Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5A - Landmark Alteration Certificate for 1043 Pearl St - (HIS2010-00181) MEMORANDUM November 3, 2010 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planning Manager James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner Jessica Vaughn, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark alteration certificate to remove the existing facade of the building and restore it to its pre-circa-1939 storefront on the property at 1043 Pearl Street per Section 9- 11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2010-00181). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 1043 Pearl Street 2. Zoning: DT-2 3. Owner: Snyder Family, LLP 4. Applicant: Brad Tomecek 5. Building Size: 5,560 sq. ft. 6. Date of construction: Pre-1883 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following motion: With the conditions listed below, I move that the Landmarks Board deny the request to remove the existing facade of the building and restore it to its pre-circa-1939 condition at 1043 Pearl Street as requested in the application dated 10.10.2010, finding that it does not meet the standards for issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9- 11-18, B.R.C. 1981 and is substantially inconsistent with the Downtown Historic District Design Guidelines. The board adopts this memo as findings for its decision. SUMMARY: • Constructed prior to 1883, the commercial block comprising 1043-1047 Pearl Street is considered to be contributing to the Downtown Historic District. • Based upon a desire to provide more light to the interior and create more presence on the street, the application proposes the removal of the existing facade and restoration of the pre-circa-1939 storefront based upon historic photographs. • Staff considers that because the existing facade was constructed during the period of significance, it has been in place a majority of the building's life and because it is a relatively rare and well-preserved example of Art Deco Stream Line Moderne design in the Downtown Historic District, it should be preserved. S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc • Staff recommends the Landmarks Board deny the request finding that it does not meet the standards for issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate in Chapter 9- 11-18, B.R.C. 1981. 00 r goo'',, - 4V T 1 r i. 1 u V.Af~ 4 pea~1 s r'j s 1043 Pearl Street r f mom Figure 1. Location Map WWI ,y 'fVW ~,fr ~NIT ■r~ rn•~~rui/w Y ~~iny,i77f~ ristiMF NF rFF kipP11 prwt OP !IF F IIFP1 F Eq':t it to Nrii flip _ - I Figure 2. 1043 Pearl Street, 2010 HISTORY OF PROPERTY: Constructed prior to 1883, the commercial block comprising 1043-1047 Pearl Street is considered contributing to the Downtown Historic District. In the late nineteenth century, the west downtown area in which it is located was characterized by a variety of commercial and hostelling establishments. Immediately to the west was located the Brainard Hotel, the Boulder House Hotel just east across 11th Street while liveries, S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc stables, and the original Boulder Daily Camera Building were located on the south side of the block. d-J 1 a t A. IL * Figure 3. 1043 Pearl Street (at right), 1886 Little historic information is available about the construction of the building and early tenants. However, by 1883 the main floor of the building consisted of two equally-sized spaces split by a (still extant) staircase providing access to the upper story. Interestingly, the 1883 Sanborn Map indicates the corner unit 1047 Pearl Street, (then 309 Pearl Street) as vacant while the subject space 1043 Pearl Street (then 308 Pearl) is shown as being in use as a "skating rink". S 1 i a - :40 All Figure 4. 