The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About08.04.21 LB PresentationPublic Participation at Board meetings •The city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful and inclusive civic conversations. •This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff and council as well as democracy for people of all ages, identities, lived experiences, and political perspectives. •More about this vision and the full rules of decorum can be found on the “Participate in City Council Meetings” page of the city’s website: https://bouldercolorado.gov/city- council/participate-in-city-council- meetings 1 Public Participation at Board meetings The following are examples of rules of decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be upheld during this meeting. •All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. •No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. •Obscenity, dehumanizing language, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. •Participants are required to sign up to speak using the name they are commonly known by,and individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online. Currently, only audio testimony is permitted online. 2 Raise Hand: Alt Y for PC Option Y for Mac *9 for phone 3 Landmarks Board Meeting August 4, 2021 4 Agenda 1.Call to Order 2.Approval of minutes from the June 2, 2021 meeting 3.Public Participation for Non-Public Hearing Items 4.Discussion of Landmark Alteration, Demolition Applications issued and pending •2130 22nd St. -Stay of Demolition expires Sept. 26, 2021 •515 Alpine Ave. -Stay of Demolition expires Oct. 31, 2021 •Statistical Report for June and July 5.Public Hearings A.945 14th St. –LAC B.1149 12th St. and 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. –LAC C.1503 and 1513 20th St. -Demolition 6.Matters from the Landmarks Board, Planning Department, and City Attorney Discussion, as of substance, to repeal and reenact the General Design Guidelines, including changes to Section 2.7 “Pools” Sub-committee status reports 7.Debrief Meeting / Calendar Check 8.Adjournment 5 2130 22nd St. –Stay of Demolition 6 •Potential Alternative •Landmark Application •Ldrc Review of Proposed Addition •Stay Expires September 26th. 6 515 Alpine Ave. –Stay of Demolition •Site Visit June 29 •Stay expires Oct. 31, 2021 •A look ahead: •Aug. 3 (today): Update •Sept. 1: Last opportunity to schedule initiation hearing at the regular meeting •Oct. 6: Last regularly scheduled meeting before the stay of demolition expires 7 7 / Link to dynamic map 8 Statistical Report 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 Jan Feb March April May June July August Sept Oct Nov Dec 2019 2020 2021 9 6/30/2020: 26 applications 7/31/2020: 41 applications 6/30/2021: 25 applications 7/31/2021: 33 applications Historic Preservation Applications Received 2019 and 2020 vs. 2021 Statistical Report 27 27 34 39 35 40 28 35 27 36 29 23 19 22 43 23 34 25 33 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 10 5-year average for June: 40 applications 5-year average for July: 28 applications 6/30/2021: 25 applications 7/31/2021: 33 applications 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 22 43 23 34 25 33 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 11 5-year average for June: 40 applications 5-year average for July: 28 applications 6/30/2021: 25 applications 7/31/2021: 33 applications Historic Preservation Applications Received Monthly Agenda Item 5A Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate application for a 11.88 kW roof mounted solar PV system at 845 14th St., a contributing property in the University Place 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 Hearings," B.R.C. 1981 (HIS2021-00052). Owners: Vicki and Joel Marks Applicant: Chelsea Bours, Photon Brothers 12 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 public 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 13 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. 14 Landmarks Board Options 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. 15 Application Process 16 March 9 Application Submitted March 17 LDRC review: referred to the Landmarks Board July 7 Landmarks Board Application Complete August 4 Landmarks Board Hearing Location 17 Property History 18 • Located in University Place Historic District (700 & 800 blocks of 14 th Street) significant for association with the growth of the University of Colorado and need for faculty & staff housing during the first decades of the 20th C. •Constructed in 1911 for Lawrence Wooster, head of the psychology department and CU regent, and Fannie B. Cole, teacher and active in civic and social groups. Property Description 19 Property Description 20 •Side gabled Craftsman-Bungalow •Widely overhanging eaves, exposed rafters, and triangular knee braces. •Squared, projecting bay window on façade has shed roof. •Off-center inset porch. •West shed roof addition to house appears to have constructed outside of the 1890-1941 period-of significance for the University Place Historic District Public Visibility 21 Proposal 22 Site Plan 23 Staff rendering Site Plan 24 2020 existing & approved site Plan Rear Yard 25 Proposal 26 Proposal 27 Proposal 28 Proposal 29 Design Guideline Analysis 9-11 -18, B.R.C. 1981 30 General Design Guidelines 31 General Design Guidelines 32 General Design Guidelines 33 University Place Historic District Design Guidelines 34 Recommended Motion The Landmarks Board adopts the staff memorandum dated August 4, 2021, as the findings of the board and, with conditions, approves a Landmark Alteration Certificate for location of an 11.88 kW Photo- Voltaic system at 845 14th Street as shown on plans dated December 10th, 2020, 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 University Place Historic District Design Guidelines. 