Loading...
5B - Landmark Alteration Certificate for 542 Marine St. (HIS2009-00225) MEMORANDUM December 2°d, 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 demolish an existing non-contributing building and in its place construct a three-car, 682 sq. ft. garage at 542 Marine Street in the Highland Lawn Historic District per Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2009- 00225). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 542 Marine 2. Zoning: RL-1 (Residential Low-1) 3. Owner/Applicant: Henry and Beverly Vellandi 5. Site Area: 10,373 square feet 6. Proposed Bldg: 682 square feet 7. Proposed Ht: 1716" STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following motion: Motion to approve issuance of a landmark alteration certificate to demolish an existing non-contributing building and in its place construct a new 682 square foot, three-car garage at the property at 542 Marine Street in the Highland Lawn Historic District in that the proposed construction meets the requirements set forth in Chapter. 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, subject to the conditions below, and adopts this memorandum dated 12.2.09 as findings of the board. AGENDA ITEM 45B PAGE 1 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development shall be constructed in compliance with all approved plans on file in the City of Boulder Planning Department, except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. Prior to submitting a building permit application, the applicant shall submit to the Landmarks Design Review Committee for its final review and approval, revised arclv.tectural plans for the new garage to make the design of the garage consistent with the historic house, including doors that are more traditional in appearance, paving material in front of garage that is more in keeping with the design guidelines, additional roof and window and door material details that are consistent with the General Design Guidelines. The applicant shall demonstrate that the design details are in compliance with the intent of this approval and the General Design Guidelines. This recommendation is based upon staff's opinion that with the conditions listed above, the proposed construction will be generally consistent with the conditions as specified in Section 9-11-18(a)&(b)(1)-(4) B.R.C., the Highland Lawn Historic District Design Guidelines and the General Design Guidelines. SUMMARY: • This application calls for the demolition of a non-contributing building and the construction of 682 sq. ft. of free standing construction within the boundaries of the Highland Lawn Historic District and, as such, requires a public hearing per 9-11-14 (b) of the Boulder Revised Code. Staff does not consider removal of the existing accessory building would damage or adversely affect the historic or architectural value of the landmark property in that was constructed in 1988 and is non-contributing. o Staff considers that the proposed construction of a three-car garage is consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Highland Lawn Historic District Design Guidelines and the General Design Guidelines. o Staff recommends that, if the stated conditions are met, the Landmarks Board find that the proposal for the demolition of the existing garage and ACl+ NDA ITEM #5S PACE S:TLAN\data\longrang\Il]ST\ALTCERTS\Historic DisttictslHigitlaud Lawn\A4arine.5421542 marine st memo 12 2 09.flnaLdoc in its place, the construction of a three-car garage will meet the standards in Chapter 9-11-18 (a) and (b)(1) -(4), B.R.C. 1981, and is consistent with the Highland Lawn Historic District Guidelines & the General Design Guidelines, in that the proposed work will not damage the historic character of the property. ❑ - ❑ ❑ DOEP Ho Da - ~ f ❑ 542 Marine Street MA O ❑ ❑ ❑ - i Fl F7 Figure 1. Location Map PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY: The 10,373 square foot property located in the Highland Lawn Historic District is characteristic for that area in its long, narrow shape. Constructed in 1896 for Uriah C. Walsh the one and a half story Queen Anne house features a front- gabled roof, horizontal wood siding, side gable additions, and a small decorative wood porch. At the rear is a wood frame garage that is proposed to be removed to make way for a new garage building. AGENDA ITt+ M #5B PAGE S:API.AN\data\torn,r:m -AiISTf ALl'('I-;R'I'S\IIr;loric Dis1n(tsU IiphILind Lal~nAkfarine.542\542 mm~ne tit memo 12 2 09.I1n2Ldoc ' .r ~ s _ Xr~ ~•1, 41 X'fil ~ 7 it ♦!