Loading...
7A - Landmark Alteration Certificate (HIS2008-00246) for 702 Srpuce St MEMORANDUM March 4, 2009 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Long Range Planning Manager Chris Meschuk, Historic Preservation Planner James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner Allison Hawes, Historic Preservation Intern SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to remove the eastern portion (approximately 204 sq. ft.) of the 421 sq. ft. contributing garage located at 702 Spruce Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District, per section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2008-00246) STATISTICS: 1. Site: 702 Spruce St. 2. Date of Construction: 1920 3. Zoning: Residential Low -1 (RI. -1.) 4. Owners: Ed and Marjorie Brentari 5. Applicant: Melton Construction STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following motion: Based upon the findings in this memo, the Landmarks Board approves the request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate to remove the eastern 204 sq. ft. of the garage at 702 Spruce Street. The proposed treatment is generally consistent with the conditions as specified in Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1-4) of the historic preservation ordinance subject to the conditions below and adopts this memorandum as findings of the board. This recommendation is based upon staff's opinion that with the conditions listed below, the proposed remodel and additions will be generally consistent with Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1-4) B.R.C., the Highland Lawn Hisloric District Design Guidelines and the General Design Guidelines. S:~f'LAN~dari\longr2~ig\HIS'11ALTCF..RTS\Hisloric Districts\Mapleton I~iII~Sptuee.702\03.04.09 J.(3 '702 Sptvec.doc AGENDA I'I'I<,M # 7A PAGE# 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance of the Landmark Alteration Certificate the Applicant shall be responsible to: 1. Accurately document the portion of the garage to be removed with black and. white photography and measured drawings in order to provide for the possibility of reconstructing this feature in the future, subject to the final review and approval of the staff. 2. Submit details regarding the removal of the eastern portion of the building, plans for constructing a new east wall, and details as to how the remaining building will be stabilized and preserved, subject to the final review and approval of the staff. SUMMARY: • On October 17, 2008, the Planning Department received an application to remove a portion of the contributing garage at 702 Spruce Street. • On October 29, 2008, the Landmarks Design Review Committee reviewed the application and acknowledged the extent of damage to the east wall of the building as a result of displacement from tree root. • The garage is constructed on the east property line and the adjacent property owner, whose tree is growing into the garage, refuses to grant the owners of 702 Spruce Street access to reconstruct the damaged east wall. • The applicant would prefer to keep the east portion of the garage, but because of its structural instability and risk of collapse, feels it necessary to remove this portion of the building. • Ina 1994 Accessory Building Survey, the garage was identified as the only "fireproof garage" of its kind in the Mapleton Hill Historic District. DESCRIPTION: Located in the Mapleton Hill neighborhood, on the south side of Spruce Street between 6~ and 8~" Streets, the 7,800 square foot lot contains the two-story Colonial Revival house and the three-part concrete garage in question. The garage is constructed on the east property line. S:\I'LAI~I\dataUongrang\HIS"I'\ALTCERTS\Iiistoric llistricts\Mapleton 1ti11\Spruce.'702\U3.04.09 LB 702 Spnice.doc AGEVllA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 2 4 ~i . f ~ 'l E k • 1 Yi s d ~ ~ ~ i .7 % r .r q - , ~ rl ~ ¢rx ~ a(- ~~y~._7~~ ~l a SFr 'f~~ y r 1{ I - I I r ~ i~ !~9 ' h~ ~ - ~ ~ ' ' 7.`T~ew!s fi~F. f :L'~ 2t `~.:...5. . `t:, t{Erv ~a ~ '7'•:.r. . ?Y .v ,L ' I Figure 7: Grzrugt?, 70? Sj?r~ircc~ Suet°f, ?t%U~i According to the 2005 Accessory Building Survey form completed for the building, the garage was built in 1920. It was added onto two more times and identified as the only remaining "fireproof garage" in the Mapleton Hill area. The west wall, the earliest poxtion of the building, was constxucted of vertical wood framing. The eastern wall, which is the side that is being considered for demolition, is made o£ poured concrete and has a hipped roof. The middle part of the structure has side-hinged, vertical board garage doors and the same roof configuration as the west side. The entire roof is covered in rolled asphalt roofing. REQUEST: At the time of the accessory building survey, the garage was considered to be in fair condition. No mention was made of the damage as a result of roots from the neighboring tree. However, this condition has clearly been pxogressing fox a number of years to the point that the east and north walls are now in danger of