The URL can be used to link to this page

5A - Landmark Alteration Certificate to demolish a non-contributing house at 14 Kinnikinic Rd (HIS2009-00037) MEMORANDUM September 2nd, 2009 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Long Range Planning Manager James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner Chris Meschuk, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to demolish a non-contributing 1,225 sq. ft. house and in its place construct a new 1,538 sq. ft. one-story house at 14 Kinnikinic Road in the Chautauqua Historic District per Section 9- 11--18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2009-00037). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 14 KiruZikinic Road 2. Historic District: Chautauqua 3. Zoning: RL-1 (Residential Low -1) 4. Owner: Trudy Hutchings 5. Applicant: Post Construction 6. Date of Construction: 1899, c.1928, 1950s modifications 7. Existing House: 1,225 sq. ft. 8. Proposed new const: 1,538 sq. ft. one-story house STAFF RECOMMENDATION: . Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board make the following motion: The board denies the proposal for the demolition of the contributing building and construction of a 1,538 sq. ft. one-story house (as shown on landmark alteration certificate drawings dated 06.10.2009), in that it fails to meet the standards in Chapter 9-11-18 (a)(b, 1-3), B.R.C. 1981, in that the proposed work will damage and destroy the historic character of the property and have an adverse effect on the character of the Chautauqua Park Historic District. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE I S:ANLAN~d2ta ton rang111IST~~11_.TCERTS\Histoi'ic DistnctsThautauqua114 Kinnickinnick\09,02.0`) memo.doc SUMMARY: • Because this application calls for the demolition of an existing building and the construction of free-standing new construction of more than 340 square feet, review by the full Landmarks Board in a public hearing is required per Section 9-11--14(b) of the historic preservation ordinance. • Tax assessor records indicate that the existing building was constructed in 1899 with additions having occurred to it sometime around 1925 (within the period of significance for the district). Subsequent non-historic alterations to the building have occurred. However, staff considers the building retains its essential form and is a contributing building to the Local Landmark District. • Staff considers plans for the demolition of the contributing building to be inconsistent with Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1-4)& (c) B.R.C. as they will have a detrimental effect on the property and the historic district as a whole. • Staff recommends that the applicant explore the possibility of rehabilitating, . and possibly adding to, the historic cottage at #14 Kinnikinic Road. 14 Kinnikinik Road. r i4 .a u..,M f E .rt p w I i CFiAL r:,UU::4 Gri`c cl4 Figure 1. Location Map AGENDA ITEM i#5A PAGE 2 SAPLAN\d2ta\Iongrang\H1S'l \AUCERTS\Historic Districts\ChautauquaU4 Kinnickinnick\09.02.09 memo.doc Description and History of Property: The cottage at 14 Kinnikinic Road was constructed. in 1899 as an investment property and is associated with early Boulder resident Lucy Bliss. Early photographs of the Chautauqua (figures #2 & #3) show the small hip roof cottage to have been sheathed with board and batten siding and to feature decorative roof cresting. Cottage #14 c„a, . 4 , - +r::. _ a.+ mirk . sFr3y rYd g :;rfoQ r f °h~'C mac' _3 et~ 6-- 1j7- \',~.Qa. ems. Figure 2. Cottage #14,1899 In 1915, Rabbi Joseph Blatt of Oklahoma City is thought to have bought the cottage and it served as his summer residence until 1956. Blatt was Rabbi of B'nai Israel, the first reform and oldest synagogue in the state of Oklahoma, for forty years and summered at Chautauqua every year from 1915 until his death in 1946. The National Historic Landmark (NHL) description (see Attachment A) of the property represents that the first year of Blatt's ownership, shed roofed porch additions were built to the west, north, and south, and the porch of the east elevation of the cottage was enclosed. The 2005 NHL documentation describes the cottage as contributing though acknowledges non-historic changes to the building including a center paneled door and replacement windows installed in the 1980s as having affected its historic integrity. An earlier 1995 survey of Chautauqua by Front Range Associates, Inc. recommended the building to be non-contributing to the district based upon the level of change describing cottage AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 3 S:~PLANldataVongrang\H15'1'1ACCCC[ZTS Historic Districts\Chau+2uquaU4 Kinnickinnick\09.02.09 mcmo.2cc #14 as "one of the most altered historic resources" in the district (see Attaclvr Ie& r.y r7 nq''r.. - t, Figure 3. Cottage #14 c. 1907 The defined period of significance for the Colorado Chautauqua is 1898-1.930. Additional research indicates that the porches, referred to in the NHL nomination, were actually constructed sometime between 1924 and 1928. Furthermore, a c.1949 tax assessor photograph shows the east porch area screened, and not enclosed in 1917, as described in the NHL documentation. W ' IP. aye .Is "4r'Z' ' ~''11 ~ "L;. rrTi~"rr'2`'Sl~'4 fh4' _•~-M•7. ~ r ` ~~y ~ 4 , p t Y f Figure 4. Cottage #14 c. 1949 AGENDA ITEM #SA PAGE 4 S:APLAN\dataUongran-\HIS'lAALTCERTS\Histmic Districts\ChautauquaA14 Kinnickiimick\09.02.09 memo.doc Additional building permit research indicates that a water plain was brought to the cottage in 1942 and that in 1959 $1,200 worth of work was undertaken, uzcluding new flooring and a new roof of the "screened porch" area. A second tax assessor photograph thought to date from about 1960 shows the east face of the porch having been enclosed (see figure 5). o f • . - ` 6~1- .ti. a Gr.y~~ 7r~ 06 Figure S. Cottage #14, c. 1960 Today, the walls of the cottage are clad with wide horizontal siding some of which appears to date from the 1920s construction of the porches. A portion of the original board and batten siding is visible at the top of the north wall (see figure 6). Post 1960 changes to the building include 1980s replacement of windows and fenestration including center paneled door accessed by a flagstone stoop. The exposed rafter tails visible in the c.1949 photograph are obscured by an eaves trough system. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE s S:'.PLAN\dataUoc~r;m~AT31S f'ALTCERTS\Ms.oric Di~tr_cts1C!.aute' yuaU4 Kinnickinn;cVM02 (19 ntea:c.doc Figure 7. Footprint of cottage showing dates of construction The property slopes up to the west to the Bluebell Trail from which it is publicly visible. This elevation of the building reveals the hip roof form and stone chimney of the original cottage. The rear portion of the house is supported by a concrete block foundation likely constructed in the post 1960 period. s Figure 8. Cottage #14, 2009 - East elevation AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 6 S:\PI.AN\dala\longrang\HIS"l'1Al,]'CERTS\Historic Districts\Chautauyua\14 Kiaiuckinnick\09.02.09 memo doc L'r P 5 ~5 1•! i r nil yr,; ~~f3Y7 tr.f rte`s : ' ,1,aP. Figure 9. Cottage #14, 2009 - Northeast corner Y- IS' 1 r f. " .i 1 r ..~L!`Ti _ Mil, S ~ ~ . t .,~e~'~-..G - j? 1. 1 V Figure 10. Cottage #14, 2009 - West elevation from. Bluebell Trail The 1899 and c.1925 portions of the building were built within the period of significance and are contributing (see i ure 7). The 1957 addition was constructed AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 7_ S:IPLAN\dataVongrang\IIIST\ALTCrKTSUIistoric Districts\Chautauqua\14 Kinnickinnick\09.02.99 memo.doc outside of the period of significance and is, therefore, non-contributing. A 1995 historic building inventory form for the building completed by Front Range Research Associates recommended the building to be non-contributing due to alterations having "diminished" its historic integrity. This assessment is at odds with the 2005 National Historic Landmark nomination for the Colorado Chautauqua which, while acknowledging that changes have "somewhat diminished" the integrity of the building, it "retains most character-defining features of Chautauqua cottages" and should be considered contributing. In a July 2008 review of the proposal to demolish the cottage, the Chautauqua Building and Grounds committee recommended that the NHL nomination was "generous" in referring to the building as contributing as a result of alterations and that, in their opinion, it should be considered non-contributing. Staff considers the building to be contributing and that demolition would be inconsistent with the Chautauqua Historic District Guidelines & General Design Guidelines and that the historic building should be rehabilitated, and if appropriate, added to. LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE REQUEST: The applicant proposes to demolish the existing 1,225 sq. ft. frame cottage and in its place, to construct a 1,538 sq. ft. one-story house with a full basement. The proposed site plan shows the proposed new construction to be largely contained within the footprint of the existing house with roughly the same setback from Kinnikinic Road. At its west the new constructiop is shown to extend roughly 10 feet more toward the Bluebell Trail than the existing house. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE S:\PL.AN\.data`lengrang\IIIS"I'\ALTCERTS1Historic Districts\Chautauqua\14 Kimdckhmick\09.02.09 rtemo.doc v~ ~ n,uao' J l 7 r NNGS RE1,2ENCE / - MMIT* Y a iA VRINCV:q!iC4 w~MO cs •Atiki ~ ~ t vx, t t Z I ~ _ t I / 1 I r K7 EROS FAZM MMM 1.91 t _ - Figure 11. Existing (hatched line) and Proposed (solid line) Site Plans Elevations show the proposed new construction to be simply designed, a manner similar in form and detail to historic cottages found at Chautauqua. The cottage is shown to feature a low-pitch hipped roof intersected by lower projecting gables at the east and west faces. I - - LJ G'tST ELEVATION (EIIS111 _rns F!'41 I Figure 12. Existing East (front) elevation Eaves are shown to be of medium projection and fenestration to feature one over one, double hung windows, a screened u1 porch on the east elevation, and four paneled doors on the east and south faces of the house. Exterior walls are to be clad with batten board siding (screened porch), seven inch exposure lap siding AGENDA ITEM 45A PAGE 9_ S:APLAMdat~Uongrang1I31S'I'1ALTCI;RTS1Historic Districts\ChautauyuaA14 Kinnickinnick%09.02.09 mcmadoc (lower portion of cottage), and 4" exposure painted wood clapboard siding (upper portion of the house). Y EAST ELEVATION Figure 13. Proposed East Elevation The foLmdation of the cottage is shown to be of stuccoed concrete slab construction. A light well is planned at the northwest corner of the cottage. The front entrance to the screened porch is shown to be accessed by way of the existing stone steps. No mature trees are shown to be removed as a result of the project. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 10 S:\YLAN\dataUongrang\HIST\ALTCER'I'S\I listoric Districts\Chautauqua\14 Kinnickinnick\09.02.09 memo.doc Figure 14. Existing North (side) Elevation 1 } NORTH ELEVATIO14 Figure 15. Proposed North Elevation AGENDA ITEM #SA PAGE i 1 S:APLAN\data\Iongrang\HIST\AJ:I'CERTS\Historic Districts\ChautauquaA14 KinuicLinnrc.009.02-01) memo.loc Figure 16. Existing West (rear) elevation WEST ELEVATION T ~W L Figure 17. Proposed West elevation AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 12 S:TLAMdata\long-ang\HiST\ALTCERTS\Historic Distric1s\Chautauqua\14 Kinnickinnick\09-02.09 mcmo.duc Figure 18. Proposed South (side) elevation f \ SOUTH ELEVATION Figure 15. Proposed South elevation AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 13 S-\PT,AN\dala\1ongJang\IiISTW.I'CERTS\I [istorio Districts\Chaulauqua\14 Kinnickiunick\09.02.09 mcmo.doc Criteria for Board's Decision: The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifies that a Landmark Alteration Certificate may not be approved by the Board or City Council unless it meets the conditions specified in Section 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981. Specifically: (b) Neither the Landmarks Board nor the City Council shall approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate unless it meets the following conditions: (1) The proposed work preserves, enhances, or restores and does not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within a historic district; (2) The proposed work 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; (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 or the 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 (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-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled. Analysis: For this application, the Board must consider the demolition request and the proposed replacement plan simultaneously. In determining the appropriateness of demolition within a designated historic district, it is critical to determine whether the subject building contributes to the character of the district. The General Design Guidelines defiles a "contributing building" as being, "built during the district's period of significance (and) exist(ing) in comparatively original condition, or that have been appropriately restored and clearly contribute to the historic significance of the district." "Contributing restorable" is defined as buildings that, "have experienced some alteration, but that still convey some sense of history." AGENDA ITEM #511. PAGE 14 S:\PI.AN\data\Iongrang\141ST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\Chautauyua\14 Kinnickinnick\09.02.09 me.mo.doc Contributing status is based upon a combination of significance and integrity. Significance tells us why the building is important. Integrity describes the ability of the property to convey its significance. The demolition of contributing resources generally does not meet the criteria for issuance of a landmark alteration certificate, as it would have an adverse effect on the special historic, architectural, and aesthetic interest and value of the district. That standard may. be mitigated by questions of economic feasibility, energy-efficiency, disabled access and other city policies, per paragraphs 9-11-1(c) and 9-11-18(c), B.R.C. 1981. If demolition is approved the Landmarks Board must also find that the proposed new construction is also appropriate. 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 is of the opinion that demolition of the existing cottage would damage and destroy the character defining features of a contributing property in the Chautauqua Park Historic District. The 1978 National Register of Historic Places nomination for Chautauqua makes no mention of #14 Kinnikinic Road, while a 1995 historic building inventory form identifies the property as non-contributing. The 2005 National Historic Landmark nomination identifies the building as contributing stating that it "retains most character-defining features of Chautauqua cottages." Staff considers the cottage retains the essential form of the building from the c.1925 period as illustrated in figure 5. After considerable historic and physical investigation, staff is of the opinion that the building retains sufficient historic integrity to be considered a "contributing" or "contributing-restorable" resource to the Chautauqua Historic District per the General Design Guidelines definitions of contributing and contributing restorable (see Attachment Q. This conclusion is based upon staff's opinion that the essential form of the 1899 building and c.1925 additions are intact. This is evident when comparing the current state of the building as illustrated in figures 8, 9, and 10 with historic conditions shown infigures 2, 3 (1899 construction) and figure 4 (c.1925 additions). However, staff has inspected the interior of the building and confirmed that the framing of the building is deteriorated and has been compromised by interior remodeling that has taken place over the years. Considerable work will be necessary to rehabilitate the cottage. Photographs indicating these conditions can be found in Attachment F. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 15 S:~PL1N\data\longraii 'I IIS PALTCCR'I'S`Ilistoric Dis:ricts.ChautauquaA14 Kinickirnnick\09.02.07 r.;emadcc 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the district? The staff finds that the demolition of this highly visible cottage would have an adverse effect on the special historic, architectural, and aesthetic character of property and the value of the district as a whole. 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? While staff considers the proposed new construction would be generally compatible with the architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials in terms of mass, scale, height, setback, and design, the loss of the existing cottage would be to the detriment of the district as a whole (see Design Guidelines Analysis section). 4. Does the proposal to demolish the building within, the Chautauqua Historic District and the proposed new construction to replace the proposed demolished building meet the requirements of paragraphs § 9-11-18(b)(2), 9-11-18(b)(3), & 9-11-18(b)(4) of this section? The staff finds that the proposed demolition of the contributing building will not meet the requirements of 9-11-18(b)(2), 9-11-18(b)(3) and 9-11-18(b)(4) - see questions 1, 2, & 3 above. 5. The Landmarks Board is required to consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled in determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate. No information regarding economic feasibility, energy efficiency, or disabled access are provided in the proposal. The building's structural system is deteriorated and compromised. If provided, the Board may consider more information regarding costs associated with and the economic feasibility of rehabilitating the cottage. b. Is the proposed application consistent with the purposes of Chapter 9-11, "Historic Preservation," B.R.C. 1981? AGENDA ITEM #SA PAGE 16 S:\PLAN\data\tongran;\HIS]'\ALTCG)tTS\IIistoric Districts\Chautauqua\14 K nnickinnick\09.02 09 cxmo.dcc The proposed demolition will result in the destruction of a contributing building and is inconsistent with the legislative intent of the ordinance as set out in 9-11- 1(a-c) of the Boulder Revised Code. DESIGN GUIDELINES: The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate. The Board has adopted the Design Guidelines to help interpret the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The following is an analysis of the proposed new construction with respect to relevant guidelines. Design guidelines are intended to be used only as an aid to appropriate design and are not intended as i a checklist of items for compliance. General Design Guidelines for New Construction, 6.0. 6.1 Distinction from Historic Buildings The replication of historic architecture in new construction is inappropriate, as it can create a false historic context and blur the distinction between old and new buildings. While new structures must be compatible with the historic context, the must also be recognizable as new construction. .1 Buildings should be of their own time The proposed design can be Yes creating contemporary interpretations described as neo-traditional of historic elements. referencing the diminutive scale, form, massing, and simple detailing of cottages in the area. Windows, doors, and firdshes will distinguish the building as contemporary construction. .2 Interpretations of historic styles may be Drawings show the proposed house Yes appropriate if they are distinguishable to interpret some of the historic as new. forms and styles found in the Chautauqua historic district in a manner that will be clearly distinguishable from the historic (see 6.1.1). 6.2 Site and Setting Consistency New buildings should be designed and located so that significant site features, including mature trees, are not lost or obscured. The size of the new buildings should not overpower the site or dramatically alter its historic character. Buildings within historic districts generally display a consistency in setback, orientation, spacing and distance between adjacent buildings. Therefore, the compatibility of proposed new construction will be reviewed to ensure that these elements are maintained. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 17 S:\PLAN\data\lattgrang\HIS'I'\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\Cltantauqua\14 Kinnickinnick\09.02.09 mcmo.doc 1 Conform to the Design Guidelines The proposed building location on Yes found in Section 2.0 Site Design, the site and orientation is generally regarding site and setting in developing in keeping with the neighborhood. a proposed site plan. The facade's orientation to Kinnikinic Road is consistent with streetscape. Rear elevation will extend approximately 6 feet closer to Bluebell Trail than is currently the case, but within the norm for buildings backing onto the trail. z Design new construction so that the Some cutting into the grade will be Maybe overall character of the site, site necessary. However, it is unclear topography, character-defining site whether existing topography and features and trees are retained. trees on the property will be reserved. 