~+y i j"' `1 - ' .ti• Y 1 f H >`yl+ ory .v~t ~ IM 'M Figure 2.542 Marine Street c. 1929 DISTRICT HISTORY: The Highland Lawn Historic District contains a concentration of well-preserved buildings reflecting the prevailing architectural tastes at the turn of the twentieth century, including Queen Anne, Classic Cottage, and Edwardian Vernacular Styles. Hannah Barker platted the middle-class neighborhood in 1884 as the Town of Highland Lawn. The area is significant for its association with historic persons and events and as an excellent collection of buildings reflecting architectural styles of the period. The defined period of significance for the district is from 1884 (the year of the platting of the sub-division) to 1925 (the last year of construction for a primary building located on the block). The Town of Highland Lawn included 19 large lots (100 x 400) bounded by Boulder Creek to the north, University Street at the south, and 611' and 411, Streets on the east and west respectively. Originally located south of Boulder's city limits, the town remained an independent community until 1891. Barker's plan for the neighborhood showed foresight: each lot included water rights in the adjacent Anderson ditch and buyers were encouraged to plant trees (cottonwoods were specifically excluded), and build fences around their properties. None of the original owners built in the neighborhood, choosing instead to subdivide the nearly one--acre parcels into smaller lots. Most of the lots were AGENDA ITEM #5B PAGE S:IPLANIdatallongrang\HISnALTCERTS\TTistoric nist,icts\Highland lawn\Marine.5421542 marine st memo 12 2 09.final.doc bisected by alleys running east - west through the district. Marine Street was originally Vine Street and was renamed Marine Street sometime in the 1890s after prominent early settler Marinus Smith. Lots in the district are generally long and narrow with principal buildings situated close together at the front of the lots and accessory buildings oriented to the alleys. Because the alleys contain a relatively low number of buildings from the period of significance with historic integrity, and because the district boundaries bisect the rear alleys, the alleys (located at the north and south edges of the district) are not a significant historic element of the district. Today, the Highland Lawn neighborhood survives as a well-preserved assemblage of late-nineteenth and early-twentieth century middle-class houses with its tree lined streetscape. The district derives its significance as an early example of planned residential design, with excellent examples of early Boulder architecture, and for its association with individuals of local significance to the history of the city including Jonas Anderson, Hannah Barker, Marinus Smith, and J.J. Harris. The defined period of significance for the district is from 1884 (the year of the platting of the sub-division) to 1925, the latest year of construction for a contributing primary building in the district. . 1,' - - - _ - - y_. 17 ILI S n yl 1 y ~s Figure 3.1988 garage at 542 Marine Street proposed for removal AGENDA ITEM #5B PAGE S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCI;RTS\Historic Districts\Highland L.awnWarine.542\542 marine st memo 12 2 09.final.doc REOUEST: This application requests to demolish the existing non-contributing two-car 440 square foot garage constructed in 1988, and in its place, construct a new, 682 sq. ft. three-car garage. GD ' I 1. I . v - I• ~f 1 W ~ > L/ r' ...{.'I~ .i. ....r Figure 4. Site Plan showing location of existing and proposed garage The proposed garage is simply designed with a low pitch roof, punctuated by a small dormer on the west, three six panel doors with lights, and a small shed roof on the north (garden elevation) surmounting a pedestrian door and exterior stairway provided access to a full basement. t_ - CA [ r-11 rui Y; -i n- - BOOTH F:I,EYAThh_ Figure 5. Proposed west elevation Figure 6. Proposed south elevation AGENDA ITEM #5B PAGE S:\PLAN\data\longrang\IIIST\A1:1'CP.R'IS\Historic Dishictsffghland LaNriiWarine.5421542 marine st memo 12 2 09.final.doc F- -LL Figure 7. Proposed east elevation Figure S. Proposed north elevation CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD'S DECISION: Subsection 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate. (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; (2) The proposed work does not adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark, (3) The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its site; (4) With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in an historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building nicets 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. AGE1 Dik ITEM #5B PAGE S:APLAN\data\longrarnh\IIISTIALTCFR7's\Historic Districts\Highlo-md LawnARQar1nc.542\542 maiinc st mcnio 12 2 09.IinaLttoc r 4. ~f y. 1 S~ r{r~ri y,qy. .I; ~11 'T .S , Figure 9. Historic three-car garage at south side of alley (out of Highland Lawn Hist. Dist.) ANALYSIS: 1. Does the proposed application preserve, enhance, or restore, and not damage or destroy significant exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within an historic district? Staff finds the proposed removal of the existing building is appropriate given its date of construction and that it does not contribute to the historic district. The proposed new construction is generally consistent with the Highland Lawn Historic District and General Design Guidelines (see Design Guidelines Analysis section) and, provided the condition listed are met, will not compromise the contributing property or the historic district. 