1043 Pearl Street, c.1930 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc The storefronts at 1043 and 1047 Pearl Street appear to have changed little into the twentieth century. 1043 Pearl Street seems to have functioned as a building/plumbing supply store from the 1890s until at least 1931. Trezise Undertaking occupied 1047 Pearl Street from 1890 until 1922, when it is shown housing a Cigar Store and Confectionary. Historic photographs indicate that between 1895 and 1915 (see attachment D an ornate onion shaped (possibly glass) awning was installed at the entrance to the 1043 Pearl Street storefront. Unusual for Boulder, the construction recalls glass "conservatory" constructions popular in the UK and eastern United States during the second half of the nineteenth century. Such constructions were sometimes placed over entrances to hotels and fine merchants. The existence of such an ornate entrance, to what was a plumbing shop, is curious and interesting. The awning is visible in a c.1935 photograph looking north on 1111, Street. rMr . A'a. GALL 20 f 9AG~GAGE y~ Mp1 BURGERS i FFRI r.,n r: Figure 5. 1043 Pearl Street, c.1939 The 1938 City Directory lists 1043 Pearl Street as being occupied by George Schut and "selling second hand goods" from the space. By 1940, the City Directory lists Saunders Glass and Paint as occupying the space. A c.1939 photograph (see figure 5), shows the building to have been remodeled in its current "Stream Line Moderne" Art Deco form with bakelite tile, glass, block, aluminum fluted paneling, and curving storefront windows. S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc 5ANDIR5 GLA55•Pgl8' ~ 1 I M7- Figure 6. 1043 Pearl Street, c.1940 LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE REQUEST: The application proposes the removal of the existing fagade and restoration of the pre- c.1939 storefront based upon historic photographs (see figure 71. This request is based upon the tenant's desire to provide more light into the interior space. 00 - PW r,l ,-4 -x r+ Figure 7. 1043 Pearl Street, proposed re-constructed storefront Scaled drawings were not provided detailing how the storefront will be re-constructed; however, photographic renderings show the addition of the onion shaped awning above the central doorway. S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc Rpm ' h .~L "1 . ■r.htr*ii~r■ i I..N~r Pr ~arrrrH ■r rrPP IMP, 11.60 I f 1PP■ I~ from PYPY t' 7rrr ~rrr ■ Frr u^ I rr rrrP Figure 8. 1043 Pearl Street, 2010 CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD'S DECISION: The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifies that a Landmark Alteration Certificate may not be approved by the Landmarks Board or City Council unless it meets the conditions specified in Section 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981. Specifically: (b) Neither the Landmarks Board nor the City Council shall approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate unless it meets the following conditions: (1) The proposed work preserves, enhances, or restores and does not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within a historic district; (2) The proposed work does not adversely affect the special character or special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the