3 New site construction to be compatible The proposed house will be located Yes with surrounding buildings that at roughly the same location as the contribute to the overall character of the existing building. The front, side, historic district in terms of setback, and rear setbacks are consistent with orientation, spacing, and distance from the historic pattern for the adjacent buildings. neighborhood. 4 New construction should not be Size of new construction increasing Yes significantly different from contributing approximately 315 sq. ft. over that of historic buildings in the district in existing cottage. The lot coverage terms of the proportion of built mass to and built mass to open space for the open space on the individual site. See proposed new construction appears Guideline 2.1.1. within the average for the historic pattern of the area. 6.3 Mass and Scale In considering the overall compatibility of new construction, its height, form, massing, size and scale will all be reviewed. The overall proportion of the building's front fagade is especially important to consider since it will have the most impact on the streetscape. While new construction tends to be larger than historic buildings, reflecting the needs and desires of the modern homeowner, new structures should not be so out-of-scale with the surrounding buildings as to loom over them. 1 Design new buildings to be compatible The proposed new construction is Yes with surrounding buildings that generally consistent with historic contribute to the overall character of cottages found in the district in the historic district in terms of height, terms of height, scale, massing and size, scale, massing, and proportions. proportion. z The mass and scale of new construction Plans and elevations indicate the Yes AGENDA ITEM 45A PAGE 1 S:\PI.AN\dataVongratlg\1IISPALT'CLRTS%Historic Districts\Chutauyua114 Kinnickinnick109.02.09 memc.doc should respect rreighborin.g buildings scale, massing and placement of the and the streetscape as a whole. proposed new construction will respect neighboring buildings and the streetsca e as a whole. 3 Historic heights and widths as well as Proportions of the proposed house Yes their ratios should be maintained. The are generally compatible with those proportions of the front fagade are of adjacent historic buildings on particularly important and should be Kinnikinic Road. compatible to those of surrounding historic buildings. 6.4 Materials Consistency 1 Materials should be similar in scale, Plans cell for the foundation of the Maybe proportion, texture, finish, and color house to be stuccoed concrete and to those found on nearby historic the walls covered in clapboard and buildings. wide exposure lap siding. The roof is specified to be asphalt shingle. Windows and doors specified to be painted wood. Details should be submitted to staff for review and approval. 2 Maintain a human scale by avoiding Plans for the cottage show shapes, Yes large, featureless surfaces and by using forms, and sizes found on private traditionally sized building cottages in the Chautauqua Historic components and materials. District. 6.5 Key Building Elements Consistency Roofs, porches, downers, windows and doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of any building. As such, they require extra attention to assure that they complement the historic architecture. In addition to the Guidelines below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related suggestions. 1 Design the spacing, placement, scale, Fenestration shown in submitted Yes orientation, proportion, and size of elevations is generally compatible window and door openings in new with historic buildings in the structures to be compatible with the immediate streetscape. surrounding buildings that contribute to the historic district, while reflecting the underlying design of the new building. 2 Select windows and doors for new Specified 1/1 double hung wood Maybe buildings that are compatible in sash are compatible and reflective of material, subdivision, proportion, private cottages in the area. pattern and detail with the windows Proportion of glazed areas on west and doors o surrounding buildings that elevation is greater than typical of AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 19 S 1P1 1\N.data'1on_raa~.HIS'I'1.4 I.ICERTS`',Iisto-ic Distrclc'.Chau':~uq.:a~14 Kin .:6:"nnic::109.02.09:ncmn.dlic contribute to the historic district. historic houses. Screened porch characteristic of Chautauqua. 3 New buildings should use a roof form The low-pitch roof form with Yes found in the district or on the landmark medium overhanging eaves is site. characteristic of private cottages in the district. 4 Porches should be compatible in The proposed screened-in porch on Yes massing and details to historic porches the east elevation is characteristic of in the district, and should be private cottages in the district. appropriate to the style of the house. While the proposed design for a new building appears to be generally consistent with the design guidelines for new construction and would likely be appropriate on an appropriately sized empty lot in the district, staff considers plans for the demolition of the contributing building inconsistent with Section 9-11- 18(a)&(b)(1-4)& (c) S.R.C. as it will have a detrimental effect on the property and the historic district as a whole. Because of the special character of the Chautauqua Park which has recently been recognized by designation of the district as a.National Historic Landmark, the removal of any historic building should be avoided if at all possible. To this end, Staff recommends that the applicant explore the possibility of rehabilitating, and possibly adding to, the historic cottage at #14 Kinnikinic Road. This may necessitate the construction of a new foundation beneath. the building. Costs associated with the rehabilitation of the building would likely qualify for the Colorado Historic preservation tax credit program. FINDINGS: As outlined in the staff recommendation, the proposed demolition and proposed new construction at 14 Kinnikinic Road is not consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance in that: 1. The cottage at 14 Kinnikinic Road is a contributing resource to the local Landmark District and has been identified as contributing to the National Historic Landmark District. 2. The proposed demolition would damage and destroy the special historic exterior architectural features of the contributing property. AGENDA ITEM #5A PAGE 20 S:TLAN\data\tongrang\i1 IST\ALTCERTSV-1istoric Districts\Chautauyua\14 Kinuickinnick\09.02.09 mcmo.doc 3. The proposed demolition of the contributing building would have an adverse effect on the historic character of the Chautauqua Historic District. 4. The request is generally inconsistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance. ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Building Inventory form and National Historic Landmark description of property B: Correspondence from Chautauqua Building and Grounds committee C: Definition of "contributing" and "contributing resources" from the General Design Guidelines. D: Historic photographs E: Existing and proposed plans and elevations F: Fxisting photographs AGENDA ITEM ,45A PAGE 21 S.'TI-AN dataVonImng\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic. DistrictsWIiautauqua\.14 Kinnictiinnick\09.02.09 rnemo.dc Attachment A COLC ADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY Office of Archaeology and historic Preservation NOT FOR FIELD USE 1300 Broadway, Denver, Colorado 80203 _ Eligible _ Nominated Det. Not Eligible _ Certified Rehab. HISTORIC BUILDING INVENTORY RECORD Date PROJECT NAME: BouLder Survey of Historic COUNTY: CITY: STATE ID NO.: 5BL361.53 Places-Scattered Resources, 1995 Boulder BouLde^ TEMPORARY NO.: 1579-01-1-00-020 CURRENT BUILDING NAME: OWNER: BALL DAVID JR % JUDY ADAMS BALL Cottage Number 14 14 CHAUTAUQUA PARY, BOULDER CO 80302-7549 ADDRESS: KINNIKINIC RD BOULDER, CO 80302 TOWNSHIP 1S RANGE 71W SECTION 01 NE 1/4 NE 1/4 HISTORIC NAME: U.S.G.S. QUAD NAME: Eldorado Springs Cottage Number 14 YEAR: 1965 (PR1971) X 7.5' 15' BLOCK: N/A LOT(S): Cottage 14 tBY TRICT NAME: Chautauqua Park ADDITION: Colorado Chautauqua YR. OF ADDITION: 1898 M ROLL NO.: 95B- 2 NEGATIVE NO.: LOCATION OF NEGATIVES: DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: Roger Whitacre 32 BouLder City PLng. ESTIMATE: ACTUAL: 1925 .4 a } , , ..y SOURCE: ` , r ay C L' V+~+ T Boulder County Assessor USE: PRESENT: a a k Q 't~ 4 i• { Residence A a HISTORIC: M1 Residence j~ L i _T..~ r c + dYS CONDITION: L.I $ I{'~`. ` 'f EXCELLENT GOOD sr• ~ ~ ti X FAIR DETERIORATING EXTENT OF ALTERATIONS: MINOR MODERATE X MAJOR _ DESCRIBE: Major remodeling. Nonhistoric siding; security door; plate glass and other window alterations; wrought iron ^i•r railings. r i CONTINUED YES X NO STYLE: Vernacular Wood Frame STORIES: ORIGINAL SITE X MOVED 1 DATE(S) OF MOVE: MATERIALS: Wood, Concrete SQ. FOOTAGE: NATIONAL REGISTER ELIGIBILITY 969 INDIVIDUAL: YES X NO ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: One-story hipped roof dwelling with overhanging eaves•and exposed rafters. Walls CONTRIBUTING TO DISTRICT: clad with wide nonhistoric siding and vertical panel siding. Center paneled and YES X No glazed door with security grille. Plate glass and other nonhistoric windows. LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION: Yes Metal chimney. Concrete block foundation. NAME: City of BouLder DATE: 09-05-1978 ASSOCIATED.BU,YLDINGS? YES X NO TYPE: IF INVENTORIED, LIST ID NOS.: CONTINUED? YES X NO ADDITIONAL PAGES: YES X NO AN SHAPE: ARCHITECT:' STATE ID NO.: 58061.53 I I 7 Unknown ORIGINAL OWNER: Unknown SOURCE: LF1. _ I SOURCE: I - BUILDER/CONTRACTOR: Unknown THEME(S): SOURCE: Recreation/Tourism: Roots & I _ Development, 1865-1945 CONSTRUCTION HISTORY (DESCRIPTION, NAMES, DATES, ETC., RELATING TO MAJOR ALTERATIONS TO ORIGINAL STRUCTURE): CONTINUED YES X NO HISTORICAL BACKGROUND (DISCUSS IMPORTANT PERSONS AND EVENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS STRUCTURE): This 1925 cottage replaced an earlier, smaller house on the site which had been present on 1900 through 1922 Sanborn Insurance maps. Houses near the outside boundary of the Chautauqua grounds were typically erected by private individuals or groups. The old Assessor card indicates that Mr. A.H. Blatt of Beechhurst, New York, was an earlier owner of the building. This cottage may have been associated with Rabbi Joseph Blatt of Oklahoma. He frequently conducted non-denominational religious services at the Colorado Chautauqua and became a "cottage owning" resident. David Ball was a subsequent owner of the property and David BaLL, Jr., is listed as the present