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark? Staff considers that the demolition and proposed new construction will not adversely affect the special character of the landmark as the garage proposed for removal is non-contributing and, therefore, not significant to the property's special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value. Staff also considers that, provided the listed conditions are met, the proposed new construction will be generally compatible with the Highland Lawn Historic District and General Design Guidelines. AGENDA ITEM #SS PAGE S:\PLAN\datauongrang\HIS'I'\ALTCI3R't'S\Historic DistrictsTighland LawnVNIarine.542\542 marine st memo 12 2 09.final.doc 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? Provided the listed conditions are met, the staff considers the proposed new construction will be generally compatible with the architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials on the contributing house. 4. With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in an historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) above. See (b)(2) and (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 has been provided to suggest that energy-efficient design or accessibility has been considered beyond that required by the city's building code. Design 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. The Highland Lawn Historic District Design Guidelines are intended as a supplement to the General Guidelines for the Highland Lawn Historic District. These Highland Lawn guidelines control when they conflict with the General Guidelines. HIGHLAND LAWN HISTORIC DISTRICT GUIDELINES 10.3 Alleys & Accessory Buildings While alleys play an important role in most of Boulder's historic districts, the alleys that form the north and south boundaries of the Highland Lawn Historic District are not character-defining features because of their loss of historic integrity. There are a small number of historic accessory buildings dating from the period of significance that are considered contributing features to the district, as shown on the map above. Its such, their reservation is strongly encouraged. 1 It is highly recommended, though not Building is non-contributing, removal Yes required, that contributing accessory of 1988 building appropriate. buildings be treated consistent with the guidelines o Section 7.1 o the General AGENDA ITEM[ #5S PAGE ~ f S:\1'f.AN\data\lons ang\HIST\ALTCERTS',Historic Districts`SL•ghland Lavm\marine.5421J42 marine st memo 12 2 09.final.doc Design Guidelines. 3 The construction of new accessory buildings Proposed new building is located at the Yes should occur only at the rear of the lot, rear of the lot taking access from the taking access from the alley when possible. alley. 4 In general, new accessory buildings Proposed building is relatively modest Yes constructed in the district should be modest in scale and secondary to the existing in scale and detailing and clearly secondary house to the primary building on Ilie lot. 5 Two-car garages are appropriate, when Proposed garage is three-car in size. Maybe scaled and located consistently, from the rear There is historic garage across alley, of the alley, with other garages in the though just out of the district, district. containing three bays. The board has also adopted the General Design Guidelines to help interpret the historic preservation ordinance. The following is an analysis of the proposed new construction with respect to those guidelines. GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR GARAGES & OTHER ACCESSORY BUILDINGS. 2.3 Parkin & Driveways 1 Maintain the traditional parking at the rear of Rear parking is maintained by the Yes the lot. proposal. z Access to parking should be from the alleys Access to the parking is from the alley. Yes. whenever possible, 6 Historically appropriate paving materials, Concrete apron proposed in front of No such as flagstone or brick, can be used to doors. Concrete area should be reduced visually break up large parking areas. - consider wheel strips or "grass crete". This detail can be worked out at Ldre. 7 Paving driveways or garage access areas with Concrete apron proposed in front of No asphalt or concrete give modern look and is doors. Concrete area should be reduced generally inappropriate, particularly when - consider wheel strips or "grass crete". adjacent to unpaved alleys. Flagstone or brick This detail can be worked out at Ldre. wheel strips are the re erred alternative. 