December 4, 2024 — Landmarks Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:16] the December landmarks meeting is called to order welcome to the December 4th 2024 landmarks board meeting it is 6: p.m. before we begin Marcy will review the virtual meeting decor for all right uh good evening the city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive meaningful and inclusive Civic conversations this Vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members staff and boarding commission members as well as democracy for people of all ages identities lived experiences and political perspectives

[1:01] more about this vision and the Project's Community engagement process can be found online through this link the following examples uh are rules of decorum found in the boulder Revised Code and other guidelines that support this Vision these will be upheld during this meeting all remarks and testimonies shall be limited to matters related to City business no participants shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person obscenity racial eth THS and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited and participants May raise their hand to speak during open comment and public comment periods during the hearings individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online and currently only audio testimony is permitted online uh this next slide goes back to you Abby thank thank you Marcy I do want to acknowledge that we

[2:00] have a full Quorum this evening and that a recording of this meeting will be available in the record archives and on YouTube within 28 days of this meeting we'll do a quick roll call and introd introduction of board members starting with Ronnie Ronnie palcio landmarks board member uh Chelsea Castellano landmarks board member I'm Abby Daniels the current chair of the landmarks board John Becker landmarks board member Renee landmarks board member and I'm Kurt nordbeck I'm the liaz on from planning board to the landmarks board thank you we know that there may be people here this evening to participate whether virtually or here in Chambers who may have strong Pro uh emotions about some of the projects we'll be discussing we do want to hear from you but we do find it more productive if you are speaking to persuade us rather than berating us staff or the applicant as with regular

[3:00] landmarks board meetings you may only speak at the appropriate time during the public hearing requests to speak outside of those times will be denied we will request any members here of the public who wish to speak on the public hearings this evening to sign up using the sheet with Aubrey and virtual participants will then follow as normal by raising their virtual hand as board chair I will call for a roll call vote on any motions made this evening so our first agenda item is the approval of the meetings from both the November 6th meeting and I move that we approve those minutes do we have a second I second on a motion by Me seconded by Ronnie those in favor of approving the November six meeting minute meetings Ronnie I Chelsea I I vote I I vote I I thank you so those minute meetings are passed for the November 20th

[4:01] meetings can I move even though I wasn't at the meeting I I'll make the motion okay I'll move the I would like to move that we approve the special meeting November 20th minutes I second thank you on a motion by John seconded by Ronnie Ronnie I Chelsea I John I and Renee I so those meeting minutes have passed as well so now we'll turn to public participation for any items not on the agenda this is the time to speak we have two public hearings so if you're speaking about anything outside of those hearings this would be the time I don't know if um anyone here in Chambers wants to speak or wait till the two public hearings okay let you may go sign up with Aubrey

[5:13] thank you Leonard and if you'll State your full name for the recording then your three minutes will commence yes uh Leonard seagull uh and uh longtime resident of Boulder and hello landmarks board and I just wanted to invite you all to the historic Boulder Holiday House Tour which is coming up this weekend we've got five historic homes four of them are in the um University Place historic district and they'll be decked out um in their holiday finery and it okay I we I can hear you I can hear you all right um assuming you all heard that I'll just move on and say I hope you can make it

[6:00] and let your friends and family know there's a great variety of really beautiful properties with wonderful stories and we have volunteers ready to help you guide you through these properties so um come one come all and um and then the last thing I just want to say is historic Boulder is uh behind you and wants to be a part of the uh solution to the issues facing historic preservation and your board so we look forward to the next year being an important to be working even closer together that's all thank you thank you Leonard and now I'll turn to Aubrey to see if we have any participants who'd like to address US virtually if anyone would like to speak virtually raise your virtual hand now and I don't think we have anyone

[7:00] Abby we're good to move on okay thank you Aubrey we'll officially close public participation for items not on tonight's agenda so moving right along this is a discussion of landmark alteration and demolition applications issued and pending all right so we currently have two stays of demolition pending um the first is the uh garage at 2119 Mariposa Avenue and and at your October 9th um meeting you voted to place a stay of demolition of up to 180 days to look at Alternatives of could this building be preserved or reincorporated into the Redevelopment the house had previously been approved after a stay of demolition um and so on November 13th Abby and I met on site with the owner and walked through um Abby you weren't here at the last um meeting so I if now would be a

[8:00] great opportunity if you wanted to share any observations or takeaways um from that site visit and then I can pick it back up with the timeline and and your options in front of you this evening well here are my thoughts about it the the whole property is currently on the market and this is one of those things where the code changes that city council may be approving and looking at on December 19th um this is one of those where um I think it's wise of the owner to reach out and see if the landmarks board either wanted to initiate or pursue potential landmarking or um she could have a demolition permit in hand while it is on the market and this is one of those things where depending on how the board decides to proceed on this if the board at some point um and I think the next opportunity is the January 8th meeting if if demolition was approved I wish it would be the demolition permit

[9:02] could last longer than the six months because it's a very Charming building I I personally think that there could be a potential buyer who might say this would be perfect they couldn't have anything on that footprint if this was demolished and rebuilt so I could see where the where Vanessa could say it has been approved for demolition but keep it standing perhaps she not incurred the cost to demolish it but as part of the marketing for the property you know I can see where she would like to say it can be demolished you don't you know the the landmarks board has made a decision either way you know because a potential seller may want to know if we are going to proceed with initiating landmarking it it's very Charming it someone who would buy it and maybe can do their own work might find a great use for it if you know especially if it was someone who was in a situation to uh rehabit

[10:03] themselves and we just don't know with it on the market so the only thing I noticed is that that six-month window really does um limit a situation like this where she could have her approval if she wanted it as part of selling it but it wouldn't necessarily need to go down in case someone came along and said hey I want to make it work I have a question on this one the the other prop or the other house on this property did it get Dem it's gone it's gone gone already okay right that was the question I haven't been a and this is sweet and and charming and I I could see a path forward where if someone wanted to rehabit that repurpose it like the carport could probably be um let go it's very clear to me that it's not original to it it was added later so um I don't know if the board wants to entertain asking that something's on the

[11:01] febru or January 8th agenda or just keep the stay in place we can't take any action tonight except a scheduling decision HT I just wanted to ask a question and I probably misunderstood but I thought that you said something about if it were to be demolished nothing could be built on the that current footprint it's it's nonconforming where it's located on the property ah okay with regard to setb okay so I could see you know every once a while you get that potential buyer like hey you know I I do want to keep it maybe remove the carport and do something with it maybe the uh only thing I'd add that was um from the site visit that uh Vanessa had pointed out is that the garage is all the way back on the lot and it's a and Alleyway but the garage G door faces Mariposa and so the drive all

[12:03] the way along the east side of the property uh one through building permit they would encourage access vehicular access from the alleyway rather than the front um and if there was a garage door on the back it wouldn't meet backing distance so I think there's a lot of potential for this building it's you know built really well it's generally um in good condition it's a shell right now that you need to add um you know heating cooling and electricity um it has potential but I think as a garage there might be challenges for a potential buyer but this is one I could see it used more like a studio perhaps an Adu it it could be added on to maybe but I mean you know there is definitely potential it's definitely Charming um but I don't know if the board just wants it the state a remain in place or

[13:01] proactively schedule something for the January 8th meeting I don't know how full that agenda is if that's a factor in your decision there are three cases already for the January one um four is our Max uh and um so we certainly could add it but know that you know with the holidays um we're trying to get ahead of that packet and um like you said like there isn't the same urg as some of the other cases I know that she wants an answer she she's ready for the process to you know come to uh an answer um but as soon as the board makes a decision let's say you approve the demolition the clock starts kicking clicking for that six months where I think what she's looking for is options as the properties on the market so where other applicants come each meeting and say please end this stay early um that hasn't been the impression I've I've gotten but I know you know people are

[14:01] don't want this process to be longer than it needs to be right and I do know we'd have an opportunity on January 8th to schedule something for the February 5th meeting just right before it runs out and we will know by January 8th if a demolition permit would be longer or would that that still be working its way through the city's process so my understanding and Chris Reynolds from the city attorney's office is on online tonight but my understanding is that any application submitted after December 19th would be under the code amendments so those approvals would be good for one year and anything submitted before that is good for 180 days so if I'm understanding Chris correctly this approval if it is approved is good for six months um and then we do oh go ahead Chris all I was gonna say Marcy was that you were that was accurate and I agree with with what you just said oh thank