owner. The original cottage on the site was reportedly associated with Mrs. Lucy BLiss. She carne to Boulder in about 1895 and lived there an Pine street until about 1915. CONTINUED YES X NO 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 ASSOCIATED WITH SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OR PATTERNS REPRESENTS A TYPE, PERIOD, OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRIBUTES TO AN HISTORIC DISTRICT TIER EVALUATION: STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Alterations have diminished the historic property of this building. This cottage is one of the most altered historic resources on the Colorado Chautauqua grounds. CONTINUED YES X NO REFERENCES (BE SPECIFIC): Boulder County Assessor information; Boulder County Assessor collection, Carnegie Library for LocaL History; Mary Galey, The Grand Assembly (Boulder, C0: First Flatiron Press, 1981), 83; Sanborn Insurance map, 1900-1931; Boulder Daity Camera, 14 July 1935. CONTINUED YES X NO SURVEYED BY: R.L. Simmons/T.H. Simmons AFFILIATION: Front Range Research Associates, Inc. DATE: November 1995 NPS Form 10-900 USD1/NPS NRHP Registration Form (Rev. 8-86) OMB No. 1024-DO18 COLORADO CHAUTAUQUA Page 15 t Jnited States Department ofthe Interior, National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form Cottage Number 13B (1971, noncontributing) Built to replace a 1900 cottage measuring just 20' x 20' this rectangular, one-and-a-half story front gable dwelling has overhanging enclosed eaves. Walls are covered with wide horizontal siding. Gable ends have horizontal siding, paired windows, and louvered vents. A shed-roofed porch on the east fagade features wide horizontal siding under the screens and vertical siding along porch foundation; the porch entry is at its south end and is accessed by wood stairs and railing. The off-center door to the house is paneled and glazed with a lattice light. A small wood deck with wood railing is centered on the west elevation second floor. A panel under multi-light door gives entrance to the upper story. All windows are. one-over-one light and double hung, with simple wood surrounds. Cottage Number 14 (1899) This rectangular, one-story hipped roof dwelling with overhanging, open cornice eaves was built in 1899 as an investment property. The foundation is wood pier covered in horizontal siding. In 1917, Rabbi Joseph Blatt bought the cottage and it served as his summer home until 1956. The first year of Blatt's ownership, shed roofed additions were built to the west, north, and south. The porch on the east fagade was enclosed that year as well. Walls are clad with wide horizontal siding and vertical siding. The integrity of the building is somewhat diminished by modern exterior features. A center paneled and glazed door is accessed by a flight of concrete steps with iron railing leading to a stoop constructed of red sandstone laid in a random ashlar pattern. In the 1980s plate glass and other nonhistoric windows were installed in each elevation. Still, the cottage retains most character-defining features of Chautauqua cottages. The area to the west of the cottage is terraced with sandstone slabs and planted with indigenous succulents. Cottage Number 16 (1941, noncontributing) Built to replace small, early cabins 15 and 16, this cottage was designed by prominent area architect John Blanchard. This is a rectangular, side gabled one-and-a-half story Craftsman dwelling with overhanging eaves. Walls and gable ends are shingled. The raised foundation is concrete. Three shingled, gabled dormers with exposed rafters and six-light windows are located on the east fa9ade. Windows are paired one-over-one light double hung windows with wood surrounds. A narrow wood sill course runs around the house. The off-center door is_ louvered screen, flanked with sidelights. A shed hood with triangular braces protects it. Concrete stairs with pipe railing lead to a concrete stoop. In the 1960s, a flat roofed addition with a double gabled second story was constructed on the west elevation. This second story has aluminum horizontal sliding windows. Cottage Number 18 (1941, noncontributing) John Blanchard also designed cottage 18 in the Craftsman style. It is a rectangular, side gabled two-story dwelling with overhanging, open cornice eaves. The raised foundation is painted concrete. Walls and gable ends are shingled. The gable ends have louvered vents. An original one-story flat roofed projection on north end of west elevation has gabled second story. The south end of west elevation has projecting shed roof enclosed addition, built in the 1960s, to the same proportions as the north wing. First story windows are paired one-over-one light double hung windows with wood surrounds, shared sill course, and shed roofed hoods supported by triangular braces. All windows have white aluminum storm windows. The entrance is a center slab door, accessed by brick stairs with brick walls surmounted with pipe railing. Cottage Number 19 (1900) This is a rectangular, one-story front gabled roof dwelling with overhanging eaves. The wood pier foundation is covered with horizontal siding. Walls and gable ends are clad with horizontal siding. The wails have tapered corner boards and wooden belt course above vertical wooden siding. The shed-roofed porch on the east fagade is screened and has tapered wood post supports, a solid wood balustrade, and narrow and wide horizontal siding below the porch deck. The porch entrance is on its south end, and accessed by wooden stairs and railing. The 10 . f r i J• dG5 I t •1 1 l ClkCr O -C\ 0 C ~LC,L"A-L CU-3 ~ V CC, r ~ ~ Circle 91 r ys $ o u.l c~ err C a l a~ra~ ra ~ ` r'~ O s sue' 12 - 2 .0 10~ 13 let 1 V 4 Or 10 a r fr f3a ~ LuVne Lane 1 l 4 I 1 4 ° FLJ ~{ml 510 y=1 frg As 1: le !ot L~ar e s+ J m . _ . tialc LV//J u 504 I r l - . ONO f 21 . Garden l~•::;,- Pre a. CaE•2mbina 1 he,hcc. i1+*-; Vi+na~ ! r:nic ofG,'c 1 Setielter Y+tl Fe~n~e•: ~ ° 2, 1 0 C.i 2 a E. a S Dllt itflelty roads ~ ?simrasa .aa<i _ • " - • - Hisforrcal district border - `4 T Sidewalk Alley Paved street I fn 31a i z7 i 0 0 100 { e f- a I FHi ALrditoriunl M~ Mornln~Gionrarve z~ J I ~•'r ~0•ItJ~ Nausery L~ 31S 313 's8 gl I Cenfdreriial Li 3t mi T O G X17 • i o =SEI T4? G l32edJ6 2 _•m T _ z14 it? ?SS ct7 ~ Tzt ST ~ I T y`ytior~ 0 7 i ; 'i o°°lufi 1 I Dining i0 iJa 10T C6 tG3 tiD 1i4 i oraWay Cl~fn,adsl3rFda ~ ~a« - ~ ® ~trase ~~eMly Children's Q~4u r ~ ~ c 446 p P h""d„rb,r The Chauiratiqua Green ¢ ) 0 74 S M I g i ~ ~ MC6ea f'' . i ~ ) ~ Shc+;cr r . ~ ~ ~ rv'fteSC B,sc'iaeALC - - - e _ - - - a• s a~ iQ ° cn Attachment B r Colorado Chautauqua Association's Position on Cottage 14 Proposed Project Motion at Regular Board Meeting July 22, 2008 Conrad Lattes moved and Richard Foy seconded the following motion, which passed 13- 0-0: The Colorado Chautauqua Association (CCA) board of directors does not generally support demolition of structures that are deemed to be contributing to the district, but Cottage 14 presents a -unique situation of prior alteration. Because of the degree of deterioration and modification, we believe that the proposed plans, with CCA's Building and Grounds (B&G) Committee's recommendations implemented, would make the cottage more contributory to our historic district. We would support the demolition if these conditions below are met. (Draft minutes- final minutes will be approved at August 18 CCA board meeting) Chautauqua Building and Grounds (B&G) Committee Meeting 7/7/08 Cottage 14 Upgrade Proposal Members present: Cody Oreck, Kathleen Woodberry, Jim Turner, Jeff Medanich, Steve Watkins. The Committee reviewed revised drawings prepared by Z-K Building Design dated 5/5/08 for Trudy Hutchings of a proposed upgrade to her cottage 14 on Kinnicinik Road in Chautauqua Park. The proposal includes a demolition of the existing structure t and rebuilding on a slightly expanded footprint with a basement under a portion of the main floor. The existing square footage is 1250 while the proposed footage is 1475 plus 800 feet in the basement. `This proposal will require a full Landmark Preservation Advisory Board review/public hearing. Chautauqua's National Historic Landmark nomination includes this cottage as a contributing structure, but that in the opinion of the committee, seems quite generous. The Cottage 14 description in the nomination states "The integrity of the building is somewhat diminished by modern exterior features.... In the 1980's plate glass and other non historic windows were installed in each elevation. Still, the cottage retains most character defining features of Chautauqua cottages." The board discussed how deteriorated the overall condition of the cottage was when the property was sold to Trudy. There's not much of any foundation left or any of the original structure. The committee questions whether this cottage is really a contributing resource. Following are some of committee's comments/recommendations: Because the proposed screened porch (which we suggested being added during our first review in early January) protrudes 4.5 feet further toward the street (east) than the existing footprint, the question arose whether the entire foot print should be moved west to retain a similar setback from the street as the adjoining cottages? With the added area outside the existing footprint on the west, overall we'd like to see the proposed east and west expansions stay within the setbacks of cottage 16 next door on the north. Will the upgrade reflect Chautauqua's strong push toward greening and enviromnental sustainability? If a "scrape" and rebuild is pursued, it will come under the City's green building requirements. The site plan shows a flagstone patio on the southwest corner of the cottage. If the mature ash tree there is removed, the committee recommends another tree be planted for passive solar shading on that west side? The proposed scale of the windows seems disproportionately small. The committee recommends larger windows similar to the one on the east elevation next to the porch at least on the east elevation, although the use of double hung windows will probably require larger windows in the bedrooms for egress sizing. There are conflicting descriptions of existing treatments on the elevation drawings. The east elevation states "existing shiplap siding", while the existing siding is actually 9" lap siding. The committee suggests the use of more board and batten siding which was on the original 1899 cabin and the originally reviewed January drawings. It also shows an "existing screened porch", which there currently is none and "existing windows, trim & fascia" which is now almost all single layer plate glass not the drawn double hung units. The east elevation also states "no external changes proposed", obviously not correct. The west elevation continues with the incorrect description of the windows and siding. The committee would like to see revised elevation details prior to a final determination on the appropriateness of this proposal. Steve Watkins Associate Mgr. Facilities and Preservation Colorado Chautauqua Association 303 618 5115 steve(aDchautauqua.com 14 Cottage Chautauqua Building and Grounds Committee Review 4/10/09 June 4, .009 li'&G Review of May drawings Following are the comments of our committee after reviewing Z-K Building Design's 2/26/09 construction drawings: We'd like to express our appreciation far the cooperation and effort made toward revising many treatments to the previously reviewed drawings submitted in April. We hope our mutual goal is to produce a plan that is as compatible to the historic district and as livable as possible. Numbered items 1-7 are comments provided to you on 4110109, followed by 614109 comments in italics. Members present: Lara Ramsey, Kristin Lewis, Jim Turner, Steve Watkins. 