Loading...
03.03.21 LB Presentation1.Meetings are for conducting the business of the City of Boulder. 2.Activities that disrupt, delay or otherwise interfere with the meeting are prohibited. 3.The time for speaking or asking questions is limited to facilitate the purpose of the meeting. a.No person shall speak except when recognized by the person presiding and no person shall speak for longer than the time allotted. b.Each person shall register to speak at the meeting using that person’s real name. Any person believed to be using a pseudonym will not be permitted to speak at the meeting. 4.No video will be permitted except for city officials, employees and invited speakers. All others will participate by voice only. 5.The person presiding at the meeting shall enforce these rules by muting anyone who violates any rule. 6.If the chat function is enabled, it will be used for individuals to communicate with the host. It should be used for technical/online platform-related questions only. If an attendee attempts to use chat for any reason other than seeking assistance from the host, the city reserves the right to disable that individual’s access to chat. 7.Only the host and individuals designated by the host will be permitted to share their screen during this meeting. 1 We are pleased you have joined us! To strike a balance between meaningful, transparentengagement and online security, the following rules will be applied at this meeting: Landmarks Board Meeting March 3, 2021 2 Agenda1.Call to Order 2.Approval of minutes from the February 3, 2021 meeting 3.Public Participation for Non-Public Hearing Items 4.Discussion of Landmark Alteration, Demolition Applications issued and pending Statistical Report for February 5.Public Hearings A.100 Clematis Dr. –Landmark Alteration Certificate 6.Matters from the Landmarks Board, Planning Department, and City Attorney 7.Debrief Meeting / Calendar Check 8.Adjournment 3 Monthly statistics link Statistical Report 34 19 32 48 35 41 30 26 28 29 32 29 42 30 30 19 36 26 41 33 27 16 25 29 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec 2019 2020 2021 6 1/31/2020: 42 cases 1/31/2021: 19 cases Historic Preservation Applications Received 2019 and 2020 vs. 2021 Statistical Report 27 27 34 39 35 40 28 35 27 36 29 23 19 24 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec 2015-2019 Average 2021 7 5-year average for Feb: 27 cases Feb 2021 cases: 24 Historic Preservation Applications Received Monthly Statistical Report 27 27 34 39 35 40 28 35 27 36 29 23 42 30 30 19 36 26 41 33 27 16 25 29 19 24 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec 2015-2019 Average 2020 2021 8 5-year average for Feb: 27 cases Feb 2021 cases: 24 Historic Preservation Applications Received Monthly Agenda Item 5A Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate application to reconstruct an outdoor open-air pavilion between the Chautauqua Dining Hall and Cottage 100 based upon historic photographs, at or near 100 Clematis Dr.,in the Chautauqua Park Historic District, pursuant to Section 9-11 -18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981 and under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, “Quasi-Judicial Hearing,” B.R.C. 1981 (HIS2020-00218). Owner/ Applicant: Colorado Chautauqua Association 9 Quasi-Judicial Public Hearing Procedure 1.All speaking are sworn in 2.Board members note any ex parte contacts 3.Staff presentation; Board may ask questions of staff 4.Applicant presentation; Board may ask questions of applicant 5.Public hearing opened for citizen comment; the Board may ask questions 6.Applicant response 7.Public hearing closed; Board discussion 8.A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass. Motions must state findings, conclusions, and recommendation 9.A record of the hearing is kept by staff 10 Procedure for Quasi-Judicial Hearings Criteria for Review 9-11 -18 (b) & (c), B.R.C. 1981 The proposed work: 1.Preserves, enhances, or restores and does not damage exterior architectural features of the property; 2.Does not adversely affect the historic, architectural value of the property; 3.Architecture, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials are compatible with the character of the property; 4.The Landmarks Board considers the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled. 11 Landmark Board Decision Approve Subject to 14-day City Council Call-Up Deny •Subject to 45-day City Council Call-Up Provide applicant opportunity to withdraw application Application withdrawn; case closed. 12 BackgroundNov. 18, 2020 Application Submitted Nov. 25, 2020 LDRC referred application to Landmarks board (Jellick, Pelusio) Applicant hires Pelusio as architect (recused) Application revised March 3, 2021 Landmarks Board Hearing 13 Location 14 90 Clematis Dr. (Chautauqua Dining Hall) 15 •Open-air wooden pavilion with a canvas awning built 1899 •gabled roof with simple wood. •It was elevated on a platform. •operated seasonally as informal dining space offering “coffee, short orders and cold meats” Existing site between Dining Hall (left) and Cottage 100/General Store at 100 Clematis Dr. (right) south of Chautauqua Green. 