The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMeeting Packet - Landmarks - 12/7/2011 ` CITY OF BOULDER ,/er LANDMARKS BOARD DATE: Wednesday, December 7, 2011 TIME: 6:00 p.m. PLACE: 1777 Broadway, Municipal Building - City Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM THE NOVEMBER 2, 2011 LANDMARKS BOARD MEETING 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA 4. DISCUSSION OF LANDMARK ALTERATION, DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS ISSUED AND PENDING 1814 Spruce Street: Expires March 5, 2012 3125 5th Street: Expires February 12, 2012 5. A. Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to install a fixed skylight on the west facing roof area of the contributing house at 432 Pine Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District per Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2011-00235). Applicant: George Watt, Architecture Owner: Terry Britton B. Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to construct a 380 sq. ft., two-car carport at the landmarked Chambers property at 3231 11th Street per Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2011-00236). Applicant: Brad Burch Owner: Bob Carmichael C. Public hearing and consideration of whether to lift the stay-of-demolition at the property at 1814 Spruce Street per 9-11-23 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2011-00168). Owner/Applicant: David Waugh/Jane and Kent McClannan 6. MATTERS FROM THE LANDMARKS BOARD, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND CITY ATTORNEY A. Update Memo B. Demolition Definition Revision C. Letter to City Council 7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 8. ADJOURNMENT For more information call James Hewat at (303) 441-3207, or by e-mail: hewati@bouldercolorado.gov. You can also access this agenda via the website at: www.boulderplandevelop.net and click on `boards'. PUBLIC HEARING PROCEDURES Board members who will be present are: Mark Gerwing Kurt Nordback Liz Payton Lisa Podmajersky John Spitzer *Willa Williford Manning Board representative withouta vote The Landmarks Board is constituted under the Landmarks Presentation Ordinance (Ordinance No. 4721; Title 9, Chapter 11, Boulder Revised Code, 1981) to designate landmarks and historic districts, and to review and approve applications for Landmark Alteration Certificates on such buildings or in such districts. Public hearing items will be conducted in the following manner: 1. Board members will explain all ex-parte contacts they may have had regarding the item.* 2. Those who wish to address the issue (including the applicant, staff members and public) are sworn in. 3. A historic preservation staff person will present a recommendation to the board. 4. Board members will ask any questions to historic preservation staff. 5. The applicant will have a maximum of 10 minutes to make a presentation or comments to the board 6. The public hearing provides any member of the public three minutes within which to make comments and ask questions of the applicant, staff and board members. 7. After the public hearing is closed, there is discussion by board members, during which the chair of the meeting may permit board questions to and answers from the staff, the applicant, or the public. 8. Board members will vote on the matter; an affirmative vote of at least three members of the board is required for approval. The motion will state: Findings and Conclusions * Ex-parte contacts are communications regarding the item under consideration that a board member may have had with someone prior to the meeting. All city of Boulder board meetings are digitally recorded and are available from the Central Records office at (303) 441-3043. A full audio transcript of the Landmarks Board meeting becomes available on the city of Boulder website approximately ten days after a meeting. Action minutes are also prepared by a staff person and are available approximately one month after a meeting. CITY OF BOULDER LANDMARKS BOARD November 2, 2011 1777 Broadway, Council Chambers Room 6 p.m. The following are the action minutes of the November 2, 2011 City of Boulder Landmarks Board meeting. A digital recording and a permanent set of these minutes (maintained for a period of seven years) are retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). You may also listen to the recording on-line at: www.boulderplandevelop.net. BOARD MEMBERS: Mark Gerwing Kurt Nordback Liz Payton Lisa Podmajersky, Chair John Spitzer STAFF MEMBERS: Debra Kalish, Assistant City Attorney James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner Marie Zuzack, Historic Preservation Planner 1. CALL TO ORDER The roll having been called, Chair L. Podmajersky declared a quorum at 6:02 p.m. and the following business was conducted. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On a motion by L. Payton, seconded by K. Nordback, the Landmarks Board approved (5-0) the minutes of the October 5, 2011 board meeting. 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA Jane McClannan, owner, 1814 Spruce St., requested that the stay of demolition be lifted for 1814 Spruce St. 4. DISCUSSION OF LANDMARK ALTERATION AND DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS ISSUED AND PENDING 1815 Mapleton Avenue: Expires November 21, 2011 1814 Spruce Street: Expires March 5, 2012 3125 5`, Street: Expires February 12, 2012 On a motion by L. Payton, seconded by J. Spitzer, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to hold an initiation hearing for potential landmark designation of 1815 Mapleton Avenue prior to expiration of the stay of demolition on November 21, 2011. 1 On a motion by K. Nordback, seconded by J. Spitzer, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to hold a public hearing at the December 7, 2011 meeting to consider whether to hold an initiation hearing for potential landmark designation for 1814 Spruce St. and to consider whether to lift the stay of demolition for 1814 Spruce St. L. Podmajersky and M. Gerwing felt that the decision about whether to hold an initiation hearing for 1814 Spruce St. and whether to consider lifting the stay-of-demolition for 1814 Spruce St. should be separated into two separate motions. On a motion by L. Podmajersky, seconded by M. Gerwing, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to reconsider the previous motion and discuss the potential of lifting the stay of demolition for 1814 Spruce St. at the December 7, 2011 meeting. On a motion by L. Podmajersky, seconded by L. Payton, the Landmarks Board voted (3- 2, L. Podmajerksy and L. Payton opposed) to discuss whether or not to hold an initiation hearing for potential landmark designation for 1814 Spruce St. at the December 7, 2011 meeting. 5. MATTERS FROM THE LANDMARKS BOARD, PLANNING DEPARTMENT, AND CITY ATTORNEY A. Demolition ordinance update - The board requested more information for discussion at the December 7, 2011 meeting on whether a demolition permit must assume the potential for complete demolition or if the permit can allow only partial demolition. Also, staff and the subcommittee will present possible changes to the code definition of demolition for discussion. B. The Boulder Design Advisory Board (BDAB) review of the development proposal for the former Daily Camera site was briefly discussed. The board also received a copy of the revised ordinance for BDAB's functions. C. Update Memo 6. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 7. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m. Approved on December 7, 2011 Respectfully submitted, Chairperson 2 CITY OF BOULDER Planning and Development Services 739 Broadway, Third Floor P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306-0791 1 e414 4 4 phone 303-441-1880 • fax 303-441-4241 • web boulderplandevelop. net Historic Preservation Reviews Between October 22, 2011 and November 23, 2011 This report shows all historic preservation cases on which the application was approved, denied or withdrawn within the stated date range. This is based on the last action and the date shown on the main screen of the case. Landmark Alteration Certificate Reviews Case Count: 15 HIS2011-00173 1325 PEARL ST Downtown Construction of new entrance vestibule ateast face of east wing of Boulder County Courthouse as detailed on plans dated 11/18/2011 and identified as LAC drawings. Sequence 132 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/18/2011 LDRC HIS2011-00195 1089 13TH ST Individual Landmark Rehabilitation of building to include new storefronts at north elevation of building as detailed on drawings detailed 10.212011. Staff will review limewash and masonry specifications prior to commencement of construction. Sequence 148 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 By: LDRC HIS2011-00217 956 16TH ST Individual Landmark Construction of underpass, bus shelter, and associated hardscaping as detailed on plans dated 07.15.2011 and identified as LAC drawings. Sequence 166 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 10/27/2011 BT_ LDRC HIS2011-00221 434 MAXWELL AV Mapleton Hill Construction of 6' high fence at west side of property with 3/4" spacing between boards; fence will be 4' high at alley, stepping up to 5' then 6' in height. Fence will be stained semi-transparent. Sequence 170 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 10/27/2011 BT_ LDRC HIS2011-00228 2016 WALNUT ST Individual Landmark Rehabilitate non-contributing carport to function as garage with rcedar clapboard siding and trim as detailed on drawings dated 10.20.2011 and identified as lac plans. Sequence 173 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/15/2011 B Y-* LDRC HIS2011-00230 1014 SPRUCE ST Mapleton Hill Installation of PVC vent pipe through basement window at east elevation as detailed on landmark alteration certificate application dated 10.25.2011. Printed on 11/23/2011 HIS Statistical Report Page 1 of 5 Landmark Alteration Certificate Reviews Case Count: 15 Sequence 175 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 10/25/2011 Bw Staff HIS2011-00234 553 MAPLETON AV Mapleton Hill Repaint house with house with crownsville gray (body), wheeling neutral (trim), bone white 9soffit, column & railing), and rockport gray (porch floor) as detailed on lac application dated 10.21.2011. Sequence 177 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 10/27/2011 B v., Staff HIS2011-00238 1125 PINE ST Mapleton Hill LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE to replace an existing metal door on the east side of the Carnegie Library with a new oak door to match existing main entrance. Sequence 180 