7.1 Existing Historic Accessory Structures J Retain and preserve garages and accessory The existing building is non- Yes buildings that contribute to the overall contributing to the district -demolition historic character of the individual building is therefore appropriate based upon site or the district. plans for new building. AGENDA ITEM 45B PAGE S:IPLANIdataUongrang\HfS'l1ALTCLRTS%Ilistoric DislrictslHighland I.aNvnlMarine.5421542 marine st memo 12 2 09.Gnal.doc 7.2 New Accessory Buildings New accessory buildings should follow the character and pattern of historic accessory structures. While they should take design cues from the primary/ structures, they must be subordinate in size, massing, and detailing. Alley buildings should maintain a scale that is pleasant to walk along and comfortable trians. 1 It is inappropriate to introduce a new The form and detailing of the proposed Maybe garage or accessory building if doing so building will not detract from historic will detract from the overall historic character of the main house. Design might character of the principal building, and be revised to take some cues from the main the site, or if it will require removal of a house. These changes may be reviewed and significant historic building element or approved by the Ldre. site feature, such as a mature tree. 2 New garages and accessory buildings Located at rear of property - physical Yes should generally be located at the rear of relationship typical of properties within the the lot, respecting the traditional district. relationship of such buildings to the rimy structure and the site. 3 Maintain adequate spacing between This guideline is irrelevant given that alleys Yes accessory buildings so alleys do not are considered "not to be character defining evolve into tunnel-like passageways. features" of the Highland Lawn Historic District. 4 Preserve a backyard area between the New garage does not significantly reduce yes house and the accessory buildings, garden space. FAR currently .37 - with net maintaining the general proportion of garage square footage increase of 242 sq. ft. built mass to open space found within the FAR increases to .39. area. 7.2 Mass and Scale 5 New accessory structures should take Design might be revised to take some cues design cues from the primary structure from the main house. May be reviewed and on the site, but be subordinate to it in approved by the Ldre. terms o size and massing. 6 New garages for single-family residences Garage is one-story with full basement, but Maybe should generally be one story tall and two rather than three. There is precedent for shelter no more than two cars. In some three-car garages in the alley scape (see fig. cases, a two-car garage may in 9). inappropriate. 7 Roof form and pitch should be Roof pitch lower than that of main house. No complimentary to the primary structure. 7.2 Materials and Detailing 8 Accessory structures should be simpler in As shown garage is simpler than maul Yes design and detail than the primary house in design, material, and detailing. building. Materials for new garages and accessory Proposed siding materials wood and Maybe structures should be compatible with asphalt shingle. No detail regarding those found on the primary structure materiality of proposed doors and and in the district. Vinyl siding and windows. Should be reviewed and prefabricated structures are approved by the Ldre. inappropriate. AGENDA ITEM #5S PAGE S:\PI,AN\data\longrang\HIST\AL; I'CERTS\I tistoric Districts\Highland Lawn\Marine.5442\542 marine st memo 12 2 09.final. doc Windows, like all elements of accessory Design of windows is simple 1/1 double- 10 structures, should be simpler in hung. Yes detailing and smaller in scale than similar elements on primary structures. If consistent with the architectural style Small dormer proposed on west elevation 11 and appropriately sized and located, of house. Yes dormers may be an appropriate way to increase storage space to garages. 12 Garage doors should be consistent with More detail regarding design of garage Maybe the historic scale and materials of doors required - can be reviewed and traditional accessory structures. Wood is approved by Ldre. the most appropriate material and two smaller doors may be more appropriate than one large door. .13 It is inappropriate to introduce features Building is simple and of its time. Yes or details to a garage or an accessory building in an attempt to create a false historical appearance. 14 Carports are inappropriate in districts Not applicable NIA where their form has no historic precedent. Staff does not consider the removal of the existing non-contributing garage would damage or adversely affect the historic or architectural value of the landmark property. At 682 sq. ft., the proposed new garage is larger than suggested in the General Design Guidelines. However, the Highland Lawn Historic District Design Guidelines put little emphasis on alleys and provides for more flexibility for new construction on the alleys than do the General Guidelines. In that this is the case and that there is historic precedence for a building with three garage doors in the alley (just out of the district, see figure 9), staff considers a building of such a configuration is not inappropriate. Furthermore, the proposed new garage