Loading...
02.28.22 PRAB PacketPARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD Virtual Meeting 6:00 p.m., February 28, 2022 100 Years of Excellence Boulder Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Members 2022 Raj Seymour (Chair) Pamela Yugar (Vice Chair) Charles Brock Elliott Hood Mary Scott Jason Unger Mission Statement BPRD will promote the health and well- being of the entire Boulder community by collaboratively providing high- quality parks, facilities and programs. Vision Statement We envision a community where every member’s health and well- being is founded on unparalleled parks, facilities and programs. Goals of the Master Plan 1. Community Health and Wellness 2. Taking Care of What We Have 3. Financial Sustainability 4. Building Community 5. Youth Engagement 6. Organizational Readiness For more information on BPRD Master Plan visit the City of Boulder web site at: https://bouldercolorado.gov/pages/ parks-recreation-master-plan AGENDA All agenda times are approximate /͘ APPROVAL OF AGENDA (2 minutes) //͘ FUTURE BOARD ITEMS AND TOURS (2 minutes) ///͘ PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (15 - 30 minutes) This portion of the meeting is for members of the public to communicate ideas or concerns to the Board regarding parks and recreation issues for which a public hearing is not scheduled later in the meeting (this includes consent agenda). The public is encouraged to comment on the need for parks and recreation programs and facilities as they perceive them. All speakers are limited to three minutes. Depending on the nature of your matter, you may or may not receive a response from the Board after you deliver your comments. The Board is always listening to and appreciative of community feedback. A.PRAB Orientation and Mentoring (5min) B.PRAB Community Engagement Updates (verbal) (5min) This portion of the meeting is for members of the board to report on PRAB’s annual work plan goal of each member: attending two or more parks and recreation-related community activities per month; promoting parks and recreation through social media; attending site tours; and supporting the department’s partnership initiatives. VIII͘ NEXT BOARD MEETING: Study Session: 6:00 p.m. Wednesday, March 16, 2022 Regular Meeting: : 6:00 p.m. Monday, March 28 2022 IX. ADJOURN sI. MATTERS FROM THE DEPARTMENT A. Park Name History Project: Next Steps (20min) VII͘ MATTERS FROM BOARD MEMBERS IV.CONSENT AGENDA (5 minutes) A.Approval of Minutes from January 24, 2022B. Updates from the Director of Parks and Recreation C. Parks and Recreation Project Updates D. Parks and Recreation Operations Updates s. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION/INFORMATION A͘ Boulder Reservoir Boat Rental Agreement (RMP) (20min) B. 2021 Year End Financial Review & 2023 Budget Planning (30min) C. Bandshell Landmark Expansion (30min) PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD FUTURE BOARD ITEMS UPDATED: February 23, 2022 FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY PRAB MEETINGS February 28: • Boulder Reservoir Boat Rental Agreement (RMP) (d/i) 20m • Bandshell Landmark Expansion (d/i) 30m • 2021 Year End Financial Review & 2023 Budget Planning (md) 30m • Park Names: Next Steps (md) 20m • PRAB Orientation and Mentoring New Members (mb) 10m • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 10m TOTAL MEETING TIME: 2hrs 30minutes (Includes 30 minutes for public participation and consent agenda) March 28: • Historic Preservation Plan (HiPP) (d/i) 90m • Boulder Reservoir Agreements; BCR, CU, AVID, Community Sailing, BAM) (d/i) 45m • Boulder Reservoir Boat Rental RMP Agreement (a) • Growing Gardens Lease Extension (d/i) 15m • 2023 Budget Strategy (d/i) 60m • Honoring Outgoing board members (mb) 10m • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 10m March 16: • Study session for Master Plan Update: Final Implementation Plan April 25: • Swear in New Members (p) • Officer Election (p) • Community Events update – summer calendar/service levels (md) • Boulder Reservoir Agreement (BCR, CU, AVID, Community Sailing, BAM) (a) 30m • Growing Gardens Lease Extension (a) 10m • FGC Restaurant RFP selection (d/i) • 2023 Budget Strategy Continued – Scenario Planning & Facility Fees, CIP 1st Touch (d/i) 90m • Community Engagement Assignments (mb) • PRAB Orientation and Mentors (mb) • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 10m May 23: • Summer Operations Overview • Master Plan Review (d/i) 90m • Financial Strategy (d/i) • 2023 proposed operating budget w/ service levels • 2023-28 CIP (2nd touch) • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) Department Events and Items of Interest • February 21: B&C Applications due • Thursday, February 3, 5:30-7:00 p.m.: Virtual Master Plan Public Workshop (e) • January 19-February 7: Master Plan Engagement online. • Tuesday, February 8, 5:30-7:00 p.m.: Virtual Master Plan Public Workshop - Spanish (e) • March 3, 8 and 10: City Council Interviews with Board Applicants (cc) • March 15: City Council Appoints New Board Members (cc) • March 20-26: BVSD and CU Spring Break • April 26: City Council Study Session for Master Plan Update Implementation Plan • April TBD: Soft-open of Outdoor pools and other summer facilities open • Memorial Day: Outdoor pools and other summer facilities open; Honoring veterans at Columbia Cemetery AGENDA SETTING The PRAB Chair, PRAB Vice Chair and BPR staff set the agenda for the next month on the Thursday directly following the regular PRAB meeting. PRAB members can submit agenda requests to the Chair and Vice Chair by Wednesday following the PRAB regular meeting for consideration. If time-sensitive matters arise, PRAB Chair and Vice Chair may amend the agenda as needed. LEGEND Action Item (a): A public hearing item to be voted on by the Board (public comment period provided). Procedural Item: (p): An item requiring procedural attention. Consent Item (c): An item provided in written form for consent, not discussion by the Board; any consent item may be called up by any Board member for discussion following the consent agenda. Discussion/Information Item(d/i): An item likely to be a future action item (or council item) and/or that benefits from an in-depth discussion. Matters from the Department (md): Items that will be reviewed and discussed during the meeting but not requiring as much in-depth analysis. Matters from the Board (mb): Items initiated by the Board that will be reviewed and discussed during the meeting but not requiring as much in-depth analysis. City Council Item (cc) Other Boards and Commissions (obc) Community Engagement and/or Events (e) Holiday/Closure (h/c) Italics indicate a tentative date or plan. TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board FROM: Ali Rhodes, Director of Parks and Recreation Bryan Beary, Senior Manager, Community Building and Partnerships Dennis Warrington, Senior Manager, Urban Parks Manager Jackson Hite, Senior Manager, Business Services Megann Lohman, Senior Manager, Recreation Regina Elsner, Interim Senior Manager, Planning and Ecological Services Stephanie Munro, Senior Manager, Regional Facilities SUBJECT: Consent Agenda DATE: February 28, 2022 A. Approval of Minutes January 24, 2022 CITY OF BOULDER BOULDER, COLORADO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING MINUTES To listen to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meetings in their entirety, please go to the following link: www.boulderparks-rec.org Name of Board/Commission: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Date of Meeting: January 24, 2022 Contact Information Preparing Summary: Charlotte O’Donnell, 303-413-7223 Board Members Present: Charles (Chuck) Brock, Elliott Hood, Mary Scott, Raj Seymour, Jason Unger, Pamela Yugar Board Members Absent: Staff Present: Bryan Beary, Jackson Hite, Megann Lohman, Stephanie Munro, Ali Rhodes, Charlotte O’Donnell, Regina Elsner, Tina Briggs, Caitlin Berube-Smith, Christy Spielman Guests Present: Mandy Vink (City of Boulder Public Art), Bryan Bowen and Don McDonald (Caddis Design – Consultants for Public Art) Type of Meeting: Regular Agenda Item 1: Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. A quorum was present for the conduct of business. Motion to approve agenda. Motion by Yugar. Second by Unger. The motion passed 7-0 Agenda Item 2: Future Board Items and Tours Rhodes reviewed upcoming PRAB items and opportunities. Agenda Item 3: Public Participation • Jim O’Neil spoke about rowing at the Reservoir and concerns about increasing fees. • Don Wharton spoke about rowing at the Reservoir and concerns about increasing fees. • Larry McKeogh spoke about his experience with open water swims at the Reservoir and shared concern that fees are increasing prohibitively. • Bella Lynch, youth crew captain, spoke about her experience rowing at the Reservoir. • Jaden Olah, youth crew captain, spoke about his experience rowing at the Reservoir. Agenda Item 4: Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes from December 13, 2021 Motion to approve minutes. Motion by Yugar. Second by Scott. The motion passed 7-0. B. Development and Operations Update The Board had the following questions and/or comments: • Excited about the skatepark at the Library. • What is the status of the North Boulder park renovation? • What was the original installation date of the bridge near the library that needs to be replaced? • What is the change in deeds for the cemetery? • Thank you for the information on waste disposal and other farmers market topics. • Spending $200,000 on a contractor for the Historic Places Plan (HiPP) sounds like a lot. How and when does the city decide to bring on consultants instead of staff? • What happens to playground equipment that is at the end of its life? Is it disposed? • Does BPR have standards for how much old material is recycled or how many recycled materials are used in new projects? Agenda Item 6: Matters from the Department A. Public Art Update – Nobel Project This item was presented by Vink, Bowen and McDonald. A summary prepared by Boulder Public Art is attached (Attachment A). The Board had the following questions and/or comments: • Excited for this project. • Concerned that this project will be subject to heavy vandalism and graffiti especially with touch screens and users skating on the elements. • Why was this location chosen? It seems there is already a concentration of art in the civic area. Other places do not have the same level of public art. • How well will touch screens do over time in the weather? Seems like it might not be practical in the long-term. • Need to make sure that there is regular maintenance budget for ongoing expenses. • Concern of having outdoor screens. Would it be possible to have related video station inside the library? Having a video screen outside gives pause. Feels that this would takes away from park setting. • What age group would the design be for? Would it help kids understand what the awards were for. • Feels that outdoor touch screens are not feasible. Would it be possible to use a screen through the window of the library? It would be great to cater to several different age ranges. • The short story kiosk inside the library is great. Would like to see something similar for this interactive project. • Support for the project and the idea. Thinks that outdoor screens would work well. B. Bandshell Landmark Discussion This item was presented by Berube-Smith. The Board had the following questions and/or comments: • Has PRAB sent a formal memo on topics like this in the past? • Why is this being pursued? The current landmark boundary protects the most important elements, staff is at capacity and the area being proposed for addition has been changed continually. Concerned that this landmarking would prevent a future bike path connection from being built and that this would have practical impacts on park operations. • Why is this being pursued at this time? • Is there a planned development nearby? • Is the lawn part of the viewing experience? Do people sit on the lawn and watch the show? • As the PRAB representative to Greenways Advisory Committee, shared information about on-going analysis of the creek path. Timing of landmark process feels siloed and not collaborative to that ongoing work. • Do not appreciate this being put in before CRSS process to try to add an extra steps. • Do not have sufficient information for PRAB to make a statement. What is the timeline for providing PRAB input? • What powers would the Landmarks Board have if this was landmarked? Would they have veto power over any future redevelopment? • Would like PRAB concerns conveyed in BPR staff memo and more information at the next meeting. • This brings forward discussion of other issues around the bandshell. Is this property being maximized? What can be done to make it more accessible, clean and welcoming? Where does historic preservation fit in to these improvements? • Understands staff has limited resources especially when dealing with the downtown area and appreciates continued creative problem solving. • Would like the GAC to be looped in given significant path implications. • What will the citizen input be on this landmark decision? What is that process? C. Boulder Parks and Recreation 2022 Action Plan This item was presented by Rhodes. The Board had the following questions and/or comments: • Grateful for all the staff work. • Is there anything that PRAB can do to support staff at this time? Agenda Item 8: Matters from the Board A. PRAB Master Plan Study Session PRAB decided to meet at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, March 16, 2022. Six board members reported that they will be able to attend. Unger will send written comments if he is not able to make it. B. PRAB Recruitment Open There were no questions on this item. C. PRAB Community Engagement Updates • Seymour spoke on a panel for those applying to city boards and commissions. • Is there a specific way for PRAB to support those impacted by Marshall fires? • Thank you for your communication around the Marshall fire. • Would it be possible to activate board members as volunteers in emergency situations? • Serves as a warning for the winds, grassland, tree interaction. Boulder has been lucky in the past. Need to make plans individually and as a city. Concern is fire and wind season overlapping. Agenda Item 9: The meeting was adjourned at 8:38 p.m. Approved by: Attested: _______________________ _________________________ Raj Seymour Charlotte O’Donnell Board Member BPR Staff Date _____________________ Date ____________________ Attachment A – Summary of Feedback on Public Art Update – Nobel Project Preliminary Feedback from PRAB 1.24.22 • Generally PRAB members expressed support for the concept of the Nobel Plaza project o Appreciate that it invites greater public awareness of high concentration of scientific community o Cool idea o Design – how to make the concept more understandable? Design and placement to consider diversity of participants: ages, abilities, cultural perspectives. Could education on the project continue within the library? Perhaps another story-telling robot, specific to this project? • Lots of art in this area – have additional locations been explored? • Lots of feedback related to the screen components o Maintenance perspective: some touchscreen, exterior (harsh environment) placement concerns; desire to not have it fail upon installation • Considerations around touchscreen in park setting o Video screens feel in conflict with park/plaza experience; disruptive o Donor “need to bring the Nobelists to life” – could this be explored through other means? QR codes, partnership with Library? • Collective concern on vandalism o Encouraged an ongoing maintenance budget as part of the donation o on ongoing maintenance related to video displays; concern (from shared experience) that the video displays will be down more than successfully working B. Updates from the Director of Parks and Recreation The following information is intended to provide the PRAB with general department updates from the Office of the Director. 2021 Annual Progress Report To help ensure the Boulder Parks and Recreation Master Plan functions as a living document that serves the mission of the department and goals of the community well into the future, progress and initiatives are captured and reported in an Annual Progress Report. We are pleased to share the 2021 Progress Report, which illustrates the ways Boulder Parks and Recreation has worked to restore, connect and sustain during 2021 to support the health and well-being of the entire Boulder community. The report is expected to be posted on Friday, February 25. Boulder Parks and Recreation Organization Structure To support the board’s understanding of the structure and functions of the department, Figure 1 below outlines the seven major divisions of the department. This reflects the future state, to be implemented as BPR fills several key vacancies in 2022. Currently, each division is led by a Senior Manager, who reports to the Director of Parks and Recreation. To be recruited in March are: -Senior Planning Manager: To lead the department as BPR addresses key priorities of the coming years such as Community, Cultural, Resilience and Safety tax projects, Master Plan implementation, and Area III planning -Senior Manager for Natural Resources: A new position to provide additional capacity and focus on natural resource planning and operations, with a focus on leading the department’s climate- related initiatives. Moving into March and as the 2023 budget is developed, staff will finalize plans for other hiring priorities– including filling the Deputy Director position vacant since February 2020. Figure 1: BPR Structure March 2022 •Budget Stewardship: •Human Resources •Systems Administration •Process Improvement Business Services: Jackson Hite •Capital Improvement Program •Long-term Planning •Asset Management •GIS •Construction Planning: Vacant (Regina Elsner Interim) •Zone Maintenance •Irrigation •Horticulture •Athletic Turf Urban Parks: Dennis Warrington •Forestry •Natural Lands •Urban Park Rangers •Climate Resilience Natural Resources: Vacant (Regina Elsner Interim) •Boulder Reservoir •Flatirons Golf Course •Valmont City Park Regional Facilities: Stephanie Munro •EXPAND •Youth Services Initiatives and Camps •Events •Volunteers •Marketing Community Outreach and Partnerships: Bryan Beary •Recreation Centers •Aquatics •Health & Wellness •Gymnastics •Sports Recreation: Megann Lohman COVID-19 The latest information and results of recovery efforts can be found at https://bouldercolorado.gov/coronavirus. • Facility Masking Requirements: As of February 18, 2022 at 5:00pm, Boulder County Public Health (BCPH) will no longer mandate facial coverings indoors. In line with the rescinding of these public health orders, the city organization will no longer require staff or patrons to mask when indoors. While masks are no longer required, BCPH strongly recommends that individuals age 2+ wear a mask when around others while Boulder County remains at a level of substantial or high transmission. • Staff Vaccine Mandate: To promote a safe and healthy workplace for staff and the community it serves, the city implemented a requirement for all employees be fully vaccinated by December 8, 2021. The city will comply with all legal requirements related to medical and religious accommodations. • Updates to Staff Guidelines: Employees who are up to date on their vaccination but have been exposed to a positive case may continue to work if they are symptom free but will be required to wear a mask on the job for five days after the last exposure date. City employees are recommended to continue to wear masks indoors when physical distancing of six feet or more cannot be maintained, but it will not be required in most places. C. Parks and Recreation Project Updates The following information is intended to provide the PRAB with relevant updates on specific planning, design, or construction projects as they reach major milestones. This section is not all inclusive of all current projects and only illustrates major project updates. For a complete list of all current projects and details, please visit www.BoulderParkNews.org. Planning and Design The following projects are currently in the planning and design process that involves research, alternatives analysis, public involvement and development of planning documents and design plans to guide decision making and future capital improvements. • Master Plan Update: The most recent window of community engagement closed in early February. Community members were able to choose how to participate, either through an activity posted on BeHeardBoulder or a virtual, staff-hosted open house. Additional micro-engagements were held during this window of engagement to get specific feedback from members of the Latinx community and older adults. A micro- engagement with the Center for People with Disabilities is scheduled for early March. The feedback received from the community will be incorporated into the draft Implementation Plan. The project team will be discussing the draft Implementation Plan with the PRAB at a study session scheduled for March 16, 2022. • Flatirons Golf Course Facility Design: The golf course design in currently in the construction document phase in conjunction with bidding. The documents are in the final corrections of the Technical Document submittals to the Planning and Development Services Department. Once that process approval is complete, the project can be submitted for building permits. In conjunction with the Technical Document submittals, the construction contractor has been requesting and reviewing bids for materials and sub- contractors to provide BPR with the most accurate overall project estimate possible. Staff are working closely with the architect consultant and the construction contractor to review updated estimates and work through value engineering options to align the project cost with the budget. Over the last twelve months, costs increased 21.5% nationally and 22.4% in Denver. Staff is evaluating the potential reductions in material and scope to offset the rising building costs. The design integrity and needs of the community are being considered alongside the financial and sustainability considerations. Below is a chart to demonstrate a historical rise compared to 2021. Any significant changes will be shared with PRAB in the upcoming months. The construction is anticipated to begin the Spring of 2022 with completion by the end of 2022. • Planning Projects Underway: Staff or contractors continue to work on the following projects and will update the PRAB as major milestones are achieved: o Historic Places Plan (HiPP) Construction The following projects are scheduled for construction, under construction or have been recently completed. For additional details please visit www.BoulderParkNews.org. • Boulder Reservoir Capital Maintenance: The 2021 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) program included funded to address key deficiencies outlined in the South Shore Capital Strategy and the restrooms located in the Reservoir Boathouse are currently under renovation. The project addresses deficiencies in the existing facility and will ensure ADA accessibility within the facility and to/from the building, replace outdated fixtures with more current, vandal resistant fixtures, new tile, and new lighting. The restrooms have also been designed to be year-round given increasing demand. The renovation is anticipated to be completed in March 2022. In November 2021, the adjacent parking lot was resurfaced. The funding also included the design and development of way-finding signage, now planned for installation in Spring 2022. • Scott Carpenter Playground Replacement: In 2022, the existing playground at Scott Carpenter Park will be replaced as part of the Department’s on-going General Park Improvement – Capital Maintenance program. The existing playground equipment was installed roughly around 1999 and has surpassed its useful life. The replacement of the playground equipment was anticipated to occur as part of the larger pool redevelopment project completed in August 2020. As total project costs exceeded available funding, the playground enhancement was delayed. Community outreach for playground replacement was completed concurrent to the outreach for the redesign of the pool facility. Feedback received focused on ensuring that the existing rocket ship, asteroid climbing structure, and sand play crater remain and are integrated into the new design. Based on community feedback, feedback from Parks staff, and consistent with the Parks and Recreation Design Standards Manual, the playground has been designed with equipment for 2-5 and 5-12 age ranges and offers a wide variety of equipment to address different play experiences and motor functions. Swings, slides, and a sand play area will also be included. The existing rocket ship, asteroid climbing structure, and sand play crater remain and are integrated into the new design. Proposed Site Plan Proposed Playground Equipment In addition to the standard 2-5 and 5-12 playground equipment, staff has also been working with Growing Up Boulder (GUB) to identify features to be included in a teen space. The Scott Carpenter Playground was identified as a possible location for a teen space for several reasons including its proximity to other play areas, areas for seating, concessions opportunity, proximity to restrooms, and visibility. While the design of the teen space is still being finalized, initial proposed features include hammock swings, interactive benches with programmable LEDs, and a climbing structure. These proposed features are consistent with feedback that GUB has received about what make spaces more appealing to teens. The schedule for the renovation of the playground is dependent on the play structure availability from the manufacturer. Depending on that timing, construction may begin as early as March 2022. Impacts to the park will be communicated to the public in advance of construction starting. The park is anticipated to re-open to the public by Memorial Day 2022. • Skate Park Improvement Projects – Boulder Public Library Underpass: Construction has started on the installation of new skate features at the underpass of the main public library. These features consist of a skate bank and rails and will meet skating needs of users of all skill levels. This fulfills a desire expressed during the Civic Area Master Plan to activate this underutilized area of the park and to add legitimate areas for skating downtown. Construction began on February 14 and is expected to be complete by February 21. During construction, east-west access will still be provided. Detours will be shown on site. All access points to the library, Civic Park Playground, and nature play space will remain open to the public. The installation of the skate spot will not impact existing library activities in this area. In 2021, the Parks and Recreation Department completed and opened to the community three new skate parks at Scott Carpenter Park, Howard Heuston Park, and Valmont City Park. The addition of the new skate features at the parks was supported by community members and stakeholder groups and funded by BPR capital funds and Capital Impact Fees. A key benefit is adding features for skaters, scooters and cyclists in Boulder at a time when self-directed, outdoor activity for all ages is critical to support both physical and mental health. General information on the skate park improvements and pump track project can be found here. D. Parks and Recreation Operations Updates This section is intended to provide the PRAB with timely updates and is not inclusive of all current operations and shares information on specific operational highlights, adjustments or milestones. Gallus Golf App Boulder Parks & Recreation is finishing implementation of a new mobile golf application for iOS and Android from Gallus Golf with an expected launch date of March 1. The app will connect to mobile-optimized pages on the city website as well as the golf course’s Club Prophet booking system. Additional features include GPS on the driving range and course, flyover videos, pro tips, scorekeeping and leaderboards, promotions, and food and beverage menus. Implementation of the app can increase efficiency of booking, save staff time in the clubhouse, enhance play with GPS tools and flyovers and increase direct communication alerts to participants. The app will work in conjunction with the city website and existing golf reservation system Club Prophet. The goal is to increase ease of access and reservations for all customers at Flatirons Golf Course and maintain high utilization. BPR will make sure the app stays clean and useful by following several principles: 1. Equity and accessibility: Colorado state law will require accessibility tools to be implemented by state and local government websites. As equity and access are also top city and department priorities, they should always be considered when modifying or running the application. Staff will be ready to implement accessibility updates and improvements as they become available to maximize inclusion and align with regulations. 