Item 5B - 903 Pine St. LB Memo 1.6.2020
MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD
January 6, 2020
Staff
Jim Robertson, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Lucas Markley, Assistant City Attorney
James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner
Marcy Cameron, Historic Preservation Planner II
Clare Brandt, Administrative Specialist II
Michelle Mikoni, Historic Preservation Intern
Landmark Alteration Certificate Request
Public hearing and consideration under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3,
"Quasi-Judicial Hearing," B.R.C. 1981, of a proposal to construct a new one story
accessory building on the property at 903 Pine St. in the Mapleton Hill Historic District,
pursuant to Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981.
Address: 903 Pine St.
Owner: Jina Park and Alan Russell
Applicant: Lisa Egger
Case Number: HIS2019-0326
Case Type: Landmark Alteration Certificate
Code Section: 9-11-18, B.R.C., 1981
Site Information
Historic District: Mapleton Hill Historic District (contributing)
Zoning: RL-1 (Residential Low-1)
Lot size: 11,542 sq. ft.
Proposed Accessory Building: 800 sq. ft
Date of construction: 1877
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Landmarks Board conditionally approve the application.
Recommended Motion
I move the Landmarks Board adopts the staff memorandum dated Jan. 6, 2020, as the
findings of the board and approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct an
accessory building at 903 Pine St. as shown on plans dated Nov. 1, 2019, finding that
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 1 of 13 Page 1 of 29
the proposal meets the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in
Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981 and is generally consistent with the General Design
Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines.
Conditions
Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance of the
Landmark Alteration Certificate, the applicant shall submit to the Landmarks
design review committee (Ldrc), for its final review and approval:
a. Final architectural plans that include details for the new accessory
building, door and window details, siding and roof materials, and
hardscaping on the property to ensure that the final design of the
building is consistent with the General Design Guidelines, the
Mapleton Historic District Design Guideline, and the intent of this
approval.
Summary
• Because the application calls for the construction of a new, free-standing building
over 340 sq. ft. within a historic district, review by the full Landmarks Board in a
quasi-judicial hearing is required pursuant to Section 9-11-14(b), B.R.C. 1981.
• The house at 903 Pine St. was constructed in 1877, within the 1865-1946 period of
significance for the Mapleton Hill Historic District. The building retains historic and
architectural integrity and staff considers it to be contributing to the historic character
of the district.
• Staff finds that the proposed new construction is consistent with the criteria for a
Landmark Alteration Certificate as per 9-11-18(a) & (b)(1)-(4) B.R.C. 1981, the
General Design Guidelines, and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design
Guidelines.
PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
The property at 903 Pine St. is located on the northeast corner of 9th and Pine streets in
the Mapleton Hill Historic District.
Figure 1. Location Map, 903 Pine St.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 2 of 13 Page 2 of 29
Figure 2. Kemp Brothers at side of 903 Pine St., c.1901
Carnegie Library for Local History.
Character Defining Features
• Two-story Italianate masonry house constructed in 1877;
• Combined use of masonry and wood shingles on the exterior, multi-gabled roof
forms, double-hung windows with stone sills, and a front porch with Doric
columns.
• Southwest garage door has sixteen wood panels.
• Two, six-light windows are located on the south elevation.
Figure 3. 903 Pine St., c.1929 (Carnegie Library for Local History)
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 3 of 13 Page 3 of 29
Figure 4. West elevation of 903 Pine St., c.1949 (Carnegie Library for Local History)
PROPERTY HISTORY
• Property located in the Mapleton Addition, platted in 1888;
• House built by E.H. Dimick in 1877 for local jeweler Arthur W. Bush;
• Dimick also constructed the Old Main Building on the University of Colorado
campus, the Morris-McKenzie House and the Tyler-Decker House;
• In 1878, millionaire Marshall Field of Chicago purchased the property and
deeded it to his brother-in-law, Dr. William Earhart a prominent local physician;
• Subsequently owned by William Degge, a real estate developer who founded the
Wellington Association and owed Wellington Height and Wellington Gardens;
• House sketched by Sturtevant in 1879 and featured in 76 Historic Homes of
Boulder, Colorado (Barker, 1977);
• In 1900 house had full front porch (see figures 2 & 3).