[15:00] you um and then we do have uh you know when these demos come in after the landmarks board has approved it we do consider that with a new application and have approved them at the staff level after something had been decided by the landmarks board so but the six month clock starts ticking when the appli with uh when if the board either let the stay expire or voted to issue it okay so they would get the year they would get six months because the application before December 19 not based on our when we make our decision right so I don't know if any board members want to well I guess I'm sorry I don't know if I understand shut your off oh no no no you didn't you're um the red is confusing

[16:01] is it's hot it's a hot mic yeah so but would we we wouldn't have the power then at the at any meeting to make this the permit last a year yeah so there's there's no option to do that right so if we but if we took any kind of action wouldn't that reset the clock on when the action expired it I'm just CU because since we have we have voted to approve the onee um you know that the demo application lasts for one year wouldn't subsequent action like if we extended the stay tonight after the fact that we had voted the one year wouldn't that Extended Stay on expiration yield a oneyear permit time afterward no there jop jump and Chris if you like but it's

[17:01] Theory yeah everything submitted before the 19th which is when Council will consider the code amendments so it's the initial yeah it's that initial CH okay yes yeah so I'm not hearing anyone wanting to schedule something for the January 8th meeting but we will have an opportunity as always to discuss this on January 8th and if you get a chance to at least go by there MH please in fact I believe Vanessa wasn't concerned if anyone walked back there on the property but maybe we could clarify that with her just to see it before January 8th and then Marcy the update for the next stay of demolition yes so um the stay was placed just uh two weeks ago and so um the update tonight will be brief in that we are looking to schedule uh state of demolition meeting um on

[18:01] site with the applicants and um let's do that right now so they had uh proposed next Thursday the uh December 12th um but I uh I think that the Friday December 13th might work better for board members um so uh Chelsea and John were the dedicated um board representatives for this one every everyone is welcome it'll be publicly noticed but uh if we could nail down a date I think the stars are aligning around the afternoon of Friday December 13 I see one thumbs I'm available then no matter what time it is okay make that great I can okay and it's not going to be a 4-Hour meeting so would we like to narrow it down to it's one hour it's usually 1 hour um is there any time within that window that you all would

[19:00] like or I can go back to the applicant with that um window they said they uh are pretty sure they could make that window work so if anybody has a preference to start with happy to lead with that I mean I would propose one o'clock great or right after one o'clock wonderful okay I I could do that and then it looks like I'm I'm good one and then Marcy I know the members of the public are welcome to attend they just can't provide any feedback but historic Boulder would be welcome to attend once that date and time's confirmed with st Aiden right yes yep and that will be publicly noticed on our website once that um date and time is confirmed but 00 on Friday the 13th and uh I will send a confirmation or Aubrey will probably send a confirmation once we hear back from the owners and applicants great

[20:01] thank you wonderful and now it's time to move on to our first public hearing this evening item 5A is a public hearing and consideration of an application to designate the property 575 uclid Avenue as an individual Landmark pursuant to section 915 of the boulder RIS code 1981 and under the procedure J prescribed by chapter 1-3 of the Quasi judicial hearings of the boulder Revised Code and Marcy will be doing this staff presentation all right thank you uh my name is Marcy Gering principal planner with uh planning and development services and I affirm to tell the truth uh the quasa judicial hearing process starts uh with uh uh all speaking to the item are sworn in we actually do that at the time that you speak um I'll pause here here for board members to note any

[21:00] ex parte contacts for 575 uid any conversations with community members uh site visits or anything else you read or saw about this property that's not in the memo great we'll move on to our staff presentation followed by board questions and then the applicants presentation followed by board questions and then the uh public hearing is opened for public comment and the board may ask questions the applicant then has a chance to respond to anything that was said and after that the public hearing portion is closed and the board discusses a motion requires an affirmative vote of at least three members to pass and motions must State findings conclusions and a recommendation and finally a record of the hearing is available in Central Records the criteria for this individual Landmark designation is found in 9115 C of the boulder Revis code and that's that the landmarks board shall determine

[22:00] whether the designation conforms with the purposes and standards in sections 9111 of the legislation legislative intent in 9112 city council May designate landmarks in historic districts the options in front of you this evening are to either recommend designation to City Council in which case we would schedule a public hearing with city council within a 100 days or you can uh recommend denial of the designation and that is subject to a 45-day callup period and the owners May file a notice of appeal within 21 days of of your decision this application process um started um in a way in 2014 when the previous owner accepted the uh recognition of the building as a structure of Merit in 2014 that was with a group of other remarkable mid-century uh buildings and the structure Merit

[23:01] program is um pretty uh underutilized but it's like a gold star for a building it's it's a way to recognize uh uh significant places but it doesn't come with any regulation The Landmark designation application was submitted in September of this year and uh you'll recognize this property um because uh you've seen it both for changes to the house at the ldrc and then uh review of the construction of a garage at the landmarks board meeting in November so um that brings us to uh today for the landmarks board designation hearing and um I think we've covered those two lac's that were approved in September and November let's see uh the property at 575 uid is located between Gilbert and 6th Street and south of Geneva Avenue it is accessed from uket Avenue but the

[24:00] house predominantly faces East and West in addition to the house there is an existing accessory building at the rear of the site and the property is located within the proposed flat irons Park historic district which is a proposed non-contiguous um District between Pennsylvania Avenue and Baseline and from the Western city limits to 8th Street and that District was proposed as part of the 2000 historic context and Survey of modern architecture in Boulder and and it uh proposes the inclusion of 18 individually significant mid-century modern houses including this one at 575 uid the house was designed by Cecil sarakin in collaboration with tishan Papa christu who also designed the jesser house next door at 595 uid it sits on a relatively large lot framed by a well-maintained garden filled with plants the walls are constructed of stacked concrete block that are painted complimented by the wood and glass window walls the scalloped rofes some

[25:01] with caled Eaves and the sculptural metal chimney contribute to the distinctive design the key usonian characteristics include the horizontal orientation Cubist volumes and the flat roofs with Cal Eaves and the relationship between solid and void that is created by the window pattern it is a blend of Simplicity and spaciousness featuring an extensive use of glass with floor toeing windows and skylights that open the Living Spaces to the outdoors the character defining features include a cluster of intersecting curval linear walls that extend into the landscape interconnected one and Story one and two story volumes numerous outdoor spaces and strips of ribbon and clear story Windows overlooking the lawn a freestanding accessory building was designed by Boulder architect l gil Ables in the spirit of the original House it has an L-shaped footprint and is one story with a basement below the building is constructed of concrete

[26:01] block with a series of Windows on the North and South elevations and entrances on the south and east elevations the accessory building was commissioned by George and Betty Woodman in 1968 to facilitate Betty's work as an artist it features High ceilings exposed wooden beams and expansive windows that allow for natural light the buildings retain a high degree of historic Integrity changes are limited to the construction of the accessory building in 1968 and it's considered a contributing feature of the property in 2024 the ldrc approved the replacement of the windows and doors in construction of a of a rear Edition and the board the full board approved the construction of a detached 715 s foot garage the house is in its original location and much of the setting remains with mature Landscaping the design including its form plan space structure and style of the original structure is

[27:00] intact many of the original materials remain including the sculptural metal chimney stacked concrete blockwork and wooden beams the skilled workmanship is apparent apparent through the curval linear roof form and caner levered Eaves and the historic character of the building conveys the feeling in association with the building's history and its uh notable residents uh and the historic character of the building conveys um its feeling and Association as you can see in these two photos uh one taken in the 1960s and one from the same angle uh in 20124 moving now to the uh significance criteria we start with the historic significance the house meets uh the historic significance criteria and in the uh survey that was completed in 2000 it found that the house would be eligible for designation both as an individual local landmark and for inclusion on the state Register of historic places uh it is associated with

[28:02] three couples all known for their outstanding contributions to the international art scene the house was designed by Cecil sarakin in collaboration with architect toan Papa christu Canadian by birth Cecil moved to Chicago at the age of 16 to attend college and study art she was awarded a marshall field scholarship to study at The Institute of Design in Chicago and among her teach teachers at The Institute were architect ledwig me vandero and artist llo maholi n Nagi and Gori uh keps she later earned a master of Fine Arts at the American University in Washington DC and worked as a senior designer for the Marshall field and Company and did freelance design for other clients in Chicago Philip sarakin received his bachelor's degree from Wayne State University in 1945 and his master's degree and doctorate in political science in constitutional law from the University of Chicago he was an

