Loading...
06.12.13 OSBT Chaut final MEMORANDUM To:Open Space Board of Trustees From:Susan Richstone, Deputy Director of Community Planning & Sustainability Glenn Magee, Facilities and Asset Management Architect and Construction Design Manager Dean Paschall,Open Space and Mountain Parks Communications and Public Process Manager Jeff Haley, Parks and Recreation Planning Manager James Hewat, Senior Planner Marcy Cameron, Historic Preservation Planner Jeff Hirt, Planner II Date: June 12, 2013 Subject:Chautauqua Auditorium Accessible Restrooms P URPOSE The purpose of this item is to request Open Space Board of Trustees (OSBT)input on the preliminary options, feasibility analysisand process for accessible restrooms for the Chautauqua Auditorium area. This input will guide the project’s next steps in this early phase. The OSBTwill also have the opportunity to provide input in the late summer/early fall 2013per the schedule in the Process and Next Steps section below. Specifically: 1. Do you have any comments on the location options for the accessible restrooms? (See Options Analysis) 2. Do you have any comments on the accessible restrooms feasibility analysis? (See Options Analysis) 3. Do you have any comments on the Process and Next Stepssection? 4. Of the six options indicated in Figure 1, which would you support and why? B ACKGROUND Last year, the city and Colorado Chautauqua Association (CCA)worked collaboratively to develop a broad initiative focusing on the stewardship of the Chautauqua area. This initiative is in its early stages, but has so far produced a key deliverable –the Colorado Chautauqua Guiding Principles for Place Management and Fiscal Sustainability(see Attachment 2). This document sets forth the overarching vision to guide decision making in the future in the Chautauqua area.During this discussion, the city and CCA identified accessible restrooms as a potential pilot project to advance the goal of establishing thresholds for collaborative processes.City Council subsequently endorsed this project as a pilotfor this purpose. The Guiding Principles provide further explanation for each of these thresholds including example projects and appropriate levels of coordination and collaboration between the city and CCA (See Attachment 2, Guiding Principle 5b). This project will be a pilot for Threshold 2: Significant Modifications Led by a Single Party. With this, the project to build ADA accessible bathrooms serves two purposes: 1) to provide accessible restrooms for the reasons outlined in this memorandum; and 2) to serve as a pilotto evaluate opportunities for collaborative decision making between the city and CCA. Agenda Item 3C Page 1 City and CCA Working Group A working group of city and CCA staff is coordinating the effort to identify a recommended location and design for ADA accessible restroomsto serve the Auditorium, and potentially other visitors to Chautauqua. This working group consists of city staff from the Parks and Recreation, Open Space and Mountain Parks, Facilities and Asset Management, and Community Planning and Sustainability Departments with CCA representatives. Thisgroup has conducted aneeds assessment, initial site analysisand has proposed an approach and timeline described in this memo. Needs Assessment There is a critical need for accessible restrooms to serve Chautauqua Auditorium users. The Auditorium had a 1 2012 ticketed attendance of 42,045, plus approximately 6,375 non-ticketed attendees,yet has no restrooms . The closest accessible restrooms are in the Chautauqua Dining Hall, a separate building. However, there is no accessible route from the Dining Hall to the Auditorium. The Dining Hall entrance is also well over 150feet from any entrance to the Auditorium.Attachment 3: Colorado Chautauqua Association Accessible Bathrooms Needs Assessmentprovides a more detailed needs assessment. While this memorandum focuses on the restrooms, the city and CCA are also currently working on several other projects.The chart below briefly summarizes these parallel efforts. Chautauqua Collaborative Stewardship Framework Transportation, Parkingand Other Governance, Accessible Site Amenities Managementand Bathrooms Lease Options Bus pullout design and between the City and construction CCA Parking -one way angled parking, parking needs analysis Street resurfacing Evaluate and Propose Decision Making Protocols between City and CCA 1 Chautauqua Auditorium events draw visitors who do not purchase tickets but congregate outside of the auditorium to listen and participate in the event. Agenda Item 3C Page 2 A NALYSIS The ADA restrooms working grouphas been analyzing options for the location of the restroom facility for compliance with accessibility codes, proximity to utilitiesand several other factors outlined in the feasibility discussion below.The working group has developed aneeds assessment, initial site analysisand proposed approach and timeline. The overall focus is on Chautauqua Auditorium users, but locations that would benefit other users in and around the