• Two-car attached garage appears to have been constructed sometime between
1929 and 1949.
• The 1906 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map shows two frame accessory buildings and
an accessory building labeled “Hand Printing” located on the property.
• Current owner purchased the house in 2017.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 4 of 13 Page 4 of 29
Figure 5. Sanborn Fire Insurance Map of 903 Pine St., 1890 and 1906.
Figure 6. Sanborn Map of 903 Pine St. with Hand Printing Office, 1906.
Figure 7. Sanborn Map of 903 Pine St., 1922.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 5 of 13 Page 5 of 29
Existing Conditions
Figure 8. Aerial View of 903 Pine St., 2018.
• The property located on the corner of 9th and Pine streets and bound by an alley
on the north;
• New accessory building is proposed at the northwest corner of the property.
Figure 9. View of the alley from 9th St.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 6 of 13 Page 6 of 29
Figure 10. View of Neighboring Accessory Building, Facing 903 Pine St.
Figure 11. View from 9th St. Facing East.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 7 of 13 Page 7 of 29
Description of Proposed Work
Figure 12. Existing (left) & Proposed (right) Site Plans.
Site Plan
• Proposed construction of a new one-story, 800 sq. ft. accessory building,
approximately 80’ north of the back wall of the main house at the rear of property
and backing onto the alley.
Figure 13. Proposed South Elevation.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 8 of 13 Page 8 of 29
South Elevation
• Proposed minimal-traditional gable-end accessory building bermed into grade, is
shown to be approximately 17’ in height from lowest point at grade;
• Four, two-over-two double-hung windows with transoms proposed on the south
elevation;
• Proposed projecting partial-width deck 10’ x 18’-6” and inset portico;
• Exterior wall shown to be clad in vertical painted wood siding.
Figure 14. Proposed West Elevation.
West Elevation
• Dimensional asphalt shingle roof w/ metal drip edge and 1 x 4 eave trim and
proposed skylight at north end of roof.
• Two sets of mulled two-over-two double hung windows and single-light
surmounted by entry portico.
• The proposed building would be visible from 9th Street.
Figure 15. Proposed East Elevation.
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 9 of 13 Page 9 of 29
East Elevation
• Two, two-over-two double hung windows and four-light panel door accessed via
six exterior steps up to the back alley.
• Proposed skylight at north end of roof.
Figure 16. Proposed North Elevation.
North Elevation
• Proposed (10’, 6” high) gable-end facing the alley is not fenestrated and shown
sided with vertical wood siding.
Criteria for the Board’s Decision - Standards for Landmark Alteration Certificates,
9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981
(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) Does the proposed application preserve, enhance, or restore, and not
damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark or
the subject property within a historic district?
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 10 of 13 Page 10 of 29
Staff finds the proposal to be generally consistent with the purposes of this chapter, in
that the proposed alteration and new construction will preserve architectural features of
the contributing garage and the construction of a new accessory building will not
damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the property.
(2) Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or
special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the
historic district?
Staff considers the proposal will not adversely affect the special character or special
historic, architectural, and value of the Mapleton Hill Historic District as it is generally
compatible with the General Design Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill Historic District
Design Guidelines.
(3) Is the architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of
color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures
compatible with the character of the historic district?
Staff considers that the proposed architectural style, arrangement, texture, color,
arrangement of color, and materials will be compatible with the character of the
Mapleton Hill Historic District.
(4) With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in a historic district,
the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the
requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section.
Does not apply to the proposed application.