collapse. The property owner to the east (704 Spruce Street) that owns the tree that has grown beneath the garage has been contacted several times by the owner, and once by staff. He has expressed an unwillingness to provide access on his property to cut back the tree and/or allow for reconstruction of the east wall. {Reconstruction of the concrete wall would require "stripping forms" from 704 Spruce Street.) S:\PLAMdataVrnio angV-IIST\P.LTCERTSV iistoric Districts\Mapleton I till\Spruce.702\03.04.09 LB 702 Spruce.doc AGENDA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 3 Because the existing condition presents a hazard and repair/reconstruction of the east wall is currently impossible, the applicant is requesting removal of the eastern (approximately 204 sq. ft.) portion of the building. Plans call for a new frame wall to be constructed at the east portion of the building to remain. Details regarding 11ow this work is to occur and whether the retained portion of the garage will be rehabilitated were not included in the application. ..;r •S. d+:-_ ~.y~~ ~ i r i, _t. ~ fir."f ~s ~ ; - . ~~F ~ .'i; i~ y~,,~'. _ _ , .s.. , ~i . Figure 2: llamaged garage wall, 2008 _ J;. v .a'. _ s ~ _ ~ ~ Figure 3: Roof to be removed S:\PLAV\data\longrang\HIS'I'\AI,TCF,RTS\Hiswric Districts\~~apleton 1 till\Snricc.702\03.64.09 I,S 702 Spn:ca.doc CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD'S DECISION: Subsection 9-11-18(bl-3)(c), B.R.C. 1981, sets forth conditions an application must meet in order for the Landmarks Board to issue a Landmark Alteration Certificate. (b) Neither the landmarks board nor the city council shall approve a landmark alteration CeYflflcate unless it meets the following conditions: (7) The proposed work preserves, enhances, or restores and does not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark; (2) The proposed work does not adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark; (3) The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its site; (4) With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in an historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) above. (c) In determining whether to approve a landmark alteration certificate, the landmarks board shall consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-effieie~tt design, and enhanced access for the disabled. ANALYSIS: 1. Does the proposed application preserve, enhance, or restore, and not damage or destroy significant exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within an historic district? Staff finds the proposed removal of 204 sq. ft. (approximately 48%) of the contributing building will result in a loss of historic material. However, the eastern portion of the building is in danger of imminent collapse and its reconstruction does not seem possible given the adjacent property owner's unwillingness to grant access for the work to occur. If left as is, the eastern portion of the building will soon collapse and pose a hazard to the public. 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark? Staff finds that the proposed application will adversely affect the historic character of the garage. However, collapse of the east portion of the building is imminent if steps are not taken to reconstruct the east and north walls. As reconstruction of the east wall is not possible and the building currently S:\PLANldata\Iongrang~RISTIALTCERTS\Historic Districts\Map(eton HiI1lSpruce.702\03.04.09 Li3 702 Spruce.doc AGENDA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 5 represents a hazard to the public, removal of the eastern portion of the building may be appropriate. If removed, 52% of the historic garage will remain. Staff considers that while the character of the building will be compromised by the removal, the garage would continue to contribute to the historic district if steps are taken to construct an appropriate east wall and stabilize and preserve the remaining western portion. 3. Is the architecturgl style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures compatible with the character of the historic district? With the exception of a new east wall on western portion of garage, no new construction is planned. Details regarding this wall and stabilization of the remaining building need to be provided. 4. With respect to a proposal to demolish. a building in an historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) above. No new construction is planned. Remaining portion of garage will maintain a presence on the alleyscape and staff considers that it with removed portion, will sfill contribute to the ivlapleton Hill Historcic District. Design Guidelines The board has adopted the General Design Guidelines and Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines to help interpret the historic preservation ordinance. Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines D. Alle s,. Easements, and Accesswa s Alleys are a strong visual element of the district, and have much variety of scale and detail. They play an important role in the development patterns that give the more visible areas their character. Alleys provide access to rear parking and garages. They have a varied edge quality, with buildings both on the property lines and set back. The size and quality of these accessory buildings varies considerably. Careful consideration should be given to changes in traditional uses. Guidelines: Anal sis: Conforms? 1. The use of alleys to provide Access will not be affected by removal o£ the access to the rear of eastern portion of the garage. Yes properties should be preserved. S:\PLAMdataVongraag\H(ST\ALTCERTS\Historic BistrictslMapleton IiilllSpruce.702\03.04.09 LB 702 Spmce.doc AGIH;NDA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 6 2. Efforts should be made to Removal of the eastern portion. of the protect the variety of shape, building will affect the unique character of Maybe size, and alignment of the building. However, retained portion of buildings along the alleys. the building will partially maintain the Alleys should maintain a variety of shape, size, and alignment of human scale and be sensitive buildings in the alley. to edestrians. 3. Buildings such as garages, Collapse of eastern portion is imminent and sheds, etc. which contribute prospect of reconstruction appears not to be Maybe to Phis variety should be an option. Collapse of east portion will retained in their original present public hazard and threat to the form whenever possible. remaining west frame portion of the garage. if west portion of garage is appropriately stabilized and preserved, it will still contribute to the character of the property and district. 5. Efforts should be made to Removal of the east portion of the building maintain the character of the will have an effect on the form of the garage, Yes alleys in the District. however, retention of the western portion will heI maintain character of the alle . General Desi n Guidelines • 2.3. Parkin & Drivewa s Conforms? 1 Maintain the traditional Parking will not be affected by removal of Yes arkin at the rear o the lot. the east option of the ara e. ~ Access to parking should be Access will not be affected by removal of the Yes from the alleys whenever eastern portion of the garage. possible. 7.1 Existin Historic Accessor Structures .1 Retain and preserve garages The existing garage is contributing to the Maybe and accessory buildings that property and district as a whole. Collapse of contribute to the overall eastern portion is imminent and prospect of historic character of the reconstruction appears not to be an option. individual building site yr Collapse of east portion will present public the district. hazard and threat to the remaining west frame portion of the garage. If west portion of garage is appropriately stabilized and preserved, it will still contribute to the character of the ro ert and district. S:\PLAN\data\fongrang\H IS'1'\AT,TCF,RTS\Histo7ic Districts\:~taplcton Hill\Spmce.702\03.04.09 LI3 702 Spnice.doc AGF;NDA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 7 .2 Retain and preserve the While the east portion of the building will Maybe character-defining materials, be lost, materials, features, and details of the features, and details of west portion of the garage will be retained. historic garages and accessory buildings, including roofs, materials, windows, and doors. As mentioned, the existing garage is contributing to the property and district as a whole. Collapse of eastern portion is imminent and prospect of reconstruction appears not to be an option. Collapse of east porti.vn will present a public hazard and threat to the remaining west frame portion of the garage. if west portion of the garage is appropriately stabilized and preserved, it will still contribute to the character of the property and district. Given the unique circumstances of this case (including the vbvious hazard the eastern portion poses to the public and the rest of the garage), staff considers removal of the concrete portion of the building appropriate. FINDINGS: The Landmarks Board finds, based upon the application and evidence presented that the proposed Landmark Alteration Certificate application, subject to the conditions of approval above, will be consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and: 1. The proposed alteration preserves, enhances, or restores and dues nat damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within a historic district. (9-11-18(b)(1), B.R.C. 1981) 2. The proposed alteration does not adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site or the district. (9-11-18(b)(2), B.R.C. 1981) 3. The architectural style, arrangement, texture, colvr, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its site or t11e historic district. (9-11- 18(b)(3), B.R.C. 1981) 4. With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in an historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the S:U'LAN\data\longrang\EIIS'TIALTCER'['S\Historic DistrictsUviapleton Hill\Sprucc.702\03.04.09 LB 702 Spruce.doc AGE~IllA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 8 requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) above. ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Building Inventory Form B: Application and Plans C: Photographs S:\PLAN\datauongrang\HIS'I'\ALTCERTS\Historic DistrictsWlapleton Hill\Spruce.702\03.04.09 LB 702 Spruce.doc AGEiV'DA ITEM # 7A PAGE# 9 Ltd.DRApO~191iTaRiCA1 fOCIETYs ' - . " • . ~ _ _ - 'O!lice a! Archaiol _ NOT FOR FIELD USE ogy enei Nfa4oric Preserwtio' Eiipible ~ Na~inated 1300 Broac9+a9?, Denver, Colorado x0203 ALtaChmerit A ~ Det.'Not Eligible ~ Certified Rehm HISTORIC BUILDING INVENTORY RECORD ate PROJECT NAME: aouldsr Survey of Nlstoric COMITY: CITY: STATE ID NO.: 5BL4790 Pisces, 1994 Boulder burr TEMPORARY NO.: 1461-25•x-30.006 CURRENT•BUILDING NAME: ONNER: BRENTARI EDWRD G i MARJORIE D 702 SPRUCE ST BOULDER CO 80302 _ ADDRESS: 702 SPRUCE ST BOULDER', CO x0302 ' TONNSHIP 1N RANGE TON SECTION 30 SE 1/4 SN 1/ HISTORIC MANE: U.S.G.S. OUAp NAME: Boulder, Colo. YEAR: 1966 (PR19T9) X T.S~ 15 BLOCK: 700 LOT(S): 6 Dl STRICT MANE: Mapleton Hiil ADDITION: Neat Boulder YR. OF ADDITION: 1874 FILM Rfll.t MO:: 94-10 'NEGATIVE NO.: LOCATION OF NEGATIVES:' DATE OF CONSTRUCTION:- ' 6Y: R.~Nhitacre 8 Boulder City Plnp. ESTIMATE: ACTUAL: 1904 SOURCE: ' _ Boulder County Assessor.. ' ?"~~~,aY,~~~:.".~; "-_y USE: / a - , J~~ PRESENT: , -,err ~ r,. ~ _ ~ Residential ' r~1~ 2 , " tix - :pt.. 1 \ . - HISTORIC: ~Y ~ y • ; ~ _ - Residential ~ 1 ' f p ~ s 'l~_ y'c' . a ~ l ~ ~ CQNDITION: - ~ -_t - - EXCELLENT X GOOD • ~ •4'~'-'!i~~-,z:. _ FAIR ~ DETERIORATING ~ _ v~;'L.. _ EXTENT OF ALTERATIONS: _ X MINOR MODERATE MAJC DESCRIBE: - ~ • . ' Balcony balustrade gone. ~ r CONTINUED YES X - _ " STYLE: [iuLtlf L:8[ontac tceTr..c...-- : , _ _ . - . ORIGINAL SITE X MOOED • ~'i/Z--~.'`~- DATE(S) OF MOVE: MATERIALS: Brick, Hood, Stone S0. FOOTAGE: NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY 2693 INDIVIDUAL: YES X NO ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: - Front gambrel roofed brick dwelling with overhanging eaves which flare over CONTRIBUTING TO DISTRICT: first story.. Gemtbrel'fece has variegated wood shingles and Palladian motif X YES NO door/wirxbws with decorative arched crown. Large gabled dormers on east and LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Mo west have paired, doubie•hung windows. Raised atone foundation. Off-center paneled and glazed door with transam_ Double-hung 1/1 light windows with stone ~ ~0 cilia and lintelr. Bay wirxbw on west•and on facade. Full-width, hipped roof DATE: porch with column auports ha¢ lattice underneath and balustrades on aides.- ASSOCIATED BUiIDINGS4 X YES I ' TYPE: Garage IF INVENTORIED, LIST ID NOS.: l CONTINUED? YE5 X NO ADDITIONAL PAGES: YES X NO - . ARCHITECT: STATE ID NO.: 5BL4790 sHAPE . = , . lA~) _ • . - ~ Ql I G I NAL OWNER: _ Unfu~own ' SOURCE: ' . SOURCE: . BUILDER/CONTRACTOR: ilnknown THEME(S): Urban Residential Neighborhoods, . 1858-present'" . CONSTRUCTION HISTORY (DESCRIPTION, NAMES, DATES, ETC., RELATING TO MAJOR ALTERATIONS TO ORIGINAL STRUCTURE): . - CONTINUED YES X NI HISTORICAL BACKGROUND (DISCUSS IMPORTANT PERSONS AND EVENTS AS80CIATED WITH THIS STRUCTURE):. In 1910, the U.S. Census noted that this was tha home of-Ja~ea~Eupene and Nilde Stack.. .tastes Stack wea a 60 year old janitor who hocked et the,post office. Hilda was a 33 year old Swedish imaiprant. In 19T3, thi• was the rasidence of John A. Johnson and V.A. Van Horn. John A. Johnson was a setel miner, who case to this Bantry frog Sweden when he was 2Q end lived in Boulder County far 65 years. Johnson was born in 1873. Vernon Van Horn wee also • miner. . CONTINUED YES; SIGNIFICANCE (CHECK APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES AND BRIEFLY JUSTIFY BElOW): ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE: HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE: REPRESENTS THE WORK OF A MASTER ASSOCIATED WITH ,SIGNIFICANT PERSONS ' POSSESSES HIGH ARTISTIC VALUES AS50CIATED WITH SIGNIFICANT EVENT6 OR PATTERNS X REPRESENTS A TYPE, PERIOD, OR METH00 QF CONSTRUCTIOq X CONTRIBUTES TO AN HISTORIC DISTRICT TIER EVALUATION: Contributing Building ~ STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: ~ This house is representative of the Dutch ColonieL Revival style, as reflected in the gambrel,roof, decorative shingles, and classicat porch colurtns, i3 ~ CONTINUED _ YES X N ~ REFERENCES (BE SPECIFIC): Boulder County Ascessar, reel estate information; Boulder Dsi7~rCaisera biographical files; Boulder Csrnepia Library, Boulder Canty Assessor collection; Boulder City Directories; Boulder Genealogical Society, Cenaw Indexes, 1400 and 1410 ' CONTINUED YES X SURVEYED BY: R.L. Simmona/T.H. Simons AFFILIATION: Front Range Research Associates, Inc. DATE; August 1994 . Address: 702 SPRUCE ST Boulder, Colorado COLORADO CULTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Cultural Resource Re-evaluation Form: Accessory Building Survey 1. Resource Number. 