5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020
MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD
August 12th, 2020
Staff
Charles Ferro, Acting 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
Landmark Alteration Certificate Request
Public hearing and consideration of a proposal to demolish a non-contributing house
and accessory building construct a new 3,295 sq. ft. house and 400 sq. ft. two-car
detached garage at 406 Pearl Street located in the West Pearl Historic District pursuant
to Section 9-11-18 B.R.C. 1981 (HIS2020-00163) and under the procedures prescribed
by chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearing," B.R.C. 1981.
Address: 406 Pearl Street
Owner: Andrew & Diane Fordyce
Applicant: Sam Austin, Samuel Austin & Company Architects
Case Number: HIS2020-00163
Case Type: Landmark Alteration Certificate
Code Section: 9-11-18, B.R.C., 1981
Site Information
Historic District: West Pearl, non-contributing property
Zoning: RMX-1 (Residential Mixed-Low 1)
Lot size: 7,017 sq. ft.
Existing House sq. ft.: 1,862 sq. ft.
House constructed: c.1890, modifications 1982
Proposed House sq. ft.: 3,295 sq. ft.
Existing Cottage size: 263 sq. ft.
Cottage constructed: c.1950
Proposed Garage sq. ft.: 400 sq. ft.
Staff Recommendation
Approve the application with conditions.
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 1 of 59
Recommended Motion
The Landmarks Board adopts the staff memorandum dated August 12th, 2020, as the
findings of the board and, with conditions, approves the demolition of the non-
contributing main house and cottage and in their place the construction of a 3,295 sq. ft.
house and a 400 sq. ft. garage as shown on plans dated May 27th, 2020, finding that the
proposal generally meets the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark Alteration
Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981.
Conditions of Approval
1. The applicant shall be responsible for completing the work in compliance with the
approved plans dated May 27th, 2020, 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 architectural
plans and specifications 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. Redesign of the proposed house to significantly reduce the size
and redesign of the rear porch and deck to have a more open
railing system, redesign of fenestration on the south portion of the
west elevation and south elevation to be more traditionally scaled
and proportioned, and eliminate the west facing skylights;
b. Determine the appropriateness of metal roofing elements and use
of stone on new garage by studying precedence in the district;
c. Explore locating the main entrance of the house on the north
elevation (facing Pearl Street), increasing the space between the
historic barn and garage and change the stone facing on the
garage to wood siding;
d. Provide details of windows, doors, trim, siding, roofing, material
colors/finishes and hardscaping.
Background & Summary
• Because the proposal also calls for demolition and free-standing construction of
new, free-standing construction more than 340 sq. ft., review by the Landmarks
Board in a public hearing is required (9-11-14(b) of the Boulder Revised Code.
• Staff considers that as a result of major non-historic changes to the house, it should
be considered non-contributing; likewise the “cottage” accessory building should be
considered non-contributing as constructed in 1952, and not within the identified
1874-1906 period-of-significance for the West Pearl Historic District.
• Staff considers the accessory “barn” building, located at the southwest corner of the
property, to be contributing as it appears on the 1900 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 2 of 59
(see figure 10), the 1929 Tax Assessment (see Attachment C) and retains a high
degree of historic integrity.
• Staff finds that the proposal to construct a house on the existing foundation generally
meets the Standards issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate pursuant to 9-11-
18(a) & (b)(1)-(4) B.R.C. 1981 and is largely consistent with the General Design
Guidelines and the West Pearl Historic Design Guidelines. With the stated
conditions, recommends approval by the Landmarks Board.
Existing Property Description
• 7000 sq. ft. corner lot in the West Pearl Historic District slopes gently to the
southwest and is located in the one hundred-year flood plain.
• Four buildings currently on lot including main house, c.1950 cottage, c.1900 barn
and small shed of undetermined age;
• Property takes access from 4th Street via mid-lot curb-cut;
• Several matures trees on the lot.
Figure 1. Location map, 406 Pearl Street, West Pearl Historic District, Boulder, CO.
Figure 2. Axiometric View from northwest, 406 Pearl Street, Boulder, CO.
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 3 of 59
Figure 3. Tax Assessor Card photograph, c.1949
Photograph Courtesy the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History
Figure 4. Historic Building Inventory Photograph
Photograph Courtesy the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History
Figure 5. 406 Pearl Street, 2018
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 4 of 59
Figure 6. 406 Pearl Street, looking east from 4th Street, 2018
Figure 7. view of back yard at 406 Pearl Street looking north with
c.1950 cottage (mid-ground) proposed for demolition, 2020
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 5 of 59
Figure 8. South wall of pre-1900 barn with lean-to addition (left) to be rehabilitated
and non-historic (right) shed proposed for removal, 2020
Figure 9. c.1893 Photograph of Boulder from Red Rocks showing property at 406 Pearl Street
Photograph Courtesy the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History
Property History
• Archival research indicates the one and one half-story vernacular house at 406
Pearl Street was constructed prior to 1893 and by 1900 the property was
occupied by George L., his wife Alice (nee Stansbury) Harding, and their
daughters Eva and Mildred.
• Born in Cork, Ireland in 1847, George emigrated to the United States with his
family in 1861 and settled in Sturgis, Michigan. George graduated from the
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 6 of 59
University of Michigan in 1874 with an MA and worked for a number of years as a
schoolteacher in Minnesota and Ohio.
• George and Alice Stansbury were married in Ligonier, Ohio in 1887 and in 1890
the couple relocated to Longmont, Colorado where George took a position
leading the growing city’s school system.
• In 1893, George was elected superintendent of Boulder County Schools,
representing the Populist party and was re-elected to this position in 1897.
• George and Alice are credited with having been instrumental in securing the
Texas Chautauqua’s location in Boulder in 1898.1
• The house appears to have been either operated as a rooming house or divided
into flats beginning around 1901 as evidenced by the number and turnover of
occupants listed in the Boulder City Directories beginning in the early 1900s.
• Building permit records indicate that in June of 1953, a permit was issued for
construction of a frame storage shed for $200 (presumably the cottage), and a
November 1954 note on the Tax Assessor card (see Attachment C), makes
reference to construction of a “12x20 . . . “storage house” with a value of $200.
• By 1972, the storage house was cited as having been illegally been converted for
use as housing.
• In 1974 a bay and bedroom addition to the main house was constructed, and in
1982 a permit was issued to “take off and rebuild the second-story”.
• The 1988 Historic Building Inventory form (Attachment B) for the property
identifies the house as being “masonry vernacular” and by that time it had “been
remodeled beyond its historic integrity”.