[29:02] instructor and an assistant professor of political science at uh Welsley College between 1950 and 1957 and the couple moved to Boulder in 1957 Philip worked at the Western Interstate commission for higher education and developed the mental health education program he became director in 1976 Cecil was a leader in the development of the Arts in Colorado and she is credited with researching and and writing the legislation that helped fund the original art in all public buildings she also helped to coordinate the first Colorado women in the arts program in 1979 George and Betty Woodman purchased the property in 1967 Betty trained at the school for American Craftsman at Alfred University in New York she played a key role in establishing Boulder's Pottery lab in 1956 one of the first Recreation Pottery programs in the United States and taught

[30:01] Ceramics classes for the city of Boulder starting in 1974 after purchasing the house the Woodman's added a gas line for kils in early 1967 and commissioned the artists uh Studio accessory building in 1968 the studio became a gathering space for local artists and students in Boulder who came to learn and collaborate with Betty George was also an artist choosing to study philosophy at Harvard University George's paintings reside at the gugenheim Denver and Brooklyn Museum collections three of his photographs are included in the photographs collection in the Museum of Modern Art and Betty Betty's ceramic sculptures sit in the Whitney Metropolitan and Brooklyn museums as well as the modern art Yale Denver and Boston museums and the Victorian and Albert Museum in London the Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York showed a retrospective of Betty's work in 2006 the first time living women in a working ceramicist had been so

[31:03] honored married cou Everett Brown and Louis padon purchased the house in May of 1997 from the Woodman family who had relocated to New York Everett Brown attended uh the shinard Art Institute in Los Angeles and worked for um Bill Melendez Productions as a director production design animator and art designer he is credited with many animated works including A Charlie Brown Thanksgiving from 1973 Here Comes Garfield in 1982 Kathy this is America Charlie Brown Frosty Returns and many others Everett retired from directing in 1997 and taught 2D animation at the Art Institute of Colorado until he retired in May of 2016 Louise padon also worked at Bill Melendez Productions and is credited on animated Works including life is a circus uh Charlie Brown from 1980 peanuts 50 years in still counting which

[32:02] was a video game in 2008 the couple is well known in Boulder for their work with the boulder Arts League a local nonprofit dedicated to traditional and Contemporary Arts and Crafts of the book Everett passed away in June of 2023 and Louise sold the house to the current owner in 2024 moving on to the architectural significance uh completed in 1959 the house is one of Boulder's most important and earliest examples of contemporary architecture it embodies key eonian characteristics including the horizontal orientation Cubist volumes and flat roofs with canaled Eaves and the relationship between solid and void that is created by the window pattern the house is oneof a kind with a unique and unconventional form that embody embodies the spirit of the post-war era of expressive and Innovative architectural design Tian Papa designed the house in collaboration with Cecil sarakin

[33:01] incorporating open spaces and a seamless connection with the landscape tishan Papa christu was born in Athens Greece in 1928 and educated at Princeton he worked for James Hunter collaborated collaborated with Charles harling and later partnered with uh Daniel hav cost in Denver Papa christu designed a distinctive midcentury homes using Innovative cost-effective materials like concrete cinder block Wood in glass he was inspired by Frank lyd Wright leuer in Greek island architecture and his designs reflect Boulder's openness to Avent guard architecture in the 1950s and 1960s lgil Ables later designed the artist studio which uh complemented Papa Christ's design Ables was born uh in August 1927 in southernland Ohio nope Iowa he graduated with distinction from the University of min inota and earned a master's degree in architecture in 1952

[34:02] from the Harvard Graduate School of Design under the direction of Walter gropius abeles moved to Colorado in 1958 first working for the prominent Denver firm of munchow Associates uh Architects and he opened his own practice lgil Ables and Associates in 1963 and lectured at the University of Colorado School of Architecture both Architects were influential in shaping Boulder's architectural identity during the mid uh 20th century and the third part of the significance criteria look at looks at the potential environmental significance and the design of the house complements the Topography of the site uh as well as that of the neighboring building the jesser house which was designed by Papa Christo at the same time the two buildings share a distinctive character they use a common modernist style use of natural materials such as wood and Concrete blocks curvit walls and Landscaping designed to

[35:01] complement the buildings uh with that staff recommends that the landmarks board uh recommend to city council that it designate the property at 575 uclid Avenue as a local Historic Landmark to be known as the sarakin Woodman house finding that it meets the standards for individual Landmark designation and adopt the staff memorandum as findings of the board with that I'm happy to answer any questions you may have well I thought the memo was really well written and it was wonderful to learn about the property and the people um so I just compliment you guys for like a very thorough description of this property thank you and I um failed to uh give full credit and kudos to our intern Marin uh who took on this project as uh her first memo that she really led the

[36:00] research and writing on and then for Claire for partnering to really bring it across the finish line so it was a group effort but a ton of credit goes to Marin and um the remarkable amount of research for the a number of significant uh people really screw I I had a question about the roof form um and I don't know if we know this but do we know what the construction of the that wavy roof is that might be a question best for the owner who I believe is on the call this evening I know that the um Roofing is a membrane like a flexible membrane and I believe there's a combination of Steel and wood but um I would save that for an accurate answer from the owner we'll do any other

[37:02] questions no great that concludes my staff presentation uh we'll then turn it over to um the applicant if they would like to present um I also understand they might be here to just available for questions that you might have thank you Marcy so Aubrey I'm going to look to you to bring the applicants they are slowly coming in great all right you should be able to unmute and test your camera for us and as a reminder to both um Sher and

[38:03] Charlie we will need to swear you in um if you speak and to answer questions as well and Sher you know this very well you will have 10 minutes however you choose to do it are you unmuted I'm unmuted oh perfect yes you are and Charlie can I don't know if you can hear us can you I see that you're on can you unmute and then start your video if you want there we go there you go um so Sherry please swear to tell the board the full truth and Charlie as well I swear to tell the the whole truth as I know it me too thank you and then um your 10 minutes

[39:00] will begin I really don't have a presentation tonight I felt that um Marcy and Marin and um Claire did an excellent job with the memo and I don't have anything to add um I can answer Ronnie's question about the roof and it was um I know if you wanted to share my screen I have the original blueprints the the roof was made of um of wood forms to make the scallop and I'd have to find that detail here in on my computer but I do have it so I don't know I'm I'm thrilled to be working on such an important building

[40:01] of Boulders history and I hope I can do it justice if you don't have any comments right now I'll ask my colleagues on the board if they have any questions for either of you I don't see or hear any and I I think part of that's a a tribute to the great oh I was I was to say I don't have any questions but Sher thanks for um letting us know what the construction is that it it's almost like an illusion that it might be concrete um which is why I was wondering although I read you know there was a membrane I thought maybe membrane on top of um some sort of concrete material but um that is just an interesting thing to think on and to understand and it clearly is easier to hold up wood than concrete but um and then I also just wanted to say um you

[41:01] know I when I read through this I also kind of reflected a little bit on my career and like how I'm going to be remembered um but I did want to tell you that I think that you are doing an excellent job on the accessory structure um and am grateful that the team in general has taken this approach to preservation as well as sensitive design additions to the to um you know something that is the special so uh I just want to share that with you um so thank you thank you any other questions at this point Kurt please I have one other question for staff um and I'm sorry that I didn't ask it earlier um The Landmark boundary that's proposed doesn't incorporate the entire outer wall which looks to me like it's because it's

[42:01] outside the property boundary and so I guess in the city RightWay is there any precedent for a landmark boundary that would go into City RightWay you know that is a great question and you never miss anything Kurt um you know that isn't something that the owners and Sherry and I have um talked about Claire's going to change the uh slide so you all can see it um yes I've noticed it but haven't addressed it but you're right that the contributing landscape walls appear to extend beyond the property line and that's something that we would certainly advocate for preserving um and I would have to you know the the tea house boundary the dambe tea house boundary which was uh designated in 2020 um that Landmark boundary crosses property lines and

