The URL can be used to link to this page

5A - Landmark Alteration Certificate for 1002 Spruce St. (HIS2009-00202) MEMORANDUM December 2nd, 2009 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planning Manager James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner Chris Meschuk, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct a two-story addition at the east elevation and to replace doors and windows on the north, south, east and west elevations of the contributing building at 1002 Spruce Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District per Section 9--11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2009- 00202). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 1002 Spruce Street 2. Zoning: RMX-1 (Residential Mixed-1) 3. Applicant/Owner: Melton Construction/Laurence Lackey 4. Date of Construction: Pre-1880 5. Square Footage: 1820 sq. ft. 6. Lot size: 3184 sq. ft. 7. Historic Name(s): Van Fleet House 6. Request: Construction of a two-story addition and replacement of windows and door. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board make the following motion: Motion to deny the proposal for the construction of a two-story addition, removal of the west chimney, and replacement of the historic windows at the Van Fleet house at 1002 Spruce Street House (as shown on landmark alteration certificate drawings dated 10.30.2009), in that it fails to meet the standards in Chapter 9-11-18 (a)(b, 1-3), B.R.C. 1981, and is not consistent with the General Design Guidelines, in that the proposed work wilt damage the historic character of the property. Agenda Item 5A Page i - Summary: The house at 1002 Spruce Street was constructed prior to 1880 and is a very early example of vernacular masonry residential design with Italianate elements in Boulder. The application was referred to the Landmarks Board by the Landmarks design review committee on October 14, 2009. On November 10, staff inspected and completed a condition survey of all windows and doors proposed for replacement. Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board deny the proposal as it considers that the addition, removal of chimney, and replacement of historic windows will adversely affect the character of this important historic property. 1002 Spruce Street f % -rte %J lip 1 Figure 1. Location Map r a 7 ~f :f. A ua _ r N ion r t Wilma Figure 2. 1002 Spruce Street, 1988 History of Property: The house at 1002 Spruce Street appears on the 1883 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map and in the same year Sanford Gladden Directory listed Mrs. I.C. Van Fleet as operating a rooming house at this address. A 1988 historic building inventory record form completed in 1988 identifies the Van Fleet properties as one of the earliest houses in Boulder. The house is vernacular masonry in form with Italianate elements exhibited in the steeply pitched gable roof and segmental and round arch windows. It is unclear whether or not the stucco finish on the house (see i re 2) was an original finish or added later. The stucco was removed during a 1991 remodel when the central doorway on the fagade was replaced with a two-over-two, double h-Lmg window and the porch was restored. During this remodel a non- historic addition at the southeast corner of the house was also remodeled. Agenda flan 5A Page 3 Sk Yf''' !4r Z r 5 7 j f$ slw~l V '.fir; i sa• r Figure 3. 1002 Spruce Street, 2009 Request: The applicant proposes to construct a two-story addition at the east elevation and to replace doors and windows on the north, south, east, and west elevations of the house. In plan, the proposed addition is shown to project approximately 6' from the north wall of the existing non-historic addition. The second story of the addition is shown to be 13', 10" in length and built over the existing one-story addition. In total, the addition is shown to be 189 sq. ft. and would increase the size of the house to just over 2000 sq. ft. (see figures 5 & 6). fi-------- - . r.1 - - - - - - - - - - - - P Figure 4.1002 Spruce Street, Proposed Site Plan Agenda Itcm 5A Page 4 - -mot ~ ~s 1 NOITNEInATION 1 HOOTIIMUTIOH Figures 5 & 6.1002 Spruce Street, Existing and Proposed North Elevation Due to cited structural concerns, the application also calls for the removal of the exterior brick chimney on the west face of the house. There appears to have been a chimney in this location historically, however the current chimney is of different brick. Materials and construction indicate it is of relatively recent construction. The application also calls for the replacement of seventeen windows, the removal of 1 window, and the replacement of 5 doors in three openings. These proposed changes are on all four faces of the house on the upper, lower, and basement levels of the house. Several windows on the east and west faces of the house are shown to be retained. i H. i Figures 7 & 8 North Window 0103), 1st floor, proposed for replacement Agcnda Item 5A Page; 5 - , S i A , Fii~ure; 9 & 10 North Windows (--201 &202),2-1 floor, proposed for replacement i Figures 11 & 12 West Window (#1113), V floor, proposed for replacement r - t A~ s - ,•.tlpilaG31i ~ ~~~r , 14 74 " Figures 13 & 14 Nortli and West Doors (-'107 & 170), proposed for replacement Finally, the application proposes to install a rooftop condenser on the one-story portion of the house at the southeast corner. ✓ Agenda Item 5A Page 6 - 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. Specifically: (a) The landmarks board and the city council shall not approve an application for a landmark alteration certificate unless each such agency finds that the proposed work is consistent with the purposes of this chapter. (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 an 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. Analysis: 1. Does the proposed application preserve, enhance, or restore, and not damage or destroy significant exterior architectural features of the contributing property? It is staff's opinion that the proposed addition will. damage the architectural features of the property by changing its essential character further crowding the lot. In terms of location the proposed new construction is not consistent with the General Design Guidelines (see Design Guidelines analysis section) and will compromise the historic integrity of the property. The replacement of the unique and early historic windows on the house would not preserve or restore, but destroy significant character defining architectural features. Agenda Item 5A Pa,e 7 - 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the contributing property? Staff finds that the proposed application will adversely affect the special character of the landmark. Only 3,184 sq. ft. square feet in size, the lot is already crowded. Construction of the proposed addition is incompatible with the General Design Guidelines, will change the essential character of the house, and will have an adverse effect on the contributing property. Likewise, replacement of the repairable historic windows on the house would result in a loss of original material and have a visual impact on the house that would adversely affect the historic character of this important historic property. 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 landmark property? Little detail is provided as to materials proposed for the addition. Elevations do show the addition to be detailed with forms that reference the historic house. The proposed replacement windows would result in a loss of original historic material and differ dimensionally and in profile from the historic sash, frames, and molding. c. 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. A finding of the City's 2007 Historic Preservation Environmental Sustainability Integration Project (HIPESIP) adopted by the City Council was that historic windows that are rehabilitated, made weather tight, and fitted with storm systems deliver comparable energy efficiency when compared with efficient thermal pane window systems. No detail was provided with the application regarding economic feasibility or enhanced access for the disabled. Addition: The Board has adopted the General Design Guidelines to help interpret the historic preservation ordinance. The following is an analysis of the proposed addition with respect to relevant guidelines. Design guidelines are intended to be used only as an aid to appropriate design and are not intended as a checklist of items for compliance. A ;enda Item 5A Page 8 - Design Guidelines 4.0 Protection of Historic Buildings and Sites Meets Guideline? .1 Construct new additions so that there is Rear 15' of west wall will be No the least possible loss of historic fabric obscured by addition. Upper story and so the character-defining features of west wall shown to be removed the buildings are not destroyed. completely. Window #106 (1s' floor) will be lost as a result of construction. .2 New additions should be constructed so Upper story west wall shown to be No that they may be removed in the future removed completely, Window #106 without damaging the historic building. (Is, floor) will be lost as a result of construction. It is not appropriate to construct an Location of addition will change No 3 addition that will detract from the character of the house. overall historic character of the building. 4.2 Distinction from Historic Buildings Meets Guideline? All additions should be discernible front the historic structure. When the original design is duplicated the historic evolution of the building becomes unclear. Instead, additions should be compatible with the historic architecture but clearly recognizable as new construction. .l Distinguish an addition from the Addition not distinguished from the No historic structure, but maintain visual historic house i.e, difference of continuity between the two. One material/finish and or design. common method is to step the addition back and/or set it in slightly from the historic structure. Every project is different and successful designs may incor orate u variety o approaches. 