Figure 10. 1900 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map
showing footprints of house and barn at 406 Pearl Street
1 Portrait and Biographical Record of the State of Colorado, Chapman Publishing, Chicago, 1899
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 7 of 59
Figure 11. 1930 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map
showing footprints of house and barn at 406 Pearl Street
Figure 12. 1958 Aerial Photograph
showing house, cottage (center), and barn at 406 Pearl Street
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 8 of 59
Description of Proposed Work
Figure 13. Existing Site Plan. Not to scale.
Figure 14. Proposed Site Plan. Not to scale.
Site Plan
• Demolition of 1,862 sq. ft. existing house; construction of 3,295 sq. ft. one
and one-half story house in its place;
• Demolition of 263 sq. ft. cottage;
• Demolition of small shed and construction of 400 sq. ft., two-car garage at
southeast corner of property;
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 9 of 59
• Probable removal of large trees at middle of property and at south of
property;
• Removal of hardscaping on property and vacation of curb cut at 4th Street.
Figure 15. Detail of 1949 Photo of house (left) Proposed North (Pearl Street) Elevation (right).
Proposed House – North (Pearl Street) Elevation
• Proposed one and one-half story neo-traditional front gable brick and frame
design inspired by original house prior to 1982 remodeling (see figure 3;
• North elevation shows 33’ wide exposure along Pearl street with stone clad
foundation four double-hung windows set into three segmented arched openings
on first floor and pair of double-hung windows on clapboard sided gable end;
• Shown to be approximately 28’ in height when measured from finished grade at
north face (first floor of building is required to be elevated above 100-year flood
plain).
Figure 16. Proposed West (4th Street) Elevation.
House – West (4th Street) Elevation
• West elevation features side gable roof punctuated by two gable-roof dormers
each with pair of double-hung windows; rear half of house set back several feet
east to create second-story knee wall with four-light casement windows;
• North portion of first-floor shown to fenestrated by three punched segmental arch
openings each with one-over double-hung sash;
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 10 of 59
• Main entrance to house at center of west face via steps accessing small portico
covering four-light door;
• South portion of wall also shown to feature double-hung window and two pairs
floor to ceiling casement windows;
• 10’ deep porch (with deck above) shown to be located south end of west wall.
Figure 17. Proposed East (side) Elevation.
House – East Elevation
• Features a side gable roof punctuated by large shed-roof frame, clapboard sided
wall dormer spanning the 1st and 2nd levels of the house and is fenestrated by set
of ten-light casement windows, two sets of mulled double-hung sash on 2nd level,
a single door accessing the first level via a small portico and four clerestory
casement windows and a small double-hung window.
Figure 18. Proposed South (rear) Elevation.
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 11 of 59
House – South (rear) Elevation
• Features a large curving deck with brick rail, standing seam roofed porch
supported by a brick column (east) and brick wall (west) opening into house by
way of set of six floor-to-ceiling nana-doors;
• Upper level features gable with set of French-doors and flanking side lights with
transom light opening onto an 8’ x 12’ deck with railing.
Proposed Garage
• Proposed free-standing two-car garage located at southeast corner of property,
adjacent to the contributing barn and taking access from the alley;
• Bottom four feet of building and east elevation shown to be faced with stone with
remain wall area sheathed with clapboard;
• Garage door opening proposed at south and to feature two overhead doors
(materials not specified);
• West elevation shown to feature a man door and north face a set of casement
windows.
Figure 19. Proposed Garage South (alley) and East (side) Elevations.
Figure 20. Proposed Garage West (side) and East (yard) Elevations.
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 12 of 59
Figure 21. Proposed garage relative to contributing barn
Public Visibility
• Located on the southeast corner of Pearl and 4th Streets, the property has high
public visibility in the West Pearl Historic District.
Figure 22. Architectural renderings showing proposed redevelopment of the property
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 13 of 59
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 that if the stated conditions of approval are met, the proposal will be
consistent with the purposes of this chapter, in that the new construction will not
damage the exterior architectural features of property in the West Pearl Historic District.
2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or
special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the
district?
Staff finds that, if the conditions of approval are met, the proposal will
will not damage or destroy the historic character, interest, or value of the property or
district as it will be generally compatible with the General Design Guidelines and the
West Pearl 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 finds that, if the conditions of approval are met, the architectural style,
arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used in the
construction of the proposed additions will be compatible with the character of the
landmarked site.
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.
Staff considers that as a result of major remodeling that occurred in 1978 and 1982,
including the reconstruction of the second floor, that the main house is historically non-
contributing to the West Pearl Historic District. Likewise, staff considers that the 1953
“cottage” was constructed well outside the 1874-1906 period-of-significance for the
district. As such, providing the recommended conditions of approval are met, the
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 14 of 59
demolition of these buildings and proposed new construction will be consistent with 9-
11-18 (b)(2) & (3).
(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 new construction will need to meet the City of Boulder’s Energy
Conservation Code.
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 (LAC). The
Board has adopted the West Pearl District Design Guidelines and 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.
Summary
Staff finds that if the following changes are made, the proposed new house, garage and
associated hardscaping on the property will be generally compatible and consistent with
the standards set forth in Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code, the General
Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual Landmarks and
the West Pearl Historic District Guidelines.
See Attachment A for a complete analysis of the proposal’s compliance with the
design guidelines.
General Design Guidelines (Summary)
• 2.0 Site Design
o Staff considers the location of existing and proposed buildings is generally
consistent with this section, but recommends the applicant explore
relocation the main entrance to Pearl Street. This may be achieved by way
of a small inset portico similar to that on the existing house.
o Staff considers that the curving rear deck/porch be reconfigured and
significantly reduced in depth to provide for more garden area between the
house and accessory buildings.
o Staff considers that consideration be given to maintaining the mature tree
in the middle of the yard. This may be possible if the deck/porch is
reduced as recommended.
• 2.1 Building Location, Orientation & Spacing
o Proposed house location appropriate, but that main entrance should be
from the front (Pearl Street) of the house as suggested above.
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 15 of 59
o Distance between rear porch/deck significantly increased to provide more
rear garden space as suggested above.
o Distance between the contributing barn and proposed garage should be
increased to extent possible.
• 6.1 Distinction from Historic Buildings
o The design of the house is a contemporary interpretation of traditional
Edwardian Vernacular in terms of mass, scale and, materials. Review
fenestration to reduce scale of windows and doors (especially at south
end of west face and south elevation).