landmark and its site or the district; (3) The architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed structures are compatible with the character of the existing landmark and its site or the historic district; (4) With respect to a proposal to demolish a building in a historic district, the proposed new construction to replace the building meets the requirements of paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) above. (c) In determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate, the Landmarks Board shall consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled. S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc ANALYSIS: 1. Does the proposed application preserve, enhance, or restore, and not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the landmark or the subject property within an historic district? The staff considers that the c.1939 Streamline Moderne fagade contributes to the historic character of the building and its removal will destroy important character defining features of the property. 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the district? The staff considers that the removal of the c.1939 Streamline Moderne fagade will adversely affect the special historic character of the property and diversity of types of architectural design in the Downtown Historic District. 3. Is the architectural style, arrangement, texture, color, arrangement of color, and materials used on existing and proposed buildings compatible with the character of the landmark? The staff considers the proposal to recreate the historic fagade inappropriate given that the existing fagade was constructed during the 1858-1946 period of significance for the Downtown Historic District, and reflects the evolution of the building and adds to the historic architectural diversity of the district as a whole. 4. 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 have been considered beyond that required by the city's building code. 5. Does the proposal to demolish the building meet the requirements of paragraphs § 9-11- 18(b)(2) and 9-11-18(b)(3)9-13-18(b)(4) of this section? N/A - application is to remove historic elements, not to demolish building. Design Guidelines: The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration Certificate. The board has adopted the Design Guidelines to help interpret the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The following is an analysis of the proposed demolition 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. S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc Downtown Historic District Design Guidelines: 1.1 Guidelines for the Preservation and Renovation of Local Landmarks, Individually Significant, Contributing, and Contributing Restorable Buildings While it is acknowledged that changes to buildings in the...district will occur over time, it is also a concern that these changes do not damage the historic building fabric and character of the downtown. It is assumed that these buildings will be preserved and that the exteriors... will continue to contribute to the unique historic character of the downtown. It is anticipated that any building rehabilitation or alteration will retain the overall design integrity of the historic building by protecting the original features and materials and respecting the traditional design elements of individual facades. Response: The original storefront including doors, windows, transom lights, and kick plate is no longer extant. While the c.1939 Stream Line Moderne facade is not "original" it was constructed during the 1858-1946 period of significance for the district and contributes to the diverse historic character of the building and the district. 