Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave memo 06.02.21
MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD
June 2, 2021
STAFF
Jacob Lindsey, Planning & Development Services Director
Charles Ferro, Interim Comprehensive Planning Manager
Lucas Markley, Assistant City Attorney
James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner
Marcy Cameron Gerwing, Historic Preservation Planner II
Clare Brandt, Administrative Specialist II
LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE REQUEST
Public hearing and consideration under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, “Quasi-
Judicial Hearing,” B.R.C. 1981, for the construction of a 338 sq. ft. accessory building, a 16 x 38 ft
in-ground swimming pool and a fence at 933 Mapleton Ave. in the Mapleton Hill Historic
District, pursuant to Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981.
Address: 933 Mapleton Ave.
Owner: Julian Farrior and Jenny Haltzel
Applicant: Lisa Egger
Case Number: HIS2021-00075
Case Type: Landmark Alteration Certificate
Code Section: 9-11-18, B.R.C., 1981
SITE INFORMATION
Individual Landmark: Patton House, 1988
Historic District: Mapleton Hill Historic District
Date of construction (house): 1900
Zoning: RL-1 (Residential-Low 1)
Legal Description: LOTS 21-24 BLK 1 MAPLETON
Lot size: 18,334 sq. ft. (GIS estimate)
Existing house sq. ft.: N/A
Proposed house sq. ft.: N/A
Proposed garage sq. ft.: 338 sq. ft.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 1 of 47
Staff recommends the Landmarks Board approve the application with conditions.
RECOMMENDED MOTION
I move that the Landmarks Board adopts the staff memorandum dated June 2, 2021, as the
findings of the board and approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct a 338 sq. ft.
accessory building, a 16 x 38 ft in-ground swimming pool and a fence at 933 Mapleton Ave. as
shown on plans dated April 16, 2021, finding that the proposal meets the Standards for Issuance
of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981 and is generally consistent
with the General Design Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines.
Conditions of Approval
1. The applicant shall be responsible for completing the work in compliance with the
approved plans, 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) Revised plans to preserve historic stone retaining wall along the alley and locate
the fence behind the retaining wall;
b) Review of fence to ensure combined height of fence and wall does not exceed 6’
in height from the alley;
c) Effort should be made to preserve tree if its condition and species warrants it;
d) Details on surrounding deck materials, colors and pool lighting;
e) Details on accessory building windows, doors, roofing, hardscaping and final
paint colors.
BACKGROUND AND SUMMARY
• On April 16, 2021, the owner submitted an application for the construction of an accessory
building, swimming pool and fence.
• Construction of a pool and accessory building was previously approved by the Landmarks
Board in 2012 as part of a larger remodel of the property, prior to the adoption of Section 2.7
Pools in the General Design Guidelines (link) (HIS2012-00172) and construction of a fence
was approved in 2014 (HIS2014-00344).
• On April 28, 2021, the Landmarks Design Review Committee (Ldrc) reviewed the current
application and referred the proposal to the Landmarks Board for review.
• The Patton House at 933 Mapleton Ave. was constructed in 1900, within the 1865-1946
period of significance for the Mapleton Hill Historic District and was designated as a local
landmark in 1988. The building retains historic and architectural integrity and staff considers
it to be contributing to the historic character of the district.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 2 of 47
• Staff considers that if the conditions of approval are met, the proposed new construction
will be consistent with the criteria for a Landmark Alteration Certificate as per 9-11-18(a) &
(b)(1)-(4) B.R.C. 1981, the General Design Guidelines, and the Mapleton Hill Historic District
Design Guidelines.
EXISTING PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
• The property at 933 Mapleton Ave. is located on the north side of Mapleton Avenue,
between 9th Street and Broadway in the Mapleton Hill Historic District. The property is
bordered by 909 Mapleton Ave. to the west, 1001 Mapleton Ave. to the east, and
Maxwell Alley on the south.
Figure 1. Location Map, 933 Mapleton Ave.
Figure 2. 933 Mapleton Ave., 2021.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 3 of 47
Character Defining Features
The Patton House is featured in Jane Barker’s 1976 book “76 Historic Houses of Boulder County,”
and is described as:
Judge Adam C. Patton’s home at 933 Mapleton is symmetrical and sedate. It was built in
1900. Doors, windows, and porch columns are in perfect balance. Exterior trim is limited to
unornamented shutters at second-floor windows and a modest balcony. Frame siding
emphasizes the simplicity. The house gives the outward impression of serenity and dignity.1
Figure 3. 933 Mapleton Ave., Survey Photo, 1993.
Figure 4. 933 Mapleton Ave., Tax Assessor Photo, c.1929.
1 Barker, Jane. 76 Historic Homes of Boulder County. Page 104-105.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 4 of 47
Figure 5. 903 and 933 Mapleton Ave., 1965-1971. Carnegie Branch Library.
Alterations
• House is largely intact to its original construction.
• The shutters and porch railings appear to have been added after 1929. The railing of the
second story balcony was original closed with piers and now matches the open railing of
the 1st level porch.
• The attached two-car garage was constructed between 1950 and 1970, when Jack Cys, a
Boulder contractor, owned the property.