2. Linking rather than reproducing: any information that is primarily based on the website will still live there: by avoiding duplication of information, it will be easier to keep current and avoid confusion. 3. Clarity: Keep the app readable and user friendly. It should only contain information and features that work best in the mobile environment. 4. Creativity with Consistency: golf and marketing staff will be empowered to creatively deploy promotions and offers while maintaining quality control and alignment with branding and tone. Figure 2: Home page for Gallus Golf App Gallus provides marketing materials and draft content to advertise the initial app rollout at the start of March, which will be deployed by our own Marketing and Golf teams. Recreation Management System The department has completed the Recreation Management System (RMS) Request for Proposal (RFP) and demo process and has decided to remain with ActiveNet for a three-year term with up to 2 one-year extensions. The current agreement with Active.net had reached five years, and thus the process explored if the department is getting the best value for a fundamental service delivery tool, which handles everything from customer information to activity, facility, point of sale, reporting, financial and league management. A short-list of three final vendors gave demos to a diverse group of staff across the city including BPR, Housing and Human Services, Open Space and Mountain Parks, and Finance. After a thorough evaluation of features, service, pricing, and implementation burden, staff input made it clear that further training with and enhancement of ActiveNet was the most feasible path for 2022, given limited organizational capacity and existing data. The pricing is superior, and upcoming enhancements on Active’s development roadmap address some existing areas for improvement (mobile app/functionality, user experience). Business Services lead on monthly trainings and targeted enhancements for workgroups to make ActiveNet as powerful as possible. BPR also plans to explore a separate cost recovery tool in Q4 of 2022 to enhance data-driven decision making for recreation services and pricing. 2021 Financial Aid Program Update Upon the close of the 2021 calendar year, staff conducted an analysis of participation in the department Financial Aid Program, which provides low-income residents fully subsidized entry to recreation facilities, and subsidized course fees for course provided directly by Boulder Parks and Recreation (BPR). The program is possible due to General Fund subsidy to the Recreation Activity Fund and grants from the Health Equity Fund. Utilization 2021 Financial Aid enrollment continues to show strong participation, largely due to the support of the department’s Recquity Program. Funded through an annual competitive grant award from the Health Equity Fund (HEF). The Recquity Program supplements the 50% subsidy provided by BPR to allow Financial Aid Program participants 100% subsidized (free) visitation to recreation facilities. The department has been a grant recipient since the HEF was created in 2017 through voter approval of a Sugar Sweetened Beverage Product Distribution Tax. Due to HEF funding reductions related to the pandemic, the 2021 scope of work for the Recquity program was limited to support 15,000 fully subsidized visits. By comparison, the pre-pandemic scope of work developed for 2020 was anticipated to support over 37,000 visits and included weekly hours for two bilingual Community Liaison staff to provide enrollment services, programming, and interpretation for Spanish speaking community members. As detailed below, BPR provided access to an additional 7,267 visits beyond what was funded through the Recquity Program in 2021, representing approximately $29,293 of unfunded subsidy. 2021 Financial Aid Program Enrollments 2,889 (16% decrease from 2020) 2021 Subsidy Provided for Courses $33,474 (158% increase from 2020) 2021 Subsidy Provided for Facility Entry $180,495 (37% increase from 2020) 2021 Subsidized Facility Entries 22,267 (39% increase from 2020) 2021 Overall Subsidy for Financial Aid $213,969 (48% increase from 2020) Most of these utilization statistics track directly in line with the restoration of services in 2021. Likewise, staff believe the decline in program enrollment is largely the result of improving economic conditions and the acknowledgement that 2020 enrollment may have been slightly inflated due to a temporary expansion to accept unemployment assistance as a program qualifier during 2020. 2021 Program Improvements Program and process improvements implemented in 2021 included: ▪ ‘Automatic’ qualification for residents of Boulder Housing Partner low-income sites; ▪ ‘Automatic’ qualification for participants of the PLAY Boulder Foundation’s PLAYPass program; ▪ The ability to apply and renew for the program via online formstack (provided in both English and Spanish); ▪ Inclusion of the financial aid program in the citywide Boulder for Me/Boulder Para Mí services eligibility tool developed in partnership with Google.org; ▪ The creation of a process for partner agencies to more accurately assist in the verification of residency of clients in temporary or short-term residential programs. 2022 Next Steps 2022 grant funding for the Recquity Program has again been awarded to the department but remains at the same reduced level as 2021 funding. Accordingly, staff will work towards costing a preferred state for the financial aid program and explore more stable and consistent funding than HEF/Recquity through budget development and the Master Plan Update process. Additionally, as programs and services are restored, staff plan to revisit which products and services are eligible for subsidy – including highly-requested products like permits and golf fees. Boulder Reservoir User Group Follow up Since the January PRAB business meeting and to address the user group and community feedback, BPR staff are working with representatives from the groups to develop 2022 agreements that support the phased implementation of a fee structure that is fair and supports BPR’s rapidly rising expenses while still supporting the user groups’ ability to access the Boulder Reservoir. During this process, BPR is working with Boulder Community Rowing (BCR), Colorado Junior Crew (CJC), and Boulder Aquatic Masters (BAM) groups’ designated points of contact. In February, staff will meet with user groups’ designated points of contact and the user groups' liaison to further discuss Reservoir fees that align services and fees with the policies outlined in the Parks and Recreation Master Plan in 2014. Staff plan to communicate discussions and progress about the agreements to the groups’ points of contact and the PRAB in March. BPR is committed to working with these user groups to support their access to the Reservoir while also supporting financial sustainability and intend to come to a mutually beneficial agreement. Boulder Reservoir Restaurant On March 2, 2022, the Beverage Licensing Authority is hosting a Special Hearing to review the application for a new restaurant/hotel type license at the Boulder Reservoir for Driftwind Restaurant. Meeting materials will be posted here when they are available. Aquatics Updates The department continues to commit additional resources to help alleviate challenges related to the national lifeguard shortage. This cross-departmental team, nicknamed AquaForce, continues to champion efforts around recruitment, retention, and pool optimization: • Recruitment initiatives are focused on building numbers to the water safety team. To date one job fair has been held with at least two more to come in March and April. The new marketing campaign, recruiting Superheroes to join the BPR team, has started and will be amplified in coming months with targeted efforts being explored. The feasibility of pay increases based upon market rates and training reimbursement programs are being explored with Human Resources. • Retention efforts are currently focused on improvements to employee onboarding, creating a positive culture intertwined with the broader department, and employee stay surveys. Employees who feel prepared and welcomed into the department are more likely to report wanting to stay. Stay surveys will help BPR better support employees by understanding why team members stay, why they might leave, what is currently working and what isn’t. Results will inform changes and actions to support vitally important front- line employees. • The pool optimization team is largely focused on ensuring BPR is appropriately prioritizing limited services and pursuing creative efforts to provide additional services. The self-guarding user group agreement is complete and select user groups have been given the opportunity to attend trainings for their own certified lifeguards. To date no user group has attended trainings made available, though this effort may prove beneficial in the near future. Additionally, as the aquatics team prepares for the summer operating season, the pool optimization team is supporting the development of scenario planning to clearly communicate service levels to the community. Plans are being developed for varying staffing situations to clearly communicate realistic levels of service depending upon resources, with the goal to have as many facilities and amenities operational as possible. Recreation Center Updates The South Boulder Recreation Center gym floor remains in disrepair due to flooding caused by a failed boiler system late in 2021. In addition to that issue, a pool leak (also discovered late last year) is also impacting moisture levels in the gym. BPR is working with the city’s Facilities department to coordinate the two repairs while continuing a reduced level of service amidst other constraints. BPR intends to close the SBRC pool in late May to early June, when the outdoor pools are open, to repair the pool and replace the gym floor. The gym will remain closed until that time. Staff intend to identify a flooring product that can meet the primary needs for the space (large indoor exercise space) and is sensible given the short remaining lifecycle of the entire building. This project should begin shortly, as staff have already begun receiving quotes for the removal of the current gym floor at SBRC. Both the NBRC and SBRC have been vital parts of the Boulder community since 1974, joined by East in 1995. In 2016, the city completed a “Recreation Centers Condition Assessment,” to ensure the city is caring for these critical assets appropriately. That plan identified that by 2026, South will have reached the end of its useful life and planning should begin for its retirement and/or replacement. To begin planning for that future, and to ensure the proper refurbishment and enhancement of East and North, staff included a new “Recreation Centers Needs Assessment” in the scope of BPR’s Master Plan update. Those findings will be discussed with the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board and City Council over the next several months as they discuss the draft master plan. Looking to the future, the Master Plan Update will help the city decide how to allocate and prioritize resources. Staff will work with our community and elected officials to determine how to serve the recreation needs of the community in BPR facilities, while considering citywide needs and goals. While the future of the SBRC is uncertain, our commitment to promoting health and well-being is strong and staff look forward to figuring this out with our community. AGENDA ITEM V-A_ PAGE 1__ C I T Y O F B O U L D E R PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: February 28th, 2022 AGENDA TITLE: Discussion of authorizing the City Manager to enter a 5-year agreement with Rocky Mountain Paddle (RMP), covering the community-serving boat rental at the Boulder Reservoir PRESENTERS: Alison Rhodes, Director, Parks and Recreation Department Stephanie Munro, Senior Recreation Manager Regional Facilities Stacy Cole, Reservoir Facility Supervisor EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item provides the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) with information to inform the board’s discussion of the proposed 5-year agreement and operation of the watercraft rentals at the Boulder Reservoir. This public-private partnership opportunity will operate at the Reservoir under a separate entity called Rocky Mountain Paddle (RMP). The parties have negotiated in good faith and propose a 5-year agreement with a term of April 1, 2022 – October 31 1, 2027, as further described in this document. The PRAB’s input will inform the final agreement, scheduled for the board’s review and approval at the March business meeting. BACKGROUND: The Boulder Reservoir is a 700-acre water supply and recreation facility west of the Gunbarrel area of Boulder that provides a diversity of recreational opportunities in an exceptional natural setting. It is a popular multi-use resource that contributes to the health and well-being of the Boulder community and to the quality of the natural environment. Constructed in the 1950s to collect and hold water for municipal, domestic, and agricultural use by members of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, the Reservoir remains, first and foremost, a valuable drinking water supply facility for the city. Recreational activities are supported and managed by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department in a manner that is compatible with the protection and management of the water supply. The Reservoir and nearby Coot Lake are popular destinations for over 300,000 visitors a year who hike, swim, fish, walk dogs, ride bikes, picnic or enjoy the rich diversity of wildlife in the area. Several recreational facilities and services in the Reservoir and Coot AGENDA ITEM V-A_ PAGE 2__ Lake areas are provided by the Parks and Recreation Department (BPR). The South Shore provides facilities to support year-round water-based activities including motorized and non-motorized boating, swimming, water skiing, fishing, wake boarding and tubing, and land-based recreation including picnicking, running, and cycling. A multi-use trail system, including two trailheads and parking lots, support passive recreational uses of the North Shore and Coot Lake including hiking, dog walking, biking, nature observations, and picnicking. The West Shore area is known for its extensive wetland and grassland complex that supports a diversity of sensitive wildlife species. To accommodate the needs and wants of the regional population that the Boulder Reservoir serves, the Reservoir provides services for small watercraft and power boating, drop-in use, special events, small watercraft boat rentals, programs, picnic rentals, and concessions. These service areas offer the user a unique, comprehensive experience in one of the only areas of Boulder where one can swim in a natural body of water and view the Rocky Mountains. Building upon recommendations and policy guidance of the 2014 Parks and Recreation Master Plan, BPR works with a variety of stakeholders, partners, and user groups to facilitate some of the services at the reservoir. These relationships supplement the experience by providing users with the opportunity for swimming and boating offered by subject matter experts. In 2016, in alignment with an analysis of Reservoir operations and the master plan, BPR staff explored outsourcing small craft boat rentals. After a formal procurement process, Rocky Mountain Paddle was selected as the vendor for small craft rentals for a 1-year agreement, with the potential of a renewal every year for a maximum of 5 years total. contract extensions. During these years RMP has provided exceptional customer service, developed positive working relationships with other user groups on-site as well as with the reservoir staff. RMP has been flexible and adaptable to the changing landscape and operational needs over the years of services provided. For example, as the use of SUPs grew over the term of the agreement (see Table 1 below), RMP worked with BPR to develop a clear communication plan that minimized conflict between small craft and motorized craft. RMP over the years has provided access to several charitable events, schools and non-profit organizations (see Attachment D Donation list). As an outcome of the After Action Review (AAR) in 2020, the BPR reservoir staff and RMP worked together to adjust and modify safety protocols that provide a safer environment for those on the water. The reservoir management team and RMP developed an education process for all reservoir users to understand the rules and regulations at the reservoir. RMP Participants 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 # Of Bookings 2,119 2,086 1,563 7,820 3,822 # Of Customers 4,791 4,622 3,061 15,208 7,686 Table 1: Year over Year Participation Growth Staff report positive feedback from RMP users. Participants shared several exciting small craft experiences with the Reservoir and RMP: AGENDA ITEM V-A_ PAGE 3__ Customer comments: “Really easy experience and team to work with. We rented 2 paddleboards for 2 hours and would highly recommend and do it again.” Boulder resident “We had a fabulous family afternoon at Boulder Res renting paddle boards, the Hobie Mirage Eclipse, and Hydrobike. Great equipment and service and knowledge. Thank you!!” June 14, 2017 "Booked time on a board at Boulder Reservoir on a gorgeous Friday afternoon in July. The staff was friendly, helpful, and informative. We had a great time and can’t wait to get out on the water again. I also love the convenience of booking online- in fact, I had to alter my reservation after booking online, and was able to do so with one quick phone call, where they were kind enough to add my friend’s reservation to mine via phone. Great customer service, friendly staff, and equipment are in great condition.” July 2019 “My family has been multiple times and rented the pontoon boat, paddle boards, and kayaks, Overall, it's been a great and easy experience, and would recommend it to anyone in the area. Pros--- Super Friendly staff. Easy to book online- in fact, I don’t think you can walk in without a reservation in COVID times. The pontoon boat is easy and fun to use. They did show us what to do beforehand, but it was super simple. No boating license is required. Everything is clean. There is a separate area for boaters and paddle boarders. Cons—The reservoir is small, but I found there was plenty of room to paddle board and kayak. I never had any close encounters with a boat while kayaking or paddle boarding. Instead of a per car fee when you enter the reservoir, it is a per person fee. However, you can pay with a credit card. There is no swimming right now due to COVID.” August 24, 2020, Boulder neighbor ANALYSIS: As the current agreement with Rocky Mountain Paddle reached its maximum length and in alignment with City of Boulder procurement policies, the Parks and Recreation Department prepared a Request for Proposal (RFP) in November 2021. The base proposal requested an expert, professional contractor to operate a small watercraft rental service on- site during the high season and flank seasons (Mid- April, and Mid-October) which includes small watercraft, paddles, and life jacket rentals for a five-year term. The procurement timeline is outlined in Table 2 below. Milestone Date Release RFP to Vendors November 1, 2021 Vendor Questions Due November 8, 2021 Answers to RFP Questions Released November 15,2021 Proposal Responses Due (4:00 PM Mountain) November 22, 2021 Finalists selected December 8, 2021 Vendor Selection (estimate) December 13, 2021 Contract signed (target) February 28, 2022 Contract Commencement March 1, 2022 Table 2: 2021 Reservoir Boat Rental RFP Timeline AGENDA ITEM V-A_ PAGE 4__ The requested proposals were evaluated based on the following criteria: Vendor Qualifications RFP Criteria: 1. Experience – bids offering a proven track record for small watercraft rental, watercraft rental operational programming, and staff management, with a preference for other municipal or lake rental operations. 2. Fleet – bids offering quality, and well-maintained small watercraft rental inventory. 3. Other Rental Experiences- bids that have a proven track record of other municipal or lake rental agreements. 4. Safety Protocol – bids that clearly outline a safety and emergency protocol and procedures including customer accountability. 5. Scope – bids that clearly define small craft program procedures, actions, and business processes according to industry standards to ensure a safe experience and to ensure compliance with ANS protocols. 6. Vision – bids that outline a vision for service excellence and enhancing the overall experience at the Boulder Reservoir in line with overarching city goals and plans. Concluding the response deadline of November 22, 2021, Rocky Mountain Paddleboard was the only proposal received and BPR began negotiations. Negotiations During contract negotiations, both parties agreed upon performance standards that determine the continuation of the contract. The current small watercraft rental service serves walk-in patrons, picnics, and city/external programs. RMP will manage the rentals that occur at the Reservoir Boathouse renting paddleboards, kayaks, and more. RMP will have the possibility, upon department approval, to expand their business into other areas of service and seasons not to include ski or wakeboard motorboat rentals, but may include pontoon boat rentals and rides, collaborations with the reservoir’s hospitality partner, Driftwind, expanded lesson program or StandUp Paddleboard races. Contractor Performance Measures For the City to promote consistent levels of service at the Boulder Reservoir, the City has established the following performance benchmarks as goals for each of the Contractors. These are standard measures that are incorporated into all BPR partnership contracts and include: • Educational Components to promote participant understanding of health and well- being; • Health Benefits; • Participation (Engagement & Activity); and • Social Relationship Building. These measures will be calculated through parent and participant interactions, participation surveys, and communication between the City and the Contractor. If performance benchmarks are not met, then the City and the Contractor will meet to discuss the future of the services offered. AGENDA ITEM V-A_ PAGE 5__ Contract Requirements as proposed in the RFP are listed below and outlined in Table 3. The proposed RMP contract includes an increased annual base rent that more closely aligns with the facility usage of the boathouse and the Standup Paddleboard storage unit. The introduction of monthly Common Area Maintenance (CAM) fees will be applied during the reservoir’s high season (May – September), which reflects the boat rental seasons. These fees will offset the costs of building maintenance, landscaping trash collection, janitorial services, and utilities use for those months the boathouse is actively being used. Revenue collected is captured at 10% for rentals and programs and 15% for all retail sales. In addition to the revenue share, the reservoir will continue to collect the access fee for all patrons using any RMP services. RFP Bid Requirements RFP Bid Included the following Negotiations for Contract Base Rent $8,000 annually Rental of the Boat House No change Common Area Maintenance (CAM) Fees $500 per month Paid during operational seasons: High Season and Flank Seasons. (Mid-April through Mid-October) CAM fees include; zero waste requirements (excluding large items), water, electricity, general building maintenance, janitorial restroom services, trash removal $300/month Paid during RMP operational season May – September Revenue Share Rentals 10% 10% retained by COB No change Revenue Share Programs 20% revenue retained by COB and participants of registered classes do not pay an access fee. 10% revenue retained by COB and participants pay the access fees. Revenue Share retail sales 20% Retail sales retained by COB 15% retail sales retained by COB Vendor proposed service pricing structure for BPR camp watercraft usage annually during 6 weeks in high season. Include pricing for COB youth summer camp at the reservoir. COB camp charged $5/ craft/ hour for watercraft. Donation of 3 craft per week equating to approx. $1500. Table 3: 2022 RMP Contract Terms NEXT STEPS: The PRAB’s input will inform the final agreement, which is scheduled for approval at the PRAB’s March business meeting. With the PRAB’s approval, the agreement will move to City Council, as their approval is required for any agreement over three years. Upon final approval, the contracts will be executed, and staff will monitor the vendor’s performance to ensure compliance with all terms and performance measures. Attachments: Attachment A 2021 Boat Rental RFP AGENDA ITEM V-A_ PAGE 6__ Attachment B Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 Attachment C Rocky Mountain Addendum 2022 Attachment D RMP Donation list CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO Finance Department / Purchasing Division P.O. Box 791 Boulder, Colorado 80306 Request for Proposal RFP No. 57-2021 Due Date: November 22, 2021 Operate and Manage Small watercraft Rental Service at the Boulder Reservoir For Information Contact: Parks & Recreation munros@bouldercolorado.gov Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO NOTICE OF CALL FOR PROPOSALS 57-2021 The City of Boulder, Colorado, is seeking proposals for: Operation and Manage small watercraft Rental Service at the Boulder Reservoir In accordance with the specifications of the RFP, proposals will be received until 4:00P.M. Mountain Time, Monday, November 22, 2021. Late proposals will not be considered. A copy of this Request for Proposal (RFP) may be obtained from the website at: www.bidnetdirect.com/colorado The city will only accept electronic submissions in response to this RFP. Electronic submissions are required to be considered for an award. Please plan for a maximum file size of 2GB. To submit your proposals online, please visit www.bidnetdirect.com/colorado. The submission deadline is Monday, November 22, 2021, at 4:00 PM MST If you experience problems submitting your electronic response, please contact the Bidnet Direct technical support team (800-835-4603) prior to the submission deadline. The 4:00 pm deadline is a hard stop. You must save your submission to the site before the deadline or you will be locked out and your submission will not be accepted. Proposals shall be prepared at the bidder’s expense and becomes a city record and therefore a public record. The services upon which proposals are submitted shall equal or exceed the specifications outlined in the RFP. Preference is hereby given to labor, materials, supplies or provisions produced, manufactured or grown in Colorado, quality and price being equal to articles or services offered by competitors outside the State of Colorado. The lowest responsible and best proposal shall be accepted; provided, however, that the city, acting through its duly authorized representatives, shall have the right to reject any and all proposals and waive any informality or irregularity contained in said proposal. Dated this: November 1, 2021 City of Boulder, Colorado A Municipal Corporation By: __________________________________ City Clerk Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 3 Table of Contents Section I: General Bid Information ................................................................................... 