2 Do not directly copy historic elements. Historic elements are generally Yes Instead, interpret historic elements in referenced through fenestration and simpler ways in the addition. forms. 3 Additions should be simpler in Addition is relatively simple in Maybe detail than the original structure. design. Fenestration should be An addition that exhibits a more simplified ornate style or implies an earlier period of architecture than that o the original is inappropriate. 4 The architectural style of additions Addition not distinguished from the No should not imitate the historic style but historic house i.e. difference of must be compatible with it. material/finish and or design. Contemporanj style additions are possible, but require the utmost attention to these guidelines to be successful. The use of two distinct historic styles, such as adding Tudor- style half-timbering to a Classic Cottage, is inappro riate. 4.3 Compatibility with Historic Buildings Meets Guideline? Introducing new construction that contrasts sharply with an existing historic structure or site detracts from the visual continuity that marks our historic districts. While additions should be distinguishable from the historic structure, they must not contrast so sharply as to detract from the original building and/or the site. Additions should never overwhelm historic structures or the site, in mass, scale or detailing. I An addition should be subordinate to Addition does not overpower, but No the historic building, limited in size size and location do not appear and scale so that it does not diminish or subordinate to the main house. visual! overpower the building. Z Design an addition to be compatible Mass and scale of addition are No with the historic building in mass, scale, incompatible with historic house. materials and color. For elevations Fenestration appears generally visible from public streets, the appropriate. Little detail provided relationship of solids to voids in the regarding material and color. exterior walls should also be compatible. 4 Reflect the original symmetry or Proposed addition asymmetrical in Yes asymmetry of the historic building. design -generally reflects that of main house. 5 Preserve the vertical and horizontal Mass and scale of proposed addition Maybe proportion of a building's mass. creates form that is more horizontal in proportion. 4.4 Compatibility with Historic Site and Setting Meets Guideline? i Design new additions so that the Little huldscaping on property. NSA overall character of the site, site topography, character-defining site features and trees are retained. Locate new additions on an Addition is to be constructed at the Z inconspicuous elevation of the side of the historic building. Only Maybe historic building, generally the rear location for addition - though one. Locating an addition to the Agenda Item ~A Page 10 - front of a structure is inappropriMc difficult to characterize the west side because it obscures the historic as inconspicuous. facade of a building. 3 Respect the established orientation of Proposed addition disrupts No the original building and typical established orientation of the alignments in the area. historic house. Addition should be set further south. 4 Preserve a backyard area between the Lot coverage will increase from No house and the garage, maintaining the existing .57 floor area ratio to .62. general proportion of built mass to Average FAR for 900 & 1000 block open space found within the area. See of Spruce Street is .44 (high of 1.56 & Guideline 2.1.1. low of.12). Currently built mass to open space considerably higher than average. 4.5 Key Building Elements Meets Guidelines? Roofs, porches, dormers, windows and doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of any building. 4s such, they require extra attention to assure that they compliment the historic architecture. In addition to the guidelines below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related suggestions. Maintain the dominant roofline and Maintains dominant roof form to 1 orientation of the roof form to the street. New east dormer form lower No street. than main roof and setback 18' from front of house. 2 Rooflines on additions should be lower Rooflines are lower than historic Yes than and secondary to the roofline of the building. original building. 3 The existing roof form, pitch, eave These elements on addition are Yes depth, and materials should be used for generally compatible with those on all additions. the historic building. 5 Maintain the proportion, general style, General proportion, style, location Yes and symmetry or asymmetry of Ilk and symmetry of window patterns existing window patterns. referenced in design for the addition. 6 Use window shapes that are found on French door on east addition is No the historic structure. Do not introduce incompatible with historic house. odd-shaped windows such as octagonal, triangular, or diamond-shaped. 8 Use materials and construction similar Application does not specify type of Maybe to historic windows. Do not use snap- windows, though are drawn as one- in rnuntins. over-one, double hung with no muntin. Agenda Item 5A Page I I - While the size of the proposed addition is modest and effort has been made to design it in a compatible manner, its location at the side of the house, set 16' back from the facade is inconsistent with the General Design Guidelines. Furthermore, at 3184 sq. ft. the lot is very small and adding to the house will further crowd an already congested site and would likely be to the detriment of this important historic property. Analysis indicates that the floor area ratio (FAR) at 1002 Spruce is currently .57 where the average for the 900 and 1000 blocks of Spruce Street is currently .44 (there are four properties in 900 and 1000 blocks of Spruce Street with FAR above .60) Constructing the addition to increase the FAR to .62 is also somewhat inconsistent with Sections 4.4.4 and 2.1.1 of the General Design Guidelines. Staff considers that while it has been reconstructed over the years, a chimney in this location is historic (and likely original) and a character defining feature of the house. For this reason, staff considers it should be repaired and retained. Plans show the location of a rooftop condenser, which if the proposed addition were constructed, would be blocked from public view. Since staff is not recommending construction of the addition, an alternative location for the unit consistent with Section 8.3 of the General Design Guidelines should be sought. Window and Door Replacement In the 2007 revisions to the General Design Guidelines there is specific guidance given for the replacement of windows on Landmark and contributing buildings in historic districts. The following is an analysis of the proposal's compliance with guidelines that address windows on existing buildings and on new construction. Design guidelines are intended to be used only as an aid to appropriate design and are not intended as a checklist of items for compliance. Window and Door Significance The following are definitions adopted as administrative regulations by the Landmarks Board in the General Design Guidelines and used to characterize the historic significance of the door/window to the building: Very Historically Important. The feature has retained substantial integrity from the period of significance and is characterized by at least one of the following: 1. Defines the'architectural type or style of the building and without it the architectural significance would be lost Agenda Item 5A Page 12 - 2. Is constructed of a rare or unusual material that would be difficult to replicate (e.g. stained or leaded glass) 3. Was executed with a high degree of craftsmanship that would render its restoration difficult 4. Conveys artistic merit through skillful integration of design, material, and color which is of excellent visual quality 5. Demonstrates superior craftsmanship or is an example of the uncommon through elements of architectural design, details, or craftsmanship that are representative of a significant innovation. Historically Important: A historically important feature is one that 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. The feature has retained some integrity from the period of significance for the building and may be ordinary in execution and has limited value in understanding historic type or style. Non-Historic: A non-historic feature is one that has been replaced, or has been so altered that it is 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 3.7.13). Location The location of the feature that is proposed to be altered is an important consideration when determining whether or not replacement or retrofit is appropriate and needs to be determined as part of the application process. Typically, there is a hierarchy of elevations on a house. The fagade, (primary elevation), of the house is usually the most important and in most cases will have the most ornamentation. The sides of the house (secondary elevations), while usually less visible, still may contain features important to the character of the building. The rear elevation can be altered without compromising the historic character of the house. In general, the more important the elevation, the less likely that replacement of a historic window or door will be appropriate. The appropriateness of window and/or door replacement will be determined based upon characterization by staff and the landmarks design review committee using the following location criteria: Agenda Item SA Page 13 - Primary Elevation: Includes the facade (front or main elevation), or any side of a building that faces a public right of way or other open space. In general, the facade of a building is the most