16 Location 100 Clematis Drive (Cottage 100 / General Store) 17 •Colonial-Revival cottage •Constructed in 1899 •Remains relatively unchanged since the 1905 removal of the open-air pavilion 90 Clematis Drive (Chautauqua Dining Hall) 18 •Chautauqua Dining Hall •Constructed in 1898 •Wrapping porch constructed about 1899 •Remains intact to its original construction Proposed Reconstruction of 1899 Pavilion 19 •Proposed reconstruction of a 24’ x 47’ open-air pavilion between 100 Clematis Dr. and the Dining Hall; Proposed Site Plan 20 Proposed Site Plan 21 North Elevation 22 Proposed Roof Framing Proposed North Elevation 23 Proposed South Elevation 24 Proposed East (Section) 25 Proposed Section (West) 26 South Elevation 27 •Proposed removal of historic double-hung window •Replace with new functioning service window •Construction of platform connecting 100 Clematis porch with pavilion (accessible) •Existing retaining wall at southeast corner to be altered •Existing gas meter to be relocated East Elevation 28 Criteria for Review 9-11 -18, B.R.C. 1981 29 General Design Guidelines 2.0 Site Design •Staff considers the location of the proposed pavilion to closely match the historic condition (1899-1905) 2.1 Building Location, Orientation & Spacing •Staff considers the relationship to the adjacent historic buildings is close to the historic condition. 2.2 Streetscape and Landscape •Staff considers the reconstructed pavilion will reinstate the historic condition of the streetscape at east end of Clematis Dr. and that no significant landscape features will be removed to achieve this. •Staff considers the removal of the existing retaining wall at south-east corner of Cottage 100/General Store may be innapropriate if the wall is a historic feature and/or regrading could damage the structure of the cottage at 100 Clematis Dr. 2.5 Sidewalks •Staff considers further investigation should be made to reconstruct the historic pedestrian access to the pavilion stairs. 30 General Design Guidelines 31 3.3 Decks •Staff considers the use of natural wood for decking appropriate and that railings should be designed to be as simple and unobtrusive as possible. •Provide details of deck and railing finishes. 3.6 Exterior Materials •Proposed replication of the similar materials, including natural wood posts and canvas roof with some use of contemporary steel roof trusses and diagonal bracing appropriate as structurally necessary. and using simple light steel railing compatible but distinctly contemporary and indicative that these materials were not part of the original construction. 3.7 Windows •Staff considers the removal of existing window at 100 Clematis replacement with a new service window may be appropriate depending on whether-or-not retrofitting the existing window is feasible, whether the window can be otherwise stored, and details of a proposed window design are appropriate. General Design Guidelines 32 4.0 Additions to Historic Structures •Staff considers that the proposed pavilion recreation is reversible, does not destroy, (and may enhance) the original historic character of this area of the district. •Staff considers the free-standing nature of the proposed pavilion is appropriate and that the subtle integration of contemporary steel with interpretative signage will clearly indicate the pavilion is a contemporary rec-construction. 6.1 Distinction from Historic Structures •Staff considers that additional steps may be taken to distinguish the pavilion as a reconstruction including the integration of steel railing to achieve life safety and ADA access.. Likewise, an interpretive sign outlining the pavilion’s history and recreation should be considered. 8.3 Mechanical and Utility Facilities •Staff considers the proposed relocation of gas meter appropriate. 8.8 Americans with Disabilities Act •Staff considers the addition of an accessible ramp from the porch at 100 Clematis Dr. will not distract from the historic character. Chautauqua Historic District Design Guidelines 33 A. Massing •The open sides of the proposed pavilion minimize the changes in building mass and help to preserve the size and proportions of the existing buildings, but do not eliminate the visual changes in mass. B. Rooflines •Reconstruction of historic roof pitch is proposed. C. Windows •Staff considers the removal of existing window at 100 Clematis and replacement with a new service window may be appropriate depending on whether or not retrofitting the existing window is feasible, whether the window can be otherwise stored, and details of a proposed window design. D. Exterior Materials •Exterior materials primarily make use of those similar to original construction –cue that pavilion is reconstructed can be achieved through appropriate contemporary rail details and interpretive panel. C. Paint Schemes and Color •Wood finish for decking and wood railings to be determined. National Park Service SOI Standards for Reconstruction 34Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Reconstruction The Standards will be applied taking into consideration the economic and technical feasibility of each project. 1.Reconstruction will be used to depict vanished or non-surviving portions of a property when documentary and physical evidence is available to permit accurate reconstruction with minimal conjecture, and such reconstruction is essential to the public understanding of the property. Because there are good historic photographs showing the original pavilion, staff considers there is adequate documentary evidence to ensure an accurate reconstruction of this early feature at Chautauqua. 