1.1.1 Preserve Original Facades Preservation of traditional facade elements found on existing buildings creates patterns along the face of the block that contribute to the overall historic character of the area. Note: It is not the intention of this guideline to recreate the past if the original facade does not exist, but if documentary evidence, such as photographs of the original, does exist, then one recommendation is to restore the facade. Response: While photographic evidence exists that could guide a re-creation of the original facade, removal of the existing Stream Line Moderne facade would result in the loss of character defining elements and materials that have been in place longer than the original storefront. The existing storefront contributes to the diverse historic character of the building and the district. Its removal would damage the building fabric and character of downtown. 1.1.2 Preserve Facade Materials Retain original materials wherever possible through repair and restoration. Avoid concealing original faced material. If the original material has been covered, uncover it if feasible. If portions of the original must be replaced, use a material similar to the original. Avoid the use of materials that are visually incompatible with the original facade such as shiny metals, mirror glass. Response: The majority of original storefront material including doors, windows, transom lights, and kick plate are no longer extant. Areas of pilasters appear to be intact behind Bakelite tile. While the c.1939 Stream Line Moderne facade is not "original" it was constructed during the 1858-1946 period of significance for the district, it is largely intact, and it contributes to the diverse historic character of the building and the district. S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 memo.doc Analysis of Historic Significance of Existing Facade: The period of significance for the Downtown Historic District is identified as running from 1858 through 1946. As such, the existing Stream Line Moderne Art-Deco remodeling of the storefront around 1939 is a potentially contributing change to the building, its relative incongruity to the rest of the building notwithstanding. Figure 8. Bakelite tile detail, 2010 The expression of Art Deco design is relatively rare in Boulder. Notable and exuberant examples of this mode of design are found on the 1936 fagade at the Boulder Theater (landmarked in 1980), and the 1930s Boulder County Court House on Pearl Street. While somewhat more subdued the Saunder's Glass and Paint fagade is a good example of the Stream Line Moderne variant of Art Deco design with its curved glass windows, swooping motif, and use of glass block, Bakelite tile, and aluminum fluted paneling. ~I ~ - -F I F~ Figure 9. Detail of aluminum paneling and curved window at entrance -9- S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\DownTown\Pearl.1043\11.3.10 inemo.doc Staff concurs with the 1986 historic building survey of the property that the, "variety of architectural styles", including the c.1939 storefront, is reflective of the "building's evolution." Furthermore, staff considers that because it was constructed during the period of significance it has been in place a majority of the building's life and because it is a relatively