35 Conditions of Approval 1.Installing a photo-voltaic system in compliance with the approved plans dated December 10, 2020, except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2.Aapplicant shall explore alternatives to the placement of panels on the east roof area of the historic house including, but not limited to locating them on the existing carport, the approved new accessory building, and/or the c.1940 south shed roof addition to the historic house. If any (or cumulatively all) alternative locations would have the capability to generate the same amount of solar power as the eighteen panels proposed for the east facing roof of the historic house, they should be installed in these locations –details shall be reviewed and approval by the Landmarks Design Review Committee (LDRC). 3.If these explored alternatives are found to not have the capability to generate the same amount of solar power as the eighteen panels proposed for the east face of the historic house, the LDRC shall review and approve final details for installation of the panels on the east facing roof of the historic house. 36 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 4th, 2021, and the evidence provided to the Board at its August 4th, 2021 meeting. Specifically, the Board finds, provided the stated conditions are met, that: The installation of an 11.88 kW photo-voltaic system will not damage the historic character or the immediate streetscape in the historic district and is generally consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the University Place Historic District Design Guidelines. The proposed work will not adversely affect the historic, architectural, or aesthetic value of the contributing property or affect the special historic character of the University Place Historic District. § 9-11-18(b)(1). • The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on the proposed construction will be compatible with the character of the contributing property and the University Place Historic District. § 9-11-18(b)(2). 37 Applicant Presentation 38 39 40 Agenda Item 5B Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate application for a 1,155 sq. ft. addition, 935 sq. ft. two story atrium and glass walkway between two pending landmarks at 1149 12th St. and 1128 Pennsylvania Ave., 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 (HIS2021-00113 and HIS2021-00114). Owner: Phi Alumnae of Delta Gamma, Inc. Applicant: Danica Powell, Trestle Strategy Group 41 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 public 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 42 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. 43 Landmarks Board Options 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. 44 Application Process 45 May 5 Application Submitted May 12 LDRC review: referred to the Landmarks Board July 7 Landmarks Board Application received August 4 Landmarks Board Hearing Location 46 Property Description 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. 47 Property Description 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. 48 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. Constructed c.1900, remodeled and added to 1935 • Ornate Tudor-Revival house approximately 15,000 sq. ft. of existing floor area. • Steeply pitched side-gable roof. • Masonry walls with random ashlar stone coursing. • Three cantilevered gable dormers sided with stucco and half-timbering. • Multi-light casement windows; some 3-over-1 windows. • Wide rusticated stone lintels and sills. • Gable entrance portico with stucco and half-timbering and decorative vergeboard. • Squared bay on both ends. • Stone chimney. • Courtyard area at east side of building. • Building is relatively well-preserved and likely eligible for individual landmark designation and listing in the National Register of Historic Places (2005 survey). Property Description 1149 12th St. 49 Property Description 1149 12th St. 50 1149 12th St. , Constructed 1897 •Front gambrel roof with shingled end with central triple window flanked by paired, engaged columns and pilasters, topped by decorative crown and cameo window with torch •Regularly coursed stone •Inset porch with solid stone walls, supported by squared columns •Bay window on south elevations •Windows have flat arches, stone sills and many have lattice in upper sash •Large pedimented and shingled wall dormers on north and south •Well -preserved example of late-nineteenth century Colonial-Revival design notable for its architectural details, including its stone walls, shingled gambrel end with triple and cameo windows, latticed window panes, bay window, pedimented dormers and inset porch supported by squared columns (Historic Building Inventory Form, 1990). •Building is potentially eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (Cultural Resource Re-Evaluation Form, 2004). Property History 1128 Pennsylvania Ave.Nichols House (prior to remodel and additions by Huntington) c.1930 51 Property History 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. 