[43:02] includes a portion of the rideway of course there's no building like the tea house but um we have gotten creative in terms of um Landmark boundaries so maybe following this um hearing if the board recommends designation um Sherry and Charlie and I can regroup and uh kind of open that conversation about recommending a boundary to account Council great thank you Kurt really doesn't miss anything does he thank you um and Sherry as you well know we'll come back to you for an additional three minutes after we hear from members of the public if you have anything else to add after that okay cool so now we'll turn to public participation for this agenda item you will need to be sworn in um if you're here in person or join joining us virtually and uh Aubrey do you have any

[44:01] signups from members of the public here okay we do have one sign up for Leonard seagull for this matter so let's start there yeah and Leonard if you'll yes thank you uh I'm Leonard seagull oh do I need to turn this on is it's on sorry my hand is still up um can you is it on now okay good um and I swear to tell the whole truth as I know it um this is uh I can't be objective at all about this because I worked for tishan Papa Christo in New York City and um I remember when he came to visit uh once or twice we got in my car and I drove around town and he wanted to see this one he wanted to see both of them the the um the two of them together and he felt a personal connection to this these two houses it was a unique um

[45:03] opportunity for him to design to at the same time and I think we also should probably give credit to Charles hartling because hartling worked also on the jesser house and they were working together at that point in time in history so I think there's some of Charles harling in this house as well um I definitely see lioran uh aspects to the scalped roof form and I'm not at all surprised that it's maybe a plywood design um and I had uh the opportunity to meet with Charlie and Sherry at the house and we walked around and I was just thrilled um that somebody like Charlie with his background in design and Development and Construction was interested in Saving this building and building off of it um and respecting it and so I think it it's a great win for preservation to get this

[46:00] as a designated landmark and also to get the building uh extended with 21st century use that Charlie is imagining with Sherry to execute on the site and um I think um you know if there's a little bit of tishan Papa Christo in me he would be thrilled tonight that you all are considering designating this building and um that's all I have to say thank you very much thank you and now Aubrey um if you will facilitate any members of the public who are joining virtually all right if anyone would like to speak virtually please raise your hand now we do have one hand raised already so let's start there uh ly seagull I will give you permission to speak momentarily and Lynn before your three minutes begin

[47:00] if you'll State your full name for the record and that you swear to tell us the truth as you know it Lyn seagull and I sore to tell the truth the best as I know it um I liked hearing about the history all the sequential people of artistic uh Renown artistic ability living in the place that's uh it's just an interesting place and of of course it should be designated Landmark um that's all really thanks thank you Lynn all right and let's give it a few more seconds if anyone else would like to speak just raise your hand and I'll give you permission to speak not seeing anyone I think think we're good to move on Abby thank you so much Aubrey so we'll officially close

[48:00] public participation for this agenda item and Sherry or Charlie I don't know if you have anything to add before we go into our deliberations thank okay so now we will turn to our board and I don't know if anyone would like to kick it off this evening I mean I'm happy to okay so this really excites me because my art history degree finally came into play again this evening so I have not seen a property or known of a property in Boulder that's not only a masterpiece but celebrate so many artists who have owned this home in the past and I think that you know both in the staff memo and again kudos to Marian for that but also just the artists names and and things that readed I mean it just oozed who's who a both architecture and who's who in the art world and I've actually seen one

[49:01] of George Woodman's thing at the Brooklyn Museum of Art and I've also I mean it just so for me was so exciting to see that it not just celebrates one of Papa Christo's Masterworks and this will be our second Landmark I believe the King Street the Samson Woodhouse is also by tishan Papa Christo to have Lyn's personal experience with him I mean it's like the best of Boulder you know the creativity the The Architects that that flocked her after World War II had created some of the most magical mid-century architecture I've seen anywhere in this world um but I I so I'm really excited to support this I do want to say I think it's in very good hands with Sherry Bells because I saw what she did with the lebro house at 8196 street that was like as lynnwell know was so close to being demolished and carted off to the Landfield and then she saved a a Hobie Wagner Masterpiece there so I know

[50:00] you're the perfect person for this project so I'm just thrilled that we get to forward this that I vote to forward this to city council um it's interesting that this is termed deliberation because this is one of those cases where there's virtually nothing to deliberate it's it's everything that's been said it's it's a showpiece P um the the building without knowing its history kind of speaks for itself as a kind of remarkable and unique piece of architecture it also speaks to a period in Colorado not just Boulder but generally in the Front Range of very experimental architecture um it's interesting how many of them came through the same firms and then spread out as it were um and it's a period of architecture that

[51:01] you could even argue has been somewhat lost at least the the Lively experimentalism in more recent times um so it's just it's a no-brainer this one has to be designated I love the fact that it was brought to us and that it is a totally voluntary process it's validation of the program and of the reason that we want to celebrate our history by designating it so I support it Chelsea I support the recommendation yep similarly I I share the sentiments of my colleagues and I support the designation as well n i support the designation you guys

[52:00] have said it so I mean the staff recommendation is great the it is it super interesting about all the I love listening to these things and hearing about who lived there and who designed it and all these things it's just a really great thing about the history of Boulder so whoos to you guys and Kurt yeah I have nothing to add I think this is very appropriate as a uh landmark in for the city and it's a fantastic house and I look forward to seeing it remain such a way and I just wanted to add one thing I I do appreciate um the observation about the landmark boundary and would like to somehow propose that we incorporate um language that lets the boundary potentially Encompass the walls um as noted so I guess Marcy is there something we need to do to um facilitate that you

[53:03] know Chris if you're on the line I could use your help there because the standard Lo Mo sorry the standard motion language doesn't reference the uh it references the name but not the specific boundary that's usually something we work out before the ordinance and so I'm comfortable with hearing the feedback and then working um um along with uh the owners towards the city council um memo but if there's something more formal Chris uh could you chime in yeah I think the standard process is what I would recommend here in terms of once if the board decides to uh recommend landmarking here that um in crafting the ordinance the specific boundaries can be um laid out and Incorporated and we've got that feedback here and uh in the the drafting of the

[54:00] ordinance can be taken into account so I don't I don't think that we need to do anything different than our what's contained here in the motion thank you does that answer your question would someone like to make a motion I will go um where is the motion language um I move the landmarks board recommends to the city council that it designate the property at 575 uclid Avenue as a local Historic Landmark to be known as the saratan Woodman house finding that it meets the standards for individual Landmark designation in sections 9-1-1 and 9-1-2 brc1 1981 and a op the staff memorandum dated December 4th

[55:00] 2024 as the findings of the board is there a second I'll second thank you on a motion by John seconded by Ronnie we'll do a a vote Ronnie I Chelsea I I vote I I vote I I and the motion carries unanimously not a surprise I think to any of us and Marcy will very briefly go over the next step all right thank you um so let's see we didn't make a next up slide so what will happen is that um we will work towards the city council uh first reading and second reading and um we are Expediting the review process um so that uh the folks can uh apply for building permit as soon as possible and apply the modifications for designated proper properties so uh this is on a lightning fast track for a landmark designation

[56:02] where first reading uh is scheduled for December 19th and then the second reading uh which will be a public hearing is scheduled for January 9th um so well within the 100 days and so if city council approves the designation the building uh is designated and the city will provide a bronze plaque and now that the landmarks board has uh voted unanimously to approve designation I just want to say um Charlie to the owner this was one of the most meaningful projects to work on and thank you for um inviting us out to view um such a remarkable piece and it is it is in such good hands um and it's hard to believe but true that um as soon as this property went on the market earlier this year we did receive an email from a realtor asking about the demolition saying the value is only in the land so it um is amazing it means a whole lot to

[57:02] be here um in December 2024 celebrating this incredible landmark and really it is in incredible hands with this next um Steward so thank you so much thank you thanks we'll now move on to our next agenda item item five B this is a public Hearing in consideration of an application to demolish a building constructed 1935 at 8441 19th Street a non- landmarked property older than 50 years old pursuant to section 9123 of the boulder Revised Code 1981 and under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3 of the Quasi judicial hearings Boulder Revised Code and Claire will be doing this staff presentation thank you

[58:02] Abby all right okay so uh this is also a quasa Judicial hearing so um I'll swear in I'm CLA Brandt historic preservation planner and I affirm that I will tell the truth and now I will pause for a couple of seconds and ask um or see if any board members have any expart contacts only need to respond if you do okay seeing none um awkward uh so here is a an overview of the process we'll go through today um I'm going to give the staff presentation after that the board may ask questions um and the applicant will have um up to 10 minutes to present to the board and the board um may ask questions of them we'll then open the public hearing after all members of the public have made comments the applicant May respond to