prominent elevation and will contain character defining doors and/or windows. Replacement of intact historic windows on primary elevations is inappropriate. Secondary Elevation: Typically the sides of a building have less public visibility and may have fewer significant character defining features than the facade. Replacement of intact historic windows on secondary elevations is rarely appropriate. Tertiary Elevation: 'T'ertiary elevations typically have little or no visibility from the public right-of- way and are usually located at the rear of the building. While they may have character defining windows or doors, in many cases retrofit or replacement of windows or doors on a tertiary elevation can occur without compromising the historic integrity of the building. Window & Door Significance and Location Matrix The General Design Guidelines include a matrix to establish when and where window or door replacement may be appropriate or not. This matrix assumes the features are in repairable condition. WINDOW & DOOR SIGNIFICANCE Very Historically Historically Important Non-Historic Important Primary Repair Repair Elevation a i Secondary Repair Reviewed Elevation case by case Tertiary Repair Elevation Agenda ]tent 5A Page 14 - Classification of Window and Door Condition A four level classification system is used to document the existing condition of each of the windows or doors. This classification is based upon the system identified in the National Park Service publication, Preservation Brief #9, "The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows." The appropriateness of window and/or door replacement will be determined based upon characterization by staff using the following condition classification criteria: Class 1. "Routine Maintenance", associated with small repairs, which are usually performed as part of a building's annual maintenance program. May include paint removal, re-glazing, weather-stripping, caulking, and repainting. Class Ih "Stabilization", shows a small degree of physical deterioration but can be repaired in place by patching, waterproofing, consolidating, and re-gluing existing material. Class 111: "Partial Replacement", localized deterioration in specific areas that can be removed and replaced without requiring a full feature replacement. Class IV. "Total Replacement" is for windows that have been damaged beyond repair. This includes a completely rotted sill, warping or a combination of Class III repairs. Those windows in Class I, lI and III should be repaired and those in Class IV should be replaced in kind (See section 3.7.13). Schedule of Door and Windows Proposed for Replacement and/or Windows Proposed for Removal Windows: # & Location Type, Elevation Characterization Condition Comments 102 - N, 1st Fl. D/H, 2/2 Primary Non-hist. I 1990's replacement 103 - N, 1s' Fl. D/H, 2/2 Primary Hist. Imp. I-1I Complete orig. unit 201 - N, 2nd Fl. Casement Primary V. Hist. Imp. I-lI Complete orig. unit 202 - N, 2nd FI. D/H, 1/1 Primary Hist. Imp. 141 Complete orig. unit Agenda Item 5A Pace 15 - 203 - N, 2n1 Fl. D/H, 1/1 Primary Hist. Imp. I-II Complete orig. unit 002 - E, basem. Awning Secondary Non-hist. I Aluminum 003 - E, basem. Awning Secondary Hist. Imp 1-III 3-light 105 - E, I- Fl. D/H, 2/2 Secondary Hist. Imp. I-11 Complete orig. unit 106 E, 11t Fl. D/H, 2/2 Secondary Hist. Imp. I-II Complete orig. unit Removal for addition No #s E, 1st Fl. 4 Case. Secondary Non-hist. I-II c.1990 0021- S, basem. Awning Secondary Non-hist. I Non-hist. 108 - S,15t Fl D/H, 1/1 Secondary? Non-hist II c.1990 109 - S, V Fl. D/H, 2/2 Secondary Hist. Imp. I Complete orig. unit 205 - S, 2rd FI. D/I-i, 2/2 Secondary Hist. Imp. I-II Complete orig. unit 206 - S, 2nd Fl. D/H, 2/2 Secondary Hist. Imp. I-II Complete orig. unit 204 - W, 2nd Fl. D/I-I, 1/1 Primary Hist. Imp. I-II Complete orig. unit 113 - W, 1St. Fl. D/H, 1/1 Primary Hist. Imp. I-II Complete orig. unit Doors # & Location !,We Elevation Characterization Condition Comments 101 - N, 1St Fl. 3 It., pan. Primary Non-hist. I 1990's replacement 107 - N, 1St Fl. French Primary? Non-hist. I 1990's replacement 110 - W, 1St Fl. French Primary Non-hist. I 1990's replacement tigci iue iLL;I13 f A Page 16 - GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES ALTERATIONS TO CONTRIBUTING BUILDINGS, 3.0: 3.7 Windows, Storm Windows, and Shutter Windows, the elements that surround them, and their relationship to one another are one of the most important character-defining elements of a historic building and should be preserved. Improper or insensitive treatment of the windows on a historic structure can seriously detract from its architectural character. The relative importance of a window depends on three factors; the location of the window on the building, the historic significance of the window, and its condition. Windows on elevations visible from public ways, particularly the fafade, are especially important. A rvindow that has a high level of historic significance, regardless of its location, may also be very important to the historic integrity of the building. The replacement of historic windows or components including glass, should be considered only as a last resort. At times, property owners consider replacement of their historic zvindorvs as a way of improving energy efficiency. Research indicates that, in most cases, the energy efficiency of an old window ain be increased to that of a thermal pane replacement window by weather-stripping, insulation of weight pockets, and the application of an interior or exterior storni system. While the energy loss of a building may be reduced by replacing or repairing historic windows, windows are only one factor in the building's energy usage. It is strongly recommended that a comprehensive energy audit be undertaken to identify areas for improvement. To increase a building's energy efficiency, a combination of air sealing, additional wall and ceiling insulation, and the adjustment of mechanical systems is generally more effective than focusing only on the repair or replacement of a window. For more information regarding energy efficiency and energy audits for historic buildings, please contact the Office of Environwental A "airs at zururu.envirortnrerrtalrr airs.coni Guideline Meets Guideline? Retain and preserve existing historic Historically important and very 1 windows, including theirfunctional Maybe - historically important windows (#s, depending and decorative features, such as 103, 105106, 109, 201, 202, 203, 205, frames, glass, sashes, muntins, sills, 206 on heads, moldings, surrounds and , 204, 113) are all located on condition hardware. Because windows near the primary or secondary elevations. fafade are particularly critical to the Classification of condition of these character of historic buildings, their windows will determine whether protection may supersede the replacement is appropriate. All doors protection of historic windows proposed for replacement are non- elsewhere. In some cases, it may be historic. appropriate to use window elements from rear or side elevations to repair those on the front. Preserve original window locations; do No proposed relocation of windows 2 not move windows from their historic or doors. N/A placement. Repair rather than replace the See.1 3 functional and decorative features of original windows through recognized preservation. methods. If replacement of a feature is necessary, replace only Agenda Item 5A page 17 - the deteriorated feature in kind rather than the entire unit, snatching the materials, design and dimensions of the on final. The replacement of historic windows Classification of condition of 5 should only be considered as a last historically and very historically No resort if the fabric of the window is important windows on primary and deteriorated beyond repair. However, if the property owner wishes to request secondary faces of building will a landmark alteration certificate to determine whether replacement is replace windows on a contributing or appropriate. individually landmarked building, the steps as outlined in the Historic Window and Door Replacement/Retrofit Guidelines must be followed. 6 The location of the window(s) proposed All historically important and very No for retrofit or replacement is important historically important windows in assessing their significance to a proposed for replacement are located historic building. In general, the more on primary or secondary elevations. important the elevation where the window is located, the less likely that retrofit or replacement will be appropriate. Elevations will be categorized as primary, secondary or tertiary, using the methodology set out in the Window & Door Replacement Application and Survey. • Replacement of intact historic windows on primary elevations is rarely appropriate. • Replacement of intact historic windows on secondary elevations is generally inappropriate. • Replacement of intact historic windows on tertiary elevations can occur provided it does not compromise the historic integrity of the building. The historic significance of the Staff considers the historic round windows proposed for replacement and segmental arch windows on this Maybe must also be assessed. In general, the building to be very important more significant a window is to the character defining features on the building as a whole, the less likely that a retrofit or replacement 7vilI be east, west, north and south appropriate. The appropriateness of a elevations of this building. Staff does window replacement will be not consider the non-historic doors determined, in art, based upon and windows or basement windows ✓ V Agenda Item 5A Page 18 - characterization of the window as proposed for replacement to be either 'Very Historically Important', important character defining features 'Historically Important', or 'Non- and their replacement may be Historic' (See Definitions). appropriate. Guideline