will only slightly increase the building to open space ratio on the property and ensure that rear garden space will be preserved. However, staff does consider that revisions should be made to the design to integrate it better with the design of the main house. In particular, if possible the pitch of the roof should be increased to approach that more closely of the main house. The concrete apron should be eliminated or replaced with a more impervious material like wheel strips or "grass crete". In addition, the design for the garage doors might be revised to be more traditional in appearance. The configuration of the doors in figure 9 would be good models to base the design for the doors at 542 Marine Street upon. Finally, details regarding windows, doors, and roofing including material and color should be revised and approved AGENDA ITEM #5B PAGE S:IPLANIdatallongranglHIST\ACCCER"f'S%Histaric DistrictMighland LawnVvIarine.5421542 marine st memo 12 2 09.5nal.doc I per the guidelines. All of these revisions should be submitted to the Landmarks design review committee prior to issuance of a landmark alteration certificate. FINDINGS: As outlined in the staff recommendation, provided the above conditions are met, the demolition and proposed new construction at 542 Marine Street will be generally consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance in that: 1. The proposed work (including the removal of the 1988 garage) will not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark. 2. The mass, scale, height, architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used for the proposed new construction will be compatible with the character of the landmark. 3. The request is generally consistent with the historic preservation ordinance and the Highland Lawn Historic District Design Guidelines & the General Design Guidelines. ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Inventory form for 542 Marine Street B: Application and Plans C: Photographs AGENDA ITEM #513 PAGE ~ S:APLAN\dataVongrangV-11S"1'\ALTCI3R'FS\Histonc Districts\ iighland Lawu''Alarine.54Z'?:3Z mari»e %1 memo 1?' f9.fnaLdo;; r { 4 wntv ilAttachment A se- y. COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY ` Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation ; NOT FOR FIELD USE 1300 Broadway, Denver, Colorado 80203 ; - Eligible _ Nominated ; Det. Not Eligible Certified Rehab. ISTORIC BUILDING INVENTORY RECORD ; Date PROJECT NAME: ; CITY: ; STATE ID NO.: 5BL686 ; Boulder Survey of Historic Places, 1989 ; Boulder ; TEMPORARY NO.: ; CURRENT BUILDING NAME: ; OWNER: Henry P. and Beverly L. Vellandi ; 542 Marine St. e Boulder, Colorado 80302 ADDRESS: 542 Marine St. ; Boulder, Colorado 80302 TOWNSHIP 1 N., RANGE 71 W., SECTION 36, 1/4, 1/4 HISTORIC NAME: ; U.S.G.S. QUAD NAME: Boulder, Colorado (1966; photorevised 1979) ; ' 1 I 1 ADDITION: Highland Lawn YEAR: 1884 DISTRICT NAME: ; BLOCK: E LOTS: 3 (west 1/2 of north 1/2) ; FILM ROLL NO.: BL-10 ; NEGATIVE ND.: 7 ; NEGATIVE LOCATION: ; DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: ; BY: Roger Whitacre City of Boulder Planning ; ESTIMATE: 1896 ACTUAL: SOURCE: Boulder County Assessor ; records and inventory form 5BL686 recorded in 1983 1 i 1 I USE: PRESENT: Residence 1 I I 1 HISTORIC: Residence I 1 1 I I I ` ATTACH PHOTOGRAPH HERE. CONDITION: ; [ ] EXCELLENT [x) GOOD ; (j FAIR [ ] DETERIORATING 1-----------------------------------------' I I 1 EXTENT OF ALTERATIONS: ; (x) MINOR, [ ] MODERATE ( ] MAJOR ; DESCRIBE: The rear and side additions ; appear historic; skylights. ; I I I - STYLE: Queen Anne ; STORIES: ; ORIGINAL SITE [x) MOVED [ ] 1 1/2 ; DATE(S) OF MOVE: ; MATERIALS: Wood ; SQ. FOOTAGE: ; FIELD ASSESSMENT: ; 1,194 [ ) ELIGIBLE [xj NOT ELIGIBLE ; . ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION: Front-gabled building with gabled dormers on the sides; several additions. Weatherboard siding. ; DISTRICT POTENTIAL: Front gable end has decorative shingles, -spindled gabie ornament, 0(1 YES LK) CONTRIBUTING ' double-hung window with architrave trim, One-bay entry parch has [ j NO ( ) NON-CONTRIBUTING hipped roof, turned spindle supports, fretwork, wooden balustrade, wooden porch floor and steps. Each front corner of the building ; LOCAL LANDMARK DESIGNATION? [ ) YES [x] NO is clipped and has a window crowned by spindled brackets with a ; NAME: DATE: pendant. Paneled and gla.zed door, Addition on east side has mansard roof. Double-hung windows with wooden surrounds. Raised ASSOCIATED BUILDINGS? [x) YES [ ) NO stone foundation. Stovepipe. Skylights. ; TYPE: Garage ; i F - []~/r ADDITIONAL PAGES: Y~ S r, NO IF INVENiORIfd, LIST ID H05.; - !;-6- ' AAPE: ARCHITECT: Unknown ; STATE ID NUHBER: 5BL686 ORIGINAL OWNER: Unknown, possibly ; Uriah C. Walsh (see "History"). ; SOURCE: ; . . . . . ; ; SOURCE: ' ' . . . . . . . . . ; BUILDER/CONTRACTOR: Unknown ; r . . . . . . . . . . . . ; THEME(S): The Urban Frontier, . . . . . . . . . . . . ; SOURCE: (1864-1920) I 1 ' . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . . . ; CONSTRUCTION HISTORY: (DESCRIPTIONS, NAMES, DATES, ETC. RELATING TO MAJOR, . . . . . . . . . . . . ; ADDITIONS OR ALTERATIONS TO ORIGINAL STRUCTURE) Unknown r I r I ; CONTINUED? [ ] YES (x] N) ; HISTORICAL BACKGROUND: (DISCUSS IMPORTANT PERSONS AND EVENTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS STRUCTURE) The 1898 Boulder city directory shows Uriah C. Walsh-, a carpenter, living on west Marine Street. The 1900 census gives thr. Walsh family's address as 542 Marine St. By 1901, Walsh was operating a wagon shop at 1921 12th St. ; 8y 1913, this was the home of William and Emma Braden. William Braden worked as a miner. In 192x, it was the home of Gao. W. R. Hay and his wife Katie. I I CONTINUED? [ ] YES (J NO SIGNIFICANCE: (CHECK APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES AND BRIEFLY JUSTIFY BELOW) ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE: HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE: REPRESENTS THE WORK OF A MASTER ( ] ASSOCIATED WITH SIGNIFICANT PERSONS ; j ] POSSESSES HIGH ARTISTIC VALUES ( ] ASSOCIATED WITH SIGNIFICANT EVENTS OR PATTERNS [x] REPRESENTS A TYPE, PERIOD, OR METHOD OF CONSTRUCTION [ ] CONTRIBUTES TO AN HISTORIC DISTRICT ; ' ' STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: This c. 1896 building is representative of the Highland Lawn neighborhoood's earliest homes. ; The wood frame building has clipped corners with spindled brackets, spindled porch supports, and a decorative gable ; ornament, CONTINUED? [ } YES NO ; REFERENCES: (BE SPECIFIC) Boulder County Assessor records; Sanborn insurance maps; 1698 Boulder City Directory; Highland Lawn Historic District nomination, 1987; Boulder Genealogical Society index to the 1900 U.S. Census of Boulder; and ; inventory form 5BL686 recorded by Heather Ann Elizabeth Smith in 1983. ' CONTINUED? [ ] YES (x} NO ; SURV`YED BY: L. Simmons/C. Whitacre AFFILIATION: Front Range Research Associates Inc. ; DATE: June 1969 Attachment B Date: November 2, 2009 l f 1 Project: 542 Marine Street Regarding: Landmarks Board Review, New Garage Structure To: City of Boulder Landmarks Board, James Hewat, Landmarks Planner RRILT0N-WEVOY Copy to: Beverly and Henry Vellandi, Owners A P. C 11 1 T E C T S From: Phil McEvoy, Railton McEvoy Architects PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Owners, Beverly and Henry Vellandi are requesting review and approval to construct a new three car garage along the alley at 542 Marine Street. Below is an outline of information regarding the project: 1. The existing garage was built by the current owner in 1988 and is not a contributing structure. 2. The new garage will have the same set back to the alley and the same set back of 4.8' to the east property line as the existing garage to be replaced structure. 3. The new structure will be 22 ft. x 31 ft. in plan for a total area of 682 sq. ft. on one level. The size and scale of the garage is compatible with other accessory buildings in the neighborhood and is subordinate in size and detail to the principal residence which is in compliance with the Highland Lawn Historic Design Guidelines. The project meets the Compatible Neighborhood ordinance. An addition is not possible since there is a need for a basement level shop space. 4. A basement shop will reduce the above grade construction required. 5. The new garage will extend only 9 feet further into the rear yard at 542 Marine Street. 6. The new garage sits perpendicular to the alley with side access which minimizes its scale as viewed from the alley. 7. Stair access to the basement will be on the north side of the structure and hidden from alley view. Stairs will be covered with a small shed roof facing to the north. 8. Exterior finish materials and colors will match the primary residence including horizontal painted siding, wood wainscot with chair rail trim cap, decorative painted shingles, open wood railing, asphalt shingles and the scale of the windows. 9. Garage doors will include small windows at the top and tall vertical panels in the bottom 3/4s of the door for a traditional appearance common to folding doors. 10. West facing roof will include a dormer with matching roof slope and two small windows to suggest there is aloft level and breaks up the mass of the roof plane. A second floor or loft is not proposed. 11. Garage is approximately 17'-6" tall as measured at the alley finished grade, it meets the maximum of 20 foot height limit per City Code and meets the limits of Solar Access. 12. A roof pitch of 6:12 is similar to most of the existing garages and other accessory buildings in the same alley. Several garages on the same alley are 3 cars in width or longer in width and depth than the proposed structure. PROJECT CONCEPTS RESIDENCES RFSTORATION - CORPORATE UESIGIV 5377 Manhattan Circle, Suite 101 Boulder, Colorado 80303 [y (303) as/3-1353 FAX 443 5,535 fia.tral ~tE'icr .n F 1,F 3-B3~R'S ELF '3= FE - ^i•l_- .r.