• Staff considers that the Patton House, an individual landmark, should be considered
“contributing” given its high level of historic integrity.
PROPERTY HISTORY
• The property is located in the Mapleton Addition, which was platted in 1888.
• The house was constructed in 1900 for Judge Adam C. Patton.
• Judge Patton was born in Indiana and moved to Colorado in the 1880s, first settling in
Greeley before moving to Boulder in 1898.
• He contributed to the development of the legal profession in Boulder, serving for eight
years as Boulder District Attorney. He also helped organize the Boulder County Bar
Association and served as its first president.
• Mrs. Nellie (Davis) Patton was a member of one of northern Colorado’s earliest
pioneering families. The Davis family had moved from Tennessee in 1873, settling west
of Fort Collins. She was active in the Fortnightly Club and was one of the founders of the
Woman’s Club of Boulder and served two terms as president.
• Later owners include Jack Cys (1940s-1950s), a Boulder contractor, Marvin Woolf
(1960s), and Dr. Oran White, an astrophysicist with the High Altitude Observatory
(1970s).
EXISTING CONDITIONS
• The house and attached garage are located approximately 30’ from the south (front)
property line.
• The distance between the attached garage to the west property line is approximately 30
feet, with mature vegetation.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 5 of 47
• There are currently no accessory buildings on the property.
• An approximately 6’ tall stone wall is located along the rear portion of the east property
line, extending from a historic accessory building on the neighbor’s property. A wrought
iron fence is located along the east property line.
• Two retaining walls are located along the north (rear) property line: a historic stone wall
and a non-historic concrete wall. A wood privacy fence is located along a portion of the
stone retaining wall.
Figure 6. View of property from Mapleton Avenue, 2021.
Figure 7. View of property from Mapleton Avenue, 2021.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 6 of 47
Figure 8. View of property from alley showing existing house, carriage house, walls and fence.
Figure 9. View of property from alley, showing two types of retaining walls, 2021.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 7 of 47
Figure 10. View of property from alley, showing existing fence and retaining wall, 2021.
Figure 11. View of property from alley, facing southeast, showing existing fence and retaining wall, 2021.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 8 of 47
Figure 12. View of property from alley, facing southeast, showing existing fence and retaining wall, 2021.
Figure 13. View of property from alley, facing southeast, showing existing fence and retaining wall, 2021.
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED WORK
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 9 of 47
Figure 14. Proposed Site Plan. Not to scale.
Site Plan
• Proposed construction of a 338 sq. ft. accessory building (pool house) and a 16’ x 38’ in-
ground pool proposed at the rear of the property.
• Historic stone retaining wall and non-historic concrete retaining wall proposed to be
removed along the alley.
• Fence proposed along alley and west property line; fence steps in 4’4 at northwest
corner.
• Request includes removal of mature tree along alley.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 10 of 47
Figure 15. Proposed South (yard) Elevation
Accessory Building
• One-story, frame accessory building with a flared hipped roof and painted horizonal
wood siding with a maximum 5” exposure proposed. Hipped roof porch extends from the
west elevation. Pool equipment shown to be located in the basement of the accessory
building.
• Building measures 15’ in height, with a 12’ x 25,’6 footprint, with an approximate 10’ x 10’
porch on the west elevation and a 9’ x 3’, 6” bump out on the north elevation for a total
of 338 sq. ft.
• South elevation has a gable dormer with a fixed, four-light window and a series of four
wood sliding French doors.
Figure 16. Proposed North (alley) Elevation
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 11 of 47
• North elevation facing the alley has a single six-light awning window with simulated
divided lights and an access hatch to the basement below.
Figure 17. Proposed West (left) and East (right) Elevations
• East elevation has a single window, matching window on the north elevation.
• The west elevation has a pair of single-light French doors under the roof extension.
Swimming Pool
• Swimming pool measures 16’ x 38’ and is located on the northwest corner of the
property.
• No additional hardscaping is proposed.
• Details of color and pool lighting not provided.
Retaining Wall and Fence
• A wrought iron fence measuring between 4’ and 6’ in height is proposed to extend along
the north (rear) property line and a portion of the west (side) property line.
• The existing 6’ wooden stockade fence extending along the alley is proposed to be
removed.
• The existing historic stone retaining wall and non-historic concrete retaining wall are
shown to be removed and replaced with a concrete retaining wall with stone facing. The
new wall is shown to measure 4’ in height at the west corner of the property and
diminish in height to follow the grade toward the east.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 12 of 47
Figure 18. Proposed North Elevation with Fence, View from Alley
Figure 19. Proposed West Elevation with Fence
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 13 of 47
Figure 20. Proposed Fence and Retaining Wall Detail
• Along the alley, fence is proposed atop the new retaining wall, measuring 4’ in height at
the east side and 5’9” at the west corner of the property. The fence is shown to extend
along the north property line along the alley until a point 4’4” from the northwest corner
of the property, then turning south parallel to the west property line. A 9’ wide gate is
proposed to be located on the east side along the alley.
• A 4’ tall fence is proposed to run parallel to the west property line for approximately 18’8”
before turning to run along the west property line, stepping up to 6’ in height. The 6’ high
fence continues to a point parallel with the existing two-car garage. The fence then
steps down to 3’ high.