Meets Guideline? The condition of the window must be Historically important and very g' evaluated prior to determining whether $ historically important windows (#s the window or door may be repaired or 103, 105106, 109, 201, 202, 203, 205, No replaced. The condition is to be 206, 204, 113) are all located on determined by assessing its elements individually. The assessment must be Primary or secondary elevations. completed through the use of a survey Classification of condition of these that identifies the extent of windows ranges from I to III (see deterioration in each window and memo pages 5 & 6). Staff considers determines whether the windows may basement window 003 not to be be repaired, retrofitted, or replaced. The character defining and that it may be survey form documents the existing replaced. condition for the window and identifies which features will be repaired and which will possibly be replaced. If, through the Window & Door Window openings are shown not to 10 Application & Survey, it is determined change in size. Yes the window may be replaced (Class III IV), the window opening itself should be carefully preserved. It should not be made larger or smaller to accommodate a differently sized window. Window & Door Application & Details for basement window 003 11 Survey, if it is determined the window should be submitted to staff for Maybe may be replaced (Class III & IV), the review and approval. same material as was the original is most appropriate, however, other materials may be considered if the operation, dimension, profile, durability, and finish are the same. Synthetic materials are generally inappropriate. Synthetic materials rarely duplicate the surface texture, reflective and detail qualities of original materials. If a window that is divided into several Details for basement window 003 12 panes of glass must be replaced, a Maybe should be submitted to staff for similar true-divided-light window that review and approval. matches the dimensions, profile and detailing of the original is most appropriate. High quality simulated- Agenda Item 5A Page 19 - divided-light windows may be allowed if they maintain the muntin size of the original window. Snap-in muntins or other inauthentic architectural details are inappropriate. If the existing condition of the With exception of #003 all 13 window(s), as documented by a historically important and very No Window & Door Survey, indicates historically important windows Class III or IV damage or proposed for replacement are class I deterioration, then the window(s) may and/or class Ii. Repair of these or replaced. All be retrofitted retrofitted or replacement windows windows should be feasible. The must match the historic feature as replacement of #102 (non-historic) closely as possible. should very closely snatch #103 in material, dimensions, and profile. Drawings indicate that dimensions of jamb differ on proposed window and are 3/a" thinner than historic. Likewise, meeting rails of proposed window is 1 1/2" wide while existing are 3/4' wide. Muntin, bottom rail, and jamb depth to glass of proposed is 3/8" while depth of these elements on existing is 3/4".Height of bottom rail on historic sash is 2" in height, while bottom rail on the proposed is 3" in height. Finally, the profile of the proposed brick mould differs from that of the historic while the depth of the historic brick mould is over 2", the depth of the proposed brick mould is only 1 1/2'. All these dimensions should match the historic sash, frame and brick mould to a tolerance of 1/8". Window and Door Replacement Analysis: Staff considers the windows numbered 103, 105106, 109, 201, 202, 205, 206, 204, 113 best meet the definition of "historically important", which reads, "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." Because of its unique historic size, location, and operation, staff considers window #203 to meet the definition of "very historically important" in that it has retained substantial integrity from the period of significance, and is characterized by the architectural type or style of the building and without it the architectural significance would be lost. - Agenda Item 5A Page 20 - The definition in the Guidelines for "Primary Elevation" includes the facade (front or main elevation) of a building, or any side of a building that faces a public right of way or other open space. Staff considers the north and west elevations of the house to meet this definition. "Secondary Elevations" reads, "Typically a side of a building that has less public visibility, and may have fewer significant character defining features than on the fagade. An elevation that has visibility from an alley may be considered a secondary elevation." Staff considers the east and south elevations of the house to meet this definition. While at the rear of the house, the south elevation is very close to 101hStreet and is quite visible from that thoroughfare. The window and door replacement matrix indicates that the replacement of very historically important and historically important doors on primary elevations of the house is generally inappropriate if the windows are repairable. For secondary elevations, such replacement is to be considered on a case-by-case basis. The replacement of the non-historic windows and doors on the house is appropriate, provided those elements closely match all dimensions of historic (to within 1/4') per the Guidelines. For instance, window #102 on the fagade was replaced c.1991, but was originally the same as the intact and historically important window #103. The replication of this #102 should match #103 to within 1/4" in alt dimensions including rails, stiles, meeting rails, muntins, frames and brick moulds. The proposed drawings indicate that dimensions of the replacement for #102 will differ significantly from #103 and that its design should be revised so that all dimensions are within 1/4' of the historic condition. As windows numbered 103, 105 106, 109, 201, 202, 205, 206, 204, & 113 meet the definition of historically important (very historically important in the case of #206), are located on primary or secondary elevations, and are of Class I and/or II condition, staff considers that they should be rehabilitated rather than replaced. The rehabilitation of historic windows is specialized work; however, there are a number of contractors and craftsman in the area who are experienced in making historic windows operable and weather tight with a minimal loss of historic material. The installation of interior or exterior storm windows should be considered as part of a window rehabilitation project. As the property owner wishes to improve the energy efficiency and comfort of the house, staff recommends that the property owner also undertake an energy audit to determine steps that can be taken to achieve this goal. Agenda Item 5A Page 21 - Staff considers that all doors on the house are non-historic and may be replaced. However, more investigation should take place to try to find out how the historic front door (#101) looked and replicate it accordingly. A search of historic tax assessor photographs (archived at the Carnegie Library), will likely show the front in either 1929 or 1949, and guide this work. Likewise, the proposed French doors (#107 & #110) appear somewhat incompatible with the design of the house. Redesign of these features should occur to simplify the design and making them more compatible with the historic house. The review and approval of window #102 and doors #107 & #110 should occur at the Landmarks design review committee. Staff considers the proposed replacement of the three basement windows to be appropriate given that two are clearly non-historic and the third exhibits class III level deterioration and is not an important character-defining feature of the house. The applicant should submit details regarding the basement windows for review and approval. Findings As outlined in the staff recommendation, the proposed addition, chimney removal, and replacement of historic windows at 1002 Spruce Street is not consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance in that: 1. The proposed addition would damage the special historic exterior architectural features of the house by crowding it and changing its essential character. 2. The removal of the west chimney and location of the addition would have an adverse effect on the historic character of the property. 3. The replacement of the windows would result in a significant loss of historic material and adversely affect the historic character of the Van Fleet house. 4. The historic windows are repairable and their energy efficiency can be improved significantly by making them weather tight and installing interior or exterior storm systems. 5. The request is generally inconsistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Sections 3.7 & 4(1-5) of the General Design Guidelines. Agenda Item 5A Page 22 - ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Building Inventory Form B: Applicant letter C: Drawings D: Photographs and window and door replacement information E: Window & Door Survey & photographs Agcnda Item >A Page 23 - Attachment A COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY NOT FOR FIELD USE Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation ELIGIBLE 1300 Broadway, Denver, Colorado -ELIGIBLE NOT ELIG. HISTORIC BUILDING INVENTORY RECORD -NOMINATED CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO Boulder County -CERTIFIED REHAB -DATE PROJECT NAME, BOULDER HISTORIC PLACES State ID#: 5BL240o82 Budding Name: - *Building Address: 1002 SPRUCE STREET BOULDER, COLORADO 80302 Building Owner: R.Q. AND HELEN WHALEY Owner Address: 23042 SHUSSMARK TRAIL. 