2. Reconstruction of a landscape, building, structure or object in its historic location will be preceded by a thorough archeological investigation to identify and evaluate those features and artifacts that are essential to an accurate reconstruction. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken. The construction of the pavilion will likely result in little ground disturbance, though it us recommended that steps be taken monitor any excavation to ensure that any archaeological resources are not disturbed. If such resources are encountered, work should cease and a qualified archaeologist consulted immediately. National Park Service SOI Standards for Reconstruction 353.Reconstruction will include measures to preserve any remaining historic materials, features and spatial relationships. With the exception of a window at the east face of 100 Clematis, no historic materials will be disturbed and proposed spatial relationships appear to be carefully reconstructed. Steps should be taken to investigate whether the existing windows can be modified to function as a service window. If not, staff suggests that the sash be carefully removed and stored. Compatible new sash should be installed into existing window- frame. 4.Reconstruction will be based on the accurate duplication of historic features and elements substantiated by documentary or physical evidence rather than on conjectural designs or the availability of different features from other historic properties. A reconstructed property will re-create the appearance of the non- surviving historic property in materials, design, color, and texture. The introduction of some new elements and materials are proposed to achieve structural, life-safety and universal access requirements for the pavilion. These elements should be clearly contemporary, though compatible with the historic character of the Dining Hall and 100 Clematis Dr. National Park Service SOI Standards for Reconstruction 36 5.A reconstruction will be clearly identified as a contemporary re-creation. Staff considers that in combination with the limited used of steel as described an interpretive sign should be considered to explain the history of the pavilion while describing its reconstruction. 5.Designs that were never executed historically will not be constructed. No design issues outside of those proposed to meet life safety and accessibility for the reconstructed pavilion are proposed Staff Recommendation Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board approve the application with conditions. 37 Recommended Conditions of Approval 1. The applicant shall be responsible for completing the work in compliance with the approved plans dated February 12, 2021, except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. a. Provide an excavation plan with protocols in the event of encountering archaeological artifacts during construction of the pavilion; b. Provide details of age of retaining wall proposed for removal and details ensuring that its removal doesn’t lead to damaging 100 Clematis Dr; c. Further investigate historic access to pavilion stair and attempt to reconstruct as closely as possible in alignment and materials minimizing the amount of hard area; d.Provide details of connection points between the porch at Cottage 100 and the pavilion; e.Investigate alternatives to replacement of east window at 100 Clematis Dr. –if replacement is necessary, the original sash should be stored and a new wood window installed in existing frame; f. Consider installing interpretive signage that explains the history of the of the pavilion and identifies the building as a reconstruction; g. Submit details of all framing, roofing, railings, flooring including materials and proposed finishes for review by the LDRC. 38 Recommended Motion The Landmarks Board adopt the staff memorandum dated March 3, 2021, as the findings of the board and, with conditions, approves the application to reconstruct the open-air pavilion between Chautauqua Dining Hall and Cottage 100 based upon historic photographs, in the Chautauqua Historic District as shown on plans dated February 12, 2021, finding that the proposal generally meets the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981. 39 Findings Staff recommends the Landmarks Board adopt the following findings: 1.If the stated conditions of approval are met, the proposal will be reversible and will not damage the exterior architectural features of the contributing buildings in the Chautauqua Historic District. 2.The proposal 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 Chautauqua Historic District Design Guidelines. 3.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 will be compatible with the character of the landmarked site. 4.The proposal provides enhanced access for the disabled. 40 40 Matters Subcommittees LB Subcommittees Community Outreach (Abby, Bill and John) Demolition Code (Ronnie and Fran) Landmarking Interiors (Fran and Abby) MCM Design Guidelines (John and Ronnie with HBI) Historic Paint Colors (Abby and John; Ronnie –intent language) Other Efforts Continue board discussion on underrepresented communities Pool design guideline revisions (Bill has drafted revisions) 41