• The fence has posted spaced 6’ on center and has 3” spacing between bars.
• The retaining wall is shown to be 8” wide with a 4” stone veneer.
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.
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 14 of 47
(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 proposal to be generally consistent with the purposes of this chapter, in that the
proposed construction of an accessory building, in-ground pool and wrought-iron fence will not
damage or destroy architectural features of the property.
2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special
historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the district?
If properly screened to reduce its visibility, staff considers the proposal will not adversely affect
the special character or special historic, architectural, and value of the Mapleton Hill Historic
District as it is generally compatible with the General Design Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill
Historic District Design Guidelines.
3. Is the architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and
materials used on existing and proposed structures compatible with the character
of the historic district?
Staff considers that the proposed architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement
of color, and materials will be compatible with the character of the Mapleton Hill Historic
District.
4. With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in a historic district, the
proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of
paragraphs (b)(2) and (b)(3) of this section.
Does not apply to the proposed application.
(c) In determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate, the Landmarks
Board shall consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-
efficient design and enhanced access for the disabled.
Information specific to economic feasibly of alternatives, incorporation or energy-efficiency
design and enhance access for the disabled was not submitted with the application.
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
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 15 of 47
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 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 & Individual Landmarks
and the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design 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
• The accessory building and swimming pool adds built mass to the rear yard. However,
due to the large size of the (18,000 sq. ft.) lot, the general proportion of built mass to
open space found in the area with be maintained.
2.7 Pools
• Due to its location at the rear of the property and the nature of the grade, the pool will
have very minimal (if any) visibility from Mapleton Avenue. However, the pool will be
visible from the alley, as it is located 10’ from the rear property line and the proposed
wrought iron fence provides visibility into the historic property.
• Pool could be removed in the future without damaging historic features on the site.
• Proposed paving is minimal and will not detract from the site.
• Mechanical equipment is proposed to be located in the basement below the accessory
building and will not be visible from the public right-of-way.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Staff has received no public comment on this case.
FINDINGS
Staff finds that if the stated conditions are met, the proposed 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 substantially consistent with the General Design
Guidelines and the Mapleton Hill 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
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 16 of 47
the staff memorandum dated June 2, 2021, and the evidence provided to the Board at its June 2,
2021. Specifically, the Board finds, if the stated conditions are met, that:
• The proposed accessory building, swimming pool and fence will not adversely affect the
special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the
property or the historic district. § 9-11-18(b)(2), B.R.C. 1981.
• The proposed accessory building, swimming pool and fence will generally comply with
Sections 2.7, Pools, of the General Design Guidelines and Section C of the Mapleton Hill
Historic District Guidelines and Section 9-11-18(b)(3) of the Boulder Revised Code 1981.
ATTACHMENTS
A: Design Guideline Analysis
B: Current Photographs
C: Application Materials
D: Historic Building Inventory Form (link)
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 17 of 47
Attachment A: Design Guidelines Analysis
General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual Landmarks
2.0 Site Design
2.1 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.
.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.
The accessory building and swimming pool adds
built mass to the rear yard. However, due to the
large size of the (18,000 + sq. ft.) lot, the general
proportion of built mass to open space found in
the area with be maintained.
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.
No change is proposed to the alley access to
the property. Yes
.2
Retain and preserve the variety and character
found in the existing historic accessory buildings
along the alleys.
The property does not have existing accessory
buildings along the alley. Yes
.3
The use of historically proportioned materials for
building new accessory buildings contributes to
the human scale of the alleys. For example,
narrower lap siding and smaller brick are
appropriate.
The proposed accessory building has
historically proportioned materials that
contribute to the human scale of the alley.
Yes
.5
Maintain adequate spacing between accessory
building so that the view of the main house is not
obscured, and the alley does not evolve into a
tunnel-like passage.
The existing privacy fence partially obscures
the view into the property. Proposed new
wrought iron fence will provide view into yard
(and of pool) and will likely not result in the alley
becoming tunnel-like.
Maybe
7.0 Garages & Other Accessory Structures
Accessory buildings include barns, sheds, garages and outbuildings. Originally accessory structures were used for storage of
equipment, animals, or carriages. Generally, these structures have been adapted for the storage of cars. In most cases,
accessory building were located to the rear of the lot and accessed by alleys. They were subordinate in size and detailing to
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 18 of 47
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.
The alleys in the Mapleton Hill Historic District are
character-defining features of the district.
Construction may require removal of mature tree-
review at Ldrc.
Staff considers the location, massing, scale and
materiality of the proposed new accessory building
will not detract from the overall historic character of
the principal building.
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.
Proposed accessory building is located at the rear
of the lot. Yes
.3
Maintain adequate spacing between accessory
buildings so alleys do not evolve into tunnel-like
passageways.
An accessory building is located 6’ from the historic
building located on the property to the east; this
condition has the potential to create a tunnel-like
effect; however, no built mass is proposed for the
approximately 50’ to the west. The building is
setback 11’ from the alley.
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.
Staff considers the general proportion of built mass
to open space found in the area will be maintained
with the proposal.