• 6.2 Site and Setting
o The Neo-Traditional design of the building is compatible in terms of
setback and orientation.
o Proposed garage is shown to be located mid-lot adjacent to new curb cut
location recommended by the City of Boulder transportation.
• 6.3 Mass & Scale
o The proposed scale of main house is somewhat larger than historically
found in the historic district, but is generally compatible with surrounding
buildings. Staff considers that the rear porch/balcony should be
significantly reduced (including redesign of the brick wall with arched
opening to be more open) to minimize the mass and scale of the building
when viewed from the west and southwest.
o Proposed two-car garage is appropriate and mass and scale, but efforts
should be made to increase space between it and adjacent historic
garage.
• 6.4 Materials
o Proposed materials including stone, brick, and clapboard all traditionally
found in the historic district, though staff considers that use of stone on
garage inappropriate.
o Use of metal roofing elements on house should be analyzed to ensure
appropriateness to context of the historic district.
o Provide detailed information on all materials including proposed siding,
wood railings, windows, doors, pathways, driveway, porch for review by
the Ldrc.
• 6.5 Key Building Elements
o Fenestration on front portion of proposed house generally reflects
traditional window patterns though over-scaled windows and doors
especially at west and south elevations should be revised.
o Skylights may not be appropriate on publicly visible areas of roof.
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 16 of 59
7.0 New Accessory Buildings (Summary)
o Proposed garage is shown to be located at rear of lot and is smaller and
simpler in design than the main house and historic barn but should not be
sided in stone.
o Staff considers that space between barn and new garage should be
increased to extent possible. Resolve at Ldrc.
West Pearl Historic District Design Guidelines
• F. New Construction
o Proposed design of house incorporates elements of historic house in form
and detail, though revisions should be made to fenestration at south
portion of west elevation and south face to better integrate design into
historic context including more appropriate scaling of windows and doors,
significant reduction of rear porch and deck, and fine-tuning of materials.
o Staff considers that large wall dormer at east elevation will have limited (if
any public visibility) and that the form and details of this element is
generally appropriate.
• C. Storage Buildings and Garages
o Proposed garage is shown subordinate to and compatible with
proposed main house, but consideration should be given to increasing
distance between it and historic barn.
6.Porches
o Reduction to rear porch/deck size and configuration should also
include revisions from brick to lighter wood railing Details of upper
porch railing not submitted – resolve at the Ldrc.
Public Comment
Staff has received no public comment on this case.
Findings
Staff finds that if the stated conditions are met, the proposed demolition of the non-
contributing house and cottage and construction of new house and garage at 406 Pine
Street will be consistent with purposes of the Historic Preservation Ordinance and meets
the standards specified in Section 9-11-18 (b), B.R.C. 1981. The proposed work is also
be substantially consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the West Pearl
Historic District Design Guidelines.
Staff recommends the Landmarks Board adopt the following findings:
The Landmarks Board finds that the project meets the standards for issuance of a
Landmark Alteration Certificate set forth in Section 9-11-18, “Standards for Landmark
Alteration Certificate Applications,” B.R.C. 1981. In reaching this conclusion, the Board
considers the information in the staff memorandum dated August 12th, 2020, and the
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 17 of 59
evidence provided to the Board at its August 12th, 2020 meeting. Specifically, the Board
finds, if the stated conditions are met, that:
1. The proposed new house and garage will not damage the historic character of
the contributing barn on the property or the immediate streetscape in the historic
district and are generally consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the
West Pearl Historic District Guidelines.
2. The proposed work will not adversely affect the historic, architectural, or
aesthetic value of the contributing garage and associated hardscaping features
on the property or affect the special historic character of the West Pearl Historic
District. § 9-11-18(b)(1).
3. The proposed demolition of the main house and cottage on the property as they
are not historically contributing to the West Pearl Historic District and the
proposed plans for the construction of a new house and garage to replace these
buildings meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section.
4. The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and
materials used on the proposed construction will be compatible with the
character of the historic district. § 9-11-18(b)(2).
Attachments
Attachment A: Design Guideline Analysis
Attachment B: Historic Building Inventory Form (link)
Attachment C: Tax Assessor Card
Attachment D: Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 18 of 59
Attachment A: Design Guideline Analysis
General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual Landmarks
DESIGN GUIDELINES
The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board
must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate and the
board has adopted the General Design Guidelines to help interpret the ordinance. The
following is an analysis of the submitted proposal with respect to relevant guidelines. It
is important to emphasize that design guidelines are intended to be used as an aid to
appropriate design, and not as a checklist of items for compliance.
The following is an analysis of the proposal’s compliance with the applicable design
guidelines:
General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual
Landmarks
General Design Guidelines
2.0 Site Design
Site design includes a variety of character-defining elements of our historic districts and building. Individual
structures are located within a framework of streets and public spaces that set the context for the
neighborhood. How structures occupy their site, in terms of alignment, orientation, and spacing, creates
much of the context of the neighborhood.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
.1 Locate buildings within the
range of alignments as seen
traditionally in the area,
maintaining traditional
setbacks at the front, side and
rear of the property
Staff considers that proposed location of
house and proposed generally maintains
traditional patterns in the area.
Yes
.2 Building proportions should
respect traditional patterns in
the district
The proposed one and one-half house and
garage generally reflect the traditional gable-
roofed forms in the district in terms of scale,
form, and massing.
Yes
.3 Orient the primary building
entrance to the street
Primary entrance is oriented to 4th Street,
where original entrance was at east side of
house and accessing to Pearl Street. Consider
location the primary entrance onto Pearl Street
(possibly at northeast corner of house?)
consistent with pattern in the historic district –
resolve at the Ldrc.
Maybe
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 19 of 59
.5 A new porch may encroach
into the existing alignment only
if it is designed according to
the guidelines and if it is
appropriate to the architectural
style of the house.
Small porch or portico at the front of the
proposed house would encroach into the
setback, but would be consistent with the
historic character of the property and of those
contributing to the district – resolve at the Ldrc.
Maybe
.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
Removal of non-contributing cottage will
provide space between main house and
accessory building(s), but the proposed rear
deck should be reduced in size to maintain
general proportion of backyard space to
buildings on contributing properties in the
district - resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
2.2.2 Preserve street trees whenever
possible
At least one mature tree (along 4th Street) is
shown to be removed.
Maybe
2.1 Building Alignment, Orientation, and Spacing
1. Locate Buildings within the
range of alignments seen
traditionally in the area
maintaining traditional
setbacks at the front, side and
rear of the property.
Proposed house and new garage are shown to
be located within range of alignments seen on
contributing properties in the district.