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 By: LDRC HIS2011-00239 14 CHAUTAUQUA PK Chautauqua Park Landscape plans dated 10.182011 and as reviewed by the Ldre on 11.09.2011. Sequence 181 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 Bv: LDRC HIS2011-00241 1115 PEARL ST Downtown Replace 3 sections of folding sash windows with new metal clad wood folding windows on the ground floor of south elevation as detailed in landmark alteration certificate application dated 11.04.2011. Sequence 182 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 B T_ LDRC HIS2011-00243 731 SPRUCE ST Mapleton Hill Re-roof house with Owens Corning, "Onyx Black" asphalt shingle as detailed on landmark alteration certificate application dated 11.07.2011. Sequence 183 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 By: Staff HIS2011-00245 1117 MAPLETON AV Mapleton Hill Re-roof house with Tamko Heritage, "Rustic Black" asphalt shingle as detailed on landmark alteration certificate application dated 11.09.2011. Sequence 185 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 B T_ Staff HIS2011-00246 0 9TH ST Individual Landmark Existing headstone bases to be preserved, installation of new headstones adjacent to, but seperate from historic bases. New stones will be set into sub-surface concrete bases and set into high-lime mortar. Existing headstone fragment will be safely stored on-site. Sequence 186 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/16/2011 B T_ LDRC Printed on 11/23/2011 HIS Statistical Report Page 2 of 5 Landmark Alteration Certificate Reviews Case Count: 15 HIS2011-00247 2027 13TH ST Downtown Modification of existing outdoor patio rail to include addition of dining ledge and vertical bars as detailed on landmark alteration certificate application dated 11.16.2011. Sequence 187 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/16/2011 BT. Staff HIS2011-00248 568 MARINE ST Highland Lawn Roof house with "Storm Grey" asphalt shingle as detailed on landmark alteration certificate application dated 11.142011. Sequence 188 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/16/2011 BT. Staff Non-Designated Accessory Demolition Reviews Case Count: 1 HIS2011-00233 1875 ORCHARD AV Not Landmarked Proposed demolition of a 380 sf attached carport on the front of the property. (Circa 1958) Sequence 5 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: Marie Zuzack Date: 11/01/2011 BT_ Staff Non-Designated Post-1940 Demo/Off Site Relocation Reviews Case Count: 3 HIS2011-00232 1875 ORCHARD AV Not Landmarked Proposed demolition of an 580 sf garage in the northern part of the parcel built circa 1958 Sequence 32 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: Marie Zuzack Date: 11/01/2011 Staff HIS2011-00237 840 GRAPE AV Not Landmarked POST-1940 DEMOLITION for a single family dwelling pop top addition built in 1957 Sequence 33 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: Marie Zuzack Date: 11/04/2011 BT. Staff HIS2011-00242 1710 VIOLET AV Not Landmarked Demolition of house constructed in 1945. Sequence 34 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 11/14/2011 BT. Staff Non-Designated Pre-1940 Demo/Off Site Relocation Reviews Case Count: 2 HIS2011-00223 955 BROADWAY Not Landmarked Demolition of building constructed in 1939. Sequence 12 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: James Hewat Date: 10/27/2011 BT. LDRC HIS2011-00240 445 VALLEY VIEW DR Not Landmarked Proposed demolition on street facade to remove existing dormer and replace with new shed dormer. Printed on 11/23/2011 HIS Statistical Report Page 3 of 5 Non-Designated Pre-1940 Demo/Off Site Relocation Reviews Case Count: 2 Sequence 13 Decision: Application Approved Case Manager: Marie Zuzack Date: 11/18/2011 LDRC Printed on 11/23/2011 HIS Statistical Report Page 4 of 5 Historic Preservation Reviews Summary between 10/22/2011 and 11/23/2011 This summary shows all historic preservation cases on which the application was approved, denied or withdrawn within the stated date range. This is based on the last action and the date shown on the main screen of the case. The cases listed "in Review" have not yet been resolved and are not shown in relation to the start and end dates. The date on the "In Review" cases is listed as the current date on the main screen of the HIS case. Historic District Amendment In Review 1 Landmark Alteration Certificate Application Approved 15 In Review 100 Landmark Amendment In Review 1 Landmark Designation In Review 13 Non-Designated Accessory Demolition Application Approved 1 In Review 3 Non-Designated Post-1940 Demo/Off Site Relocation Application Approved 3 In Review 3 Non-Designated Pre-1940 Demo/Off Site Relocation Application Approved 2 In Review 13 Non-Designated Primary Demolition In Review 15 State Tax Credit In Review 10 Printed on 11/23/2011 HIS Statistical Report Page 5 of 5 MEMORANDUM December 7, 2011 TO: City of Boulder Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planning Manager Marie Zuzack, Historic Preservation Planner James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate to install a fixed skylight on the west facing roof area of the contributing house at 432 Pine Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District per Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981 (HIS2011-00235). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 432 Pine Street 2. Zoning: Residential Low -1 (RL-1) 3. Owner: Terry Britton 4. Applicant: George Watt 5. Property Area: 6,360 sq. ft. 6. Date of construction: c.1912 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following motion: Motion to approve a landmark alteration certificate request to install a fixed skylight on the west facing roof area of the contributing house at 432 Pine Street in the Mapleton Hill Historic District as detailed on drawings dated 10.27.2011, in that, subject to the conditions below, the proposal generally meets the requirements of Section 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, and to adopt this memorandum dated 12.07.2011 as the findings of the board. Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for installing the skylight in compliance with the approved plans dated 10.27.2011, except as modified by these conditions of approval. AlZenda Item #5A Page 1 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc 2. Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance of the Landmark Alteration Certificate, the applicant shall submit revised drawings showing the skylight to be reduced in size to 24" x 24" to staff for final review and approval to ensure that the approval is consistent with the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines, the General Design Gi.tidelines and the intent of this approval. Background: In September of 2011, a landmark alteration certificate for the reconstruction of the roof at 432 Pine Street was issued by the Landmarks design review committee (Ldre) following improperly installed foam insulation in the attic. Y,. - AW~--01 .LSw 1~- L CIO) Ca film* Figure 1. Location Map for 432 Pine Street The applicant is now requesting a landmark alteration certificate to install a west facing skylight on the roof which will be visible from Pine Street. This item was referred for full Landmarks Board review by the Ldre. AlZenda Item #5A Page 2 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Description and History of Property: amw= - w pow 73 Figure 2. Fagade of 432 Pine Street, 2011 The standard sized lot is located mid-block on the south side of Pine Street between 4th and 5th Street. The 1994 historic building survey of the property described the house as being moderately altered, though contributing to the Mapleton Historic District and a good example of brick Four Square house design from the early twentieth century with its boxy form, low-pitch hipped roof, front dormer, wide overhanging eaves, leaded glass windows and enclosed front porch. The house has been subsequently rehabilitated to restore the original windows in the front dormer reconstruct the enclosed front porch. Limited archival research indicates that the house was constructed in 1911 and owned by Harry W. & Katherine Hopkins until Katherine's death in 1932. Katherine was born in Kentucky in 1863 and lived in Boulder for 22 years. The Hopkins' are buried in Green Mountain Cemetery. AlZenda Item #5A PajZe 3 S:\PLAN\datallongranglHIST\ALTCERTS1Historic Districts\Mapleton HiII\P11e.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Y ~ Y 'r `f .3'+ Set 1 i(a F 'F ~Al~•. ''t~"' ti`s Figure 3. 432 Pine Street from northeast Landmark Alteration Certificate Request: The applicant is requesting that the board consider the installation of a low- profile, fixed skylight on the west facing roofing area. A plan shows the proposed skylight to be 48" x 48", to rise approximately 3" above roof plane, and to be located 12' north of the chimney and 54" from the edge of the west eave. I J I I I I f k. v/ Figure 4. Roof plan showing location of skylight (arrow) AlZenda Item #5A PajZe 4 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hill\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc " 4-J a L:. ~Y F 7.~ 417 01- Figure 5. View of house from north west (mock up skylight not visible) iN 41 ~a■ N» MEN Figure 6. View of house from moving west (mock-up skylight visible, arrow) Agenda Item #5A Pale 5Item #5A Pale 5 S:\PLAN\datallongranglHIST\ALTCERTS1Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi111Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc 1i - t Figure 7. View of house from moving west (mock-up skylight visible, arrow) J r ~ J[ 40 1 isC; Figure S. View of house from moving west (mock-up skylight visible, arrow) Criteria for the Board's Decision: The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifies that a Landmark Alteration Certificate may not be approved by the board or City Council unless it meets the conditions specified in Section 9-11-18, S.R.C. 1981. Specifically: AlZenda Item #5A Pace 6 S:\PLAN\datallongranglHIST\ALTCERTS1Historic Districts\Mapleton HiI1\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc 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? Staff considers that while visible from Pine Street, a low-profile skylight in the requested location would not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the contributing property. However, staff is of the opinion that the skylight should be reduced in size to minimize its appearance. 