auditoriumare also being considered. The options under consideration include 1) an exterior freestanding structure and 2) repurposing of space within the Auditorium. The analysis will inform the number of fixture units that can physically be constructed and identify opportunities to serve a variety of users, including Auditorium patrons and other users of the greater Chautauqua area. Cost-benefit analysis will further inform the location and size decisions. Due to accessibility requirements and site constraints, the options are limited. Work is also continuing to identify operation and management responsibilities and times of operationfor any new restrooms. This will have an influence on the physical location ofthe facility and initial and ongoing operational costs. Board Roles and Feedback Several boards will provide input onthis project. The roles of each will depend on several factors -most notably the location and size of the restrooms. For example, historic preservation considerations will vary depending on size and location. There are six different locations under consideration in the Options Analysis section below. The working group is requesting preliminary feedback from these boards at this stage. As the options get refined, more specific board roles will become clearer. The State Historical Fundprogram (SHF) will also have a consultation role. This group has made a site visit and is currently evaluating the six options presented in this memo. The SHF will provide feedback to the working group on these options and will continue their consultation role throughout this process. Below is more detail on the anticipated roles of various boards. The schedule for these meetings is also included in the Process and Next Steps section. BoardAnticipated Role Colorado Chautauqua Association Board The CCA Board of Directorswill review the alternative locations and the of Directors evaluation criteria and offer input, with a particular focus onthe operational feasibility of each. Landmarks BoardAny exterior changesto the Chautauqua Auditorium area(including landscaping) require review by the city’s Historic Preservation program due to itslocal historic districtdesignation. The proposed options to locate the bathrooms within the existing footprint of the building (interior work) does not require review. New construction over 340 square feet requires review by the full Landmarks Board. Open Space Board of Trustees At this early stage, staff is requesting OSBTfeedback on the preliminary options and feasibility analysis. While the focus is on Auditorium users, there may be opportunities to serve other users with freestandingor external facilities. Staff may request more specific Open Space Board input depending on the location and whom the restroom may serve as the options get refined. Agenda Item 3C Page 3 BoardAnticipated Role Parks and Recreation Advisory BoardAt this early stage, staff is requesting PRABfeedback on the preliminary (PRAB) options and feasibility analysis. While the focus is on Auditorium users, there may be opportunities to serve other users with freestandingor external facilities. Staff may request more specific Parks and Recreation Advisory Board input depending on the location and whom the restroom may serve as the options get refined. Options Analysis The preliminary analysis of options revealed several design challenges. First, aconnection to a sewer line is problematic, with the closest line located approximately 300 feet west of the Auditorium. Any new restrooms must also be consistent with the historic character of the Auditorium and grounds. With this, there are limited options within and near the structure that would minimize these impacts. Several other design issues reflect current conditions included in the Feasibility Matrix (see Attachment 1) from egress to lighting and safety to activity area conflicts. The working group has identified six potential locations for ADA accessible restroom facilities serving the Chautauqua Auditorium. Two locations identified are insidethe Auditorium and four are located along accessible routes outsideof the Auditorium. The working group analyzed each option using the following criteria: Financial –whether the option has design complexity, its construction costs, lifecycleand required permitting/approvals ADAAccessibility –whether the option meets or exceeds standards, has design flexibilityand can accommodate multiple facilities Site Context –how well the option considers the ChautauquaAuditorium (and Auditorium area, if applicable) and its aestheticscompatibility with the historic district guidelines Operational Feasibility –whether the option has egress conflicts, activity area conflicts, adequate lighting andsafety, overall access and visibility to Auditorium usersand any access for other non- Auditorium users Agenda Item 3C Page 4 Inside the Auditorium (Options 1 and 2) Potential locations within the Auditorium itselfcome with significant challenges. While they providethe most direct accommodations for Auditorium users, there