Yes
.6 … garages should be located
at the rear of of the lot and
accessed from the alley.
Proposed garage is shown to be located at the
back of the property.
Yes
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.
Proposed new garage takes access from alley
– curb cut appears to be vacated as facet of
design.
Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 20 of 59
.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.
The proposed new garage is shown to be
approximately 4’ east of existing barn. Consider
options to increase space between existing and
proposed buildings (i.e. locating proposed
building at east lot line) to create more
permeability into the property – resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
6.0 New Primary Buildings
New construction within a historic district can enhance the existing district character if the proposed design
and its siting reflect an understanding of and a compatibility with the distinctive character of the district.
While new construction should fit into the historic character of the district or site, it should not replicate
historic styles. Instead, new buildings should relate to the fundamental characteristics of the historic district
or landmark site while also conveying a contemporary style. New buildings should not overshadow existing
historic structures. Fundamental characteristics to be considered in designing compatible new buildings
include: site and setting, building size and proportions, materials, and the placement and style of doors and
windows.
The primary focus in reviewing new structures will be on aspects that are visible from public streets. The
guidelines will be applied most stringently to these publicly visible areas. More flexibility will be allowed for
rear elevations and other areas largely screened from public view.
6.1 Distinction from Historic Buildings
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 be compatible
with the historic context, they must also be recognizable as new construction.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
.1
Create compatible
contemporary interpretations of
historic elements.
The design of the proposed house is a
contemporary interpretation of traditional
Edwardian Vernacular in terms of mass, scale
and, materials. Review exterior materials,
fenestration and design details at the Ldrc.
Yes
.2 Interpretations of historic styles
may be appropriate if
distinguishable as new.
Proposed design of the house contemporary
interpretation of the Edwardian Vernacular.
Review exterior materials, fenestration and
design details at the Ldrc.
Yes
6.2 Site and Setting
New buildings should be designed and located so that significant site features, including mature trees, are
not lost or obscured. The size of the new structures should not overpower the site or dramatically alter its
historic character. Buildings within historic districts generally display a consistency in setback, orientation,
spacing and distance
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 21 of 59
.1 Conform to Section 2.0 Site
Design.
See above for analysis. See above
for analysis.
.2 Overall character of site is
retained.
Residential character will be retained, with
similar setbacks.
Yes
.3 Compatible with surrounding
buildings in setback,
orientation, spacing, and
distance from adjacent
buildings.
The Neo-Traditional design of the building is
compatible in terms of setback, orientation,
spacing and distance from adjacent buildings
– see 2.3.5 above for recommendation
regarding spacing between accessory
buildings.
Yes
.4 Proportion of built mass to
open space not significantly
different from contributing
buildings.
While proposed site design appears to
preserve general proportion of built mass to
open space, staff considers that large rear
porch/deck area should be significantly
reduced in depth to provide more back yard
area – resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
6.3 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 façade 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 structures should not be so
out-of-scale with the surrounding buildings as to loom over them.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
.1 Compatible with surrounding
buildings in terms of height,
size, scale, massing, and
proportions.
While the proposed mass and scale of main
house is larger than contributing houses in the
district given its immediate context, staff
considers it will be compatible with
surrounding buildings. Proposed two-car
garage is in scale with accessory buildings in
the area.
Maybe
.2 Mass and scale of new
construction should respect
neighboring buildings and
streetscape.
Proposed massing of the new house generally
respects the neighboring buildings and
streetscape.
Yes
.3 Historic heights and widths as
well as their ratios maintained,
especially proportions of
façade.
General proportions of the façade elements
are generally consistent with those found in
the district.
Yes
6.4 Materials
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 22 of 59
.1 Materials should be similar in
scale, proportion, texture,
finish, and color to those found
on nearby historic structures.
Proposed materials include stone, brick,
clapboard, and asphalt shingles, are all
traditionally found in the historic district. Staff
considers that use of stone (especially on
garage), may not be appropriate and that
utilization of standing seam metal roofing
elements on house may not be appropriate -
resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
.2 Maintain a human scale by
avoiding large, featureless
surfaces and by using
traditionally sized building
components and materials.
Some window and door openings at sides and
rear of proposed house appear to be over-
scaled in comparison with historic properties in
the district – resolve at the Ldrc.
Maybe
6.5 Key Building 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 complement the historic
architecture. In addition to the guidelines below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related
suggestions.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
.1 Design the spacing,
placement, scale, orientation,
proportion, and size of window
and door openings in new
structures to be compatible
with the surrounding buildings
that contribute to the historic
district, while reflecting the
underlying design of the new
building.
Fenestration generally reflects traditional
window patterns on northern portion of
proposed house, though fenestration of
southern portion of house (especially on highly
visible 4th Street and south elevations) may be
inconsistent with window and door patterns
found on historic buildings in the district.
Resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
.2 Select windows and doors for
new structures that are
compatible in material,
subdivision, proportion, pattern
and detail with the windows
and doors of surrounding
buildings that contribute to the
historic district
See .1 above. Maybe
.3 New buildings should use a
roof form found in the district or
on the landmark site
One and one-half front gable roof form of the
house generally references the Edwardian
Vernacular, a prevalent form in the district.
Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 23 of 59
.4 Porches should be compatible
in massing and details to
historic porches in the district
and should be appropriate to
the style of the house.
No front porch proposed (see 2.2 & 2.3 above)
in consideration main entrance and possible
portico facing Pearl Street consistent with
historic condition. Resolve at the Ldrc.
Maybe
7.0 Garages & Other Accessory Structures
Accessory buildings include barns, sheds, garages and outbuildings. Originally accessory buildings
were used for storage of equipment, animals, or carriages. Generally, these buildings 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.
7.2 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
.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.
At least one mature tree appears to be
removed as part of development.
Consider ways to preserve trees
(including significant reduction of rear
deck) to preserve tree(s). Resolve at the
Ldrc.
Maybe
.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.
Staff considers that the proposed
location of the proposed new garage at
the rear of the lot is appropriate.
Yes
.3
Maintain adequate spacing between
accessory buildings so alleys do not
evolve into tunnel-like passageways.
The proposed new garage is shown to
be approximately 4’ east of existing barn.
Consider options to increase space
between existing and proposed buildings
(i.e. locating proposed building at east lot
line) to create more permeability into the
property – Resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
.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.
While proposed site design appears to
preserve general proportion of built mass
to open space, staff considers that large
rear porch/deck area should be
Maybe
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 24 of 59
significantly reduced in depth to provide
more back yard area – resolve at Ldrc.