5BL4790 2. Temp. Resource Number: 3: Attachments: 4. OfFcal determination: OAHP USE ONLY (Check as many as apply} ? Determined Eligible [~J Photographs ~ Determined Not Eligible ©,Site sketch map ~ Need Data ? U.S.G.S. map photocopy ~ Nominated ? Other ? Listed ? Other ? Contributing to N.R. District Not Contributing to N.R. District 5. Resource Name of Primary Building 6. Purpose of this current site visit Resurvey 7. Previous Recordings: Front Range Research Assoc. Aug. 1994 8a. Description of Accessory Building: There are three parts to this garage. It appears as though the west part Outbuilding Type: (wood frame), with vertical boards closing the former garage door Garage opening, is the earliest part of the building. The eastern third of the Outbuilding Material: garage is constructed of poured concrete, with vertical boards closing Concrete the former garage door opening, and has a hipped roof as referred to in the 1920 building permit. The middle portion of the garage, with side- Outbuilding Covering hinged, vertical board garage doors, wood frame west wall and poured Concrete concrete east wall, has the same roof configuration as the west part. The entire roof is covered in rolled asphalt roofing. Outbuilding Roof Materia This "fireproof garage' is the only structure of its kind identified during Asphalt the accessory building survey of the Mapleton Historic District. 8b. Date of Construction: 1920 8c. Date of Construction Source: Building Permit Ledger, Carnegie Library: July 29,1920 permit fora "fireproof garage." Historic Assessors Card, Carnegie Library: 1929 note, 12x16 frame garage with dirt floor: additional note, 18x30 cement, dirt floor. 1931 Sanborn Map: building appears.on map. 1994 Survey: lists garage as an "associated building:' 9. Condition: Fair 10a. Changes #o Location or Size Information: 10b. UTM Coordinates: Cultural Resource Re-evaluation Form: Address: 702 SPRUCE ST Accessory Building Survey Boulder, Colorado Ternp. Resource Number 11. Current Ownership BRENTARI EDWARD G & MARJORIE D 702 SPRUCE ST BOULDER CO 80302 12. Other Changes, Additions or Observations: 13. Eligibility Assesment: Individual District National Register: NIA National Register: Contributing Local Landmark: NIA Local: Contributing Locally Designated Property: NO 14. Management Recommendations: N/A 15. Photograph Types and Numbers: Type: B8~W Roll No: 16 Frame No: 14,15 16. Artifact and Field Documentation Storage Location N!A 17. Report Title: Accessory Building Survey 18: Recorder(s): Kathryn Howes Barth, AIA; Lara Ramsey 19: Dates}: Apr. 2005 20: Recorder Affiliation: Kathryn Howes Barth, AfA; Ramsey Planning and Preservation i Colorado Historical Society, Off+ce of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 1300 Broadway, Denver, CO 80203 SBL4790 702 SPRUCE ST SITE PLAN LL ~ ~~Y C~ _ ~ Y' ~p~~C '~DZ~ i 1 tt:: yy'' r f A~~ , f f t• - ~ ;I i I d.J I~I 1 i i1 ,[rJ~~ t ~ r.t ~ ~ J ~ r+ J F~~- ~ It ~ { V~ >v. a lSf~~~~ fi;J f ~ i-I ' ~ r' , t T ~ , r~ { s,..., k ~ la•.. w r. ~ 5. c~ ~',~5;'fT'~7C ~~r*(,~ ;t._ i ` ~ , ! ''t4 ~'/jl T~'~r k~s+li•}~ ~f i `~.Y;. ~l~~t rJ' . i~r 'il . j ~z ~ ~~~`1it~k- r_ n i ~ ,f'a~! ~ X11- ~I j',: x ' _ ''r.;si"~ ;fir,-'.:. - 1~ ~ ~ a rf~ I ~e!~~ iP• . I: J~ Ley. ~ S 1 . ~ ~ ti1~ ~ (U . - - 1.':'. i,+ ' `nom - _ i _ e _ ~ 'try . .•1y ~ . a~rr•t Cr'"_"' ' 1 _Y T' _ J I T3~~+p ~ r ~ 1 J i.? l.. ~ e ti/~ e~ T: 1 ~i t.T _ _ -r` if .f_- y1Z ~.'~~`~<CL, ~-~jfS~.f'ti ~ -EEyy ~ rr _ rf _ ~ r> l '^!s :?'~ij ~4f 1~A~1 M t{ltl ja S ~ ~ 1 d T 1/ 4 i e ~P'tp J"` ~ t t !~F A Z ! iy T r'.9'-S~, 4 a ~~~~"y/ ~tryr~ HI `A. i ~ 1. L ~ V. y T ~ .-.yjfa5' t r.: 1 G _ t ~Q ~ f ~~''~f r'' DTI i Ls t -..~-tV ~ ~ -A.i _ i s l 2,^.` 3~ T n~ ~ 9,~ . 1 \YA }.f. 'I I - . -r-=^1"'i .s.. A _ l' ."i"ce ! »»7 } J 1 9{~ ~ 4 3 A•~ ~ ~ 5~ { ~ { T }4 4~ i k r~ y .iii,. ~~~(F,y~~ ~i ~ , Pf' jj+' -:.x,;: - <t~},y. _ _ "T,".'w~"_ are attachment B MELTON CONSTRUCTfON 2/5/2009 Planning and Development Services -Historic Preservation Program 1739 Broadway, 3`d floor Boulder, CO 80302 Re: Brentari Garage Demolition To Whom It May Concern: At the request of Edward and Marjorie Brentari Melton Construction has been contracted to demo the easterly twelve (12) feet of their garage. The scope of work includes finishing the exposed wall after the demo to match the existing West wall of the garage. In addition, the exposed portion of the yard (after demo) would have a fence installed to match existing. The garage appears to have evolved in three stages. The first stage is the 12 feet we are looking to demo and the second and third stages were added onto as you work your way to the west. Although the first stage has some historical significance a tree in the neighbors' (Christopher Walker) yard has damaged the garage to the point where it's not worth restoring. The Brentari's have tried working with Mr. Walker since 1987 regarding the tree and the damage it has done to the garage and have had no success. Mr. James Hewatt from the historic Preservation Program can attest to this as he has tried to work with the neighbor directly. The tree is considered non desirable as far as