(c) In determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate, the
Landmarks Board shall consider the economic feasibility of alternatives,
incorporation of energy-efficient design and enhanced access for the
disabled.
Information specific to economic feasibly of alternatives, incorporation or energy-
efficiency design and enhance access for the disabled was not submitted with the
application. The reuse of an existing building is inherently sustainable, and the
rehabilitation of the building will need to meet the City’s energy code regulations and
Section 106.5 helps ensure that any alterations needed to meet the energy will not
detract from the historic character of the site.
Design Guideline Analysis
The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board
must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate. The Board
has adopted the General Design Guidelines to help interpret the ordinance. Design
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 11 of 13 Page 11 of 29
guidelines are intended to be used as an aid to appropriate design and not as a
checklist of items for compliance.
Summary
• 2.3 Site Design
o Alley access is maintained;
o Narrow lap siding is historically proportioned and will contribute to the
human scale of the alley;
o The new accessory building is located 27’ from the alley, avoiding a
tunnel-like character along the alley;
o The new accessory building will be partially visible from 9th St.;
o Staff considers the proposed paving and construction of wood decks will
preserve a backyard area between the house and the accessory buildings
and maintain the general proportion of built mass to open space found
within the area.
• 2.6 Fences
o Proposed location and height (5’) is characteristic of the historic district;
o Proposed material (wood) is consistent with the design guidelines and the
pickets are spaced to provide an open appearance;
o Wood pickets shown to be painted.
• 7.0 Protection of Historic Buildings and Sites
o Massing, scale, location and materiality of the proposed accessory
building to be consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the
Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines;
o Building is simpler in detail and design than the historic house.
o Design of the new accessory building is compatible with the contributing
house through the use of a similarly-pitched, traditional gable roof form,
the use of narrow, wood lap siding, and the overall simplicity of the design;
o Staff considers the integration of these elements, direct and implied, result
in a building that is of its own time but that would not detract from the
historic character of the property and district.
• 8.1 Paint and Paint Colors
o Garage proposed to be repainted in existing color (white);
o New accessory building shown to be painted dark brown, which is a muted
shade and neither bright or garish.
Findings
The Landmarks Board finds, based upon the application and evidence presented and
provided the stated conditions are met, the proposed Landmark Alteration Certificate
application is consistent with Section 9-11-18 B.R.C., 1981. Specifically that:
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 12 of 13 Page 12 of 29
1. The proposed new accessory building will not adversely affect the special
character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the
property or the historic district. § 9-11-18(b)(2), B.R.C. 1981.
2. The proposed construction of a new accessory building will generally comply with
Sections 2.3, Site Design, and 7.0, Garages and Other Accessory Buildings, of
the General Design Guidelines; Section S., Alleys, Easements and Accessways,
of the Mapleton Hill Historic District Guidelines; and Section 9-11-18(b)(3) of the
Boulder Revised Code 1981.
ATTACHMENTS
A: Design Guideline Analysis
B: Current Photographs
C: Plans and Elevations
D: Historic Building Inventory Form
Item 5B - 903 Pine Street - Page 13 of 13 Page 13 of 29
Attachment A: Design Guideline Analysis
2.3 Site Design: Alleys
The alleys in historic districts were traditionally used for secondary access to the houses,
for deliveries, and as storage places for horses and buggies, and later, for cars. A view of
the backyards from the alleys was maintained. While today’s alleys have evolved into use
as pedestrian paths for jogging, bicycling and dog walking, they still contribute to the
historic character of the neighborhood. They are typically minimally paved.
Along the alleys are historic accessory buildings of various shapes and sizes including barns,
chicken coops, sheds and small garages. This variety contributes to the general feeling of
human scale in the alleys.
Guidelines Analysis Conforms?
.1
Maintain alley access for parking and
retain the character of alleys as
clearly secondary access to
properties.
•Parking area proposed at
rear of proposed building.