rare and well-preserved example of Art Deco Stream Line Moderne design in the Downtown Historic District, it should be preserved. Staff recommends the tenant and/or property owner work with the Landmarks design review committee to come up with a design that preserves the historic integrity of the fagade while allowing more light into the interior and creating more street presence for the restaurant. This may be achieved by opening the transom light above the door and providing for an outdoor seating area in front of the restaurant. Staff also recommends the owner look into the possibility of taking advantage of state and federal tax credits to offset the cost of rehabilitating the fagade and interior space. Findings: The Landmarks Board finds, with the conditions listed, that the proposed Landmark Alteration Certificate application is inconsistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and: 1. The removal of the existing fagade and restoration to its pre-c.1939 appearance would destroy contributing architectural features of the contributing property. 2. The proposal would adversely affect the historic, architectural, and aesthetic interest of the contributing property. 3. The proposal is substantially inconsistent with sections 1.1 Guidelines for the Preservation and Renovation of Contributing and Contributing Restorable Buildings, 1.1.1. Preserve Original Facades, 1.1.2 Preserve Facade Materials, of the Downtown Historic District Design Guidelines. Attachments: A: Historic Building Inventory Form B: Sanborn Map Research C: Historic and current photographs of 1043 Pearl Street D: Application Materials -10- S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Dist1icts\DownTown\Pear1.1043\11.3.10 inemo.doc Attachment A: Historic Building Inventory Form COLORADO HISTORICAL SOCIETY NOT FOR FIELD USE Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation --ELIGIBLE 1300 Broadway, Denver, Colorado __DET NOT ELIO HISTORIC BUILDING INVENTORY RECORD __NOMINATED CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO Boulder County --CERTIFIED REHAB --DATE PROJECT-NAME:-BOULDER-HISTORIC-PLACES -State ID#s-5BLI519--------------- iBuilding Names TOM'S TAVERN +FBuilding Address: 1043-45 PEARL ST BOULDE~2, COLORADO 80302 Building-Owners GE-RALD &-HAZEL-SNYDER Owner•Address¢ 2065 GLENWOOD DRIVE BOULDER, COLORADO 90302 USGS~Quad a ___-Road Year a~ 1 "9~9 7, 5+ #Legal: Tnsp iN Range 70W Section 30 $Wi/4 SW1/4 +~Histc~Name: ori District Name: DOWNTOWN BOULDER HISTORIC DIST N.R. -Blocks-97 -rLata 12 Add1i 7a W84ULDER 5T--_------_--______- Year of Addition: 1859 Film RoIE^By:~1 HITACRE_ Film Number: ---B Number of Negatives: 26,27, Negative Location: BOULDER *Canstructian~t)ate: ESTIMATE FIRE-1883 Sources SANBORN MAPS 1883-1931 PresentWUse: COMMERCIAL----------------Piatoric Use; CCMMEEiCIAL---___ ition: FAIR _ Extent of YAlterationsc MODERATE CondDescription: REMODELED FIRST FLOOR FACADE OpIC3YNAL - ~'If Moved, Dateisl a - St Materials: CENTURY COMMERCIAL 8tories• 2 Materials: BRICK Square Footage: 5335 FieldTAssessmtznts~NOT-ELIGIBLE-~---District~Patential:YES-C[7NTRIBU7ING Local Landmark Designation7: NO --Nat'nes---__..---------------Data-:------____ ed Associat Buil -s NO Type: If Inventoried, List Id Numbers: Architee-ti - ._...____--8aurces-------------__r___--.»_ Builder/Contractor: Source: Original Owners Source. 