Item 5C - 311 Mapleton Ave. LB Memo 1.6.2020
MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD
January 6, 2019
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 of a proposal to relocate the c.1900 frame
cottage on-site at 311 Mapleton Ave., a pending individual landmark, pursuant
to Section 9-11-18 B.R.C. 1981 (HIS2019-00332) and under the procedures
prescribed by chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearing," B.R.C. 1981.
Address: 311 Mapleton Ave.
Owner/Applicant: Mapleton Hill Investments / Michael Bosma
Case Number: HIS2019-00332
Case Type: Landmark Alteration Certificate
Code Section: 9-11-18, B.R.C., 1981
Site Information
Individual Landmark(s): Pending HIS2019-00186
Zoning: P (Public) and Residential-Low 1 (RL-1)
Lot size: 15.77 acres (approx.)
Date of construction: c. 1900
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends the Landmarks Board conditionally approve the application.
Recommended Motion
The Landmarks Board adopts the staff memorandum dated Jan. 6, 2020 as the
findings of the board and approves the on-site relocation of the c.1900 frame
duplex at 311 Mapleton Ave. as shown on application materials dated Oct. 16,
2019, finding that the proposal generally meets the Standards for Issuance of a
Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, subject to the
following conditions:
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 1 of 15 Page 1 of 47
Conditions of Approval
1. The applicant shall be responsible for relocating the building in compliance
with the approved plans dated Oct. 16, 2019 except as modified by these
conditions of approval.
2. Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance
of the Landmark Alteration Certificate, the applicant shall submit
final details to the Landmarks design review committee (Ldrc), for
its final review and approval to ensure that the final design of the
building is consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the
intent of this approval:
a. As-built drawings of the building, including siding and trim
dimensions;
b. A written methodology detailing the steps to relocate the
building;
c. Final architectural plans that include details for the
foundations to ensure the height matches the existing height.
d. A completed Landmark Alteration Certificate application for
the reconstruction and rehabilitation of the building for review
and approval by the Landmarks design review committee.
Alternative Recommended Motion Language
If the Landmarks Board finds the proposal does not meet the criteria, staff
recommends the following motion:
The Landmarks Board denies the on-site relocation of the c. 1900 duplex at 311
Mapleton Ave., as shown on application materials dated Oct. 16, 2019, finding
that the proposal does not meet the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark
Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981 and is inconsistent with the
General Design Guidelines.
Summary
• Applications to designate the frame duplex (c.1900), the Smokestack
(c.1922), Nurses’ Dormitory (1930), a stone duplex (1940), and the stone wall
along Mapleton Avenue (c.1920s) as individual landmarks were received in
June 2019. The designation applications will be reviewed by the Landmarks
Board in a public hearing (date to be determined).
• This proposal is to relocate the c.1900 duplex from its current location
northwest of the smokestack to a location between the Nurses’ Dormitory and
the Stone Duplex.
• The c. 1900 frame duplex was constructed around 1900 and was moved to its
current site between 1922 and 1931 to make way for the construction of the
Nurses’ Dormitory.
• On Nov. 16, 2019, the frame duplex was severely damaged through an act of
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 2 of 15 Page 2 of 47
vandalism. There are plans in place to reconstruct damaged elements
including the front porch, façade, and portions once the building has been
relocated. The reconstruction of these elements and rehabilitation of the
building will require review by the Landmarks design review committee under
a separate Landmark Alteration Certificate.
• Because the proposal includes the on-site relocation of a pending landmark,
the application must be reviewed in a public hearing.
• Staff recommends the Landmarks Board approve the application, considering
it has already been moved from its original location and that its proposed
location would not be detrimental to its historic character.
Property Description1
The 15.77-acre property is located close to the intersection of Mapleton Avenue
and 4th Street and contains a number of buildings associated with the former
privately-owned Boulder Memorial Hospital. The property has had a long history
of medical-related uses beginning in 1895 when the Boulder Sanitarium was
established on the site by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. In the 1950s, the
Boulder Memorial Hospital campus was established and in the late 1980s that
became the Boulder Community Hospital which renamed the site Mapleton
Center.