are a number of concerns including structural obstacles (e.g., sloping floors), space limitations,or conflicts with Auditorium-related operations. Options 1 and 2 would only serve Auditorium users.Both locations are on accessible routes to accessible seating areas. Landmarks Board review would not be required on either option due to their inside location. Both inside locations have Option 1 space limitations.would displace an existing janitor closet. This is also a high traffic area during events. Option 2 would displace an existing storage area and require significant Figure 1: The map above shows the six options the working construction to level the floor and provide group has selected from a preliminary analysis. utilities. The area around Option 2 is less congested than Option 1 during events. Outside the Auditorium (Options 3-6) Potential locations outside of the Auditoriumgenerally provide greater opportunities for a number of reasons. The outside locations better accommodate adequately-sized facilities,provide better access to utilities infrastructureand present opportunities to serve non-Auditorium users.However,eachof the four outsidelocations identified presents limitations and opportunities. All outside options are currently on routes accessible to the Auditorium (or could be made accessible), Option 3 could serve non-Auditorium users, and could support both men’s and women’s facilities.is an elevated plaza on the north side of the Auditorium. It is adjacent to an Auditorium entrance and accessible Option 4 seating. Utility service and emergency access would be more difficult due to the elevated plaza. is on either the north or south side of an existing loading driveway. It is accessible to the Auditorium but farther from a main entrance than some of the other options. This option would have a significant visual Option 5 impact, in part because a large tree would have to be removed. is on the southwest entrance plaza and accessible to the Auditorium. It would replace an existing ticket kiosk and has good access to Option 6 utilities. It is alsoclose to accessible parking.is the lawn area east of the CCA Administration Building. It is large enough to support a multi-fixture facility and could serve a wider variety of users than the other options. However, it is highly visible and will require crossing a driveway to use (normally closed during Auditorium events). These findings are preliminary at this point. The purpose of this initial feasibility analysis is to identify a short list of locations and then conduct amore detailed analysis of these optionsincluding construction cost estimations. The results of the June 2013 board discussions and community input this summer will also inform and guide this analysis to determine the most appropriate location for the accessible restrooms. Agenda Item 3C Page 5 A summary of the current findings from the feasibility matrix is also included in Attachment 1, along with a map of the potential locations considered. PNS ROCESS AND EXT TEPS The working group has laid out a process that ensures feedback from a wide range of stakeholders. Before proceeding any further with the feasibility analysis and other next steps, the working group is requesting feedback from various boards. The draft project schedule issummarized below: DPS RAFT ROJECT CHEDULE 1.Formed ADA Accessible Restroom Working Group Quarter 1, 2013 City staff from Community Planning and Sustainability, Public Works, Parks and Recreation, Open Space and Mountain Parks, Facilities and Asset Management; CCA staff 2.Preliminary Options Analysis June 2013 3.Feasibility Analysis March –June 2013 4.Board Check Ins Colorado Chautauqua Association Board of Directors June 3 Landmarks BoardJune 5 Open Space Board of TrusteesJune 12 Parks and Recreation AdvisoryBoardJune 24 5.Community InputSummer 2013 The working group will utilize the summer Auditorium season to collect public feedback on potential restroom locations. 6.Working Group Recommendations to Boards and City Sept–Oct2013 Council 7.Preliminary Design Oct –Dec 2013 8.Landmark Alteration Certificate Application Nov 2013 –Jan 2014 9.Completion Quarter 2, 2014 A TTACHMENTS Attachment 1: Chautauqua Auditorium Accessible Restrooms Initial Feasibility Analysis Matrix Attachment 2: Colorado Chautauqua Guiding Principles for Place Management and Fiscal Sustainability Attachment 3: Colorado Chautauqua AssociationAccessible Bathrooms Needs Assessment Attachment 4: Input from the Chautauqua Board of Directors Agenda Item 3C Page 6 ATTACHMENT 2: Collaborative Stewardship ofthe Colorado Chautauqua Guiding Principles for Place Management and Fiscal Sustainability Purpose of the Guiding Principles These guiding principles represent a shared statement about the nature of the Colorado Chautauqua and the manner in which its primary stewards (the City of Boulder and the Colorado Chautauqua Association) intend to collaborate in the planning and management of its future. 