52 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. –Nichols House later Delta Gamma Sorority House •Founded in 1873 at Lewis College in Mississippi and established at the University of Colorado in 1886, the Delta Gamma Sorority purchased property in 1918 from Walter H. Nichols. •Original Nichols House faced east and had a large circular front porch. •In 1920, an addition was added to the south elevation and in 1935 the building underwent a major Tudor-Revival remodeling after designs by prominent local architect Glen H. Huntington –two stories were added to the building and the exterior was covered with stone, stucco, and halftimbering. •A new wing added on the south elevation and patio incorporated the New Anderson Ditch, which runs through the property. In 1952, the Delta Gamma sorority purchased the property to the south (1149 12th Street) and turned it into an annex. Property History 1149 12th St. 53 Property History 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. 54 1149 12th St. –Delta Gamma Annex •Constructed in 1897 this well-preserved Colonial-Revival house is eligible for individual landmark designation and for listing in the National Register of Historic Places; •In 1910, this was a boarding house run by Anna E. Warner (above), a widow with two children, Edward and Annelliel. Lodgers included Amy Gordon, Georgia Field and Barbara Dolak. Field was a graduate of Smith College and was enrolled in the Graduate School at the University of Colorado in the English Literature. By 1914, she had become an instructor at the university. Ms. Dolak had resided at this house until at least 1908. •By 1952, Phi Alumnae of Delta Gamma had purchased the property. Property Description 55 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. 1149 12th St. Property Description 56 Photos 57 Photos 58 Property Description 59 Proposal 60 Existing & Proposed Site Plans 61 Proposed Site Plan 62 62 East Elevation (facade) 63 East elevations (as seen from 12th Street) The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for both additions. 64 64 East Elevation (facade) 65 •1,052 sq. ft., 23’ tall flat roof atrium addition in existing courtyard Steel and glass curtain wall system intended to create transparency/visibity •Second-story glass connector linking sorority house and annex •East bay entrance and east wall openings. •Fenestration of north and south walls of courtyard, though flat roof shown to intersect with and truncate second -level eaves and dormers. •Reconfigured deck at south wing of sorority house •Brick wall at east face shown to be replaced with new walls Main House South elevations The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for both additions. 66 66 East Elevation (facade) 67 East Elevation (facade) 68 West Elevation (alley) 69 West elevations (as seen from alley) The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for the Annex addition. 70 70 West Elevation (alley) 71 •970 sq. ft. steep gable-roof addition shown to be constructed against existing Gambrel roof house to a height of about 38’ (approximately 3’ higher than existing annex house). •Addition is shown to be constructed on concrete piers (10 parking spaces beneath). •Two flat roof bays project from the north and south walls reflecting the curtain wall design of the proposed atrium and connects into the sorority house via a proposed 150 sq. ft. elevated and enclosed walkway. •Gable addition clad in in stucco steel and glass curtain walls on stone and/brick clad concrete piers. Annex North elevations The elevations depict current and proposed elevations for both additions. 72 72 West Elevation (alley) 73 West Elevation (alley) 74 Design Guideline Analysis 9-11 -18, B.R.C. 1981 75 General Design Guidelines 76 General Design Guidelines 77 General Design Guidelines 78 Recommended Motion The Landmarks Board adopts the staff memorandum dated August 4, 2021, as the findings of the board and deny approval of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct a 1,053 sq. ft. addition, 970 sq. ft. two story atrium and glass walkway between 1128 Pennsylvania Ave. and 1149 12th St. as shown on plans dated September 11th2020, finding that the proposal does not meet the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981 and is generally inconsistent with the General Design Guidelines. 79 Findings The Landmarks Board finds that the applicant has failed to demonstrate 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 considered the information in the staff memorandum dated August 4, 2021, and the evidence provided to the Board at its August 4, 2021, meeting. Specifically, the Board finds that: 1. The proposed addition linking the houses will not preserve the historic character of the pending landmark properties and is not consistent with the General Design Guidelines. 2. The proposed work will adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the pending landmark properties. § 9-11-18(b)(1). 3. The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on the proposed addition will be incompatible with the character of the pending landmark properties. § 9-11-18(b)(2). 