4 OVERVIEW .................................................................................................................. 4 Section II: Requirements ................................................................................................. 4 Section III: Administrative Information and Requirements ............................................... 6 RFB OFFICIAL CONTACT .......................................................................................... 6 PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE .................................................................................... 6 QUESTIONS REGARDING RFB ................................................................................. 6 PROPOSAL PREPARATION ...................................................................................... 7 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION ......................................................................................... 7 EVALUATION PROCEDURES .................................................................................... 8 Section IV: Required Proposal Response Forms ............................................................ 8 Section V: Attachments ................................................................................................. 10 TEMPLATE 1: REFERENCES ................................................................................... 10 FORM 1: NON-COLLUSION CERTIFICATE .............................................................. 12 FORM 2: ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS ......................................... 13 Section VI: Appendices ................................................................................................. 14 RFB AMENDMENTS ................................................................................................. 14 VENDOR’S COST TO DEVELOP PROPOSAL ......................................................... 14 WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS ............................................................................. 14 REJECTION OF PROPOSALS – WAIVER OF INFORMALITIES OR IRREGULARITIES .............................................................................................................................. 14 PROPOSAL VAILIDITY PERIOD .............................................................................. 14 PUBLIC INFORMATION ........................................................................................... 14 CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION .................................................................. 14 CONTRACT DRAFT………………………………………………………………………..16 Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 4 Section I: General RFP Information A. OVERVIEW BACKGROUND The City of Boulder, Colorado (hereafter referred to as “the City” or “City”), is located in Boulder County, is 35 miles northwest of Denver, and has a population of just over 100,000 residents. The City is approximately 25 square miles in size, surrounded on all sides by nearly 65 square miles of City-owned open space. Boulder is home to the University of Colorado at Boulder and its 36,000 students, faculty, and staff; has a vibrant local economy, with significant industry clusters in “clean tech”, natural and organic foods and active living/recreation; and is home to several federal laboratories, including the National Center for Atmospheric Research, National Institute for Standards and Testing and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The Boulder Reservoir (hereafter referred to as “the Reservoir” or “Reservoir”) is a 700-acre water supply and recreation facility west of the Gunbarrel area of Boulder that provides a diversity of recreational opportunities in an exceptional natural and visual setting. It is a popular multi-use resource that contributes to the health and well-being of the Boulder community and to the quality of the natural environment. Constructed in the 1950s to collect and hold water for municipal, domestic, and agricultural use by members of the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District, the Reservoir remains, first and foremost, a valuable drinking water supply facility for the City. Recreational activities are supported and managed by the City’s Parks and Recreation Department in a manner that is compatible with the protection and management of the water supply. The Reservoir and Coot Lake are popular destinations for over 500,000 visitors a year who hike, swim, fish, walk dogs, ride bikes, picnic or enjoy the rich diversity of wildlife in the area. Several recreational facilities and services in the Reservoir and Coot Lake areas are provided by the Parks and Recreation Department (hereafter referred to as “the Department: or “Department”. The South Shore provides facilities to support year-round water-based activities including motorized and non-motorized boating, swimming, water skiing, fishing, wake boarding and tubing, and land-based recreation including picnicking, running, and cycling. A multi-use trail system, including two trailheads and parking lots, support passive recreational uses of the North Shore and Coot Lake including hiking, dog walking, biking, nature observations and picnicking. The West Shore area is known for its extensive wetland and grassland complex that supports a diversity of sensitive wildlife species. B. Boulder Reservoir site location Boulder Reservoir 5565 51st Street Boulder, CO 80301 Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 5 Boulder Reservoir Boat House Building Located at the Boulder Reservoir Amenities include: Boat House Building; High season operations, storage during low season, trash, recycling, utilities, and janitorial for restrooms. 1,500 Total Square Feet C.SCOPE OF SERVICES Base Proposal The City of Boulder is seeking an expert, professional contractor to operate a small watercraft rental service on-site during the high season and flank seasons (Mid- April – Mid October) which includes small watercraft paddles and life jacket rentals. The successful vendor will establish a contract with the City for a five-year term. There will be established performance standards to determine the continuation of this agreement, and these will be agreed upon during contract negotiations. The current small watercraft rental service serves walk-in patrons, picnics, and city/external programs. 70-150 rentals occur at the Reservoir Boathouse daily renting paddleboards, kayaks, and more. The successful vendor will be expected to operate the boat rental service during high season hours, and will have the possibility, upon department approval, to expand their business into other areas of service and seasons. This does not include motor boat rentals. The vendor will supply and support its own software to process boat rentals, and payments. D.DESIRED QUALIFICATIONS Contractor Requirements 1.Demonstrated experience, license and/or certification in coaching, training, education, and supervision of a variety of small watercraft rental options. 2.Verification of a valid Colorado Business License. 3.Demonstrated best practices for recruiting, hiring, and training staff members. 4.Demonstrated experience in tracking and accountability of all participants and water craft, and/or recreational-based classes, events or programming. 5.Demonstrated experience providing education about rules, regulations and instruction on how to use craft safely and safety on the water to customers. 6.Proven track record in small watercraft rental operations. 7.Demonstrated ability to have successful working relationship with managing entity. 8.Safety certification and risk management protocols for all staff to ensure the highest safety standards and emergency response. 9.Demonstrated experience managing a financially successful business. 10. Fully staff operations according to facility hours; to include the below. High Season: Memorial Day – Labor Day Flank Seasons additional possible operations: Mid April to Memorial Day and Labor Day – Mid October . 11. Abide by reservoir rules and regulations and policies Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 6 12. Have a clear understanding of the Boulder Reservoir Aquatics Nuisance Program (ANS) and support its goals and objectives. E.Long Term Goals 1.Explore options to expand small watercraft rental service to provide a more comprehensive service to the public (including collaboration with other partners, user groups of the facility and Boulder Park and Recreational based programs). 2.Explore options to expand service offerings beyond High Season; Flank Seasons; Mid- April – Memorial Day and Labor Day – Mid October . 3.Explore options to expand programing throughout the facility amenities with particular focus on BPR camps, and community benefit programming such as those for youth, those with low resources, and people with disabilities. F.EXPENSES TO BE COVERED BY THE CONTRACTOR 1.Staff, instructors, and sub-contractor salaries, compensation, and benefits. 2.Legal, human resources, payroll, and other administrative functions. 3. Insurance, certifications, and permits. 4.All program materials and supplies. 5. Business software and all associate fees. Section II: Requirements a) Annual Base Rent for; facility rental which includes, the rental of the boat house: $8,000 b)Common Area Maintenance (CAM) fees; paid only during operational seasons; High Season and Flank Seasons. (Mid April – Mid October) CAM fees include ; zero waste requirements (excluding large items), water, electricity, general building maintenance, janitorial restroom services. Approximately $500 per month c) Revenue share retained by the City of Boulder of all rentals is 10% d)Revenue share retained by the City of Boulder for registered programs and classes is 20% e)Revenue share retained by the City of Boulder of all retail sales is 20% Section III: Administrative Information and Requirements A. RFP OFFICIAL CONTACT Upon release of this RFP, all vendor communications should be directed to the RFP Coordinator listed below. Unauthorized contact regarding this RFP with other city employees may result in disqualification. Any oral communications will be considered unofficial and non- Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 7 binding on the city. Vendors should rely only on written statements issued by the RFP Coordinator. Name: RFP Coordinator; Stephanie Munro; Regional Facilities Manager Address: City of Boulder E-mail: munros@bouldercolorado.gov B. PROCUREMENT SCHEDULE The procurement schedule for this project is as follows: Note: The city reserves the right to adjust this schedule as necessary. Milestone Date Release RFP to Vendors November 1, 2021 Vendor Questions Due November 8, 2021 Answers to RFP Questions Released November 15,2021 Proposal Responses Due (4:00 PM Mountain) November 22, 2021 Finalists selected December 8, 2021 Vendor Selection (estimate) December 13, 2021 Contract signed (target) February 28, 2022 Contract Commencement March 1, 2022 C. QUESTIONS REGARDING THE RFP Vendors who request clarification of the RFP’s requirements may submit written questions to the RFP Coordinator by 4 p.m. (Mountain Time) on November 8, 2021. Written copies of all questions and answers will be provided as an addendum on Bidnet. An email attachment sent to munros@bouldercolorado.gov is preferred. D. PROPOSAL PREPARATION GENERAL INFORMATION Vendors must prepare proposals using an electronic version of the forms provided in Section IV of this RFP. This approach will allow all the proposals received to be compared in a consistent manner. E. PROPOSAL SUBMISSION The following provides specific instructions for submitting your sealed proposal. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 8 Due Date: Proposals must be received no later than November 22, 2021 at 4 p.m. (Mountain Time). Submission Format: Electronic Submissions The city is implementing use of electronic proposal submissions for this RFP. Please plan for a maximum file size of 2GB. To submit your proposal online, please visit www.bidnetdirect.com/colorado. If you experience problems submitting your electronic response, please contact the Bidnet Direct technical support team (800-835-4603) prior to the submission deadline. The city will not accept facsimiles. Late proposals will not be accepted nor will additional time be granted to a specific vendor. All proposals and accompanying documentation will become the property of the city and will not be returned. F. EVALUATION PROCEDURES The evaluators will consider how well the vendor's proposed solution meets the needs of the city as described in the vendor's response to each requirement and form. It is important that the responses be clear and complete so that the evaluators can adequately understand all aspects of the proposal. The evaluation process is intended to help the city select the vendor with the best combination of attributes based on the evaluation factors. Proposals will be evaluated based on the following criteria: Qualifications 1. Experience – bids offering a proven track record for small watercraft rental, watercraft rental operational programming, and staff management, with a preference for other municipal or lake rental operations. 2. Fleet – bids offering quality, and well-maintained small watercraft rental inventory. 3. Other Rental Experiences- bids that have a proven track record of other municipal or lake rental agreements. 4. Safety Protocol – bids that clearly outline a safety and emergency protocol and procedures including customer accountability. 5. Scope – bids that clearly define smallcraft program procedures, actions, and business processes according to industry standards to ensure a safe experience and to ensure compliance with ANS protocols. 6. Vision – bids that outline a vision for service excellence and enhancing the overall experience at the Boulder Reservoir in line with overarching city goals and plans. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 9 The city reserves the right to require that a group of finalist vendors make a presentation to a selection team. The individual that will be directly responsible for carrying out the contract, if awarded, should be present at the oral interview. The city reserves the right to request additional information from any proposing firm. The city may contact and evaluate the firm’s and subcontractor’s references; contact any firm to clarify any response; contact current users of the firm’s services; and seek and review any other information deemed pertinent to the evaluation process. Section IV: Required Proposal Response Forms Vendors must respond to each question outlined in Section II: Requirements, as well as complete all the forms in the Attachments section, and any other requests for information contained herein. The following format is required for response. Proposals must contain all of the following information in the same sequence as presented below. Proposals should provide a straightforward and concise presentation adequate to satisfy the requirements of this RFP. 1. Cover Letter-The cover letter should introduce your company and must contain the following statements and information: Company name, address, and telephone number of the vendor submitting the proposal. Name, title, address, e-mail address, and telephone number of the person or persons who are authorized to represent the vendor and to whom correspondence should be directed. The proposer's federal and state taxpayer identification numbers. 2. A statement of project scope and understanding and vision for the partnership. 3. Your general approach to executing the work, services, rentals, and programs required of the project. Include a description of the specific boat rental and boat recreational services your company provides. Specifically describe how you intend to structure your work, staff, and services to deliver a quality product including tentative programs for seasonal classes. 4. A description of how your previous experience prepares you to facilitate a project such as watercraft rental operations 5. A list of key personnel, including yourself if applicable, who will be assigned to the project, small watercraft rentals, programming and/or classes. For each person list their: a) Position with the company/organization b) Years involved with the company/organization c) Years of experience providing service d) Relevant skills, experience, dance history and credentials e) Applicable training, certifications and licenses f) Results of any background checks performed (if working with children or youth) g) Identify their specific discipline(s) 6. A list of owned/leased equipment that may be used during the project. 7. Information for at least three (3) previous boat rental operations and/or recreational boat/craft programing your company/organization has completed in the last three (3) years, including: Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 10 a) Service name b) Location c) Service description and duration d) Number of staff and participation, e) Services offered including classes, programs, events and types of rentals f) Methods of promotion or marketing g) Contract or fee information h) Photos of instructor, class and venue (optional) i) Service feedback, references and statistics 8. Form 1: a.) provided in this document along with the proposal. Provide an outlined fee structure of the vendors, watercraft rental fees, other rental services fee and pre-registered programing. b.) Provide proposed service pricing structure for BPR camp water craft usage annually during 6 weeks in high season. c.) Provide proposal to ensure accessibility for and/or expand access to groups identified by the Boulder Community as priorities for BPR to serve: aging adults, youth, those with disabilities and those with low-income. City of Boulder Reservoir access fees are paid by the customer upon entry for any rental services. Access fees will be waived for participants pre-registered in ongoing programming (classes) this excludes rentals. Vendor will provide a program roster for all pre-registered programming to receive the waived fees. Vendor will be assessed annual permit fees, any other associated fees outside of small craft rental fleet, and storage fees based on current Boulder Park and Recreation (BPR) fee schedules. 9. Form 2: Provide safety and emergency protocols and procedures for customer accountability, ANS mitigation, weather protocols, and medical emergency procedures, 10. Form 3: Provide an inventory list of rental inventory to include watercraft, lifejackets and paddles 11. Form 4: Please complete and attach the Non-Collusion Certificate 12. Form 3: Please review the city’s contract attached to this RFP, as well as the RFP itself. Proposals which take exception to the specifications, terms, or conditions of this RFP or offer substitutions shall explicitly state the exception(s), reasons(s) therefore, and language substitute(s) (if any) in this section of the proposal response. Failure to take exception(s) shall mean that the proposer accepts the conditions, terms, and specifications of the RFP. If your firm takes no exception to the specifications or contract of this RFP, please indicate so. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 11 Section V: ATTACHMENTS FORM 1: BID FORM All program bids shall be submitted on this form and submitted with the proposal. INSTRUCTIONS TO BIDDERS: The City will accept individual bids for watercraft rental services. The best bid meeting the City’s objectives will be accepted; provided, however, that the City shall have the right to reject any and all bids and to waive any informalities contained in said bids. If your bid is an all or nothing bid, you must state so on the bid form. Service bids will be graded and selected based on the following criteria: 1. Experience – bids offering a proven track record for small watercraft rental, small watercraft rental operations programming, and staff management. 2. Fleet – bids offering quality, and well-maintained boat rental inventory. 3. Qualifications – bids offering a proven track record for programs and staff credentials. 4. Other Rental Experiences- bids that have a proven track record of other municipal or lake rental agreements. 5. Safety Protocol – bids that clearly outline a safety and emergency protocol and procedures. 4. Scope – bids that clearly define program procedures, actions, and processes according to industry standards. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 12 FORM 1: NON-COLLUSION CERTIFICATE NON-COLLUSION CERTIFICATE STATE OF ) ss. COUNTY OF ) The undersigned, being duly sworn, deposes and says that the person, firm, association, copartnership or corporation herein named, has not, either directly or indirectly, entered into any agreement, participated in any collusion, or otherwise taken any action in restraint of free competitive bidding in the preparation and submission of a proposal to the City of Boulder for consideration in the award of a contract on the improvement described as Boat Rentals at the Reservoir. (Firm Name) By: (Authorized Signature) Title Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 13 FORM 2: ACCEPTANCE OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS The Draft Contract attached is intended for use as is. Use this form to indicate your acceptance of the terms and conditions contained in draft Contract attached. Please indicate exceptions to the RFP itself in this form. Proposals which take exception to the specifications, terms, or conditions of this RFP or offer substitutions shall explicitly state the exception(s), reasons(s) therefore, and language substitute(s) (if any) in this section of the proposal response. Failure to take exception(s) shall mean that the proposer accepts the conditions, terms, and specifications of the RFP. Submitters that take exceptions to any terms and conditions or offer language substitutions shall explicitly state the exception(s), reasons(s) therefore, and language substitute(s) (if any) in this section of the proposal response. Failure to take exception(s) shall mean that the proposer accepts the terms and conditions as contained in the draft Contract. Note that such exceptions may render the proposal non-responsive and cause the submittal to be rejected. If your firm takes no exception to the specifications, terms, and conditions of this RFP, please indicate so. The City of Boulder asks that vendors do not submit their own contract. Signed, By: Title Date For: Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 14 Section VI: Appendices RFP AMENDMENTS The city reserves the right to change the schedule or issue amendments to the RFP at any time. The city also reserves the right to cancel or reissue the RFP. VENDOR’S COST TO DEVELOP PROPOSAL Costs for developing proposals in response to the RFP are entirely the obligation of the vendor and shall not be chargeable in any manner to the city. This includes travel to and from the city of Boulder for the purposes of participating in interviews as part of the selection process. WITHDRAWAL OF PROPOSALS Proposals may be withdrawn at any time prior to the submission time specified in this RFP, provided notification is received in writing. Proposals cannot be changed or withdrawn after the time designated for receipt. REJECTION OF PROPOSALS – WAIVER OF INFORMALITIES OR IRREGULARITIES The city reserves the right to reject any or all proposals, to waive any minor informalities or irregularities contained in any proposal, and to accept any proposal deemed to be in the best interest of the city. PROPOSAL VALIDITY PERIOD Submission of the proposal will signify the vendor’s agreement that its proposal and the content thereof are valid for 180 days following the submission deadline and will become part of the contract that is negotiated between the city and the successful vendor. PUBLIC INFORMATION Proposal may be released in total as public information in accordance with the requirements of the laws covering same. Any proprietary information must be clearly marked Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 15 CONTRACT AWARD AND EXECUTION •The city reserves the right to make an award without further discussion of the proposal submitted. Therefore, the proposal should be initially submitted on the most favorable terms the vendors can offer. It is understood that the proposal will become a part of the official file on this matter without obligation to the city. •The general conditions and specifications of the RFP and as proposed by the city and the successful vendor's response, as amended by agreements between the city and the vendor, will become part of the contract documents. Additionally, the city will verify vendor representations that appear in the proposal. Failure of the vendor's products to meet the mandatory specifications may result in elimination of the vendor from competition or in contract cancellation or termination. •The vendor selected as the apparently successful vendor will be expected to enter into a contract with the city. •If the selected vendor fails to sign the contract within five (5) business days of delivery of the final contract, the city may elect to cancel the award and award the contract to the next-highest-ranked vendor. •No cost chargeable to the proposed contract may be incurred before receipt of a fully executed contract. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 16 CITY OF BOULDER SERVICES CONTRACT FOR A RECREATION PROGRAMS AND SERVICES CITY OF BOULDER PARKS AND RECREATION THIS CONTRACT made and entered into this __ day of ____________, 20__, by and between the City of Boulder, (the “City”), and _______________, a Colorado ___________________, (the “Contractor”). RECITALS: The City is desirous of contracting with the Contractor for services associated with the operation of a Recreation Program on behalf of the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation for the period from ____________ __, 20__to ____________ __, 20__ (the “Recreation Program”). The Contractor is fully qualified to perform the services needed by the City in connection with the Recreation Program. COVENANTS In consideration of the terms, conditions and covenants herein stated, the parties agree as follows: 1. SCOPE OF WORK 1.1 The City agrees to use the Contractor's services in connection with the Recreation Programs and services for the period from ____________ __, 20__to ____________ __, 20__, inclusive, and the Contractor covenants and agrees to provide said services as required and requested by the City during said period. The City reserves the right to extend this Contract as mutually agreeable by both parties; such renewals shall be in writing and signed by both parties. 