1A Public Place Chautauqua is a shared community resource and a public place. It is essential that it remain a place that is accessible, safe and welcoming to the general public. 2A Historic Landmark The Colorado Chautauqua is a recognized national and local historic landmark.Preservation of its historic character is of the utmost importance when making decisions about its future. 3A Historic Mission Chautauqua supports cultural, educational, social and recreational experiences that are integral to its historic character and function. Preservation and perpetuation of its historic mission and supporting operations are paramount to sustaining the spirit of Chautauqua. 4A Balanced Approach Chautauqua encompasses multiple ownerships and missions; the needs and interests of many must be balanced in a manner that protects the site and spirit of Chautauqua, in keeping with principles 1, 2 and 3. Management decisions about surrounding uses should be made with sensitivity to potential impacts on Chautauqua. At the same time, Chautauqua should be managed and preserved in a manner consistent with the community’s sustainability goals and with sensitivity to impacts on surrounding residential neighborhoods. 5Collaborative Place Management To achieve the balanced approach described in principle 4, the Chautauqua area (including the CCA leasehold and adjacent parks and open space) must be collaboratively managed. In particular, the following components of collaborative place management mustbe clearly defined and agreed to by the city and the CCA: 5aRoles and Responsibilities. The city and the CCA have the joint responsibility of preserving, perpetuating and improving the spirit and historic character of Chautauqua through collaborative stewardship and place management as well as the responsibility of managing specific public and private assets: The Colorado Chautauqua Association has the role of perpetuating the spirit and mission of the historic Chautauqua through production of cultural, educational, social and recreational experiences to benefit the Boulder community and visitors to the area. The CCA also has the responsibility, under its lease with the city, of managing and programming certain public assets and CCA’s owned cottages, lodges and other facilities in a manner consistent with its historic mission and these guiding principles. Agenda Item 3C Page 9 The City of Boulderowner has multiple roles, including: 1) of the underlying land throughout Chautauqua, three key historic buildings and an historic structure in the leasehold, manager serving in this role as landlord to the CCA; 2) of the public infrastructure throughout Chautauqua and of the public assets and lands outside the leasehold, including a regulator public park and open space; and 3) in terms of city laws. The city has the responsibility of representing the interests and priorities of the community at-large; maintaining safe and efficient access to and within the site; and coordinating policy and action in a manner consistent with these guiding principles. 5bThresholds for Collaborative Processes. Effective collaboration among the multiple core entities responsible for the Chautauqua area’s management is critical. In general, the collaborative processes between CCA, the city and the public should proportionately increase as the scope of the proposed change increases as illustrated in the following graph: Threshold 3 Threshold 2 Threshold 1 Scope of Change or Investment The following is illustrative of “thresholds for collaboration” that will be refined, clarifiedand agreed to by the city and the CCA to guide future agreements and decision- making processes. It may or may not be the final recommendation to have three thresholds; that will be determined in the next steps. Threshold 1:Minor Modifications. These encompass site or facility changes that do not involve significant changes to the site or public building exteriors; are led and financed primarily by a single party; and are consistent with these guiding principles. Coordination and collaboration between the CCA and the city is essential, but successful precedents exist that can be clearly defined and followed to ensure transparency, mutual understanding and continued success. Examples of this type of change include recent enhancements to site way finding and interpretive signage and current work to improve the bus pull-out and site circulation for improved pedestrian safety. Agenda Item 3C Page 10 Threshold 2: Significant Modifications Led by a Single Party. These are changes to the site or facilities that significantly alter a city-owned building’s exterior, involve new construction or demolition, significantly alter historic site patterns or designsand/or represent a significant change in use. This level of change may be proposed by a single party but will require a higher degree of coordination and collaboration early in the process to address the concerns or needs ofother parties and ensure consistency with these guiding principles. The resulting process may or may not lead to shared financial responsibility, but should ensure