1. Want to see a site plan that shows the current footprint overlaid with the proposed new structure footprint, to better see square footage comparisons and placement on the site. We had earlier requested that the proposed front and rear setbacks be within #'s 13B and 16 on the south and north. The site plan should show the footprint in relation to setbacks to confirm that this request has been met. The current drawings don't deal with our request for set backs in relation to the adjacent cottages. We walked the site and would like to see the screened porch extend no further east than the existing footprint (essentially moving the entire footprint 4' west). This would also possibly save the mature silver maple tree on the northeast corner. 2. Would like to see an existing floor plan for comparison to the new proposed structure. (the statement on page A-O, the cover page of the drawings "Replacement of existing house perimeter walls and roof on footprint approximating existing" is misleading) Drawing sheet L-I dated 4125108 has the incorrect overlay of the existing footprint and the proposed footprint. Hans made the correction by hand, but it needs to be corrected on any submitted plans. 3. Committee is concerned about the total increase in square footage and is evaluating other recent additions to Chautauqua cottages for comparison. Suggest looking at whether the "above grade" square footage might be reduced a bit and regained in the basement. We reviewed several cottage expansions from the last 20 years and concluded that the proposed footprint expansion is comparable and in scale with the adjacent cottages. 4. Need to re-evaluate window type/proportions. The east elevation proportions are ideal while the west, north and south elevation window variations don't seem compatible to the general district, especially the 3-gang units with a non-operable lite in the middle. The new window type/proportions are a marked improvement. We would however suggest that the west elevation bedroom and kitchen windows and the south elevation kitchen window seem notproportioned quite right, a bit squarish. We feel like more rectangular, vertical proportions are more compatible with double hung windows in the general district. We'd suggest using the same west windows in bedroom 1 as the west windows in bedroom 2, replace the 2 short west kitchen windows with perhaps 3 narrower width windows, and use a narrower window on the south kitchen wall. Last, since all windows would be new, the typical exterior trim in the park is 1x4 casing, no brick mold should be used. 5. Suggest more board and batten siding. The drawings appear to be more of a 4" lap than that of the labeled 1 x8 milled material. A suggested siding treatment might be something similar to the Mission House: a larger horizontal lap up to the window sills (would be very similar to the 1949 assessors photo at Carnegie), a smaller tongue and groove horizontal siding the remaining way up and board and batten on the screened porch (board and batten being the original cottage siding). The revised siding treatment is great! 6. The roofline and height, while changed from hip and shed to gables, seems OK knowing that the existing perimeter walls are probably less than 7 feet. 7. The east facade screened porch is a welcome addition, the double door from the living room to porch is acceptable given that the porch is screened, not open. 8. Taking dimensions from the floor plan and sight plan, the total north/south width of the lot would be 51.5 feet. The leased lot width is 50 feet. Please reflect this on a revised site plan. An Improvement Location Certificate (ILQ will probably be required in the City building permit process. 9. There were some concerns with the amount of hardscape and boulders on the current site plan. A detailed landscape plan will be needed with a separate review prior to beginning work. We would suggest a consultation with an arborist to discuss the possibilities of saving the existing mature maple tree on the northeast and the ash tree on the southwest corners of'the cottage. A possibility with the ash tree would be to have a sidewalk only come frorn the west door up to the elevated patio and move the egress well north closer to that door. G4 r #14 Perimeter History Sanborn map] Dept. Pub. Service map*- Perimeter description Date Date 1900 J Approx. 12'X28' with 6'x12' open porch on east fagade 1906 Same-- 1910 'Sam- 1918 Same 1919 _Same 1922 Same 1924 I Same 1928 Added 8'X28' on_west and 8'X36' on east wrap around southeast to center ridge 1931 Same- porch wasn't continuous around all 3 sides _ observation _ Appears that the original north/south hip roof was lengthened about 50% 1949 assessor photo Screened in with wide horizontal lap skirt below screens- --1960-assessor photo All 3 sides (e,s,w) closed in with windows and fill for screens This is taken from the maps we have in our archives. The 2 assessors photos are a bit fuzzy, so the comments about the 1960 windows may not be totally accurate, however it's obvious that the screening is gone. Department of Public Service Parks Division Steve Watkins Attachment C 9. DEFINITIONS Alignment The arrangement of objects along a straight line. i Balcony A railed projecting platform found above ground level on a building. Arch A structure built to support the weight above an opening. A true arch is curved. It consists of wedge-shaped stones or bricks called voussoirs (vu-swar'), put together to make a curved bridge which spans the opening. Baluster A short, upright column or urn-shaped support of a railing. Balustrade A row of balusters and the railing connecting them. Used as a stair rail and also above the cornice on the outside of a building. Bargeboard A projecting board, often decorated, that acts as trim to cover the ends of the structure where a pitched roof overhangs a gable. Bracket A supporting member for a projecting element or shelf, sometimes ui the shape of an inverted L and sometimes as a solid piece or a triangular truss. Cantilever A projecting beam, girder or other structural member supported only at one end; used to support a balcony, cornice, extended eaves or any other extension to a building or structure. Column A slender upright structure, generally consisting of a cylindrical shaft, base, capital, and pillar: It is usually a supporting or ornamental member in a building. Contributing Buildings Those buildings built during the district's period of significance that exist in comparatively original condition, or that have been appropriately restored, and clearly contribute to the historic significance of the district. Such buildings may have compatible additions. GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Contributing-Restorable Buildings Those buildings built during the district's period of significance* that have original material that has been covered, or buildings that have experienced some alteration, but that still convey some sense of history. These buildings would more strongly contribute, however, if they were restored. Such buildings may have less compatible additions. Cornice A projection at the top of a wall or the top course or molding of a wall when it serves as a crowning member. Deck An uncovered platform, usually with wood decking and railings, that extends from out from the main face of a building. Dormer A window set upright in a sloping roof. The term is also used to refer to the roofed projection in which this window is set. Eave The underside of a sloping roof projecting beyond the wall of a building. Elevation A mechanically accurate, "head-on" drawing of a face of a building or object, without any allowance,for the effect of the laws of perspective. Any measurement on an elevation is in a fixed proportion, or scale, to the corresponding measurement of the real building. Facade The front or principal face of a building, or any side of a building that faces a street or other open space. Gable Building ends above eave level of a pitched or gambrel roof. In the case of a pitched roof this takes the form of an angle. The term is also used sometimes to refer to the whole end wall. Historic Context An organizing structure for interpreting history that groups information about historic properties that share a common theme, common geographical area, and a common time period. GLOSSARY OF TERMS e 3_. the development of historic contexts is a foundation for decisions about the planning, identification, evaluation, registration, and treat- inent of historic properties, based upon comparative historic significance. Historic Integrity The degree to which a building has retained its original elements. Historically Important Window or Door The feature has retained integrity from the period of significance and is an integral part of the historic design or is essential to the understanding of the architectural type or style. Human Scale Human scale refers to the relationship between the dimensions of a building, street, streetscape or outdoor space to the average dimensions of a. human body. Individually Significant Buildings Those buildings that are considered individually eligible for the National Register of Historic Places or for local landmark designation. These buildings have a special character and historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value in Boulder's local history. Interior Energy Panel Interior energy panels are single pane glass panels affixed to the interior of historic windows in order to reduce conductive heat loss and prevent the infiltration of cold air from outdoors. They are an option for increasing energy