1.2 The City will provide the facility for the operation of the Recreation Programs and services (_________________________________), which facility is known as Boulder Reservoir Boat house_______________ (the “Facility”). The Contractor is responsible for maintaining the Facility in a clean and orderly fashion. Facility space will be provided by the City based on historical needs for the Recreation Services. Additional space needed for the Recreation Program will require approval by the Facility Manager. 1.3. In connection with the Recreation Service, the Contractor shall undertake the duties and responsibilities and provide the services described in Appendix A, “Scope of Work,” which is attached and incorporated herein. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 17 1.4 The Contractor is responsible for providing inclusion services. If a participant in the Recreation Program or service requests an accommodation, the Contractor is responsible for providing any such accommodation in accordance with ADA requirements. By way of example, accommodations may include hands on teaching techniques in addition to verbal instructions, one-on- one staffing assistance, two-on-one staffing assistance, interpreter etc. The Contractor is responsible for all costs associated with providing the accommodation. The Contractor shall contact the City’s EXPAND program at 303-413-7256, for additional information or training regarding accommodations and the inclusion process. 1.5 In addition to those duties outlined in Appendix A, the Contractor shall provide adequate supervision at all times. The Contractor shall maintain a 1:8 staff to child ratio and have at least 2 adult/staff at the Facility at all times. The Contractor, at its own cost, shall obtain a background check on each employee prior to working with any of the Program participants. The background check shall be in accordance with Section 12 CCR 2509-8 and Section 7.701.33 of the Social Services Rules (Staff Manual Volume 7; Child Welfare, Child Care Facilities). The City will perform a background check on the Contractor if the Contractor is an individual and will be working directly with program participants. All background check information as well as CPR Certificates shall be on file with the City of Boulder by ____________ __, 20__. 1.6 As a general matter, the Contractor shall communicate with the City about the Recreation Services only through ________________who has been assigned by the City as the Facility Manager. 1.7 The Contractor agrees to comply with the requirements of the Independent Contractor Manual of the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department. 1.8 The City hereby reserves the right to decide all questions arising as to the proper performance of said services, and as to the quality of the materials used. In the event that the City shall determine that the services are not being performed in accordance with the terms of this Contract, or if the services be wholly, or in part, negligently, or unsatisfactorily performed, then written notice of such defect or defects shall be given to the Contractor. The Contractor may be given 30 days to cure the defect. The Contract shall terminate within 60 days of delivery of such notice. 2. COMPENSATION. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 18 2.1 The parties will cooperate to set fees that will be charged to the participants. However, the City shall have final authority on price set. The Contractor will pay the City on the basis of fees collected from participants. 2.2 Option 1: Payments to the City are based on the amount of revenues collected by the Recreation Programs and services. Such revenues are calculated from the data generated by the Contractor’s software. This data includes both the number of participants and the amount of revenue collected year to date for the Recreation Programs and services and is set forth in a revenue report generated by the Contractor (the “Revenue Report”). The City will be paid __% of the revenue collected by the Recreation Programs and services. 2.3 Option 2: Payments to the Contractor are based on the amount of revenues collected by the Recreation Programs and services. Such revenues are calculated from the data generated by the City’s recreation registration software. This data includes both the number of program participants and the amount of revenue collected year to date for the Recreation Program and is set forth in a revenue report generated by the City (the “Revenue Report”) The Contractor will be paid __% of the revenue collected by the Recreation Program. 2.4 The Contractor agrees to provide City with an initial invoice and a copy of the Revenue Report within 30 days of the conclusion of the Recreation Program session. It is the responsibility of the City to review this information and to submit a final invoice to the Contractor for payment. Subject to final approval by the City, the Contractor shall pay the final invoice within 30 days of receipt. The City shall only pay expenses associated with the operation of the Recreation Program as set forth on Appendix A. 2.5 The Contractor will provide the City with program registration information prior to the first class. Upon reasonable advance request, the City may inspect and copy any or all records of the Contractor which would bear on any amounts charged to the City pursuant to this Contract. The Parties will share any information collected including registration information, addresses and emails of participants. 2.5 If the Contractor is unable to meet its obligations under this Contract, and any participant requests a refund, the Contractor may refund all or a portion of the course fee to the participant and withhold such amount from the payment to the City. If payment to the City has already been made, the Contractor will bill the City for the amount to be reimbursed, and the City will pay that amount to the Contractor within two (2) weeks of the date of such bill. If a participant chooses to drop out of a scheduled class, the City’s refund policy outlined in Appendix B, “Refund Policy,” which is attached and incorporated herein, will be adhered to. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 19 3. INSURANCE. 3.1 The Contractor agrees to procure and maintain in force during the term of this Agreement, at its own cost, the following minimum coverages: A. Workers’ Compensation and Employers’ Liability i. State of Colorado: Statutory B. General Liability i. General Aggregate Limit: $2,000,000 ii. Per Occurrence: $1,000,000 Coverage provided should be at least as broad as found in Insurance Services Office (ISO) form CG0001. C. Insurance shall: i. Provide primary coverage; ii. Include the City of Boulder and its officials and employees as additional insureds as their interest may appear (except for Worker’s Compensation and Professional Liability). Additional insured endorsement should be at least as broad as ISO form CG2010 for General Liability coverage and similar forms for auto liability; iii. Include a waiver of subrogation for General Liability coverage; iv. Issue from a company licensed to do business in Colorado having an AM Best rating of at least A-VI; and v. Be procured and maintained in full force and effect for duration of work. D. Certificates of Insurance evidencing the coverages described herein, shall be forwarded to the Program Manager. Certificate Holder shall be: City of Boulder, 1777 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80306. E. Within twenty-one days after receiving insurer’s notice of cancellation or reduction in coverage, the Contractor, or its insurance broker, shall notify the City. In either such case, the Contractor shall promptly obtain and submit proof of substitute insurance complying with the City’s insurance requirements. 3.2 The Contractor agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City against any and all damages to property or injuries to or death of Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 20 any person or persons arising from its performance of this Contract, including property and employees or agents of the City and shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the City from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions or proceedings of any kind or nature, including without limitation Worker's Compensation claims, of or by anyone whomsoever in any way resulting from or arising out of the Contractor's operations in connection with this Contract, including operations of subcontractors and acts or admissions of employees or agents of the Contractor or its subcontractor. 3.3 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Contract to the contrary, no term or condition of this Contract shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any of the immunities, rights, benefits, protection, or other provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10- 101 et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. The parties understand and agree that liability for claims for injuries to persons or property arising out of negligence of the City, its departments, institutions, agencies, boards, officials and employees is controlled and limited by the provisions of Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. 4. MISCELLANEOUS. 4.1 The relationship between the Contractor and the City is that of an independent contractor. The Contractor shall supply all personnel, equipment, materials and supplies at its own expense, except as specifically set forth herein. The Contractor shall not be deemed to be, nor shall it represent itself as, an employee, partner, or joint venturer of the City. No employee or officer of the City shall supervise the Contractor. The Contractor is not entitled to worker’s compensation benefits and is obligated to directly pay federal and state income tax on money earned under this Contract. 4.2 The Contractor shall not assign this Contract without the written consent of the City, which it may withhold at its sole discretion. 4.3 This Contract shall be subject to the provisions of the Charter, Municipal Code and Ordinances of the City of Boulder. 4.4 Termination. This Contract may be terminated by either party if it has been materially breached by the other party and written notification is tendered or as set forth in paragraphs 1.7 and 1.9. In the event of a material breach, the City reserves the right to terminate within three (3) days of tendering written notification to Contractor of the breach. City may, at any time, terminate this Contract, in whole or in part, for its own convenience. City shall Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 21 pay Contractor for work satisfactorily completed, to the date of termination. The City shall determine the portion of work completed. 4.5 It is expressly understood and agreed that the enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Contract and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the City and the Contractor. Nothing contained in this Contract shall give or allow any claim or right of action whatsoever by any other third party. It is the express intention of the City and the Contractor that any such party or entity, other than the City or the Contractor, receiving services or benefits under this Contract shall be deemed an incidental beneficiary only. 4.6 The waiver of any breach of a term, provision, or requirement of this Contract shall not be construed or deemed as waiver of any subsequent breach of such term, provision, or requirement, or of any other term, provision, or requirement. 4.7 This Contract is intended as the complete integration of all understandings between the parties. No prior or contemporaneous addition, deletion, or other amendment hereto shall have any force or effect whatsoever, unless embodied herein in writing. No subsequent notation, renewal, addition, deletion, or other amendment hereto shall have any force or effect unless embodied in a writing executed and approved by the City pursuant to City rules. 4.8 The Contractor certifies that the Contractor shall comply with the provisions of Section 8-17.5-101 et seq., C.R.S. The Contractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this Contract or enter into a contract with a subcontractor that fails to certify to the Contractor that the subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with an illegal alien to perform work under this contract. The Contractor represents, warrants, and agrees: (i) that it has confirmed the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment to perform work under this contract through participation in either the E-Verify or the Department Program; (ii) that the Contractor is prohibited from using either the E-Verify Program or the Department Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while the public contract for services is being performed; and (iii) if the Contractor obtains actual knowledge that a subcontractor performing work under the public contract for services knowingly employs or contracts with an illegal alien, the contractor shall be required to: Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 22 a) Notify the subcontractor and the contracting state agency or political subdivision within three (3) days that the contractor has actual knowledge that the subcontractor is employing or contracting with an illegal alien; and b) Terminate the subcontract with the subcontractor if within three days of receiving the notice required pursuant to Section 8-17.5- 102(2)(b)(III)(A) the subcontractor does not stop employing or contracting with the illegal alien; except that the contractor shall not terminate the contract with the subcontractor if during such three (3) days the subcontractor provides information to establish that the subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with an illegal alien. The Contractor further agrees that it shall comply with all reasonable requests made in the course of an investigation under Section 8-17.5-102(5), C.R.S. by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment. If the Contractor fails to comply with any requirement of this provision or Section 8-17.5-101 et seq., C.R.S. the City may terminate this contract for breach and the Contractor shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City. 4.9 The Contractor warrants that the individual executing this Contract is properly authorized to bind the Contractor to this Contract. [Signature Page Follows] Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 23 The parties hereto have signed this Contract effective as of the day and year first written above. CONTRACTOR By: __________________________ Title: _________________________ STATE OF COLORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF BOULDER ) The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me, a notary public, this __ day of __________________, 20__, by______________________________________ as _____________________________of ______________________________________. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: _____________________________ (SEAL) Notary Public CITY OF BOULDERATTEST: _____________________________ City Manager _____________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: ______________________________ City Attorney’s Office Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 24 Appendix A SCOPE OF WORK A. Specific Program Information: INCLUDE PROGRAM/SERVICES DESCRIPTION HERE B. The City of Boulder agrees to provide the following services for the program specified above: 1. Facility and location: 2. Equipment: 3. Advertise the services in marketing efforts as they present themselves. 4. Provide inclusion training for the Contractor as needed. 5. Provide the Contractor with orientation on the City’s policies and procedures. C. The Contractor shall comply with the following standard City of Boulder requirements: 1. TRAININGS. Prior to the start of the services, Contractor agrees to participate in City trainings as follows: a. The Contractor and/or staff will participate in pre-service training on the City of Boulder policies and procedures and facility use. b. The Contractor and staff will attend staff training both before the start of the services and as necessary to provide all services. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 25 c. The Contractor and staff will attend inclusion training by the City of Boulder EXPAND program as needed. 2. RECREATION PROGRAMs and services OPERATION. The Contractor will schedule and supervise all recreation programs and services s and participants with approval from the Facility Manager, such duties include but are not limited to the following: a. The Contractor will hire, supervise and pay all staff of the Recreation Programs and services. b. The Contractor will brand the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department through marketing materials, staff uniforms, banners, etc. consistent with all City of Boulder Parks and Recreation regulations for branding. c. The Contractor will submit all promotional materials to the facility Manager for use in the Recreation Guide in a timeframe determined by the Facility Manager. d. The Contractor will collect City Risk and Release forms from each participant and return to City of Boulder staff at the end of each operational season. . e. The Contractor will keep accurate records and provide complete and timely information for required reports on activities including check-in and check-out procedures, incident and accident reports and injury log. f. The Contractor will collect all participants’ information for promotional materials (i.e. name, e-mail, address, phone number) and provide to the facility Manager on or before the conclusion of the program. g. The Contractor will meet with the Facility Manager on a 3X per year to report on the Recreation Program. h. The Contractor will submit incident or accident forms within 72 hours of such incident or accident. The forms will be provided to the Contractor and should be faxed or turned into the facility Manager. 3. The Contractor will maintain an injury log that will be provided and kept at the facility and turned into the facility Manager at the end of the high season MASTER PLAN GOALS. The Contractor will align with the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Master Plan goals to meet community needs, including, but not limited to the following: a. The Contractor will provide a scholarship program for participants who Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 26 the City determines are eligible for financial assistance. The Contractor is responsible for all costs associated with providing the assistance. b. In conjunction with a scholarship program, the Contractor will conduct community outreach to underserved populations of the community. c. The Contractor will set program plans to broaden the scope of offerings for a wide range of community opportunities. d. The Contractor agrees to participate in a minimum of one City special event and appropriate “guest appearances” within current City programming and outreach efforts. e. The Contractor will work with the facility Manager to maximize facility use while exploring creative ways to use available spaces. REPORTING OBLIGATIONS. The Contractor shall submit a Lifecycle Management and Delivery Model Report (the “Lifecycle Report”) to the Program Manager on or before November 1 of each contract year. The Report will be generated on form provided by the City. The purpose of the report is to assist the City in the evaluation of the Recreation Programs and services and the development of future programs and services. 4. PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS. In order for the City to guarantee consistent levels of service for all its Recreation Programs and services, the City has established performance benchmarks as goals for the Contractor. Performance measures will include participation and satisfaction rates as follows: • Educational Components; • Health Benefits; • Participation (Engagement & Activity); and • Social Relationship Building. These measures will be calculated through parent and participant interactions, participation surveys, and communication between the City and the Contractor. If performance benchmarks are not met, then the City and the Contractor will meet to discuss the future of the services offered. The performance benchmarks are as follows: 1. In 2022 an average of 75% of respondents indicate they are fully or partially satisfied with program offerings and/or instruction on quarterly program participant surveys, 2. In 2023 and 2024, increase the number of participants in 2022 by 2% each year and; Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 27 3.In 2023 and 2024, an average of 80% of respondents should indicate they are fully or partially satisfied with program offerings and/or instruction on quarterly program participation surveys. Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP 28 Appendix B REFUND POLICY Programs: • Before second meeting $15.00 fee • After second class No Refund Attachment A - 2021 Boat Rental RFP AGREEMENT FOR USE OF BOULDER RESERVOIR THIS AGREEMENT FOR USE OF BOULDER RESERVOIR (“Agreement”) is made this __ day of ______________, 20__, by and between the City of Boulder, a Colorado home rule municipality ("City"), and Rocky Mountain Paddleboard, LLC, a Colorado limited liability company (" RMP"). The City and RMP may hereinafter be referred to individually as a “Party” or collectively as the “Parties.” RECITALS A. The City owns and operates the Boulder Reservoir (the “Reservoir”), located at 5565 51st Street in Boulder; and B. The Reservoir is subject to heavy, and frequently competing, demands for use from individual citizens and from organized groups; and C. The City has incurred and will incur substantial expenses to own and operate the Reservoir; and D. The Parties recognize that it is in the public interest that access to the Reservoir be allocated fairly among the various users and that individuals and organization using the Reservoir each pay a fair share of the operating costs; and E. Both Parties recognize the need for boat rentals and associated services at the Reservoir; and F. The Parties desire to reach an agreement which will allow RMP to rent small craft boats (kayaks, paddleboards, canoes, hydro-bikes, stand up paddle boards), instruct on small craft use, and hold classes and programs related to small watercraft (the “Services”). AGREEMENT In exchange for the mutual promises and agreements contained herein, which constitute good and sufficient consideration, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Term. A. The term of this Agreement shall be April 1, 2022 through October 31, 2027, inclusive (“Term”). 2. Amendment in Writing. A. No amendment or modification shall be made to this Agreement unless it is ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 in writing and signed by both Parties. Neither the course of conduct between the Parties nor any trade practice shall act to modify the provisions of this Agreement except as expressly stated herein. 3. Scope of Work. 3.1 The City agrees to use the Services of RMP as set forth in more detail in Appendix A, Scope of Work, attached hereto and incorporated herein, for the Term of this Agreement and RMP covenants and agrees to provide the Services as required and requested by the City during the Term of this Agreement. 3.2 The City will provide the facility at the Reservoir for the Services, which facility is known as the Boathouse (the "Facility") as depicted in Appendix C, Boulder Reservoir Boathouse Facility, attached hereto and incorporated herein. RMP is responsible for maintaining the Facility in a clean and orderly fashion. The Facility space will be provided by the City based on historical needs for the Services. Additional space needed for the Services will require written approval from the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee and shall be reflected as an amendment to this Agreement. 3.3. In connection with the Services, RMP shall undertake the duties and responsibilities and provide the services described in Appendix A. 3.4 RMP is responsible for providing inclusion services. If a participant in the Services requests an accommodation, RMP is responsible for providing any such accommodation in accordance with American Disability Act (ADA) requirements. By way of example, accommodations may include hands on teaching techniques in addition to verbal instructions, one- on-one staffing assistance, two-on-one staffing assistance, interpreter, etc. RMP is responsible for all costs associated with providing the accommodation. RMP shall contact the City's Exciting Programs Adventures and New Dimensions (EXPAND) at 303-441- 7256, for additional information or training regarding accommodations and the inclusion process. 3.5 In addition to those duties outlined in Appendix A, RMP shall provide adequate supervision at all times. RMP shall maintain at least two (2) adult staff members at the Facility at all times. RMP, at its own cost, shall obtain a background check on each employee prior to working with any of the participants. The background check shall be in accordance with Section 12 CCR 2509-8 and Section 7.701.33 of the Social Services Rules (Staff Manual Volume 7; Child Welfare, Child Care Facilities). The City will perform a background check on RMP if RMP is an individual and will be working directly with program participants. RMP shall provide the City with all background check information, as well as CPR Certificates, no later than May 31 of each year of the Term of this Agreement. 3.6 As a general matter, RMP shall communicate with the City about the Services primarily through Reservoir Supervisor or their designee or their designee. 3.7 RMP agrees to comply with the requirements of the Independent Contractor Manual of the City’s Boulder Parks and Recreation Department. ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 4. Compensation. 4.1 The Parties will cooperate to set fees that will be charged to a person who wishes to obtain rental, class, or lesson services with RMP (the "Participants"). However, the City shall have final authority on price set for fees. All RMP participants shall pay the established facility access fee upon entry into facility. RMP will pay the City on the basis of fees collected from participants, as set forth below and more fully described in Appendix B, Fee Schedule, attached hereto and incorporated herein. 4.2 Payments to the City are based on the amount of revenues collected by RMP for the Services. Such revenues are calculated from the data generated by RMP’s rental software. This data includes both the number of rentals and the amount of revenue collected month to date for the Services and is set forth in revenue reports generated by RMP (the "Revenue Reports"). RMP will pay to the City ten percent (10%) of the total revenue collected by RMP from the Services. In addition, RMP will pay to the City fifteen percent (15%) of retail sales of any products sold by RMP, as well as $8,000 (“Base Rent”)for boat house rental for year round use of the boathouse, and $300/month in Common area maintenance fees in the months of May - September. Base Rent shall increase annually by three percent, with the first increase occurring on the first day of the thirteenth full calendar month from the Effective Date and every 12 months thereafter. Late payments shall incur a late penalty fee of $50 per day that it is late. Tenant may also be subject to termination of Agreement for non-payment or late payment as set forth in Section 8 of this Contract. 4.3 RMP agrees to provide the City with a copy of the Revenue Reports within thirty (30) days of the dates set forth in Appendix B. It is the responsibility of the City to review this information and to submit a final invoice to RMP for payment. Subject to final City approval, RMP shall pay the final invoice within thirty (30) days of receipt. The City shall only pay expenses associated with the Services as set forth on Appendix A. 4.4 RMP will provide the City with boat rental information prior to the first day of business each year. Upon reasonable, advance request, the City may inspect and copy any or all records of RMP which would bear on any amounts charged to the City pursuant to this Agreement. The Parties will share any information collected, including participant information, addresses, and email addresses of the Participants. 