1205 OAK CREEK, COLORADO 80467 USGS Quad: BOULDER Quad Year: 1966 (REVo1979) *Legal: Tnsp IN Range 70W Section 30 I /4F 1/4 Historic Name: District Name: DOWNTOWN BOULDER HISTORIC DISTRICT Block: Lot: Addition: TRACT 329, LESS A&B sar of Addition: Film Roll By: ROGER WHITACRE Film Number: BL-25 Number of Negatives: 34 Negative Location: BOULDER Construction Date: ESTIMATE: PRE 1880«)sr;~~ Source: ASSESSOR/NATIONAL REGISTER NOMINATION FORM, 1978 Present Use: RESIDENCE Historic Use: RESIDENCE Condition: FAIR Extent of Alterations: MODERATE Description: STUCCO, PORCH ALTERATIONS. ORIGINAL If Moved, Date(s): Style: VERNACULAR MASONRY, FRONT GABLE Stories: 1 1/2 Materials: BRICK, STUCCO Square Footage: 1820 Field Assessment: NOT ELIGIBLE District Potential: YES CONTRIBUTING Local Landmark. Designation?: NO Name: Date: Associated Buildings?: NO Type: If Inventoried, List Id Numbers: '\rchitect: UNKNOWN Source: iilder/Contractor: UNKNOWN Source: Jriginal Owner: POSSIBLY MRS. I.C. VAN FLEET Source: SANFORD GLADDEN, DIRECTORY OF BOULDER FOR 1883 nf= 1002 Spruce Street Plan Shape: D . . . . . . O O D O 0 O O O 0 O O 0 O O O 0 D O 0 O 0 O O o O O O O O O . O O b O O O O O 0 O O O D O O O O O O O O O O H O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O Theme(s): The Urban Frontier (1860-1920). Architectural Description: Front gable roofed brick house which now has stucco on walls. Overhanging eaves. Frieze board. Gable end features paired, double-hung windows with semi-circular arches and engaged column between them. Also small semi circular window in gable end. Porch has been altered with new supports and wall. Original porch featured classical wooden columnso Pediment over porch entrance. Facade has two entrance doors with segmental arches, drip molds, and transoms. Single, tall, narrow, double-hung window with drip mold on facade. Stone foundation. Gabled wall dormer. Bay with segmental window arches. Construction History: _bstorical Background: In 1883, this house was used as a rooming house and run by Mrs. I.C. Van Fleet, an assayer, lived here., In 1901, the house was still used as a boarding house and its residents were; W.S. Beals, retired; Louis (a barber) and Emma Koehler and Kate McFadden, principal of Highland School. By 1913, this house was vacant. Architectural Significance: Represents the work of a master. Possesses high artistic values. _X_ Represents a type, period or method of construction. Historical Significances Associated with significant persons. Associated with significant events and/or patterns. X Contributes to an historic district. Statement of Significance: This house is one of the earliest residences in the downtown district, and its style displays several elements representative of Boulder°s early architecture, including brick construction, steeply pitched gables, semi- circular and segmental window arches and drip molds. The house is also notable-for its use as a rooming house during Boulder°s early days. - ,ferences: Boulder County Assessor°s Records Sanborn Insurance Maps Sanford Gladden, Directory of Boulder for 1883 Boulder City Directories, 1898, 19011902 and 1913-1914 Surveyed by Whitacre/Simmons Affiliations Front Range Research Dates June 1988 Attachment S 1002 Spruce Street Boulder, CO 80302 September 18, 2009 Boulder Landmark Design Review Committee Boulder, CO I've been at 1002 Spruce since 1990. It has been good for the kids with the former Mapleton School and the university nearby. 1990 --1991 saw major remodeling with a return to single family occupancy including new electrical, plumbing, and furnace. By 2004 it was essential to replace the hopeless rusted steel roof and deal with foundation, masonry, and wood deterioration. Total costs over the years have far exceeded the 1990 purchase price. The purpose of this request is to address chronic issues that previous efforts have failed to resolve. Rear Addition The patio door, number 107 on the diagram, has been inoperable most of the time since installation in 1990. The request is to push out the wall and create a firm foundation because: • The previous wall was unstable and rebuilt in 1990. • In 2004 the doors were realigned • But the doors quickly became inoperable again, possibly because of the approximately 1900 coal room below. As part of this, those doors and the matching number 110 ones are to be replaced, the adjacent unstable chimney originally for the coal furnace removed, and ventilation improved. Windows Because of my unsuccessful previous restoration attempts in 1990 and 2004 of, scraping, painting, caulking and some wood replacement on the windows as well as unsafe and ineffective storm windows, the proposal is replacement to address: 1. Ice Buildup Up to 1 inch of inside ice in winter even without humidifier; associated interior and exterior water damage 2. Leakage Wind, dust, and water leakage because of miss-alignment of upper and lower panes, major gaps; warped and inappropriately sloping sills; wind induced rattle 3. Disintegration Glazing and frames disintegrating; bare wood quickly re-exposed after painting even in areas protected by the porch roof 4. Inoperability Miss-alignment; broken pins; inability to open and close windows. 5. Security Windows without locking mechanism 6. Noise Extensive traffic and truck noise from commercial activity on sidewalk, street, and across alley- with even people eating food on my porch 7. Safety Broken glass from unreliable pins I appreciate your assistance on these issues within the context of a transition zone that extends into a residential area. Larry Lackey PAONCTMORIMON ewst-'u-. 0.a xo5 «d xe' ~ ' i ~ - xr~y w~wow MCLMT DN _ ~ I' ece, see w.cow. ♦~f ~a o Ia, `~a_.a e.~~ HSOSlewl+ - ~ - ' ~ - - r im m w46 en pbra H.ILIAtl,~lYla1 f ~ til a^Oi W.[L „C' 1 wn s~G f,~`CI ~ ~I ~1 q..x YP%~ aR2" 1 ~ x ~w.lce s-c_cr U I` I I elamlacaoomaxKEVHOTES r- e: +H.I I!C 1 14 / ~ , Iw'm`w 1 , , ^ ~ C i / 1 ~tv ~ ~ .a-c a..xi~aw~su~nzlr~ea>v+ I' I fit oc +a.+ . 10. COOSEOOH= x ~ W ~"c*oc'xxint Iu 0, 1 ~~w , e our LJf 10 LUL" ner..ars~.,. s...p+n. eaor»• U U . vu J U ♦ ~ wrr e.. ,w.. N ame e,~ a!+c amo a!u atra:r ~w .a R.'~!- ~°w Q o U exn~w~ I eofloa ° o...m~ ~ w ~1 emtr+ma [..1 Il1SIPRt1.4Ci 1 SMPIAV 1 SITEPIAN aSOrnlu,kl AS-BUILT SITE PROPOSIO SITE A ' II 1> - - y o - YIIYYOW/UIURSCY®UlE 11 n~ I ` 0.»I'^• t' Ify kL^~TON t ~ I f.a ~r- o-e E : 4 .r fwd _C 1•c'. r.r ~pmtN•rrs L115MUM%," I it L/ t a.a' c 761.1R9i1 D t •C . •'J• rw 9L1P~ M it l,~ rN iQ1$1(.fM{ I yr Boa ~ r.n• x v~• ~ ~ .•lrr us:.~.rnnr s ~~Lab..•.~ 4 •l ~ a0a. a+'. •'a' t ~ ~ ~"n I ~ p i •v~ •oNf or~ we ♦qvm n avocM wvaR~ aOG~ j ,..p { ~.e'b~ee~'~rRa~a ro*neRC.ra~ aa+m nm-,n, i; - ~ % ~ Fuon nay M ROM w f/;1 ~v q ,a; oam.Tai snot r..>L W o i Y V ova ae~ CYHN Wl tXl •+xfs5~,~6 uro N~Nro a N N~LO w Q W L) ® Gx5~V61L'M. YT',411 it ~I O-'a• aim b'IeN1t>♦/L • • . aw W l U N O o J ° m "ON MA LEND L.?_'_i Cas I ~ ~oxo- u.,e. aov, ~I' li J NurliEVR rt oM oohs ICI 1 MAIN LOW FLOOR PLAN 1 MAIN LEVEL FLOOD PLAN All PLAN PROPOSED PLAN All M~ lj - WINDOWIDOORDCNEOULE i J_ .Y . t-7• ~ C~SNfI ~P I 9~Yn1h ! ~ ,w rr~~•_e_ wY aaaa.vsecsra v;1 IIILI YIL T•5r•P~' - r-e vy . P.r : - I I il:l _J•A1y li f rwHi y ~ I I s I I rLu BOOR PIAN of NDEEB W la) Selo w,n~ r~ kK W 55 Lx* w O ~ eP5»n .e• w ew rvxnr r.w. ~ U U ~ O ,c.5'^tl rVP:o 9JFLw 6M~DRNL W uj aW tuCO~Y ~ U N J 1 ~ O ROOK PLAN LEGEND m - - D rKx LL'M IaVS II REVIEW '1 ``J ~ YAJI LEVlL I 7 7 2 UPPER LEVEL FLOOR PIN 2 UPPER LEVEL ROOD PLAN=:-` AS-BUILT PLAN PROPOSED PLAN All vl~ ,I EIEVATION M NOTES I - ~ ~ I I ~ ❑ o~.o' vnne c .uLL 511 II I ~ 1nC LEON _ r m l _ jj _ L _ _ _ IIIn _3vt 34. 3a.ucun -I-~_i., - - 9d~U K4L PARTIAL 2 EASTEEEVATIOM TA NORTH ELEVATION 1 NORTH REVATION AS-BUILT ELEVATIONS ~i w C w I I ~ ~ I - two ~I > V ~I - FWM* Fq. -II to - - _ pp____ _ II III I I~I I ' 1j ` !If I i' ~ ..~~I I . I~ I r•~ I A4vAT~0Y9 PARTIAL 1 2 FASTELEVATION 1A IORTR ELEVATION T NORTH ELEVATION - PROPOSED ELEVATIONS EBATYON NEY NOTES - I 1 - - I•/ R'%P NKeI.0.i~Jn"NCAW'! i lM ,nve ,wm co. n eionw o.eQ 1 =xrws'~aw ,see. e~ia aeor I r ~ ! I ~ I 1 i ' i ' I I G ~n+nrow ove w.unne.~1 I / _ i i r--i II j - u-M, G ~ Fi~~ • f1~' f~~ j ~~~~I - 7C7.5161'c3 L. . I 4 _ YlESTELEIiATION 3 SOUTH ELEVATION AS-BUILT ELEVATIONS z w ti\ IiIiII~I ,~=f XLu o + 1 1 LLI .r. Y o f aw r Y(_~ i f I ti-1`~I I C I i J III' _ -,,-•L.:~ - - ~~~I 1 _=T~ - - - - urwwa>avs a 1--- I 4 WISTEEEOATION 3 SO OTH ELEVATION I PROPOSED ELEVATIONS r _ EXTERIOR FACE OF BRICK / l TRIM _ FRAME I _T BRICK ~ 1f , \ ARCH f I i1 MOLDING L'y f J1 \1` HEAP SASH 3" GLAZING I 15° 4 4 I-2L I I.. MEETING RAILS -10 GHEGKRAIL 3" 11-0" MULLION 4I 2I 3 4 2 MULLION 311 1'-OII SASH I" SILL - v mil 5. 1002 Spruce Street SILL 5oulder, CO 3° = I'-o° I1-II-oa 30" MO 34 32 RO T 333-" F5 I i 5 Z (L 0 3 ~ O o0[ m`O m~q N~ 2 t\ - N N 4 I WUDMKT CUSTOM 5CALE: 3/4 I '-0" 6 5t&o ~-lwufLc l DISTRIBUTOR: BMD SOLAR GLASS 5t1EET Wnw~a~~n ty NUMBER:50LGL5LD DATE: 08/ 12109 BOULDER, CO I ARCHITECTURAL DIVISION DRAWN: KVB 1 REV DATE: OF 5 8 I 2, 616 ~e C\j - - r ~ - - p U- HEAD 2 5CALE: G I'-C" OWN DISTRIBUTOR: BMD SOLAR GLA55 5HEET w~do... 7000.NUMBER:SOLGLBLD DATE: 08/12/09 BOULDER, CO 2 AfiChITECTUQAL 01 VI50N DRAWN: PV[ 31 REV DATE: OF 5 r cl. I 1 IG N r ~t ~ CHECKRAIL C3 SCALE: G = 1'-0" :APC~IITE:CTUKAL DISTRIBUTOR: BMD SOLAR GLASS 5HM NUMBER: SOLGLBLD DATE: 08/ 1 2/09 BOULDER, CO 3 piV1510N DRAWN: KVB 1 REV DATE: ~y OF 5 i r 443" I I l ' 2 3 221„ 32 32 - - \ 1 1 L O m`Q N (U S32 SILL SCALE: G 1'-0" kARCHITECTURAL DISTRIBUTOR: BMD SOLAR GLASS SHEET . NUMBER:SOLGLBLD DATE: OS/! 2/09 BOULDER, CO 4 DIV1510N DRAWN: RVB I REV DATE: OF 5 e RO 1/21l , F5 l 4N I I 318 1 2° 1 I 132 MO JAMB SCALE: G 1'-0" DISTRIBUTOR: BMD SOLAR GLASS 5tIEET IYIAl~VIN z }~h nqq .,d oo.- NUMBER:SOLGLBLD :DATE; 08/I 2/09 BOULDER, CO 5 DRAWN: RVB I REOF 5 SECTION 08 52 00 WOOD CHAIN & PULLEY DOUBLE HUNG WINDOW PART 1 GENERAL 1.1 SECTION INCLUDES A. Wood double hung window complete with hardware, glazing, weather strip, Authentic Divided Lite, jamb extension, and standard or specified anchors, trim, and attachments. 