HomeMy WebLinkAbout5B - 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