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic., architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the district? While visible from Pine Street when approaching the property from the west, staff does not consider that a low-profile skylight in the proposed location will adversely affect the historic or architectural character of the 400 block of Pine Street. 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 historic district? The proposed location, style, form, and arrangement of the proposed skylight will be compatible with the character of the landmark, provided its size is reduced to minimize its visual impact. 4. Does the proposal to demolish the building within the Mapleton Hill Historic. District and the proposed new construction to replace the proposed demolished building meet the requirements of subparagraphs 9-11-18(b)(2) and 9-11-18(b)(3) of this section? Not applicable. 5. The Landmarks Board is required to consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled in determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate. No information regarding energy efficient design or universal accessibility was included in the application. Design Guidelines: The Historic Preservation Ordinance sets forth the standards the Landmarks Board must apply when reviewing a request for a Landmark Alteration AlZenda Item #5A PalZe 7 S:\PLANldatallongranglHIST\ALTCERTS1Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi111P11e.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Certificate. The board has adopted the Design Guidelines to help interpret the Historic Preservation Ordinance. The following is an analysis of the proposed construction with respect to relevant guidelines. Design guidelines are intended to be used only as an aid to appropriate design and are not intended as a checklist of items for compliance. General Design Guidelines 3.1 Roofs The roof is one of the primary character-defining features of a historic building, and the repetition of similar roof types creates part of the visual consistency that defines a historic area. Alterations or additions to roofs must be given careful consideration to ensure that they do not compromise the integrity of the historic structure. Typical roof shapes are gabled or hipped. Shed roofs sometimes occur on historic additions and accessory buildings. Meets Guideline? 1 Maintain the roof form, slope, Proposed addition of skylight will Yes height, and orientation to the not affect roof slope, height, or street. orientation to the street. 3 Skylights that are installed on a The proposed skylight will be visible Maybe historic roof should be as unobtrusive from Pine Street when approaching as possible and not visible from a the property from the west, public street. Flat skylights that blend However, the low profile skylight is with the roof are most appropriate. set back 13' from the edge of the Sculptural or bubble-type skylights north (front) eave and relatively are not appropriate. Also see Guideline unobtrusive. Staff considers that a 8.3.4. reduction in size of skylight to 24" x 24" would significantly lessen its visual impact. Additions to Historic Buildings, 4.0. 4.5 Key Building Elements Meets Guideline? Roofs, porches, dormers, wbidozw road doors are some of the most important character-defining elements of any building. As such, they require extra attention to assure that they complement the historic architecture. In addition to the guidelines below, refer also to Section 3.0 Alterations for related suggestions. 1 Maintain the dominant roofline and Proposed installation of skylight Yes orientation of roof form to the street. maintains the dominant roofline and roof form to the street. AlZenda Item #5A PajZe 8 S:\PLAN\datallongranglHIST\ALTCERTS1Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi111Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Miscellaneous, 8.0. 8.2 Energy Efficiency Energy conservation is a growing concern for property owners today. In the historic districts it is important to ensure that such concerns are addressed in ways that do not damage or diminish the historic character of the building, site, or district. 8.3 Mechanical and Utility Facilities Meets Guideline? 4 It is not appropriate to install The proposed location on the west Yes ventilators, solar collectors, antennas, roof area will be visible, but will not skylights in locations that compromise the character of the compromise character-defining roofs, or hipped roof form or the property. on roof slopes that are prominently Staff considers that a reduction in visible from the street. size of skylight to 24" x 24" would significantly lessen its visual impact. Mapleton Hill Historic District Guidelines G. Roof lines, Skylights, and Dormers The variety of roof forms in the Mapleton Hill Historic District is an important visual element. The most usual of the roof forms are steeply-pitched hipped or gable roofs, but most other types are represented. Guideline: Analysis: Conforms? 3. Roof lines interrupted by solar panels, Proposed low-profile skylight is flat Maybe skylights and roof decks demand and rises 4" above the roof plane- sensitivity in design to be appropriate. Proposed skylight design is relatively b. On the historic portion of buildings, unobtrusive despite visibility from west on Pine Street. Staff considers skylights should be in unobtrusive reducing the size of the skylight locations. Bubble-type skylights are opening from 48" x 48" to 24" x 24" inappropriate in all areas of the historic would mitigate the visual effect of the district. Flat skylights are more skylight when viewed from Pine appropriate. Street_ While the skylight will be visible from Pine Street, staff considers its location at the west roof area set back from the front eave 13' to be relatively unobtrusive and that its low profile design will not compromise the character of the low hip roof at 432 Pine Street. However, staff recommends the size of the skylight be reduced from 48" x 48" to 24" x 24" to further mitigate the visual impact of the new opening. If this condition is met, staff considers the proposal will generally be consistent with the General Design Gtcidelines, the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design AlZenda Item #5A Paee 9 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hil1\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Guidelines and the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate as set out in 9-11-18(a&b). Findings: Staff considers issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate for the proposed installation of a low profile fixed-light skylight on the west roof area to be generally consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines, and the General Design Guidelines for Boulder's Individual Landmarks and Historic Districts. The Landmarks Board finds, with the conditions listed, that the proposed Landmark Alteration Certificate application to install the skylight as detailed on plans dated 10.27.2011, is consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and: 1. The proposed work will not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the property. 2. The proposal will not adversely affect the special historic and architectural character of the property or the district. The location and design of the skylight will be relatively unobtrusive and not compromise the character of the low hipped roof. ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Building Inventory Form B: Roof plan, product information Alzenda Item #5A Page 10 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc ATTACHMENT A Historic Building Inventory Form VILMA00 HIST02117041. SOCIETY Office OI AreKioolow Nlyd HlStaric Pr64ltN571an OUT FIN FIELD USE 11CO lirvadray, Dearer, COlarado OQUI _ Eligible _ YoninaceA _ Det. Not Eligible _ Cer[i+lyd RehNb. ALS70R1C BO[LOING IWEMTORY lECOW Dare At01ECT NAME: Boulder Survey of Historic COMITY: CLIT: S1ATE ]D 10.r 5314550 platea, 1944 amLder i6Mt TEMPERARY RLF.L 1461-25-4-33-064 CURRENT SUILDLN6 NAME. 9AER: FRhMK M L cj; PINE ST EKRRJ FIR W 89302 ADDRESS: 432 PINE ST BOULDER, ED 80302 TDNISHIP 10 RAMA 71W SECTION 25 SE tj4 MU Iji. HISTORIC NAME: U.S,C.9- ELND IW61 Boulder. V31.0. Hopkins Residenre YEAR: t9w (PR197v) Y 7-v 15' BkO4'R: 3 LOTS&)r 8-4 DISTRICT PW1EL ADDITTCM! MDplebm Terrace TR. W RDOITICII: ID90 dILM RClI ND.: 44-Y IIEW4T14E MO.; LOCATIDIN OF NECAI]VEB: DATE DF rDMSTRIICT]ON: BT: R. Whitacre 30 Bmtder City 11,44. ESTIMAT(: ACTUAL: 1411 sawa4E: 9wider County Asii;eus UCE: PRESE9IT: Re. ident 4L HISTORIC: Rea ident Sal CMITION; ATTACH 011016tillAIM HERF N EXCELLENT Dam FAIR DETER]ORAr]NG EXTENT OF ALPERATIONS: MINOR N MWERATE MAJOR WEER [,.W; Enclosed parch; altered dorwr window; rear frane addition and "c*erd Story dry=i; row porch stops. CONTINUED YES X NO STYLE: xoursq"e STORIE6: GR10_NAL SITE X " EO 2 DATECV Of MCA; MATERIALS: Brick. NOW, Stour 69. FOOTAGE: NKTLONAL REGISTER ELL93HIL11T 2Ft3 INDIVIDUAL! TIES X I* ARD irMUR.AL DE9CRIR11CK: TMR-"" hipped root 4"; 4 1 nq wllle overhetlg irg oev"; broad aoodon fr We board CONTRIBUTING TO D19TRICTL .eµ*r 4#vep, iriw gabled wall. drrrerer with roturn_ Tan qtr{k wPLls stop coursed R TES 00 stone foundation, Mipped roof parch has been enclDsed with narrow, fired pane LOCAL yANDIVRN DESIGNATION. ND petrels. Cemxor. Pane Led door with skki.i4htx- D*4bte-hung 1j1 ltpht windows wit% stare sllLs etd llnre Le. Beveled boy wimift on cast with double-hang NAME: rirrdns5- Uppitr story has 6r icy: paxl_ Le+yrd glens wirriows an eppyr weary DAIL- laced& arid. on weal. Pall, coral Lied brick ctowneys, ASSOC[ATED BUILDINGS? N YES 90 TTPE: GaraO6 [F' IMENTEIt1ED, LIST 14 NW.-. CENTINLED7 Jig N KO ADDITLONAL PACES; TES X ND Alzenda Item #5A Page 11 S:\PLAN\data\longrarrg\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pi1e.