The site has been privately owned and developed since the late 1800s when the
first of many health, wellness and medical-related facilities were built on the site
by the Seventh Day Adventist Church. In addition to guest/patient rooms and
cottages and the health services, the sanitarium had an on-site dairy and poultry
farm, a laboratory, icehouse, powerhouse, and greenhouse. A 1904 brochure for
the Boulder-Colorado Sanitarium was used to promote the facility as a health
institution where “the weary pilgrim may find rest from wearing perplexity and
relief from sickness and suffering.” The 1922 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map shows
a total of 33 buildings on the site including the large main sanitarium building and
the smokestack. By 1933, the nurses’ dormitory was built on the highest terrace
on the site and remains today.
1 City of Boulder City Council Memorandum dated July 17, 2019. Page 145. Accessed 27 June
2019. http://lfprod/WebLink/0/edoc/14113011/Agenda_2018_7_17_Meeting.pdf
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 3 of 15 Page 3 of 47
Figure 1. Site and Surroundings, 311 Mapleton Ave. from June 19, 2018 City Council
Memo.
Figure 2. Site Plan showing existing and proposed location of c.1900 Frame Duplex.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 4 of 15 Page 4 of 47
Character Defining Features
• Constructed as two front-gabled frame buildings around 1900;
• Originally located where the Nurses’ Dormitory stand today (see Figure 6);
• Buildings relocated to current location and combined into a duplex
between 1922 and 1931. The Nurses’ Dormitory was constructed in 1930;
• Building clad in drop lap siding with corner boards and decorative trim;
• Hipped roof full-width porch on each gable end with square post supports;
• Each porch has an off-center paneled and glazed door;
• One-over-one double-hung windows;
• One-story, shed roof addition extends across north (rear) elevation;
• Wood deck with wooden supports located on north elevation;
• Concrete foundation.
Figure 3. Frame Duplex, South Elevation, July 2019.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 5 of 15 Page 5 of 47
Figure 4. Frame Duplex, North (rear) Elevation, 2019
Figure 5. Frame Duplex, West (side) Elevation, 2019
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 6 of 15 Page 6 of 47
Figure 6. Overlay of 1922 and 1931 Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps. Original and
proposed location of frame duplex shaded in yellow.
Property History
The 1930 Nurses’ Dormitory, c.1922 Smokestack, c.1900 Frame Duplex and
1940 Stone Duplex at 311 Mapleton Ave. were surveyed as part of the 1995
Boulder Survey of Scattered Resources in 1995. The Survey Report is available
online at https://bouldercolorado.gov/links/fetch/26794. The survey report
includes the following history of the Sanitarium:
By the 1890s, Colorado was regarded as an ideal location for the
treatment of those suffering from tuberculosis and other health problems.
The state's dry, sunny climate and clean air were considered essential
ingredients for restoring health. In 1895, the Seventh Day Adventists
established a sanitarium on a ninety-acre tract west of Mapleton Hill as a
branch of the Battle Creek, Michigan facility. It advertised "refreshment of
the mind, body, and spirit," in a heathy and relaxing atmosphere which
included, in addition to medical treatments, Swedish massages and
vegetarian meals. A nurses’ school established in 1896 trained 655
students during its nearly half-century of operation.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 7 of 15 Page 7 of 47
The sanitarium included a five-story main building, a powerhouse, a
bakery, a laundry, a dairy barn, a nurses' dormitory built in 1931, and a
scenic lake. The institution attracted many Texans who spent the entire
summer relaxing at the "San" and Boulder citizens who spent a week
there being refreshed. The Sanitarium was the predecessor of Boulder
Memorial Hospital, established in new facilities in 1961. Boulder
Community Hospital acquired the property and located its Mapleton
Center on the old Sanitarium grounds in 1989.
In 2015, the owners hired Winter & Company to prepare a Historic Assessment
for the property, including the evolution of the main hospital building and the
history of the institution. The following is an excerpt on the history of the hospital
between 1900 and 1930:
1900-1909
The Boulder Sanitarium became a popular destination to receive
treatments that included dieting, exercise, massage, hydrotherapy and
electrotherapy (Clemons, 1958). Guests were also encouraged to enjoy
the fresh cool climate of Boulder and to hike the trails along the foothills to
the west of the Sanitarium.
The facility expanded quickly. By 1906, seven new cottages had been built
in a line to the north of the East and West Cottages. A laboratory was also
built just to the north of the East Cottage to allow for expanded testing
services.
Already it was clear that the Sanitarium leaders desired an orderly
development of the site, with buildings framing open space. New
structures also tended to follow the topography, ensuring ease of
movement between different buildings. By 1907 Kellogg’s influence on the
Sanitarium was minimal. He was expelled from the Adventist Church in
this year and focused his efforts instead on the Battle Creek Sanitarium
while also serving on the Michigan State Board of Health from 1911 to
1917 (Schwartz, 1970).