•Bermed garage at alley is in
keeping with and will add
to the variety of accessory
buildings on the alley.
•Proposed materials
generally contribute to the
human scale of the alley.
Yes
.2
Retain and preserve the variety and
character found in the existing
historic accessory buildings along the
alleys.
Yes
.3
The use of historically proportioned
materials for building new accessory
buildings contributes to the human
scale of the alleys. For example,
narrower lap siding and smaller brick
are appropriate.
Yes
.4
Structures that were constructed
after the period of significance but
are still more than 50 years old and
contribute to the variety and
character of the alleyway should be
retained.
N/A
.5
Maintain adequate spacing between
accessory building so that the view of
the main house is not obscured, and
the alley does not evolve into a
tunnel-like passage.
A garage is located on the adjacent
property approximately 18’ to the
east; however, the proposed
accessory building is set back
between 12’-16’ from the alley and
will be approximately 10’ in height
at the north side. Staff considers
the 22’ wide building will allow for
view into the property and not
result in a tunnel-like effect. The
Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 1 of 10 Page 14 of 29
proposed 5’ high fence along the
rear of the property at with 1”
spacing between pickets, which will
maintain visual permeability into
the lot.
2.4 Parking and Driveways
2.4.6
Historically appropriate paving
materials, such as flagstone or brick,
can be used to visually break up
larger parking areas Proposed parking space at rear of
new building. Staff considers that
gravel material would be most
appropriate given the immediate
alley context. Confirm gravel
surface at Ldrc.
Yes
2.4.7
Paving driveways or garage access
areas with asphalt or concrete gives a
modern look and is generally
inappropriate, particularly when
adjacent to unpaved alleys. Flagstone
or brick wheel strips are the
preferred alternative.
Maybe
2.6 Fences
The appearance of the house from the sidewalk, street, and alley contributes to an area’s
character. Historically, fences were not common in Boulder. Where they existed they were
very open, low, and used to delineate space rather than to create walled-off privacy areas.
Rear and side yard fences were built low enough so neighbors could talk to each other over
them. The fences could be easily seen through and were built of woven wire (not chain-link),
wrought iron, or painted or opaque stained wood pickets. Elaborate wrought iron and cast
iron fences were typically found only on lots with large or grand homes.
Guidelines: Analysis: Conforms
.3
Introduce compatible new fences of
traditional materials only in locations and
configurations that are characteristic of the
historic district. New fencing should reflect
the character of historic fences in height,
openness, materials, and finish.
The proposed location of the
fence at the rear of the lot is
characteristic of alleyscape.
Painted wood with spacing
between the slats is in keeping
with the character of historic
fences. Height of 5’ will maintain
pedestrian scale and
permeability along the alley.
Yes
.4
Generally, historic fences were constructed
of wrought iron, wood pickets, or woven
wire with an open appearance and a scale
that related to the main building. Cedar
Fence is proposed to be
constructed of wood, with an
open (minimum 1” space
between boards) appearance.
Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 2 of 10 Page 15 of 29
stockade fences or block walls are
inappropriate.
.5
Generally, historic wood fences were
painted or opaque stained. Transparent
stains and unfinished wood are generally
inappropriate. The side of the fence facing
the street, alley, and/or sidewalk must be
finished.
Fence proposed to be painted,
and the posts are to be located
on the interior of the lot.
Yes
.6
Front and rear fences should have some
degree of openness and spacing of slats so
that the main structure on the site is visible
from the street or alley. Solid wood
fencing along the rear of a lot obscures
much of the irregularity and variation that
defines the essential character of an alley
and creates an inappropriate "tunnel"
effect. Rear and side yard fences below 5
feet in height with a minimum of 1" spacing
between the pickets can be reviewed at
staff level.
Fences are shown to have an
open character, with 1” spacing
between slats, which will
maintain visibility of house from
alleys.
Yes
.7
Where appropriate, fences in the front yard
should be no more than 36 inches high.