4.5 If RMP is unable to meet its obligations under this Agreement, and any of the Participants requests a refund, RMP may refund all or a portion of the service fee to the Participants and withhold such amount from the payment to the City. If payment to the City has already been made, RMP will bill the City for the amount to be reimbursed, and the City will pay that amount to RMP within two (2) weeks of the date of such bill. 5. Insurance ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 5.1 a. Minimum Coverages. RMP agrees to procure and maintain in force during the term of this Agreement, at its own cost, the following minimum coverages: i. Workers’ Compensation and Employers’ Liability State of Colorado: Statutory ii. General Liability – ISO CG 00001 or equivalent A. General Aggregate Limit: $2,000,000 B. Per Occurrence: $1,000,000 iii. Automobile Liability Limits - ISO form CA0001 (BAP) or equivalent including coverage for owned, non-owned, and hired autos 1 Bodily Injury & Property Damage Combined Single Limit: $1,000,000 b. Additional Insurance Requirements. i. All insurers must be licensed or approved to do business within the State of Colorado, and unless otherwise specified, all policies must be written on a per occurrence basis. ii. Where commercially available, RMP shall name “the City of Boulder, it's elected and appointed officials, directors, officers, employees, agents and volunteers” as additional insureds as their interest may appear (except for Workers’ Compensation and Professional Liability). Additional insured endorsement should be at least as broad as ISO form CG2010 for General Liability coverage and similar forms for auto liability. iii. The Certificate Holder shall be identified as: City of Boulder, P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306. iv. All policies of insurance shall be written on a primary basis, non- contributory with any other insurance coverages and/or self-insurance carried by the City. v. A Separation of Insureds Clause must be included in general liability policies. vi. RMP limits are reduced below the required per occurrence limit. At its own expense, RMP will reinstate the aggregate limits to comply with the 1 Applicable only if RMP, its agents, employees, or representatives will be using motor vehicles in Colorado while performing the Services. ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 minimum requirements and shall furnish to the City a new certificate of insurance showing such coverage is in force. vii. RMP’s insurance carrier shall possess a minimum A.M. Best’s Insurance Guide rating of A- VI. viii. RMP, or RMP’s insurance broker, shall notify the City of any cancellation or reduction in coverage or limits of any insurance within seven (7) days of receipt of insurer’s notification to that effect. RMP shall forthwith obtain and submit proof of substitute insurance in the event of expiration or cancellation of coverage. ix. RMP is responsible for any damage or loss to its own vehicles or equipment. x. The City and RMP shall cooperate with each other in the collection of any insurance proceeds that may be payable in the event of any loss, including the execution and delivery of any proof of loss or other actions required to effect recovery. xi. RMP and its insurers shall waive subrogation in favor of Additional Insured parties. xii. RMP shall not be relieved of any liability, claims, demands, or other obligations assumed pursuant to this Agreement by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance or by reason of its failure to procure or maintain insurance in sufficient amounts, durations or types. xiii. General Liability coverage shall include a waiver of subrogation. 6. Indemnification 6.1 Contractor agrees to indemnify and save harmless the City against any and all damages to property or injuries to or death of any person or persons arising from its performance of this Agreement, including property and employees or agents of the City and shall defend, indemnify and save harmless the City from any and all claims, demands, suits, actions or proceedings of any kind or nature, including without limitation Workers’ Compensation claims, of or by anyone whomsoever in any way resulting from or arising out of BCR’s operations in connection with this Agreement, including operations of subcontractors and acts or omissions of employees or agents of BCR. 7. Immunity. 7.1 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no term or condition of this Agreement shall be construed or interpreted as a waiver, express or implied, of any of the immunities, rights, benefits, protection, or other provisions of the Colorado Governmental Immunity Act, Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 The Parties understand and agree that liability claims for injuries to persons or property arising out of negligence of the City, its departments, institutions, agencies, boards, officials and employees is controlled and limited by the provisions of Section 24-10-101 et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. 8. Miscellaneous. 8.1 The relationship between RMP and the City is that of an independent contractor. RMP shall supply all personnel, equipment, materials, and supplies at its own expense, except as specifically set forth herein. RMP shall not be deemed to be, nor shall it represent itself as, an employee, partner, or joint venturer of the City. No employee or officer of the City shall supervise RMP. RMP is not entitled to workers’ compensation benefits and is obligated to directly pay federal and state income tax on money earned under this Agreement. 8.2 RMP shall not assign this Agreement without the written consent of the City, which it may withhold at its sole discretion. 8.3 This Agreement shall be subject to the provisions of the Charter, Municipal Code and Ordinances of the City of Boulder. RMP shall comply with any city ordinance and use codes, relevant local and state ordinances. RMP will follow sound ordinance and ANS policy. 8.4 This Agreement may be terminated by either Party if it has been materially breached by the other Party and written notification is tendered. In the event of a material breach, the City reserves the right to terminate within three (3) days of tendering written notification to RMP of the breach. The City may, at any time, terminate this Agreement, in whole or in part, for its own convenience. The City shall pay RMP for work satisfactorily completed, to the date of termination. The City shall determine the portion of work completed. 8.5 In addition, the City reserves the right to terminate this Agreement if RMP fails to meet minimum revenue requirements established by the City and RMP one (1) month prior to Memorial Day. Failure to meet minimum revenue requirements shall be considered a material breach and the procedures set forth above shall be applied. 8.6 Furthermore, the City hereby reserves the right to decide all questions arising as to the proper performance of the Services, and as to the quality of the materials used. In the event that the City shall determine that the Services are not being performed in accordance with the terms of this Agreement, or, if the services be wholly, or in part, negligently, or unsatisfactorily performed, then written notice of such defect or defects shall be given to RMP. RMP may be given thirty (30) days to cure the defect. This Agreement shall terminate within sixty (60) days of delivery of such notice if the City determines that the defect has not been cured. 8.7 It is expressly understood and agreed that the enforcement of the terms and conditions of this Agreement and all rights of action relating to such enforcement, shall be strictly reserved to the City and RMP. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall give or allow any claim or right of action whatsoever by any other third party. It is the express intention of the City and RMP that any such party or entity, other than the City or RMP, receiving services or benefits under ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 this Agreement shall be deemed an incidental beneficiary only. 8.8 The waiver of any breach of a term, provision, or requirement of this Agreement shall not be construed or deemed as waiver of any subsequent breach of such term, provision, or requirement, or of any other term, provision, or requirement. 8.9 This Agreement is intended as the complete integration of all understandings between the Parties. No prior or contemporaneous addition, deletion, or other amendments hereto shall have any force or effect whatsoever, unless embodied herein in writing. No subsequent notation, renewal, addition, deletion, or other amendments hereto shall have any force or effect unless embodied in a writing executed and approved by the City pursuant to the City’s rules. 8.10 RMP agrees to rent watercraft to City of Boulder watersports camp at $5/craft per hour 9. Worker Without Authorization. a. No Employment of Worker Without Authorization. RMP certifies that RMP shall comply with the provisions of Section 8-17.5-101, et seq., C.R.S., as now or hereafter amended. RMP shall not knowingly employ or contract with a worker without authorization to perform work under this Agreement or enter into a contract with a Subcontractor that fails to certify to RMP that the Subcontractor shall not knowingly employ or contract with a worker without authorization to perform work under this Agreement. b. Employment Eligibility Confirmed. RMP represents, warrants, and agrees (i) that it has confirmed the employment eligibility of all employees who are newly hired for employment to perform work under this Agreement through participation in either the E-Verify Program as defined by Section 18-17.5-101(3.7), C.R.S., or the employment verification program established pursuant to Section 8-17.5-102(5)(c), C.R.S. (“Department Program”); (ii) that RMP is prohibited from using either the E-Verify Program or Department Program procedures to undertake pre-employment screening of job applicants while work under this Agreement is being performed; and (iii) if RMP obtains actual knowledge that a Subcontractor performing work under this Agreement knowingly employs or contracts with a worker without authorization, RMP shall be required to: i. Notify the Subcontractor and the City within three (3) days that RMP has actual knowledge that the Subcontractor is employing or contracting with a worker without authorization; and ii. Terminate the subcontract with the Subcontractor if, within three (3) days of receiving the notice required pursuant to Section 8-17.5- 102(2)(b)(III)(A), C.R.S., the Subcontractor does not stop employing or contracting with the worker without authorization; ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 except that RMP shall not terminate the contract with the Subcontractor if during such three (3) days the Subcontractor provides information to establish that the Subcontractor has not knowingly employed or contracted with a worker without authorization. c. Compliance with Investigation. RMP further agrees that it shall comply with all reasonable requests made in the course of an investigation under Section 8-17.5-102(5), C.R.S., by the Colorado Department of Labor and Employment. If RMP fails to comply with any requirement of this provision or Section 8-17.5-101, et seq., C.R.S., the City may terminate this Agreement for breach and RMP shall be liable for actual and consequential damages to the City. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 The Parties to this Agreement have caused it to be executed by their authorized officers as of the day and year first above written. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be original, but all of which together shall constitute a fully binding and executed Agreement. ROCKY MOUNTAIN PADDLEBOARD, a/k/a RMP By: _______________________________ Title: _____________________________ CITY OF BOULDER __________________________________ City Manager ATTEST: _______________________________ City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: _______________________________ City Attorney’s Office ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 Appendix A Scope of Work A. Specific Program Information. The Services include renting small craft boats (kayaks, paddleboards, canoes, hydro-bikes, stand up paddle boards and one pontoon boat), instruction on small craft use, classes and programs related to small watercraft, and ensuring the Participants’ safety and compliance with RMP’s rules and the City’s rules. As a key partner at the Boulder Reservoir, RMP will work with the city to ensure all operations honor that the Boulder Reservoir is a shared community resource and a public place. Its first and foremost purpose is a valuable drinking water supply for the City of Boulder. The recreational activities at the Reservoir are provided in a manner that is compatible with the protection and management of the water supply and have grown to be deeply appreciated by community members. It is essential that it remain a place that is accessible, safe and welcoming to the general public B. The City agrees to provide the following services for the program specified above: Facility and location: Boulder Reservoir, 5565 N 51st Street, as depicted in Appendix C. 1. Advertise the courses in the seasonal City of Boulder Recreation Guide, website, email blast, promotional flyers, and additional marketing efforts as they present themselves. 2. Provide inclusion training for RMP as needed. 3. Provide RMP orientation on the City’s policies and procedures. C. RMP will provide small craft rental to Boulder Reservoir Camp at rate of $5.00 per craft per hour. 1. Trainings. Prior to the start of the Services, RMP agrees to participate in the City’s trainings as follows: a. RMP and city staff will participate in pre-program training on the City’s policies and procedures and facility use. b. RMP and city staff will attend staff training both before providing any of the Services and as necessary throughout the season. c. RMP will attend the City’s EXPAND inclusion training as needed. D. The Services. RMP will schedule and supervise all the Services activities and the Participants with approval from the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee, such duties include but ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 are not limited to the following: 1. RMP will hire, supervise, and pay all staff of who perform the Services. 2. RMP will brand the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department through marketing materials, staff uniforms, banners, etc., consistent with all City of Boulder Parks and Recreation regulations for branding. 3. RMP will submit all promotional materials to the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee for use in the Recreation Guide in a timeframe determined by the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee. 4. RMP will collect the City’s Risk and Release forms from all the Participants. 5. RMP will keep accurate records and provide complete and timely information for required reports on activities including accountability procedures, incident and accident reports, injury log, and major customer service issue reports. 6. RMP will collect all of the Participants’ information for promotional materials (i.e. name, email address, address, phone number) and provide to the Reservoir Supervisor their designee on or before the conclusion of the program. 7. RMP will meet with the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee on a quarterly basis to report on Boat Rentals and Associated Services. 8. RMP will submit all required reports and/or forms within twenty-four (24) hours of any incident and/or accident. The completed, signed forms will be provided by the City to RMP and should be faxed, emailed, or hand delivered to the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee. 9. RMP will maintain an injury log. The log will be provided by the City and kept at the Facility and turned into the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee at the end of September each year of the Term of this Agreement. 10. RMP will submit annual operations and safety manuals to Boulder Reservoir Supervisor or their designee. 11. All additional watercraft permit fees and storage fees apply at resident rates 12. RMP will comply with all requirements of Appendix D, Addendum, ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 attached hereto and incorporated herein. The City reserves the right to update Appendix D on an annual basis. E. MASTER PLAN and RESERVOIR GOALS. The Services will align with the City’s Parks and Recreation Master Plan goals to meet community needs, including, but not limited to the following: 1. RMP will provide a scholarship program for the Participants who the City determines are eligible for financial assistance based on the City’s eligibility policy for reduced fees. RMP is responsible for all costs associated with providing the assistance. 2. In conjunction with a scholarship program, RMP will conduct community outreach to underserved populations of the community. 3. RMP will set program plans to broaden the scope of offerings for a wide range of community opportunities. 4. RMP will work with the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee to maximize facility use while exploring creative ways to use available spaces. 5. Partnership reporting will include data on items 1, 2 and 3 above. F. Reporting Obligations. 1. RMP shall submit a Lifecycle Management and Delivery Model Report (the “Report”) to the Reservoir Supervisor or their designee on or before November 1st of each year of the Term of this Agreement. A Report will be generated by the City. The purpose of the Report is to assist the City in the evaluation of the Services and the development of future programming. 2. RMP shall submit Revenue Reports that clearly show total revenue earned by RMP at the Reservoir every thirty (30) days, beginning at the start of business each year of the Term of this Agreement. 3. RMP will shall submit annual reporting on community benefit programming/master plan goals. G. PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS. 1. RMP shall be responsible for meeting the following software requirements: a. Has a secured contract or agreement for rental software; ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 b. The software, or associated credit card processor, meets PCI compliance standards; and c. The software will record or report total revenue. 2. RMP shall maintain RMP’s staff appearance to meet the following standards: a. RMP’s staff shall be dressed appropriately for the outdoor-oriented job (shorts, t-shirts), while maintaining a professional appearance (no bathing suits) with RMP’s logo. b. The City will determine the appropriateness of RMP’s staff members’ appearance. ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 Appendix B Fee Schedule RMP agrees to pay the City according to the requirements below. • Revenue- share agreement o Ten percent (10%) of revenue generated at the Boulder Reservoir from rentals and programs Fifteen percent (15%) of all retail revenue generated at the Boulder Reservoir • Payment occurs every thirty (30) days (begins thirty (30) days after the first day of business each year of the Term of this Agreement) o RMP submits the Revenue Reports. o The City approves the Revenue Reports and has the option to ask RMP for clarification and more information. o The City submits an invoice to RMP based on the Revenue Reports. o RMP submits payment according to Section 4.3 of this Agreement. ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 Star over the Boathouse at the Boulder Reservoir represents the Facility. ATTACHMENT B - Rocky Mountain Agreement 2022 Appendix D Addendum Addendum to Reservoir boat rentals and associated services agreement dated April 2022 All conditions will remain the same through December 15, 2022, as stated in the Agreement for use of Boulder Reservoir (agreement) dated April 1, 2022. Additional items for the 2022 contract of boat rentals and associated services at the Reservoir are the following: RMP must submit for approval a COVID-19 plan for all programs and services. This plan must be approved by Boulder County Health Department and must be strictly adhered to throughout operations. Must follow user groups Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) for incoming watercraft from contracted users. All requests for maintenance, repairs, or assistance with projects or project requests will be submitted in writing to Irrigation and Maintenance Supervisor and Facility Supervisor or Reservoir designee. No personal vehicles will be stored on site. No personal craft will be stored on site unless it has paid the current reservoir permit and paid assigned storage. RMP will not provide storage for any personal craft. ALL vehicle/motorized craft repair and maintenance will occur offsite. Building access keys will be provided to RMP staff from reservoir staff. Keys will be managed by Irrigation and Maintenance Supervisor or Reservoir designee. All requests for hard keys will be submitted via email to Irrigation and Maintenance Supervisor or reservoir designee. All requests for key cards will be submitted via email to Facility Supervisor, or Reservoir designee. Front gate access will consist of one (1) key card to the Facility for after hours. This key card is to be issued to and used by Shawn Rodine. Pontoon boat usage will include wet mooring at the current resident fee and powerboat permit at the current resident permit fee. All use of watercraft use for the City of Boulder Water Sports Camp will be $5 per hour per craft. RMP will donate three (3) craft per week for the City of Boulder Reservoir Camp for their use without a rental fee All watercraft entering or leaving the facility will be subject to current ANS Protocols. Any necessary decontaminations or additional inspections will be charged at current ANS rates. RMP shall comply with any City ordinances and use codes, including noise ordinance, ANS protocols or any relevant local and state ordinances. Annual hours, fees, and programming including events will be submitted via email to Facility Supervisor, or Reservoir designee each year or annually by April 1. Any changes will be submitted via email to Facility Supervisor, or Reservoir designees at least three (3) weeks in advance of the change date. Attachment C - Rocky Mountain Addendum 2022 Over the past 9 years at Boulder Reservoir, Rocky Mountain Paddleboard has had the privilege of playing an integral part in our community; creating an accessible avenue for hundreds of thousands of people to explore and enjoy Boulder Reservoir as well as several other bodies of water throughout the Front Range. It is an honor and our duty to provide meaningful, impactful and affordable experiences to all. The following is but a small sample of the many charitable events, schools and non-profit organizations we are fortunate enough to donate our service, time and financial resources to. Inland Ocean Coalition TEDxMileHigh Community Sailing of Colorado ABLE to Sail Imagine! Foundation Ignite Adaptive Sport PLAY Boulder Foundation National Sports Center for the Disabled Boulder County Juvenile Assessment Center Urban Peak Ability Connection Colorado Habitat for Humanity - Boulder County Denver Post Community Foundation Impact on Education Volunteers for Outdoor Colorado Brave Young Hearts "I Have A Dream" Foundation of Boulder County Special Olympics of Colorado Reading Partners Colorado Project C.U.R.E First Descents YMCA of Northern Colorado YMCA of Boulder Valley/St.Vrain Mile High Youth Corps Boulder Valley Women's Health Center DMK Rehoming Sustainable Resilient Longmont Ronald McDonald House Charities RezDawg Rescue Canine partners of the rockies Project V.E.T.S. Work Options for Women Alpha Phi Foundation Attachment D - RMP Donation list Rocky Mountain Immigrant Advocacy Network Boulder Opera Global Village Museum of Arts and Cultures Thorne Nature Experience The Golden Civic Foundation Colorado Environmental Film Festival National Paddling Film Festival PaddleJam Colorado There With Care Truly Inspiring Rinn United Methodist Church Foundation 1023 Cyclists 4 Community Anchor Center for Blind Children Mountain Area Land Trust Lutheran Hospice and Palliative Care Services. Longmont Community Food Share Garden to Table T2 Dance Company Alpine Rescue Team Indian Ridge Elementary Southmoor Elementary School Aspen Creek PTA Sandoval Elementary School Sandburg Elementary school Mackintosh Academy Niwot High School Black Forest Hills Elementary School Firestone Charter Academy Logan School for Creative Learning Shelton Elementary Red Rocks Elementary School Leawood Elementary School University Hill Elementary PTA Copper Mesa Elementary School Stone Mountain Elementary Attachment D - RMP Donation list AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 1__ C I T Y O F B O U L D E R PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: February 28, 2022 AGENDA TITLE: 2023 Budget Strategy Roadmap PRESENTERS: Alison Rhodes, Director of Parks and Recreation Jackson Hite, Business Services Manager Stacie Hoffmann, Sr. Budget Analyst Chris Passarelli, Data Analyst Tim Duda, IT Applications, Sr. Administrator EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board has formal approval for capital expenditures from certain funds and an advisory role in developing Parks and Recreation’s annual operating budget. The intent of this item is to get the board’s feedback on the 2023 Budget Strategy. This memo provides information on: • PRAB engagement in 2019 that informed 2020 fees (still in place in 2022); • The impacts of COVID on revenues in 2020 and 2021; • The evaluation and outcome of recreation access fees for 2022; and • The opportunities, challenges, and recommendations for 2023 Budget Development Strategy. Staff anticipates the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget development will follow the 3- touch approach used in years past, and this item outlines the proposal for developing the 2023 operating budget and considering access fee adjustments. The PRAB will be consulted monthly on BPR’s operating and capital budgets from March through May and input this month will shape the conversations in the months to come. BACKGROUND: 1. 2019 Process for the 2020 Budget Development and Fee Increase Outcome: In 2019, BPR staff collaborated with the PRAB throughout the budget development process (see Attachment A for full memos). After reviewing the holistic department budget, community input survey, and different options to adjust revenues and expenses, PRAB recommended 2020 Facility Entry Fees that: • Accelerated departmental efforts to align fees with financial sustainability goals and with subsidy targets per the master plan – providing discounts to youth, seniors, and under- AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 2__ resourced residents with low incomes. This included increasing fees while applying consistent pricing and subsidy based on age, affordability, and facility. • The department committed to continue to build the financial aid program to promote accessibility for under-resourced residents with low incomes. These efforts were bolstered by grants from the Health Equity Fund and for YSI and EXPAND and included 100% discounted facility access passes for the first time starting in 2020. • Fee increases reflected the strategies discussed throughout 2019 related to non-resident rates, seasonal facility access and multi-visit passes. These fees have been in place since implemented in January 2020: Table 1. Daily Entry Fees Single Visit 10 Visit Punch Pass Age Resident/Worker* Non-Resident Resident/Worker* Non-Resident Adult 19-59 years $9.00 $11.00 $81 $99 Senior 60+ years $6.75 $8.25 $61 $74 Youth 3-18 years $5.50 $6.50 $50 $59 Daily 4-Pack 4 entries; Max 2 adults $24.00 $29.00 *Individuals who live or work in the City of Boulder are eligible for Resident/Worker rates with proof of residency. Table 2. Unlimited Entry Fees Monthly Pass Annual Pass Age Resident/Worker* Non-Resident Resident/Worker* Non-Resident Adult 19-59 years $62/month $76/month $648/year $792/year Senior 60+ years $47/month $57/month $486/year $594/year Youth 3-18 years $38/month $45/month $396/year $468/year Household See note below $99/month $122/month $1,037/year $1,267/year *Individuals who live or work in the City of Boulder are eligible for Resident/Worker rates with proof of residency. 