1.2 RELATED SECTIONS A. Section 01 33 23-Submittal Procedures: Shop Drawings, Product Data, and Samples B. Section 01 62 00-Product Options C. Section 01 65 00-Product Delivery D. Section 01 66 00-Storage and Handling Requirements E. Section 01 71 00-Examination and Preparation F. Section 01 73 00-Execution 0. Section 01 74 00-Cleaning and Waste Management H. Section 01 76 00-Protecting Installed Construction 1. Section 06 22 00-Millwork: Wood trim other than furnished by window manufacturer J. Section 07 92 00-Joint Sealants: Sill sealant and perimeter caulking K. Section 09 90 00-Paints and Coatings: Paint or stain other than factory applied finish 1.3 REFERENCES A. American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM): 1. C 1036: Standard Specification for Flat Glass. B. WDMA I.S.4: Industry Standard for Water Repellent Preservative Treatment for Millwork. 1.4 SUBMITTALS A. Shop Drawings: Submit shop drawings under provisions of Section 01 33 23. B. Samples: 1. Submit corner section under provisions of Section 01 33 23. 2. Include glazing system, quality of construction, and specified finish. 1.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE A. Regulatory Requirements: Emergency Egress or Rescue: Comply with requirements for sleeping units of [IBC International Building Code] [BOCA Basic Building Code] [Southern Building Code] [Uniform Building Code] f 1. 1.6 DELIVERY A. Comply with provisions of Section 01 65 00. B. Deliver in original packaging and protect from weather. 08 52 00 - 1 Wood Ultimate Double Hung Window - 2008 / r Pr 1.7 STORAGE AND HANDLING A. Prime or seal wood surfaces, including surface to be concealed by wall construction, if more than thirty (30) days will expire between delivery and installation. B. Store window units in an upright position in a clean and dry storage area above ground and protect from weather under provisions of Section 01 66 00. 1.8 WARRANTY A. Windows shall be warranted to be free from defects in manufacturing, materials, and workmanship for a period of ten (10) years from purchase date. PART 2 PRODUCTS 2.1 MANUFACTURED UNITS A. Description: Wood Double Hung, as manufactured by Marvin Windows and Doors, Warroad, Minnesota. 2.2 FRAME DESCRIPTION A. Finger jointed edge-glued pine, head and side jambs with clear pine interior stops, finger jointed sill. 1. Kiln dried to a moisture content no greater than twelve (12) percent at the time of fabrication. 2. Water repellent preservative treated in accordance with WDMA I.S.4. B. Frame thickness: Per design, 1 inch head jamb, 1 9/32 inch at sill. C. Frame width: 6-518 inches. 2.3 SASH DESCRIPTION A. Clear pine. 1. Kiln dried to a moisture content no greater than twelve (12) percent at the time of fabrication. 2. Water repellent preservative treated in accordance with WDMA I.S.4. B. Sash thickness: 1-21132 inch. C. Removable exterior glazing stops. 2.4 GLAZING A. Glazing method: Single glazed, 1/8" Annealed. C. Glass Type: Clear. D. Glazing Seal: Silicone bedding. 2.5 FINISH A. Interior / Exterior: Treated bare wood. 2.6 HARDWARE A. Balance system: Cold Rolled Steel Weights, Brass Pulleys and Chains. 08 52 00 - 2 Wood Ultimate Double Hung Window - 2008 B. Lock: High pressure zinc die-cast cam lock and keeper. 1. Finish: Brass. 2.7 WEATHER STRIP A. Dual durometer bulb weather strip at top rail; dual durometer bulb weather strip at check rail; continuous leaf weather strip on vertical sash edge; dual durometer bulb weather strip at bottom rail. Color: Beige. 2.8 JAMB EXTENSION A. Factory installed jamb extension for wall thickness indicated or required. B. Finish: Finish: Match interior frame finish. 2.9 INSECT SCREENS 1. A. None. 2.10 AUTHENTIC DIVIDED LITES (ADL) A. 7/8 inch (22 mm) single glaze mullion. 1. Pattern: Rectangular, Custom lite layout. 2. Finish: Match sash finish. 2.16 ACCESSORIES AND TRIM A. Installations and Hardware Accessories: 1. Masonry brackets: 10 inches (254 mm). A. Exterior Wood Moufding: 1. Profile: To match existing, supplied loose for field application. 2. Finish: Match exterior frame finish. PART 3 EXECUTION 3.1 EXAMINATION A. Verification of Conditions: Before Installation, verify openings are plumb, square, and of proper dimension as required in Section 01 71 00. Report frame defects or unsuitable conditions to the General Contractor before proceeding. B. Acceptance of Conditions: Beginning of installation confirms acceptance of existing conditions. 3.2 INSTALLATION A. Comply with Section 01 73 00. B. Assemble and install window unit according to manufacturer's instructions and reviewed shop drawings. C. Install sealant and related backing materials at perimeter of unit or assembly in accordance with Section 07 92 00 Joint Sealants. Do not use expansive foam sealant. D. Install accessory items as required. E. Use finish nails to apply woad trim and mouldings. 3.3 CLEANING 08 52 00 - 3 Wood Ultimate Double Hung Window - 2008 A. Remove visible labels and adhesive residue according to manufacture's instructions. B. Leave windows and glass in a clean condition. Final cleaning as required in Section 01 74 00. 3.4 PROTECTING INSTALLED CONSTRUCTION A. Comply with Section 01 76 00. B. Protect windows from damage by chemicals, solvents, paint, or other construction operations that may cause damage. END OF SECTION 08 52 00 - 4 Wood Ultimate Double Hung Window- 2008 N la rrl ` L~ . y r• I IfJ ;'"JkY , h~. ~ ,_r~• 1~1 1ti ~ Sr _ .':.ter 10 G~ eSyC ~ i ~ ~y C M ~ ~•I( ~ w _ 1 1 J rY~ ♦r4..G11 41.1 ^ C ~ n, - I C i J K l,~' r~ - s.~ , l Y••i _ .._._-~i F F lY~,~,~~y~ 4~{~Ill,~t,. F - AN 4002 SPRUCE STREET PROPOSED ADDITION - VIEW FROM SIDEWALK AT SPRUCE STREET •4 J Y~ M. h J. --.-zys E • fI ~Y I aa Y . t < A107 A201 A202 ,P WPM AN d' t Y,T IF ~ V e Y Al -01 C~ ■■■rd"9 - -G. - I'IIIiI~~l~~~l~~~~~ I I ~ ~II III I I ~II~ + ~h ~rI I I~ 'fil11 ;IJI I .r I III Cll.l f r 1002 SPRUCE STREET NORTH-PRIMARY ELEVATION A 1 ~I A~ r.; ■n VE A2O4 r~ - art„ '1. •1 - . - _ - ~ , ~sv P~A F v All 12 1002 SPRUCE STREET WEST-PRIMARY ELEVATION A y +ro i r ,t 'r ~I 2 ~r i i= . `d _ P . tiFt ~~f.„ ~ P lei - - - ~ Y~ - 7a-r'~n~..~i ~ ~ ~ 4.. 411 N L Y ~ ~f i " all A„ " M r,iil~i~1 ll!?fl'fll~lillll(llll . i iTT i il'o IilTil'dT r'. y....fr, ;~•S~C~Cy'.~i~c. ,-~i rtr< !1 1•' 7S y y .iii - - - - i L ,s+ ~••~3`r - 1002 SPRUCE STREET EAST-SECONDARY ELEVATION B l r-'-9 f' J r 11 99 r f :.11, ; C`f 09 - (}yam - I '---f 4 l•J~•S tf 1 .1 i t 1.J J.U4+ .rll Ali. t', ,+A~yti} c J ' S~ :Y ~•1 _ _ i` .1 T• PP_ i r - ~r+-- • , I z ~ t$~ _ ~i+ r i 4~' - ,s i. Y ~.~~F'~ 33 s"^r~:~ 1~ _ - _ f ~ ~ ~I Z ~ '3Z~R3 w c"~f4 yv ~.~~SJ a~. a 1~.e. 1 ~_i ~•7~q~'r _ ',~I` 4~~-~~ M1 + ~ - ~ iii ~ '"~..+31yf'~ C201 C202 V r eo,"?~ W~ r f'°. ~'fi`•~"'F ~ 1 ! i 1 ir~a.:~if ~l• _ l d ;1 ~ _ ~ J _ . r -.::,i'ce' K4a 1-J~~r~•~}r" .s 9' _ - hG~^ _ S - - - IF r ~ >~23'••>a.V r s.r• sr r';=t.^~~ti ~ ~.-.r. _ _ _ _ r - ~ J .wL.fi _ `4. 1~.s' i, 'v ~ ,I 4• •,r _ _ ~'7 1 ~.t"'.-r . X111 +~-.•~Tr ~ ~L't' ~uih~a ,.#r~ {~N - e, ~ '~`~.~y, i~.r.-'I ~ l+r 4, ~ _ ,:.sf s;E „ycaY-f1~j{~• ~ ri <"~.:y) IIN ~r~; r. ~ ivy.-_ y~~.3•'Sa-nn-~" _ _ ~fjrJz ~ r. wry:- - 'J• ..i 47'7. ,;,r; d e. ;'Si-„~' - ' --y ~a~ir' 6.4 1002 SPRUCE STREET SOUTH-TERTIARY ELEVATION C ~I lit r " 111 f - I` i ra+~ 5„ •ec . , on'ez BRED ING 'I F^• - _ i1 ,-icy S :•'1'd._ n .i~ y ~S`h~dry 1002 SPRUCE STREET CONTEXT - r C~ c„ Cs• ~.If. -'T T _ r _MW r= V r - k ' ~!"r #~AyYs'~•.. -.74.• a 6rZ r nom- ter:., EXTERIOR 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW B002 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 002 Z-2" x 2'-2" Location: Basement on east side of house facing alley. Type: 1950's single pane sliding aluminum window Condition: Leaks; not secure; water damage to wood frame. !Votes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2, Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. r; ~T ter-. • ~i.'~ ~f~"..~ ~ GJt y~~`"t-►~.....~~i_ i ~.Yu- ~{/1~v vv~' II >f _ ~v+~l I'wSU. _ .s-•4 l "art "y~'e,•.,..1`1~" ~1'!}Fy~•L .~-..t r7 ...:foss-.',yf.~-,-,._,f~~ .•r~~.~ ,e• ; 1„ ry L''F~ _ ~ f _ ilr +~~-.f13~.r~•i4 ~ i' i EXTERIOR 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW 8003 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 003 2'-Z' x 2'-2" Location: Basement on east side of house facing alley. Type: Single pane wood window Condition: 25" to .5" gaps; leaks; water damage to wood window and frame; to be enclosed by rebuilt eastern addition foundation Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. 1 11 Q_ ~~G< < I man" yp r . , i 131 Q T IMimi.- EXTERIOR 1NTERlOR 1002 SPRUCE STREET DOOR A101 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 101 T-3 W x 8'-3" Location: Main level on north side of house facing Spruce street. Type: 1990's woad door wl transom Condition: Door, warped; .25' to .5" gaps on all sides; water damage at bottom; double pane windows loose. Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. ~I ~I r~: eT x 1 7 P T!rrl T 1 M1 EXTFRIC;R INTERIOR UL O11_ 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A102 - REPLACMENT REQUESTED No. SIZe Remarks -see notes for numerical references 102 T-1" x 6'-5' Location: Main level on north side of house facing Spruce street. Type: Built in 1990's was a door converted to wood window. When the single family owners began renting the house as a duplex in the 70's this original window was converted to a door for the lower level. In 90's the opening was converted back to a window, and a new single pane single hung window was built. Condition: Poor sealing; no latch; ice build-up in winter; not at same level as other windows. Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Stone windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. r_rs n,. 1 t a t. 'I EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A103 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 103 3'-1" x 6'-8" Location: Main level on north side of house facing Spruce street. Type: Single pane single-hung wood window Condition: 1, 2, 3; Up to 1" ice in winter; glazing and frame disintegrating; barewood quickly re-exposed after painting. Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2, Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to Irregular shape and unable to support at head. t. r r: f I, t . ~ MJt ✓n4 ' in. ~ ~ fey rr ~i~l 1~ 4 V'"tP - 1 G YA 6. Z.~Lti. L -!fit - - - F4 ,CIr.4tit < L a WRSFI 'catt ~Mfg - oi~ L • ~ ,+1 is I -F Z' him EXTERIOR WTERIOR E~c7 +I' 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW B104 No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical relerences 104 3'-1"x6'-8" Location: Main level on east side of house facing alley. Type: Single pane single-hung wood window Condition: 1, 2,3; Operable, ice buildup; paint damaged; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood. Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. C; f 1 Ems!:: ~ •:>~~4 ' - ~ ~ ;a: 7 7" EXTERIOR :^J IOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW 8105 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 105 3'-1" x 6'-8- Location: Main level on east side of house facing alley. Type: Single pane single-hung wood window Condition: 1, 2, 3; Inoperable w/ gaps, 1" missalignment of upper and lower panes; major gap filled with rod and calking; sill warped; leakage; major ice buildup; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood; win- dow damaged and glass shattered because of problem with pin Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezefthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. ,I ~I c; _WL1 t 7 Wif ` - - - f!C Fem. r''1 . p~ul~:;ao~ t-~ ! I r r:+: t y}~• I ~~a4ssaiq _•rt,i ~4y~~!~C7'•y~+A C-2L~3~1Ficl Awin o a~ =lIt - rw~ EXTERIOR INTERIOR. CF`. I' 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW 8906 No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 106 3'-1" x 6'-8" Location: Main level on east side of house facing alley. Type: Single pane single-hung wood window Condition: 1, 2,3; Inoperable, pin inoperable; requires window removal to repair, ice buildup; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood. Window removal required in association with proposed addition. Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice buiid-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3, 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. ME 191:1 E PM I .00 t I , EXTERIOR INTERIOR 1002 SPRUCE STREET DOOR A107 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 107 6'-0'x6'-11' Location: Main level on north side of single story house addition facing Spruce street. Type: Dbl. wood door%,/ transom Condition: Inoperable 90's double door (settling? swelling?); seals broken on double pane; water damage. Replacement recommended as part of requested addition. Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. QI if ~a*~ Al EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW C108 NL9. Size Ramarkg - see notes for numerical references 108 3'-0' x 3'-11" Location: Main level on south side of house facing property to the south. Type: 1990's single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1; Glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood; no latch; poor position; remove as part of rebuilt eastern addition Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. ~I 'WIN a S. .",.~-a.~;~ 111' - EXTFRIUt N I tRlUl DETr51'_ 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW C109-REPLACEMENT REQUESTED N% Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 109 3'-1" x 6'-6" Location: Main level on south side of house facing property to the south. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: Leakage; ice buildup; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annuai maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. 'I ~i rr~ C ~i I r7:1 , ME- JiL ME ME on so-ZE 4 EXTERIOR INTERIOR 1002 SPRUCE STREET DOOR A110 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical reference 110 F-0" x 6'-8" Location: Main level on west side of house facing 101n street. Type: ❑bl. wood door wl side lights built in 1990'5 Condition: Seals broken on double pane; water damage. Door and side lights to be replaced Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezeithaw cycle- 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. (ZY I C'! c~ 77 --log llz- r~ EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A111 No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 111 T-7 112" x F-$" Location: Main level an southwest face of bay at west side of house facing 10" street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Interior does not hold paint - peeling Ice buildup; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. -~V 3 1 P § _ - ea{rCf l _ j 1 ~ - EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A112 No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 112 2'-8 1/2' x 6'-B" Location: Main level on west face of bay at west side of house facing 10t' street. Type; Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Operable, warped sill; window does not fill frame; ice buildup; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. r ti; ~j r 7, `g"11 A . •_i' is 7! }r - It~ e ~ r 74- A_rjrr-~ Y EXTERIOR INTERIOR JF i /;Il. 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW All3 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 113 2'-8" x 6-8" Location: Main level on northwest face of bay at west side of house facing 10"' street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Inoperable w/ gaps, 1" miss-alignment of upper and lower panes; filled with foam and calking; sill sloping to northeast: ice buildup; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood Notes: t. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head- C"dPmil, i= C~ i ~_.r. # ~A6 nt~Nx•.a, ~~~w~Rn~,C1if~ it ^~~.a'~, - .k ~ + - jt ,y _z,~,~ ~ ~ E y . r ~L' n - ~+fyt t- e'T. ssR tr. •],1-C~ tr'_ 7krL _ ~ 1 f_ ~+I~hYi~tr ~~P ",a.d a~,i~ S7 , - 4,~~ _m t~~7 I'J- f • J, 4 •t' ,i r~ -r Asa. i t - ] l -11 • -sW+-a ,a~-` ~J• - r- K '.g- _ - _ y.,-.s __.ri.;.trli.~'t1??"?:~•'.t==rTy~,:.:?e_'~.."a_l,ZSsSi;✓.:~- ~ "~.4+ ~ -'f"a r~~--ra^r•:.r-- i EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1082 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A201 No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 201 2'-8'x 6'-5' Location: Upper level on north face of house tacing Spruce street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Operation problem - sticks, major ice buildup; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood; water damage Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. M CV e ++i~Y~ ~~~~1 r- ~ it ,yY~..".At~t' r r ~ - i ~ .~5 .r ~ t~•,,tv.~\'- o~ . i ~ 7i~JC.,x•~rc~•i ~ r, ..xi9'...c ~'t! I Y : ~ ~ is n • r.,~. s ' 1 . '.rMi+eSa'Y erC.yv A f fl D 4 r'J r [i 1,MV RWj'S~ r~~oi~'$#q 94~ \ ~r rte. •-tea fF£' 4~z r i ~>s,•, ,t~~ 4~Y+: ~ _ y~ y f .S I♦~ M1_,~.i 4'. ~~j :,II ~hy- ~.-.N r-, x t i°~~j . ~ 7 - s - _ t ~~:Sfd Y. i 1. _ _ _ 'fie. - . - 6F EXTERIOR INTER'IOP DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A202 No. Size Remarks- see notes for numerical reterence5 202 2'-8" x 6-5 Location: Upper level on north face of house facing Spruce street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Pin inoperable, major ice buildup; leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood; water damage Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. h ' Y +-P v\ L = i, EXTERIOR INTERIOR a. 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A203 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes For numerical references 203 V-8' x 2'-7- Location: Upper level on north face of house facing Spruce street. Type: wood casement window Condition: Leakage: frame cracking Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. aarw , o r - - rt - M EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW A204 No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 204 2'-8" x 6'-6' Location: Upper level on west face of house facing 10th street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Water damage, leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood; water damage; pin not working Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. r ~I i 1 a ry~ Y r t ~!4'tc±esifL#~1 94'~•'~^~;' ,k mss r.-S"-c.'"n---t«~~~ _ 4 " - W"01" MCC ? .1 y 7r & 0_1 a ~'~•-~.4Z t f 'mss` I.~ ~ ~ .+R i,Y ~„ta ~i .16 i - - s- -r` cum orn EXTERIOR INTERIOR DETAIL 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW C205 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks- see notes for numerical reference2 205 2'-6" x 6-8" Location: Upper level on north face of house facing Spruce street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Pins missing, loose glazing -rattle, leakage; glazing and frame disintegrating; bare wood; water damage; missing pin; window is loose and shakes with wind Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freezelthaw cycle, 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. \I -7f, L EXTERIOR INTERIOR CFTA0 1002 SPRUCE STREET WINDOW C206 - REPLACEMENT REQUESTED No. Size Remarks - see notes for numerical references 206 2'-8'x6'-8- Location: Upper level on north face of house facing Spruce street. Type: Single pane single hung wood window Condition: 1, 2; Pins missing, cracked glass, window damaged and glass cracked because of problem with pin; water damage; missing pin; window is loose and shakes with winds Notes: 1. Single glazing causes ice build-up and glass blows out during freeze/thaw cycle. 2. Wood at frame and sash extremely weathered, cracked and split, and does not hold paint well requiring annual maintenance and re-painting. 3. 1990's Storm windows ineffective -gaps due to irregular shape and unable to support at head. I I 1 1 1 1 i fhl' .(III E +.k; ~•i I 0 7344 y! 7132 +'41i 7134 i!" T°eiVl 7120 tlLb~se d Panel with I.G. 1?