[59:00] anything that was said and then the board will deliberate a motion um requires an affirmative vote of at least three members to pass and we State findings conclusions and a recommendation um and a record of this hearing will be available in a couple of days as a video recording and the official record will be added to the records archive within 28 days the criteria for review is outlined in the boulder Revis code under 911234 if it has historic or architectural significance the relationship of the

[60:00] building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area and the reasonable condition of the building which includes the projected cost of restoration or repair although not deterioration caused by unreasonable neglect and the options for the board tonight are to approve the demolition request or place a stay of demolition to allow time to consider alternatives a stay would not exceed 180 days from the day the review fee was paid so it would expire on um April 22nd of next year so this is the application process so far uh the department accepted the application to demolish the non-designated building on October 3rd uh due to the age of the building the initial review was held by the landmarks design Review Committee and they referred the application to the landmarks board finding there was probable cause to believe the building

[61:01] may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark and this is the building here 8441 19th streets located mid block between Aurora Avenue and Cascade Avenue on the east side of 19th Street um the uh the lot is bordered on the east by an alley which was confusingly historically Broadway Street um it's not within a historic district or an identified potential historic district the building itself is located at the rear of the property with a deep front setback um the lot contains a number of mature trees and vegetation uh it's a one-story vernacular building with an asymmetrical youth shaped plan both of the front Gables include simplified half timbering and stucco um the facade is clad in unusual asymmetrical and randomly applied stone and brick

[62:04] tile this is the south side of the building um and the southeast corner you can see the continuation of that randomly applied um Stone and Tile um the windows themselves are under the shallow Eaves this is the rear portion of the building it's an attached garage which was original uh with a Gable roof and shingle in the and the Gable end um the uh the rear of the house includes a combination of the stone brick tile cladding and uh decorative painted wood shingle so according to County records the house was constructed in 1935 however our research showed that the house was um constructed by the owner starting in 1931 and was occupied by 1932 the building is in the original location and the um original design of

[63:00] the building does not appear to have been modified since at least 1935 when this earlier image was made uh the building retains some of its historic materials not toally that um stone and brick tile cladding and the half timbering and stucco in the Gable ends however the uh Windows um some doors and the wood shingle roof have all been replaced the building demonstrates vernacular workmanship typical of the original construction um and the building's ability to convey a feeling of its time has has um not been diminished um has somewhat diminished by the change in context with the surrounding neighborhood which has developed since the 1950s the setting of the house on the property uh has not been diminished with walkways lawn and decorative plantings near the house um and the area remains residential so in general the building retains some

[64:01] ability to convey its association with its early residence and architecture however staff found that um while the building uh dates from the period of Great Depression um we didn't consider the property to possess a high degree of historic significance the property was not a site of a historic event that had an effect upon Society uh nor does the building show character interest or value as part of the development of the community nor does it exemplify the cultural political economic or social Heritage of the community uh mattye Huston purchased the land and her daughter Lois constructed the house with her husband Arthur balm um mayard K Skinner subsequently purchased the house in uh 1959 and the family rented out the property for many years none of the past residents appear to be locally or nationally

[65:03] significant the building does represent an unusual vernacular residential period um of construction during the Great Depression uh this was a period of severe economic hardship um and the construction of any building during this period is interesting and this building uses materials in a unique way that provides um some aesthetic interest but is not a significant example of an architectural style of the past also the building uh does not have environmental significance it doesn't represent uh unique natural or man-made environment and the property is not located within the boundaries of a potential historic district um it's one of the earliest um non-agricultural houses constructed in this area which was relatively undeveloped in um in the 1950s when this image was made however the area

[66:01] predominantly reflects the residential building boom that occurred after the 1950s and 60s so the applicant provided information about the condition of the building and the projected cost of repair which was included in the packet and um the applicant is here and can answer any questions you may have so staff's findings are that while the house is an example of a unique vernacular Residential Building constructed during the Great Depression uh the property's architectural significance is minimal it does not meet the significance criteria for individual Landmark designation and is not associated with persons or events significant to local state or National History nor does it have environmental significance the character of the neighborhood has been diminished over time and the loss of this building would not constitute a significant impact on Boulder's historic resources and it has

[67:01] been demonstrated to be economically challenging to rehabilitate the building therefore staff's recommendation um is that a stay of demolition for the property at 8441 19th Street is not appropriate based on the criteria and staff's recommendation um is to approve the application to demolish the building so that's the end of the staff presentation um a quick reminder of the next steps in the process the applicant has up to 10 minutes to present to the board followed by public participation and an opportunity for the applicant to respond to anything that's said and then board deliberation and the question today for the board is if the building has historic significance if yes the board will place a stay of demolition on the application to provide time to consider alter atives if no the board will approve the demolition

[68:00] request so any questions for staff okay I don't see or hear any Aubrey I'm hoping the applicant is here as I promised they would be okay good yes it looks like we have Elizabeth and Ken out there and I've sent them the promotion request oh and trip is there as well great you should all have the ability to test your mic and your video momentarily I think I'm good perfect you sound good you look good well that's debatable but thank you Elizabeth I don't know if you're the only one Speaking tonight but I will

[69:01] need to swear everyone who might be speaking to this in so um if you're going to kick off the 10 minutes just raise your right hand and say you promise to tell the board the full truth and give your name for our recording please full name okay this is Elizabeth Smith with FAS architecture and I promise to tell the whole truth as I understand it and know it thank you um I'm basically just here kind of in the same capacity to answer some specific questions um the information that we provided to Claire and um The Landmark review board um we got did a little bit of a deep dive we had some um cost analysis provided in terms of what it might take to actually get in there and try to restore some or all of this property versus new as most of you can imagine there is a significant difference between the two

[70:00] just with the state of um where this building is the one thing you can't see and I'm sure staff realized it when they went and visited the site was the interior of the space has about three or four different floor levels um some of it is rotting at the bottom it actually sits over the setback the rear setback um against the alley so it's a very difficult site to try to reuse any portion of it if we were going to try to save even a part of it we would need to be adding on to the west of it which would basically block anything for on some level um in terms of what we're trying to save so that was something that we had looked at to see if there's a possibility with that but we just couldn't see how we could save part of it and not end up hiding it with what we would need to be adding on to it um if there's any questions I'm but I didn't have much more of a presentation thank you does anyone have

[71:00] any questions for Elizabeth okay I I don't believe we do and certainly not at this point but there will be an opportunity um we'll now turn to members of the public who wish to speak to this no pressure that I'm looking at Leonard no so Aubrey do we don't have anyone in person so let's go to Virtual we have one hand up virtually and if anyone else would like to speak just raise your hand and we'll get to you next so Lyn seagull you're up first ly seagull s to tell the truth as I know it yeah this um this house looks pretty nice to me but I don't think there should be any demolitions in Boulder without a visit by the landmarks board and I'd like to see this in in

[72:01] um live and then I'd make a decision on it um that's my two bye thank you Lynn and Aubrey I'll give you another moment or two to see if anyone else would like to speak to this all right not seeing any other hands I think we're okay to move on thank you then we will officially close public comment for agenda item 5B and Elizabeth this is another opportunity if there's anything you want to add or anything you want to say before the board begins deliberations uh I think I'm good I think one thing that we found out we had a structural engineer go out and analyze the structure for us and one thing that was interesting is that even though there's that kind of unique exterior Stone and Tile work on it it is actually nonstructural just applied to

[73:01] the exterior and so that was interesting just personally to find that out because it looks structural until you start to dive a little bit into it so okay thank you for that information and Marcy I think it was was it or Claire the Lopez architectural firm who has a lot of experience in historic properties um I know I mean my experience they they are very well versed in properties of this age and older and um yeah it was performed yeah it was performed by Lopez small and Smith and Ian Smith one of the partners actually did the analysis okay thank you so we'll turn it back to the board for discussion I don't know if there's anyone who would like to kick it off sure I I can so I was on the DRC when this came through and I think as Elizabeth pointed some of the uniqueness of the building really um relates to the