2. 2020 & 2021: COVID Impacts and Recovery The department adapted to challenges the COVID-19 pandemic created for 2020 operations which continued into 2021 by working collaboratively as a team, across the city and with consultation from the PRAB (see Attachment A for full index of memos) to identify and provide safe, sustainable, equitable and efficient solutions to support our community. Community benefit programming that serves youth, individuals with disabilities, and under-resourced community members have been prioritized and remain accessible to the community during a time of great need. The department has responded to each shift and phase of the pandemic in a way that is responsible to participants and staff while being financial stewards of public funds. To ensure responsible fiscal stewardship, the department’s Business Services team conducts a bi-weekly analysis of all revenue and expenses which is then reviewed by the department’s leadership team and used to make real-time adjustments in operations. AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 3__ 2020 adjustments focused on decreased recreational offerings based on the public health limitations, decreased participation levels in many recreation activities, decreased staffing levels and declines in revenues. The operating budget was reduced by $5.3M and $2.2M was deferred for capital projects (CIP). The department did preserve important services to provide access and enjoyment at Boulder’s parks, safely serve our community with virtual classes, outdoor recreation and swimming, and provide summer camps fulfilling a critical community need for childcare services. BPR maintained a focus on equity and extended the new 100%-subsidized financial aid offerings, with financial assistance awards increasing 34% over 2019. The 2021 approved budget of $29.5M met the recommended reductions from the Finance Department, maintained operating reserve levels and continued critical capital projects. The department was able to fund 100% of core services and focused on equitably restoring recreation services by expanding hours at facilities and restoring programs reduced in 2020 and maintaining community assistance through the enhanced Financial Aid program. The rebuilding phase of these programs focused on reintroducing programs in a way that was financially sustainable, could be supported within existing budget and staffing levels, and provided access to community recreation. Mid-year, staffing challenges created a bigger challenge for the department and resulted in reduced service levels for some of the programs and facilities. This mainly impacted access to pools in the summer months and continuing to indoor pools in the fall and winter of 2021. As a result of the positive economic recovery efforts observed across the city and American Rescue Act (ARPA) funds, BPR was able to expand service restoration in 2021 to include a one- time restorative payment to 2020 extended holiday furlough impacted employees. All services restored in 2021 have an ongoing funding source in 2022 and are outlined by fund below: General Fund • Reinstated reduced funding and improve maintenance sustainability for Urban Parks with the approval for two standard maintenance person positions and additional non-standard staffing funding to support park operations, catch up on deferred maintenance, and maintain cultural areas to our high community standards. • Restoration of the Assistant Forester position held vacant since spring 2020 to better support the urban canopy with increased rotational pruning, tree planting and managing contracted work. • Restored funding for the computer replacement and telecommunications that was temporarily shifted to the 0.25 Cent Sales & Use Tax fund. 0.25 Cent Sales Fund • Restored special events and outreach funding for activation in the downtown/Civic Area. • Restoration of the Irrigation Manager position held vacant since spring 2020 to support park operations and maintenance within the Irrigation division. Recreation Activity Fund AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 4__ • Increase center hours to support center and aquatic operations, health and wellness classes and age-based subsidy. • Restoration of youth programming in the areas of childcare, swim lessons, EXPAND programming for people with disabilities and Youth Services Initiative (YSI). Overall, the Recreation Activity Fund (RAF) experienced positive recovery in 2021 with a year- over-year revenue increase of $2.1M or 31% (deducting the ARPA funding). The ongoing bi- weekly usage data through 2021 indicates that outdoor activities such as reservoir visitation, park usage, rounds of golf and outdoor pools had higher levels of participation than a typical season. Indoor usage and program participation is trending above 2020 levels but still has not reached pre-pandemic levels. There are some anomalies to this data, with exceptionally high participation in youth gymnastics. Some highlights include: • Gymnastics: Strong recovery with $694k in revenue and lagging only 10% behind 2019 • Golf: Record breaking year with revenue exceeding $1.8M • Scott Carpenter Pool: First full year of operation since enhancement saw 75k visits (Fig 1) • Recreation Center Usage: Slow, steady increase in 2021 (Fig 2) Figure 1: Visitors to Scott Carpenter Pool, per hour (NOTE: Sep 2018 highly attended dog event skews figures) AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 5__ Figure 2: Graph of Rec Center visits, per hour All funds are spent below targets as the department strategically continues to prioritize services based on safety, financial sustainability, resource availability, and classification of services. Final 2021 revenues and expenses lag six to eight weeks behind, so a comprehensive year-end revenue and expense analysis will be shared at the March 2022 PRAB meeting. 3. Developing a Stable 2022 Budget The approved 2022 budget is based on the best knowledge and assumptions of a recovery during the timeframe of April to June 2021. In April 2021, as vaccines were becoming widely available, the department began to prepare the 2022 proposed budget based on guidance from the Finance Department and the city’s Executive Budget Team. Revenue assumptions were developed in consultation with economists from CU Boulder for sales tax dependent funds, while department staff identified anticipated impacts to participation for revenue in the department’s Recreation Activity Fund (RAF). The department also evaluated access fees on the target two-year cycle, since the last fee update was in 2019 for the 2020 budget. The PRAB supported development of the budget by reviewing the 2020 actual revenues and expenses, 2021 approved operating budget, levels of service, and recreation facility entry fees. The department assessed options to increase revenue in collaboration with the PRAB, including the bi-annual fee evaluation. The PRAB and staff determined that Boulder is at the upper end of market pricing already and that fees should be kept stable to avoid disrupting the ongoing recovery in programs and facilities with the intent to revisit for the 2023 budget development. Full details on these discussions can be found in the 2021 budget development memos listed in Attachment A. The 2022 budget proposal responded to the Finance Department’s request for prioritizing a decreased budget that also adheres to the department’s 2014 Master Plan fiscally constrained planning scenario. The department utilized the 2020 Budgeting for Resilience definitions to categorize services and the city’s Rapid Response Racial Equity instrument, which allowed the department to fund 100% of Important services and more significantly reduce those that fall into Helpful or Amenity categories. AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 6__ BPR’s 2022 approved total budget is $28.3 million, with approximately $15.3 million for personnel, $7.8 million for operating expenses, $4.5 million for CIP and $700,000 for interdepartmental transfers. This represents a 14% increase in the operating budget over the 2021 approved operating budget, while the CIP is decreased by 46% based on the timing of several large CIP projects. BPR began restoring positions and services included in 2021 mid-year adjustments (described previously) ahead of the 2022 budget year. Additional services that the department plans to restore in 2022 include: • Continuing to increase hours at recreation facilities and pools building back towards 2019 service levels based on public health guidance, usage, and staffing levels. Services inside of the facilities including drop-in fitness and yoga are in a rebuilding phase, along with the reintroduction of child-care. • Rebuilding the portfolio of registered courses in every area, with an emphasis on widening program offerings for people with disabilities through EXPAND/Inclusion and providing programs with the most community benefit (per the PRAB accepted Recreation Priority Index). • Increasing hours at Boulder Reservoir compared to 2020 and 2021, but still below 2019’s level of service. • Restore staffing resources and stabilize the non-standard work force across the parks & recreation system by attracting and retaining talent to provide quality services. • Restore social benefit maintenance contracting which helps maintain our public spaces while providing a social benefit to these groups. Overall, the department’s budget submission for all funds were balanced; however, the RAF relies on a stopgap of $1.2 million in ARPA funds in 2022 which has not yet been approved. This need will be revisited as 2021 year-end financials and current trends are analyzed to update the 2022 budget projections. 4. BPR’s Diverse Funding Sources BPR benefits from diverse funding streams including dedicated taxes (sales and property), user fees, general fund support and other fund support. Understanding these varied funding sources is an important first step in the 2023 budget development process, please see this chart for a funding overview: BPR 2022 Uses & Sources chart General Fund: The city’s General Fund is supported by fees, sales, property and other taxes. General Fund dollars are managed by Central Finance and allocated each year to city departments and projects by City Council through the annual budget process. The department primarily uses its allocation to fund park and forestry operations and department administration. Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund: Funded by property and development excise taxes, the fund is dedicated for acquiring land and renovating or improving existing parks and recreational facilities. It may not be used to fund daily operations or routine maintenance. AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 7__ Recreation Activity Fund (RAF): The RAF is a quasi-enterprise fund used to operate the department’s many recreation, fitness and sports facilities and programs. RAF funds are largely derived from program and facility user fees with some supplemental funding from the General Fund (primarily to subsidize programs for individuals with disabilities, provide financial aid to those with low incomes and age-based discounts for youth and seniors). .25 Cent Sales Tax Fund (.25): The department receives voter-approved sales tax funds (.25 cent) dedicated to acquiring, developing, operating and maintaining parks and recreation facilities. In November 2012, voters renewed the tax with an 85% voter approval through 2035. Lottery Fund: The lottery fund is a special revenue fund that accounts for state conservation trust fund monies allocated to local governments based on population. State conservation trust fund monies are dedicated to parks, recreation, and open space site maintenance and capital improvements. The city receives lottery money on an annual basis from the state and allocates money to the department based upon a percent allocation. Other Funds: The Department receives additional funding on a limited basis from the Capital Development Fund and Community, Culture and Safety (CCS) capital improvement bond (2012 and 2017, which was recently reapproved by voters in 2021 as the Community, Culture, Resilience, and Safety tax (CCRS). These funds vary in frequency each year and are primarily intended for one-time capital improvement program projects and are funds shared with other departments. To submit a balanced budget, the department must have balanced fund financials for each of the 6 out years in a budget (in other words, the department must plan carefully to ensure expenses do not exceed revenues for the current year plus five additional years). The revenue projections and expenses are developed in consultation with the Central Finance Department. The Parks and Recreation Department is fortunate in the diversity of funds that are used to fund operations and capital improvement projects; however, each fund is subject to variability in revenue from different economic conditions. The perceived health of each fund will be addressed at the March 2022 meeting with the PRAB. INITIAL 2023 BUDGET DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY AND ANALYSIS As part of the 2023 budget development, staff will engage the PRAB in several discussions to review the 2023 budget philosophy and make recommendations on a variety of opportunities, challenges, and recommendations. The staff identified opportunities, challenges, and recommendations below will shape the PRAB’s conversation over the coming months. Opportunities: • Update to the Master Plan • Prioritized service levels • Potential increases in revenue through strategic fee increase • Staffing levels and utilization of partnerships and volunteers AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 8__ Challenges: • Full recovery timeline is unknown: some level of decisions will be based on assumptions for the 2023 budget year without complete information • Decrease / shift in indoor recreation center and program participation and potential long- term trends in fitness • Revenues are not keeping pace with increases in expenses: o Increase in cost of labor through current labor market and recent citywide compensation adjustments o Increase in fixed operating costs with inflation o Increase in construction / CIP costs due to escalation • Age of Assets / Unfunded Capital Maintenance Recommendations: • Equity/Equitable Access Focus • Conduct user fee study and develop data-based levers/options to balance funds • Prioritize service level offerings based on safety, financial sustainability and classification of services • Define clear budget for operations and maintenance in line with the Asset Management Program • Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund CIP approval Questions for the PRAB: 1) Does the PRAB agree with the process to examine revenue and expense levers/options to balance the 2023 budget submission? 2) Staff developed the parameters to guide the budget conversation over the next several months. Is there anything else you would like us to explore? 3) Is there any input on opportunities, challenges and recommendations? Are there any additional areas that should be a focus? NEXT STEPS: In March, April and May, staff will consult with the PRAB as it develops the 2023 Budget: March 2022: Surveying the Landscape & Looking Ahead In March, and to provide a base understanding of the department’s financial condition, staff will provide a recap of 2020 and 2021 actual revenues and expenses, the 2022 approved budget and look ahead with a 5-year financial outlook. Staff will also provide an overview of the health and outlook for the various funding sources. Finally, staff will provide an overview of the current fee structure and levels of service. Separately but related, the PRAB will also participate in a Master Plan Study Session and discuss potential policy and planning matter that will inform future budget development. April 2022: Investment Scenarios In April, the department will review 2022 first quarter facility and program utilization and discuss options to increase revenue or adjust programming levels to help achieve a balanced budget in AGENDA ITEM V-B_ PAGE 9__ 2023. The PRAB’s input, as well as City Council’s at the April Master Plan Study Session, will inform additional financial analysis. Finally, April will include the PRAB’s first touch of the 2023-2028 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). May 2022: 2023 Fee and/or Service Proposals In May, the department will share recommendations for 2023 service levels and/or fees based upon April PRAB and council input. While the PRAB’s role is advisory, the board’s input is valued and respected as the department’s budget is reviewed with the city’s Executive Budget Team, different boards and commissions and ultimately, City Council. May will also include the board’s second touch of the 2023-2028 Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The Parks and Recreation budget submittal is due by late May for citywide review and synthesis. City Council review of the 2023 budget will begin in September and formal adoption by City Council is planned for October. Attachments: Attachment A Index of PRAB Budget Memos (2019-2021) 2022 February Budget Discussion Item: Attachment A Index of Recent PRAB Budget Memos (2019-2021) Each year, BPR staff connect with the PRAB multiple times during the preparation of the next year’s budget. The memos delve into the priorities and considerations each year, including fee setting in 2019 (for the 2020 budget) and 2021 (for the 2022 budget) and COVID response and recovery in 2020-2021 (including American Rescue Plan funds). 2019 Memos preparing the 2020 fees and budget: • January 28, 2019 – 2020 Budget Strategy Overview • February 25, 2019 – 5-Year Master Plan Progress Report / Overview of 2019 Priorities • March 2019 – 2020 Budget Strategy Financial Update and Levels of Service • April 22, 2019 – 2020 Budget Strategy: Recreation Activity Fund • May 7, 2019 – Study Session: Recreation Facility Fee Strategy • May 28, 2019 – Budget Strategy: Recreation Activity Fund 2020 Memos adapting to COVID impacts and stabilizing the budget, developing 2021 budget: • April 27, 2020 – Parks and Recreation Department Response to COVID-10 and Financial Impacts Update • May 11, 2020 – Ad Hoc Meeting – Recreation Recovery Feasibility • May 27, 2020 – Financial Strategy: 2020 Budget Reductions, 2021 Operating Budget Development, 2021-26 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) • June 22, 2020 – Matters from the Department – 2021 Operating Budget; Public Hearing and Consideration of Motions Approving the 2021 Expenditures from the Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund and 2021-2026 Park and Recreation Department Capital Improvement Fund • August 24, 2020 – Public Hearing and Approval of Revised 2021-26 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) • September 30, 2020 – Matters from the Department – Operating Budget Update • December 21, 2020 - Matters from the Department – 2020 and 2021 Operating Budget Update 2021 Memos building the 2022 budget, evaluating fees, and pursuing ARPA funds/restoration: • February 22, 2021 – 2022 Budget Strategy Roadmap • April 12, 2021 - 2020 Year-End Financial Reivew and 2022 Budget Strategy • April 26, 2021 – Scenario Planning and Fees, CIP first touch • May 10, 2021 – Study Session: Recreation Facility Fee Strategy • May 26, 2021 – Proposed Operations and Fees, CIP second touch • June 28, 2021 – Submission of Draft Operating and CIP Budgets • July 19, 2021 – ARPA Funding for Community Recreation AGENDA ITEM V-C_ PAGE 1__ C I T Y O F B O U L D E R PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: February 28, 2022 AGENDA TITLE: Glen Huntington Bandshell: Proposed Amendment to Expand Landmark Boundary PRESENTERS: Alison Rhodes, Director, Parks and Recreation Department Regina Elsner, Interim Senior Manager for Planning + Ecological Services Tina Briggs, Sr. City Planner Caitlin Berube-Smith, Program Manager-Historical & Cultural Assets EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: This item follows the January Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) meeting to provide additional information requested regarding the proposed amendment to expand the landmark boundary for the Glen Huntington Bandshell. In addition to information contained in this memo, historic preservation staff from the city’s Planning & Development Services (PD&S) department will provide information and be available for discussion regarding the process and impacts of landmarked properties. As an outcome of this memo and presentation by historic preservation staff, PRAB has the opportunity to transmit comments to the Landmarks Board (LB) on the proposed expansion of the landmark boundary for the Glen Huntington Bandshell to include all of Block 13. PRAB comments may be included in the final designation memo for LB review at the designation hearing, scheduled for April 6, 2022. BACKGROUND: On August 27th, 2021, the Landmarks Board received a letter from the Friends of the Bandshell (Attachment A) requesting the Landmarks Board consider an expansion of the current landmark boundary. In response, on October 6, 2021 (Attachment B), the Landmarks Board voted to consider amending the Bandshell boundary in an initiation hearing at its November 3rd, 2021 meeting. Subsequently, and in discussion with Boulder Parks and Recreation (BPR) staff, Historic Preservation staff recommended that the Landmarks Board postpone an application to AGENDA ITEM V-C_ PAGE 2__ hear the expansion to the boundary for two years (until November 2023) to provide time to integrate the boundary expansion into the Historic Places Plan (HiPP) process to include documenting existing conditions, historic context development and proposed recommended treatments within the existing boundary and the expanded boundary in a public process. At its November 3rd, 2021 meeting (Attachment C), the Landmarks Board voted 5-0 to initiate the process to consider expanding the landmark boundary of the Glen Huntington Bandshell based upon the Friends of the Bandshell request to amend the boundary, but chose not to postpone hearing the landmark application to November of 2023 as recommended by staff. Initiation of an application to landmark does not pre-suppose the outcome of the quasi-judicial designation public hearing, which Boulder Revised Code outlines must occur between 60-90 days of the initiation vote (per 9-11-5a of the Boulder Revised Code). Subsequently, staff scheduled the application to be heard at the March 2, 2022 Landmark Board meeting. In January of 2022, staff presented information to PRAB on the proposed amendment to expand the landmark designation boundary for the Glen Huntington Bandshell (Attachment D, beginning on page 21). This aligns with precedent, as staff reviewed the original landmark bandshell landmark boundary with the PRAB and city council in October 1995 (the resolution from PRAB is shared on page 46 of this packet). The information initially presented to PRAB referenced background information on site history, amendment status, and implications. Feedback from PRAB following review of the item was that the board did not have enough information or time to adequately transmit comments on the proposed amendment to expand the Bandshell's landmark boundary. PRAB's requests from the January 2022 item included that staff: 1. Provide additional information regarding this park property's historical importance and Saco R. DeBoer’s contribution to the space outside the existing landmark boundary. 2. Explain the implications of a landmarked property and associated compliance process, specific to future physical changes. 3. Define PRAB's role and sphere of influence on this and future parks and recreation landmark applications. 4. Interpret the potential precedence this process could set for future parks and recreation landmark applications. 5. Clarify the minimum required level of community engagement for the landmarking process. 6. Describe opportunities for process improvement in future landmarking of public lands and property, including communication and coordination with boards and commissions related to the identified property. The Landmarks Board agreed to postpone the public hearing until April 6, 2022 to provide the PRAB the opportunity to transmit comments to the board on the proposed AGENDA ITEM V-C_ PAGE 3__ expansion (the extension of this hearing date beyond the 60-90 day period from initiation per 9-11-5a BRC., requires the agreement of the owner (the city) and the Landmarks Board). P&DS historic preservation staff will attend the upcoming PRAB meeting to provide information and answer RPAB's questions regarding the property, process, and implications of landmarking park properties. ANALYSIS: As part of the HiPP, a draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report was developed with consultants in March 2021. After the October 2021 meeting and Landmarks Board scheduling the initiation hearing to review the Friends of the Bandshell’s request to expand the boundary, staff asked the consultant to revise the resource assessment report to include additional research, evaluation, and analysis associated with the proposed expanded boundary for the site. Both versions of the draft assessment report, with and without the expansion, are available for the final HiPP – with the appropriate report being included based on the outcome of the landmark process. Related HiPP documents: • March 2021 – Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report DRAFT o This draft includes information based on the existing boundary (Attachment E) • January 2022 – Revised Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park Resource Assessment Report DRAFT o This draft includes information based on the existing and proposed expanded boundary (Attachment F) Proposed Landmark Boundary Expansion Timeline: • August 27, 2021 - Letter from the Friends of the Bandshell requesting Landmarks Board consider an expansion of the landmark boundary (Attachment A) • October 6, 2021 - Landmarks Board voted to consider amending the Bandshell boundary in an initiation hearing (Attachment B) • November 3, 2021 - Landmarks Board voted 5-0 to initiate the process to consider expanding the landmark boundary (Attachment C) • January 24, 2022 – PRAB Matters from the Department item provides information regarding the proposed expansion resulting in a request for additional information (Attachment D) AGENDA ITEM V-C_ PAGE 4__ • February 28, 2022 – PRAB Discussion Item as a follow-up to provide more information about the proposed expansion, landmark process, and implications. • April 6, 2022 – Landmarks Board public hearing to consider the designation of the proposed boundary. The designation memo is currently being drafted and will include information from the revised bandshell assessment and PRAB discussion. The designation memo will be made public at least ten days before the designation hearing. At the April 6, 2022, LB designation hearing, PD&S historic preservation staff will present a designation memo to Landmarks Board. The designation memo is written by PD&S staff, with review and contributions from BPR. The memo will provide a recommendation based upon analysis of all of the documentation, including the revised bandshell assessment report. In addition, the designation memo will expand on the information in the initiation memo, explicitly addressing the criteria for evaluation of individual landmarks, and will help define the final language for amending the existing ordinance if forwarded to City Council with a recommendation to expand the boundary. Even if the board chooses not to amend the designation, the City Council has the opportunity to review. During the LB designation hearing, naming the proposed landmark will be presented for consideration. The proposed name would likely reflect both the architect (Huntington) and the landscape architect (DoBoer), for example, the 'Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park’. NEXT STEPS: The Landmarks Board’s April 6, 2022 meeting includes a Public Hearing to review the proposed landmark boundary expansion and the board will discuss a motion to recommend the expansion to council. Should LB recommend the expansion, it would be scheduled for 1st reading at City Council, followed by 2nd Reading with a Public Hearing. Should Landmarks Board not recommend expansion for approval at City Council, the item would still be presented within a future City Council consent agenda and council could decide to expand the boundary through a public hearing. PRAB has the opportunity to transmit comments to LB and City Council regarding the proposed expansion of the landmark boundary to include all of Block 13. This consideration accounts for the interrelationship of the Bandshell structure to the rest of Block 13, which includes the northern portion of Central Park, and that the PRAB members are council’s delegated community representatives to examine matters related to the city’s urban parks. Questions for Staff 1. Do you have questions for BPR staff regarding the documents provided for review? AGENDA ITEM V-C_ PAGE 5__ 2. Do you have questions for PD&S historic preservation staff related to landmarking, decision-making, public process, or implications of landmarking parkland? 