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc 'Pim 9HAK: ARCHITECT: STATE rD VD.: 5BL4550 I --ri-_i IA•ardodA+ IA URIGINRL OWNRL Harry tr. E Katherirk Woo Iht (1) - ~ SKURGf: ~ iNI11FICE - - - City Directory, 1913 ~u I LDE•rrrorT ~DTEat: LY'Anorrs i- THENE(93: Sa1RCEz Urban Residential aai Qhlawboods, 1 l 18S9rpreetflt CBNETRLlCT10a HISTCIIT IDESCRIPIJON, NAESr DATES, Erc„ RELATING 10 NA" suERATIUas 10 OkNINAL STRLCTLIv:}r WWTIWAD YES x No HISTORICAL RACKGRIAIND (DISCUSS INP(RTANT PERSCa1S M nEWS ASSOCIATED lrITR THIS STRUCTURE)! Thr 1913 arty directory irdieates that this was the how of Merry 10. and Katherine Hopkim- Upon Katherine Hopkins,& death in 1932, the Loral mwepaw mpoemd ThaT 'she and her family lived an lest Piro NTr4et for many, years.' Ke0*ririr Nspkine was born in Kentucky In IMS and resided in BmLder for 22 years. No inforeatim was available for Harry ao ion. A later comer vas Edith H. E('iis. IMII NLED YES" x -No SIGILCIPANCE (CHECK APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES AINO BRIEFLY A1ST[FT BEL13W)! AkCHI TECTLIRAL SI ONIFICANCE: HLSIORICAL SLGNIFICARCE: RERRESENI5 T1E WCATK OF A 40TER A .lATF9 WON ;11:14I1PICAMr PERSONS PetsO SUS HIGH ARTISTIC VAtAWS ASSOCIATU WITH SIGNIFICANT EVENTS DR PATTERNS K REPRESENTS A TYPE, PEIti'b, KTk HEtNOD bF UAVA ETtON X CI1WINBIJIE9 1O AN HISTORIC DISTR90 11ft trVALUAT1ON- Contributing guil.dina-Restorable vATEF&A1 Of SIGNIFICANCE! Althauyll smlenAlat altered, this duoLling is representative of the Foursglaro style popular during the early tvantleth "nlyry In the IarlTed $xoms, as reflected in the try ahapre, hipp,t-d roof meth overhanging eaves and front dorner, prminent porch, and variety at window details. COINTINUED YE4 N No REFERENCES (K SPECIFIC): Gawkier rXrPry Assay,Nor. real !Slots information; 11odder CLal(yf.RFer• bioyrophieti. f6Le*; Boulder CarTlagIt L1bearyi Boulder Canty AsmessDr collection, Isarlder City Directeri&4, Boulder Genealogical egcuetyr Census Irdeaes, 19W and 1910 EMT INLCD TEs N No SIICAI D HT: R.L. SiN OISIT.N. SllwO AFFILtA119N. Front Ralrge Research Associat+ , Eric- DAP€ JUft 199L Alzenda Item #5A Page 12 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Alzenda Item #5A Page 13 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hill\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Address: 431 PINE ST Boulder, Colorado cOLORADD Ct1LTURAL RESOURCE SURVEY Cultural Resource R"val"Con Form. Accessory Building 5unrey 1. RftoUM* Numbisr: SBL45M 2. Temp. Pesourm Number BUILDING A 3. Attachrmnls: 4. Of tcal determinalmn: {Check as many as apply) 4.A-HP U5E ONLY Determined Ehigible +r1 Plopkogr8phs ✓ _ Deierminim Not Eligible Si6e sketch map Need DWa _1 U.S.G S. map photocopy Nominated tither Other ! Lislbd -i Contributing to M.R. District Not Contributing to N_R. f3vs1nct 5. Resource Marne of Primary Buildwg Hopkins ReaMence 6. Purpose of the current site visit: Resurvey 7. Previous Re=dings- Front ftangra kesaarch Assoc, June 1994 Sa. Desuiptiion or Accessory Budding: Two accessory buildings on property. Outbuilding Type_ {Building A), gabble roofed garage with compostion roofing, wood siding. Garage cornerboards, winnow and doorlr&m, and overhead twelve panel garage Uutbuilding Mateial chat with three panels Red with plastic. Garage door fat" ea*L Paif ed single-pane windows face west, Wood Frame jButlding B}, "non-contributing" second accessory building on lot ie lase wilding Covering than fifty years old_ Wood Siding Outbuilding Roof Materla Asphatl $b. Date of Q)nsmrti-: pre 9949 Bc Date of ConstRrclian Source: MlaWk Assessors card. Camegle t.R ary: 1829 md*,1Ykb@ liw. garage. 19943urrey: lists garage as m'asaockx bwldlng-' 9. Concf5on: Excellent 14e- Charges te, Location or Size InformAon: 10~ UTM Coordinates Al;enda Item #5A Page 14 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pi1e.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc Cuhurnl Resource Retvaluatlwn Ferns: page 2 of 2 Address: 433 PIXIE ST Accessary Building Survey Boulder, Colorado Temp. Resnuraa Number BUILDING A 11. Current 0wn"ip BRITTDN TERENCE B 1922 EUCLID AVE STE 1014 CLEVELAND CH 4#115 12. Othar Changes, Additions or Db erwati4ns: 1a Eligibility Assesment Indnadual District National Regisler. WA National Register. C4nVibuting Local Landmark; WA Local: ConlribLAk l Locally DesigrnMW Property NO 14. Management Reaammendabons: NIA 15. Photograph Types and Numbers: Type: B&W Roll Na; 13 Frame No. 9.10 16. Artifact and Field Doeumewation Storage Location MA 17. Rope" Title' Accessary BuGdin+B Survey 18' Recorder(s): Kathryn How" Barth. AIA; Lora Ram"y 19: DaW5); Apr. 2005 20: Raoorder Mhabw !Cathryn Nowas Barth. AW; Ramsey Planning and Preservation Al;enda Item #5A Page 16 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AL,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hi11\Pi1e.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc 5BI.4550 432 PING ST SITE PLAN Sf A 131 NOUR NN S:IPLANIdata\longrang\HISTIALTC'ERTS\Historic Districts\Nlapleton Hi111Pine.4 32\AI~ . ,Nl O R Item A N D~U -M do c 17 - ••F ! 11.:.4 A 7 yy-~ Agenda Item #5A Page 18Item #5A Page 18 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\AI,TCERTS\Historic Districts\Mapleton Hill\Pine.432\M E M 0 R A N D U M.doc ATTACHMENT B: Applicant letter, Plans, and Photographs Agenda Item #5A Pagel. ~b S:TLAN\data\longrang\HISTIALTCERTS\Histoeic DistrictsNapleton HilllPine.432VA E M 0 R A N I) U M.doc GEORGE WATT G architecture LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION Project Description 10.27.11 Britton Residence 432 Pine Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 It is the desire of the owner to take advantage of the reconstruction of the roof assembly (per LAC #HI52011-00177) to place a low profile 4646 skylight on the western slope of the low slope hip roof. The skylight will project above the shingles @3", minimizing the ability of a pedestrian to see the skylight from the street, as can be seen in the attached photos of the full scale mock up. The skylight will provide day-lighting to the existing staircase, increasing safety and reducing the need for artificial lighting (and associated costs and carbon emissions) during the day. The addition of the fixed skylight is consistent with the General Design Guidelines for Boulder's Historic Districts and Individual Landmarks: • It is compatible with the form and pitch of the roof as it is pan-flashed, not curb mounted, resulting in the lowest profile of any skylight available. • It is unobtrusive due to the pan-flashed mounting resulting in a projection above the roof plane of @3". • It is not installed on a roof plane that faces the street. • It is partially obscured by the existing chimney. • Has no impact on the "character defining" roof -the north facing roof assembly that includes the dormer and eave detailing. Fixed pan-flashed skylight (QN-) I VELUX 10124111 1:27 PM Fixed pan-flashed skylight (QPF) The tPF fir--d rkyllght des g J for serf flashed $ - v :r•=_ta•,at+eru..S rre_r or - x-ally expand ng la-c• r ary:iS aU~:`' 05 h>31.i'ia Y`-, E 4 CfIS, ~r .d GLi2!' d ~ x! ~ . cloyed-,n, dark =pacs rho.- r:<:n l.e trai~stnrmed - - r,• i!ght ~r vie,.,. k pr,Ara, art - iii mi:.Ci ti;Qi.:= in = ~afl FSir ~ =Gar. >>a- .,•';[I~T p is-- lir i7 "v!': riu=mot v. Tn: QFF :,kyl;gh n -t. E-NFfi UI ;Af i?: approval guateiine for :n all c-limatli r>•,~i~r:~ liar t~$. - Ifer If;st"Oe- loc:tor Instatiation slope Thai QPF sk7€i_xh • scans rues ith s - he"x=en 14- 1'3:12) and 600 (?3:'_'<i. C1t ! list: uc.'sens i"PF SA.f•S • 5trc.nnitned cxtr'.riar ;he 1'n':::p,li. <nvo praf;ir _1f the QP F s. ,i!oht don- -Qt uLStrr Ct )10L.. ruorlre. 4111-- -irp ZCit;w LUFRGY ~TAR_eLllg Solar blackout blind Integrated flashing Eiro_x the I.3hL US .3 - "S' "m _=.;_{e1'a.-factcrr- .n!y the pm-, of the _ ir~lcailed aan-flashinq sun. vau:o_ NO Jesgneci fo1 sun. - C, nt shmolle r_ai_-< only. w. Make use of cij. most Warranties you can anu^dn; natural trust _ .c U. - ..ne Su... a.:y covers -10 vea!.~ on ns--W.ted ..r 31 1 -F F lit he- iu.ilas I to -ears cn ._.3t Pint On the Caryl. Prodtxt details Installation - in, ai'. r, ofim bz~ed painted -mooing Ic1': is ,`.,r s+.r_rn,- •~nd IUra JSPty Pickg, lick! pre-Installed The n=.w inntro.,-.re Fic g;( ;d*! bra-'ret= mak- hll^d+nsi [labor. a snap! Eve,-,, •QPF sk,l;QM Corr:F2.- p1~-instu3ied u;l:h Picks' Cltckl braciters th-, for fr._ of sunscreer-:ing t? ir.Js Energy efficient glass options Ail VELD skylmht gL <<inas arc built usng creel-gy efFicien.• L--:F?, Ann gas itte. -ed dual gla:=s Danes. The QPF zk: kgli! coriic5 ,vitt, yc•ur :ho' of tine fn!I: wing a!azing notions, each d~-,igncd rn: th:= needs of sPe,5r boidinq SltunvonI,: Impact glass - S.'rda'! safaty gfas> Jesmn°_d :a meat code requirements for hurrica11e prone are=5 (Availabie Nw relec-, f!ZCs,f - Lamina.ed g?ass .empe:Fd L-fe'Y grass eX a laminated oa F. "r added safety arid cornior Tctt;pnreri glass -Terriper.edsafe?-Y: g':ass ' Whv:e lavr nat<_d mass - Ten- e1'ed, !ammated safety glass mth a l' Nte mating to provide diffused iiq!;T:ng (Cun`ar-' ug .-r availability and p .c,:ng 5unscreening options for optimal light control the OPF skylight is compaFUbie v'!th S-ve,=A 5u:.srreervmg acc=_sswies mdud!ng: http://skylights,veluxusa.corn/consumer/products/residential_skylights/Skylights/pan flashed/QPF/default.aspx# Page 1 of 3 Fixed pan-flashed skylight (QPFI 1 VrELUX 10/?-!/11 12& PAi Venetian BI!nds - Acc.rata_ ula r: and Gaht r:rd'rr•!. Ava-izb!e in Yn~:- rnanua! versiars. Roller Blinds Rffttse t!,1 int?t_ Available in solar and mane?! versions. Quality conStrur_tion -'Ie QPF sk,;hni;t canes with pre-fr..ishsd a:hite r mines :hat F.lminate the nced for s<_ccndar; high crct :rips t:y a painter. integr,-,tcd gasket= d. zn cordensaron to the rubside. Wide range of sizes The QPF slcrlight comes in a varicLy cif sizes that k Fth rart_- crtruss rr..o - o t;-:at you can select il7e Una `hat is ngh .r ynur proje-_.. For- d=_taii= en thrs_ 5:7 7. p':ca5+'_ dr,:s:l ;ad a cap y C-, cur Residential .prcdurt siz=_s. Due to Igcal sa!•_s tax, trcns;ar:a!ir..rI and del!v2ry cnsr; that may vary, plaasn consult your focal VELUX dealer For pr;dnq. QPF Technical Information _ Gla5S 04 as o6^• j u8 Air infiltration/eehitration' J v' . t n r. Water resistance 3.4 L1m'/min (5 U59al/ft"/hr) inc.. xcA -e~r.c.: pa, T Thermal performance ~e-n;: _ ra'•_ao, U-Far-tor SHGC V7 a - I - - U- Factor SHG( t _ • _ i is c VT r UV protection, Fading protection, Wo i_- t i 41 Structural Performance Uplift -,'Fl 4646 LC- Download 4646 17 littp://skylights.veluxusa.com/consumer/products/i,esideiltial_skylights/Skylights/pan flashed/QPF/default.aspx# Page 2 of 3 V MI'M 04-PKIEN -1 - 106 J6 - o .t Skylights Skylights saes ~SS 4. rll;; ,I . { 4. :Lhw P nrr. ~ 1~ F, F LIB I- 1 a_ as Models VSF and VS Outsidefraroe in. 21+""x27', 2111,x3814 211/:x461/. 211/.x54'=/46 30'A-x383/0 30s/,,x46'/. 30'%mx5"'I", 44 Ax271A 441/.x461/. Rough opening in. 21x26'4 21x37'/4 21x45'/, 21 x54 %m 30'"",x37'10 30'"".x45'/. 301 x547,"" 441Ax26IA 441/,x45'/+ Daylight Area in. 16x2OA4 16x315 16x39.38 16x48 25x3L5 25x39.38 25x48 30.25x20.44 39.25x39.38 Ventilation Area sq. ft. 2.60 3.56 4.14 4.71 417 4.75 532 431 5.84 Model FS Outside frame in. 15114x 21112x 21'/>x 21V.,x 211/,x54 21,hx 231hx23 231/,x 30"A,x 30"A0x 30'A,x 30"/,6x54 443/.x WAx 41WA 27`A 38 V,, 46'/, 1& 703/. 7An 461/+ 301h 38'/0 46'A 1/1, 273A 46'/+ 14 11,x 21x 21x 21x 21x 21x 22'/,x22 22'hx 30'/mx 301&x 30+A,x 44 'Ax 44 1/4x Rough opening in. 451/+ 261A 371A 453/4 5471., 701/4 451/. 30'/i.