[74:02] exterior material and clearly um it is of an err of construction worthy of our review and it has other aspects that um look like they historic in nature um but I do agree with staff's uh assessment in that while this building um I think rightfully went through a process to come to the board and to have a review you um that looked at other aspects of um designation criteria that this one doesn't rise to the Merit of designation who would like to follow Ronnie um I can follow um it's we're we're Limited in review of a demolition to the issue of historic significance Andor worthiness for designation um so I'm going to make my standard statement I think demolition needs to be more comprehensively looked

[75:01] at when it is reviewed that being said um I have great respect for and confidence in staff's review of these issues and their body of knowledge and their recommendations I generally and this time support so I will be voting to Let It Go thank you John Chelsea or Renee Chelsea sure I'll make it short I agree with staff's recommendation um I think it was a thorough analysis and it sounds like the applicant also did a lot of um research and um their due diligence to identify the uh conditions of the building and what it would take to um to save it so I think we are at a point where we can uh safely make a determination that it can be let go for for now it's served

[76:02] its purpose for a long time thank you Renee um I am in I will agree with staff's recommendation um I do uh I do think that they did their due diligence they went out they saw the site um I I you know uh along with some of the public comment um you know demolition in general is hard and I think that you know we're quick to demo things um so I I do I my inclination is always let's not demo um but I do think staff went out there and I think the applicant has done enough due diligence to know that you know we we to to move to the next stage to ask not to be demoed is it's just not in significance for the historic so um I will be approving with staff's recommendation thank you and um this is

[77:01] one of those nights where our two public hearings we have the one that's that's joyful and celebrates preserving you know a wonderful piece of of mid-century architecture here in Boulder and then we have what I find the hardest thing to do and that is to really weigh and assess a demolition of something that um will be lost forever and it's kind of funny to have both Polar Opposites tonight but that's that's what we signed up for and that's what we're here to do I think that um and people who know me well know I look for every way and every reason to try to save a building or at least place a stay and really see if there's any creative alternatives to demolition I think that the most fascinating thing to me is it was one of the few buildings built during the Depression I also think that the stoneware ston work that I found so charming and so character defining Elizabeth and staff you've

[78:00] explained why it really isn't um the stonework I thought it might be because I could look at this and say this is such a rare example of this type of architecture maybe we need to place a stay and and and I think if staff had recommended that I probably would have fairly happily supported a stay of demolition however as as you know and I know that the board is as we work with City staff about the U the update for the preservation plan I also recognize that that we have to look at things differently and I think that as much as I lament losing this building forever I don't see a path forward to designation especially designation over an owner's objection so it's been very rare for me to ever support a demolition permit at this level here because you know where there's a will there's a way but I think that I'm in

[79:00] agreement with my colleagues tonight and I think that the convincing thing for me is staff's memorandum and staff's presentation because you know otherwise i' say well could we do a stay but I really do think you guys so clearly and so um convincingly brought this to us and I think that but I'm am glad it came before us because I think until it was called up at ldrc and you had this chance to visit it I don't think we really knew what we had and so you know I reluctantly and I lament it but I will support staff's recommendation um and I want to give Kurt a chance to speak as well thank you I think that the board is going in the right direction um that is how I would be uh voting if I were voting uh the one thing I will say is more from my Landing board perspective I believe that in rm2 which is the Zone District that um this is in that um two

[80:02] principal dwellings are not an allowed use I could be wrong about that but um depending on what the owner wants to do with it potentially that if it were allowed that could be a good solution that would it would technically if you were building something in front of it it would technically still be a demolition right because you're obscuring the front wall but it would actually allow for preservation of the historic material but our as often happens our zoning codes are kind of getting in our own way on that and so it's something to consider as the historic plan um is revised and also as the B Valley comp plan um is revised in the coming couple of years that would be something to potentially consider thank you Kurt um and I agree with with John your comments about at some point there has to be a fome

[81:00] conversation about demo and and Renee too and and whatever but that's not what's before us tonight so you know we have to respond to what was presented to us in the testimony so um if there are no additional comments or anything anyone wants to share I will ask if anyone's ready to make a motion I can I move the landmarks board approve the application to demolish the building at 8441 19th Street finding that the building does not have significance under the criteria set forth in section 911 23 fbrc 1981 do we have a second I'll second on a motion by Ronnie seconded by John we'll take a vote Ronnie I Chelsea I I I I the motion passes unanimously and and Claire will explain next steps for the

[82:01] applicant yeah thank you Abby um so uh as we heard earlier in the discussion uh the approval is for 180 days um so an approval letter um will be issued by staff and um it will expire on June 2nd um of next year and the permit to deconstruct the building needs to be obtained within those 180 days if it's not then uh it will need to um go back through the process which will require going back to the ldrc and if you have any questions about that Elizabeth or anybody else please uh let me know we do thank you thank you for your time thank you thank you Elizabeth thank you bye bye bye and now it's time to move on to

[83:03] matters all right oh I'm going the wrong way okay uh all right so um a few housekeeping things um before we go to a year in review um so the next scheduled meeting is going to be on January 8th uh the first Wednesday of the month is on the 1st and um or is right after the holiday so we're moving it to January 8th uh that'll be a a virtual meeting um we also asked uh for your confirmation for the CPI conference registration by today um that uh conference is going to be at the cheyen mountain resort in Colorado Springs at the end of January um and then there is a special board training opportunity on that Saturday February 1st um we don't have a full schedule but uh I know staff is planning to go at least

[84:01] Wednesday because we have a session and then um there was something on oh I have another session on Friday so staff will be going um you're all incouraged to attend but um usually we just register everybody but it's just the cost of registration whereas this uh will cover um lodging as well so we just want to get an accurate headcount before spending those tax dollars do you want us to tell you now or email maybe if you could email Aubrey okay and we'll give you an extension till tomorrow but after that thank you okay alrighty okay I don't know if anybody else is a Spotify user but our Spotify wrapped came out today and I always love that um kind of chance to look back at the highlights for the year so this is not as interesting uh or as like

[85:01] graphically beautiful or as um short as the Spotify wrapped but um I do think that uh it can often feel like a hamster wheel with our work and so it's nice to like take a pause reflect on the last year this is the last meeting of 2024 um let's take a look at what you all reviewed in uh this year so um oops let me go to my notes in the last year uh you all recommended approval for six new landmarks which is on track with our average of five to seven designations each year the theme for the 2024 Landmark seemed to be a growing appreciation for mid-century modern buildings uh Boulder as we know has an incredible uh buildings from this time period and it was this brief period where Innovative expressive designs really thrived here so starting with the oldest Landmark the Thelma Mau house was originally proposed for Demolition and preserves at a significant building from

[86:01] the 1880s uh it's an example of how a state of demolition can change the course of a project and um the owners were really key Partners in that uh in that project the Garder Sando house uh is a unique one because it's already designated as part of the Mapleton Hill historic district but the longtime owners really um wanted to recognize it individually the words from the owner were particularly touching as she recalled her family's history here dating back to the 1940s the fake Bonner uh Hartman Eli house was designed by Hobart Wagner and is believed to be one of the first accessibly designed houses it's an excellent example of how historic buildings can be sensitively updated to be energy efficient and the owners nominated their house after it was featured on a month of modern tour and historic Boulder suggested the idea of landmark designation so you never know where these owner supported designations

[87:01] um will come from and then the sarakin Woodman house as we just heard is a remarkable building uh designated no designed by Tish and papa christu with an incredible Legacy of artists and the leech Moritz uh house is an understated gym in Newlands and that one was really wonderful to connect with the owner and architect um to see what a a special place it it is and then finally the Geological Society of America building is a delightful post-modern building that will be adaptively reused into affordable housing um so I'll note that both the Madeo house and the sarakin Woodman house were previously recognized as structures of Merit by the landmarks board um as I mentioned it's an honorary program but sometimes it can Inspire the owners to designate their buildings uh let's see we reviewed four tax credit applications in 2020 for the 2023 tax

[88:02] year that uh provided a total of $127,000 in tax credits and since 2022 we've approved a total of $262,300 in tax credits um and uh our credits tax credit applications have fluctuated but we're still within our average of 2 to five applications a year the program is expanding next year so it'll be interesting to see if we have more applications um for example the maximum which is $50,000 uh for a credit will double to 100,000 um which is uh I think I looked back at the projects for the last five years not everyone would have exceeded that you have to spend a lot to get that much but quite a few would have would have maximized that credit so we'll see that's consistent with that's consistent with the increase in material and