- G Li c. z F' - WOOC FENCE 1Y000. DECK PP mI v I I 1.C._ J-u FLAGSTONE tP I J1, j O6R FOR ~l $IKE STORAGE 1 [!J Co 22'x31" J - Z V EXTENT OF STpNE I 3 BAY ¢ a 0051ING HOUSE WALL j CARACE Q LL RAILING _ . _ - I < o ~ Q STAIR c BASEMENT < - Ln ELST I P NO STOk'( F.AC5TCN ~*7C ~ ~ x 7 FRAPI,F RFSII)F.I':CF PA (!p U' ` 1 r.I u l UP LINE OF 2R fLAGST ' ` - - - EwSTING I ONE WALK _ _ GARAGE O 6NEW CCNCRETE DRIVE ONF-HA: F OF LOEPLACE EX,ST. K0. FENCE WITH TO MATCH We SAVE TREE BOG' (P) WCCO FENCE tuJ.2n Y I i I:) NEIGHBOR'S DRIVE NORTH SITE PLAN z L O T 4 Scale: 1" = 10' s I Ts' O 5 10 20 I I ' - - " Vv 1 ~D ~;.lrt; r:Ek;ti Lu Q w t1 EAST ELEVATION NORTH ELEVATION Q O SCALE: 1/8"=1'-0" SCALE: 1/6"=1'-O" J O - z U 0 W of ~ Q ~o LU ML- BR- SOUTH ELEVATION `PEST ELEVATION :j SCALE: 1/e"=11-0' SCALE: 1/6°-1'-O° 111 """ttt I I ~ 1 5, . t r+Y J ' Existing Garage r -AA a (j_ f f PH :7 4 1? R ~ ~ j. rS a. - - • ice' ~ ~ Ito, A + I Rear View of Residence J~•f ~r Gray Locomotive Tornado Season J Moe f Gray Locomotive Preserves Proposed colors will match residence. I'ornndo Season Exterior White* 1 GI-j i . r I - - - - Pimpernel Gray Locomotive Stonewall Jackson I i13-6 Preserves 18I-5 18 f- 1811-6 Colors of the residence. ~r 5... v ~t~f7.1 4 ll .t :}fir ~Af r.~a ~ E ~i -PAP, View of Proposed Garage ~,~y{t t {I~d _ Fr 4 t' Mariufacturer's gallezy sample of proposed doors. 56 Attachment C i i is 'IF `.t T ( _ - - ' r 491 -i 41 1,47 r P . FL. J~f ~ 7. jJ ~ •t sir' o iA kZ; ~(y t'Y rtiZ Cb~, =.R«. W r ~ ..tea _ ; C. • { 17, .77 ;1' tir n'Sl. ra.~, v - ksld t i f. J;ir f j- { :9~ i. -Aa its 74 Aerial view of Highland Lawn Historic District .141,E 1 r'S%', ? -"q - f v-: It~ 5 ~wMJat. _ ? ''T'•ld E - ! " ~X' 1{*.t'Fzr r,~~~~-v~r ~r M1.rtJ p' t i~ . - :~S ~ k 'G - 7 { Ei* \ r 1. : ~ l~ i ' ~''y' c`R~+i y ~ ~i?~' Y w S r Y~i is - "w. v. " ~ .•.i f r ~ - ; ~ z r ~ - f t+~i'' ^~'~a~i L~_ ~.--•fFIN 4YS.--. - ;T ew ---G'w FiL-"•P,A,,Nn Pa VTp - - - - 3 ~ i(J s.o _a ' •l } y I "fin ~ , i . .a. 540 Marine St, garage, directly adjacent to proposed garage. 35'x21'. 3 5e I Al. t { .77 77 ;:r•il!Li~i-~ - iii 537 University Garage, dircctly opposite proposed garage, 28'x21'. ' , f'AI ' < ~ : c Q 'P r~ ~ ti Y~ ~'j`re ' ~ `.;~ylc e.t ~ a 1 srL'•~ r 'at ,iii , 4 ~r'•r y>~.t{' U ~l ~,df, tI ~I,.J~~(rir t ~"f• • ! •a -l~i:Y3, ~Y~ ~j yY - ff", : }r~i~ ~ 4``1 ~ = s x^9,7 ~p yJl.. r .8•t.''( • 5'`i c`• ti^ti - 1 -'°n` fir- Y J 4r, D• - l'ti-.'~-+'.a pIR• 1+ t~'j s~ 7t.i N,, P ' - i ; . ~;e i,',It~e ~ ~ ~ r ..,yy,/{y~~`~ i4, A~rr•.~ r6 i l4•'+ rkl"I1 i~li'. SSr .y 14 ~/jt~-+o•~ t~.llwaf< f 1 M1 r' _ 1\ .fL~ ~1. VM l t/ , r i ~ if yr_ "s,t ~,ty.i .3~yr .,1y~,~ - ~-~fff-~; .t 1•'` f . ~.s_ _ iti►6-. 544 Marine St, garage, directly adjacent to proposed garage. 6 t,~ ~ 9~' ~t :'A s l{ ~iT S { a •h ~~+s,~.~ ~t9 ~''i) iJ• - - - - r ;~~4~rtr ~ _ ,~''e j ~"J ~C t, ...':;y `{r Y~e~:rt a'z',7 ,{,~,ei+{'?7~r, r-~.)x+ ~ t 1 ' J ►h { ~ "yl .tF by J~ ti.. J 5f J `'I ` q1~ r _:'tia-_,~,u}~i' NNJ1^1~~°,7.•" iA~ J t °~i•b. " t _ _ -:7J •F";~~ 'yt?'~--4~ t ~ IS . ' p„ Ft GS+.' •C 4~ w n y$1 -vF k ~ ~f4`~~~ P{ s ifi~i MILL - - ~ ~ L ~ X31 t ` ~ ! y ~e wl -.1 1 t. 1. 6• + _€1 , 1 I etc, f it lL r r 1;5 1 Y { r t 1 l z`lRi*.^3~'_.-.-. _ - _ - . , .t3~y~'!i- --~t,i~~~_';7`~ir?t'~,c~`vl l,`. . f~ .rx 512 Marine St, garages. Note 2 garages on single lot. -4_3 jjk~ 1~ F . 'x37. f-4s•. 1 - _ t I~ ~ -.i~ r P"t~ ~~k. ~`i~'-. 7 - A-A _ s f ' 1 J 1 i t ~rarf~~~',~1- ,rt • 2~ •n~" "r~'`T. •s r f} _t ,a' '~•s,. 1-.r..,r ~F'•~ ~~-r ~,r,~'• }'~t, ~ 4 SJg s L r ,1~C L f ~ 1 r =-S ~~~•rf~' 7 ~ fj ~tY~ ~ f J •.~•r^" Fs 558 Marine St. Two structures at rear of lot. 14 rr }'}~i°., tbs. a '"3 c4~1~j~.q r, 4!', + /t&,i t~ 1. ►1 AvA 1-4 { ,~qe qa<° 'D " ~l.}'.1,~ { 4 "fit ~u~t r )i J r ay]+k :l S?~]t?' 1i. v Y~ l^t. ~Oa'.r+. s~ !9"Z 1 a ~~i J _ . 19 1 ~ ~s5fp~y~~•r-cs ~!;24,~ '(r`iglr~ y,7!` r, - y r '-C ,n. SN````~~~ ,r~+y{ t , , ~r ..,z X5(1 r f1A.h~ f' } _ ~ 4 F Y~~'t! 3~~:i j ' -,r°~ ~ ~ fly 1. i r t~ = ` a - - ,&t7t:, - ' q r r, i ~ r la -"a.At ,Y• ~ifl 1------~~"' r," _ r~ a'4-ate ~ }~-1 ~ t s•- ~ ,-~_~y F+Si~S- ~a .1 +~r.?Se t ,,,V r " ~ ~ _ _ ~,,r n 3 ro a ra r ~-,>J•r -sc a4 i:t~~~~+tif s"~-. 504 Marine St. garage, 33'x18. ti9 f3 u y r~ x ~d r ~f+'.~e',tF~ y'~ ~,,'t~ t ~ fa ~ 1 ~ ~l } 1l( Y f ~y!(~?t' t~i~q ♦.C~ ~4 .XrM{t v'>r i'o-. 'qf., t ,,~~t~ ~~r~: t.G. ~,+.ly,~~~., ra lC 11. / ~q y, ~IJ ~~'~iCi j~Uy, r l,a. F~ d C9 r - 'Y $ 4+v ''MM E~..r ~.^1" j_ . 'I j9 liti~'F , ~f i J ti pt14 r`'~. tt, ES ~S~t~'-y 71~' ~''+:}r' 1} ~4;'fit ,'t/ ti~ij1~~,6 ~y q ci*± as v may'-. - Ffq~~ ~g4j{ mac,, j JV(AN 1 t~`Y f ~t' ~ a ~}1 ° ~ 1 ~~I`;5~:+fi}~~ 5•~+~~';( ,y ~~r +1F4~~ r w k' a -t..c - - w ~ `~~rE, ~i•~Sl,`- •v~ ].''f+, ~ _ iyr~ ,JJ SYld ~h ~ r_.- _C + .J,.Az , - ~tr,Y D t y'fl y{f ~~s ~ •ea¢ t.' ~ ~1 _F'~ ~~4 - ,~r'7„ f~ ~f~~r f r4 ~ I - ;1'~'N ~ - ~r~ - ~=^1e>-~'4 _ _w- r Y.. 550 Marine St. garage, 26'x18'. n ` . ~ ~ •Y=~ 121,• ~ M i 555 University garage, 31'x30'. .c , lr l i Y I~ 1 .11 '•'i w r ~ .z7 .r„~ ~ l i, : ~i wit . ` . pn ~ • , - c: - --ft d 1111 1 111, 111 490 Marine St. garage, facing end of alley, 31'x23'. C' - c-_c~ J~) voE3U C Vsc~ Highland Lawn 12 2 /Q~j 1-vv~ Accessory Building Roof Pitch Avg=5.4:12 Median=5:12 5 ka* .