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 8 of 15 Page 8 of 47
Figure 7. Excerpt from Boulder Sanitarium Historic Assessment prepared by
Winter & Company in 2015.
1920-1929
By 1922, nine additional cottages were added to increase patient capacity,
along with a furniture storage building.
The Sanitarium site also expanded significantly northward during this
period. Much of this northward expansion was due to the growth of food
production on site. Although the Sanitarium generally advocated for a
vegetarian diet based on grains, a dairy barn and two hen houses (for
eggs) were constructed on the north end of the site as well as a
greenhouse and ice house (Sackett, 2005).
Since its creation, the Boulder Sanitarium under the direction of Mr.
Kellogg had been manufacturing much of its own cereal and granola
products needed for the dietary component of treatments (Pettem, 2010).
However, the bakery on the grounds of the Sanitarium became its own
distinct entity called the Colorado Sanitarium Food Company as early as
1897 (Shurtleff and Aoyagi, 2014). The Colorado Sanitarium Food Co.
experimented with health foods, and even received patents for breakfast
cereals in 1913 (US Patent Office, 1913). The Food Company also
experimented with peanut butter (Pettem, 2010). By 1912 the Food
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 9 of 15 Page 9 of 47
Company was distributing its food products to a health food store in
Denver that also had outlets in other cities (Shurtleff and Aoyagi, 2014).
Figure 8. Excerpt from Boulder Sanitarium Historic Assessment prepared by
Winter & Company in 2015.
Recent Changes
On the evening of November 16, 2019, the c. 1900 frame duplex was severely
damaged by an act of vandalism. Following the damages, the building was
protected with a water-resistant cover and materials were sorted through to see
what could be salvaged. Though the building is not entirely stable, the damage
should not impede its relocation. According to Mapleton Hill Investors, LLC, the
safest way to move the frame duplex will be to dismantle it into 4 sections and
move each piece individually. They will then pour new foundations and
reconstruct the building as it was prior to the vandalism using detailed
photographs and drawings of the building. (See Attachment D: letter from
applicant describing vandalism).
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 10 of 15 Page 10 of 47
Figure 9. The damages sustained by the frame duplex were to the (south) façade
of the building
Figure 10. The north elevation remains intact.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 11 of 15 Page 11 of 47
Description of Proposed Work
• The building is proposed to be relocated between the Nurses’ Dormitory
and Stone Duplex (pending landmarks);
• The proposed method of relocation is to dismantle the building into 4
sections, moving them one at a time to the new location.
• The application does not include hardscaping or rehabilitation of the
building; this work would be reviewed under a separate application in the
future.
Figure 11. Aerial photograph showing existing and proposed location of c.1900
Frame Duplex.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 12 of 15 Page 12 of 47
Figure 12. Cropped view of Site Plan showing proposed location of c.1900 Frame
Duplex.
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?
Staff finds the relocation of the building near to its original location
on the site will not damage or destroy the exterior architectural
features of the building. Reconstruction of the damaged exterior
features will be reviewed by the Landmarks design review
committee under a separate landmark alteration certificate
application once the move has occurred.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 13 of 15 Page 13 of 47
(2) Does the proposed application adversely affect the special
character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or
value of the landmark(s)?
Staff finds the proposal will not adversely affect the special
character of the landmarked site. The building was moved from its
original location between 1922 and 1931. The proposed location
between the 1930 Nurses’ Dormitory and the stone duplex will be
an appropriate setting for the building closer to its original location.
(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
landmark(s)?
The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color and materials
are not proposed to change as part of this application.
(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 guidelines are intended to be used as an aid to appropriate
design and not as a checklist of items for compliance.
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 14 of 15 Page 14 of 47
Summary
Staff finds that the relocation and rehabilitation of the house will be generally
compatible and consistent with the standards set forth in Section 9-11-18 and the
General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual
Landmarks.
See Attachment A for a complete analysis of the proposal’s compliance
with the design guidelines.
Additional Information Needed Prior to Final Approval:
• Narrative description of the methodology to relocate the building.