Yes
Mass and Scale
.5
New accessory buildings should take design cues from
the primary building on the property, but be
subordinate to it in terms of size and massing.
The design of the new accessory building is
subordinate in size and massing and references the
historic house through the use of a flared hipped
roof form, frame construction and horizontal wood
siding.
No
.6
New garages for single-family residences should
generally be one story tall and shelter no more than two
cars. In some cases, a two-car garage may be
inappropriate.
The accessory building is one story tall (15’ in height
at the peak of the roof). Staff considers the height,
scale and massing of the building to be appropriate.
Yes
.7 Roof form and pitch should be complementary to the
primary structure.
The accessory building is complementary to the
primary house through the use of a flared hipped
roof and gabled dormer.
Yes
Materials and Detailing
.8 Accessory structures should be simpler in design and
detail than the primary building.
Proposed accessory building is simple in design and
detail to the primary building. Yes
.9
Materials for new garages and accessory structures
should be compatible with those found on the primary
structure and in the district. Vinyl siding and
prefabricated structures are inappropriate.
The primary building is frame construction with
horizontal siding. The proposed accessory building
is shown to be clad in narrow lap siding and will be
compatible with materials found in the district.
Yes
.10
Windows, like all elements of accessory structures,
should be simpler in detailing and smaller in scale than
similar elements on primary structures.
The windows shown on the accessory building
reference the traditionally proportioned windows on
the primary building. However, plan indicate the
windows have simulated divided lights. Revise to
true-divided light wood windows.
No
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 19 of 47
.11
If consistent with the architectural style and
appropriately sized and located, dormers may be an
appropriate way to increase storage space in garages.
See Section 3.5 and 4.5 for additional direction.
Small dormer proposed on the north elevation of
the accessory building is appropriately scaled. Yes
2.7 Pools
Pools (including hot tubs and spas) reflect contemporary lifestyles and were not traditionally part of the fabric of historic
districts during their periods of significance. The following guidelines are designed to minimize the potential impact that
pools have on the historic character of the site and/or the district as a whole. Pool design and associated paving, patios,
structures and/or mechanical equipment, should be sensitive to and compatible with the overall historic character of the
property and/or of the district as a whole. The impact of contemporary site features or equipment such as pools and
associated features can sometimes be diminished through careful siting and screening. In most cases, the introduction of
a pool will be so detrimental to the character of the site or the streetscape that such construction will be inappropriate.
.1 General
Guideline Analysis Meets Guideline?
Pools and associated features should be
located in an inconspicuous location so as not
to be visible from a public right -of -way.
Pool proposed to be located in the rear yard and
will have very low visibility from Mapleton
Avenue. However, its location 10’ from the alley
and the proposal of a wrought iron fence (with
spacing as encouraged by the design
guidelines) means as proposed, the pool will be
visible from a public right-of-way.
Maybe
Pools and associated features should not
obscure the view of or negatively impact any
contributing buildings or features on the site.
The pool is proposed to be located at the
northwest corner of the property and will not
obscure the view of the contributing building on
the site. Its construction may require the
removal of mature trees.
Maybe
Above-ground pools are not appropriate; in-
ground pools should be designed to be
unobtrusive.
The pool is proposed to be in-ground.
Yes
.2 Siting
Pools should be constructed in rear yards only
and are generally inappropriate in side yards or
front yards.
The pool is proposed in the rear yard.
Yes
On corner lots, pools should be located at the
portion of the rear yard farthest from the public
rights -of -way. It may not be possible to locate a
pool on a corner lot in a way that is not visible
from a public right -of -way.
Lot is not located on a corner.
Yes
Pools should be designed and located so as to
allow for future removal without damage to the
historic property.
Pool could be removed in the future without
damaging historic features on the site.
Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 20 of 47
A back yard planted area should be preserved
when locating the pool, maintaining the
appropriate proportion of paving and other
hardscape to planting on the property.
Proposed paving is minimal and preserves the
appropriate proportion of paving to planting on
the property. Yes
.3 Fencing and Screening
Fences, including required security fencing, will
be reviewed as part of the overall project and
should be consistent with the General Design
Guidelines and applicable district-specific
design guidelines.
Proposed fence meets the design guidelines
related to spacing and material, but results in
the pool being visible from the public right-of-
way.
Maybe
Chain link fencing is generally inappropriate. Wrought iron fence is proposed.
N/A
Vegetative screening should be indicated on
project landscape plans and should be
maintained.
Information on vegetative screening is not
included on the project plans.
Maybe
.4 Materials & Colors
Patios and decks surrounding the pool should
be of materials such as stone or brick.
An approximately 1 ft. wide border of concrete is
proposed. Other paving is minimal.
Yes
Pool finishes and colors (including interior liner,
tile, & pool covers) should be subdued.
Submit final details to staff.
Yes
.5 Lighting
Lighting for swimming pools should be low
intensity and beneath the surface of the water
or at ground level.
Submit final details to staff.
Yes
.6 Grading
Grading modifications will be reviewed as part
of the overall project and should meet the
General Design Guidelines and applicable
district-specific design
Historic and non-historic retaining walls are
proposed to be removed and replaced with a
new stone-faced retaining wall. No
.7 Paving, decks & patios
Paving, decks, and patios surrounding the pool
area will be reviewed as part of the overall
project and should be consistent with the
General Design Guidelines and applicable
district-specific design guidelines.