This low height should be maintained along
the side yard as far as necessary to
maintain an unobstructed view of the
building's main architectural features, at
least to the front elevation of the house
and/or porch. At that point, the fence may
become gradually higher and less open.
Front yard is not proposed to be
enclosed by a fence. New fences
are shown to begin at the rear
corners of the house,
maintaining an unobstructed
view of the house and garage’s
architectural features.
Yes
.8
Side yard fences were typically located
behind the main house, not in the front
yard. Where side yard fences do extend
into the front yard, they should be low and
open with a gradual transition in height
toward the rear yard. The portion of the
side fence that extends beyond the front
elevation of the building should not exceed
a maximum of 36 inches in height.
See 2.6.7 above. Yes
7.0 Garages & Other Accessory Structures
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 3 of 10 Page 16 of 29
Accessory buildings include barns, sheds, garages and outbuildings. Originally accessory
structures were used for storage of equipment, animals, or carriages. Generally, these
structures have been adapted for the storage of cars. In most cases, accessory building were
located to the rear of the lot and accessed by alleys. They were subordinate in size and
detailing to the primary house. Over time they have emerged as important elements of many
lots and alleys in the district. Efforts should be made to protect the eclectic character of
alleys.
Both additions to existing accessory buildings and new accessory building will be evaluated in
terms of how they affect the historic character of the individual site and the district as a
whole. In the past, larger accessory structures have been allowed than may be appropriate
today.
7.1 Existing Historic Accessory Buildings
A primary concern of the Landmarks Board in reviewing proposed changes in historic districts is the
protection of existing historic accessory structures and the character of the site and district.
Guidelines: analysis: conforms
.1
Retain and preserve garages and accessory
buildings that contribute to the overall
character of the site or district.
Existing historic attached garage
to be preserved.
Yes
.2
Retain and preserve the character-defining
materials, features, and architectural
details of historic garages and accessory
buildings, including roofs, exterior
materials, windows and doors.
Yes
.3
The use of historically proportioned
materials for building new accessory
buildings contributes to the human scale of
the alleys. For example, narrower lap siding
and smaller brick are appropriate.
Proposed materials will
contribute to the human scale
of the alley. See guideline 2.3.3
above.
Yes
.5
Maintain adequate spacing between
accessory building so that the view of the
main house is not obscured, and the alley
does not evolve into a tunnel-like passage.
See guideline 2.3.5 above.
7.2 New Accessory Buildings
New accessory buildings should follow the character and pattern of historic accessory
buildings. While they should take design cues from the primary buildings, they must be
subordinate in size, massing, and detailing. Alley buildings should maintain a scale that is
pleasant to walk along and comfortable for pedestrians.
Location and Orientation
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 4 of 10 Page 17 of 29
.1
It is inappropriate to introduce a new
garage or accessory building if doing
so will detract from the overall historic
character of the principal building, and
the site, or if it will require removal of
a significant historic building element
or site feature, such as a mature tree.
The alleys in the Mapleton
Hill Historic District are
character defining features
of the district. The new
construction is approx. 800
sq. ft. and will not require
the removal of a significant
historic site feature.
Yes
.2
New garages and accessory buildings
should generally be located at the rear
of the lot, respecting the traditional
relationship of such buildings to the
primary structure and the site.
Proposed accessory
building is located at the
rear of the lot.
Yes
.3
Maintain adequate spacing between
accessory buildings so alleys do not
evolve into tunnel-like passageways.
An accessory building is
located 18’ east from the
proposed accessory building
and the proposed building is
to be set back between 12’ -
15’ back from the alley. This
likely will not create a
tunnel-like effect.
Yes
.4
Preserve a backyard area between
the house and the accessory
buildings, maintaining the general
proportion of built mass to open space
found within the area.
Staff considers the 80’
between the proposed
garage and existing house
will maintain ample back
yard space on the property.