transparency, opportunities for public input and clarity and timeliness of decision making for the concerned party(ies). Examples of this type of change include the potential addition of ADA-accessible bathrooms for the Chautauqua Auditorium and the concept of a new free-standing building. Threshold 3: Significant Modifications Requiring Multi-Party Investment. These are changes similar in scope or impact to those in Threshold 2, but which would clearly benefit from joint investment in their design and implementation. Due to the shared investment, these may require an even higher degree of collaboration early and throughout the process. An example of this type of change is the potential undergrounding of utilities around and through the National Historic Landmark area. 5cGuiding Policy Documents. To support a collaborative approach to management of the Chautauqua area, key policy documents should be jointly developed and adopted by the core parties. These include, but are not limited to, the Chautauqua Collaborative Stewardship Framework (which should be revised and finalized consistent with these guiding principles) and the Chautauqua Design Guidelines. 5dPublic Information and Input. Because the management of Chautauqua is a shared responsibility across multiple entities, it can be difficult for the public to find complete and accurate information regarding planning and management-related issues for the area. A shared approach to providing public information and opportunities for public input shall be developed and implemented to support these principles’ goals for collaborative stewardship in the public interest. 6A Cautious Approach to Change While it is recognized that changes within and around Chautauqua will occur over time, decisions over these matters must be thoughtfully and cautiously considered, and collaboratively managed in accordance with these guiding principles to ensure the preservation of Chautauqua’s historic character and unique sense of place. 7Shared Financial Responsibility Because the Chautauqua area is a shared resource with community-wide as well as interest- specific benefit, investments in its care and upkeep should beshared in accordance with the benefit provided to each interest or user group as well as the community at-large. This does not remove the possibility of significant changes being funded by a single party; however, when there are clear benefits to multipleentities, joint funding should be considered. Agenda Item 3C Page 11 Definitions Enhancement:to make greater, as in value, beautyor effectiveness; augment; provide with improved, advancedor sophisticated features. In the context of historic preservation, “enhancement” is usually used to refer to the repair, rehabilitation, restoration and, in some cases, the re-creation of historically documented features. Historic character: those aspects of ahistoric property or historic district that accurately convey a sense of its past. The National Register defines seven aspects of integrity that are important components of historic character: location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feelingand association. National Historic Landmarks typically possess all of these aspects of historic character/integrity. Historic preservation:an endeavor that seeks to preserve, conserve and protect buildings, objects, landscapes or other artifacts of historic, architectural or environmental significance. Leasehold: the property managed by the Colorado Chautauqua Association under a lease agreementwith the City of Boulder as shown inFigure 1. The city-owned property leased by the CCA includes all the land and three buildings including the Auditorium, Dining Hall, and Academic Hall. Manage: to have oversight and responsibility for the on-going affairs and/or the upkeep of a site, property, organization or business. Figure 1: CCA Leasehold (outlined in red) National Historic Landmark: a nationally significant historic place designated by the Secretary of the Interior because it possesses exceptional value or quality in illustrating or interpreting the heritage of the United States. Place management: the process of preserving or enhancing an area in a manner that maintains its integrity as a “place” with a unique character and function. This is practiced through programs to enhancea location or to maintain an already attained desired standard of operation. Place management can be undertaken by private, public or voluntary organizations or a mixture of each. Despite the wide variety of place management initiatives, the underlying common factor is usually to best meet the needs of multiple users and interests (e.g., residents, visitorsand owners) in a manner consistent with the nature of the place. Agenda Item 3C Page 12 Protect and preserve:broadly speaking, protecting and preserving is the process of determining and implementing appropriate actions to minimize change to identified historic properties or districts that would adversely affect their historic character. Stewardship: the ethical overseeing and