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.
Proposed 400 sq. ft. garage subordinate
to proposed primary house, and
generally compatible with it in terms of
form and proportion. Resolve at Ldrc.
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.
See .5 Above Yes
.7
Roof form and pitch should be
complementary to the primary
structure.
Roof pitch of proposed garage is
complementary to main house and
historic barn.
Yes
Materials and Detailing
.8
Accessory structures should be simpler
in design and detail than the primary
building.
Proposed garage is smaller and simpler
in design than the main house and
generally compatible with the character
of the adjacent contributing barn.
Consider eliminating stone siding and
increasing space between these
buildings - see 2.3.5 above. Resolve at
Ldrc.
Maybe
.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.
Use of stone on proposed garage is
inconsistent with frame/clapboard
construction of historic barn. Revise to
use wood siding to ensure that new
accessory building is subordinate to
barn. Resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
.10
Windows, like all elements of
accessory structures, should be
simpler in detailing and smaller in
scale than similar elements on primary
structures.
Windows are shown to be simple in
design. Yes
.12
Garage doors should be consistent
with the historic scale and materials of
traditional accessory structures. Wood
is the most appropriate material and
two smaller doors may be more
appropriate than one large door.
Overhead garage doors shown – details
not provided. Resolve at the Ldrc. Maybe
.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. Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 25 of 59
West Pearl Historic District Guidelines
The following section is an analysis of the proposal relative to the West Pearl 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.
A.
Site Planning
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
a.
Proposed setback and
location of house is
generally consistent with
historic properties in the
district.
Yes
b.
Proposed spacing between
proposed house and large
non-contributing property to
the east is consistent with
historic condition on property
and in the district.
Yes
c.
Little information provided
about proposed landscaping
and hardscaping. Review at
Ldrc.
Maybe
d.
While proposed site design
appears to preserve general
proportion of built mass to
open space, staff considers
that large rear porch/deck
area should be significantly
reduced in depth to provide
more back yard area –
resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
C. Storage Buildings, Garages and Carports
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 26 of 59
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
2.
Proposed garage is shown
subordinate to and
compatible with proposed
main house but
consideration should be
given to increasing distance
between it and historic barn
– see 7.2.8 above.
Maybe
3.
Proposed garage is one-
story and simpler in than
house, though use of stone
should be reconsidered to
ensure it is subordinate to
proposed brick & frame
house and contributing wood
barn. Resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
4.
Overhead garage doors
shown – details not
provided. Resolve at the
Ldrc.
Maybe
8.
Massing of proposed garage
is compatible with historic
accessory buildings in the
district.
Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 27 of 59
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
2.
Proposed design of house
incorporates elements of
historic house in form and
detail. Staff considers that
revisions should be made to
fenestration at south portion
of west elevation and south
face to better integrate
design into historic context.
This should include more
appropriate scaling of
windows and doors,
significant reduction of rear
porch and deck, and fine-
tuning of materials. Staff
considers that large wall
dormer at east elevation will
have limited (if any public
visibility) and that the form
and details of this element is
generally appropriate.
Resolve at Ldrc.
Maybe
4. See. 2 Above. Maybe
7.
Use of metal roofing may be
inappropriate and use of
stone on house should be
minimized. Proposed garage
should be redesigned with
wood siding to ensure
subordinate to historic barn.
Maybe
8.
Large vertical openings
(especially on west and
south faces of house)
should be revised. Review
at the Ldrc.
Maybe
H. Architectural Features
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 28 of 59
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
2.
One and one-half story
gable roof form is generally
consistent with forms in the
historic district.
Yes
3.
Proposed roof deck over
rear balcony appears
integral to the roof design
and appropriately scaled.
Yes
5.
Skylights facing 4th Street
may be inconsistent with this
guideline. Resolve at the
Ldrc.
Maybe
7.
Staff considers that in
general publicly visible
dormers consistent and that
large wall dormer at east
elevation will have limited (if
any public visibility) and that
the form and details of this
element is generally
appropriate.
Yes
3.
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
e.
Side wall of the contributing
garage faces onto alley;
garage is accessed by 9th
Street curb cut that is
proposed for removal.
Garage access from alley
not possible.
Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 29 of 59
g.
Existing contributing garage
on alley will be preserved. Yes
i.
Existing contributing garage
on alley will be preserved. Yes
j.
Floor-to-ceiling windows and
nana doors should be
scaled more appropriately –
material details of windows
and doors not submitted –
review at Ldrc.
Maybe
6. Porches
Guideline
Analysis
Meets
Guideline?
e. Reduction to rear
porch/deck size and
configuration should also
include revisions from brick
to lighter wood railing
Details of upper porch
railing not submitted –
resolve at the Ldrc.
Maybe
.f See e. above Maybe
.g See e above.
Yes
7. Decks and Balconies
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 30 of 59
Guideline Analysis Conforms?
.a See 6e. above Maybe
.c
Proposed second-
story rear balcony
appears integral to
the roof design and
appropriately scaled.
Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 31 of 59
Attachment C - Tax Assessor Card
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 32 of 59
Attachment C - Tax Assessor Card
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 33 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 34 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 35 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 36 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 37 of 59
Diana and Andy Fordyce purchased 406 Pearl and are requesting permission to
adapt the property to serve as their family home as they are returning to Colorado
after an extended work expatriation. Andy is a Colorado native and CU graduate
and Diana was a postdoctoral researcher at CU Boulder. As a young married couple
in the 1990s, Diana and Andy started their careers together in Boulder area. Both
retain strong family ties to Colorado. Diana and Andy have a strong fondness for the
Boulder community and its beautiful surroundings. By investing in the West Pearl
district Andy and Diana want to enhance the historical value of the 406 Pearl property
and establish a family home in the community they feel a strong affinity toward.
406 Pearl Background and Proposal
The property at 406 pearl is comprised of a main house, a cottage, and a barn/shed.
The main house and cottage ADU are designated as Non-Contributing by the West
Pearl Historic Design guidelines. The existing main house has had a number of
additions over the years, including a duplex addition, which have undermined the
historic value of the structure to the extent that it is considered Non-Contributing.
Additionally, the main structure is in the flood plain with the ground floor 12” below
the flood plain elevation. The building also has numerous structural defects.
The West Pearl Historic Guidelines indicate the following supporting elements that
should be preserved as they add character to the neighborhood:
• The original brick first floor with pressed brick segmental arches and cut stone
sills.
• On the southwest corner of the property is a barn with shed considered an
important historic accessory building.