•x30 376, 451/ 54 7/,s 26% 453A Daylight Area in. 11 %^x42 181A>x 18 4x 1814,x 181&x 181/mx 19'/,,x 93---/:,x42 271/,x 27V.x 271/4 x 271Ax 417A.x 411/mX 241 35V, 1211, 51'/ 67'/:. 20 27`1.. 35'A,421'/x. 511A 241/m 42'=/46 Model FS sizes D26 and D06 fit perfectly between roof tm=_ses. 10odel UDL ~iA Ix r I'ITII Model GPL Outsidefranre W. 305/sx55 443/.x46'/0 Rough opening in. 31'A x 551/2 45 V. x461A+ Outsidefrante in. 37'A,x991A Daylight area (9t,s:( ill. 231/, x45'/. 37 /.,x36'/0 Rough opening in. 391/2x101 Ventilation area (w.wo sq. ft. 11.34 11.64 Daylightarea in. 30x531/. Ventialtionarea (nm) sq. in. 30.00 47.81 Daylightarea (m-- u.) in. 30x281A NetWt_(,,/L j-) Ibs. 1_U 123 Ventilation area (uppc,-um) sq. ft. 225 Venti lation area (a, p) sq. in. 36.7 Net Wt+,r/L',o- d:, + lbs. 160 Model VCE Sizecode . , , ■ , ■ ■ 2222 2234 2246 3030 3046 3434 4646 Insidecurb in. 221/2 x22'/2 221/x341/: 221/2x46'/.• 301,x30', 30'/-x46'/_ 34'/2x34'2 46Vx461h Outsidecurb in. 25',x25', 25'12x37'/ 251hx491h 331hx33'h 331/.x49`/: 371hx37'h 49'/'x491/: Max. skylight clearance in. 26'h,.x26''h,. 26'h,x38'& 269/mx5WA, 341/.x341/2„ 34"/,,.x50"/.. 36'/6x38"h:. 50''/,,x50"h,. Daylightarea in. 19.47x19.47 19.47x31.44 19A7x43AI 27.46x27.46 27.46x43.44 31.44x31.44 43.44x43.44 Ventilation area sq. ft. 3.17 4.16 515 4.49 5.81 5.15 7.13 Model VCM Size code ■ , ' ■ , ■ ■ 2222 2234 2246 3030 3046 3434 4646 Insidecurb in. 221,x22V.. 221/2x341/2 2212x461/; 301,x30'/. 3012x461/2 34'2x34', 46',x46'/- Outsidecurb in. 251hx25V, 25'hx37'h 251/2x491/2 331hx33V, 33',x49', 37'/2x371/2 491/:x491/`- Max. skylightclearance in. 26'&x 26'/w 26 "he x38 26°%,x 50'/c 341&x341& 34 "hex 50'/2. 389/r x 38 9/,, 50'/mx 50'& Daylightarea in. 19.47 19.47x31.44 19.47x43.44 27.46x27.46 27.46x43.44 31.44x31.44 4344 Ventilationarea sq. ft. 3.17 416 515 'IA9 11.81 5.15 7.13 Model FCM Size code ' ' ■ . , ' ■ , ■ ■ 1430 1446 2222 2230 2234 2246 2270 3030 3046 3434 4646 Inside curb in 14',x 14',x 221/,x 221/,x 2212x 22'2x 221hx 30',x 30'hx 34112 x 461/,x 302h 4616 22'/. 30th 341/. 46'h 701/2 301, 461/, 341, 461/2 Outsidecurb in 171,x 17'hx 25'/2x 25%2x 25'hx 25'hx 251hx 33'/2x 33112x 371,x 491,x 331h 491, 251, 33'12 371, 491/2 731/2 331h 491, 371/2 491/2 Max. skylight clearance in. 18'/x 18`G,x 26'Ax 26"hx 2656,x 26`/.x 26`1x 345Ax 34'Ax 38=/.x 50`hX 34 h, 50' 26`/ 341 A 381h 50 `/A 741 A 345h 50 38/0 50 1h Daylightarea in 14.5x 14.5x 22.5x 22.5x 225x 225x 22.5x 30.5x 30-5 x 34.5x 46.5x 30.5 46.5 22.5 30.5 34.5 465 70.5 305 46.5 34.5 46.5 Model ¢PF Fixed skylight Outsidefranie ill. 24'4.x24'1. 24V.02Y, 24'&x481& 321&x321& 32'&x48-ha l83&x48I& Rough opening in. 221/2x22'/2 221/2x30'1 22'1x461/2 30'/2x301/2 301/:x461/: 461Lx46'/~ Daylightarea in. 19.5 19.5 19.5 275x27.5 275x43.5 43.5 SUN TUNNEU'skylights Models TMR and TGR Model TMR Model TGR Size code • 0 0 010 014 010 014 Outside flashing Ill. 27x27 29'1x30"1 251/x251/, 29x29 Roughopening (ceiling) in_ 10 Y: 141/2 10'/2 1411 Rough opening(roofdeck) in. 1411x16 141/2x20 1411-x14'/ 14'1x18 Daylight area sq. in. 6529 137.82 6529 137.82 Net wt (w/ acrylic) lbs. 20 29 19 28 Standard tubing kitlength in. 48= 48' 48* 48= Maximum recommended install length ft. 20 20 20 20 *subtract approximately 6' for flashing Model TGF Model TMF Sizecode . • Size code 014 021 014 Outside flashing in. 29x29 37x37 Outside flashing in. 291/<x30I/s Roughopening (ceiling) in. 141/2 221/, Roughopening (ceiling) in. 14'1 Rough opening(roofdeck) ill. 141.x18 221/2x26 Roughopening(roof deck) in. 1411x20 Daylightarea sq. 13782 314.00 Daylight area ,q. 137.82 Ill. Netwt(w/acrylic) lbs. 24 36 Netwt(w/acrylic) lbs. 26 Standard tubing kitlength in. 96 72 Standarcitubingkit length in. 96 Maxinmmrecommendedinstall length ft. 8 12 Maxirnumrecommendedinstalllength ft. 8 ~ as Skylight cannot be seen from Skylight is virtually unnoticable the front of the house along and is unobtrusive from Pine Street. adjacent to the neighbor's house to the west. kJAI- PHOTO 1 PHOTO 2 Skylight is unobtrusive from - Skylight is unobtrusive from across Pine Street. Pine Street to the west. ly - •4" . 04% PHOTO 3 PHOTO 4 LANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE APPLICATION Project Description - Skylight Mock up Photos 10.27.11. Britton Residence 432 Pine Street Boulder, Colorado 80302 : i z. E q i _ I vow i L i D E I ~ i Pm I I a ~ i g I „ I i I 451 Yid ~TILtrT - S.. ~ R L ~ VX bl4 EKX,k _ 1 8 ~ a m"+:l Y eetrrr:.i MEMORANDUM December 7, 2011 TO: City of Boulder Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planning Manager Marie Zuzack, Historic Preservation Planner James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of a Landmark Alteration Certificate for the construction of a 380 sq. ft. carport at the individually landmarked property at 323111", Street, per Section 9-11-18 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981 (HIS2011-00236). STATISTICS: 1. Site: 3231 11th Street 2. Zoning: Residential Low - 1 (RL-1) 3. Owner: Bob Carmichael 4. Applicant: Brad Burch 5. Property Area: 12,700 sq. ft. 6. House size: 1,367 sq. ft. historic, 1,618 sq. ft. addition 7. Proposed carport: Approximately 380 sq. ft. 8. Date of construction: c. 1902, addition 2010 STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the following motion: Motion to approve a landmark alteration certificate request to construct a carport on the landmarked property at 32311111, Street as detailed on drawings dated 10.27.2011, in that, subject to the conditions below, the proposal generally meets the requirements in Section 9-11-18, B.R.C. 1981, and to adopt this memorandum dated 12.07.2011 as the findings of the board. Agenda Item #5B Pagel S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc Conditions of Approval: 1. The applicant shall be responsible for constructing the house in compliance with the approved plans dated 10.27.2011 except as modified by these conditions of approval. 2. Prior to submitting a building permit application and final issuance of the Landmark Alteration Certificate, the applicant shall submit the details regarding roofing and framing of the carport to the Landmarks design review committee for its review and approval to ensure that the alteration is consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the intent of this approval. Background: Designated as an individual landmark in 2008, the approximately 12,700 square ft. lot contains the Wallace Chambers House, believed to have been constructed in 1902. In 2010, a landmark alteration certificate was issued for the construction of a two-story, 1,618 sq. ft. addition to the historic 1,367 sq. ft. Chambers House. may, i-"'Tie. 7z .4' may'- SSS 14. s " C2) .77 01. ..P Figure 1. Loc~ition M tp of 3231 I111A Street (arrow)) Agenda Item #5B Page 2 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc The applicant is now requesting a landmark alteration certificate to construct a 380 sq. ft., carport at the northwest corner of the property, behind the recently constructed addition. r~,t'~ ' r + ti' ^ 7 F 4r [b5`~'r }:.may ~4•.- - y~\ l~ ~~;~'R - . y ~jts +tis~ Yomy, ~ Hli.~i' ~ ~ yy r ; fie ~ t" R"Y . r 'tom{ + y • _ - _ _ A: y- ~ ~4+. `ski Figure 2. 3231 11th Street, c1953 courtesy Boulder Carnegie Branch Library for Local History Description and History of Property: Vernacular masonry in form, the one story house at 3231 11th Street features a hipped roof with dormers on the north and south elevations and a one story rectangular addition on the rear. The walls of the house are constructed of rough faced stone laid in irregular courses, and is believed to have come from the Chambers' stone quarry northwest of Boulder. The original portion of the house has simple one-over-one double hung wood windows, which appear to be original to the house. A contemporary addition extends west from the rear of the house by way of a flat roof connector which intersects with a two story gable extending south beyond the face of the historic house. Agenda Item #5B Page 3 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc l 't r 1 b1 'J, J T a F t y'3 t SHE i t ttyy I 1 d •f. $ ry ~ V ~ V, w Jr'r ?'r`te- t a~ 11 T ' I I I 111 1 11 J - r• +134...'..., ,r+,.nve Figure 3. Facade of Chambers House from 11th Street, 2011 Essentially flat, the 12,700 sq. ft. lot is characterized by several mature trees and a number of landscaping and hardscaping elements including raised planter beds, fruit trees, and a wood fence around the property that ranges in height from 4' to 7'. The lot is roughly twice the size of standard lots in the Newland subdivision and, while significantly smaller than originally platted, survives as a remnant of the agricultural property that predates the subdivision. The property is notable for its association with Wallace Chambers, an early Boulder stonecutter and teamster. The Chambers Stone Company, which was founded by Wallace's father, George Chambers & partners in 1881, supplied Boulder with stone quarried near Left Hand Canyon for many of its commercial and residential buildings. Some of the projects include the footing for the Masonic Temple and flagstone for the floor of the vault of the First National Bank. It is likely that the stone house at 3231 11th Street was built by the Chamber's family with stone from the local quarry. The Chambers only owned the house for one year, selling the house to T.H. Fitzpatrick and J.A. Teagarden in 1903. Fitzpatrick was a prominent businessman, and served on the Boulder City Council for 20 years. Thomas served as the City Street Superintendent, and was responsible for the paving of the city's streets. He had a life-long friendship with William F. Cody, more Agenda Item #5B Page 4 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc commonly known as "Buffalo Bill". His daughter, Jessie Fitzpatrick, was the principal of Whittier School from 1924-1947. The property is also considered significant architecturally as a well-preserved example of stone hipped box house and distinctive by its pyramidal roof, dormers, simple square form, local stone construction, front porch, and one-over- one, double hung windows. 1 _ L Yr ' - Ir" 'y. 7-1 L 40 t !III i~ ~ it .j. 41. r Figure 4. Chambers House, Southeast corner, 2011 Landmark Alteration Certificate Request: The applicant is requesting that the board consider the construction of a 380 sq. ft. carport at the northwest corner of the property, approximately 6' west of the 2010 addition. Agenda Item #5B Page 5 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc Proposed Location of Carport 7i N f a s~ l i Figure 5. Proposed location of carport from alley (looking southeast) A site plan shows the accessory building to be 18' 10" x 19' 7" in size and to be located at the north and west lot lines. h i t {3,rti F-7- PI& i Figure 6. Proposed Site Plan (arrow indicates proposed location of carport) Agenda Item #5B Page 6 S-.