Yes
Mass and Scale
.5
New accessory buildings should take
design cues from the primary building
on the property, but be subordinate to
it in terms of size and massing.
While larger than typically
found in Mapleton Hill,
Sanborn maps indicate that
a large building was located
in roughly the same location
as the proposed new
building and that the new
construction is subordinate
in size and massing to the
house.
Yes
.6
New garages for single-family
residences should generally be one
story tall and shelter no more than two
cars. In some cases, a two-car garage
may be inappropriate.
The proposed accessory
building is 1 story in height.
Staff considers the height,
scale and massing of the
Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 5 of 10 Page 18 of 29
building to be
appropriate(sse.5 above).
.7
Roof form and pitch should be
complementary to the primary
structure.
Roof form and pitch is
complementary to that of the
primary building.
Yes
Materials and Detailing
.8
Accessory structures should be
simpler in design and detail than the
primary building.
Proposed accessory
building is smaller and
simpler in design than the
house.
Yes
.9
Materials for new garages and
accessory structures should be
compatible with those found on the
primary structure and in the district.
Vinyl siding and prefabricated
structures are inappropriate.
The primary building is
constructed of brick and
masonry. The proposed new
garage is shown to be clad
in painted wood siding.
Yes
.10
Windows, like all elements of
accessory structures, should be
simpler in detailing and smaller in
scale than similar elements on
primary structures.
Proposed windows are
simpler in design than those
on the main house.
Yes
.13
It is inappropriate to introduce
features or details to a garage or an
accessory building in an attempt to
create a false historical appearance.
Building design is of its own
time and will not create a
false sense of history.
Review details at the Ldrc.
Yes
Mapleton Hill Historic District Guidelines
The following section is an analysis of the proposal relative to Section VI of the
Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines. Only those guidelines that further the
analysis of the proposed project are included and those that reflect what has been
evaluated in the previous section are not repeated.
B. Site
Traditional settlement patterns generally placed houses in the center of a site,
with garages, carriage houses, etc. and parking at the rear of the lot at the
alley. Sidewalks parallel streets with a planting strip between, and individual
sidewalks approach the center of the house at right angles to the house and
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 6 of 10 Page 19 of 29
the street. Landscape material is concentrated near the house with trees in the
sidewalk planting strip, and as focal points of the lot.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
1.
Accessory buildings such as sheds
and garages, and driveways
should be located at the rear of the
lot as is traditional. Adding them
between existing buildings
interrupts the rhythm of the
spacing
Proposed accessory building is
located at the rear of the lot. Yes
C. Landscaping
Landscape features can form a significant part of the historic character of an area.
Landscape materials, such as the use of a specific street tree throughout an area,
can establish part of the character of a historic district. Particular trees may be
historically significant in themselves. The pattern of landscaping in an area, such as
the use of street trees, planting strips and sodded front yards, are also important.
Trees, shrubs, vines, and irrigation systems also may have a potential for damaging
exterior building features and surfaces. (See Section B. for site)
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
4.
Where strong retaining walls exist,
they should be preserved and
incorporated when introducing new
wall elements. Tall, plain concrete
walls should be discouraged.
Railroad ties should also be
discouraged.
No retaining walls are shown -
confirm at the Ldrc. Yes
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 important part in the development patterns that give the more
visible areas their character. Alleys provide access to rear parking and garages.
They have a varied edge quality, with building both on the property lines and set
back. The size and quality of these accessory building varies considerably. Careful
consideration should be given to changes in traditional use.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
1.
The use of alleys to provide access
to the rear of properties should be
preserved
Access to rear of the property is
preserved. Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 7 of 10 Page 20 of 29
2.
Efforts should be made to protect
the variety of shape, size, and
alignment of buildings along the
alleys. Alleys should maintain a
human scale and be sensitive to
pedestrians.