We are proposing to remove the existing main structure and the detached non
conforming cottage ADU and build a new single-family home that preserves the
historic supporting elements. In addition, a detached garage consistent with the
neighborhood would be added as well as preserving the historic barn while
converting it into a legal ADU.
Our strategy has been to acknowledge the original home by using historic cues found
in old photographs along with a survey of original details still in existence. It is worth
noting that not all of the brick work or even the massing on the first floor is still
original.
Our design approach has been informed by traditional massing and detailing and
deliberately incorporates a more contemporary glass to wall ratio (South of the entry),
while being sensitive to the historic character of both Pearl Street and 4th Street.
New construction guidelines :
(in bold) copied from the Westend Historic District Design Guidelines, for New
Construction:
1. While respecting the historic character of the district, new construction
should be an expression of its own time period and is not encouraged to
replicate stylistic detailing of buildings found in the district.
This has been fore front in the design process.
406 Pearl Boulder CO: Architect, Samuel Austin
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 38 of 59
2. New construction should respect the historic character of the district and
incorporate the elements which contribute to the mass, rooflines, windows,
doors, bays and porches. Modern expressions of traditional elements are
encouraged.
This design has undergone several iterations. Working back and forth with James
Hewatt, We have arrived at a simplified roof structure and massing which reinforces
the historic character of the district.
3. New construction should respect the traditional alignment, site layout,
orientation and spacing found in the historic district. Generally, a new building
should be located at the front of the lot, while accessory buildings should be at
the rear along the alley.
Our proposed sitting of the structure respects the traditional alignment of the
neighborhood and our block.
4. New construction should be compatible with traditional elements of existing
historic buildings, respect traditional spacing and massing of the existing
buildings in the district, and be sensitive to their surroundings.
As mentioned above.
5. New accessory buildings should be secondary in nature to the main house
and smaller in scale and mass.
The two-car garage is secondary and smaller than the house. It incorporates the roof
pitch used on the Barn and has two garage doors which are in line with the scale of
other garage doors found in the alley. (photos supplied)
Currently the property has a substantial curb-cut half-circle driveway off of 4th street and open
parking on the property which is in non-conformance to the West Pearl Historical Guidance
recommendations. The proposed garage will effectively remove this non-conformance as well
the prefabricated shed and be in keeping with other garages off of the rear of the property (Lawry
Lane) while preserving the look of the alley/ Lawry Lane.
6. New porches are an important historical visual element and are encouraged
in new construction. They should be an appropriate scale for the house.
The new porch/entry roof is a contemporary expression which incorporates metal roof
detailing found on the historic porch. The west entry/porch and southwest configuration
returns the feel/elements of the property from Pearl and 4th street from the historic
photos. The historic porch is included in the photographs."
7. The use of building materials that have traditional dimensions is
406 Pearl Boulder CO: Architect, Samuel Austin
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 39 of 59
encouraged, such as standard sized brick, lap siding with a traditional
dimension facing the weather and appropriately sized roofing materials.
Building materials with traditional dimensional elements have been used in the
design. Brick, Lap Siding with traditional exposure, Asphalt dimensional Shingles and
Standing Seam metal.
8. Strongly horizontal or vertical facades should be avoided unless they are
compatible with the character of the structures in the immediate area.
We have avoided strongly horizontal or vertical facades.
406 Pearl Boulder CO: Architect, Samuel Austin
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 40 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 41 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 42 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 43 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 44 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 45 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 46 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 47 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 48 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
COVER SHEET
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
TITLE
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.2 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.
SHEET INDEX
TITLE
SP-1
SP-2
SP-3
A-1
A-2
A-3
A-4
A-5
COVER SHEET
SURVEY
SITE PLAN
BULK PLANE SECTIONS
MAIN AND UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PLAN
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
BARN FLOOR PLAN AND ELEVATIONS
GARAGE FLOOR PLAN AND ELEVATIONS
406 Pearl Street
406 Pearl Street, Boulder, CO #Site Postcode
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 49 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
SITE PLAN
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
SP-2
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.4 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.12.5'SETBACK12.0'
SETBACK 5.0'SETBACK25.0'
SETBACK 3.0'4.4'5393.485394.585391.365390.765394.35391.755393.5
5394.0
5393.55394.0
5394.01
SP-3
1
SP-3
2
SP-3
2
SP-3
3
SP-3
3
SP-3
4
SP-3
4
SP-3
5
SP-3
5
SP-3
6
SP-3
6
SP-3
7
SP-3
7
SP-3
8
SP-3
8
SP-3
20"/16'
MAIN FLOOR 100'-0" = 5397.2
EXISTING METERS
25"/15'
6"/6'
6"/6'6"/6'4"/4'6"/6'
GAS METER
25"/20'
8"/8'
4"/4'4"/4'
4"/4'
WM
6"/6'
4"/4'
6"/6'
4"/4'
4"/4'
6"/6'
4"/4'
4"/4'
5390
5391
5391
5392
5392
5393
53935394
5394
N15°36'54"W 139.51' (C)
S15°36'54"E 139.51' (C)N74°51'00"E 50.30' (C)S74°51'00"W 50.30' (C)TWO STORY BRICK
FRAME W/CRAWLSPACE
POSTED ADDRESS:
406 PEARL ST.
EXISTING COTTAGE
TO BE DEMOLISHED
EXISTING BARN
SHED TO BE
DEMOLISHED
COVERED
PARKING
PEARL STREET
(80' R.O.W.)
4TH STREET
(80' R.O.W.)
LOT 6
BLK 59
PEARL
STREET I
CONDOS
20' ALLEY
50' (P)50'(P)140'(P)
140'(P)
GAS METER
OVERHEAD UTILITIES
OVERHEAD
UTILITIES
EXISTING DRIVEWAYSIDEWALK
EXISTING SIDEWALK
5391.5
LOW POINT 25'
FROM HOUSE 5391
EXISTING HOUSE
TO BE REMOVED
SECTIONS ARE
SPACED 10'-0" O.C.