efficiency without full window replacement. Landmarks Board The City-of Boulder's Landmarks Board consists of five volunteer city residents appointed by the City Council to consider applications and make recommendations to Council for landmark and* historic district designations and to review proposed exterior alterations to Landmarks or within landmark districts. GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES Landmarks Board Design Review Committee A Committee that consists of two members of the Landmarks Board and one member of the Planning Department staff and meets weekly to review alteration certificate applications. Molding A decorative band or strip of material with a constant profile or section designed to cast interesting shadows. Generally used in cornices and trim around window and door openings. Mullion A large vertical member separating two casements; the vertical bar between coupled windows or multiple windows; the central vertical member of a double-door opening. Muntin One of the thin strips of wood used for holding panes of glass within a window; also called muruuon, bar, sash bar, munton bar. Also, the central vertical member of a door. Non-Contributing Buildings: Those buildings built during the district's period of significance that have been altered to such an extent that original historic elements are not interpretable, and restoration is not possible, also buildings erected outside the period of significance that are not individually significant. Non-Historic Window or Door: Windows or doors that have been replaced, or are so extensively altered that they are inconsistent with the pattern, proportion or materiality of the historic window or door. Non-Historic windows and doors.may be retrofitted or replaced. However, the character of the retrofit or replacement should be compatible with the historic character of the building. (See Section 3.7.15). Parapet A low wall or protective railing; often used around a balcony or balconet, or along the edge of a roof. Period of Significance The time period during which the majority of GLOSSARY OF TERMS 71"1- _ Cottage 1 Pl- r. r. r - p 5r?~l• v~~rr' r. L.,V;Q 8a`='',r. -.:,rYii -~.,1.. ^ r v .F 2k. sm .r i •Y I FM^^~ M W 16~~1 i r ~a ~'.-y,~• ~ Y _~'if14 n ~ • I I 1~ ~ ~ r - _ .'~1 . - ~ L ~ , ~1 ~ .~~'a~„~-. ~ ~ ro• 1 al" l ~f.3. ~asrr-L_~• .s ''i~- I' QL-t _ ~ a~ ~ _ ate- ~-.i^-I ~ 'r:a'- - I J. *EMS . - r.' .x': }'v--' i s f"~6•~ r,1_ ..rte- ~ ! iW-r- T'eY ~,IT ~ ~°s i~~ - ~r.+ ff .F t. - al".f T : ~ '~'~+tr•c%-r.n t-N _sw ~w •Ly AL ;I~,~r'~~,,,y.•`.1~~ ,r.r^ ..V~~. ~:,n•~'''~~ _wy, - •r~~ 'r f j~.+f~7'tP -1 - t, I a = 4 - I I 1,Y ~3.4 -;'t`~1~y, a L~`'~.,~ -+,h'~, ` .~I~- R . ty ;''~j-•y _,J-1~ 1 [ ..jt~~9.Y r k.~a t. `a}hf}~±a -..y~,~•t+~x Y`'y. f", ~r ~~11L ~•j-L• IY~ + ,r ~~M~~~~~i'~ . ~F„' ~~y. ~ r ,+_•ll,/• ~ ~'.ffii. ~Zt ~A-. - ' If,k1~ y,..A • ~yl r 1 ~ ~i .y. Mit ~ ~T ~ tl '1!.•..`. 5 -t r~ 1 - . pill .At :r WA , •R _ ~ :Fps. .V rC ' Ipl.. a_ 4 ~ r N' ~.~ytiw~ _ t`• 3 { ,Cf.+ Yv ~ 'x-d f - ~ - ~t ti I R ~t*' it - it s . T. ' J "'r"" ~ rll, . Jl/N~:- 1 J~ ~~'ti ,t • ~ 1 T . rFt . it ~ 4 'L' ~ ~ ~ ..h ~p i'- i ~ ~ ~ ,-s ` - 1 ~1~ } ) 1,11 .1" i + S 1~. ~ ~J ~ y ~,lp~I. ~~I[ ' '1,~ 4~i'. J l ` - - vR ' ; 01 /t. •w .l M • r~ ~'r - ~ 'w~ t w'jai. ~ "1!+•~ F.•r ~ ~ ' ,4 . -rte pis 13~-~,. + l1 a r.~ ~ , ss. !I 1 ~ + - _~l ;._~~b-pi.r .4^.. 'S'~~_ ~~.~Iri•^~'~ a~'~-./~~' ~~f7f y~ V - - Va i a I . ~F~"t..N f t ~ •-1 • ! 41 1' - .yam : _ _ . :u•+ ~ •a ~~i '.~R - .+-Ft1._r<'~'` -t2 y yid-j ~ :M` .AW>•`' .fir L• i,~y;~4 .y -•.f - MY '~,V~ w.[ -~ww YL i J J~•~ - _ -+~-1 Y+e •r~'., ~"r , ~/L. 4 .v - -ice _ - '..~...'';'!!a~ _ t - 'k{t. 9'~ { M r~~ Tyr C 1~_al~, . ~ r i,r•~~ - ~ - ~ - I' _4 y' ~H':~ ri'1 yY4;•~~ .Q.,j.~~P 1 w a° S q. ',~l ~ ~ - ~-t,~.. _ _ _ _ • • Cy- 11 f S,hYy ~ 'rfi ' kj ~ijAF ~S a'.k} I 5:.` - FY _ M1i{--..'" !-eR o' f `'C w fir; r ns.. _ Y>'; j .r s4 " 10A 7 31 Hr" V'i`' ~d~~. ■ - ~r. r.`!~ ter' lb~k..dY p~7• a i +1t ' ~ ry,y ~ r~ / ) ~ L "'('1r•n+ -7~ _ V.. `~ZZ-~ ~ _ _ L. _ ~ Jr 1••y_ ' - Y ' a , •'S• J ~ 7,'.4'S~ ♦:~R~. ~ •Td rrY-1'-^'?~'^~~- - 'v T ~ _ .'!3"!11. ~.rt5~ ti ~y~~.:-rij ~ ..~'l~IIvYt `,y t ~ r r f 1 000 a _ , - - - y our- ~ a I Oil y } Oka s''T n 1 110 va -1e tr. : -I is T . 1 .0 Ik• _ s r F a~ - iEr r _ t t t F. M* _ y z 14&6 LJ 0QN d/? 4 Z) m~ Oa ~0 C I- a t!1 U ¢ Q LF11 [hi LFd Lhj Z ZD -aJ U ~ ~Q U 2ox LEJ x O D -IT, 0 DRAWING INDEX A-4 SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN i.+~',`~•1~ A-1 MAIN FLOOR PLAN AND DOOR SCHEDULE OWNER A-2 BASEMENT PLAN WITH PLUMB. FXTR; SCHED. & trj f,' APPLIANCE SCHED. A3 NORTH & SOUTH ELEVATIONS I 1 1` TRUDY HUTCHINGS As EAST aWEST ELEVATIONS A-5 BUILDING SECTIONS 2422 WEST MAIN ST. A•6 BUILOINGSECTICN WALL SECTION HOUSTON, TX. 77098 PH: 713.502.0345 A-' MAIN ENT WALL LE Z= A-5 EASEMENT SECTION _ ;,m• I a, A-9 KrERIOR ELEVATIONS we A.K WINDOW SCHEDULE CABINET AND TRIM DETAILS PZUEE E-1 ELECTRIC J LIGHTING PLAN r ELECTRIC NOTES AND .rte. LIGHT FIXTURE SCHEDULE / d - BUILDER "!i' G2 BASEMENT ELEC. & LIGHTING PLAN J M-1 HVACPLANNOTES ' d HAMS POST VANUENBERG S FLCOR FRAMING PLAN AND BASEMENT FORMING" .S-2 CE2!NG FRAMING PLAN AND WODO FRAM 13 NOTES k Y al L':=- C PH. 303.651.0263 S-3 ROOF FRAMING PLAN .Q,If CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS { Z-K BUILDING DESIGN, INC. 18.10 W. BELL ST., HOUSTON, TX. 77019 PH. 713-528-3956 i ' I--• I c 3 pµy/YyIIW 1 - - _ LIL(-1 pp SCOPE OF WORK REPLACEMENT OF EXISTING HOUSE PERIMETER WALLS AND ROOF ON FOOTPRINT APPROXIMATING EXISTING. L J _ r ± CHAUTAUOUA GREEN CONSTRUCTION OF NEW HOUSE INTERIOR AND NEW PARTIAL L'J BASEMENT. W AREA TAKE OFF: 0 MAIN FLOOR (FOOTPRINT) = 1421 SQFT. SCREENED PORCH(NOT INCL. IN 1421 SQ FT.) = 70 SQ. FT.. q z a - BASEMENT = 430 SO. FT. 1 YtCiNr1YMAP - I 1 ~ ti icy r0 ' - /JST WIATAW fGk+O^l.HL IZ_'~ f~~~ byl C 1] ggG~G E Yl i~E 5T ELfl!FT10k (Ul-TA, GAI) x g i _ sob: ,i.•., a' o..r..~•w.v,. j ¢ $ ~ F A-1 v. W 0 E f ~ ~~r7 cn < Z) O O C~ DOOR SCHEDULE , .S' dATRt, 4 Z Z O BEo I , I _ Y O O ¢ c; C. . sox ,l 1 I P° o E... U ~ I c. es I LIYB/G - = Z D as ,I1 txTE:wRO~•:Fa. •~:ev,LDVnt~•.c~crrA,+ -i , V11'F. R'Oi3.^,{><]A t•4`,\t~ F:l•.r`+A #1 DE PACE - = ;IFY :ALL THCILN'E55 ON 5RE FCR ppCSrNp FPgME6 -/7/ W ,w UjTFN T70x UELGW FOR N tr5dGFl~rOG rb, rl f y ~~'/17 i V = L C S I B' THICK PANT GRADE SOLID FF E BIRCH VFNEEfi _ 1}85 PRE-HUNG UNG IN \4'HITE PINE INE FRArAE6 rtEv: GGPJG , LANDING t'-w-q'an EXTENSION V i . 4 PAWL OF,IIKfN I. LI CIDWrALCTED Or I a,! WAIN GRAgC MUD F.R STILE 6 flAIL (>APCf,EV:3'Wn1 F~.EN_-i•:,S OR PRE-R,-4 . ALL,.. MALL\d ✓ T E1.TE3CE y ~ EXIST " CONC. AND. • I LT E EITEAG,1 OrSG,11(121 TU N%)L CIE t6v_A '/,'4 4 O 3,'A_g FSfTRY STONE STEPS C. FJA I [•1PfZrr D ULA.GS UNITS IN WA3J Ci IXX 1 344' ' T." D01lGLA5 FIR GMF a R:A_ UCKY-;L K4 40 TYPICAL FL01 PlN, 'D' GRADE c 0 ANO LAN INGS `,f>f r0.nss Q..wO'~~3 AS'~ED 6v rcln [F o ~2/A-9 KRCrrpl PLANE SAWN OOU(3. FIR 2'a FA.",r-' <L, . TwCK (vE7) TOUNGE JS GPOCLJL W pHnrlr'.9 ,u,F FteE;bL45S OLJD T*7rtr. RN= i y' -9 - PLANKING, AUNN[NG N'CRTH - S' !MWL..T WT-r, lPr f.0. M! L1 F!IN ALUM, 7RPPFL.0LDSOLDS\ A EvP1j SLAIN PEA OWNCR APPA'JVE❑ OW ~ . t4TMI~, - _ S",PL5 A!`JC APPLY 2 COATS L9 LUSTCPi -OL.RETHANE (EIUFFEDI - _yyl.r..• 71;.9 ExTF3SRU MINOE3 BRU SHEDSTAINLE53 BALL BEARNG 3llZi.21.T y";~. _ i r.j A - - - t/PPTISED BUTT HINGES EO. 7D HAWR (j'PE;+MOP) / ; % • - _ - _ I^ FJ:RHIN3ES L66Z L. c cC NTABLE edATT BRASS 3 1,2', 3 1,7 MCRrSED aLrrr C 9/A-9 C'~1 - IINUES (S PER MDR) - I j _ • un NcNJ PAIN!FG C=_ STL. GUAR') -c.'Ofl LOCKS (y~ LJ r. '•+O_L CYL DEADBOLT \Y/ 2 3Z BADCSET & SRUSHED OCD 2 _ a=3 TIROf.IE F+N. MODEL f BI 02N BY SCHLACi (10'f(72'I F BATH * 2 DK,~ENSIONS ARE SHO'NN TO FACE OF EXTERIOFI KNOB BETS - ~ 4IA-9 SL•D EXCr?T AT CAF:NETS NvHERE BRUSHED CHRCME 2 °.JT SA XSL? KEYED Sd~GLE CYL V' OVENS ARE TO WALL F INISHy r^E9W LATCH SET M7JCL I A53PD SY SCHLAGE N ORINT DESIGN'VVlRFS LIPS~IKE LL _ :•'-Ir1 w PRIVACY SET ' • N CRUSHED CH99ME FIN. 2 3,B' BASSET: •ORBrr CE61GN MODEL. k A4CG BY SCH(A;GE W/ FEE . LIP STRIKE I PASSAGE SET I I - I eRuSHEo C(,ROME P.N. 23.E BACK6ET,'DRBT DESIGN IL]L - - n' - ~1 - MODELop AICS.EY ECHLAGE N'/FIE6. LIP STRIKE FLOOR PLAN " LLI . ~ ' I - ' Pf4 Fti•Ht i.Y/Ut. .,i.i. J ~ U j j. rvP. oooi CAW* 0 I`7;5.}pa r'_A .L'tlNC -.hI' ,I , `L.,LyGI ':f\ U`! L~ ' I1v17 PER NGTif'• PER 14ANIC (~C; ~7r (7 .`'cQD.: `.yam..' v g"q~, REti'G; %..:•L,; REQ''~; f i REL~•G1 r~r:~-'I?+ - _ : r •f Jv'-.. 9~ 1'~~ TYPICAL DCOF CAS OPROR E _ AL- 1 U3 Q]0 0°M tan U a q~ ~Z0 ~z Z no o° u U_ g U Z _j W Y00 Lu \ . ` 4CV-1,W;SRATEo 1 1 ,et t 1 ~---i1115HE0UHEIHOtCAIES SCFEE:iEO~ / E195i.IMpg91j1E191 PpRCf, ' ~ r ~MBNCpIC. LAMW 1 , DMNSMN q HUTCHINGS RESIDENCE AXDSM W14 KINNICKINNIC►C s1EPSU+n ` v N4 SIM'4.G FOOAPM = 1540 smv. - m=~-' U -New PROPE - -1491 Sa FT. siL GL' Bs z i MPMM - - 1 - -~4-- _\`~WM_DOWMIEil _ _ _ _ _ c~'Td-`7155. _ rL • ~ ,e is a ' !c~ L.43iC- " t DOSi: AD:ACEHi CA51K ~ to y Z W N m fl 1 91,E aLM1 O Z ,~.,•a w LU a , ~ I LU F -O. i c oft to i, ''II 51J2'CM11v;Ji I ACF St 1741~ Cm IIIIIIII I ~:.I~• Y . s L~rr i' _ \ fey G1 V N N 4 S=Ei i Ic I ~ ~ M1I - II 111 ~ I ~n1:En ~ m = Fla3sttce r" w~p i 1 _ • i I r: ^J,9f1211I2 I Z _ ~r~r Ortl~~Adckmr Rrals~ ~ p ~ U C%I (Ez- fII I , ,0 m o o p - L ;Um Original cabin r~ c 12 ft x31ft - III N C 0 ° Co ~m I 1 I, Cv n II a I j! I'"`''`I") f O = CL Rrrtla I 4,1 ox- 3 1. -rno° m i 1 1 II m L) V `o d 4 r. ca ~j O F- 19'- 2' a•°h ;.n• ` ;I 19'•2" ll~ U O v Y- LL LLI n.J ras.q I4r:: :id!• a,~: r 14. c: 5 __t.~r_er 6~ t7na: fae a+.' I :Far r,.r.,~ 6 rc:.,.tll : rlT e._~ . - I, cc 33•_0" Cencrece 57cu~ L U rsers Cr 5 . 12' LIP r FLOOR PLAN (Existing-As Built) Al/ Scale: 1/4° = 1'-0" Z Printed 0 75% p ox< =X~d W U ~Zn Z Q f2 1:`. Z p 0 Ix PIN. .f` EVW55 vr- K" I W Y ~ `,:•,\t C. x4. x710.1 LtTi11Ei5 ~H9W.4: ~ J~: I F--1 WN4C M'.f°DR I 0 1 ~r s xr°: g.~ 2, 2, WPM. 717$I K:14 Re k7,Goa7~ r.75 ,3.'75 LSlio OMl`It TO '~If E;ECt~[ 4A•+GC ,f M R_ , 03 I '•I - SG CJA. PLC', SLUE IN •`V+ + ' 14A t CDC ~L. H L IS3L1 'G Il, u, a, -P1',IS 49 1Y. E4 Jkl PLAY AIEA ^/U sou- U•c k2 - rD U if' LAN" _ 1 vAn rP I--- 11 Isr-°'Ala' ] i ! ru •cCt1 2'1 CSR ~I r-c r„x.:+.. Ann : ~d noxenv° sVi-!Lx "Q LI LN 7/ALE r ~ 7SC5 -iAN,L55 STET. - M .t 4K-46$2{ nl •/'~I % C.x•fw I s ~~QQ 0 - >v5-I.R 0'541 5'A^R ESS S'EEl r""'11~ 1'':G 3r_SL 'JIOi •E f ~%~$71 J,..P I / Lr7 OV aPrCaY - _ l' . . e' alA 9 _ r. - i PLUMBING FIXTURE SCHEDULE rlln lC^CSSf R C5 k - l X771 1 VIOL I . S...K K:)1•lER .(-5537 SiNA..SS $~CyT '4U: _ YO [S. rl - _ - - }-r'• ~ 1 II rC., S:SK ET' 0 ,.ER 11-8763 P'Jl CNRaUL '_l0.L - ~ yl- I IBS VASTER BA IH LAL' KCH' C4 z2tt S°IFECsS C-f AA 24 l WEST OR ; I o Si R sa I, LAV F'Mk M.,Er - IPDLlwIEl.) Haaei- ,Z SID0tA4E uS HW R4 K_OI L P Y.