Minimal new paving proposed; An
approximately 1 ft. wide border of concrete is
proposed. Yes
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 21 of 47
Paving and patios surrounding the pool should
be limited in dimension and permeable to the
greatest extent possible.
See above.
Yes
.8 Pool & Spa Mechanical Equipment
Mechanical equipment should be located
inconspicuously so as not to be visible from the
public right-of-way.
Mechanical equipment is proposed to be
located in the basement of the accessory
building and will not be visible from the public
right-of-way.
Yes
Mechanical equipment should be located at or
below ground level and shall be screened
through fencing or landscape screening.
Landscape screening should be indicated on
project plans and maintained.
See above. Equipment will be located below
group level and will not be publicly visible.
Yes
2.6 Fences
The appearance of the house from the sidewalk, street, and alley contributes to an area’s character. Historically, fences were
not common in Boulder. Where they existed they were very open, low, and used to delineate space rather than to create
walled-off privacy areas. Rear and side yard fences were built low enough so neighbors could talk to each other over them. The
fences could be easily seen through and were built of woven wire (not chain-link), wrought iron, or painted or opaque stained
wood pickets. Elaborate wrought iron and cast iron fences were typically found only on lots with large or grand homes.
GUIDELINES: ANALYSIS: CONFORMS
.1
Retain and preserve historic fences that contribute to the
historic character of the site or district whenever possible.
Repair deteriorated fence components rather than replace
them.
Existing fence is non-historic. Yes
.2
Where fences were not traditionally found in the front yard
and where the streetscape character is defined by
open front yards, the introduction of new fences in the
front yard is inappropriate.
Front fence is not proposed. N/A
.3
Introduce compatible new fences of traditional materials
only in locations and configurations that are
characteristic of the historic district. New fencing should
reflect the character of historic fences in height, openness,
materials, and finish.
Proposed fence meets the guidelines in this
section in terms of materials, location,
configuration, openness, height and finish.
However, Section 2.7 Pools states that
pools should be minimally visible. Staff
considers that the fence around the pool
should follow the guidelines in Section 2.7
and be
Maybe
.4
Generally, historic fences were constructed of wrought
iron, wood pickets, or woven wire with an open
appearance and a scale that related to the main building.
Cedar stockade fences or block walls are inappropriate.
Proposed fence is wrought iron with an
open appearance. Review details of new
fence at Ldrc ensuring that combine height
on wall does not exceed 6’ in height.
Maybe
.5
Generally, historic wood fences were painted or opaque
stained. Transparent stains and unfinished wood are
generally inappropriate. The side of the fence facing the
street, alley, and/or sidewalk must be finished.
Wrought iron fence proposed (see .4
above). Maybe
.6
Front and rear fences should have some degree of
openness and spacing of slats so that the main structure
on the site is visible from the street or alley. Solid wood
Fence is open and house will be visible from
the alley. Review details to ensure height Maybe
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 22 of 47
fencing along the rear of a lot obscures much of the
irregularity and variation that defines the essential
character of an alley and creates an inappropriate "tunnel"
effect. Rear and side yard fences below 5 feet in height with
a minimum of 1" spacing between the pickets can be
reviewed at staff level.
and openness consistent with guidelines
(see fences above)
.7
Where appropriate, fences in the front yard should be no
more than 36 inches high. This low height should be
maintained along the side yard as far as necessary to
maintain an unobstructed view of the building's main
architectural features, at least to the front elevation of the
house and/or porch. At that point, the fence may become
gradually higher and less open.
Front yard fence not proposed; side yard
fences end at building face. Yes
.8
Side yard fences were typically located behind the main
house, not in the front yard. Where side yard fences do
extend into the front yard, they should be low and open
with a gradual transition in height toward the rear yard.
The portion of the side fence that extends beyond the front
elevation of the building should not exceed a maximum of
36 inches in height.
Front yard fence not proposed; side yard
fences end at building face. Yes
Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines
C Landscaping
Landscape features can form a significant part of the historic character of an area. Landscape materials, such as the use
of a specific street tree throughout an area, can establish part of the character of a historic district. Particular trees may
be historically significant in themselves. The pattern of landscaping in an area, such as the use of street trees, planting
strips and sodded front yards, are also important. Trees, shrubs, vines, and irrigation systems also may have a potential
for damaging exterior building features and surfaces. (See Section B. for site)
.4 Where strong retaining walls exist, they should
be preserved and incorporated when
introducing new wall elements. Tall, plain
concrete walls should be discouraged. Railroad
ties should also be discouraged.
Historic stone retaining wall and non-historic
concrete retaining wall along the alley is
proposed to be removed. In its place, a concrete
retaining wall with a stone veneer is proposed.
Historic wall should be preserved – resolve at
Ldrc.