80 Applicant Presentation 81 Landmark Alteration Certification Application Applicant Presentation 1128 Pennsylvania Avenue,Boulder Colorado August 4,2021 82 Vicinity Map -1128 Pennsylvania Ave.and 1149 12th St. Pennsylvania Ave. CollegeAve.12thSt.11thSt.North 1128 Pennsylvania 1149 12th St. Context 83 Project location: southeast corner of Pennsylvania Avenue and 12th Street;1128 Pennsylvania is located on the corner, and 1149 12th is the adjacent home directly south of 1128 Pennsylvania; applicant will request the parcels be joined through a lot-line elimination process in site review Application type:Landmark Alteration Certification,one for each of the two buildings Landmark status:none currently;property owner has submitted a designation application pending site review Z oning:RH-5 Property size:20,040 square-feet (combined) 83 An additionto the second floor of the annex building ●1,155 square-feet of additional study and meeting space. ●Visible to the alley and 12th Street and located above the current parking ●Constructed with stucco cladding and a shingled roof. A glass walkway ●Connect the annex addition to the main house ●Increase safety for the residents to access both buildings and better supervision of the annex Addition to the main house Addition to the Annex building An additionto the main house ●935 square-feet of enclosed open space in the form of a ●2-story,energy efficient atriumfeature ●Visible addition from 12th Street ●Intended to be mostly glass ●Is separate from the current exterior walls and is connected to the main house through an existing entryway onto the existing patio. Proposal 84 We have read the staff report for this complicated project,and we are seeking collaboration from the Landmarks Board and staff in finding a solution and look forward to your feedback. 84 85 85 5 86 The design team arrived at a blended mix of forms that are differential, yet complementary, to the historic elements of 1128 Pennsylvania and 1149 12th. Providing the additions with a distinct and subtle design is a nod to the historic importance of this property, something that Delta Gamma honors. Safety, sustainability, and function are also important considerations in the design of the additions. We are excited to talk in more detail at the Landmarks Board meeting about how we arrived at the design principles of these additions,including the form of the additions. As with many older homes in Boulder,some elements of the properties do not meet current code requirements for landscaping, parking, and potentially occupancy. The Delta Gamma houses will be making a concerted effort to bring the properties closer to conformity and has chosen to enter a voluntary landmarking process to demonstrate its interest in maintaining the properties as an example of high quality design in Boulder. Addition to the main house Addition to the Annex building Our intent is to be collaborative with the city in an effort to build the additions at Delta Gamma while navigating the many requirements and interests for the property during the regulatory process.Delta Gamma has voluntarily submitted a Landmarks designation application for this property and is pleased to receive input from the Landmarks Board on the proposed additions prior to submitting a Site Review application. Proposal -View from 12th Street 6 87 Addition to the Main House “Atrium feature” Design Rationale ●Atrium feature is intended to complement and be deferential to the historic aspects of the main house ●“Tucks”the A trium into the current patio, not to be seen from Pennsylvania and with minimal visibility from 12th ●Encloses the space in glass that echoes the window design of the main house and “disappears”into the facade ●Adds appropriatevolume that best suits the scale of the space and alignment with first two stories on the main house Historic considerations ●The “front door”to the main house and the address faces Pennsylvania Ave, and the A triumfeature cannot be seen from the primaryor front door elevation ●Constructs the addition to be separate from the exterior walls of the main house ●Is setback from the corner of main house ●Maintains the character defining features of the main house intact 7 88 Addition to the Main House Revised to a“conservatory” Original concept Revised concept 89 89 Addition to the Main House Revised to a“conservatory” Original concept Revised concept 90 90 Addition to the Main House Revised to a“conservatory” Original concept Revised concept 91 91 Addition to theAnnex “Annex addition” Design Rationale ●Traditional roof form compliments the roof forms along the west elevation of the main house, while the addition itself is contemporary in design. ●The usability and volume of the interior space is important to conduct meetings and make the most of the square-footage,so the ultimate roof form is important in maximizing available space. In studying alternateroof forms,the gable shown yielded the best volume for the space, as well as being the most aesthetically pleasing. ●[Glass walkway design theory] 11 Historic considerations ●Addition is elevated from the ground level, maintain permeability ●Faces the alley and is minimally visible from 12th ●Is designed distinctfrom the historic buildings ●Rem oves minimal facade,windows and a balcony (non-historic) from the current Annex 92 93 BACKUP SLIDES 93 Existing Site Plan 94 94 Proposed Site Plan 95 95 Existing Level 1 Plan 96 96 Proposed Level 1 Plan 97 97 Existing Level 2 Plan 98 98 Proposed Level 2 Plan 99 99 West elevations (as seen from alley) The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for the Annex addition. 