arborists are concerned. Like a weed. The garage, as it stands right now, is dangerous and the tree is continuing to do damage. If left alone, the tree will eventually destroy the garage itself. If the board approves the application the alley and the surrounding area will be more visually pleasing for neighbors and passers by and the danger will be eliminated. Part of the demo process will have to include trimming the tree to some extent because we are confidant that if the garage were removed from under the tree one, if not moxe, of the tree trunks will lean even further if not fall over completely. Sincerely, MELTON CONSTRUCTION, INC. - Ton Mitchel~~ Y Project manager I I-_f l;l i.:'i,~)i-l? ~I'I 'i ~ II \P.A:~tl VI_ l I. I;I;LI I)LJZ_ CV `~il ~Ul 1.1\ ~0,'~', i~ ~i.J,i~ti ~y~/~~ t Y f S ~ '.'7 1)...-.. g \\\t\\'.\9GLTO\Cu\S7RUC'TIpN.CO~1 ~~~':i,:~t~.,...,~r_ L ~,~x City of F3oulder Planning and Development Services LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION Date of application: ! t 1 ~ t r`~~ Case number: HIS Zy t°' 6 ~ ` er" Property address: Z- `7 ~'~~-vC~ 7T Historic District/Landmark name: lt/t~-??C~~N ~iG~ ' Applicant name: ti~ 1~1--~~~ C Cifv S l - Relationship to project (s?g., architect, contractor): C l.~(:~-r~-- C'~' ~ ~,2-- Phone: jU ~ Z ~ z-- Mobile phone: 'Sli ~ _p v~S' Fax: 3~ ~ - Applicant's mailing address: ~t7~7 ~ C 1~~~~'R-~1~L__. C w~~ r~~)~~L~~~ - ~-y ~U~V~ Street ~ p _ Liry State Zip Property owner's name: ~7cK-l ~~~-1 Daytime phone: ~ D ~ ~ `-f ~ ° Z--~ Properly owner's address: 7U ~ 5(!7t(Z..vC_(= -7 ( ~LLt--~~L.'~n- ~C~ r~J~~~ ~ Street City State Zip PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Please list all exterior alterations proposed for the property in the space provided below. Please see the following pages for submittal requirements. All 4 pages must be included in the application. d la~'~-d ~~S~Z-~'r'\i ~Z ~ G~~ ~i F~+~A~.(~' ~ r~ ~~SC-~`~ \1 J~3~i G: Nl-V t..~-~ACC,t--' --~''t' ~-~c~-f~ - N c~~-C-~- i~v,>h-~--~ ~ "t~~ ~ Z` S t=~T7es F ~4~i-~ `ti~°~-- ~ P cote ~r~r?~ ~ ~.=~-~5~ INITIAL CODE REVIEW The following applications require initial review and sign off by a project specialist or zoning administrator tip or to acceptance of a landmark alteration certificate application. Please mark all applicable boxes. ? New detached construction (accessory structure, garage, new residence, shed, etc) ? Dormers - ? Porches ~ Fences ? All new additions THIS SECTION IS FOR STAFF USE ONLY S-r~,Y.,~. Property Zoning~L~ I Lot Size: ~YGa Required setbacks: ti,- Floodplain: Prior Reviews (Use Review, PUD, etc) r--1o- ° S~d~,t Other Applications which may be required based on proposed opplication: Preliminary Comments: % Reviewed b~ Date: ~ Z ~ G~ This section is o customer service review, and does not constitute a formal review of oll applicable codes and regufotions. Att sections of the Boulder Revised Code must still be adhered to rior fo erformin an work. Please submit this completed application, along with the required information outlined on the following pages to a project specialist. Applications for the design review committee must be received on the Friday prior to your requested design revievi meeting. If you have any questions, please call (303)44) -1880 and ask to speak to a historic preservation planner. We look forward to working with you on your project! I I LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION (Page 2) Shown below and on the facing page is a list of the most common types of alterations. Please check off the type of work you are proposing and follow the application requirements listed to the right. TYPE of STAFF REVIEW ALTERATION: City staff may review common types of applications, which involve minor aaerations. This (Please check all type of review can have a ctuick opproval turn-around providing the applicant submits a thot apply) complete application form with documentation and the proposed alterations meet the Landscaping applicable design guidelines. ? Paint A complete application submittal includes: ? Roofing ? This application: Completely filled out Fenc (rear side. and only if ? Plans and elevations: All drawings should be to scale, with dimensions, and as i \ rnaxirY i ~ wiih minimum detailed and clear as possible, whether or not an architect or contractor is 1"spacing between pickets} involved. Both existing structure and proposed changes should be shown. Fences: bring to-scale drawings showing dimensions and spacing between ? Restoration of Existing Features pickets. DOWNTOWN ONLY: ? Photographs: Comprehensive color photos of the structure and of details thct relate directly to the requested alteration are required. ? Commercial awning ? Samples: Color chips of paint are .required. Printed samples of roofing types are ? Commercial patios helpful. ? Commercial signs TYPE OF DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE (LDRC) ALTERATION: City staff and two designated members of the landmarks board review applications for alterations (Please check all to buildings or special features