• Details on the new foundation to ensure the building height remains the
same after the move;
GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES
Relocation of the Building
• The relocation will align the historic building within the range of alignments
seen traditionally in the area. (2.1.1)
• The primary entrance will remain oriented to the street and the original
location of the walkway will remain. (2.1.3-.4)
o The building is proposed to be oriented east-west, when historically
it was oriented north-south. Staff considers either orientation would
maintain an appropriate setting on the site.
Hardscaping and rehabilitation of the building is not part of this application and
will be reviewed under a separate application in the future.
Public Comment
Staff has not received comments from the public regarding this Landmark
Alteration Certificate application.
Findings
Provided the conditions outlined in the staff recommendation are met, staff
recommends that the Landmarks Board approve the application and adopt the
following findings:
1. The proposed relocation and rehabilitation meets the standards in 9-11-
18 of the Boulder Revised Code.
2. The proposed relocation and rehabilitation will not have an adverse
effect on the value of the landmark property.
3. The proposed relocation and rehabilitation will be generally consistent
with the General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and
Individual Landmarks.
Attachments
A: Design guideline analysis
B: Current photographs
C: Original application
D: Letter from applicant describing vandalism
Item 5C - 311 Mapletone Ave. - 1.6.2020 LB memo - Page 15 of 15 Page 15 of 47
Attachment A: Design Guidelines Analysis
General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual
Landmarks – Relocation
Relocate Building / Overall Site Design
2.0 Building Alignment, Orientation, and Spacing
The pattern of setbacks is an important element in defining neighborhood
character. A front yard setback serves as a transitional space between the public
sidewalk and the private building entry. When repeated along the street, these
yards enhance the character of the area. The relatively uniform alignment of
building fronts, as well as similar spacing between primary buildings, contributes to
a sense of visual continuity.
Traditionally, the primary entrance of a building faced the street and, depending on
the architectural style of the house, was often sheltered by a one-story porch. This
feature provided an additional transition from the public to the private space and
helped establish a sense of scale to the neighborhood.
The primary structure generally "stepped down" to one story at the rear of the lot.
This, and smaller accessory structures along the alley, helped frame the rear yard.
Guideline Analysis Meets
Guideline?
1. Locate structures within the
range of alignments seen
traditionally in the area,
maintaining traditional setbacks
at the front, side and rear of the
property.
The building is proposed to
move __’ west on the property,
in line with the 1930 Nurses’
Dormitory and the 1940 Stone
Duplex and near its original
location.
Yes
.2 Building proportions should
respect traditional patterns in
the district
The form and massing of the
original building will not be
changed.
Yes
.3 Orient the primary building
entrance to the street.
The entrance will be oriented
toward a walkway that will be
the primary access for the
building. Historically, the
building has been oriented
north-south; it is proposed to be
oriented east-west. Staff
considers either orientation
would preserve the historic
character of the building; the
east-west orientation would
allow the façade of the building
Yes
Attachment A - design guideline analysis - Page 1 of 3 Page 16 of 47
to be more prominently viewed
from below and would orient
toward the primary walkway. A
north-south orientation would
maintain its historic orientation
and more closely align with its
original relationship to its
setting.
.4 Preserve the original location of
the main entry and walk.
The original location of the main
entry and walk will be preserved
and will extend from each of the
porches to the walkway.
Yes
.7 Preserve a backyard area
between the house and the
garage, maintaining the general
proportion of built mass to
open space found within the
area.
Building will back up to City of
Boulder Open Space and be
flanked on either side by historic
buildings. Property does not
share the development pattern
of individual building lots found
in the area.
Yes
2.2 Streetscape and Landscape
The overall character of the historic districts is defined by more than the buildings.
Landscape features of the streetscape, such as the pattern of street trees and
planting strips between the sidewalk and the curb, form a significant part of the
historic character of an area. Similarly, traditional landscape designs help to unify
the district visually. Lawns and low plantings define open spaces between the
street and the houses. Traditionally, few front yard fences or landscaping materials
obscured the view of the building from the street. Those traditional patterns should
be maintained as the districts continue to evolve.
.1 Maintain the established
spacing pattern of street trees
No street trees exist in front of
the property. Review
hardscaping under separate
application.
N/A
.2 Preserve street trees whenever
possible.
.3 When a tree must be removed,
or where there is a gap in the
rhythm of street trees, install
new street trees in locations that
continue to express the
established rhythm.
.4 Maintain the tree-planting strip
as a lawn area. The planting
strip (the area between the curb
or street and the sidewalk) is
traditionally simple, consisting of
Attachment A - design guideline analysis - Page 2 of 3 Page 17 of 47
grass or low ground cover along
with regularly spaced street
trees.