^'wr'• .qs.. MINN, e:1r' h Awe". ^ •.r~p r~ , . we iaair t ~ W Aiftl 4 VW cv , , pip Q 1 L 1 _1116 t a-R- tf~ ~ _ e r ~ ~ ~1 _ ' R• CC T~i; . t . = D 1`~I' pl at 00 G~ iAE " -AMU jftt" ~ r. • ~ S r - I 'S *;jdh AML Bonnell, Juliet From: Hewat, James Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:31 PM To: Ipab Subject: FW: Landmark Board Re:454 Highland See below. -----Original Message----- From: JOHN COOPER Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 11:50 AM To: Hewat, James Cc: Subject: Landmark Board Re:454 Highland Hello James, I walk by 454 Highland almost everyday. I have no problems with seeing a 374 square feet garage in place of the present shed. I trust the Landmarks Board will approve the request Thank you John Cooper 1 Bonnell, Juliet From: Hewat, James Sent: Monday, November 30, 2009 8:31 AM To: Ipab Subject: FW: garage at 5th and Highland See message below regarding 454 Highland Avenue item on the December 2nd agenda. -----Original Message----- From: Brant Liebmann Sent: Friday, November 27, 2009 3:40 PM To: Hewat, James Cc: Subject: garage at 5th and Highland Hi James, I live up the block from Craig Willert, at 428 Highland. I have no problem with him building a garage. It seems to be uncharacteristically modest by today's standards. The footprint is hardly larger than the existing shed. In my opinion it would be totally unfair to deny that permit after allowing a double garage that did not replace, but was placed next to, the old garage at 436 Highland. (That monstrosity is not a problem for me either.) regards, Brant Liebmann i Bonnell, Juliet From: Hewat, James Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 9:10 AM To: Ipab Subject: FW: Willert/Zompa Landmark Alteration Certificate See below. -----Original Message----- From: Thomas Flaherty Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 9:09 AM To: Hewat, ~-c Cc: Subject: Wil.lert/compa Landmark Alteration Certificate James, I wanted to drop you a note to commit our support for the new garage design. Please approve the Landmarks Alteration Certificate for the Willert/Zompa garage. All the best, Tom Flaherty 1 Bonnell, Juliet From: Hewat, James Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 4:00 PM To: Ipab Subject: FW: Garage See letter of support for 454 Highland Avenue proposal. From: Warren Rovetch f Sent: Tuesday, December 01, 2009 3:16 PM To: Hewat, James CC Subject: Garage Dear Mr. Hewett, I live at 570 Highland and may well have lived on Highland longer than anyone else on the street. I feel very protective about our small neighborhood. I want top make very clear that I strongly support the Wllert/Zompa alteration request for 454 Highland. Regards Warren Rovetch t Bonnell, Juliet From: Hewat, James Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 2:31 PM To: Ipab Subject: FW: Willert Garage at 5th and Highland See attached From: Sent: Wednesday, December 02, 2009 12:59 PM To: Hewat, James Cc: Willert, Craig Subject: Willert Garage at 5th and Highland James, Craig asked me to write and provide you with my feedback on their proposed garage. During our conversation, I mentioned my preference for building the structure on the east side of their lot to provide them with: 1) access to 5th rather than the muddy alley 2) gain additional privacy from 5th for their back yard, while also keeping the feel of our combined back yards rather open. Both Craig and Kristen also preferred this idea, as well. Seems to me that there are other such garages that do not always access the alley in the neighborhood, but instead the side streets. As for the structure itself, I have no issues with the design. One request would be related to building the structure with reasonable height constraints, as we were VERY unhappy with the garage that Steve Ruddock was allowed to build immediately to the west of our property. In my opinion, the height of his garage has given us a very closed in feeling, and given that another structure is now being proposed on the opposite side of our property line, we are concerned about the resulting feel of being boxed in. Perhaps a bit hippocritical with our request given the size of our garage, however, it does have a very low roofline that does not prevent us or our our neighbors from having views to the west. Thanks for your consideration to these ideas. Sincerely, Jim Zoller 1 Bonnell, Juliet 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@[-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 [mailto:HewatJ@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.co m] 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:HewatJ@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: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.php?option=com content&task=view&id=1861&Itemid=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