\PLAN\data\longranglHIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\11th.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc The proposed carport will be partially visible, both from the alley and from the street at the northeast corner of the property. Access to the carport will be from the alley through an existing gate. F U:~ 'pal ; . L Figure 7. Axonometric rendering of property showing proposed carport (arrow) The proposed carport is shown to be of a very simple design with a corrugated metal shed roof supported by a painted white steel frame. r I. Figure 8. Proposed south face of carport from garde At its highest point, the carport is shown to be 13' 6" high and, at its highest point) will rise approximately 6' above the existing west (alley) fence. Agenda Item #5B Page 7 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc Located in the RL-1 zone district, 323111 thStreet is also subject to the compatible development regulations. The proposed carport meets required setbacks but, because is not an enclosed building, would not be included in lot coverage or FAR calculations. Criteria for the Board's Decision and Analysis: The Historic Preservation Ordinance specifies that a Landmark Alteration Certificate may not be approved by the board or City Council unless it meets the conditions specified in Section 9-11-18, S.R.C. 1981. Specifically: 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? Location: The location of the proposed garage maintains 6' between it and the existing house. However, the configuration of the lot provides considerable open space at the south side of the property. Staff considers that locating the carport at the southwest corner of the property would be inappropriate in that it would be significantly more visible from the front of the property. Form: The lot size is almost double that of those around it. Staff considers the design generally compatible with the 2010 addition. Given the physical remoteness and minimal visual relation to the historic house, the proposed shed roof design is appropriate. Materiality: The proposed garage will be simple in materials and construction. The proposed garage is to be constructed of steel with a corrugated metal roof. Staff does not consider the proposal will damage the historic design features of the landmark. 2. Does the proposed application adversely affect the special character or special historic., architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the district? While the carports are not typical of historic properties in Boulder, its location, direct visual relationship to the 2010 addition, and minimal visual impact on the property, staff does not consider the proposal will adversely affect the special historic character of this property. Agenda Item #5B Page 8 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc 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 historic district? The proposed location, style, form, and arrangement of the proposed carport will be compatible with the character of the landmark. 4. Does the proposal to demolish the building within the Mapleton Hill Historic District and the proposed new construction to replace the proposed demolished building meet the requirements of subparagraphs 9-11-18(b)(2) and 9-11-18(b)(3) of this section? Not applicable. 5. The Landmarks Board is required to consider the economic feasibility of alternatives, incorporation of energy-efficient design, and enhanced access for the disabled in determining whether to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate. No information regarding energy efficient design or universal accessibility was included in the application. 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 construction with respect to relevant guidelines. Design guidelines are intended to be used only as an aid to appropriate design and are not intended as a checklist of items for compliance. General Design Guidelines 2.0 Site Design Site design includes a z7ariety of character-defining elements of our historic districts and buildings. Individual structures are located within a framework of streets and public spaces that set the context for the neighborhood. How the structures occupy their site, in terms of alignment, orientation, and spacing, creates much o the context o the neighborhood. 1 Locate structures within the range of Proposed carport along alley is typical yes alignments seen traditionally in the area, of accessory buildings found in the maintaining traditional setbacks at the Newland subdivision. front, side and rear o the property. 2 Preserve a backyard area between the Proposal does not preserve distance Maybe house and the garage, maintaining the between house and carport. However, configuration of lot with garden space Agenda Item #5B Page 9 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc general proportion of built mass to open historically to the west of the house space found within the area. preserves adequate garden space and built mass to open space not inconsistent with that seen in this area of Newland. Staff considers locating garage at south west corner of property (providing more distance between it and house) would be less appropriate given the visual impact it would have on the property when viewed from 1111, Street. 6 Historically appropriate paving materials, Existing concrete driveway. N/A such as flagstone or brick, can be used to visually break up large J )ark:in. areas. 7 Paving driveways or garage access areas with Existing concrete driveway. N/A asphalt or concrete gives inodern look: and. is generally inappropriate, particularly when. adjacent to rnrpaved alleys. Flagstone or brick Wheel strips are the preferred alternative. 2.3 Parkin & Driveways 1 Maintain the traditional parking tit the rear Rear parking is maintained by the Yes of the lot. proposal. 2 Access to parking should be from the alleys Rear parking is maintained by the Yes whenemer possible. proposal. 6 Historically appropriate paving materials, Existing concrete driveway. N/A such as .flagstone or brick, can be used to visually break up large parkin areas. 7 Paving driveways or garage access areas with Existing concrete driveway. N/A asphalt or concrete gives modern look and. is generally inappropriate, particularly when adjacent to ynrpaved alleys. Flagstone or brick wheel strips are the preferred alternative. 7. GARAGES & OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES 7.1 New Accessory Structures New accessory buildings should follow the character- and pattern of historic accessory structures. While they should take design cues from the primary structure, they mast be subordinate to the primary structure in size, massing, and detailing. Alley buildings should maintain a scale that is pleasant to walk along and comfortable for pedestrians. GUIDELINES: ANALYSIS: CONFORMS? It is inappropriate to introduce a .l Given location and relative lack of visibility new garage or accessory building if from 11t, Street, staff considers the doing so will detract from the Yes proposed carport's construction will not overall historic character of the detract from the character of the historic principal building and the site, or if Agenda Item #5B Page 10 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc it will require removal of a landmark. significant historic building element or site feature, such as a mature tree. 2 New garages and accessory Carport is located at rear of property taking buildings should generally be access from the alley- Proposal does not located at the rear of the lot, preserve distance between house and respecting the traditional carport. However, configuration of lot with relationship of such buildings to the Yes P garden space historically to the west of the primary structure and the site. house preserves adequate garden space and built mass to open space not inconsistent with that seen in this area of Newland. 3 Maintain adequate spacing between Staff does not consider that the open form accessory/ buildings so alleys do not of the proposed carport will result in a Yes evolve into tunnel-like tunnel-like effect on the alley. passageways. 4 Preserve a backyard area between Proposal does not preserve distance the house and the accessory between house and carport. However, buildings, maintaining the general configuration of lot with garden space proportion of built mass to open historically to the west of the house space found within the area. preserves adequate garden space and built mass to open space not inconsistent with that seen in this area of Newland. Staff Maybe considers locating garage at south west corner of property (providing more distance between it and house) would be less appropriate given the visual impact it would have on the property when viewed from 11th Street. 5 New accessory buildings should The proposed carport is subordinate to the take design cues from the primary landmark house in mass, height, and scale structure on the site, but be as well as location behind the two-story Yes subordinate to it in terms of size 2010 addition to the landmark house. and massing. 6 New garages for single-family The proposed carport is 13',6" and residences should generally be one designed to accommodate two cars. story tall and shelter no more than Yes two cars. In some cases, a two-car garage may be inappropriate. Roof form and pitch should be 7 While the proposed garage does not have complementary to the primary steep pitch similar to that on the historic structure. portion of the house, it does utilize a roof Yes pitch reflecting that of the 2010 addition to which it relates both physically and Agenda Item #5B Pagel 1 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc visually. 8 Accessory structures should be The proposed carport is very simple and simpler in design and detail than contemporary in design, detailing, and Yes the primary building. - materiality. 9 Materials for new garages and The proposed garage is simple in accessory/ structures should be materiality. Use of steel and corrugated compatible with those found on the metal roofing is not incompatible with primary structure and in the Maybe - materials on 2010 addition. district. Vinyl siding and prefabricated structures are inappropriate. .11 If consistent with the architectural Four dormers are proposed for the garage- style and appropriately sized and Staff considers that while a usable half- located, dormers may be an story is appropriate given historic appropriate way to increase storage precedent on the property, the number and space in garages. See Section 3.5 scale of dormers is not consistent with this No and 4.5 for additional direction. guideline. Consider reducing to two dormers, reducing their height, and setting back from wall of garage (See Sections 3.5 & 4.5 below). 