• . • -~ ~ . , R~'i ~: . .: t'~.~; , ' '*t • • '• ~f ::o:: ! s , ~ _ -_ ~ ~ ..... . .............::::::: :::_:: ................ ::::::::::::::::: , ~t' n. ::.._ . .................. ''j ~ _ ~~ .^ ~~ ~ . '.. '~`` 7 ~ '~ ~ ' .~ ` ii_.~~1 .. ; ~ ~ . ~-.~ k , i .. ~ ~ _; . ~.. .. _ r- ~ , '~1. ~~ ~_ _ ~ :~ ~, . ' ~'~'S ~ 4 ~ _ ~ ~~~ ~~1 3~~ ~ . ~ . - . , ~~ . ~y ., ~~ 1i~- ~ ' ~, ~ ~ti~`. a~- , ~ , '" ~~. ~ ' . L .1 `. ~ ~ ~., ' ::~":~ ~ ' s ~:G'..:~ ~ •'i ~ ~ 4 ~c[~'".:.:,. ~ ~ \ ~ ~.~'. . { ~ ` ~ t -' . _ ~ * - ~ •,,~I~ ~ 7~ 1:::~::F:~:::::::: ~ ~'::::::::'.." ` tii::::~i~~i: _ i::~~"'" ~'. . ~ ., ~'~.~ ~ ;• ' ' r ~ t. - ~. y, : 1~ ^ ~. r LEGEND i-w:. ~ ~~~''/1 ~ '`- ~ • ~;,rfding Footprints Mam Roads N Arterial N Highway Street Cenlerlines Survey Polygons ~ Lakes Ownership Parcels ~ City Limits N 1:720 / "~~~~~ ~ Maplink City of Boulder 7'he m£ortnanon depicted on Jtia rtup ~~ P1O'^d~ L &~Pheil ~eprnrnneon ody. 71~e Gry of BouNa prmdn no .vmnry. apcnsed or r u~a ~he accvracy and/o: comp ~f ehe mfomvtion cnnt~ined hen a~ ~ v ~ ~ ~~. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~,r b O -~ 3 2~ 3 3~- 3'~- j b 2-}> a 3so~ o~~l. ~l~i C~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ U I~t 1- S~' l.- ~ fz .~ P~ f-~~L-- ~~ ~ ~- .. M } ~ ~ • \ ~ r;1; . ~ ~ ~ ..~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~~ __, ~ ~ ~~ ~ , " ..~, ~ ~. `_ _ _ - ~ ~ _ - . _ ..... ~- ~;,;,,;,~ __ ~ -. . ~ L+-v~ .'r = -= ~.. ~?~ ~~'I ~ L~ o~ Ll U t- S o L f~ FZ l I.i 5-t1~ -- ~T 1 c~ ~( ' ~ ~r~('' ~ - - - -.ti~-~ ~ ~..