100 100 East elevations (as seen from 12th Street) The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for both additions. 101 101 North elevations (as seen from Pennsylvania Avenue) The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for both additions. 102 102 Main House South elevations The elevations depict existing and proposed elevations for both additions. 103 103 Annex North elevations The elevations depict current and proposed elevations for both additions. 104 104 Both Additions -Renderings The renderings below depict the Annex and Connector additions as seen from 12th Street (landscaping altered to fully visualize the additions) View looking southeast of both houses from 12th Street View looking east of both houses from 12th Street 24 105 Atrium feature -entry/exit points (landscaping altered to fully visualize the additions) View looking north from Atrium inside Main House View looking west from Main House living area (Atriumto the south)25 106 Atrium feature -interior rendering Conceptual point of view from the northeast corner of the proposed addition looking southwest (landscaping altered to fully visualize the additions) 107 107 Atrium feature - 3D aerial Conceptual aerial looking west with views of both additions (landscaping altered to fully visualize the additions) 108 108 Atrium feature -photo with proposed addition included View from the corner of Pennsylvania /12th Street toward the primary elevations of the property 109 109 Atrium feature -photo with proposed addition included View from 12th Street toward the proposed addition 110 110 Annex Addition -Renderings The renderings below depict the Annex and Connector additions as seen from the alley (landscaping altered to fully visualize the additions) View from the alley looking northeast toward both houses Current photo of the main house (left)and Annex (right) from the alley View from the alley looking east toward both houses Balcony,added in 1994, proposed for removal 2nd floor window proposed for removal 111 111 View from the alley Photos represent the current views from the alley toward the houses.Hardscape parking lot to the west of the Annex (right photo)will be improved with the addition. 112 112 General Design Guidelines - alignment with proposed additions Summary overview of how the proposed additions meet the guidelines -Aligned with existing setbacks in the area -Additions are appropriately proportioned to the size of the existing buildings -Maintains main entry and walkway on P ennsylvania 2.0 Site Design Building Alignment,Orientation,and Spacing Streetscape -The project will comply with landscaping standards as required in the site review process and in coordination with the historic preservation team Alleys -Access for parking is maintained -The proposed Annex addition maintains the ground level permeability Parking -Parking in the rear (alley access) is not a proposed change -No new curb cuts are proposed Sidewalks -Sidewalks will be maintained in current condition (except if requiredin site review) Fences and P ools -Not applicable -No new components of this nature are proposed -Existing porches will be maintained -Existing, non-original 2nd story balcony on the Annex is proposed to be removed 3.0 Alterations Roofs,Skylights,and Solar P anels - No changes to the existing roof form Roof Decks,Balconies,Decks and P orches Dormers -Not applicable Exterior Materials -Some existing exterior materials will be removed to create the proposed additions;however,the project intends to preserve exterior materials to the full extent possible during construction -New finish materials are compatible, but not replicates of,existing materials Windows, Storm Windows,and Shutters -Some existing windows are proposed for removal for the Annex addition and glass walkway -All other windows,storm windows and shutters will be maintained unless required by the Energy Code Doors and Storm Doors -No changes to the front doors of either homes -The existing Main House entry from Courtyard will open to the new Atrium addition with the proposed renovations. A new glass entry door system is proposed to enter the south elevation of the Atrium 32 addition. 113 114 -Character-defining features of the historic building are maintained -Minimum loss of historic fabric on west elevation of the Annex and south elevation of the main house for the Annex addition -Atrium feature allows for removal in the future without damaging the historic structure General Design Guidelines - alignment with proposed additions Summary overview of how the proposed additions meet the guidelines 4.0 Additions Protection of Historic Structures and Sites Distinction from Historic Structures -The design of both additions are complimentary of the historic style of the homes,yet is distinguished with its own design characteristics -Atrium feature was designed to “disappear”into the facade of the historic home -Annex addition was designed to be distinct and contemporary,yet mirror the roof lines of the main house to unify the styles of the two homes Compatibility with Historic Structures -Neither addition visually overpowers the existing homes -Mass,scale,materials and color are compatible with the scale of the existing homes Compatibility with Historic Site and Setting -Additions have been designed to maintain existing character of the site,including the Anderson Ditch and surrounding landscaping -Annex’s front door faces 12th St,and the proposed addition’s view from 12th St is limited to the glass walkway between the buildings and the roof peak of the addition -Annex addition will increase the view from the alley,as it is currently hardscape parking from the alley to the building -Atrium feature is proposed for the elevation facing 12th St,however it is “tucked”into the existing patio area of the facade as historic chosen to voluntarily enter the LAC process as if the properties were landmarked as it is the intention of the property owner to landmark the property after site review. 