-16{Y-, Ptx$ Ea 1 R4 uC Ig•_p• r i of ITP k[['P16 I .I 136' r 15 "'~~+111 a 3., r tp .CT R L Vo VSd:4 IIS: -!n"~CPa is ;JB rta. b I rl[a• p Kx I J I L ~Ar, TLS KOH',CF 'I-ifo - • aI - .,4,L',•;, "Irl S-F?l1'JB !RMI KN•LiR POLISHQD CHROME _ ' I I ^ I_ N ' ~~gIIy~LY 7:u 9i11: I(i Am *rM 21 p6,C16 NNLT( ^:'LII LOC. f a I I 2 0 RAIN .Al_LI Y KCHI.[4 K-9210 -ATRECVS CHIMA11!+1111[ I I I _,,-a I'A•` Oi 1- 2 ku.r LAV I;.V UOCI¢ _ POISHED Nn f KA E+ 1 JI. r41~s,S + I IO I I q}~-- .4 y(~:5 a C'-r• DUMVI 22 W'nE I 1 NJ WZN-OL uM1:t-il I 31. Ou To Y-~•r• ~'1 N 1 f 1 S LAT.. SAV V. HL[A K-9955 411'+L'OUS CN1P M111IE 1 NET 0(CAVA7TON lV [d2S5 Sr`~ q ~ r l y.11- LAL' MY KCHLER K-942--r F'6!15NL7 CHROME G)] .'q rt.Pe `l . i 1 e ' L[ ~r'I P1 A - raaea w[u xn wee xc vlaal ~ U.J DIMENSIONS ARE SHOWN TO FACE OF r-a• q' I Ij Z Z STUD S, AJ;E AT CABrNETS (Wi•IEAE - - - - _ _d O;N.EJJS. AFE WALL F41;IS ~ a- C o LLI W ~ U cl ~ U 7N--r~• m d A-2 W pa 0 _ .:.C ••v ~.:••~`LY+y I CoLoli O•-P1~ R~YffLICT.:?N3/ If U) U " ~~{ry-. tR ~ -rztM ~-wn~,,.,tc, e,<~~r. narz,zt~ 4 caar. ~ Z U 0 00 - Ir. a~ati rR~•y J LLJ ~ t 'r = coo ~ ! F,;,'ar-=- - - - _ - _ + •--,r•__,. T+ LJJ 1 NORTH ELEVATION d' 1!a•~1'-0' ~Ja - r nLNr nL•~s. Feet. PrFCr~.. F.' Ollfl•t Ccc!'~`kn "Tr' MATCH {taicf.NU Ca ~ - Y i'CC.E w^ . ~%/tY`.L r eR Pry omp, 7r r _ - `I QE~FJ ~Twr+7J _ IZ FPO L&I'RLM 1b d _ ~J 4 '•w,c u mu ter. (cea_vi i -ur.~ - V, Lit' r-'^-- - --I •'•`~e.~.1 to .n~_-: ~If~ ~I. I 1t [ilk L81 ~ ~~~1 it ~ 5L= •,T_t7 : , I f p l4J r ?F J Ljj %=:2 SOUTH ELEVATION :T ~ . . ~ ~f ~la~r-0• ,gip - - , _ ::r v l +wle M(rv4GhaT TO.GT - A_3 u>1lt.. •vrr- :;i4D %abTYi.I CO \ M rnu { 7Q1r1 +Ka~cJ+tva~r. - ,,._.,iv =a~z-~ d O 'Y - - - - L a J r b v.»rp n ° P + s ' r f ,rl__'~ Z O O -4 691) -j Lu UJI = ~ 1 o ~LL V r f.~ A ,.p•- T 7 O aL ."F, • _ - _ _ _ _ _ 4+IT'll 'rp r Iii, rJ'P--q L-. _ LTA _ _ W2 Exi^f y:...f.lE' cl..:a ~JCaF'J T null av_ jc•.aE.~ _„c EAST ELEVATION ,M. r=y T ~ (rYt1 ~ ov~oR Ge'~ % paw !®rrtTU=?19-"a? C.F., r - = j 4 1• ,f _ i I ;~IMF. ~a4GTUCRR• a-1- e brwr..,• r t'To1+tl-..iJ U} ..:.,.-ter 1 t ~I I r IA!w r.'w z O T' a c•'_p J ra7Of.+v j , ' rrxra 6•aa, W WEST ELEVATION _rr ~pir bh¢4RLuT T. d.C. ._.-_J L 1 _~..J L•_.J [A-4 Q 3 rs ~03310, 3OI 0 (f 0 S was kT: = Y ❑ was. sx` c~ spa - - - - - - - - o :moo..,- .w. ,e :.eer,r_a •~R :+r.+`' - - - _ - - . - = = 0 .n=~ = Z O Z o 0 W 0 w cy --i _ d 20 r w~•ar~z~ BLDG. SECTION Z D Y yy arooe N, ~ - ~ _r - _ - - N4 eEOat i ItrrCHEH I!r`r-_ I v r_ -I - OZ1 s I z0 O CJ W -eci $/e= _ - - - i J I I I C7 Q 2 BLDG. SECTION m cnQ:)0 0 (3 0 O =Y~°a cn U a ~Z0 zZd-1 =R00 VU§ - o 13~~ =Z0o W ~W:) H rrm Z~ . {mnE_Ht. PL. H7, V .n.- ~~e• - Q'g I BATH w t - f' OINMKi BED I I nAyxp. Kk - Q I. WI[ GUEST OR STORAGE ~ I 1 I!c ki" -e•-~ s~s• i ;-ylx~ ~j~ • gtr 1-2. ~pppp~~c'/bd Cr SECTION (LOOKING FAST) va•.r-0• C Z I I Z Q i I V CO U) A-6 Q05 =Y~a 0) U ~ZUO Z Z0j yYoO p - D ZaUJ Q) zoo 4 _ W ~'W~ - r4G -IT" S I~ 'j t4 TYP. WALL SECTION NOTES IT -1 EJI 'L I!'_ FIEIERG.ASS 3 TAR CCM°DS,`ICN SHIFJC'-ES DN 30 L9. R FELT Z- 4," CEx PLYNCCD DECK 10TH ALJr,4. RAJ EAn RI_R AcII~c - (I~~ 2x10 RAFTERS AT 24" C-C 4. ARAFT-FACED R-30 FIBERGLASS GATT INSCLATION OO 5. RECLAIMED 1X5 SHIPLAP PLANKING HCR';ZONTAL 1e COURSING - 6. SlI., SON H-25 TIE DOWN CUP AT EA. SECONC y RATER 7. J8L 2x4 'OP PLATE B. I%E SHIP LAP PLANKING, AT VISIBLE SAVE AREAS 9. GALV. TAPE "D.L: DRIP EDGE WITH VERT.. LEG ' 1 (PAIN- TO VA-CH RAFTERS` ID. C_3, JCISTS PER FRAWNG PLANS {II` 11. RATTER TAILS RIP-CJ' TO 3 Y2" ~a 16 12. CIRCULAR PAINTED ALJU. V'NTL_A'.ION CAP ~2?," ~-C~ 13. 1X6 SEC%4EN7 11T'vVN. RAKERS ui IT i4, KRAFT-FACED R-15 FBERG',ASS BAT` INSLLATION 15. PAINTED CLEAR VfE STERN CEDAR S7S 'X4 T& C W CENTER MATCH "V" JOINT SIDING (S U3VIT CG LCR SAti4P_E FOR AFPROVAj h°EXT.OS.BFACE . StiEATHI\G 'JJ'TH AIJ)1. RADIAN? BARRIER S 17. VAPOR BARRJC (DR G,2 OR E0.) 18. 2,4 1/2 SPRUCE DR DOJC, FIR STUGS AT 16- C-C 5 - 19. DRAFT STOP BLOCKING AT MID-HEIGHT OF STUD WALL a 2D. CONTI\uOUS 2x4 SOLE P-TE ' y 21. CONT. 02 CCU-- FIR 0R Y.P. 2X4 RIM ('°ET INTO FLR, I IS'S) 22. •Y JO" TOJNGE & GROCVE STUR-D-FLOOR PL1^}LOCO i k~ $USFLOCR (CLUED & NAILED) 23, #2 Y. P, 2.IC =LCOR JCIST$ AT 16" C-C (PRCV'AE v /BLOCKING AT 7 FT. VAX C-C) ? I 1 24, NO. FIN, FLR . ^~V 25. CONT. TRIG. N2 Y=. SIT'_ PLATE 1N'H Y"® A.B. Q 49 26 A' CCRADE PERK lA1JDSCAP-EL?WPON z I- ICI ~o'. 1 7.7. GAILY. HARDWARE CLOTH (y2" X GRID) IxsuLAT,oN - SUPPOR-/V-RHINE BARRIER STAP-ED TO OF FLOOR JETS, m a~°~•. 28, CONT. 12" ',VICE X '6' HIGy GRACE 31,'. OF 3000 P51 R: ~ s. CONC 7TH (4) !5 CONT. AND M3 T. S R AT A_L 5 RcINOROING, 1 I- 1 V PROV CE 3' MIN 'c'. I~y~ryulJ~ 29. 24• x 24" X B' THICK CONC. COTNG OF 3000 PSI i'\I \I~ / ~I O' FOOTINGETONLY) W!-ZRE JaJ'ST REED BECK'PSJORFACE I~~STRATULI PRCV-s JNSOI:ND OP S ABSENT IN SJrry OFF y'.. \~f~\\/ AREAS FCTO'INGS R M11AY B_ PLACED AT 5_G," C'R - T C-CTR AXtIAUN SPACING. 30 SLOPING CE DAR LATER -AB- E (MATC-1 WINDGJ 31. PFNITECCC EAR SSILL t,ROFE7AR S25 1x9 LAPPED l ESTER EXPOSLRE) Su RNI' CC-OR SAI,,IP-E FR /f A=PROVA, . ',TYPICAL WALL SECMN U ,1 Q ~ I • I A-7; Lu 0< ca00~'; OIao =~Do CIO 0 4 CD zUO ? zo-j =Y0 0 0 ~z_Jw =Z00 W Y w =VTOI OO O - BASEMENT WALL SECTION NOTES Z? ` I1 I. RE-- i%IEO IXE ViOCD SHIP,AP PLA10%'C IN iOR2O,!AL COURSING L~ 2. rLCOR FRAYI\C PER 5TRJC". OR'NGS- _ Il 3. F_COR FIN'!SH PER O'NNER SELECTION C-3 4. N W 2%6 ORAL' STOP 3LKG. k INELLATION S t} 5. NE'N )5"e % 'C" GALV. MCI-OR 90'_TS CAST 'N NEW CO".CRETE 4 - I RETAINING VIAL. A' 4'-0" 1,1A%. CTR. -O CTR. AND 6" FRCM o - 1:1:.ll11(!lr w~ CORNER I OO - ='I'AS.~' ` ` 5. WFV! CEILING FINISH PER OWNER SELECTION 7. NEV! CONT. TRTO. Y.;'. 2%4 SIL UNDER EXIST. FLOOR JOISTS B. )4' O.S.B. SHEATHINv W/ RADIANT BARRIER. 9. #2 OR STR. DOUG. FIR 2%4 STUDS 0 16" C-C 10, MODIFIED BITUVIN ROT._ER APP-ED V,ATER STOP MEMBRANE Ze 4 ~ (PROVIDE PRODUC- APPROVED 3Y ,OCA'_ BGLCP.C 07:.C[AL F 711 f~~/; CSTED BY 3CILDND CEPT.) T -Y,': GRAVEL BACK-F-LL J~ 12. UVD15"UR@ED SOUL QQ I :c^aY.`,•i~\`f\f\ 13-'INAL GRADE PER LANDSCAPE P_AN 14. 45 VERTICAL 9A11S AT 12"C-C T ~rx~f 15. q5 CONT. HORIZONTAL BARS AT 10' C-C VERT. SPAC"NO (LAP •i I 32' AT DIMS A,VD PROVIDE 32" MN. CORNER LAPS A' 9:) DEG. ~ ~ ~ ~ 5i + ~5' CORNER EEVDS 1F - !Tr`~\ ~f~ / i6. 3000 PSt CAS: IN PLACE CONC. O,_.--_~. I V•'!,T.`/•~' 1. 3 h5 T,ES A- J4? OPEN VO D C BEHIND HIND KC • _ v / D NSUTATED STILE ."G._L - I~g - ~f/~`~f~'~• 1d9. 2X4 ♦,'2 FIR STUDS AT 16' C-C 20. I4" '.10'STURE RESISTANT GYPSUM BOARD ELSE 'f"- 1•% 21. •;ti'ALL FACE LAYER: W000 PLANKING OF C'LNEF - , f / PAIN-ED G'P. B7_ TI" l 22. 3' TOTAL TH:CKV-SS RIGID INSU_ATION CJ' T7 SIZE L 3 I .gy I PRESS-,'IT BETWEEN S%DS I ' ---III 23. TRTD. Y.P. 2%4 (CONT.) SOLE PATE 24. CO. GdR3 FORMED DURING BASEMENT FLOOR -Oil rT RC: rDE J S+ -ON-. 05 REINF. BAR AS S.iCWN) a f ® I I h' ".V'~,j•'• yr 25. )J3 BARS AT '2' C-C EACH WAY POSITIONED IN FLOOR SLAB F \~r ;>'~--~t CENT"eRL'.'JE I - MI 26 (6) #5 SAPS CON'... WITH jf3 TIES AT 12° C-C. I~ 4 I PA. 5 #5 % 54" BARS AT PITCH AND 12 C-C. SHORT it 'r 'J . 27 LED D MET. - 22' AND PROJECTION ABOVE COLD ,;D'NT- 32" +L` - _ _ _ ~z-. ~ - r \ 1 N' 29. PROVIDE CONT. WATER STOP INSERT AT KEYWAY FORMED AT 29. CONT, A" :.0. SCHED. 40 PVC DRAN ENE (PERFORATE AND \ tit ti i'lRAPPED WITH GEO FABRIC). SET A` •7531 SLOPE 'AM. 4: RCUTE x~ ttsD o I y- `/~T TO CURB CU'LE- AT S'REE- IF STREET BELC'A BASEMEN ._OCR ALTI'1,0E. POUTE PIPE TO SUMP VA-I PUMP A40 FLOAT SMITC•' bk wvs,d f vU{•' i _ T\~;_~ 'D SCHARGINO TO C133 ORION) IF STREET LEVEL ABOVE f\i y i i• 9ASEMEC T FI:OR A TI'LD°-. ~ Q ~111BASEMENTWALLSECTION O Z Ju•-T'~ W V 2w 0 d m A -8 - - - - - LV -Q Q N ca 0 P~ PLVrO EI]-~,_~I' ~J Z U 0 _ 11 S"JF, L ` '0 AOmrl ~A51 ~s a ' I = Y o 0 I HINDU" - - , goo 0 _j 94, Lu PALM'KiI1C I r9+f `1P4 M.•, fO /fir- r.. 5'i:C Phr:E r r F W ~r.r\=~. i,YC 7Y1 vg~ 8 Z; KR. LOOKING SOUTH ^--",KIT. LOOMS WET KR. LOOKING NORTH ; ~ye-_T.a L 'se.-t.o- I~~/as•.ra ~~qq ~F 77 E T S _ 4 r - ~-3~.Fil l AV ' OFF ~ ~ '.__1 / ' L``A. C rT - '...I n • AF I • ' .I n 1-~ . , HIE nRF, . ~ REOLESTS r.v- -4 -j- N4 o F_t arm - I _ W~_111 i , = I I{ i BATH 2 VANITY (G~BATH 1 W.C.BATH I LOOKIMG NORTH _ 19' ' f `J'se.ta ~~~se T{r `mar to 5 E0 SPACE. t),B' 4 -r:: r:-OD -CV> 6O. FACE : + - GWhtR POR PA141 CDL OR - S,NN S-EC. AND (.RA•DE AND - SPEOIES OF WOOD ,r STAINED •OININGAREASOUTH WALL r r-i S S ^ ' la+ -_1 C sr: Lv E sH a =nlr T r ;n OV 6101 TAR ES'sigN CfP' .-6 J~r'~: BD. OR WOOD -LAAh14G ,r.L-: CIO m Z i 1 _,F?-~; - E_' - al+. T.Y. NrtNE O SOLID SURFACE Rm:. O O • ~ / . ! n• F o EQUA AL T0 O CI C13RAL7AR _'AR O DR Or A c s ,Tm '.A F n W I "°-'I U AND FACES PER DETAILS. 1 . f, 4-1/4• SO. C.M.T. ON } W uUC BED WITH 4rL, ION r - I~ I r ' GRACE "0 VA'. BARRICR +f- ~t!o1 V S C 'RECAST ONE PC. RECEPiM Y"POL, PtA'C G.ASS AIPP r, uaa."rI SL:rn. s ,Po C8 I BATH2S KRCHENALVCOVE LIVINGAREAWESTWALL 1; A-9 i WINDOW SCHEDULE - - _ < ~ a ~ 00 wo< J11I / 1- / 1 i ZZ00 Zof A a _ LL i -1 Y 0 0 F j O~ f-ZO~ =z0 Yom -ALL UKI75 200 SERIES 2Y ANDERSEN = Q -A_L IVAGES AS SEEN FROM EXTERIOR -NET FRAME NVZNSIONS SHOWN gg ' -EXT-RIOR CLADOING CO-OR TO BE VIHITE (.AS APPROXIMATES EY.IST'NC) ~7p ZZZZ~ SOLID TOP (PER Ez-~ND TD 13" (UNLESS CAB. FACE FLJSh "ilTrl-i EVAT',ONSJ iALL/G.ASS C/ D wSNT-RTDa EDGE ON 31<" B I'+ As NOTED NOTED) I 1 _ to FIR PLi('D % y •'1 tiIATC.IING GRADE, • ~i rn FINISH 3 SP_CI - Z E - - - - OF CAC FIG I - 3/4` LUkt9_R FACE 314" JOINED PINE 130 CONCEALED IINGES - (PER ELE`JATIOry57 PU^:K F.CE EQ. TO BLLIV ;r^ PER E'EVATL N i5" 1 L f _ f- IN \ El: >t__N _ ;.AT;l 1/2 BALTIC I R RAILS (CEAR 5" S Y` FLUSH JOINED PINE VARNISH FINISH) SOLIC PLANK FAC•S (SEE ILIVAT~ZNS - 0'a-, cPOXY CG NTL FOR CRkOE. $PECI'S, DRAtlVER 3/4 EY.1N 1/4" BIRCH PIWp aTµ J/A' PLYlO FINISH) SWES W/ rEFLON (CLEAR VARNISH F,NISH) SPELL @ SHE° _ 1 MEPLA 130' N WHiE:S MATC HINC CRAOE. CONCEA'..C FINISH & SPECIES - 1 T4R0'..•GHJU 1/<" BACK PANEL 0VERA:' HNGES OF ChB FACE { MATCHING GRADE, SPECES ` r ' I 1 TV11A.1_ DRAWER v7L FINISH OF CAB SHEtI v." I( t - -'V HO-ES FOR - F.F. J ShEOLt 3/t.EL p. ,,s I 2 - 172- GRAD`" SIRCH P,',10 SOLID WSJ _ _ _ ~G "E? 25" (UNLESS NOTED) c 1 I SOLID WOOD (3/4") RAILS TYPICAL ',4ALL CABUIET TYPICAL BASE CA81NEr A '''I="'~'--y'•' If I III. i4 - -WALL FINISH + j 3/4" VE3'JrIEER •1' VENEER W 7 ` '.R• - _ 3/4' VE'EER l C J{ PLWD LKHEAO } PLMD BULKHEAD 1 SH A, P LAD BJLK'NEA.D J J_ Y," THICK 50'_10 1 + THICK SO'L'O l:" THICK SOLID m Q STOCK CA? THCK 5SL'p TOOK CAP $T6CK CAP W ~ CASING (SANDED FLUSH) CAP (SANDED FLUSH) {SAhpEp FL45H) = W :a{oED coati) - V 1f2 FACE Ee TO? EDGE W SIE R x , LE7 4EATHERED. - CU'SIE BASE KILLED FROM i CORKER _ 00,NER-51JPT=LIFOLVUB£R O m Zia" LLVBER Q RECLA:NED StiIP t~ DACES %ACES n PIAN SECTION 11 BULKHEAD EDGE LAP PLANKIC ^"L OAE!i SHELF HEAplIAN$ H~_TYPICAL BASE AND CASING PLAN 510TI111 ® BULKHEAD 100E PLAN SECTION 11 BULKHEAD EDGE CABINET DETAILS IA-1 01 - - - W Ojo _ '01 jl~ p~< n ELECTRICAL =Y~p ZOO MROO ...:e_ •.'