12 Garage doors should be consistent The proposed garage doors appear to with the historic scale and materials generally be appropriately scaled and of traditional accessory structures. designed - provide details for review and Wood is the most appropriate Yes approval by the Landmarks design review material, and two smaller doors committee. may be more appropriate than one large door. Staff considers that given the location and lack of visibility of the proposed construction when viewed from 11th Street, construction of the proposed carport is generally consistent with the General Design Guidelines and the Standards for Issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate as set out in 9-11-18(a&b). Findings: Staff considers issuance of a Landmark Alteration Certificate for the proposed construction of the garage to be generally consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and the General Design Guidelines for Boulder's Individual Landmarks and Historic Districts. The Landmarks Board finds, with the conditions listed, that the proposed Landmark Alteration Certificate application to construct a garage as shown on Agenda Item #5B Page 12 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc the plans dated 10.27.2011, is consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and: 1. The proposed work will not damage or destroy the exterior architectural features of the property. The proposed carport is complementary to the landmarked property in terms of location, mass, scale and general design. 2. The proposal will not adversely affect the special historic and architectural character of the property or the district. The proposed carport is considered to be appropriately located on the site given historic configuration of the lot with garden space primarily located to the west. ATTACHMENTS: A: Historic Building Inventory Form B: Site plans, existing elevations, photographs Agenda Item #5B Page 13 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc ATTACHMENT A Historic Building Inventory Form COLORALO HISTGRICAL SOCIE`y Qf TIC! of APC!V a Lc4jy and li i stores pr*tervat 54M NOT FOR FIELP USE 1300 Broadway, ]en"r, Cpleraeo $[1203 EL%gihla Maei riat ed _ Drt- Oat EtipibLe tert+FSilid ReNk- NIST4IRIC BUILDING IMMKRY AEC= DAtf PROJECT NAME: Flauldar Survey pi NSiCOrlt CDLINTY CITY- STATE 1D MD 5AL57Kr Ptaces, 1495 BauLdrr dwlLd!r TENP4RARY MO-: ?461-24a-69-007 CURREPU BUILDING MME: ~ 'AhEt vM9tHIE1 RMRgm TRUSTEE OF SAROARA 484RM[IS raU#T 5251 11TH ST W%LbER C9 anm .ADDRESS. i2vl 1+TH ST BOU~DEA, CO M504 TCt hrMIP '.x K"E 7161 SEcr_cpL 24 W 1/4 hi 114 1413"IC NONE. U.S.G.S. PVAD NAME: WuLder, C*Lo. Yr.AR: '066 (PR1974) % 7 15, F1L4LR: W LOS 51: 75-14 DISTRICT NAME_ A061T10Fr. Nrytard• y# OF APPITIEN: '&31 rtLN RGL,L NO.- 95 7 NEGATIVE 104.: LOCATION OF NEGATIVES: DATE Of CONSTRI.IITION: 3T: "*r kbirac•t 2 Roretder City Ptng. ESTIMATE. 1899 ACTUAL 59JRCE: Exwl ydtr La4nxy A#4la3Wr USE: ~AESEk1- i Alberinc■ HISTCA_i_ Res+tlense Coro L-1011: 4TTACH Pt/7T"APH HERE F11ZE LL1!% % (:Wb 'AIR DETERIORATING EXTENT aF ALTLHA-1045: FIINOR T MODERATE MAJOR D83CR:BE: M!v 9*L!d p*Pch aided, nee vYndovs in s Vri side ant Lasoa entry and In do-erlr brick eAditi - on mirth. F CONTINUED Y'Es M 4O Si!LE: Ver*+lcw l.~r N.amry ,Tmles. dR[G_NLAL SITE X HIVE} DArE(t) art f1OVL: MATERIALS' Sicr., YRUO, Concrete SO FC4T*3E: MAT30MAL REGISTER ELCG:EIIL['y 1191 IHPaVIDDAL: YES L Do AtOilTEc'URAL DISCRIPTION' One-ang o-natf story ¢Mellir,4 pith py,aaidoL hiwoed root v1[h 04erhanging eaves; CNINIBOT'r4 TO DISTASCT: shed roatetl do.•eers m harm a:1 south. pelts F7epustd of roughly g4arrlla YES No alone. Projecting, ga4.ed porch with wn"ht iron arippQrti atop concrete Dose. LOCAL LANOMW 0*s[6LSATI0M: Nd center, p.-q LAd Aryd SLarwl fir. Double-hur% 1f1- Lis*n wirdtl * with ctget lin[w lA and sntls. Brick chiarrey an erd aLL. MAraE ASSOCIATE-) fW[LOTMOS! X YES MG TYPE: Carage I.MVEhTOR1EP, LIST 10 NOS.: C0NTIFFJE0? YES X NO ADDITIONAL PACTS: YES X rtQ Agenda Item #5B Page 14 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc 'LAN SHAPE: ARCItITECT: STATE 10 NO.; 5OL5266 - . . _ Unknown ORIGINAL OWEN: UnknCmn • . I 1 SOURCE - SOURCE: I 9J I L 0 E RY ECRITRA(TORI : ~r • J,knoun --I I I 1 TnEMELS): -4 . Urban Reaidentilal MeigFborhoads, • T DOUR{E 1656-pr"ent CONSTRUCTION HISTORY (DESCRIPTION, NAMES, GATES, ETC., R{;aTLW, TO mAa OR ALTERATIGNS TO ORIGINAL STRUCTURE) C:OIITlFi TES M NO HISTORICAL 9ACKGRCUND ;OLSCJSS :MKRTAIT PERS011T AND EANTS AS50C01T10 ME-H THIS STRUCTURE); In 19'6, ch*s was the hone of COrneLiut C. and R.th Sarnett, COrTel•ws Barnett iiiiam. ■ palnter. In 1919, S. EaFI Grid winifrea Wagner reed het!. Wagner Ws a brick Layar Ard Lu'Ld19y COnrra£IOr. -he Wagner5 sti.L L-ed Here in 1928. CONTINUED YES K Alp 515h IF5rANCF (CHECK APPROPRIATE CATEGORIES AtAD BRIEFLY i-isr;rf BELOW : AFKHITEC-URAL i:GNIF:;ANCE; M.STORICAL SIONIFICAIaCE: RE+RESEN'S THE VOAX OF A MASTER ASSOCTATIED Wt-,H SIGNIFICANT PMMS PO$$ESSES •ITriH ARTISTIC VALUES ASSOCIAr" WITH SIONEFICAMP EVENTS OR PATTERNS Y REPRESENIS A -"E. M160, OR WTWOO OF WNSTRUCTIW 074TALR M TO AN HCSTORIC 515TRIET TIER 'VALUATION: STA74FIERT OF SIG+;TICANCE, This hwse, ■Lthotw4h ■LCared, r+ileitt ver-'yGULor rWn%ruct+Pn qt :he Nriy twentieth aMt4ry eta hspp-d -rof with - overheLng-riq eaves, double-huri9 wi MCws, and Lack ni ar£hiSect oral 4tS4pLli whio N4444 i Mirete a particular style. The h*"q it Mtable !ar 'Cl 1111+--v Stoma LonstrUCtion. I CONTIMM Yes x NO RE)EREN{tS tot SPECtT1t7: I)NK4er Comty Aaaaeser rec4rd6; Boulder City Dira{torles. cWIFINUEB YES X No SURVEYED 17Y~ A L. Sinai E. Broekev AFFILIATION: From: RAFi9A Raanareh Associates, Inc. VALE: June '99S Alzenda Item #5B Pa-ze 15 S:\.PLAIv data\Iongrang\ IIST',ALTCERTS\Landmarks111th.3231\12.07 2011 carport mL:mo.doc Jy,` ~5.1 ~ l • 1 Yom"` ~ - - f _ F A r lid ~a to gC.gI~ _ LA y~ ~9 1• Agenda Item #5B Page 16 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc ATTACHMENT B: Applicant letter, Plans, and Photographs r ~ vp ~ - z lFl c--•] -E-r~~~ _ I t t a I y~ I• °I r ~ 50 II• ~ ~ I o _ ti t t I e , ~ , ' tit •1 I• 1 ~ 1 ° 11 ~ r I I~-~ I~I i~ I ~rylll .,t` ~ ~II 14~ t~'•. I ~J~~91'tl`I°~ I a' ~I a r a t e~E i F1 X111 Ik I I i ~I I ar 5 i ~t i ~ t l ~ I• 1 ~ b + ~ ~ I a Agenda Item #5B Page 17 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc A L Y A I I 4 Sys ~ r ' e•1 5 111.. s• I ,~i ~1 1 I I 1 Iti ~ti J ~ J~.~E f 1 YI Id , ~ 1 i r~ ~ y ,I ■TN :WM R Fr Agenda Item #5B Page 18 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc --r_ ' r.ix w gip' "IN ■ 333111 _ . r _ IIII ~ I1 I ~ ~ ' Y 1 , Agenda Item #5B Page 19 S:\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\l lth.3231\12.072011 carport memo.doc - - ; fiit rf. - ;1 a a 4%, I~I I I~ I 1 ~ (~II I i I I I i t. 3~1w IN I Agenda Item #5B Palze 20 S:APLAN,data\lonarang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\l lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc 1 - & 6 7 I l ~ ~r \ ~k t'i 5 f{V 1 \..C I ~ ' 1N A 13~'t.~A '2 f`p}~ 3`' ¢ 'IF y ti _ik - 1,t ~II. 'S I d~~~.r ~ ~ • +b - - 11 Agenda Item #5B Page 21 S-.\PLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc a A ~r i 1 j I l I 1 I Agenda Item #5B Page 22 S:IPLAN\data\longrang\HIST\ALTCERTS\Landmarks\1 lth.3231\12.07.2011 carport memo.doc MEMORANDUM December 7, 2011 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planning Manager Marie Zuzack, Historic Preservation Planner James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner SUBJECT: Public hearing and consideration of whether to lift the stay of demolition at the property at 1814 Spruce St. per 9-11-23 of the Boulder Revised Code (HIS2010-00168). Owner: Jane and Kent McClannan SUMMARY: • On August 23, 2011, the Planning Department received a demolition permit application for demolition of the house at 1814 Spruce St. • On August 312011, the Landmarks Design Review Committee (Ldre) referred the application to the Landmarks Board for a public hearing, finding there was "probable cause" to believe that the building may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark. • The Landmarks Board imposed a 180-day stay of demolition on the property at its October 5, 2011 meeting finding the building may be eligible for landmark designation per 9-11-23 (f) of the Boulder Revised Code (B.R.C.). The stay commenced when the Landmarks Board fee was paid on September 7, 2011 and will expire on March 5, 2012. • Staff and the owner have discussed alternatives to demolition of the building, including amending the proposed addition so as not to trigger the definition of demolition and landmarking the building. • The owner submitted a landmark designation application on October 6, 2011, applied for a landmark alteration certificate and attended two Ldre meetings to discuss scaled-back versions of the proposed addition. • At the November 2, 2011 Landmarks Board meeting, the owner, Jane McClannan, requested that the board lift the stay of demolition on the property. She stated that after due consideration, she had withdrawn the landmark designation application (see Attachment A). The board instructed staff to schedule a public hearing to consider lifting the stay at the December 7, 2011 meeting. • Because a good faith effort has been made by the owner to explore alternatives to the demolition per 9-11-23(a), B.R.C., staff is of the opinion that the stay of demolition AlZenda Item #5C Patel should be lifted and that, upon completion of Historic American Building Survey (HABS) photographic documentation, a demolition permit should be issued. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Landmarks Board lift the stay of demolition for the house located at 1814 Spruce St. and adopt the staff memorandum dated December 7, 2011 as its findings. Staff will require a HABS level one photographic documentation prior to the issuance of the demolition permit. BOARD'S DECISION: The purpose of this hearing is for the Landmarks Board to consider lifting the stay of demolition in effect for the building at 1814 Spruce St. until March 5, 2012. Section 9-11- 23 (g) of the B.R.C. allows the board to impose a stay of demolition for a period of up to 180 days, while subsection (h) lists activities that may take place during the stay to seek alternatives to the demolition. If the board considers that sufficient effort has been given to seeking alternatives to the demolition, it may: a) make an affirmative statement that it doesn't intend to landmark the building at this time and it lifts the stay so that a demolition permit may be issued; b) take no action and let the stay of demolition continue, in order to seek further alternatives to the demolition (if individual landmark designation has not been initiated during the 180 days stay period, the manager shall issue a permit) or; c) make an affirmative statement that the board would like to hold an initiation hearing to consider landmarking the property. DESCRIPTION (excerpted from October 5, 2011 memo): The property is located in the Whittier neighborhood, on the south side of Spruce Street between 18", and 1911' streets. The approximately 1,450 sq. ft., Queen Anne-style brick house is located on an approximately 7,000 sq. ft. lot. The Boulder County Assessor records indicate the year of construction was 1902. However, the 1900 Sanborn Fire Insurance Map shows a house in this location in the same configuration as subsequent Sanborn Maps. According to the Assessor records, a side and a rear addition to the house were constructed in 1950. An alley unit/garage and storage shed are located at the rear of the lot and are not proposed to be demolished. Agenda Item #5C Page 2 1 QQQ~~~rr/1MM.r ~ 1 t Uii~ ' 1 s off l o r` t - j r 1814 SPRUCE 7 y s s ' z 11 1 r UH, LLJE~Q i . t 1 s - Location Map, 1814 Spruce St. } 4. , c YL 1 ` e Y 1814 Spruce St. House, September 2011 Agenda Item #5C Page 3 ANALYSIS: Per Section 9-11-23(1) of the S.R.C., the purposes of the review of demolition permit applications are to prevent the loss of buildings that may have historical or architectural significance, and to provide the time necessary to initiate individual landmark designation or to consider alternatives for the building. As stated in the Summary above, staff, the Ldre and the owner have considered alternatives to demolition of the building. Although the Landmarks Board found on October 5, 2011 that the house at 1814 Spruce St. is potentially eligible as an individual landmark and contributes to the character of the neighborhood and is in good condition, the owner has indicated she does not wish to pursue landmarking and would like the stay to be lifted. The only other alternative, besides allowing the stay of demolition to expire, would be for the board to initiate landmarking the building against the owner's desire. This option has been exercised only on rare occasions, and staff believes should be used sparingly. This particular building, which has non-historic side and rear additions and replacement of some original windows, doors and porch materials, does not seem to warrant this approach. Because board-initiated landmarking is not recommended and because alternatives to demolition have been explored, staff recommends lifting the stay of demolition. Agenda Item #5C Page 4 Attachment A From: Jane McClannan Sent: Monday, October 24, 20119:58 AM To: Hewat, James Subject: 1814 Spruce Street Dear Landmark's Board, Thank you for taking the time to meet regarding the potential landmark designation of 1814 Spruce Street. After much thought, however, we have decided to pull our Landmark's Application and Landmark Alteration requests as of today (October 24). We are, also, requesting a lift of the 180 day stay that was imposed earlier this month. I plan on attending the November 2nd public meeting, if necessary, to further formalize this decision. Again, thank you for your input regarding our addition. It is our sincere belief that by meeting with the DRC, a nicer and less obtrusive design was created in the end. Take Care, Jane McClannan Agenda Item #5C Page 5 DATE: December 7, 2011 TO: Landmarks Board FROM: James Hewat, Marie Zuzack SUBJECT: Update Memo Demolition Definition Revisions Update at meeting First Christian Church A concept review for the redevelopment of the property with a proposal to landmark the church is scheduled for review by the Planning Board at its December 1 meeting. The review materials can be accessed on line after November 25 at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/index.12hp?ol2tion=com content&task=view&id=1858 &Itemid=469. CLG Grant An annual CLG grant application was submitted on November 15, requesting $23,800 to cover the consultant cost for preparing a Boulder Historic Preservation Plan. Grant awards will be announced in winter 2012. Valmont Butte Update at meeting Boulder Depot Update at meeting Planning Board Calendar See attached. 1 Community Planning and Sustainability/Planning and Development Services Department Calendar November 2011 Amended November 18, Last Planning Board meeting November r 17 17, , 2011 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC LB, 6 p.m. in CC PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC CANCELED DUE TO ELECTION '1352 College Use Review (Jessica V.) '955 Broadway Site Review (Jessica V.) Environmental Advisory Board (EAB) Retreat 5.9 p.m., Park Central 401 Conference Room 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Downtown CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC CP& S All Staff 2:30-5 iOLIDA' Management 2nd Reading CDOT IGA (Bev J.) Pm Hill Commission (D 'Boulder Junction Lease, Disposition & Land Revltaliz (DMC) 5:30 In Authorization for the Depot Square Owners) Implementation (Randall R.) Group, 'IP Combined Site and Use Review for Depot 10:30-12 Square (Elaine M.) pm, 'IP: Update on the Nuisance Mosquito Control Grace Program (Rella A.) Lutherai 'IP: Call up -Vacation of a 690 square foot portion of an existing utility easement at the Crossroads Commons Shopping Center (2905 Pearl St.) for relocated fire hydrant (Chandler V.) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC University Hill PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC '1st reading Code Changes - Breweries Commercial Area A. Shoemaker Absent (Bev J.) Management Commission 'BVCP Code Changes - (Jean n iwrniurt oar„ in rr G.) Congregate Care code changes (MZ) 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC HOLIDAY CANCELED 27 28 29 30 Oct 2011 Dec 2011 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 1 2 3 'Transportation Maintenance Fee and 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Economic Vitality (Liz H.) 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 30 31 Community Planning and Sustainability/Planning and Development Services Department Calendar December 2011 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri sat 1 2 3 Nov 2011 Jan 2012 PB Meeting, 5 p.m. in CC S M T W T F S S M T W T F S ' BCFH Site and Use Review (Karl G.) 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 'Province (1st Christian 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Church) Concept Plan - (Elaine M.) 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 •1600 Pearl Site Review 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (Elaine M.) - A. Shoemaker Recused 27 28 29 30 29 30 31 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Downtown Energy Future Roundtable, 4:306 p.m. in Muni Lobby Hill Revitalization, BOZA, 5 p.m. in CC Management or 1777 West Conference Room Ownership Group, Commission CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC 10:30-12:30 pm, Grace (DMC) 5:30 in 'Zero Waste Master Plan Study Session Summary Lutheran Church, 1001 rr (Jamie H.) 13th Street Environmental Advisory '2nd reading Code Changes -Breweries (Bev J.) Board (EAB) 6-8 p.m. '1st Reading for an amendment to ordinance 2-3-11 to 1300 Canyon Blvd allow for temporary alternates at PB meetings (Jess V.) LB, 6 p.m. in CC st reading land use code changes: BVCP, Congregate Care (Jean G.) 'IP: Update on SmartRegs Implementation and Rental Licensing Enforcement (Kirk M. & Megan C.) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC DDAB, 4 p.m. in Muni PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC 'BHP Lee Hill and Homeless Review Lobby 'Avery Brewery: 4910 Nautilus Ct. Concept Plan Review (Elaine M.) - Recused A. Shoemaker, B. Holicky and D. Powell `Initiation of a comprehensive rezoning to implement BVCP land use changes (Louise G.) ' NAP changes (Sam A.) 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC University Hill HALF CANCELED Commercial Area DAY Management iOLIDA' Commission rlJNrAMrt Qnm in rr 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 HOLIDAY CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC HALF CANCELED DAY iOLIDA' January 2012 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 HOLIDAY CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC Environmental Advisory PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC '2nd reading land use code changes: Board (EAB) 6-8 p.m. * Boulder Creek Commons BVCP, Congregate Care (Jean G.) 1300 Canyon Blvd Concept Plan (Hogan Pancost) 'IP: Report on the 2010 Census Results - (Karl G.) for the City of Boulder and BEC LB, 6 p.m. in CC Demooraohic Profile (Chris M.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC BDAB, 4 p.m. in Muni BOZA, 5 p.m. in CC 'Retreat Prep Lobbv 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC Update on Boulder Junction '1335 Broadway, Lau'au's Taco Implementation: Key Public Shop Use Review - (Jessica V.) Improvements and Funding (Trish J.) 'Consideration of proposed changes to 'Gunbarrel Center Site Review the NAP connections plan and section (6685 Gunpark &6580 Lookout) drawings for Pearl Parkway and Junction - (Karl G.) Place (Sam A.) 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC 29 30 31 Dec 2011 Feb 2012 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC S M T W T F S S M T W T F S 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 26 27 28 29 February 2012 Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri sat 1 2 3 4 7 Jan 2012 Mar 2012 Environmental Advisory PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC Board (EAB) 6-8 p.m. S M T W T F S S R1 T W T F S 1300 Canyon Blvd 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 LB, 6 p.m. in CC 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 29 30 31 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC BDAB, 4 p.m. in Muni BOZA, 5 p.m. in CC Lobbv 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC PB Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC North Boulder Subcommunity Plan Transportation Plan Amendment (Annie Noble/ Marie 7u7ack) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 CC Meeting, 6 p.m. in CC 26 27 28 29 CC SS, 6 p.m. in CC L