6.0 New Primary Structures and 7.0 Garages & Other Accessory Structures None proposed Key Building Elements -No changes to roofs or dormers -The majority of windows will be maintained.The windows on the south elevation of the main house and removed towestelevationoftheAnnexwillbe construct the Annex addition. 5.0 Additions to Non-Historic Structures These properties are not yet designated landmarks.However,the applicant has 114 115 General Design Guidelines - alignment with proposed additions Summary overview of how the proposed additions meet the guidelines 1.Miscellaneous P aint and P aint Colors -No brick or original structure painting is proposed -Annex addition will be stucco,and the paint color will be a single body color that compliments color scheme of the existing homes Energy Efficiency -The projects will be evaluated for Boulder Energy Conservation Code (BECC)requirements during the site review and TEC document phases of development.The applicant will coordinate with historic preservation and energy code specialists to meet the intent of this section of the guidelines as well as the BECC Mechanical and Utility Facilities -No new mechanical or utility facilities are currently proposed on the exterior of the homes.Additional study will need to take place to determine if suck facilities are required Signs,Lighting,Artwork and Public Improvements - No changes Americans with Disabilities Act -Project will follow ADA requirements as well as the design guidelines to the extent possible for accessibility requirements 115 About Delta Gamma:The Delta Gamma sorority was founded at CU Boulder in 1886 and is the oldest, continuously occupied residential chapter house in Delta Gamma’s history.Delta Gamma is the proud owner of a group home located at 1128 Pennsylvania Avenue (main house)and 1149 12th Street (annex)in the University Hill area and intends to build two additions to the property that increases communal space for studying and gathering.The focus of the addition is to increase common areas and bring together the unique and important historic nature of the houses with modern,energy efficient technology and a focus on environmental sustainability. The Phi Chapter (Boulder chapter)of Delta Gamma has adapted its residential footprint over the past century to respond to changing needs of the chapter,beginning with the purchase of 1128 Pennsylvania in 1908 and expanding with the purchase of 1149 12th Street in 1952.Both purchases and multiple modifications to the homes over the past 100-years has been in support of the needs of Delta Gamma sorority members that need a safe,accommodating residence during their college journey. Delta Gamma sisterhood is founded on the ability to create strong bonds and has long held itself to high academic standards that have demonstrated the need to increase communal and study space at the Delta Gamma homes in Boulder.The proposed additions,alongside interior renovations and technology improvements,will bring the Delta Gamma house into the 21st century needs of the sorority while preserving the historic integrity of the property. View of Main House Addition from corner of 12th Street &Pennsylvania Avenue 116 116 Agenda Item 5C Public hearing and consideration of a demolition application for two primary buildings and an accessory building constructed in 1880 and 1955. located at 1503 20th St., pursuant to Section 9-11-23 of the Boulder Revised Code, 1981., and under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, "Quasi-Judicial Hearings," B.R.C. 1981 (HIS2021-00036). Owner: Paritosh Rohilla Applicant: Matthew Schexnyder, Arcadea Architecture 117 Quasi- Judicial Public Hearing Procedure 118 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 public 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 Purpose of Review 9-11 -23 (a) B.R.C. 1981 Prevent the loss of buildings that may have historic or architectural significance Provide the time necessary to initiate designation as an individual landmark or to consider alternatives for the building. 119 Criteria for Review 9-11 -5 (c) B.R.C. 1981 The Landmarks Board “shall consider and base its decision upon any of the following criteria: 1.The eligibility of the building for designation as an individual landmark consistent with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11 -1 and 9-11 -2, B.R.C. 1981; 2.The relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area; 3.The reasonable condition of the building; and 4.The reasonable projected cost of restoration or repair. In considering the condition of the building and the projected cost of restoration or repair as set forth in paragraphs (f)(3) and (f)(4) …, the board may not consider deterioration caused by unreasonable neglect. 