and determine within 14 days after a complete applic:etion is `:fled that apply) whether or not the proposed work would have a significant impact upon or be potentially ? Deck /porch detrimental to a landmark site or historic district. Large projects usually require more than one meeting and may be referred by the Committee to fihe full Landmarks Board for review. ? Doors /windows ? Dormers /skylights The following documentation is required to initiate review by the Design Review Committee: ? This application: Completely filled out ? Additions ? Photographs: Photos of existing building and surrounding context Fence (font yard or rear rd yard if over ? Drawings: All drawings should be to scale, with dimensions, and as detailed and clear 5'-tall or less than 1" as possible, whether or not an architect or contractor is involved. Both existing structure spacing between pickets) and proposed changes should be shown. Examples are available if needed. ? Nevr garage /accessory The following documentation is required for final review and approval: building (340 sq. ft. and ? Scaled site plans: including existing and proposed site plans under) ? Elevations: usually'/a" = 1'scale including existing and proposed elevations Other~'}M.C? a"~ ? Materials: Specific materials used should be noted on pions. Samples may be requested. ? Colors: paint/stain color chips ~ Z + ~ ~ ? Photographs: photos of existing building from all sides and existing context µ ~ t. 5~,~ ? Manufacturers/catalogue "tear" sheets ~ ? Fences: bring to-scale~drawings showing dimensions and spacing between rails. ? Details The following may be requested prior to final approval: ? Building sections ?Methods of restoration ?Sfudy model or 3-D simulated model TIP: Far large or complex projects you are encouraged to contact a Historic Preservation Planner early in your project before detailed drawings are completed. All completed applications for LDRC review must be turned in by noon on the Friday prior to the requested meeting. Please nose ;hat your requested DRC meeting may not be available due to scheduling. The Committee meets at 9:00 a.m. every Wednesday (except fio(idays) ai the P&DS Services Center on the 3`° floor of the Park Central building, 1739 Broadway. Please call and ask for a Historic Preservation Planner if you have questions with any of the above alterations or submittal requirements. ,~.-~~..1 i-~.,; t~,;: ih,:. - _ LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION (Page 3) LANDMARKS PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD (LPAB) TYPE OF New free-standing construction greater than 340 square feet, or the demolition or moving of ALTERATION: structures requires review by the entire Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board. A public hearing is (Please check all required in order to issue an alteration certificate under these circumstances. The full board meets that apply) once a rrronth, usually on the first Wednesday. Submittal deadlines are listed on the following page. All applications must be submitted to a project specialist by 4:OOpm 20 days prior to the hearing. New free-standing Public hearings must be held within 60 days after a completed application is received. All public construction hearings for landmark alteration certificates are conducted as quasi-judicial proceedings. After a (over 340 sq. ft.) public hearing, a Notice of Disposition is served to City Council regarding the recommendation of the Landmarks Board. The City Council has 14 days to call up a decision to approve a landmark alteration certificate application made by the Landmarks Preservation Board. If the Landmarks Demolition Preservation Board votes to deny a landmark alteration certificate application, tiie City Council has (includes primary 30 days in which to call up the decision. ar,d/or accessory buildings) A complete application submittal includes the same as that required for the Design Review Committee as listed on the proceeding page plus the fallowing items: ~ Application called ? previous Page requirements (Listed under LDRC) up from DRC ? Written project description ? 10 folded copies of project drawings, showing existing and proposed conditions (preferably 24"x36") plans, including: ¦ Scaled site plan (existing and proposed) ¦ Scaled elevations for all sides of tha building (existing and proposed) at 1 /4" or 1 /8" scale. ¦ Sketches, as needed ? 10 copies of any color renderings or photographs, color samples, etc. (preferably no greater than 1 1 "x17") ? 1 reduced (8 ~/i'x 11") copy of all materials submitted At the request of staff or the board, the following may also be required as part of your application: ? Building sections ?Methods of restoration OStudy model or 3-D simulated model TIP: Projects which are required to be reviewed by the full board should be presented to staff early in your project before detailed drawings are initiated. Please contact us prior to submitting an application as these projects and reviews ore usually complex. We encourage you to complete the initial code review section on page 1 of this application prior to <:ontacting us. Call (303} 441-1880 and ask to speak with a Historic Preservation Planner. 