REMOVE EXISTING FENCE - BUILD
NEW FENCE AT PROPERTY LINE
WALKS TO BE REMOVED
ROOF ABOVE
NEW 5'-0" TALL FENCE
NEW 3'-0" WIDE GATE
EXISTING TREE TO REMAIN
NEW 4'-0" TALL STONE WALL5-0x6-03-0x6-03-0x6-03-0x6-03-0x6-0 3-0x5-0
3-0x6-0 3-0x6-03-0x6-0
6-0x10-06-0x10-03-0x4-6
3'-6" x9'-0"21'-0" X10'-0"3'-0" x6'-8"5-0x5-08'-0"x8'-0"8'-0"x8'-0"3-0x2-0 3-0x2-03-0x2-0 3-0x2-0
2-0x3-6
3'-0" x8'-0"
3'-6" x9'-0"3-6x3-65-0x4-0
3-6x3-62-0x2-0
2'-6" x6'-8"5393.35393.15392.25392.55393.485394.585391.365390.765391.55393.05393.255392.05391.85394.05393.05393.5
5394.4
5394.2
5393.8
5393.6
5393.85394.0
5393.7
5394.35391.755393.5
5394.0
5393.55394.0
5394.0MAIN FLOOR 100'-0" = 5397.2
5391
53925393
5394
N15°36'54"W 139.51' (C)
S15°36'54"E 139.51' (C)N74°51'00"E 50.30' (C)S74°51'00"W 50.30' (C)A
5409.2
MAIN FLOOR 5397.2
B
5417.9
D
5425.9
5391
C
5417.9
E
5409.2
F
5409.2
SOLAR ANALYSIS WORKSHEET
Property Zone District:Solar Fence Height 24
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4
Roof Element Elevation of Roof
Element (y)
Elevation of Grade at
Property Line (x)*
Relative Height of Roof
Element (h)**Length of Shadow (L)***
10:00 AM 2:00 PM 10:00 AM 2:00 PM 10:00 AM 2:00 PM
A 5,409.2 5,393.6 5,393.3 15.6 15.9
B 5,417.9 5,393.7 5,393.1 24.2 24.8 0.5 2.1
C 5,417.9 5,392.2 5,392.2 25.7 25.7 4.5 4.5
D 5,425.9 5,394.2 5,393.5 31.7 32.4 20.4 22.3
E 5,409.2 5,394.4 5,393.8 14.8 15.4
F 5,409.2 5,393.8 5,393.8 15.4 15.4
* Elevation in USGS or relative to survey datum where the building element's shadow would cross the property line.
** The relative height of the building element is the elevation of the building element (step 1), minus the elevation of grade at the property line (step 2).
*** The length of the shadow is determined by using the "Adjusted Solar Shadow Lengths" of Table 1, for Solar Access Area 1, of the Solar Access Guide.
1
NNSCALE: 1" = 10'1 Site Plan
0 5'10'20'
SCALE: 1" = 10'2 Solar Shadow Plan
0 5'10'20'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 50 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
BULK PLANE SECTIONS
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
SP-3
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.5 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"1 Bulk Plane Section 1
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"2 Bulk Plane Section 2
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"3 Bulk Plane Section 3
0 4'8'16'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"4 Bulk Plane Section 4
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"5 Bulk Plane Section 5
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"6 Bulk Plane Section 6
0 4'8'16'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"7 Bulk Plane Section 7
0 4'8'16'SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"8 Bulk Plane Section 8
0 4'8'16'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 51 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
MAIN AND UPPER LEVEL
FLOOR PLAN
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
A-1
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.6 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
111213141516171819UP19 RISERS (7 7/16")5-0x6-03-0x6-03-0x6-03-0x6-03-0x6-0 3-0x5-0
3-0x6-0 3-0x6-03-0x6-0
2'-4" x8'-0"
6-0x10-06-0x10-03-0x4-6
3'-6" x9'-0"21'-0" X10'-0"2'-4" x8'-0"
3'-0" x8'-0"
2'-4" x8'-0"
2'-4" x8'-0"2'-6" x8'-0"6'-0" X7'-0"2'-6" x8'-0"
2'-8" x8'-0"
2'-6" x8'-0"2'-4" x8'-0"3-0x2-0 3-0x2-03-0x2-0 3-0x2-0
2-0x3-6
3'-0" x8'-0"2'-4" x8'-0"3'-6" x9'-0"8'-0" x9'-0"REF.STACK W/D
32'-0"29'-0"5'-6"32'-0"6'-6"2'-0"4'-0"24'-0"5'-7"3'-0"24'-1"38'-5"4'-0"6'-6"6'-0"12'-0"5 1/2"5'-1"5 1/2"8'-10"5 1/2"9'-0 1/2"3 1/2"11'-7"3 1/2"9'-0 1/2"5 1/2"5 1/2"12'-0"3 1/2"
12'-9"5 1/2"5'-1"5 1/2"8'-1"15'-9 1/2"27'-10 1/2"
66'-6"
66'-6"
16'-0"3'-0"5'-6"5'-0"
10'-0"6'-0"
10'-0"
10'-0"8'-0"8'-0"3'-6"
KITCHEN/DINING/FAMILY ROOM
BEDROOM 1
ENTRY
PATIO
PORCH
MUD ROOM
LAUNDRY
COATS
BATH 1
BEDROOM 2
BEDROOM 3
ALIGN BENCH WITHCABINETS ABOVE5'-0" WIDE
CIRCULAR STAIR
POWDER
PANTRY
SITTING
ALIGN
CRAWLSPACE
ACCESS
BENCH
FLOOR ABOVE
30"X60" TUB/
SHOWER
30"X60" TUB/
SHOWER
LAUNDRY
CHUTE
ABOVE 6" STEPFLUSH
6" STEPTOP OF WALL
SLOPES
TRANSOM ABOVE
FIREPIT
BATH 2
DN
6R AT 7 1/2" MAX
5T AT 12"DN5R AT 7 1/2" MAX4T AT 12"DN
DROPPED BEAMS ABOVE
BRICK VENEER
GAS METER
ELECTRIC
METER
DN5-0x2-010'-0" X8'-0"2-0x3-65-0x5-65-0x6-63-0x3-03-0x3-0
2'-6" x5'-0"
6-0x5-06-0x5-03-0x3-0
2'-4" x6'-8"
2'-8" x6'-8"
6-0x5-0
2'-4" x6'-8"
3-0x3-0
6-0x10-0
2'-8" x6'-8"23'-8"38'-5"
11'-7"8'-0"8'-7"7'-5"10'-0"16'-6"3'-0"23'-2"9'-0"15'-2"31'-2"8'-0"3'-0"13'-0"3'-6"9'-6"3'-0"3'-8"MASTER BEDROOM
VAULTED CEILING
LOW ATTIC
WATERPROOF DECK
DECKING OVER SLEEPERS
SLOPE TO DRAIN
6'-10" PLATE
BEDROOM 3/EXERCISE
8'-1 1/8" CEILING
12'-10" PLATE
12'-10" PLATE
8'-1 1/8" PLATE
7'-11" PLATE
MASTER CLOSET
3" PLATE
3" PLATE
ATTIC ACCESS TO
MECHANICAL
EQUIPMENT
5'-0" WIDE
CIRCULAR STAIR
7'-0" PLATE7'-0" PLATE7'-11" PLATELOW HEADROOM
LOW HEADROOM
MASTER BATH
8'-1 1/8" CEILING
8'-1 1/8" CEILING
30"X72" TUB/
SHOWER
7'-11" PLATE
7'-11" PLATEREC. ROOM
11.5:12 VAULT
LAUNDRY CHUTE
DROP CEILING ABOVE
DROPPED BEAMS ABOVE
LINEN CABINET
REQUIRED
MAX. FAR = 3,818 S.F.