.5 Provide a front yard that is
landscaped in a traditional
manner with traditional
materials.
• Avoid replacing sod with
concrete or any hard
surface
• Edge areas with natural
materials such as stone.
• Locate planting beds in
traditional areas such as
around foundations and
along walkways.
• The use of railroad ties in
landscaping is a recent
design approach that is not
permitted.
Area in front of the relocated
building shown to be
traditionally landscaped, with
sod and concrete walkways.
Review hardscaping under
separate application.
Yes
2.5 Sidewalks
Many of Boulder's older neighborhoods were originally paved with flagstone or
aggregate concrete. These original walkway materials are important elements and
contribute to the historic character of the neighborhood. The traditional pattern of
walkways perpendicular from the public sidewalk to the front porches or main
entries of the houses provides unity to the streetscape. New sidewalks must meet
the Americans with Disabilities Act requirements.
.1 Retain and preserve original
sidewalk materials where they
exist. If replacement of a
deteriorated section is
necessary, match the original
section or element in location,
pattern, spacing, dimensions,
materials and color. ♣ Replace
flagstone with flagstone. ♣
Replace concrete with concrete.
However, if the blockface is
predominantly paved with
flagstone, replacing concrete
portions with flagstone is
appropriate.
Existing sidewalk extends from
each of the porches and is
proposed to be removed.
New walkway at proposed
location shown to be curvilinear
and oriented north-south.
Review hardscaping under
separate application.
N/A
Attachment A - design guideline analysis - Page 3 of 3 Page 18 of 47
Attachment B: Current photographs
East face 11.18.2019
Façade 11.18.2019
Attcahment B - current photographs - Page 1 of 2 Page 19 of 47
Rear (north face) 11.18.2019
West face 11.18.2019
Attcahment B - current photographs - Page 2 of 2 Page 20 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 1 of 11Page 21 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 2 of 11Page 22 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 3 of 11Page 23 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 4 of 11Page 24 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 5 of 11 Page 25 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 6 of 11 Page 26 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 7 of 11 Page 27 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 8 of 11 Page 28 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 9 of 11 Page 29 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 10 of 11 Page 30 of 47
Attachment C - application - Page 11 of 11 Page 31 of 47
Mapleton Hill Investors, LLC
1035 Pearl Street, Ste. 205
Boulder, CO 80302
December 18th, 2019
Historical Preservation Board
City of Boulder Planning and Development Services
Third Floor
1739 Broadway
Boulder, Colorado 80306
Reference: 311 Mapleton Historical Building Vandalism
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Per the approved site review associated with the 311 Mapleton Ave property it was proposed that
an existing duplex cottage (N on the site plan) was to be proposed as a landmark while being
relocated to a location adjacent to the old Nurses Dormitory. As described in the provided
historical report this duplex was originally 2 cottages which we located in the general area as the
proposed relocation. Once combined this cottage has moved multiple times through its history
and relocation has become part of the history of this structure. It is this reason that staff,
Planning Board, and Ultimately City Council essentially signed off on this relocation as part of
our site review proposal. This relocation creates three structures on the western part of the site
that are all proposed to be landmarked within a buffer zone high on the hillside.
As you are aware, on November 16th, 2019 vandals illegally took control of a piece of heavy
equipment on our project site located at 311 Mapleton Avenue and severely damaged the
historically designated building located at 365 Maxwell Street. You should know that the
Boulder Police have individual suspects in this crime but no arrests have been made as of yet.
Immediately upon learning of this situation, we engaged a firm familiar with the moving and
preservation of historical buildings to assess the damage and render the remaining structure safe.
We had our crews’ sort and stack the material that was damaged and then we protected the
structure and material from weather by putting a protective water-resistant covering over the
building and stored material.
The professional moving company’s opinion is that the building is not structurally sound to
move as is. After considering several options it has been decided that the safest way to move the
structure is to dismantle it into 4 sections and then move these sections one at a time to the
building’s new location. We will then pour new foundations and reconstruct the building as it
was prior to the vandalism.
It is fortunate that several months ago we commissioned a local Architect to prepare as-built
drawings of this existing structure. A copy of these drawings are attached to this letter. We
intend to use skilled craftsman to reassemble the building in order for the new structure to match
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 1 of 16 Page 32 of 47
Mapleton Hill Investors, LLC
1035 Pearl Street, Ste. 205
Boulder, CO 80302
as closely as practical to the one prior to the damage and use are best attempts to use salvaged
material when possible.