No
Attachment A - Design Guideline Analysis
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 23 of 47
Attachment B: Current Photographs
South Elevation (view from Mapleton Avenue), 933 Mapleton Ave., 2021
Attachment B - Current Photographs
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 24 of 47
View from Mapleton Avenue, facing Northwest, 933 Mapleton Ave., 2021
View from Mapleton Avenue, facing northeast, 933 Mapleton Ave., 2021
View along alley, facing southwest, 2021
Attachment B - Current Photographs
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 25 of 47
View along alley, facing southwest, showing tree proposed for removal, 2021
Attachment B - Current Photographs
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 26 of 47
View along alley, facing southeast, 2021
View along alley, facing south, showing proposed location of fence and gate, 2021
Attachment B - Current Photographs
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 27 of 47
Historic stone retaining wall along alley, 2021
View along alley, facing south, 2021
Attachment B - Current Photographs
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 28 of 47
Project Address: ________________________________________ Date of Application: _____________
Historic District / Landmark Name: ________________________________________________________
❑Chamberlain ❑ Chautauqua ❑ Downtown ❑ Floral Park ❑ Highland Lawn ❑ Hillside ❑ Mapleton Hill
❑University Place ❑ West Pearl ❑ 16th Street
CONTACT INFO
Applicant’s Name: ___________________________________________________________________________
Email: ____________________________________ Phone: ___________________________
Owner’s Name: _______________________________________________________________________
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Staff Level □Landscaping□Paint
□Roofing
□Commercial awning, patio and/orsign (demonstrate signs meetprovisions in Section 9-9-21 Signs,B.R.C., 1981)□Antenna or mechanical unit
□Restoration of existing features
Landmark Design Review Committee (LDRC) □Deck and/or porch□Doors and/or windows
□Dormers and/or skylights
□Solar panels□)URQW IHQFH RU IHQFH WDllHU WKDQ IW
□Addition□1HZ IUHH VWDQGLQJDFFHVVRU\
EXLlGLQJ VPDllHU WKDQ VT IW
Landmarks Board
□New free-standing construction340sq. ft. or larger
□Demolition and new construction
□Application Referred by LDRC
Description (attach additional narrative for additions and free-standing new construction):
*Please Note that all Landmark alteration certificate (LAC) applications must be submitted through a Project Specialist
at the P&DS Services Center. Application for review by the Landmark design review committee (Ldrc) should be
submitted by noon on the Friday prior to the requested meeting date.
Submit with application for new construction, additions, dormers, porches or fences
Courtesy Review – Complete for new construction, additions, dormers, porches or fences.
I agree to perform the work described herein, in accordance with the plans and/or specifications submitted and with all
provisions of the Historic Preservation Code, Building Code, Zoning Ordinance and Health Regulations of the City of
Boulder as enumerated in the Boulder Revised Code, 1981.
_______________________________________________________ ___________________
Signature of owner or authorized agent for owner Date
Landmark Alteration Certificate (LAC) Application
For Exterior Changes to Properties Located in a Historic District and/or Individually Landmarked
For Office Use Only
Date Received Time Received Case Number
HIS
Historic Preservation | 1739 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302 | (303) 441-1994 | www.boulderhistoricpreservation.net
mail ᴀ̀.................................... 3hone BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
0ailing address (if different from proMect address) BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
BBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBBB
reYised .09
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 29 of 47
Property Information – Please complete for:
❑New free-standing construction ❑ Addition ❑ Dormers ❑ Porches ❑ Fences
Staff Use
Verified Need Info
Zoning District ❑RL-1 ❑ RL-2 ❑ RMX-1 ❑ RH-2 ❑ DT-1 ❑ Other: ______
Floodplain ❑None ❑ 500 Year ❑ 100 Year ❑ Conveyance ❑ High Hazard
Lot Size _______________sq. ft. ❑ Interior ❑ Through ❑ Flag ❑ Corner
Source: ❑ City of Boulder ❑ Boulder County ❑ Survey ❑ Other:___
Existing Principal Building Setbacks Section 9-7-2 ❑No Change
Front: Side: Side: Rear:
Proposed Principal Building Setbacks ❑No Change
Front: Side: Side: Rear:
Existing Accessory Building Setbacks ❑No Change
Front: Side: Side: Rear:
Proposed Accessory Building Setbacks ❑No Change
Front: Side: Side: Rear:
Primary or accessory building located within 3 ft. of a property line: Y / N
Primary or accessory buildings located within 6 ft. of each other: Y / N
Existing Proposed Allowed Maximum
Building Coverage
Floor Area (sq. ft.)
Height
Past Discretionary Review: ❑ Site Review ❑ PUD/PRD/PD ❑None
Will your project require a variance or exemption? Verified Need Info
Setback variance Section 9-7-2, B.R.C., 1981
Bulk plane requirements Section 9-7-9, B.R.C., 1981
Side yard wall articulation standards Section 9-7-10, B.R.C., 1981
Exemption from the maximum building coverage for accessory buildings in the
rear setback Section 9-7-11(d), B.R.C., 1981
Solar exception Section 9-9-17, B.R.C., 1981
Form Completed by:__________________________________(Applicant) Date:______________________
Initial Verification by: ____________________________________(Staff) Date: ______________________
INITIAL CODE REVIEW
This review is intended to identify potential zoning and building code issues. Please fill out to the best of your ability.
The verification of this form is a customer service review and does not constitute a formal review of all applicable
codes and regulations. All sections of the Boulder Revised Code must still be adhered to prior to performing any work.