1043-45 Pearl Street Plan Shape: . . . . . . . . . . • s O • • e. tl s n . . . • . . • • • . Themets3e Architectural Descripti~,n: First story remodeled. Second story: red brick, segmental arched double hung windows, stone sills, brick lintels, carved wood in arches, pediment abovE corner entrance, bracketed cornice, cast iron pillars. Construction History: Historical Backgrounde This building was built sometime before 1683, according to the Sanborn Maps. Architectural Significance: Represents the work of a master.- Possesses high artistic values. Represents a type, period or method of construction. Historical Significance: Associated with significant persons. Associated with significant events and/or patterns. Contributes to an historic district. Statement of Significances The Downtown Boulder Historic District is the city's oldest commercial district, exhibiting a variety of architectural styles reflecting the city's avolvtion and growth. This large, two-story commercial structure is one of the district's more imposing commercial blocks and adds to that architectural diversity. Referencesc Susan Baldwin, Boulder Historic Places Inventory 1977 Boulder County Assessor's Office Sanborn Insurance Maps, la83--1' 31 Surveyed by Whitacre/Simmons Affiliations Front Range Research Dates 1986 tom, P ~ - rp I ~7 : ~ x ax ti°~ x pp M, i 1 ~ W ~ Y t i ~IR Attachment B: Sanborn Map Analysis II I~ it I ~ II a ey+~-~ II .F.{%r1.7~^F .1P1iVYi. ~ Yi~r ful- I; r I L„ II ~ d ~ a ~I Sf,+._ r I~'t+'.b~ S Gv• 111 ~k 7py I ~ A ~Q3~ ar Feel'. 1883 10:1 a [[A - 4 - may: f$:1ilA S A AY ~lrRlfr`.917DS.'~,`GrTEG L40LlL -FE-RE: r ~s' i s f w An N 1886 ~OULDER I~ p~ ..._.p~.:,...: ~vl ~ I a -.~;tl ~crerir ~I ] k !1 A-4 N~ ~ I'G3 z it - _ - ~ y h~ri~~~rr~s ~ lJnss~r~,c R'RZ I •rh'.~4 qC d _ E S t r Mgt=; , F1 I< 1890 It _ u c 07,3, u u ST. B O 'U D E R GOI..fl. II !I zo• ~ u~r~k . ' ti ~a. 197 Fi- it 'b * fl 2 . o KEt/rei Dnrietp $mc ~ ~'T"o I 2c` Sl l A ~ ~ II ° U f li "17 ua JJ ~ li li 1895 QULJuDHe1906ER ~ d sT. p GOLO, EO?5 7.?~ Z035 2033 ?727 r g 2 Z d ° ° ,9 ! Vn e2 w P~rQ Z.lJ, rz N Plum69•. Z M n n BnN ing N! ey, r t. r. ~ °~'A i i 3y ir~~. - -rvrxaa f(epdres~~-Ha~.s2e o ° o E /t to rrn 3 97 >recc t T e y. Qa N o ° i . 10 llBlelO f ter cr•° d Ya4- n d D c Z II n :IND. ! 9 Z D, f13_ r iidd ° Z0~ y '1004 rl.. 11'. 7nne _ s' 1906 ST. QBQULD?ER r P 9.~aA_ I, GSn•4rl+k« ice, n ~y~ rrr~ 5t ~ r.97 -[A1dZr s'~ I~ 7. ! t r f Zo7~ 0 ST, R 1910 F, iyl . S i Ed t~~ ~ ~+i ~ ` ~ m s~ • /f• 1 e~.,._ ttar.tiR`:~.~~ 'q `P` ,r~j.~' ivy o -w E4 r ~ e .~iYY} ....I!fS.''.•~7 •r~1i .,P~Y"`de~ ~~ig. S I y ~ ' ~d:8 ~ i ~ ,J!a I: ~k 1918 jaw ST. n ZD (~r~~l 2oa/ CI m 12 Plrim6er . -y' R¢ Paint tN~// ~apar ` o a o J,d leaatc Pandy:. Ell 1~ A my , j Wa// F~prr ' 4[~ 0 2 - n_v, 1922 ! J.rrir'd, VD31 n ~ (3 BOULDER Z; T ,`r~ F,.:-! ~ I-•7 1 _ w mss,=. •'.I` 'IJ 1 i •M All 1 r r~ ~ aT • ds__._'r s: j our I 7 ~ h ..a.. ~ •e~x.b?.~_.-,. v:. ._,..n_,..m~ r.ew <a r,~,_me~»..-~~-..` s ~-~1.-I 1930 PA. N JAN. 19.-31 a BOULDER !i ,,Cry p r~ a pl, rd B & Z•' I M ~r-.~ f°ll 3 E~l ` iFj `r•^ , _='+H'„ s~~ a I T , ~ t11 J, Aar S~ r 1_h•.. I .s. t i f } . >i~d ax s9! r€9~ ! I 1 d r.. _ 7 ~;Wn~ ,n t ~ P.=77aa. w y Gi - a i `7 ~ ap 4 ~ ; I _.la 1961 Attachment C: Historic and Current Photographs "ol ~ kd YtY ~ N f - y[? r r~'1~ ,caaa`w't'wVt ~ , ~ r t a -f J31 _ ~n a n3 a d~ ~r- ~s a s o W'k ~a : t o t 4a s ~Z r°s~ 4 - ~ ~ 3sw 3yr ~ v;r ~ _ ~ ~~aw.i.3 s. r ~~'c, 'i , q'"R,' ~ `S.k`"Y`;~'i ) ,»~.:<'r s't~., . r~ xw ~a` ~~~L a " ~ y, k 64 a 1886 i ! 