[89:01] construction cost five years yeah looking right doubling it can I ask a question on that also do you know the status of funding of the tax credit program yeah so it was approved all the way through 2038 for the residential tax credit and then the commercial tax credit uh they created a new they Governor polus created a new pool for um projects specific to adaptively reusing historic properties for housing and so um those are more on the commercial side we won't review those inhouse but hopefully that I'm sure that will lead to a lot of great adaptive reuse um projects so that sets up a separate pool for just housing and then there's the pool for other commercial projects which uh opens every January and then usually is depleted by

[90:01] the end so that one's more competitive whereas the residential one is is I I don't think there's a limit great yeah cool thank you and it resets every 10 years so for long-term owners you can get now $100,000 uh every 10 years um all right moving to to Landmark alteration certificate and demolition applications um this chart shows the trends um over the last five years and in 2024 um we reviewed 162 applications that number will increase a bit in the final few weeks of the year but um that 162 uh represents an 11% increase from last year however we're about 6% below the 5year average of 172 cases per year and then uh we reviewed 138 demo

[91:00] applications for non-designated buildings over 50 years old and we saw a that's a 20% increase in uh demo applications from um last year but it's right on track with our five-year average of 136 cases a year so there was a real dip down in 2023 uh and I don't know why when you say um and that includes the one staff approves at staff level right okay yeah that's all the uh all of the demo applications but then looking at the levels of review uh the lac's are there on the left and um over 60% of lacc's were reviewed at the ldrc level and less than 10% were reviewed by the full landmarks board uh staff reviewed just under 30% of the application and um this is where we expect to see the biggest amount of change with the new administrative Rule and that those

[92:01] could even flip and um dramatically decrease the the number of ldrc cases and then for demolitions you can see that the vast majority three quarters of the applications were reviewed by staff those are post 1940 primary buildings and accessory buildings the ldrc reviewed about 20% of the applications and the landmarks board move uh reviewed 7% so looking at the 28 pre-1940 applications uh 16 of those so about 72% were approved at the initial review within two weeks 72% six of those uh so about 30% were reviewed to referred to the landmarks board and four are still in review so I didn't count those and then of those referred to the landmarks board to withdrew before going to a hearing and then the four others uh were um approved

[93:03] either at that initial review or after a stay of Demolition and for post 1940 buildings 97% of the applications in 2024 were approved after the initial review and uh three were referred to the landmarks board all went forward with the process and in case you feel like you're missing out on these staff level reviews this is a sample of the routine you know again that's the biggest slice of pie here we reviewed 110 um post 1940 buildings and then a handful of accessory buildings it's three qus of our demo applications are these um you know pretty bread and butter Ranch houses and the way the code is written we review things like siding replacement on a street facing mall for a Martin acr's house um though it was

[94:02] interesting pulling this heat map on the leftand side I you know clearly there's a concentration in South Boulder which is what you would expect for post-war um houses but there's also a concentration uh up north and uh West but more evenly distributed than I would have thought uh you know I feel like they're all in South Boulder but uh clearly they're not yeah did you say you review siding replacement on post 1940s houses yeah we do we do which is on our list of dream code amendments because it really clogs the clogs the filter sometimes wow so yeah the way the code is written it says um the demolition of a street facing wall you have to keep the exterior sheathing so if you're replacing the siding the

[95:01] materials it comes through our preservation review which for an eligible building taking the original siding and putting something could impact it but it it catches a lot of stuff it doesn't need to catch yeah it can have a lot to do with the visual character of a facade is the simple things like the width of the siding unit and orientation of the sighting it's if you change it it's completely different looking composition right oh I don't doubt that I was just surprised on post 1940 non-designated buildings that there would be reviewed yeah well in speaking post 1940 um I just want to make a comment it's not I mean it's it's more that as the preservation program embarks on updating the preservation plan plan next year I think it's fascinating in our code that it it isn't it it has a date

[96:01] that that staff can start reviewing it and make the decision but the date is like set in a a specific date and it doesn't move like 60 years or 50 you know what I mean and I don't know how other communities do it but I I kind of personally someday want to think about that a little bit more that it's fixed in a year as opposed to like a Time frame and I just find that interesting yeah I picture our um demo uh code language as a net but that it's like handmade and some there's like really big holes and there's really small holes and so like sighting gets caught but things like front porches don't and so you know it was written in 1994 um and other than the administrative rule that allows us to look at the scope of demolition which is great uh there's some room for improvement yeah how many total

[97:01] demolitions um post 90 1940 110 though that does capture the accessory buildings but it's such a small number that I grouped them together do we have a s do we know how many total demolitions for residential structures the city sees you know I looked up that number a handful of years ago and don't remember because what is misleading about this is that this captures sighting replacement as well as full scrapes and so the the deconstruction permits are much lower than 110 or you know 150 um but I don't know how many of those are less than 50 years old and how many are older but that would be I'd be interested in knowing that statistic does any anybody keep any kind of watch on the cubic feet of demolition waste created every year that would ciac I

[98:03] know but that is the real number the volume of material I I think our colleagues in climate initiative might be tracking that as part of the deconstruction process should be but I don't know how to pull those numbers you know yeah that'd be interesting yeah okay uh so yeah the ldrc big changes are coming next year so this is a nice snapshot of the final year of how it used to be um so in 2024 we had 39 ldrc meetings out of the 52 weeks of the year um we had 145 reviews some of those were cases that came back multiple times but 65% of the cases were approved in one meeting and so that um means that it took two weeks to get through the historic preservation process for 65% of the uh uh ldrc cases we totaled an estimate of

[99:04] the volunteer time of you all combined and that came in at 144 hours and then uh we put a range in of um per board member it ranged from 26 hours up to 60 hours and um John gets the trophy for uh DED ating 60 hours of um volunteer time and that is an estimate based on the average uh ldrc case time of 38 minutes or so off the street I don't know what you're gonna do next year right and then looking at our our landmarks board uh we had 13 meetings because we had a special meeting in November we had one Retreat that was in June and we uh had seven stay of demolition meetings or full Board site visits uh you all reviewed 15

[100:00] applications for landmark alteration certificates and 10 applications for demolitions and then six uh applications for new landmarks and then I didn't add there you also had two hearings to either initiate designation or uh issue a demolition so interesting to see if there were themes in the Lac applications that the full board reviewed and the theme of 2024 is accessory buildings and um yeah the question came up well is that because of the Adu changes is there some like Market forces but uh they're really so unique it goes from the shiaka greenhouse to adus to the new you know Hotel on Spruce and 11th um and then there were you know an Eclectic mix of a new house in a historic district one after the fact review uh modifications to key building features whether that

[101:00] was Dormers or solar panels or doors and then two additions to non-contributing buildings and then the demolition of one house so this is kind of the smaller scale projects there was the after the fact fence way back in January uh solar panels and garage doors last month and then the two Dormers in front wall uh kind of later in the the summer and fall and then the accessory buildings as I mentioned there is the new garage at the sarakin house the greenhouse up at shiaka a new accessory building up in the hillside historic district which we isn't a district that we see a lot of activity in and then the kind of two bigger projects were the new house in the west Pearl historic district that you all saw twice and then the um kind of major renovation of a non-contributing house at 432 Concord in construction of a new

[102:01] um accessory building and that one is um pending final review by the ldrc and then um kind of these two downtown more commercial projects of 1105 Spruce which was really three projects uh crammed into one application with an addition to a historic House rehabilitation of a carriage house and then construction of a new building and then the rooftop addition um next to the Boulder Theater was a really unique one as well and then our demolition applications um saw a theme of mid-century buildings so these were each called up uh by staff to the full landmarks board and um you can see the 2260 Baseline right on the corner of Broadway and Baseline and then just up this up Broadway at 777 Broadway were both these um kind of rustic modern buildings um 211 was one that the board

[103:03] placed a shorter stay of Demolition and really moved on um setting up a site visit walking the property with the with the applicants and and then um ultimately letting that one go and then uh 2425 Colorado is is pending review and then we have the small old house houses um a handful of these 7th Street arapo and Orange Place were all oh and 19th Street were all um called up to the full board but then approved at the first meeting and so I think what I heard with those of it was worthwhile to understand the building a bit more understand the history and the changes to the building but ultimately they they didn't meet the the eligibility significant uh criteria or you know the um kind of worth putting a stay on and then the 613 Walnut had a