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. L ~ U I 1 _ ~ Sign ture of owner o_r~uthorized agent for ~vner Date Contact Us: Planning & Development Services -Historic Preservation Program 1739 Broadway, 3`d Floor Boulder, CO 80302 (303) 441-1880 Http://www.boulderhistoricpreservation.net . LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION (Page 4) FOR STAFF USE ONLY Date completed application received by Planning and Development Services Date of initial•DRC meeting Date(s) of follow-up DRC meetings Date of Full Board Hearing Date Application Approved/Denied Date of Building Permit Review Date Case Closed Date case sent to imaging 2008 Landmark Preservation Advisory Board Meeting Dates and Application Submittal Deadlines Landmarks Preservation Advisory Boord meetings are generally held the first Wednesday of each month at 6 p.m. in the Municipal Building, Council Chambers Room, located at 1777 Broadway. Landmark Alteration Certificate applications scheduled for a public hearing before the full Landmarks Board are due by 4:OOpm 27 days before the meeting date. All applications must be submitted through a project specialist. _ Boord Meeting Submittal Deadline March 5 February 14 April 2 March b May 7 April 10 June 4 May 8 JII;y-2 ~~5- Canceled August 6 July 10 September 3 August 7 October 1 September 4 November 5 October 9 December 3 November 6 ~n ~ ~ m 50 ? 2 51.85 J U N ~Oq i Q~~I O ~ ~ ~~CO~ v wOOD PORCH "O r ! 6 1 1 1 ~ ~ W ) 7 ' 7 p • ' ~ ~ ~ 4 ~ ~ Q s rr zs.8~ X0.9•- wooo , PORCH _ - Q r g a ~o ~ ~ ~ r ~ I\ ~ _ ~ ~ it N ~ \~1 l ~ ,v ~ , ti~ ~ , e~` $ ~ ~ G l" ~ i ~ ~ ~ r" s ~ ~ r ~ ; coHCae's~, ~t~~' 6AR~GE ` r ~ i NFR AME ~ ~ \ ' SNEO , of 1• roc ~O~ of ~~nP~ov~.t~E~~s o~ ~o~ B~oc~ goo, a~aE~ 11i 1 S I S TO CERTIFY THAT ON THE 6Tr+, DAY OF SM~~HS SUF3 - D\V1S\0~1 ~ A SUB' OCT08ER, 1966, A SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY DIV1~\O~ OF ~ PP~~~C OF ENE HEREON SHOIdN WAS MADE 8Y ME AND THAT All -C'\/ \ ` ` ~f EASEME NTS,ENCROACHMENTS.ETC. KNOWN TO ME C\ \ ` O~ ~v~r~~~~~Qvh~ Oc ARE HERF.Or! SFiOWM. ~~~~~R'~'A--'t~ ~ (..Q~~,JRi'~~a+ i ~ ~t E~~ sUUV \N~ iaoo P~R1. sY,, tt /2309 ~ _ ~ THE ACCURACY OF THIS SURVEY lS l'IMtTED . ~QU1e~~ a.~o t•(•-•}: ~.•_-__j_-••_-- TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS P!.OT PLAN, 44q-gos5 S, 2l'~' Comments Sheet Date° ° G FL Z S ~ , 2008 Landmark Alteration Cert~cate X or Demolition /Moving Address of Property: ~ L S c.E src. c-,~ Owner's Name: C-n ~ ~ r'?~-~v ~t r` 3 ~T~-t DRC Members: ~ ~ ~ L ?-~'t Remarks: W U ~ ~I C7~ t't) 13 ~ jZ.C-Z.~ i•15 -t-.2 ~ ~ z-t -x~ S U ~-(r Cis rt 2 t;--~.r~..~/S c is ~ L t + n/ n--~ w ~ w ~ ~-z-k. (~Y~.itp t= 1~ Q J C,2,._ CZ~a -r'S _ rt t N{,~--r~ 0 ~ ~ 'f"D Cis r) ~ ~ w t c-~ t mac- ~ i.u ~ w o z. ~ ~o F-h S ~rwo r~-~--'. S `t~.c w ~ c~ ~ ~ ~ ~t-~ ,y; t'u ~ t^-~ w ~-~,-~-L~. --t~-t.~-,~,.~ t S ~ t ~ ~ t``1 tv LG e-:_ N mac. wrr,3 u ti ~u Nt .'h. ~ r--i=~ •r--~ L ~ Q ~ i~~r `C Cy,J~i Ch-S Al C-~.,,, t,~.l /~`Z-~- q c ~ ha (-~rla l nJ ~ r~, L U ~ 'tj U r 1'~~-~' S Tn- \ p A ~ .J (r T--rJ 2 ~t A-P"~~-°-- c_c~ ~ c K.r-~-~= l5 ~a ~ rL ~ ~ S ~=-r' t~ ~ u ~ ~ 4z e=-~ ~ t ~ /~'t-l-C-~ s ~U N t-t wt.~fi3o ~2 S ~-e~ p t~-=YU~-~ - . . n15 U c.Y"'L'"O -(Zjj S ~ 5 T~"b' C U ~1 v c C-l G ~ ~ ~ TC~'b`--. Tit,-~--. C ~cLe~ ~,>r ~~,v s ~ Next steps: ~~"s`"` ~,..t -~-'~''t-. -t-~-(~ -P ~-~I 1~~--y t ~~-~--J Lo.v~ t r-~"L= =1= -Iv M~-~- ~ ~~~r v ~ s c-r ~Z a i3 ~r~-~t ~ u~~c-~..r ? U,~t~ c cz ~,~5 - Public hearing: Y N S:\PLAN\data\\HIST\\ALTCERTSI CommentsPage2.doc Note: These comments do not constitute a Landmark Alteration Certificate. Comments Sheet Date: ~ L ~ , 2009 Landmark Alteration Certificate ~ or Demolition /Moving Address of Property: ~O2. S~ti~L~ ST~t~ Owner's Name: '`1~°t~l DRC Members: ~t-1~, S ~~c-~) A"~" ~o4M-~r('C-~'L~t~--1 Remarks: S ~ gnu ~ r IP~t1-Po s ~ -F~;~w c. cs t+- -t~, ~t ~.ta ~ ~v a~- tz> -Fv c.~ ~P'~~~',~gi~0~r?~ ~U 1~`~J i~j~- t~.~ t P.~ t ~ ~u t3 c..~ Next steps: Public hearing: Y N S:\PLAN\data\\HIS'I1\ALTCERTS\ CommentsPage2.doc Note: These comrnents do not constitute a Landmark Alteration Certificate. Photographs Attachment C `iii?. ri" - ~ ~ I h~1,•f I! < _ / z:~ L 1 k 1 zee ~ f IY^~~ ' I to ,t, -~'1 Y `tom t'~-~~ r -~tS~ ) ~ - r _ +r ~~r . _ :'.fem. ' . S y is y° ' .y ~Fi~ y `~g`~~~ r ~ + QTR rr`t ~ ~c: ' 7i 1_ N,4 it t ~ ~ fir' ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1~^rn i~.;. j; ~ - -spy' J 1 I ~ ~f - }.kI?~ n~. ~<..-vt' t;}.~-! ~ 144'+~~^i~~R~~w~~~~ F -•~-~v^ ~ v~~~_~ I J - - - -;r - - - - - _ ~l _ ~ ~ 1 ~ =t Y 1 I ~ ~ • i lit .y } a { 4 / RI_ t r .t -.--;;w. ~ r.. _ . ~ ,fix,.,-..a~• ~ ~ ~ ~ , l^` 1. ~ ~X r ~ ~ - ~ •Ji~'j ~ ~ 4'~ • her: ~.1~``t ~t3i ~ i • R ~ ~,F-~c4, , ; '3 ~ Mt= ~ q} `•r L y p y~r. ~yy' - 1 - ~ ~ i 'i r~~.Y• i . A. ~ ` r 1; w ~ 7f ~ ~Y. ,i y ~ `.w ,1 i ~,i, ~ him ~ I, M' ~ ? r V y., ~ r - .1 l:}" y ~ ~ j .Y~ ~ t -_C>~Y .1 I , a~ ` ~ Jr. ' Vin.. ~ _ . 1 1. .A l L 1