3. Does the PRAB feel informed enough to comment on the proposed expanded designation? 4. Would PRAB like to transmit comments to LB? a. Staff can summarize comments and share them with historic preservation staff to consider including in the designation memo. b. PRAB may choose to write a formal letter and sends to LB by email c. Individual members may choose to participate in the public hearing on April 6. Attachments: Attachment A: Friends of the Bandshell Letter Attachment B: Landmarks Board Meeting October 6, 2021 Minutes Attachment C: Landmarks Board Meeting November 2021 Landmark Initiation Memo Attachment D: PRAB Meeting January Discussion Item Attachment E: Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report DRAFT Attachment F: Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park Assessment Report DRAFT FRIENDS OF THE BANDSHELL (an unincorporated Colorado nonprofit association) P.O. Box 1001, Boulder Colorado 80306-1001 Dear Landmarks Board, August 27, 2021 Re: Glen Huntington Bandshell, Seating and Site, City Landmark # 95-4. Smithsonian Inventory Number 5BL.5680 Friends of the Bandshell requests that the Boulder Landmarks Board expand the boundaries of the Landmarked Glen Huntington Bandshell, including the bench seating, landscaping and entire site. The Bandshell, along with its seating, landscaping and site became a Boulder Individual Landmark in1995 (Ordinance 5751). The site was defined to be from Broadway on the West to 13th Street on the East, and from Canyon Boulevard on the North extending south 170’ in Block 13. The southern 130’ of Block 13 are not protected or included as part of the landmarked site. The Boulder and Left Hand Ditch is the border of Block 13 on the South. On July 25, 1995, the Landmarks Board met to evaluate a request by the Modern Architecture Preservation League (MAPL) to designate as a ‘Landmark’ what was commonly referred to as the Central Park Bandshell. But for the fact that, at the time, a train composed of Locomotive #30, Rio Grand Western Coach #280, and Rio Grande Southern Caboose #040 was located in the south part of the park, it is very likely that the Landmarks Board would have designated the site to include all of Block 13, (300’ x 300’). To carve out the train, so that in the future it could be moved away from the park, the southern 130’ portion of the block was not included as part of the site. As the train was moved some years ago, the reason to exclude this area no longer exists. We are asking that the whole of the historic Central Park (Block 13) be included as part of the Glen Huntington Bandshell landmarked site. This will ensure that the original 1938 Bandshell by Architect Glen Huntington, the1938 site plan/landscape design by Saco DeBoer, as well as the existing 1950 bench seating will be protected, While the Friends of the Bandshell concur that rehabilitation and improvements are certainly possible and desirable, at the same time we want to ensure that alterations will not damage the original Bandshell, trees and site features of Central Park, and that they will be reviewed and approved by Boulder’s Landmarks Design Review process. There is precedent for expansion of Landmark boundaries in both the Chamberlain and the Mapleton Hill Districts. Thank you so much for your consideration, .Karl F. Anuta Dan Corson Kathryn Barth On behalf of FRIENDS OF THE BANDSHELL Attachement A Friends of the Bandshell Letter 082721 1940 Aerial View of Boulder. Note front plantings, lawns, walkways, trees, seating, walls (levee?). 2015 Autumn at the Bandshell Attachement A Friends of the Bandshell Letter 082721 CITY OF BOULDER LANDMARKS BOARD MEETING ACTION MINUTES Wednesday, October 6, 2021 at 6:00 p.m. Virtual meeting The following are the action minutes of the October 6, 2021 City of Boulder Landmarks Board meeting. A digital recording and a permanent set of these minutes (maintained for a period of seven years) are retained in Central Records at 303-441-3043. You may also listen to the recording online at www.boulderhistoricpreservation.net. BOARD MEMBERS: Abby Daniels, Vice Chair - present John Decker, Chair - present William Jellick - absent Fran Sheets - present Ronnie Pelusio - present Jorge Boone, Planning Board representative without a vote - present STAFF MEMBERS: Lucas Markley, Assistant City Attorney II - present James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner - present Marcy Gerwing, Historic Preservation Planner II - present Clare Brandt, Administrative Specialist – present Faith Hamman, Historic Preservation Intern – present Jean Gatza, Moderator - present 1.CALL TO ORDER [00:00.00 audio minutes] The roll having been called, Chair J. Decker declared a partial quorum at 6:03 p.m. and the following business was conducted. 2.APPROVAL OF MINUTES [00:05.30 audio minutes] On a motion by J. Decker, seconded by R. Pelusio, the Landmarks Board (4-0, Jellick absent) approved the minutes from the September 1, 2021 Landmarks Board meeting. 3.PUBLIC PARTICIPATION FOR NON-PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS [00:06.50 audio minutes] 1.Lynn Segal 538 Dewey Ave 80304 Noted that the Landmarks Design Review Committee meeting has no public comment period. Asked the Landmarks Board to comment on how issues of equity, inclusivity and affordable housing intersect with preservation. 4.DISCUSSION OF LANDMARK ALTERATION AND DEMOLITION APPLICATIONS ISSUED AND PENDING [00:16.34 audio minutes] A.515 Alpine Ave. - Stay of Demolition expires Oct. 31, 2021. Attachment B - Landmarks Board Minutes 10062021 R.Pelusio requested noting this property as an example of where a preservation tool is missing. J. Decker concurred that incentives should be explored, and properties not preserved should be documented. B.1503 20th St. – Stay of Demolition expires Nov. 21, 2021 F.Sheets requested additional information about the potential cost of rehabilitation. C.Statistical Report for September 5.PUBLIC HEARINGS under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, “Quasi-Judicial Hearing,” B.R.C. 1981 A.[00:47.55 audio minutes] Public hearing and consideration of a proposal to designate of a portion of the property at 3485 Stanford Ct. as an individual landmark, pursuant to Section 9-11-5 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981. (HIS2020-00298). Owner/Applicant: Housing Authority of the City of Boulder d/b/a Boulder Housing Partners Ex Parte Contacts J.Decker:None A.Daniels:None F. Sheets:None R. Pelusio:None Staff Presentation M.Gerwing presented the case to the board, recommending the Landmarks Board forward the application to the City Council with a recommendation to designate a portion of the property as an individual landmark to be known as the Mount Calvary Lutheran Church. Applicant’s Presentation 1.Ian Swallow Boulder Housing Partners 4800 Broadway 80304 Detailed the history and expected future use of the building and site. Public Comment 1.Susan Osborne Historic Boulder, Inc 1200 Pearl St., Suite 314 80302 Wrote to the Landmarks Board in support of the application, and urged the new construction proposed to not attempt to duplicate the architectural style of the proposed landmark, but rather serve as a respectful backdrop. 2.Lynn Segal 538 Dewey Ave. 80304 Spoke in disagreement of plans to demolish the 2001 addition to the proposed landmark. Motion [01:17.17 audio minutes] On a motion by R. Pelusio, seconded by A. Daniels, the Landmarks Board voted (4-0, Jellick absent) to adopt the staff memorandum dated October 6, 2021, as findings of the board and recommend to the City Attachment B - Landmarks Board Minutes 10062021 Council that it designate a portion of the property at 3485 Stanford Ct. as a local historic landmark, to be known as the Mount Calvary Lutheran Church, finding that it meets the standards for individual landmark designation in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981. B.[01:19.56 audio minutes] Public hearing and consideration of a proposal to designate of a portion of the property at 1902 Walnut St. as an individual landmark, pursuant to Section 9-11-5 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981. (HIS2020-00135). Owner/Applicant: September Schools, Inc. / David Stanek, Coburn Architecture and Michael Bosma Ex Parte Contacts J. Decker:None. Reviewed at LDRC A. Daniels:None F. Sheets:None. Reviewed at LDRC R. Pelusio:None Staff Presentation J. Hewat presented the case to the board, recommending the Landmarks Board forward the application to the City Council with a recommendation to designate the property as an individual landmark to be known as the Stewart House–September School. Applicant’s Presentation 1.Michael Bosma Rubicon Development 1035 Pearl St #205 80302 Answered questions regarding the condition of the building. Public Comment 1.Susan Osborne Historic Boulder, Inc 1200 Pearl St., Suite 314 80302 Wrote to the Landmarks Board in support of the application, and urged the new construction proposed to not attempt to duplicate the architectural style of the proposed landmark, but rather serve as a respectful backdrop. 2.Sean Bodhivajra Scanlan 1940 Walnut St., Apt 521 80302 Spoke and wrote to the Landmarks Board noting the lack of maintenance at the property, garbage accumulation and deterioration of the structure. Requested that Site and Use Review be revisited to ensure compliance with the Boulder Municipal Code. Photographs of the property were included and shown during the public hearing. 3.Lew Swafford 1940 Walnut St., Apt 519 80302 Co-signed letter received from S. Scanlan, noted above. 4.Lynn Segal 538 Dewey Ave. 80304 Spoke in support of landmark designation. Attachment B - Landmarks Board Minutes 10062021 Motion [02:14.50 audio minutes] On a motion by R. Pelusio, seconded by F. Sheets, the Landmarks Board voted (4-0, Jellick absent) to adopt the staff memorandum dated October 6, 2021, as findings of the board and recommend to the City Council that it designate a portion of the property at 1902 Walnut St. as a local historic landmark, to be known as the Stewart House–September School, finding that it meets the standards for individual landmark designation in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981. 6.MATTERS [02:16.20 audio minutes] A.Landmarks Board continued the discussion from the Sept. 1, 2021 Landmarks Board meeting regarding a letter received from Friends of the Bandshell requesting the Landmarks Board consider expanding the boundary of the landmarked Glen Huntington Bandshell. [02:43.34 audio minutes] On an amended motion by F. Sheets, seconded by A. Daniels, the Landmarks Board voted (4-0, Jellick absent) to consider the initiation of landmark designation of the Bandshell boundaries pursuant to Sections 9-11-3 of the Boulder Revised Code, 1981. B.Staff updated the Landmarks Board that a meeting is planned for Oct. 7 with Historic Boulder, Inc. regarding the individual landmark designation of the Atrium building at 1300 Canyon Blvd. C.J. Decker requested Board Members send ideas and reflections to Board Secretary of board priorities for 2022 and accomplishments, achievements, or events that the board is most proud. D.Staff summarized the site review process to the Landmarks Board and detailed the process for 2504 Spruce St. currently undergoing review by City Council. 7.DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK •Next regular Landmarks Board meeting scheduled for Wednesday, November 3, 2021 8.ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:09 p.m. Approved on _______________, 2021 Respectfully submitted, ______________________________________________, Chairperson November 3 Attachment B - Landmarks Board Minutes 10062021 MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD November 3, 2021 STAFF Jacob Lindsey, Planning & Development Services Director Charles Ferro, Interim Comprehensive Planning Manager Lucas Markley, Assistant City Attorney James Hewat, Senior Historic Preservation Planner Marcy Gerwing, Historic Preservation Planner II Clare Brandt, Administrative Specialist II Faith Hamman, Historic Preservation Intern INITIATION OF LANDMARK DESIGNATION Public hearing and consideration of a motion to adopt a resolution to initiate the process for amending the designation boundary of 1236 Canyon Blvd., the Glen Huntington Bandshell, an individual landmark, pursuant to Section 9-11-3, B.R.C. 1981. Address: 1236 Canyon Blvd. Owner: City of Boulder Applicant: City of Boulder Landmarks Board Case Number: HIS2021-00263 Case Type: Initiation of Landmark Designation Code Section: 9-11-3, B.R.C., 1981 SITE INFORMATION Date of Construction: 1938 Zoning: P (Public) Lot Size: 88,694 sq. ft. (approx.) Building Size: 27,898 sq. ft. (approx.) Legal Description: BLOCK 13 BOULDER O T STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Landmarks Board initiate the process for amending the designation boundary of the Glen Huntington Bandshell at 1236 Canyon Blvd., an individual landmark, and that the designation Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 1 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo hearing be delayed until the Historic Places Plan (HiPP) is complete, or for 2 years, whichever occurs first. RECOMMENDED MOTION I move that the Landmarks Board adopt the staff memorandum dated November 3 , 2021, as the findings of the board and adopt the resolution (Attachment A) to initiate the process for amending the designation boundary of 1236 Canyon Blvd, an individual landmark, finding that it meets the criteria for such initiation pursuant to Section 9-11-3 “Initiation of Designation for Individual Landmarks and Historic Districts” of the Boulder Revised Code 1981, and, in balance, is consistent with the goals and policies of Section 2.27 of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. I further move that the designation hearing be delayed until the Historic Preservation Plan (HiPP) is complete, or for 2 years, whichever occurs first. ALTERNATIVE MOTION LANGUAGE If the Landmarks Board chooses to not initiate the process for reviewing the designation boundary, staff recommends the following motion language: I move that the Landmarks Board does not initiate the process for reviewing the designation boundary of 1236 Canyon Blvd., an individual landmark, finding that it does not meet the criteria for such initiation pursuant to Section 9-11-3 “Initiation of Designation for Individual Landmarks and Historic Districts” of the Boulder Revised Code 1981, and does not represent a balance consistent with the goals and policies of Section 2.27 of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. SUMMARY •On May 3, 1995, the Modern Architecture Preservation League (MAPL) submitted a landmark designation application for the Glen Huntington Bandshell. •Prior to the Landmarks Board designation hearing on July 25, 1995, Front Range Research Associates, Inc. surveyed the Bandshell and determined that the structure and its site meet both the National Register and local landmark criteria (see Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, Attachment D) •On July 25, 1995, the Landmarks Boulder recommended that City Council designate the structure and a portion of the site as an individual landmark to be known as the Glen Huntington Bandshell. •On October 17, 1995, City Council adopted Ordinance 5751 (Attachment C) designating the structure and the northern 170 feet of the lot as an individual local landmark. •In 2015, the Glen Huntington Bandshell was listed on Colorado’s Most Endangered Places list by Colorado Preservation, Inc. •On August 27, 2021, the Landmarks Board received a letter from the Friends of the Bandshell (link) requesting Landmarks Board consider an expansion of the landmark boundary. •On October 6, 2021, the Landmarks Board voted (4-0, Jellick absent) to consider amending the Bandshell boundary. •Pursuant to Section 9-11-3 of the Boulder Revised Code, the Landmarks Board must hold an initiation hearing within 45 days. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 2 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • Staff recommends the Landmarks Board adopt a resolution to consider amending the landmark boundary of the Glen Huntington Bandshell to encompass all of Block 13 and that the designation hearing be delayed until after the Historic Places Plan (HiPP) is complete or 2 years, whichever occurs first. Delaying the hearing would provide time to integrate the boundary expansion into the HiPP process, which includes documenting existing conditions, historical context and proposed recommended treatments within the existing boundary and the expanded boundary in a public process. The HiPP will help determine and document character-defining and non-character-defining features to provide clarity in the designation ordinance. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The Glen Huntington Bandshell is located on the south side of Canyon Boulevard, between Broadway and 13th Street, in Central Park. The individually landmarked Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse (1770 13th St.) and the City Transfer and Storage Building (1750 13th St.) are located to the east of the property, next to the Midland Savings and Loan-Atrium Building (1300 Canyon, pending landmark designation application). The Boulder Bandshell was constructed in Central Park in 1938 by the Boulder Lions Club as an outdoor amphitheater for musical concerts and other forms of community entertainment. Architect Glen Huntington designed the structure and landscape architect and city planner Saco R. DeBoer selected the site and prepared the landscape plan.1 The City Council designated the Bandshell and a portion of the property as a local landmark in 1995. The boundaries encompass the northern 170 feet of the property and include the Bandshell and seating area (see Figure 2). 1 Mundus Bishop. Draft Resource Assessment Report for the Glen Huntington Bandshell. City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department. 2021. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 3 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 1. Location Map, 1236 Canyon Blvd. Figure 2. Designated Landmark Boundary. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 4 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION2 The Boulder Bandshell Historical Report prepared for the City of Boulder by Front Range Research Associates in 1995 describes the structure: The Band Shell is located in the north central portion of Central Park and is visible from Canyon Boulevard which forms the northern boundary of the park. Park lands surround the Band Shell site on the east, west, and south and are bounded by Broadway on the west and Thirteenth Street on the east. The facade of the wood frame Art Deco style Band Shell faces south and is semielliptical, nearly circular. The interior roof is composed of a compound paneled arch (six concentric arches). The structure's design conveys a sense of theatricality and reflects Art Deco elements in its streamlined, simplified form. Interior walls are clad with panels of acoustic wallboard. Flexboard, "a slick, hard surfaced composite material with the appearance of tile" was considered for the wall cladding by the builders, although it is not known whether that material was actually used. The flat rear interior wall is arched and has a double door. The lower sides of the facade exterior wall are buttressed. According to city records, the structure is seventy-eight feet wide, including buttresses, and has a forty-eight foot opening, while the height of the structure from the ground to the roof apex is thirty-one-and-a-half feet. The structure has a raised concrete foundation. The elevated stage has wooden flooring, which is now painted. According to city files, the flooring is portable so that the stage can be raised or lowered to varying levels. The stage is accessed from each side by concrete stairs with pipe railings and concrete stair walls. A series of four concrete piers are situated in front of the stage. The conical roof of the Band Shell slopes toward the ground toward the rear. The exterior walls are covered with rolled roofing material with some patches. The rear exterior wall is arched and has utility boxes and a trellis covered with ivy. The eastern elevation of this rear section has double metal doors. 2 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Prepared for the City of Boulder. 14 July 1995. (Attachment D) Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 5 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 3. Glen Huntington Bandshell, October 2021. SETTING3 The Boulder Bandshell Historical Report prepared for the City of Boulder by Front Range Research Associates in 1995 describes the setting: In front of the stage is a semielliptical, level area covered with small gravel. Behind this is a concrete paved, arched, bermed seating area sloping upward away from the stage. The seating pattern is arched facing the stage. The bench style seats are composed of concrete pier bases topped by large wooden boards. Fifteen rows of seats are divided by aisles into five groups, with the three central groups having the longest benches. Behind the seating is a level area extending to the edge of the berm, which has low stone retaining walls, stone walkways, and landscaped plantings, including grass, low bushes, and trees. There are also plantings along the edges and to the rear of the Band Shell. 3 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Prepared for the City of Boulder. 14 July 1995. (Attachment D) Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 6 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo The City of Boulder Public Tree Inventory Map identifies the existing trees within the existing boundary as Honey locust, American Elm, Linden, Ponderosa Pine, Norway Maple, Sugar Maple, Shumard Oak, and others. Figure 4.View facing west, showing bermed area and low flagstone wall. October 2021. Figure 5. View facing northeast, Bandshell seats visible on left. October 2021. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 7 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo EXISTING LANDMARK BOUNDARY The applicant, Len Segel and the Modern Architecture Preservation League (MAPL), proposed a conical boundary that encompassed the Bandshell, the seating, and a portion of the landscaping (see solid line in Figure 6). At their July 25, 1995 meeting (see Attachment E: LPAB Action Minutes, July 25, 1995), the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board discussed the proposed conical landmark boundary and considered expanding it further south to encompass the northern 250 feet of the 300 foot lot to “more accurately outline the Bandshell and the site associated with it, including the half which Mr. DeBoer sited to control the traffic pattern around it, the plantings that were intended to mitigate the acoustic interference from the roadways, and in general, all of the landscape issues.” Ultimately, the board forwarded a recommendation to the City Council to designate the northern 170 feet of the property. City Council adopted Ordinance 5751 (Attachment C) designating the structure and the northern 170 feet of the property (see dashed line in Figure 6). Figure 6. Designated Landmark Boundary. The Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report (2021) (link) summarizes the features within the existing landmark boundary. Reference pages 13-17 for more detailed information. The Bandshell’s original setting, features, and spatial relationships remain largely intact. The Bandshell is set on the site’s north edge and oriented to the south. The setting is characterized by a sloped amphitheater (a concrete terrace with fifteen rows of wood and concrete benches) that faces the Bandshell. A landscaped berm and remnants of a sandstone retaining wall remain Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 8 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo along the south boundary of the Bandshell’s setting, separating it from the park and defining the southern edge of the amphitheater. The berm continues to mitigate seasonal flooding. Large mature trees frame the Bandshell on its east and west sides and define the edges of the amphitheater and the Bandshell setting. Concrete paved sidewalks extend from the east and west sides of the park into the Bandshell’s setting. They end at a large level area between the Bandshell and amphitheater that is paved with loose gravel. PROPOSED LANDMARK BOUNDARY EXPANSION In a letter dated Aug, 27, 2021 (link), the Friends of the Bandshell request that the Landmarks Board expand the boundary of the designated Bandshell site to include the entirety of the parcel. The group cites the train, composed of Locomotive #30, Rio Grande Western Coach #280, and Rio Grande Southern Caboose #040, that were located south of the berm at the time of designation as the likely reason the Landmarks Board did not include the entire parcel south to the ditch. The locomotives were relocated between 2003 and 2008 and the tracks were removed around 2015. The expanded boundary would “ensure that the original 1938 Bandshell by Architect Glen Huntington, the 1938 site plan/landscape design by Saco DeBoer, as well as the existing 1950 bench seating will be protected,” and that “we want to ensure that alterations will not damage the original Bandshell, trees and site features of Central Park, and that they will be reviewed and approved by Boulder’s Landmarks Design Review process.” In a subsequent letter dated October 22, 2021, (see Attachment B: Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021) Kathryn Barth representing the Friends of the Bandshell writes, “With the work of Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. creating Boulder’s “Central Park” as part of his recommendation of a green parkland from where Boulder Creek leaves the mountains to the eastern edge of City, and with the 1938-39 Landscape Plan by Saco R. DeBoer, realized as the Bandshell was being completed, there is a historic cultural landscape site that should be included in the landmark boundaries.” Figure 7. 