.•=x:..`-' ° R'id`" a rte/ ~r V U U ---sue =31Z-1 W = Z 00 Lij Y u OIL asp YRY'Lk`.T^'~•9' S' I •L r(1.1 5~ i GCf.1`i1iS.:vE^'••-- • DIY r •Ir ~a3 - - ELECTRIG PU1H , ~,i•p'"'Sp.F LIGHT PKTURE SCHEDULE ~~J i - . P. Uf. D l Ra t4AU: ~A11}„~'G R A 1 U l % 1AW I 1~ ~3 GJ55=-fi•`{k ~ W11V:. W J ir-ca rc: U FLGOR REGISTERS TD'c K1CK REGISTERS C, ~ iKf. T~:R .L S'~--~ sttA' I{.ud. •I..~__ waV0.E CRCNI. "NE Kl'.ILC M•nC IT, dS, .C, °M" '.nu, _ 4 ' a,o. ~Lrsk I _ fT• flHit 04 MnIE a Itl!£ WOLL ~ ~ ® O z .^Ln !'•4 R t5D•G':?'+^- MIE 1.71 0"' OUiWDR 4n EiGN PRODUCTS .~nn.D¢:LWiA.4 LOUVER DIFrL15ER O -4.74.Gq~4~6Si [SA C'.-~ PA 1W 4% I!r.,'J!'~1 B 43'. K..17/w d 502 74'%2 Y" as C.!-;.12-x2"-ALAi1AI ~ f4~wll r tiiI `;Aa - 7151 C( 0GU1,'IIOCN 1A41YhtGNI Z II-! `b51. 104 x IH~ry 11a - r- ¢ ~P 4 tl K7t; P Y' \'Ai~',Y2 EG.I •L:L tiflo, t LEIGH PRCD'.:CTS NA'LCR;'_iVEsP. '_OL~VER DIFFUSER M N N i,5,1. _ 7k:]A 1 7~'_ 10A' u1?, ,1j tARC SPM y750= 4"X12.. -A-.A.VU E-1 W C) j o QDco oaQ0 Z Y~o Vn0a~ on Zo - Z =ZYQ❑0 zo W X0:) t:ro oi, CUB - Z5 - wa ~I w ...~D•grFAp' Y ans~xr mac. gA►r ~ ~ ~ ~'s` e LU g w a- ~ c~ zz w P: M= w J m ~ E2. Vl < 0 cy V) 0 r) m `J', o ¢ =Y~o Z U MECHANICAL Zo ~ n- .•„r ~ 0 SCOPE N.n F cp`[° ~n a° t^-a 's^1 Z Z 0-i eN'fL~KV°"" •m~ ca~SN,i 0. s~ - - = Y 00 w's mrc-s Me .-a'• V u ai ' " ZOJW T .L KCO. arN ~nlrea i - W NTD~°r4:e_ :LOC U-ET1 EOrt p° i e Wna LLN 1.~ C\'YES OcWM: ~tt Y dW.-:d EN[nar Cee! - ,y d~ W 5- OwMt reP Ear v•W ,W wO - i i 0 EQUIPMENT F a ,awvrapn rwu PfaR.a +c 7µrs Iur. wL _ _-'-r-- : s_ _ a•• p U s s 'KLUr~ s+CE -.ILU W rP_ J III ~ 1 [NiIATT N[Tn eN.] 1'e5,t. ' -Y O 1. T^ ,>a c.' n ..dN N WWiN W'" one YS eoNV-r[S 1. 111- 6-- fL[. ' P. CONNC-, vN.U4w CONC=45A,IpN' nn.dt4 f0 1 l- -.II L16. M.Ilfp W ut',:Afu \C (>NI F[ranaaoul- IC A[IIC pr -1 CONTROLS U~nU .k^ a~S~ N4rN &1. 1.1 p aSP- T o: -S Mx 1- w s.- ^ -'a• mY44.. 1515 I DUCTWORK / 13~ ~ f xxASSS a/'_• . 5 n a, .ruc > ) fhYW,l[a S+Ur yCrµ Cun -wdOUC>t- I; JJ NAY(R 'MI 0 ~ _ "'ciw:` ~ w ~ u-uwa'"au",[°~riln.Y:"`. ~(.Ane~. ~i Y d -r3 u.et° nc I - ,I I. 0.1 . N,S 'x[M• SLHtA M M ~ ~ rP _ u.r'c L-- _ I 11 re J[I CcvSCr'\'c rLNxt. o Nu•c+ 0._rs i6%J M GLa 10/r - M I T11HaH,t • ~wlnw s,= , u-r - a :•Kt _ • Vs man ms ~ - I . DIFFUSERS&FILTERGRILLS a ar _ys ...a,[t[a cans 5 .L, a( u.vu01[ :OC~A. r6SrRl µ Y.. N.Ln[5p NrtH r,Ni Ta[tr IAIµ KJ7L [ d A-I OuCi ••,t• I (tis, r•rdc cm.x--. ryr '6 sJS °.0 f' Rt) HO W lrv I.t•~' . _ Wtf GItlN Jd M I 1 orrUC,.CU Iyye +n:a C M y^4 ; °r'S[r[ OW— 79), 1 0.. nS i•lfll K -U ' 0 Pp 0 oUOE W°txs c - ~S~ ' Mµ t ~pna wp v>ciY ~t w~Vaur~e[Y CO4>'~14. 10 KY,I'. I _ h `r E"! 0'I I r VNG Cp ` - ~ h TESTINGB~BALANCING Rae. r~ .,rluac( +x---a =1 I ' - 01 .r °NILLTuu PID a wG[ v.as=s, ~ . a _ Ens .Ne .w., axael N[eslp I ! / , ry 4+y4. y ,y J':~ r ALL HVAC E0UIPMEMTT0 Or Yi1_ N• S"~'Y - sHUr DOWN Duwr(o PAavnl(r I oe„r r, ws(°IN, a AND FLOOR FLNISHNOI Fs ocR `Tao v; «.A• r L - • d • - - - - ' (VfY [1 "RT T. C I t"' dY4' I-i/ ~.a. I c 'u L= r.. ~ v,. u~'vw. •w:wvr N•. tVV tr~ 'Oar °Or.t I- ` a..`c~'».,,~un> sss [u n. ca,.a.cw - - . - rtcl !b vwL '~rsaR ...~m+. r: r rrtY •f'r lr' '1 ~i"' . lrr '.Y 1 /HVAC PLAN - 1I VCL'JL+E CAIAPCR AS REDUaICO ~ . - I` F_Ex CONAECTLN ~ ~'_•`i"^-- _ REFar~EnKT RFU AS co0, nG COIL RECOMMENCED 0Y MANUFA::LI~>rr; ~~a FOR VERTICAL RISERS vR• CONDENSATE CRNN ® tril W rO SAN, SEWER. Y1µ, V-0• KIN RRW'J0IS 'YACRImrm LmiR 0/ru$p rr••ss _ /1 pOR ,.'YS l:• .a-J L 0.4`) w.2--_vM LL FAN AND - SIGHT CAS ELECTRIC HEAT Eel ® `r O LESe+ aRaol,e:s nN~a.Lww LOVAA O'/rara° Q Z ~rOOd .~t,1" •0-J 10f-1.i.'dJ'-K.E.W -is" HIGH PLATFORM ORAN PAY i~TF F~~:,T SW S3w CVS> 'U2 ~ FAN COIL UNIT DETAIL 1p'.1'-0• ~I 1 Lu © Q -4'-o' -A Klwi2 t O f1 ) PER smv1 L-i Q Nti 1 _ SLOPED CLG. THIS AREA FOR :_.'.i. _-t- - 10.-(GUTTER) -FORT,1 7" NICE POCKET IN y ~7 T.D.C. t 1 - 1- % 1D 00" HEAD CLEARANCE : FOR Sli _ ~ SEA" ;4 " FIAT SIL hllN. O !7. Q UI FLU5(2:24 HJR COKC T _--ti, s ! BEARING LENC'H) ] T 1 0.. T 3 C (WALL LL}Pj~ - l: T.O:~yrA~L_ T'~R) - - - - vI U Q I I T,O.c7 (r ER) - ~T O.C. ICUR _ C. _ CUTT{R _ /~y O OU ~l\\}[~~• 41- EXIST. SrOkL Z -i w CLAD ca..:. = 2 on p^pW ,fi STEPS J a LR. o-, _ .5z uL, N ,,r Y a r! _ T.o a cculicR) I • ! I ~ F- t- m [ n 1~~.: I 1 'd r V Mal 1 AR FA uY o *s. w! ~c Z nI POLr614 E0 A, s:EAUE0 CONIC. (1VALL TOa) ' r,lc.$H AT 9ASEYENI FlR_ tUNl ESS MTDRON:C HL4lIIYG I._ ~ \ _C -!'-h ~I ING Y, Li O 8" t: r Ki I 0 } rrNOLR TItE REDUL •CD BY tSUTJP) OWNER N YIMIGa CrSE PRdV:'DC ; - ~'6•---yam 1 1 - Y} h; I 1 ~a LtMT 912CUIJ FINISH lir ` +r x 1 I 4~ q5 'PERT. T T°?I CG=r•REM _ • M1~ ?~5' ~ e' - ~ L l Ui. a 5 - .0c. ly!k (FLOCR)-•5. - D C. ` n ; E oceT lue r~1 ~tivac oocr o~axaus 1 l.b.c. (GUI ER) -B 7 ~4' ~I ° i' (3} elr HC+{ - 1 - tu•• a 707461AIKVAA)N CUEAR ~ _ I _a } ccRC a+sE~JEnr I T - _ L,.~§ ~ • T,D, G._ wAtL rCP wA,L PR _ - % e RL: HVAC E,15r$ • f'a• 1 rt PLAN -OR J *E w'Ac.l _C I -0-- . R /A CREV IVG n•~ SECTID`: i 1 r.o.c. {Fur sIu ~ II PABV GRACC~ i - - yR 3H. L- t EE~ 1 eLKC (TTP I 1 r'S1. T.O.C. (wEU fiAi) _ ' - . ~ Wr+ERL kk I RE m ........r. T.a.C. IwAa _•FOR~F 7 M.nl -OP) RUST HER. ~ ;,'.CE POCKET IN N fiYd _I CCON1 12' IL ,SEA" 14 14, EN BERI,G r,a.c. (currtq) + LOOR F"n PIAN f •I E`~ . SUB. FLR. CJ-'-5 P _F? r_ i8" ~CNG 2X6 SLKG. Q 6 TYh 4F `x` 1 HVAC FLAN CRCSSNG (3 LCCATICNS) ~'F = }1 2k1r J5T5. ~ 4 + BASEMENT FORMING PLAN ~u•-r•o- !II - r 1 1 C7 Z T L ~ ` I I I I~ l.~ Z g~ 6x6 SILL i, ± i I[ sxB S'L' L1J Z 4 2x6 SEQ BLOCK ILL (B• LONG) tlldP15E86%9 SILL D) II m cbd U F~ a SHIN AS REa'C -r - 1 O O z U- FIRM'S 4x1 LD T~`Siss ~l, of/, 4~/- tiff, ~~/~~1~f/, ~~1. ti~/, trr~~/, ~ cz r. L 'Jn .RT s owNl t/ A~EGRESS WELL S"-L ~••DROPPED SILL ELEVATION /ar.rv S-1 /ar+•-r-0• i 1 - - - - W Od U) Q ~ . O~dm = ~0 U) L)< C7 Z o 0 Ii 0 Q -31 509 vil L) r z OY. jf,E ROC: =RANRJG :3r- -Z O O IAN FOR CCNT.NUATICN FRAMING e i.A:, AREA W Y W r f4~;,~A Lx.LL pErJ~ ;,4,.i,. a =L 0xr~ ' CCM[nr er 9R Wx. WLCSS Noif> a -R.n_ - ~A•T r r W Z VIP SS ILS A. ExiI-1 SI!L• I-, e[ R:C 1:14a(R _ ] 111 .>.FS inaLNF MDLe JUL- 9e R--I • t \ \ gy ~/Ir• VuL ! W>ER ~Wr Kt:S tG Q r bofi wxo~ry~. SrxiC,FnsOD> swu aE C ~xi 'JOIST 1 [ F WLR w' si>LCtx[)C r S-NulS - NN[.'r x0 dam- $118. X111. SO KV5CP5 ] Woo] IR ,l. w:_o~r.cE wx «r el.ao xc L:x wrs ~ ZR e r. ErEa<s s' : xxr.s sw~f !c srfAnE) ~ V on^ I~r c e:- ~.ICx r s: 4cfEU. ac w,u R o-c ra ..n r'e. A t. KL KAttt ra lmtrp u Ap itrC _ / hl 7 I I la wu.: a awns v,w KlrII`iwae ' eG~[M[9 rM .l! IrUI. 11• ~0 (.,Ix. uL•11 >a I uq •J,41 Q pHCID Vp` IIC~ '+xn e'..Y Awl y,\_ K uxrri!J d f`p ~J, \ n0. , w. r,[K e•• dxf tlf :Oft'W \xM ~ wovx ar w4+o v.~> ~ nr ~ ~ '1',1 J ~m nom: _IKI Lw.CiiW: ncm iu Nrw 5~•~ ~T'r 'Iy oeN r:eNr] -K f/rE- 'O e[ xr0.4> . I ~ ~t 1~ ~ V ` ~ F 5' K,u mxceen truer 4 x'Ml) f~ 1;v R t rrEan,., _ T b O C 3 A I'r ' A c u H.-~ oc. auu R +'aEV O 7 ' C-C Silas 1:> i13.: [5 ! BCnoU RATES AI UJ ' sRACINO Oc o-C Wx. ~ f m U O Q ^ r,~. la eRAI[cn•F IX«uNC Ar Mo-ntc41 IC a[ = 5 4z V ~ovaro r Aw s^.a W.tu. ' r,E,e rur t> rstx v:c] w~eors n 1'!fl AEN. `.B LR •b'• I = f C!S Mi• 3-]C) K:IS Or 3/.' .AU n ~ Is-w GJi'[R5 ABYk~l TL4 . . _ ~ R R 1 7 I~y E RoN e. N B~:nG'.J~ FCi EYEAr ,MNEC. I` Is CR YCN-CMC 1C4xNG oµ1ICfC; Lful- B[ Cc.1.fo. Q1JY Kp CGyTRf Gran' GA lrnG SI•aA IX A:co~cultE rri- "+rA MiO'w awama'u'rt3f"xa'.. "`s0.-Km I. ' m. a«nw Imsrs am caullNS s4A.A eE lu,~.c+ i ~ OI ~Zi x- ~w { oR 1]Ix.r, i ' E P7~w o +)b c ~ J) ~ (];'eo a u'o-[ 0 4 z e 1-•ICS - - _K 6 _ i5 +a. nf>wE vu3su•a R e9V SU0 hR ~eiiNfci ons Ai •f:ttntvaiis Lnu n.-u - I 'O 4- C- IT. HIVHO« RWPS roe >CCCR. WAI: Ax] ~I i'+ - - C[CXS sl.µf BC rWUC e' o-C A• _OUSR.`C+~ I x d F -1}y/+ E~.~{~ ~ - ic' 0-. 09 N-FA4WIAIE rry,Vw> 4EUaC':. ` - - - 'e• slcssss~xro.iw s-RKrta s-AU cr ~ 0, U9L 2z8 IeORS. Fr - . a. mw eorw R,rE rT• M ti. ihV7Q'M & :aCOR :0.OI,. N^ REaYTr'J ''_NIHGS le. w.~~C/Gf ~<5 ~~xuY~os~e"u~ CNLBCMIS CZ tl~ : + I. - - ~ij ~i &k' rr~c•~~6 rw 6 I Z co scc rtxr CO)4tl rftAUspC ~S ~ PWI =0R CQVTU.'L:ti;ON TEfS AREA O N Z 4 CEILING FRAMING PLAN otS i iq'-1'd Z Z J S uj (1 U i LLJ C) <N 0 OI =Yo0 U) O a ZOO - - - _ - --T 1 - - = You FRAMING I - ` • F- Z o 4uaca sx!.. >EAn a dEma sD.'r~n4 I I = J W o co- v .Ix YU. 4'aESf NDry -III F. - ` I ( • ".]]:::lr = Z fl ❑ u~~sa:s 7>ERda swat eE 'td -nm t aar NoLrs M:D434 awa s.uu EE Daaab 1 • ? ro + v i : u m L''P'Ea rxa4 acLrs rD er ~ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ~ t ~ i Q = a- ODL'Z MPONLn e.0 -I YE -E. W. w wi 7 ! n,uara uA suE of RLLC cox4ECr..4 r q NCOD VENuGaS !WErx[P Evil aE IN - ( y [C,i p,,pWG( WIIN LDGL Iw!DYr4 r00E URfI I ~ } U71~ R HL EtRRgR flo aa'.La lxat: B_ svG~M(p , 71 I m!., +O r' 4-0 L~'NOOSe, 50 Hut[o. NN; • ~ I , 1 .-J , I ,M1 1 . ^ o e• < ra x.R d I I v. au.s alts r~. tNntY>. a.L_saro ro.C \ I - - _ -x 6 tE f eMira ~vLi'w /w DwY e+rt~o• rx~v up.:a - - _ _ - fi!• ' D ~y3 rack E.c, u.e D• •.r~ _ )f`o-0, sla M` ~1- - E PaUU'C! su.sW FV:.; 'S.r y'.cU ~:>E' -ar1:. Ar H •.U~~ : it 40 w[ K ~P r I aapyrr( •_.4>;Oh BW4 -FW wn4C s' a •1VSP+ M.W rDN4[:I.LNS [PG[Pr Af MDT, ~ ~ ' fWESO4 tlRSr.C 'PC (JIGS' r0 6c PaL416> a i~. Nt ,V v e 4 aµ BUY CCNHCrtl1E [xCS• As ALEJ ' ~ ( Cwr- 1 S+4- SW "afY4 WH. B0. 4HL BE MatEr HL I ` x • I r^' SrJLf, lo/ Y.ArFf t e01fW P11ff Ar n ) ~x- _ ~ IZa 14 I~M[RVEW2 e'.OC.IM1L .1r 4 L-NEW4r BE ~A1.. _ s' ` - a'au> nl Pu wuLS. - • - II, r,eLD eacW rD ra En wodD Nr4aeas ro s,ttx II ~ r ~r lI I I7 Lnd+ef WIM A-:ol exrs ws/.•w4. al --~J f-ilea 'F- 1>. ,olrs oa RuleRS suu wvr one aow cr - - _ I V••~~~ I BRgCIN4 fON MDT r fEA Sru44:L. e~__ - I] Afrf NNL!R VON-EGAD BCaRf14 PANUi10!F Y a I ~ r. 6 I sNnLL tlc Dr4'v:i0 ' ~i - 1/. Imo- 1 I.. M[ Mfn1 A4D CONSRUC]DH Cf A:L MODD -1 + ' - -~T~- 'D--'~ - - - T o4fraNC~O 4AN • An0 Mi SOVrr[aM1 . YV.d- [Sr Cdr,Oti'. - - W , NI IS ODURC 45if -U" s- BF nPl,[D Dddlp! RDO' fa rocfl.na an N.. SJPq.P IYPDSED ahM - j ! _ ' (+)leD d 1D•D-0 rpa Rase 44cr ~E:x'nG !2 b)leo o IrD-r res uus. t (rp.!D'a t ~ y `y I 1 I I I~ (•)IED d +i'0-L r0a U)al Yn ~ ~ ~ 1r ~ a I 1 ,6 M.0.1d[ SW..'v, Bn+r.9 1!A04NC aNO,^.t5 wn- wnol ,LIb• ar 4a RCOr M.-ErtT q+ ta.rsf ? k to J _ _C eawecDws n +a.cm Purrs Er sruD !w=s I n. nrrc> rLw+s rDS rmL¢ WxA u,~D RA~vo r 1' I , \ • 7a a-D DeC+s DWI. ew,EO r" -e A! a 1ID• D-: a .aura.R rvwuiD i,EUreu, t I - le A.roOarM1' fM E SWA er I f ' ui Mww.:o4s .004 eD rD4 Puii w.M ND ~ I I J I - ?i I I If. YD xpL(S sWLa BE w 1xPDaCx 3CNd9 OR ! _ 7 ,C~?'~o .D'SIS cuttP• i5 ./eaOKJ -M, 1 R017F FRAMMG PLAN k tn•. ra ~ Z E J IL a O O ~ I S-31 per: ~ . ,y"~.~• o- ram. mobilesn v r i-* r - O 0 1 r _ ~ lY _ 11 -Al f . ~v 4 It JJl y