protection of something considered worth caring for and preserving. Agenda Item 3C Page 13 This page intentionally left blank. Agenda Item 3C Page 14 ATTACHMENT 3:CCAAccessible Restrooms Needs Assessment Auditorium Usage- The Auditorium is not winterized and is usable only in the summer for an approximately 130 thth . day annual season from aboutMay 15to a September 25 In 2012, CCA hosted 58 events in the Auditorium (34 CCA events and 24 Colorado Music Festival (CMF) events). Of the 58 Auditorium events, 56 were in evenings. In 2012, there were 47 CMF daytime rehearsalsin the Auditorium that were mostly free and open to the public. Total 2012 ticketed Auditorium attendance was 42,045(22,840 ticketed for CCA events and 19,205 ticketed for CMF events). CCAestimatesan average of 200 non-paying attendees listening on the lawn outside the Auditorium for each CCA-producedconcert and an average of 125 per CMF concert. This accountsfor an additional estimated 6,375 non-ticketed Auditorium attendees. Current Availability of Restrooms - There are no restrooms in the Auditorium. The closest restrooms are in the Chautauqua Dining Hall on the main dining level on the south side andbelow the Dining Hall on the north side. They areshared with Dining Hall guests and employees andusers of the adjacent park and open space. The closest accessible route from the Auditorium (southwest doors) to the closest restroom door (south side of Dining Hall) is approximately 320 feet in length and slopes downhill, necessitating a significantincline on the return to the Auditorium’s southwest accessible 2 entrance. Neither the distance nor theincline meets accessibility requirements. Patron and Community Demographics and Trends - Survey Data:Ticket purchaser survey data (2012) indicates that of 704 patrons who completed the survey (6.2% response rate): 35% were 55-64 o 24% were 45-54 o 16.5% were 35-44 o 58% of all survey respondents said “convenient restrooms” was very important to o their experience Age Demographics:We know from the 2010 Census that the average Boulder resident is 29 years old.This has remained constant since 1990 while Colorado and the nationhave steadily aged. However, residents in the 55-64 age group havemore than doubled since 1990. This age groupwent from 5% of the overall population in 1990 to 10% in 2010 while the citywide population grew by 17% during that same period. As the baby boomers continue to age and with the increased life expectancy of the population,the segment of the population over 65 will increase significantly in the coming years. Agenda Item 3C Page 15 Commitment to Greater Accessibility - The Chautauqua Auditorium has been a popular community-serving musical and other (orators, dance, theater, comedy) public event venue for community residents and visitors of all ages and many interests since its construction by the City of Boulder in 1898. The City and the Colorado Chautauqua Association, nonprofit steward of the historic core of Chautauqua pursuant to leases with the city since 1898, collaborate to ensure the continuation and sustainability of the Chautauqua tradition.This includes its accessibility. Providing accessible restrooms for the Auditorium will help meet accessibility goals for Chautauqua and all city-owned buildings and will enable more community members and visitors to access and enjoy the offerings in the Auditorium each summer. Agenda Item 3C Page 16 Attachment 4: Input from the Chautauqua Board of Directors From: Susan Connelly Subject: Chautauqua Auditorium Accessible Restrooms Project -CCA Board of Directors inputs to preliminary analysis of location options Working Group members –The Colorado Chautauqua Association board of directors (CCA BOD) held a pre-meeting site visit and then discussed at its regular meeting last night the locations identified to date and the evaluation criteria. Attached is a map that indicates the CCA BOD’s initial reactions to the initial locations –finding that three do not work at all, and suggesting consideration of modifications to two locations. They also endorsed the following statement of support for: Six or more toilets and urinals –three female, three male Dispersed locations desirable –i.e., more than one site –e.g., two compostables at McClintock Trailhead, four nearer Auditorium Do a mixture of HC and standard to increase capacity and efficiency Open for use 4 –6 months/year –not heated Available forall users, not just Auditorium users Respect the iconic buildings and their outdoor spaces. The CCA BOD did not address cost of construction or maintenance at this stage, only intended use and possible locations. Our Public Events staff later added a concern about the possible locations on either side of the loading drive on the west side of the Auditorium, expressing concern about noise right on the other side of the stage wall interfering with performances. The concerns re: operational conflicts are critical to consider. Agenda Item 3C Page 17 This page intentionally left blank. Agenda Item 3C Page 18 %KIRHE-XIQ'4EKI