120 Process February 16 Application Submitted February 24 Landmarks Design Review Committee May 26 Landmarks Board complete application accepted August 4 Landmarks Board Hearing 121 Application Process •Approve the Demolition Approval valid for 180 days •Place a Stay-of-Demolition on the Application Provide time to consider alternatives to demolition Stay would expire Nov. 21, 2021. Initiate Landmark Designation Schedule an initiation hearing 122 Landmarks Board Options Property Location 123 Property Description 1503 20th St. 124 East and north elevations Property Description 1503 20th St. 125 East elevation Property Description 1503 20th St. 126 North elevation Property Description 1503 20th St. 127 North along 20th St. Property Description 1503 20th St. 128 South elevation Property Description 1503 20th St. 129 North elevation Alterations ALTERATIONS –1503 20TH ST., C.1880 Constructed around 1880, with additions likely constructed pre-1940 and alterations since 1970 Original narrow lap siding has been replaced with vertical siding, likely in the 1 970s Majority of windows appear to have been replaced; original multi-light windows remain on second story of east elevation and in gabled dormers. Wood shingles replaced with asphalt shingles (common alteration, as wood shingles are no longer permitted) 130 Property Description 1513 20th St. 131 East elevation Property Description 1513 20th St. 132 South elevation Property Description 1513 20th St. 133 West elevation Alterations ALTERATIONS –1513 20TH ST., 1955 Remodeled in the 1990s. Front-facing gables reframed to provide a steeper pitch; four dormers added Window and door openings appear to be maintained; windows and doors have been replaced Brick painted 134 Property History 135 Willits Map, 1887 Property History 136 Benford Bryan’s Bird’s Eye View of Boulder, 1909 Property History 137 •Located outside of city limits until the 1950s •City directories in 1913 and 1916, list the building as vacant. Known owners: •1918: C.G. House •1921: M.J. Leahy •1923 -1945:Edison and Martha Pilmore •1947 –1953: Dolores Kiser •1953 –1958 HF and Faye Wonrow, •1953 and 1974: short term renters including Waldo Black, Joseph Matysek and George Zaltzer. •1979 -1993 Alfred Franz The property was bought and sold in 1991, 1993, 1999, 2004, 2007, 2016 and the current owners purchased the property in 2020. Criteria for Review 9-11 -1 and 9-11 -2 B.R.C. 1981 138 CRITERION 1: ELIGIBILITY FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION Historic Significance 139 140 CRITERION 1: ELIGIBILITY FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION Architectural Significance 141 CRITERION 1: ELIGIBILITY FOR LANDMARK DESIGNATION Environmental Significance 142 CRITERION 2: RELATIONSHIP TO THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD 143 CRITERION 3: CONDITION OF THE BUILDING 144 CRITERION 4: PROJECTED COST OF RESTORATION OR REPAIR Recommended Motion The Landmarks Board issue a stay-of-demolition for the buildings located at 1503 and 1513 20th St. for a period not to exceed 180 days from the day the permit application was accepted by the city manager in order to explore alternatives to demolishing the building, and adopt the findings of the staff memorandum dated August 4, 2021. 145 Findings A stay of demolition for the property at 1503 and 1513 20th St. is appropriate based on the criteria set forth in Section 9-11-23(f), B.R.C. 1981 in that: The property may be eligible for individual landmark designation based upon its historic, architectural and environmental significance; The property contributes to the character of the neighborhood as an intact representative of the area’s past; It has not been demonstrated to be impractical or economically unfeasible to rehabilitate the building. A 180-day stay period would expire on Nov. 21, 2021. 146 Applicant Presentation 147 1503 -1513 20TH STREET BOULDER, COLORADO HISTORIC DEMOLITION PERMIT APPLICATION AUGUST 4, 2021 CASE NUMBER:HIS2021-00036 OWNER: PARITOSH ROHILLA, ET AL ARCHITECT:ARCADEA ARCHITECTURE 148 PURPOSE STATEMENT The applicant would like to redevelop the property to provide additional, affordable priced units of rental housing in this conveniently located area of the city. If redeveloped to its full potential,the property could provide needed, modernized housing options,open space,right-of-way improvements,and other benefits. The actual, architectural, and historical value of existing structures do not seem to warrant the extensive measures necessary to preserve the buildings. 149 PROJECT CONSTRAINTS •The conditions of the existing buildings do not lend themselves to additional remodel or upgrades. •1503 is not a great example of architecture from its period;perhaps the age of the structure is only incentive to preserve the structure. •2230 20th St.