Historic preservation and affordable housing

potential changes to site design and architecture to more clearly pay homage to the landmarked Lincoln Hall building

historic preservation demolition approval is valid for one year and that's what it states in the code

chicken and egg problem of historic preservation versus site plan

And staff wants to talk about the value of evaluating historic preservation as a part of site review

the removal of the existing houses removes some existing naturally occurring affordable units and reduces the mix of housing on the site

the proposal requires historic preservation review for the demolition of the four 1920s-era houses along Arapahoe Avenue, because the houses are more than 50 years old

the historic preservation demolition approval is valid for one year, and the code does not provide the ability to extend that approval.

did more to destroy historic renovation and historic preservation in Boulder than anyone on any board ever

And then the board voted to initiate the designation process for one of the properties, 990 Arapaho

staff recommends that the Board initiate the landmark designation process to prevent the loss of significant buildings and provide the time for the planning board to comprehensively review the concept plan application.

draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest in preserving significant buildings by ensuring that demolition is carefully weighed with other alternatives.

holds affordable housing as important, sustainability, and historic preservation

find a way for two deeply held community values, affordable housing, and historic preservation, to work together in tandem

to consider a solution that incorporates shared community benefits of affordable housing, historic preservation, and environmentalism.

And you guys don't even have it ever involved with you. This is called carbon footprint destruction in a landfill for nothing.

because Landmarks Board is a priority for me. I don't like to see these properties going into the landfill, as I've seen many.

my understanding is the property has the status of both being affordable housing and landmark designation

I think it should be a hundred 40%, because the impact on this community is tremendous

did this developer ever go back to Ldrc when they were modifying those historic structures on it

the initial ballot measure in 95 had it really restricted for capital, for planning projects for historic preservation

So landmark designation can be reversed by review of the Landmark Board.

also because little remains of the exterior of the original historic structures.

It seems like, maybe from the technical standpoint, demolition has already occurred, in which case,

about whether they consider these additional 2 buildings to be worthy of landmarking?

Does a relocation have the same sort of requirements as a demolition permit

I was hoping you can go a little more in depth on the impact of the potential historic preservation of the 2 other buildings on the property.

I actually think that the worst outcome that we can have in a review like this is that we make a demolition. The easiest.

It may be helpful to have some guidance in the BBCP about how we see historic preservation for Boulder, right?

We have an awful lot of our housing stock especially that is coming into its uh being 50 years old and would be eligible for landmarking

The applicant deserves due process, and we should not be landmarking in a de facto way through site review

But you don't want to be approving a Site Review that hasn't considered the potential historic preservation aspects of the project.

It talks about historic preservation, demolition review application.

following the demolition of a principal building after a finding of probable cause that it may be eligible for landmark designation

fire resistance should trump historic preservation in all cases

I believe any change in street facing facade materials is considered a demolition

whether that would trigger historic Preservation Review as a demolition

So I think there are benefits to that from the historic preservation standpoint

if you demolish something without permits, or you don't go through the proper. You know historic preservation process.

tries to really incentivize units within buildings that are historic, to to try to avoid a bunch of demolitions of historic housing stock

The Landmarks board just agreed to demolition of what was going to be the phoneless shelter.

So we're providing many, many avenues of how to add additional density while balancing and and incentivizing the preservation

by building something in that incentivizes the adaptive reuse of eligible buildings and existing stock

Just going back to the demolition of buildings that are potentially eligible for historic preservation.

These demolitions are, you know, big money operations instead of 40 units.

because the building is 50 years old historic preservation is required if demolition is proposed

it makes sense in the the context of historic preservation to distinguish between the building that was built the part of the building that was built in 1900

Then stop demoing these places. This is utterly ridiculous. Oh, fortune 5, 45 pearl big house, perfectly affordable the way it is.

Because this place should never have been demolished. It isn't yet, but it will be.

orange Court was just demoed yesterday it's a house it's an Old English cottage it went down for no reason

the historic preservation or landmarks process has become more robust in recent years

did they have a vers of the historic preservation ordinance like what we have today

Review historic preservation codes zoning for sustainability, which has as an addendum embodied carbon initiatives.

we already do have on the work plan and update to the historic preservation plan which is just due for an update.

reviewing historic preservation codes my understanding. This is the initial scoping of that was pretty narrow.

I'd also like to see us review our historic preservation codes while preserving our city's rich.

if we are in fact considering historic preservation of that building

the only thing that we could preserve through historic preservation is the exterior of the building.

the project is subject to historic preservation. Review. This could result in landmark designation eligibility

But I am aware of nothing outside of the the historic preservation code. The restricts pink color.

whether that is giving them a break like we do for historic preservation properties, or if it is increasing

one of the incentives that the landmarks board can grant is that a building that is landmarks does not have to meet the energy code

including the expanded area in the context of the historic building or district would provide additional time for staff, the Landmarks Board

The historic preservation staff under our plan and Development services. That's also been part of the process.

it's just stunning that something like that could happen how can you allow ldrc to to to just okay a demolition like that

Which does include policies around historic preservation. So, if we would have to find that on balance, the other interests are more compelling than the historic preservation.

If you feel like you're getting heartburn about historic preservation and the Mecca Building.

the city council can maintain this legacy building and still have room to develop the adjacent site for more housing

staff and the planning board encouraged the applicant to look at retaining the building as it would add character on the Block

the applicant should consider integrating it into the site as indicated in the memo

close the loopholes in demolition related ordinances so as is you can sort of piecemeal

incentivize the reuse of existing buildings when we demolish a building the construction waste

are you so in effect you are consenting to The Landmark designation with the Demolition

a new unit or units built at the rear of the property

this came in for review through the historic preservation program

THIS BUILDING A SPIN AROUND A LONG TIME AND IS A SIGNIFICANT KIND OF A HISTORIC BUILDING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD

incentives for the preservation of existing houses or disincentives for demolition of existing housing

include something about the why a statement to include in their historic preservation

ONE IS FROM THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BEAST THAT IT'S BEEN FOR ABOUT A LONG TIME

ESPECIALLY WITH REDEVELOPMENT AND I'M GOING TO BRING UP SOMETHING A LITTLE LATER HISTORIC PRESERVATION

we've had over the last ten years a lot of really cool smaller houses that represent different parts of our history