Alley will maintain a pedestrian
scale. Yes
5. Efforts should be made to maintain
character of the alleys in the district
Staff considers the location,
scale, massing, and placement to
be appropriate.
Yes
O. FENCES
Traditionally, the appearance of a house has been more important than privacy from the streets, so
fences were open, for example, made of wrought iron or wood pickets. Solid wood fences are not
traditional and were not used at the fronts of houses, and the present-day addition of such a fence
interrupts the strong visual element created by uniform building alignment.
.1 Low fences are encouraged. Proposed fence design at 5’ is
consistent with height approved for
rear yards in the Mapleton Hill
Historic District.
Yes
.2 Although not typically found within
front yards, if used, a durable material
in an open design should be used for
front fences. Painted iron or steel, or
painted wood pickets are appropriate
and might be used in conjunction with
low masonry walls. There are types of
wire fencing which are historic and
would be encouraged. Low shrub
hedges are also appropriate. Vertical
board, stockade, chain link fences and
heavy brick posts are generally
inappropriate.
Fence design is durable with an
open character.
Yes
.3 Fences without spaces between slats
can alter the character of a building site
and of the streetscape and alleyscape
because the historic architectural
elements that contribute to the pattern
of spacing, setbacks, scale, details and
materials of the historic district are
blocked from view.
Spacing is proposed as 1” for the 5’
tall fence along the west elevation,
1” spacing is proposed for the fence
along the alley. Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 8 of 10 Page 21 of 29
a. Solid or tight fences are not
appropriate
b. Every effort should be made to
allow visual penetration in the
design of fences visible from the
street or alley. The visual impact of
solid wood fencing at the rear of a
lot is that the alley becomes a visual
tunnel, and much of the irregularity
and variation that make the
essential character of an alley are
changed.
.4 Fences on the rear portion of corner
lots should have some degree of
spacing along the public right-of-way
unless the fence is set back far enough
to avoid a fortress effect.
The 1” spacing between boards will
provide adequate openness.
Yes
.6 Raw wood (unfinished or unpainted)
fences are inappropriate in the historic
district. Fences should be either
painted or coated with an opaque
stain.
Fence is specified to be painted.
Yes
.7 The finish side of the fence should face
toward the street or sidewalk.
Finished side of fence will face the
alleys. Yes
.8 Fences should have a regular pattern. Fences shown to have a regular
pattern. Yes
P GARAGES, CARPORTS AND ACCESSORY STRUCTURES
A variety of accessory buildings has been adapted for use as garages in the
Mapleton Hill Historic District. Whether carriage houses or sheds, these structures
have certain similarities. They are plain and utilitarian and are located at the rear of
the property on the alley. Materials and building elements are varied.
Guideline
Analysis
Meets
Guideline?
.3 If a new structure is to be
constructed, design ideas might be
found in existing historic accessory
buildings located nearby
Historic one-story, flat roof
accessory buildings are found in
the Mapleton Hill Historic District
and simple character of
proposed building is consistent
with simple character.
Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 9 of 10 Page 22 of 29
.4 The new building should be
secondary in nature to the main
house and smaller in scale.
New building is secondary in
nature and smaller in scale than
the main house.
Yes
.5 Accessory buildings should be
small in scale and mass, and
constructed in a manner which is
complimentary to the character of
the house and alley. They are
clearly secondary in importance to
the primary structure. Typically,
prefabricated sheds are
discouraged.
The building is shown to extend
20.95’ across the 50.25’ width of
the lot. The new construction is
approx. 800 sq. ft. and will be
set back 13’ from the alley.
Sanborn maps indicate that a
large building was located in
roughly the same location as the
proposed new building.
Yes
Attachment A - design guidelines - 903 Pine Street - Page 10 of 10 Page 23 of 29
Attachment B: Current Photographs
903 Pine St., South Elevation of Main House.
Attachment B - 903 Pine Street current photographs - Page 1 of 3 Page 24 of 29
903 Pine St., North Elevation of Main House.
View from the Alley at 9th St.