If you should have any questions do not hesitate to contact me,
Sincerely,
Michael Bosma
Managing Member
Mapleton Hill Investors LLC
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 2 of 16 Page 33 of 47
Duplex Cottage prior to damage –front and back view
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 3 of 16 Page 34 of 47
•Duplex Cottage prior to damage –side view
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 4 of 16 Page 35 of 47
•Damage to building
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 5 of 16 Page 36 of 47
•A tarp has been put up around the entire front of
the building where damage occurred to protect it
from the elements.
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 6 of 16 Page 37 of 47
•The interior of the building has been framed to
stabilize the structure and the tarp.
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 7 of 16 Page 38 of 47
DNDNUPUPDNDNUPUPDNDNUPUPDN DN
UP
UP
DNDNDNDNUPUPDNDNUPUPDNDNUPUPDN DN
UP
UP
DNDN1OVERALL LANDMARK SITE PLANNORTHOVERALL LANDMARKSITE PLANA-4.16MAPLETON AVENUE
4TH STREETBUILDING AWESTBUILDING AEASTBUILDING ABUILDING BBUILDING FBUILDING GCOTTAGE HEXISTINGCHURCHBUILDING CBUILDING DBUILDING L(EXISTING)BUILDING O(EXISTING)BUILDING N(RELOCATED )TRAILHEADSUBDIVISIONVILLAGE GREENCOURTYARDACOURTYARD ABCOTTAGES RR1 R2 R3R4R5R6R7BUILDING KM1M2COTTAGES MEXISTINGMEDICALOFFICENEW ADDITIONBUILDING EBUILDING PCOTTAGES JJ1J2J3J4J5J6LOCATION OF EXISTINGCOTTAGE TO BE RELOCATEDPRIVATE ACCESSDRIVE BPRIVATE ACCESS
DRIVE A
COTTAGES RPRIVATE ACCESS DRIVE DH1H2B2B1B3DEVELOPER:ARCHITECT:ENGINEER:THE ACADEMY ON
MAPLETON HILL
BOULDER, COLORADODATE:SHEET NUMBER:SHEET NAME:REVISION:MAPLETON HILLINVESTMENT GROUPSITE REVIEW SUBMITTAL #4 LUR 2016-00065 CONSULTANT:08-01-16SITE REVIEW #104-03-17SITE REVIEW #207-26-17BDAB11-06-17SITE REVIEW #301-16-18SITE REVIEW #4EXISTING NATURAL TERRAINRAMPDOWNBUILDING ANORTHCOURTYARD BPLAN KEYLANDMARK BOUNDARYAttachment D - letter from applicant - Page 8 of 16Page 39 of 47
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 9 of 16Page 40 of 47
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 10 of 16Page 41 of 47
Boulder Police Department
Incident Case Number:
Reporting Agency:
Print Date/Time:
Boulder Police
19-13601
11/18/2019 13:47:16
Disclaimer: The information contained within this report is
reflective of the investigation at the date and time of its printing.