•in" Innerhopui 1 mel Rail C;I2xing Bc:t 1 4 Y. Y. !n" Insula[c51 A I. I Glazing(I.G.) FS.G. hL Gk.;,-;,,g Stickil g V j/Y° Raised Panel with S.G. Sticking K" Raised SinglO G12zin Bead Panel ' ( Glaring f 1-;4 i.~~{g l Sticking y Raul { i if' Y ; ..f-, a ~r-+ r1 L s 2020 " ®©w~ 2132 2134 i~l": v®n?E?e 2005 4 rb2045 E1r~~ii 1 j s - I l T 71 - 1 77 .l- i YOUR I.IFIi YOUR DOOR. I KEY Src omrc hiforn,aYJna"n pftn An • A& Aiiv Glass Camin* Privacy M Q_ \~,Ood Size E■ Options Choices Raring 70 E TRADITIONAL E:CTERIOR DOORS Available on all 1-34" doors. 57 Attachment E 1002 Spruce Street Window Survey Photographs 1 J ~ R f 1 ilf (Jay ~ ~ s~]~; _•u ~'~!-1 a A~ r' "r`y~ ~Y • Window 103, North elevation first floor 06. r I I Window 103, North elevation first floor Y' 6 Window 103, North elevation first floor r' Window 203, North elevation 2" floor 1 l r f v~ Af• '~k'H, k ti • .4v Window 201 & 202, North elevation 2°~ floor 4 Window 201, North elevation 2 " floor ~ry,~ ryl • ~ a ~P 1'I t• rl'!! . 1 ,1' !!f L Nk k 11 .1, vim Window 105, East elevation Iirst floor t T ".A,• Y n Window 105, East elevation first y J r 1 f~~-~r N~4• ~ • ~ ~ Y e r ~lY ~ ! 4t1`~ Q~ 1 r } z~ „ ,b ;"~a~d s~ frr s Vt 141 Window 106, East elevation first floor -"i4, r Window 106, East elevation first Floor Y r + ,I -a ~5 jt_ j~. ~i ~f~~• f"it"' ~M•~y~' ~ I:~ y.3j ►`~•'ll ~ti {..ra F I F; as/~~~ .I .P- r • ~ r ~ ; ~ r., P ~ N y' y Ja d, ~k~gl~~`~u}iFl S T` ~'A•r'~J111.~~t i Nrj '+.~..a` ti. [~,~+/:~~~~i v l• mpg •iL i 1 y _ ?1•: [4,311 I ~'t'F :.F'~ 'fit;..., •9y~lj„3~_p:`~, ~sjr:~` a~2~'' !{~.:1K' 11~ ~ 'tAtrly.l~' a.. hl~~J1~~•.~-~i,~~ fl- Window 109, East elevation first Floor N ; IYI t` t. ,0+x'$1 i ' . rEf, ~ p J ' 9 t try , ' F F~II 71 I ti , Fa fib . aw {y .r ti f,@n rye" iX A1r M-r3.t rt s Y1 + 7i .~'F t}• r + f {7 ti L y lr•;. ✓ ~ ~''~xC :F t -_f2'~j`-.any=, I Jd-~~ J., -.,rCE, i - f f4 ~a ~ r' l ti i ~s ~ a d ! ky~ . + a ~ >c~ y ~K• ~ t'~~ t'~r~ a i } 7 7'' Window 109, East elevation first Floor !k~' .t S 1 v s. Ali fit. a`+ I Window 204, west elevation 2"` hlLIor rr t ~ ~I I` Window 205, south elevation 2"" l looi- ~XI I r n=. Window 206, south elevation Floor .4, till, yy+' 1 ~ r V ck' Wen _ •'~+{~r 7 CY I~~ I f ~yy Window 113, West elevation first Floor L L,'L~ ( ~ =er•~~ 1 1. 7 , Vrol, Window 113, West elevation first Floor k S r .1 f - a "t'`~•' j ~t' L t i ,...r f r"•t ti Jrg{J,~r A L.', C ;~1 , v fl fY 7 '7 - } it Ih•-_ ~hf.l:" LL} .Y_1L~ - 1 y 42, prp 5~ ~J y.•y)~ylf ~t/~yh;}~1jr.?%( ~:.f'~y ~C"~Q.1211 .,1 IV r g{~~ yy~,~311 l ,7^,-7-I,k 4.- ~~e ~y, A~ ~;'•~J _ri~ _ ti L frr v~yD '11.ti~: ~29.~4a Window 001, Basement south c l Ovation ~UWindow and Door Survey November 10th, 2009 1002 Spruce Street Location Existing Type Existing Condition Proposed Type Comments Repair Class I-IV sash frame sill glass muntim casing 102 N/1st D/H, 2/2, wood I I I I I I 1991 wood replacement 103 N/1st D/H, 2/2, wood II I I I II I Complete Historic window 203 N/2nd wood casment I I I I I I Outswinging, round arch 105 E/1st D/H, 2/2, wood III I Il I II I Complete Historic window 106 E/1st D/H, 2/2, wood II I II I I II Complete Historic window 108 S/1st D/H, 2/2, wood II II II I U II Non-historic replacement 201 N/2nd D/H,1/1, wood II E I I II Complete Historic window 202 N/2nd D/H,1/1, wood II E I I II Complete Historic window 109 S/1st D/H, 2/2, wood I I I I I I Complete Historic window 205 S/2nd D/H,1/1, wood II II I I I Complete Historic window 206 S/2nd D/H,1/1, wood II II I I I Complete Historic window 113 W/ 1st D/H, 2/2, wood III II II I I 11 Complete Historic window 001, S, Base Stained leaded lass II II II II II II Non-historic replacement 002, E, base Casment, aluminium II II 11 II II II Non-historic replacement 003, E, base Wood, 3-li ht, casem. II II II II 11 II Complete Historic window 101, N Single, panel door I I I I I I 1.991 wood replacement 1 107, N French, multi Light ii H E H II 11 1991 door 110, N French, multi light II Il H H II lI 1991 door J r UAC_ Q,~,_C_Oj Bonnell, Juliet J-7 ~J~1 ~J From: Hewat, James Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:46 AM To: Ipab Subject: FW: 1002 Spruce Street See attached comments from Brad Farkas on 1002 Spruce Street proposal. James From: Brad Farkas [mailto:brad@i-hatch.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 10:40 AM To: Hewat, James Subject: RE: 1002 Spruce Street Sure, thanks for asking... From: Hewat, James [maiIto: Hewat] @bouldercolorado.gov] Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 12:39 PM To: Brad Farkas Subject: RE: 1002 Spruce Street Thanks for your input. Would you like me to share it with the Landmarks Board? James Hewat Historic Preservation Planner City of Boulder 1739 Broadway Avenue Boulder, Colorado 80306 303.441.3207 From: Brad Farkas [mailto:brad@i-hatch.com] Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2009 9:14 AM To: Hewat, James Subject: RE: 1002 Spruce Street James, thanks for the info. I see that you've recommended rejecting the application for the alteration certificate at 1002 Spruce. However, for what it's worth, I thought the proposed addition was small enough in scale, and tastefully enough done that, assuming that it was to use matching brick and roof material, it should have been approved. Frankly, I'm a bit confused as to how you could deem the mass and scale of a 200 square foot addition be inappropriate at 1002 Spruce, when you were such an ardent supporter of the 3000 square foot 3"d floor addition to the Howe Mortuary. In this case, the applicant has a legitimate need to expand the premises, as 1002 Spruce is barely large enough to comfortably house at most 2 people. The proposed addition is also invisible from the street at all but the north elevation. It seems that preventing even the smallest of expansions in the face of legitimate need reduces everyone's property value. I'm all for historic preservation, but I feel its more important to apply our preservation code in an equitable manner, with consideration for the justifiable needs of the applicant. In this case, I don't believe one can in fair conscience deny such a small extension while approving such an enormous one just a hundred yards away. My 2 cents for what it's worth. Regards, 1 Brad Farkas 1019 Spruce Street From: Hewat, James [mailto:Hewatl@bouldercolorado.gov] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 6.01 PM To: Brad Farkas Subject: RE: 1002 Spruce Street Dear Brad: A small, two-story addion is being proposed at the east side of the house. A detailed description of the proposal is available at: htto://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.r)hp?option=com content&task=view&id=1861&ltemid=471. Please let me know if you have questions or need more information. James Hewat Historic Preservation Planner City of Boulder 1739 Broadway Avenue Boulder, Colorado 80306 303.441.3207 From: Brad Farkas [mailto:brad@i-hatch.com] Sent: Monday, November 23, 2009 3:46 PM To: Hewat, James Subject: 1002 Spruce Street James, Just received a notice for an alteration certificate for 1002 Spruce, but am totally confused from the description as to what is being done! It says a 2-story addition is being added on the east side of the house, but the east side (at least the majority of the north portion of it) is already 2 stories. Can you send more info on what is being proposed? Thanks, Brad Brad Farkas i-Hatch Ventures General Partner 584 Broadway, ste 1103 New York, NY 10012 brad@i-hatch.com tel: (212) 651-1760 www.i-hatch.com fax: (212) 656-1664 2 1 J ~ ~ ~ L Q e~c-c~ 121X10 G TTMJ~ Observations on 11-20-2009 Version of Memorandum Regarding 1002 Spruce • Page 3 o 1929 photo shows that stucco was post 1929. With that information and the 1988 photo, it is likely the white enamel covered stucco was added by the Whaleys when the single family house was converted to a duplex around 1970. The front window shown on the 1929 photo was also converted to a second door. • Page 5 o The requested number of window replacements is 11 rather than 17, specifically 001, 002, 003, 102, 103, 105, 109, 113, 203, 205, and 206. o Windows on the north, west, and east (rather than just west and east) faces are to be retained. • Page 6 o Windows 201 and 202 are not proposed for replacement. o Requests for removal of window 108 and replacing existing fixed windows with operable ones on southeast addition are omitted. • Page 9 0 4.0.1 reference should be to east wall 0 4.0.2 should reference a portion of east wall • Pages 11-12 o 4.4.2 reference should be to east side • Page 12 o The east chimney (as distinct from the original central chimney) served a coal furnace within an area excavated inside original foundation - likely around 1900. Original east wall in the area are intact with no evidence that a chimney was structurally attached to the soft original brick, which seems a wise decision. The chimney will also be non- functional. The effect of the request is to return this area of the house much closer to its original appearance than it has been in many years. • Pages 15-16 o Reduce list of windows proposed for replacement and /or removal to those in the proper page 5 list o Window 002 is an aluminum sliding window likely replacing a trapdoor when the coal room became a bedroom approximately 1970. • Page 17 o 3.7.1 should reference proper page 5 window list • Page 19 0 3.7.8 list of windows should reference proper page 5 window list • Page 20 o Reduce list of windows proposed for replacement and /or removal to those in the proper page 5 list o Possible difference in classification of window 203 on page 20 and page 15. • Page 21 o Reduce list of windows proposed for replacement and /or removal to those in the proper page 5 list o Perhaps reference to window 206 should be 203. • Page 22 o Only 1988 and 1929 pictures appear available. In the 1929 picture the front porch is shadowed and dark, providing little guidance as to the appearance of door 101. o The chimney should be noted as on the east side. • Page E-6 o Window 109 is on south elevation