MAX. SITE COVERAGE = 2,453 INCLUDES GARAGE
MAX. HEIGHT = 35'-0"
MAIN = 1,927 S.F.
UPPER = 1,368 S.F.
3,295 S.F.
GARAGE = 440 S.F.
3,735 S.F.
SITE COVERAGE = 2,430 S.F.
SITE AREA = 7,017.44 S.F.NNSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Main Level Floor Plan
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Upper Level Floor Plan
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1" = 10'4 Bulk Plane Section 3A
0 5'10'20'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 52 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
A-2
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.7 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.35'-0"5'-8 3/8"3'-0"10'-1 1/8"1'-8 1/4"12'-9"5391.5
LOW POINT 25'
FROM HOUSE
MAIN LEVEL
T.O. SUBFLOOR
5397.2
HIGHEST ADJACENT
FINISHED GRADE
(PER FLOOD CERT.)
5394.2
UPPER LEVEL
T.O. GYPCRETE
T.O. PLATE
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE 35'-0"5'-8 3/8"3'-0"10'-1 1/8"1'-8 1/4"12'-9"12'-9"5391.5
LOW POINT 25'
FROM HOUSE
MAIN LEVEL
T.O. SUBFLOOR
5397.2
UPPER LEVEL
T.O. GYPCRETE
T.O. PLATE
HIGHEST ADJACENT
FINISHED GRADE
(PER FLOOD CERT.)
5394.2
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
REQUIRED
MAX. FAR = 3,818 S.F.
MAX. SITE COVERAGE = 2,453 INCLUDES GARAGE
MAX. HEIGHT = 35'-0"
MAIN = 1,927 S.F.
UPPER = 1,368 S.F.
3,295 S.F.
GARAGE = 440 S.F.
3,735 S.F.
SITE COVERAGE = 2,430 S.F.
SITE AREA = 7,017.44 S.F.
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 East Elevation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 North - Pearl Street - Elevation
0 2'4'8'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 53 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
BUILDING ELEVATIONS
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
A-3
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.8 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.35'-0"5'-8 3/8"3'-0"10'-1 1/8"1'-8 1/4"5391.5
LOW POINT 25'
FROM HOUSE
MAIN LEVEL
T.O. SUBFLOOR
5397.2
UPPER LEVEL
T.O. GYPCRETE
T.O. PLATE
HIGHEST ADJACENT
FINISHED GRADE
(PER FLOOD CERT.)
5394.2
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
CONCRETE RETAINING WALL
35'-0"5'-8 3/8"3'-0"10'-1 1/8"1'-8 1/4"12'-9"5391.5
LOW POINT 25'
FROM HOUSE
MAIN LEVEL
T.O. SUBFLOOR
5397.2
UPPER LEVEL
T.O. GYPCRETE
T.O. PLATE
HIGHEST ADJACENT
FINISHED GRADE
(PER FLOOD CERT.)
5394.2
EXISTING GRADE
PROPOSED GRADE
REQUIRED
MAX. FAR = 3,818 S.F.
MAX. SITE COVERAGE = 2,453 INCLUDES GARAGE
MAX. HEIGHT = 35'-0"
MAIN = 1,927 S.F.
UPPER = 1,368 S.F.
3,295 S.F.
GARAGE = 440 S.F.
3,735 S.F.
SITE COVERAGE = 2,430 S.F.
SITE AREA = 7,017.44 S.F.
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 South Elevation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 West - 4th Street - Elevation
0 2'4'8'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 54 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
BARN FLOOR PLAN AND
ELEVATIONS
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
A-4
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.9 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.
3'-0" x6'-8"5-0x5-08'-0"x8'-0"8'-0"x8'-0"3-6x3-65-0x4-0
3-6x3-62-0x2-0
2'-6" x6'-8"22'-0"20'-0"23'-1 1/4"EXISTING20'-2 1/2"
EXISTING
18" UC. REF.
30" COOKTOPWORKBENCH/STORAGENSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 Main Level Floor Plan
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Barn and Garage South - Alley - Elvation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Barn North Elevation
0 2'4'8'SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 Barn West Elevation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Barn East Elevation
0 2'4'8'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 55 of 59
JOB# 2011406 Pearl StreetCADDesigns
5/27/2020
GARAGE FLOOR PLAN
AND ELEVATIONS
issued:
drawn by:
revised:
A-5
sheet 406 Pearl StreetBoulder, CO #Site Postcode1701 15th Street, Unit ABoulder, CO 80302(303) 499-2099Samuel Austin & CompanyArchitects, Inc.10 of ####
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
Release of these plans contemplates further
cooperation among the owner, his
contractor, and the architect. Design and
construction are complex. Although the
architect and his consultants have
performed their services with due care and
diligence, they cannot guarantee perfection.
Communication is imperfect, and every
contingency cannot be anticipated. Any
ambiguity or discrepancy discovered by the
use of these plans shall be reported
immediately to the architect. Failure to
notify the architect compounds
misunderstanding and increases
construction costs. A failure to cooperate by
a simple notice to the architect shall relieve
the architect from responsibility for all
consequences. Changes made from the
plans without the consent of the architect
are unauthorized, and shall relieve the
architect of responsibility for all
consequences arising out of such changes.
3'-0" x6'-8"5-0x5-08'-0"x8'-0"8'-0"x8'-0"22'-0"20'-0"WORKBENCH/STORAGENSCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"5 Main Level Floor Plan
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"1 Garage South Elevation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"3 Garage West Elevation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"2 Garage East Elevation
0 2'4'8'
SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0"4 Garage North Elevation
0 2'4'8'
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 56 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 57 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant MaterialsItem 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020Page 58 of 59
Attachment D - Applicant Materials
Item 5A - 406 Pearl Street Memo 8.12.2020 Page 59 of 59