Page 1Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 11 of 16 Page 42 of 47
Closed
#1
#2
#3
Agency Name
ORI
Case#
Date / Time Reported
Crime Incident(s)
Crime Incident
Crime Incident
At Found
Weapon / Tools
Premise TypeLocation of Incident Zone/Tract
Case Status
Invest ID#
Case Disposition:
Supervisor
CODES: V- Victim (Denote V2, V3) O = Owner (if other than victim) R = Reporting Person (if other than victim)
Type:
Code Name (Last, First, Middle)SexRaceDOBVictim ofCrime #
Home Address Home Phone
Business PhoneEmployer Name/Address
Type:
Code Name (Last, First, Middle)SexRaceDOBVictim ofCrime #
Home Address Home Phone
Business PhoneEmployer Name/Address
# of Victims Type:Injury:
V1
Victim/Business Name (Last, First, Middle)Resident StatusSex
Home Phone
Business Phone
RelationshipTo Offender
Home Address
Employer Name/Address
VYR Make Model Style Color Lic/Lis VIN
RaceDOBVictim ofCrime #
1 = None 2 = Burned 3 = Counterfeit / Forged 4 = Damaged / Vandalized 5 = Recovered 6 = Seized 7 = Stolen 8 = Unknown("OJ" = Recovered for Other Jurisdiction)
VI#Code Status Value OJ QTY Property Description Make/Model Serial Number
Boulder Police Department 19-13601
CO0070100 11/16/2019 10:39
Criminal Mischief $100k To <$1 Million
18-4-501(4)(G)
Trespass 2nd Degree-enclosed Premise
18-4-503(1)(A)
11/15/2019 13:30
11/16/2019311 Mapleton Ave, Boulder CO 80304-Construction Site
MO
2
MAPLETON HILL INVESTMENT 1,2
303-413-3053
V2 EARTH SERVICES & ABATEMENT 1,
6700 E 50th Ave Commerce City, CO 80022
303-991-1280
IO FELTON, MICHAEL CHRISTOPHER
1035 Pearl St - #205 Boulder, CO 80302
Mapleton Hill Investments, 1035 Pearl St #205 (MAINTENANCE)
03/20/1982
37 W
612-272-0726
612-272-0726
2 24 4 $5,000.00 1 HYUNDAI HL757-9 WHEEL LOADER HYUNDAI/Hl757-9
1 30 4 500,000.00 1 NURSES COTTAGE
PD1 EVID $0.00 1 SWABS FOR DNA ON HEAVY EQUIP
(0)MACPHERSON, J. (DET) (972)
I
C
N
I
D
E
N
T
D
TA
A
V
I
C
T
I
M
O
T
H
E
R
S
I
N
V
O
L
V
E
D
P
R
O
P
E
R
T
Y
Status 11/16/2019
Co
Co
Printed By: JENNINGSA,11/18/2019 13:47
Sat
10:00 Sat
BUSINESS
(
(
(
)
)
)
MilitaryBranch/Status
BUSINESS
INDIVIDUAL
Weapon / Tools
Weapon / Tools
Relationship
Relationship
To Offender
To Offender
Resident Status
Resident Status
MilitaryBranch/Status
Complainant Signature
Age
Age
Age Resident
Branch/StatusMilitary
Entry
Entry
Entry
Exit
Exit
Exit
Security
Security
Security
Frm/To
Officer/ID#MOORE, J. (PAT) (9446)
INCIDENT/INVESTIGATION
REPORT
Sys#: 45251
Fri
Activity
Activity
Activity
Last Known Secure
Page 2
Mobile Phone
Mobile Phone
Mobile Phone
F
M
Injury:
Injury:
R_CS1IBR
311 MAPLETON AVE , Boulder, CO 80304-
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 12 of 16 Page 43 of 47
Case #
Assisting Officers
StatusCodes
IBR Status Quantity Type Measure Suspected Type
19-13601
PELLE, B. (14468)
D
R
U
G
S
INCIDENT/INVESTIGATION REPORT
Suspect Hate / Bias Motivated:
Boulder Police Department
NONE (NO BIAS)
1 = None 2 = Burned 3 = Counterfeit / Forged 4 = Damaged / Vandalized 5 = Recovered 6 = Seized 7 = Stolen 8 = Unknown
Narr. (cont.) OCA: 19-13601
INCIDENT/INVESTIGATION REPORT
Boulder Police Department
N A R R A T I V E
This report will document a Second Degree Trespass and a Criminal Mischief that occurred at 311 Mapleton Ave (City and County
of Boulder, State of Colorado). The crimes took place between 1330 hours on 11/15/2019 and 1000 hours on 11/16/2019. There is no
suspect information, this report will be closed.
By: JENNINGSA, 11/18/2019 13:47R_CS2IBR Page 3Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 13 of 16 Page 44 of 47
OCA
19-13601Boulder Police Department
Date / Time Reported
Sat 11/16/2019 10:39
OffenseVictim
MAPLETON HILL INVESTMENT CRIMINAL MISCHIEF $100K TO <$1
REPORTING OFFICER NARRATIVE
On 11/16/2019, I, Officer J. Moore, responded to 311 Mapleton Ave reference a Criminal Mischief/Criminal
Trespass last night. Upon arrival, I met with site security, Michael Felton. Felton told me the following:
The construction crew left yesterday (11/15/2019) at approximately 1330 hours. He (Felton) was called to the
site this morning at approximately 1000 hours due to fresh damage to both the structures and the construction
equipment. Upon arrival, he observed that a Hyundai HL757 had been moved from the lower area of the lot and
was now parked just south of a freshly damaged white cottage. There was fresh damage on the Hyundai
including a broken windshield and a damaged step ladder to access the cab (estimated damage was
approximately $5000). I was then told that the white cottage was a historical building that was going to be
moved to a different location. The damage done to the cottage was extensive and it`s unclear now whether it will
be salvaged or destroyed. The cottage is valued around $500,000.