Attachment B - 903 Pine Street current photographs - Page 2 of 3 Page 25 of 29
View of Garage at 911 Pine St.
West Elevation of Garage at 911 Pine St.
Attachment B - 903 Pine Street current photographs - Page 3 of 3 Page 26 of 29
PINE STR
E
E
T9TH STREETALLEY
PROPOSED
ADU
LOW
W
A
L
L
NEIGHBOR’SGARAGE
POTENTIALPARKING
low point SIDE YARD
SETBACKSIDE YARD
SETBACK
REAR YARD SE
T
B
A
C
K
PROPOSED
ADU
903 PINE STREET
11,542 SF LOT
Scale Date
Sheet
Revisions
Drawings
11/01/199 0 3 P I N E S T R E E T 2455 Tenth Street
LISA EGGER, AIA
ph 303.449.0490
Boulder, CO 80304
A C C E S S O R Y D W E L L I N G U N I Twww.lisaegger.com
B O U L D E R , C O 8 0 3 0 2Landmarks Public
Hearing Submittal
11/01/2019
A1.1
1" = 16’-0SITE PLAN1
A1.1
Attachment C - 903 Pine Street plans and elevations - Page 1 of 3 Page 27 of 29
18"DWrange24"
REF24"pantry24"
W/D
STORAGE STORAGE STORAGE
BEDROOM
wood flrvaulted clg
9’-10" x 13’-6"
WH
BATHRM
tile flrvaulted clg
5’-1" x 9’-10"skylight above2’ x 4’-8"2’ x 4’-8"2’ x 4’-8"DN
LIVING SPACE
wood flrvaulted clg
16’-0" x 18’-6"
KITCHEN
built-intable w/
seating
DECK
wood10’ x 18’-6"
DN
PARKING
9’ x 18’
PORCH
5’ x 7’-6"
ENTRY
COVERED
MECH.
LAUND.existing brick fenceneighbors garageel. 5415
el. 5415
concrete
24" x 66" island
new fence - max. 5’ high w/ 1" spacing new fence -
max. 5’ high
w/ 1" spacing
skylight above5432.5
5412.5
EL. 5415
LOW POINT
20’ HEIGHT LIMIT
EL. 5415 PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEpainted wood
fixed transom
6.5
12
DH window w/
window above
metal drip edge
w/1x4 rake trim
skylight
painted wood
casing with
1 12" head & jamb
1" sloping sill
painted wood T&G
siding, max. 6"
exposure
painted wood fence
5’-0"max. high with1" spacing, typ. both
sides of structure
APPROX. FENC
E
PROPERTY LINEdimensional asphaltshingle roof
painted wood column
metal drip edge
w/1x4 eave trim
skylight
Scale Date
Sheet
Revisions
Drawings
11/01/199 0 3 P I N E S T R E E T 2455 Tenth Street
LISA EGGER, AIA
ph 303.449.0490
Boulder, CO 80304
A C C E S S O R Y D W E L L I N G U N I Twww.lisaegger.com
B O U L D E R , C O 8 0 3 0 2Landmarks Public
Hearing Submittal
11/01/2019
A2.1
1/4" = 1’-0PROPOSED FLOOR PLAN 5
A2.1
SOUTH ELEVATION1
A2.1
EAST ELEVATION2
A2.1
NORTH ELEVATION3
A2.1
WEST ELEVATION4
A2.1
798 sf
Attachment C - 903 Pine Street plans and elevations - Page 2 of 3 Page 28 of 29
Flatirons, Inc.
Surveying, Engineering & Geomatics
www.FlatironsInc.com
16406PROFESSIONAL LAND
S
U
RVEYOR
COL
O
R
ADO LICENSEDJ OHN
B
RUCE GUYTONAttachment C - 903 Pine Street plans and elevations - Page 3 of 3Page 29 of 29