Property information can be found on https://bouldercolorado.gov/planning/property-report
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 30 of 47
ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW
LANDMARKS DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE (LDRC)
LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE REVIEW CHECKLISTS
Initial review is completed by Staff (Administrative) or the Landmarks Design Review Committee (LDRC)
within 14 days after a complete application is received. Staff and the LDRC can either approve the
application, request revisions, or refer the proposal to the Landmarks Board for review in a public hearing.
Please call 303-441-1994 if you have questions.
City staff review of minor alterations typically has a quick review turn-around
provided that application is complete and the proposed alterations are consistent
with the applicable design guidelines.
A complete application submittal includes:
This application: Completely filled out
Photographs: Color photos of existing conditions and details.
Samples: Col or chips of paint and printed samples of roofing types are helpful.
Fences and Hardscaping: Elevations and site plans should be clearly detailed and scaled preferably at an / or /4 scale on [ paper. Show e[isting conditions and proposed changes sidebyside. )or fences show dimensions and spacing between picNets and a site plan showing e[isting and proposed locations.
Landscaping
Paint
Roofing
Mechanical Unit
Fences and Hardscaping
(rear / side yard fence only if
maximum 5ft. tall with minimum
spacing between pickets)
Restoration of Existing Features
DOWNTOWN ONLY: Commercial
awnings, patios and signs
Typical Projects:
A staff member and two members of the Landmarks Board meet weekly to review
applications for exterior alterations to designated properties. Large projects often
require more than one meeting and may be referred by the committee to the full
Landmarks Board for review.
A complete application submittal includes:
This application: Completely filled out, including zoning review sheet.
Photographs: Photographs of existing building and surrounding context
One set of scaled elevations and site plans: All drawings should be
clearly detailed and scaled preferably at an / or /4 scale on [
paper. Show existing conditions and proposed changes sidebyside.
Fences: A scaled drawing showing dimensions and spacing between
pickets and a site plan showing existing and proposed locations.
Survey: A land survey may be required if the proposed project is within
20% of the maximum permitted lot coverage, floor area or floor area ratio.
The following documentation is required for final review and approval:
Final Details: Specific materials should be noted on plans; include color
chips and printed samples of roofing types manufacturers/catalogue “cut”
sheets for windows/skylights.
Typical Projects:
Deck / porch
Doors / windows
Dormers / skylights
Additions
1HZ DccHVVoU\ EXilGinJ
(smaller than 340 sq. ft.)
Fence (front yard or rear / side
yard if taller than 5ft. or less than
1 Vpacing between pickets)
Solar Panels
Completed applications for LDRC review must be turned in by noon on the Friday prior to the requested
meeting date and must be submitted through a Project Specialist.
Please note that LDRC meeting requests are processed in the order in which they are received and that a first request
may not be available due to scheduling. The LDRC meets each Wednesday morning (except holidays) at the P&DS
Service Center offices on the third floor of the Park Central Building, 1739 Broadway.
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 31 of 47
LANDMARKS BOARD REVIEW (LB)
2019 Landmark Board Meeting Dates and Application Submittal Deadlines
Landmarks Board meetings are generally held the first Wednesday of each month at 6 p.m. in the Municipal
Building, Council Chambers, located at 1777 Broadway. Applications scheduled for a public hearing before
the full Landmarks Board PXVW EH VXEPLWWHG at least 28 days prior to the meeting date. All applications must
be submitted through a Project Specialist.
0ore information including deadlines and agendas can be found online
ZZZEoXlGHUKiVtoUicpUHVHUYationnHt
The Landmarks Board reviews new free-standing construction 340 square feet and
larger, the demolition or moving of buildings, and applications referred from the LDRC.
Public hearings take place within 60 days of the receipt of a complete LAC application
and are conducted as quasi-judicial proceedings. Following the public hearing for the
LAC, a 1otice of Disposition is sent to the City Council outlining the %oard
s
recommendation. City Council has 14 days to callup a decision of approval made by the
Landmarks Board. If the Board votes to deny a Landmark Alteration Certificate
application, the City Council has 30 days to call-up the decision.
Tip: Projects that require full /andmarNs Board review should be presented to staff early
in the planning process, before detailed drawings are initiated. Please contact staff prior
to submitting an application for full Board review; these reviews are often complex.
A complete application submittal includes:
LDRC requirements (listed on the previous page)
Written project description
7 copies of project drawings, including side-by-side existing and proposed
conditions (preferably 11”x17” or 12”x18”) plans, including:
▪Scaled site plan (existing and proposed)
▪Scaled elevations for all sides of the building at 1/8” or 1/4” scale
▪Sketches, as needed
1 copy of any color renderings or photographs, color samples, etc.
(preferably no larger than 11”x17”)
1 digital copy of all materials submitted in a PDF file format
At the request of staff or the Board, the following may also be required:
Building sections Methods of restoration 3-D modeling
New free-standing
construction
340 sq. ft. and larger
Demolition
Includes primary and/or
accessory buildings
designated as individual
landmarks or within an
+istoric District.
Application referred
from LDRC
Typical Projects:
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 32 of 47
EXIST. HOUSE
HOUSEPOOL
338 SF
EXIST. GARAGE
EXIST. DRIVEWAY
EXIST.