(a few blocks away)recently landmarked;fit to landmark due to evident architectural and historical value; these structures do not have the same merits. •The current configurations of the structures create several non-confirming conditions that also limit significant improvement to the structures or site. •Residential occupancy in 100-year flood plain and situated below estimated flood protection elevation •1503 encroaching over property line •Combustible construction and unprotected openings at zero-lot line •Non-conforming parking, driveway,and landscape configurations that cannot be reconfigured to meet standards •Lack of typical ROW improvements •Shared site access from adjacent lot without permanent easement •Maintaining one or more of the structures prohibits the applicant from achieving the by-rights floor area and unit density on the property,as these structures do not offer the highest and best use of the available buildable area. •1503 has been subject to numerous,significant alterations over time which arguably diminish the historic character of the structure. •Based on physical inspection and a builder’s cost model, it is estimated that it would cost more than two times as much to stabilize and bring 1503 up to standards as it would cost to demolish and build a new structure of the same floor area and level of finish. •Significant flood insurance costs upward of $10,000 per year w/ $35,000 deductible. 150 1503-1513 20TH ST.- SITE PLAN SCALE:1”=30’15’30’60’ N KEY: EXISTING BUILDING 150320THGARAGE 1513 20TH 151 1503-1513 20TH ST.- SITE PLAN SCALE:1”=30’15’30’60’ N KEY: EXISTING BUILDING 1503 20TH RELOCATED 3’NORTH BUILDING SEPARATION REDUCED FROM 15’ TO ~12’; DRIVE RE- DUCED FROM 12’ TO <9’ APPROX. 26’ DRIVE LANE WITH PARKING (NON-CONFORMING: DOES NOT MEET LAND- SCAPE STRIP, BACKING DISTANCE, DRIVE AISLE WIDTH) ACCESSIBLE RAMP NEEDED AS BLDG RAISED TO FLOOD DE- SIGN ELEVATION BUILDING RELOCATED 3’OFF INTERIOR LOT LINE EXISTING SHARED DRIVE ACCESS ON ADJACENT PROPERTY 152 INSPECTION REPORT &RECOMMENDATIONS •The structure at 1503 is in the 100-yr floodplain. Assuming the owner takes on any significant improvements on the site,it is recommended and may be required that the structure be raised to above flood elevation. •To comply with flood protection elevation (FPE),all mechanical,HVAC equipment must be moved above FPE.Alternatively,equipment may remain below FPE (in cellar/crawl) in waterproof vault. •The structure at 1503 currently encroaches over the south property line. If the building is to be raised to address the previous conditions, it is recommended that the owner have the building relocated approximately 3’north to the zoning setback for interior lot lines. •Assuming that 1503 is raised to 2’ above grade to conform to flood design, approximately 24 linear feet of ramp will be installed to access the finished floor elevation. •Other corrective actions will be necessary to stabilize the existing structures. •Roof sagging and other structural issues •Wood destroying organisms •Deteriorated masonry chimney •Grading •Other issues 153 ESTIMATED COST OF WORK •The conditions and corrective actions outlined in the previous section establish a conceptual scope of work for stabilizing and remediating the structures on the property.The owner contracted with Magnolia Building Company to review this scope of work and conduct an independent physical assessment of the structures. •Based on available reports and physical assessment, the estimated cost of work is approximately $804,000 at current market cost. This price includes materials, labor, and contractor overhead. •Based on industry standards,10%should be added for design and engineering. •The total estimated cost of stabilizing 1503 would be approximately $884,400. •TheActual Structure Value (per assessor)of the structure on the property is $1,285,160.The prorated structure value of 1503 based on finished floor area is $405,840.Based on this value, the estimated cost of work would be more than 200% of the value of the structure. •Using the cost per square foot another metric, the cost of stabilizing 1503 will be approximately $700 per square foot. By comparison, market-rates for new, residential construction are typically $250-300 per square foot. •The projected costs do not include renovated finishes and amenities needed to bring the property up to current market standards for rental housing. 154 CONCLUSION The property offers and excellent location for high-quality, attainably priced housing. The existing structures limit the potential of providing these up-to-date housing options and accessory benefits. We would like to see this site offer housing for next fifty years or more. And we are looking forward to engaging in a thoughtful and meaningful reinvestment in the future of this property and neighborhood. 155 1503 20TH ST.-EAST ELEVATION (FACING 20TH STREET) 1503 20TH ST.-SOUTH ELEVATION #1 156 1503 20TH ST.-SOUTH ELEVATION #2 1503 20TH ST.-WEST ELEVATION 157 1503 20TH ST.-NORTH ELEVATION #1 1503 20TH ST.-NORTH ELEVATION #2 158 1503 20TH ST.-GARAGE -NORTH EAST CORNER 1503 20TH ST.-GARAGE -SOUTH ELEVATION 159 1503 20TH ST.-GARAGE -NORTH WEST CORNER 1503 20TH ST.-GARAGE -NORTH ELEVATION 160 1513 20TH ST.-EAST ELEVATION (FACING 20TH STREET) 1513 20TH ST.-SOUTH ELEVATION #1 161 1513 20TH ST.-SOUTH ELEVATION #2 1513 20TH ST.-WEST ELEVATION #1 162 1513 20TH ST.-WEST ELEVATION #2 1513 20TH ST.-NORTH ELEVATION 163 Matters •Discussion, as of substance, the repeal and reenactment of the General Design Guidelines, including changes to Section 2.7 “Pools” •Sub-committee status reports •Landmarks Board Retreat 164 Recommended Motion The Landmarks Board approves, as of substance, the repeal and reenactment of the General Design Guidelines, including changes to Section 2.7 “Pools”. 165