3 ~ Y^'a~ , u 2y ?,~r~ 6th r t+ S Akv ~gg N Try k ~S ~ 1889 gaa us- ~q,k*t x i ~ ~ .sb a td'~t f~ 4'S s'•• e ~~I;~ l r ~ a ~g g j £ i a ~t 3 t ti R YTI Allr d c.1895 ' t o q"'S ` _ Nkp\ YX j i `F t~ 3b 1915 I aj~, T VI 11 { a S s, b ~ i.9 f c.1922 p, sn~ Fla" ~~a @ 3}C E ~ S s c i F s c ~r r r y ~4 f } A 4 a ALLYt ~ i b ~ F i R ,,~S~qa $3,~~By+'TJ4"~ N dcv a ~3+~L 1 q' ~ J ~[FRt~S'4AF c.1930 s ' all P y 'led e M rI ~ L, ~ o K ~x~'k L ~5 ~i~zv O c.1930 t . ~n v i . f gky psi s a a ~~~j~;p ~t9 yF blF a h t } w i t we x~ C ~g > ~a@xr B u ~ 4 ~ t t~ P} z'S v o3W\ t ~~r~ a hs 4 j Fe~i is~~+~ S a L 04 {vF? 1Y 1 d ti o y~ 3 i1 Y ~ja y A s 9 i 4,,pi~ ¢x # d • F iy,~ ~1'~k~ ~m't~ ~~i ~ $ ~ 'ti ~ ~a~+ 1~ ~y,;.a .g t47..at~ ~z~'~',a "YE~fi'F ~~..~~ya~`z~h~~ji^iyp~r 1 f ~~-y ^~;~i ~~~1"~'d.S~`u ~`,~~~^1\~~~ c.1935 r ` vl > s = sY yrfi 7 ~ ~ ~j~~~' ~:.kR ~ r,~,~h 4~''~ ~pe=`s~ ~Zi,~~ L~wsng- •e'is t: aW g w tj $3` >,2 3 E ,sS l ¢ 4E\ S q 11 rµ" ° ~ S Ayl~+tvr 0.1939 RAW s1t r8 o-ya~ 4 yf tr`wa ° StY J ~ 1 i s e t ~ ? i ~ `~c t'~ e ~d• ~ Y Y ~ cNg ~ ~ a. ! 3 ~~x 3rd? sitar ~ ears i t s#~~~ps~rfr~stic~~:trfjG} x't t~ ~;1~3$ tt~ ~ t`.tati3~,>ty s~, ,yluES sa, to1,~y .?~i r 31~~+ ' r1 r {~r7 F3 d S t tt n~ d yYa ¢ sa r is s ="n .`o i a M x3~+`` 'Y s`~Y r j W ti t~f~ 3 r9 y s$ ~Y ~4 TA~ f~' AF ~t P iyC F ~r q ~ t 'y i `f`,•~y •~i`3.:r . ~ k t o~ 'i { dP~ EY I x r y t s ~ i eu~e ~ ~ ~ s t r } ri ~ ¢yy ca ~ ~ i ~ R ~7 } ~i t s q3 x S 1 ~ Yr }Lg 7 Z } t t k19 a ~~a ~sr= t~ o-.t~R~a ~~\~:~a;.~~~r ~ac~v~,~~~ ~ ra'~" ~F ~,.,r sjt r S~ "F:`~~~' 1,y~'~`Scy~ `t;'.`t \~Y~x'•. ##~3~.t R • 1 e a l 1 y •w~ ~ Q S ~ - Yr e.1940 L ~ ~4 k 1 x.. m l ~ t a~ 1949 3~nF4r r ,k ~~XSStiti 5~,+ y 1 y t a 6 ?r .1 Y .e , t ~Y K M j K t y 19505 1✓:`•--....._......, m } f All A {L1111 I~ 0 q ~ E L!{YA fl P ~T aS. SvG ~4A 11 A~ a °h 1960 14 e, ' xr \jx* 9 ~ an Y' 4 1 { kl a ~e yv.. 1 I9703 4 M z; R~ T f ~v k 1 i k$ dt+~ Y 4 re j... M4 3 2010 z i CC Fr s ^xe~~ ~ x 2010 qwil yy $ 50 0 son = «14ia' i. Am IN 'F 7 R r e F Y E ' "nit ~ r ~ y i S ~ AT to T two 2010 1 ' v..e ? 33 iill A EEs~ m a I I'll Y } - 2010 ar ~ ~ 1 tf 4 , ti F r F ROCI, c t'i I 2010 z i i 4 _ nue~u :v is 2010 Attachment D 07 November 2010 1043 Pearl Street Landmarks Board Review Project Narrative: In an effort to add further light and visual transparency as well as update the physical presence of the current storefront, we are submitting to the Landmarks Board for approval to return the current 1043 Pearl Street facade to it's original appearance. Based on extensive research we have determined through historic photos the original facade (shown on sheet A2). This facade adds a considerable amount of glass to the current street front and will preserve the integrity of the entire building elevation by visually tying the current 1045 Pearl facade in with the newly transformed 1043 facade. While adding to the holistic character of the building, the newly renovated facade will stand alone as an historical icon with it's period columns, brackets and distinctive glass and metal awning (see photos page A3-A5). In addition to the historical restoration, the new facade will also do away with the dilapidated conditions of the current facade. With it's dented aluminum, chipped and broken ceramic tiles and faceted glass it is far from it's original aesthetic. The current facade is merely an applique over the still existing decorative columns (see photos sheet A2) of the original architecture. Because of these reasons we believe that removing the existing deteriorating applique facade and restoring the character of the pre-1930's era facade will not only enhance the clients restaurant image but will also add back