[104:00] stay of demolition on it and then um the garage at Mariposa is a pending review and then there were two uh the 1015 Juniper was a carryover from um last year where uh you all held a hearing to consider initiation or demolition as well as with 77 um Broadway But ultimately um let those two go as well any reflection about the cases do you all um have any thoughts about seeing all the work a Year's worth of work Flash before your eyes no wonder I'm tired um Marcy the ones that post 1940 that staff chose to call call up to the full board thank you because I know you could have by right you know made a staff decision on those so I do really appreciate those being called up and then I had a comment about

[105:00] the small ones now I can't remember what the comment was uh it's gone so no thank you for doing this this is very Illuminating and there's one more section which is um one of the biggest uh I think achievements from this last year and and the biggest change to the program of how we operate is the process improvements that you all passed in the fall and so that will allow staff review for the majority of Lac projects it gives us additional time to complete that initial review which will give us flexibility in scheduling ldrc meetings the approvals for both lac's and demos will be valid for one year if Council passes these changes and then um uh removing the planning board leaz on Roll from the landmarks board will also be a change that would uh be going forward uh if Council approves those um in two weeks and then I put these under

[106:02] honorable mention but gosh this represents a whole lot of work um and also kind of the um the kind of approach and philosophy of this current preservation program so um we welcomed Chris Reynolds and his good um Council uh in January of this last year um Renee chose to reup and thank you for doing that can take it back can we um presented at and attended the saving places conference and I think the relevancy project that was kind of the keynote of that whole conference really resonated with many of us did the proposed historic district effort while it was uh not approved I think really um was meaningful in challenging the kind of dominant narratives that was being told about the history asking new questions and a lot of good research and

[107:00] Partnerships came out of that process and um the research that came out of that Claire then contributed to an exhibit at the Museum of Boulder over the summer and gave a talk um and uh she also uh pulled it together for a talk at the that was not a nice way of putting it you pulled your research together in a compelling way and stepped foot into a very academic setting um at the center for Colorado's women's history uh and presented it their 20124 Symposium at history Colorado and uh we were um able to see a um uh that presentation at our staff meeting and it was really incredible of like like you can zoom in and zoom in and zoom in and just like understand these stories of these women and these people that lived here that

[108:00] had been completely erased um until recently so I think um you never know where the research will take you or you know where the program will go but um those are some really positive things that have come out of that in Reflections on that before we look ahead to 2025 great all right well 2025 is going to be the year of the 10-year update to the historic preservation plan we are going to dovetail with the uh major update to the Boulder Valley comprehensive plan and um so stay tuned for that that'll be a major effort um and an exciting opportunity to um really refresh the plan that is our strategic vision for the program um we will say goodbye to Ronnie

[109:00] in February after what I believe is has it been eight years that you've served I I've lost track feels like 15 yeah a term is five amazing yeah yes so I think uh I'm still in the denial stage but by February maybe we'll move through that but U that'll be a huge change and then a possible farewell to Kurt if the council removes that planning board um look so happy Kurt so I did just want to say we don't know what the outcome of council's um review of that uh will be but uh did want to miss this opportunity just to say thank you for um just how engaged and thoughtful your comments are and how

[110:00] I think you really brought a a good integration of the two boards and I also um wish you the best for using all of that extra time that you'll have back thank you it really has been a joy working with everybody here so yeah appreciate it and you're always welcome to come anyway yeah at least for dinner your comments zero in so often in a very useful way that you will be missed I I knew it was fortunate to have a former landmarks board member serve as the planning board liaison but despite kind of Kurt's background and resume and everything the Myriad ways he contributes to the community of Boulder it's the way you think it's you know it's really brilliant and your mind you you really bring insightful thought-provoking things that I've looked at for I don't want to say how many years and you just

[111:00] shed a new light on it because you see it from a different prison than I do a lot of times so it's going to be a real loss but you do get some more free time back all right so um we'll also be looking to attend the saving places conference down in Colorado Springs and then Claire and I will be um presenting a session uh that came out of the Civic area uh research but about um challenging the dominant narratives telling a different story considering um different perspectives and uh we have a fair amount of work to do between now and then but it's going to come together um it's going to come together as well as an American Planning Association conference is going to be hosted here in Denver um in the spring and uh I'll be partnering on a session about Boulder's um history of planning and then the impact that that has had on

[112:04] um like the good and the bad and we're partnering with um Jill Adler Grano and it's going to be a hike and so I will send you all um info if uh you all might be interested in attending I yeah yeah yes yeah okay and then we'll also be um contributing to the Heritage for all uh recognizing a broader history in the landmark designations and on the state Register that is um part of the uh America 250 Colorado 150 sesa sem Centennial there's another uh I'm sure another syllable in there um and then the Museum of Boulder uh we will contribute to a um exhibit and events uh celebrating lgbtq history here in

[113:00] Boulder related to um not just uh CLE loric at the Boulder County Courthouse but also Penfield tape II and a lot of other individuals here um in Boulder and so um we will also let you know when those are happening and I'll also um follow up and say we did get a letter of support in for the NHL designation under the wire but thank you I sent it to Abby and she got back to me within 10 minutes and um we were already past the deadline but they still accepted it so all right that is the recap of 2024 yeah oh um can you speak to the uh a little bit of the process overview for the 10-year update um and how the board will be

[114:01] involved and how that'll look yeah it's a a skeleton right now I think but for with the um development of the historic preservation plan in 2013 the landmarks board members played a central role you know you are the ones that will adopt it um and so having your input and really shape it through the process is going to be key so um I think whoever replaces Ronnie will come in at like a pretty important point on the board and then we'll also um plug into the community engagement efforts and popups with the comp plan and kind of piggyback on that rather than try and compete with it or you know be asking the community too many questions or about too many things so we'll try and um align as much as we can on that and hopefully reach a

[115:01] broader audience um than we have in the past I will say with the five-year update there was a open house where we had more presentation boards than we did people and so I really want to that was a while ago but that was like a low point in terms of like we got to do better and we have a different team we have a community engagement um dedicated staff now but I think it's very um fortunate that the comp plan will uh be kicking off and uh their reach in that interest is much broader than what I think we can do on our own um that's as much as I know right now but I will be uh bringing it together pretty rapidly at the beginning of 2025 for a project plan yeah yeah yeah Kurt this overview was

[116:01] fantastic do you think that there might be any opportunity to present that to council because I think that they would really appreciate that you know they get these lac's to for call up and all that kind of stuff and I don't know that they have a terribly good big picture view of it as especially ones who haven't been involved with the program so that's a great idea if you could I think it'd be fantastic yeah and with some edits it could probably be um a little bit more like Standalone you know be able to just pick it up and be like here's what the board wait here's what the program did in 2024 I think that's great Marcy yeah you should do it as a video oh John and in Le of the letter to council I was just thinking would be this would be a better letter to council exactly yeah this is this is but you're right it could be done in in more of a media

[117:00] presentation that is true you know give me more time than I would have done the Spotify wrapped yeah 2024 your top Landmark but no I I don't want this um to go to waste I think that it's really helpful like for for us as well to just like say wow here you know what are the trends over time what were the key projects and initiatives um and accomplishments this year uh but packaging up and sharing it more broadly and on the website too is a great idea I also think you you know since sadly we're goingon to lose Ronnie it could be a part of the orientation for a new board member like hey this is what we did last year you know it it really does kind of show the different aspects in different roles like tonight so interesting to me to have a landmarking of a stellar building and a demolition of a Suite building you know it's like it runs the

[118:01] gamut but that might be great as part of an orientation I love that idea excellent so I just want to say since you gave us this really great year in review none of this would have happened without the Stellar staff and um I just so appreciate it I'm so amazed with what Claire Aubrey Marcy um you know everybody does to make this all happen Marin and everybody it's it's kind of amazing and I I know how hard you all work and I know there are things you sacrifice with um the program and you know there's a lot of evenings and weekend things and so forth so I just you know with a real heartfelt thanks you guys really have made this run pretty

[119:01] seamlessly is there anything else I think I think other than one in potentially two ldrc um this is the end of 2024 for landmark sport activities so see you all in 2025 soon thank you so um I gota look at my clock um so the meeting is adjourned 59 p.m. it's a record I know I know an end of your record yeah