WALK
LAWN
PORCH135 SF
in setback)(max. 500 sf EXIST. BLDG
EXIST. BLDG
OF ROOF= ELEV.
HEIGHT
5459.15
EXISTING 5'-2" WROUGHT IRON FENCE
PROPOSED 4' WROUGHT IRON FENCEPROPOSED 6' WROUGHT IRON FENCEPROPOSED WROUGHT IRON FENCE & RETAINING WALL
EXISTING 6' WALL
16'x38' POOL
(608 sf)
+43.54' WROUGHT IRON FENCE4' WROUGHT IRON FENCE
4' RETAINING WALL
4' RETAINING WALLEXIST. TRELLIS
ff = 5444.75
+43.5
+43.5+43.5 +43.75
+43.75
+43.75
+43.75
A1.1
1" = 10'-0"
1
A1.1
SITE PLAN
Scale Date
Sheet
Revisions 933 MAPLETON AVENUEDrawings
4/16/21BOULDER, CO 80304fax 303.449.0489
2455 Tenth Street
LISA EGGER, AIA
ph 303.449.0490
Boulder, CO 80304
www.lisaegger.com
MAPLETON POOL / POOL HOUSE / FENCESITE PLAN
0 10'5'
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 33 of 47
39 north property linenorth edge of neighbor'ssouth edge eave height access. bldg south edge of 933 garage43 accessory bldglength of fence @ corner set back until fence is 6' high max.accessory bldgof neighbor's 39
4343west property linelength of fence @ corner set back until fence is 6' high max.
43 east edge east property line44.75 of poolwest edge of poolPH ff=44.75PH ff=
39
43
43.5 property linemin. 8"
t.o.stone cap
el.5443.25
b.o.wall
belowgrade
A1.2
AS NOTED
FENCE DRAWINGS
Scale Date
Sheet
Revisions 933 MAPLETON AVENUEDrawings
4/16/21BOULDER, CO 80304fax 303.449.0489
2455 Tenth Street
LISA EGGER, AIA
ph 303.449.0490
Boulder, CO 80304
www.lisaegger.com
MAPLETON POOL / POOL HOUSE / FENCE3
A1.2
FENCE ELEVATION (PARTIAL) FROM WEST NEIGHBOR
1/4" = 1'-0"
FENCE ELEVATION FROM ALLEY 2
A1.2 1/4" = 1'-0"
FENCE DETAIL 1
A1.2 1/2" = 1'-0"
0 4'2'
0 4'2'0 2'1'
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 34 of 47
FLEX SPACE
12 BATHPORCH
9' flat wood clg
vaulted clgcut stone flr
paver
landing
tile flr
wood flrvaulted wood clg
cut stone
9'clg
40"x61"accesshatch
5'x11'
19'-1" x 14'-7"
LINEN
asphalt shingledimensional
10:12 main slope
5:12 slope @ eave 10:12 slope
12 round gutter
&downspout, typ.
12 round gutter
&downspout, typ.
wood sliding
asphalt shingle roof
horiz. wood sidingmax. 5" exposure
french doors
window w/fixed wood12
10
WM-74 bed mould
2 x frieze bd/
head casing, typ.
54 x 4 corner bd
painted8" column
125
54 x 2 12" head& jamb casing& sloping sill
main level
fin. flr @
= elev. 5444.75'
100'-0"
= elev. 5439.5'
low point
within 25'
20' HEIGHT LIMIT
doors
wood french
= elev. 5459.5'
wood awning wdw w/
simulated divided lites
property line(typical for 2)
access hatch
54 x 4 jamb casing, typ.
2x sloped sill
WM-74 bed mould
2 x frieze bd/
head casing, typ.
POOL EQUIP.
conc. flr6' max. clg
40"x61"accesshatchdoor w/slopingside walls
R-13 batt insulation"curtain" to maintainthermal envelope
water heaterslope downboiler
sub panel100 amp electrodesconc. encasedslope down1/4" = 1'-0
Scale Date
Sheet
Revisions 933 MAPLETON AVENUEDrawings
4/16/21BOULDER, CO 80304fax 303.449.0489
2455 Tenth Street
LISA EGGER, AIA
ph 303.449.0490
Boulder, CO 80304
www.lisaegger.com
MAPLETON POOL / POOL HOUSE / FENCEEXT. ELEVATIONS,
ROOF/FLR PLANS,
FLOOR PLAN4
A2.1
1/4" = 1'-0
A2.1
2
A2.1
ROOF PLAN1
A2.1
SOUTH ELEVATION
WEST ELEVATION5
A2.1
6
A2.1
EAST ELEVATION
NORTH ELEVATION3
A2.1
344 SF
FOUNDATION PLAN7
A2.1
0 4'2'
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 35 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 36 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 37 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 38 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 39 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 40 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 41 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 42 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 43 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 44 of 47
Attachment C - Application Materials
Item 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021 Page 45 of 47
Attachment C - Application MaterialsItem 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021Page 46 of 47
Attachment C - Application MaterialsItem 5B - 933 Mapleton Ave. memo 06.02.2021Page 47 of 47