a significant historical piece of the street front to the already rich Pearl Street Pedestrian Mall. Thank you for your consideration sTUOio i--i 1445 pearl street suite 208 boulder co 80302 303 247 0405 303 247 0410 Page 1 of 1 maiI(_8studio11 t.com I-andmarks Board Project Narrative.odt 1015 11.07.10 OWNER ~N Juanita's Comilla Mexicana w o ° 1043 Pearl Street N m Bouder, CO 80302 ttU p 303.449.5273 w Ix aw f 303.440.0815 ro o e ell@juanitas boulder.com 00 contact Ed Bigg m Drawing List No. Z Name ARCHITECT AO Cover Studio H:T, Inc. Al Original Facade 1445 Pearl Street, Suite 208 A2 Existing Facade Details Bouder, CO 80302 A3 Proposed Elevations p 303.247.0405 A4 Proposed Elevations f 303.247.0410 A5 Proposed Elevations a crh@studioht.com contact Christopher Herr - - MaplewnPV° ~ o ' Maplelan Ave ° pme 51 , Mapleton Ave 'y N fl-ids-i ' h 11 9,0e 11 II 9 Pr'tu ° - N s pvesl m u.eM.o-„c.,,. ©afkcr Pnik lm n Hn,M'.wn.i SV~51 ry N. gme51 Juanita's Restaurant sw u51 II 0 1043 Pearl Street SP sl o - :i a Q Spryw 51 ~ Mort ytn7At l' E,i I Ppa,l91 p - H .N N o 11 i.. m fp, N amnl L+ o P_ 0 e p`,1: 5 -u.iu~ ,ry _ 51 NiN e yanNUV ;Iln u ~n~51 0 M Si iw.n i1 Q W 9 0 I~ TF mt Pf, © O 1 C~Yengrvd ea I 5 N„ne r.:. ~ II 119 N ...o- II N vnrru m.a 119 b ' Cant VIJIn•t 51 9a Q 0 a iNnaA~ o0f n9 0 Ln emn> Wg„ot 51 ~ dMCanY°,.. I& , I"! m" Boulde, c Yee Q ~anY°o ,or pr Q 119 a :119 pl ~ p>vl ''/UNh PON 91 e_iMx1.Y.--i.• co"Io 1 VICINITY MAP 1 445 PEARL STREET, SUITE 208 I BOULDER, Co I P 303.247.0405 F 303.247.041 B WWW.5TU0I0HT.C0M An LANDMARKS 1015~ 11,07.10 I- M 0 Close up photo of overhead w o canopy on original 1043 1n U Pearl Street elevation ❑ ttU photo dated 1909-1944 W IL w 0 ~ I d7 ❑ 0 r~ r m I i Original 1043 Pearl Street Elevation - photo dated 1927-1933 - ~t U r- 1" 7 OWN ~.i~ ' ' Original 1043 Pearl Street 1 : , I 'j ' . <w . I ' ( 1 , it Elevation - photo dated I i ' S' -T~ E R 1927-1933 w + 71 - - Images courtesy of Carnegie Branch Library for Local History, Boulder Historical Society Collection 1 ❑ RIGINAL ELEVATION PHOTOS N.T.S. 1445 PEARL STREET, SUITE 208 I BOULDER, 00 I P 303.247.0405 F 803.247.0410 WWW.STUDIOHT.COM _ I A t- LANDMARKS 1016 11.07.10 F N I F 0 U)m Icy. o r<r I Existing o I t column remains Dented , o 0 ~m behind tile aluminum - facade paneling 'AL P"VI t 4 Chipped > - tiles K exposing original columns ,t Dented - - - / - aluminum ~I~I I J paneling I ~l I/ Faceted glass - changed from il,~,, original curved - glass facade Broken and Chipped and chipped tiles the broken tiles 10 A I :III EXISTING ELEVATION DETAILS 1 N,T.S. - - - t~ 1 445 PEARL STREET, SUITE 208 BOULDER, CO I P 303.247.0405 F 303.247.0410 WWW.STUDIDHT.COM LANDMARKS 1 01 5 1 1.07.1 0 v TV' RUSIN" W o F0 A 11` m 0 Q~ U Q W ~ aw + m C or - MOW rt I 1 - r , Ilti LJ J ~ 1 Adw A IF j... PROPOSED ELEVATION - PERSPECTIVE LOOKING NW 1 ~ N.T.S. - - - - - 1 445 PEARL STREET, SUITE 20B I BOULDER, CO P 303.247.0405 I F 303.247.0410 WWW.STUDIOHT.COM i~- A-3 LANDMARKS - - - 1 0 1 5 1 11.07.10 1,, ~ti'{t~e}l h. rA`.: is AC _ i 7: _ rF J w0 m a w aw mo d~ 0 m y.- III 4-1 I allow ~ 1 r f~ x fi" ~ N I y , PROPOSED ELEVATION - PERSPECTIVE LOOKING NE- N. T. S. I 1 445 PEARL STREET, SUITE 208 I BOULDER, 00 I P 303.247.0405 I F 303.247.041 0 WWW.STUDIOHT.COM -T- A LANDMARKS 1015! 11.07.10 FN w0 WM ~0 NO '0 - - / Q _ IL w f [7 0 PAN" IIM ~t 7 0 0 -ARM , I II ~ m 7.~ r I .1 , PROPOSED ELEVATION - LOOKING N N' T.5. I 1 445 PEARL STREET, SUITE 20B BOULDER, co I P 303.247.0405 F 303.247.0410 WWW.STUDIDHT.COM LANDMARKS