The Frakes House
Dec 26th, 2007 by rlsorbe
Historically preserved buildings, landmarks, and districts are critical components that create a sense of place and established character to an area. Preservation enhances environmental, historical, and architectural significance to a home or neighborhood. Preservation of our 50 plus year old Boulder homes and buildings have been a positive influence in maintaining the stories and symbolic significance to Boulder’s past. However, I question landmark designation for homes and buildings that are unable to maintain the value for which they were created.
On October 10, 2006 the property of 1936 Mapleton Avenue was purchased for below market value. Soon after ownership, the homeowners applied for a demolition permit for this decaying home. Unsuccessful of the permit, the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board forwarded landmark designation to the council, over the owner’s objections. As of September 18th this home, The Frakes House, was designated as Boulder’s newest landmark. This house dates back to 1898 and has both historical and architectural significance. Located on the southwest corner of 20th Street and Mapleton Avenue, this home is situated as a gateway to a potential Whittier historic neighborhood.
Landmark designation can become a controversial situation for homeowners, neighbors, and city residents. In the case of 1936 Mapleton, the homeowners argued that the designation would be an economic hardship. However Historic Boulder, Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, and city council agreed that with strong demand and steadily increasing values in the neighborhood, the owner could rehabilitate or sell the property without economic loss.
As I walked by 1936 Mapleton this afternoon I found NO TRESPASSING signs within the windows, and witnessed this rundown home. To me, this home stands out in the Mapleton Ave. neighborhood for it’s unkempt appearance more than it’s historical significance. I value historic preservation and think it is a responsibility of stewardship for our built environment. However if money, time, design, and build efforts are unable to be incorporated into the site, does it create a decreasing value to both itself and area? If the house is unable to be restored to the initial value for which it was designated, should it sit as a deteriorating landmark? What draws the line between a historic landmark and a demolition site?
If we start designating buildings that are not particularly significant, it would seem to cheapen the Historic Landmark designation given to previous applicants. Landmark status is an honor that should be reserved for those buildings that are truly deserving - not just those that are old.
What is another option to maintaining some of our heritage or history?
I have seen the Landmark card used and often times it is not to the benefit of the owner.
This is an idea for the city. If Landmark status is attained, how about some incentives to maintain, protect, build, sustain the property that could truly make it a Landmark and designate it for people to appreciate.
This building has been sitting empty for several years since it was originally sold. What a waste. I cannot imagine the amount of work and money it would take to restore this small, derelict home.
I checked out this house the other day, and it is on it’s way to becoming a unique boulder home. if you get a chance, drive by and see the developments.