I was also pointed toward the western side of the old hospital. A Yanmar Skidsteer had also been moved from
it`s parking spot in the lower area of the lot and was now next to a freshly demolished overhang. There was no
observable damage to the skidsteer. The overhang was part of the hospital that was going to be demolished
anyway. There was also a second entrance further east that the skidsteer had driven through, destroying the glass
doors and items inside. This too was part of the hospital that was going to be demolished anyway.
Officer Pelle arrived on scene to assist and took swabs of inside both the skidsteer and the Hyundai. These swabs
will be placed into Boulder Police Evidence. There were no fingerprints or personal effects inside the
construction equipment that could be collected as evidence. I did not see any footprints in the mud both around
the construction equipment and the perimeter fence.
I was told that the front gate was still secure this morning, so entry was either made by jumping the fence or
crawling under. I observed some areas where the fence was sitting on a small hill of dirt, which created a space
that would be easy to crawl under.
Officer Pelle and I then conducted a canvass of the nearby neighborhood. Officer Pelle contacted Gina Denucci
at 2551 4th St who told him that she was woken up to a loud noise at approximately 0300 or 0330 hours last
night. She said the noise sounded like machinery, but she assumed a crew was working early and did not call the
police (she planned on calling later in the day to complain). She estimated that the noise lasted approximately 1
hour. She did not get up to see what was occurring, but said that her husband might have. She was going to ask
him about it later when he was home.
I conducted a canvass at the following addresses:
2564 3rd St (No Answer)
330 Dewey (Did not hear anything)
2621 3rd St (No Answer)
2675 3rd St (Did not hear anything)
345 Dewey (Did not hear anything)
2605 4th St (Did not hear anything)
2583 4th St (No Answer)
MOORE, J.Reporting Officer:Page 4Printed By: JENNINGSA, 11/18/2019 13:47
R_CS3NC
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 14 of 16 Page 45 of 47
OCA
19-13601Boulder Police Department
Date / Time Reported
Sat 11/16/2019 10:39
OffenseVictim
MAPLETON HILL INVESTMENT CRIMINAL MISCHIEF $100K TO <$1
REPORTING OFFICER NARRATIVE
2591 4th St (No Answer)
340 Dewey (No Answer)
2567 4th St (Out of Town, did not hear anything)
No cameras were found on the nearby businesses and the construction site does not have cameras. I was told that
there are no disgruntled fired employees, but was told that the suspect appears to have some skill with heavy
machinery to be able to drive like he/she did. Photos were taken on scene and case numbers were given to the
victims.
This report will be closed.
MOORE, J.Reporting Officer:Page 5Printed By: JENNINGSA, 11/18/2019 13:47
R_CS3NC
Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 15 of 16 Page 46 of 47
OCA:19-13601
Incident Report Related Property List
Boulder Police Department
Name (Last, First, Middle)
Mapleton Hill Investment,
Property Description
Notes
1
DOB Age Race Sex
Make Model Caliber
Color Serial No.
NIC #State #Local #Status Date
Value Qty Unit Jurisdiction
OAN
NURSES COTTAGE
$500, 000.00 1.000 Locally
11/15/2019Damaged/destroy
Name (Last, First, Middle)
Earth Services & Abatement,
Property Description
Notes
2
DOB Age Race Sex
Make Model Caliber
Color Serial No.
NIC #State #Local #Status Date
Value Qty Unit Jurisdiction
OAN
HYUNDAI HL757-9 WHEEL LOADER HYUNDAI HL757-9
$5, 000.00 1.000 Locally
11/15/2019Damaged/destroy
Name (Last, First, Middle)
* No name *
Property Description
Notes
3
DOB Age Race Sex
Make Model Caliber
Color Serial No.
NIC #State #Local #Status Date
Value Qty Unit Jurisdiction
OAN
SWABS FOR DNA ON HEAVY EQUIP
$0.00 1.000 Locally
11/15/2019Evidence
Page 6R_CS0IBR Printed By: JENNINGSA, 11/18/2019 13:47Attachment D - letter from applicant - Page 16 of 16 Page 47 of 47