1236 Canyon Blvd., proposed expanded landmark boundary (yellow line). Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 9 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Features i n the Proposed Expanded Boundary The proposed expanded boundary would encompass the southern 130 feet of Block 13, which has evolved over time. The area within the expanded boundary includes the following features: •Open lawn area, with turf and woodchips. •Mature trees, including Northern Red Oak, White Oak, English Oak, Shumard Oak, Crabapple, Rocky Mountain Juniper, American Linden, Silver Maple, Honey Locust.4 •Multi-use paths along the west and south boundaries of Block 13. A path parallel to Broadway is visible in the aerials dating 1938-2020 and the Boulder Creek Path along the south edge of the property was added between 1984 and 1993. Both paths were repaved in 2003; the east path was also reconfigured at that time. •Boulders with engraved text along the Boulder Creek Path. •Concrete column with light fixture. The Boulder Left Hand and White Rock Ditch runs parallel to the multi-use path on the southern edge of the Block 13 and is outside of the proposed expanded landmark boundary. 4 City of Boulder Public Tree Map. https://boulder.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=5ecc3d671d264b5aadff76cd89f3e 4b0. Accessed Oct. 26, 2021. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 10 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 8. View facing southwest, October 2021. Figure 9. View facing southeast, October 2021. Figure 10. View facing west, October 2021. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 11 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo HISTORY GLEN HUNTINGTON Glen Huntington, noted Boulder architect, designed many important buildings in Boulder, including the Boulder County Courthouse, Boulder High School, and Huntington Arms. The Bandshell design, although based on other Bandshells, represents the variety of structures and architectural styles in which Huntington produced designs. SACO R. DEBOER 5 Noted Denver landscape architect Saco R. DeBoer recommended the site and planned the landscaping for the Bandshell, as well as reviewing other components of the project. In June 1937, the Boulder Daily Camera reported that DeBoer, as consulting city planner, had made recommendations to the planning and parks commission for the new Bandshell.23 In July 1937, the Camera recorded that “S.R. DeBoer, landscape architect and consulting city planner ... took preliminary sketches of the proposed Bandshell to be erected by the Lions club in Central park and photographs of similar structures at Sioux City and Sioux Center, Iowa, to prepare final drawings for the work here.”24 At the same time DeBoer was working on the Bandshell project, the newspaper noted that “he also took back to Denver with him his preliminary plans for the new city park on University Hill [Beach Park] and will 25 revise them in accordance with suggestions of the city planning and parks commission.” Also in 1937, DeBoer worked on landscaping of the grounds, curbing, gutter, and sidewalks for Boulder High School.26 In 1926, DeBoer had drafted Boulder's first zoning ordinance.27 He designed the amphitheater on Flagstaff Mountain (1933) and also designed North Boulder Park. Saco Rienk DeBoer was born in Ureterp, Netherlands, in 1883. He studied engineering for three years until contracting tuberculosis and being advised by his doctor to pursue a different career. DeBoer stated that “I went in for landscape design because I had a feeling for beauty.”28 He studied his new field in the Netherlands and Germany before opening a landscape design office in Ureterp. When his tuberculosis returned, DeBoer left for America in search of a cure. Denver during the early twentieth century was a mecca for those suffering from respiratory diseases and DeBoer moved to the city, where he lived until the age of ninety-one. 29 DeBoer’s first effort in Denver transformed a former dump on Cherry Creek into Sunken Gardens Park. Mayor Robert Speer, in the midst of converting Denver into a “City Beautiful,” appointed DeBoer the city's landscape architect in 1910 and reappointed him in 1916. He became a member of Denver’s first zoning commission in 1925, the first city planner in 1926, and co-authored the ten-volume Denver Plan 5 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Prepared for the City of Boulder. 14 July 1995. (Attachment D) Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 12 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo (1929-1947). In 1926, he developed a master plan for Grand Junction which received widespread attention and resulted in his being hired to plan the new town of Boulder City, Nevada, in 1930. DeBoer died in Denver in 1974. Saco DeBoer’s Landscape Design for Central Park Planning for the Central Park area began in 1909 with Frederick Law Olmsted Jr.’s Plan for the Public Improvements for Boulder, Colorado. In 1937, the City of Boulder purchased Lot 13 Old Town and in 1938. Saco DeBoer was commissioned by Parks & Recreation to develop a plan for the area. Saco DeBoer was consulted on the location of the Bandshell and its construction was completed in June 1938, with trees planted around the Bandshell site.6 In 1939, DeBoer developed a schematic landscaping plan for the larger civic area (see figure 6), which included planting trees to screen the structure from adjacent streets including a curving parkway along Canyon Boulevard and 13th Street that was never realized (at this time Canyon, or Water Street as it was then known, was a railyard). The scheme shows paths to the Bandshell to prevent people from taking shortcuts to the site. DeBoer’s final plan included both deciduous trees and pines. In 1947, DeBoer proposed a new plan for the Bandshell area which included amphitheater style seating (figure 7). The seating was constructed in 1950 with regrading to the south of the Bandshell to accommodate stepped amphitheater seating. 6 Mundus Bishop. Draft Glen Huntington Resource Assessment Report. City of Boulder. 2021. https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/5789/download?inline Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 13 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 11. "Proposed Boulevard & City Building Group, with Flood Protection, Parking Areas and Farmer’s Market. Boulder, Colorado. S.R. DeBoer, Consultant. February 1945.” Denver Public Library. Figure 12. Cropped image of “Boulder Creek Boulevard Plan. S.R. DeBoer & CO City Planners.” Date unknown. Denver Public Library. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 14 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 13. “Sketch of Proposed Civic Center and War Memorial. War Memorial Committee of Boulder Colorado. S.R. DeBoer & CO City Planners, Landscape Architects, Denver, CO, July 1947.” Denver Public Library. Figure 14. Bandshell c. 1940 – prior to regrading and addition of seating. Figure 15. Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1938 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 15 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 16. Construction of stepped seating in 1950 (note area has been re-graded) Figure 17. Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1958 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 16 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 18. Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1972 Figure 19. Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1984 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 17 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 20. Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1993 Figure 21. Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 2020 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 18 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo PUBLIC HEARING REQUIRED Section 9-11-3, B.R.C. 1981, provides that amendments to an individual landmark may be initiated by the City Council or the Landmarks Board, the property owner, or a historic preservation organization. On October 6, 2021 the Landmarks Board voted (4-0, Jellick absent) to consider a motion to adopt a resolution to initiate the process for reviewing the designation boundary. A public hearing must be held by the Landmarks Board within 45 days of this motion to review the application (before Nov. 20, 2021). This is a legislative determination. CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD’S DECISION Initiation hearings are legislative, not quasi-judicial. In reviewing applications, the Landmarks Board may consider without limitation the following criteria: (1)There is probable cause to believe that the building or district may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark or historic district consistent with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1, “Legislative Intent,” and 9-11-2, “City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts,” B.R.C. 1981; (2)There are currently resources available that would allow the city manager to complete all of the community outreach and historic analysis necessary for the application; (3)There is community and neighborhood support for the proposed designation; (4)The buildings or features may need the protections provided through designation; (5)The potential boundaries for the proposed district are appropriate; (6)In balance, the proposed designation is consistent with the goals and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan; or (7)The proposed designation would generally be in the public interest. ANALYSIS Staff’s analysis is based on the criteria for review provided above. 1)Is there probable cause to believe that the building or district may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark consistent with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1, “Legislative Intent,” and 9-11-2, “City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts,” B.R.C. 1981? The existing landmark boundary encompasses the northern 170 feet of lot 13 and the expanded boundary is proposed to include the remaining 130 feet of Block 13. Ordinance 5751 (Attachment C: Ordinance 5751) describes the characteristics of the property that justify its designation as a landmark as: 1)Its historic significance for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of the city; for its importance in the history of park development; and for its association with the Boulder Lions Club; 2)Its architectural significance as a rare representation of Art Deco style as reflected in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplified design; as Boulder’s only example of Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 19 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo park Bandshell construction and one of few such examples in the state; and as representative of the work of Saco DeBoer and Glen Huntington, noted landscape architect and architect; and 3)Its environmental significance for its planned and natural site characteristics; as a component of the central urban park; and as an established, familiar and prominent visual landmark. Staff considers there is probable cause to believe the area in the proposed expanded boundary may be eligible for designation, based upon extant designed and vernacular landscape features.7 While the landscape has evolved over time, the essential character of the site remains. Additional information on the existing conditions and historic context of the Block as a whole is now planned as part of the Historic Places Plan (HiPP) and will help document its significance in the designation memo and ordinance. 2)Are there currently resources available that would allow the city manager to complete all of the community outreach and historic analysis necessary for the application? The Parks & Recreation Department is currently undertaking a Historic Places Plan (HiPP), funded by a State Historic Fund (SHF) grant. The HiPP will serve as a planning document and guide for the department’s stewardship of twelve culturally relevant and historically designated resources that are both owned and managed by BPR. The outcomes of the final plan will ensure each site’s vibrant integrity and preservation within the community. As part of the HiPP’s community outreach, a group of technical stakeholders with a variety of backgrounds and areas of expertise are working closely with staff and consultants to guide the development of the plan. The HiPP also involves staff across the city and planned check-ins with the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board and Landmarks Board as part of a cohesive planning process. Due to this initiation request, BPR staff has expanded the scope of the Bandshell section of the HiPP to extend documentation of existing conditions, historic context and treatment recommendations for the entirety of Block 13. Staff recommends that, if the Board chooses to initiate the process for reviewing the designation boundary, the Board delay the designation hearing until the HiPP is complete. By integrating planning efforts and delaying the designation hearing to complete the above-mentioned documentation and analysis, the city will have resources to complete necessary community outreach and historic analysis for the boundary amendment. 3)Is there community and neighborhood support for the proposed designation? 7 NPS Bulletin 36. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB36-Complete.pdf (link) Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 20 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo On August 27, 2021, the Landmarks Board received a letter from the Friends of the Bandshell (link) requesting Landmarks Board consider an expansion of the landmark boundary. Between Oct. 6 and Oct. 26, 2021, the Landmarks Board has received 7 letters in support of expanding the boundary. (Attachment B: Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021.) 4) Do the buildings or features within the expanded boundary need the protections provided through designation? There is no immediate threat to the features within the expanded boundary. If passed in November 2021, Ballot Measure 2I: Extension of the Community, Culture, Resilience and Safety Tax Extension would provide funding to “IMPROVE THE BOULDER CREEK PATH CORRIDOR ; IMPLEMENT THE BOULDER CIVIC AREA PHASE 2/CENTRAL PARK IMPROVEMENTS.” The HiPP will inform these future planning processes, which may include physical changes to the site, similar to how the site has evolved over time. Expanding the landmark boundary provides additional review processes. 5) The potential boundaries for the proposed district are appropriate; Consistent with the National Register of Historic Places guidance the City of Boulder’s Historic Preservation program typically recommends landmark boundaries that encompass the entirety of a property, unless there have been significant changes to a portion of the property. This allows a logical and consistent approach to providing an appropriate setting to individual landmarks. Staff considers that the entirety of Block 13 should be considered for inclusion as it retains its historic character, with minor changes over time. 6) In balance, is the proposed designation is consistent with the goals and policies of the Boulder Valley Compr ehensive Plan? Hearing the application would be consistent with Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan policy 2.27, Preservation of Historic & Cultural Resources, which states “The city and county will identify, evaluate and protect buildings, structures, objects, districts, sites and natural features of historic, architectural, archaeological or cultural significance with input from the community. The city and county will seek protection of significant historic and cultural resources through local designation when a proposal by the private sector is subject to discretionary development review.” BVCP policy 2.28, Leadership in Preservation: City- & County Owned Resources states, “The city and county will evaluate their publicly owned properties to determine their historic, architectural, archaeological or cultural significance. Eligible resources will be protected through local designation, including secondary buildings or elements that are part of and convey the cultural significance of a site, such as a farm complex and alley buildings.” 7) Would the proposed expanded boundary generally be in the public interest? Staff considers the proposed landmark boundary expansion would generally be in the public interest. Central Park is significant for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of the city and for its importance in the history of park development. The entirety of Block 13 serves a variety of purposes and has evolved over time to meet the public’s needs. The public processes and community outreach and support as described above allude to the interest this serves to our community. Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 21 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo NEXT STEPS If the board chooses to initiate the process for reviewing the designation, it must do so by resolution. A draft resolution is included in Attachment A: Draft Resolution. If initiated, the application will be scheduled for a public hearing before the Landmarks Board between 60 to 120 days (unless otherwise agreed upon by the board and the applicant) in order to determine whether the proposed designation conforms with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1, “Legislative Intent,” and 9-11-2, “City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts,” B.R.C. 1981. If the Landmarks Board chooses not to initiate the process for reviewing the designation boundary, the application will be denied. The designation boundary will remain as defined in Ordinance 5751 (Attachment C: Ordinance 5751). ATTACHMENTS A: B: C: D: E: Draft Resolution Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Ordinance 5751 Boulder Bandshell Historical Study LPAB Action Minutes, July 25, 1995 Letter from the Friends of the Bandshell (link) Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 22 of 91 F: Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo RESOLUTION NO. _______ A RESOLUTION OF THE LANDMARKS BOARD INITIATING THE PROCESS FOR REVIEWING THE DESIGNATION BOUNDARY OF 1236 CANYON BLVD., AN INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK. WHEREAS, on October 6, 2021, the Landmarks Board submitted a request to review the designation boundary of 1236 Canyon Blvd., an individual landmark; and WHEREAS, on November 3, 2021, the Landmarks Board held an initiation hearing to determine whether to initiate the process for reviewing the designation boundary of 1236 Canyon Blvd., an individual landmark, and determined that the property meets the standards for initiation; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE LANDMARKS BOARD OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO: The City of Boulder Landmarks Board hereby initiates the process for reviewing the designation boundary of 1236 Canyon Blvd., an individual landmark and will schedule a designation hearing to be delayed until the Historic Preservation Plan (HiPP) is complete, or for 2 years, whichever occurs first. ADOPTED this 3rd day of November 2021. This resolution is signed by the chair of the Landmarks Board on November 3, 2021. _____________________________________ Chair, Landmarks Board ATTEST: Secretary to the Board Attachment A - Draft Resolution Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 23 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo From:DAN CORSON To:Brandt, Clare Subject:Initiation of Bandshell site boundaries Date:Thursday, October 21, 2021 2:49:46 PM External Sender Dear Landmarks Board, I urge you to initiate the request of the Friends of the Bandshell to expand the site boundaries to include the lot to the south as was originally discussed when the Bandshell landmarking was before the Landmarks Board. I was not on the Landmarks Board at that time as I was on the Planning Board. However, I remember the discussion well. The hang up was the train cars and whether it made sense to approve boundaries that included such incongruous objects. The train cars are now gone, and the East End area redevelopment continues to be an issue. An expanded boundary would provide the historic site the protection it needs to ensure that any future development honors it. Sincerely, Dan Corson Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 24 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 25 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo From:Karl F. Anuta To:Brandt, Clare Subject:Expansion of Bandshell Date:Thursday, October 21, 2021 8:53:51 PM External Sender The existing boundaries of the landmarked Bandshell are arbitrary. They were created, as the record shows, for the sole purpose of excluding railroad cars which are no longer extant. I strongly support expansion of the site to include all of Block 13 north of the ditch. Karl Anuta Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 26 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo From:Natalie Feinberg Lopez To:Brandt, Clare Subject:Enlarge the bandshell boundary Date:Friday, October 22, 2021 2:06:33 PM External Sender To the Landmarks Board, Thank you for considering the expansion of the Central Park Bandshell designation per the request of the Friends of the Bandshell. There are very few cities that can boast a Central Park designed by an Olmsted, Boulder is one. The entire park should be protected as a critical component of Boulder history. Block 13 is one of the most important blocks in Boulder, with the design of the park serving as the kick off for Boulder to be one of the leaders in designing parks and trails for the community. This movement was about equality, fir workers to have access to nature as the wealthiest had when in their summer homes. Parks served as open space for clean air, recreation, and fir the community to gather for local events. While many communities now designate extensive assets to park development, this was not always the case, and many looked at Boulder as the example to follow. The addition of the bandshell continued the effort to create outdoor space that acts to support all in the community, while embracing the mid-century modern aesthetics. The bandshell is a symbol of Boulder’s dedication to vibrant culture made available to all at the core of City, a central component to the community values. The bandshell has been shamefully neglected for years, however this hasn’t diminished the importance of the structure, nor the potential. The total site, bandshell and seating are intrinsic to the original design and intent of Glen Huntington, it cannot be pulled apart or portions demolished without losing the integrity that is critical to any landmark. Any physical additions to the site must be done with care so as to enhance the integrity, and improve the site. With small improvements and excellent programming, the bandshell can once again become the symbol of Boulder’s dedication to culture, outdoor recreation, and a dedication to equality of service for everyone in the community. A designation of Block 13 will protect the park, critical to the bandshell context. Thank you for your attentions to this matter, and your dedication to keeping Boulder our town, this designation is a critical component to our community values. Sincerely, Natalie Feinberg Lopez Principal Architectural Conservator BUILT ENVIRONMENT EVOLUTION PRESERVING THE PAST TRANSFORMING TOMORROW PO Box 21433 Boulder, CO 80308 www.be-evolution.com 303-562-5872 This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 27 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 28 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo From:Comcast To:Brandt, Clare Cc:Sharon Rosall; Kathryn Barth Subject:Expanded Bandshell site landmarking Date:Tuesday, October 26, 2021 3:23:01 PM External Sender Let’s remember that in a past century, two of the most renowned landscape designers, F.L. Olmsted Jr. and Saco de Boer, were commissioned to come to a small college town in the west to help our city envision a scenic park that would run beside Boulder Creek, near the town center and near CU. And we have the original site plan. I ask you to approve landmarking of the extended bandshell site plan, Original Block 13. 300’x 300’. Back in the day, autos were a novelty and people were enthralled with “scenic drives” such as the Rock Creek Parkway in Washington D.C. Well, luckily, those Boulderites didn’t put in a roadway right beside Boulder Creek as some cities did. They made it a park with a bandshell and then with a noteworthy and lovable “creek path”. Please landmark this treasure, so it can never be lost to all of us and our grandkids. Best, Sharon Purvis Rosall Former Landmarks Board Member 303- 589- 6323 rosall@comcast.net Rosall Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 29 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo To the Landmarks Board 22 September 2021 No other town has a Bandshell and surrounding park like Boulder. Embrace it. Protect it. Enhance it by appreciation and maintenance. Please expand the Bandshell to the original boundaries of Block 13. In 1995 June Holmes, along with Bob McDonald and other concerned citizens, led a hard and passionate fight to “save” the Bandshell. They were successful. It was renamed with a Glen Huntington plaque, restored, and reused. I cannot believe that I, June Holmes’ daughter, is now 26 years later involved in a critical issue involving the preservation of the Bandshell with its surrounding park. Again, there is renewed concern to protect a unique place of historic, cultural, not to mention, sentimental value in the heart of our unique town. New is not always better. The Train Depot - gone, hidden among tall concrete. North Broadway’s Welcome arch sign - gone. Valentine’s brick wall of a charming Boulder map – gone. Favorite and familiar stores and businesses - gone replaced by national franchises. These are special and unique interests; this is what makes Boulder Boulder. The Bandshell and the green park do not need to be changed. The do need to be protected. If anything, enhance the area and make it even more appealing. Such as the winter lights on the bare trees that is warm and appealing. Please recognize the wonderful value of the surrounding park for family picnics, an open green and safe space for children, an enjoyable and relaxing destination in the center of Boulder. All tied together with the Bandshell. Be thankful and proud of our Central Park. Thank you, Caroline Holmes Stepanek Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 30 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Dear Landmarks Board, October 22, 2021 Friends of the Bandshell, (a Colorado Nonprofit formed in 2015) sent a Request to the Landmarks Board on August 20, 2021, asking to Enlarge the Boundaries of the Landmarked Bandshell Site to encompass the entire Original Block 13 of the City of Boulder. See Figures 1,2 You will be considering this request on Wednesday, November 3, 2021. Friends of the Bandshell will make a presentation at that time. In the meantime, I would like to share some personal thoughts reflecting on my concern for and interest in the Bandshell over the many years since 1988 when I moved to Boulder. I had recently met June Holmes, and one day we met at the Bandshell. June told me that it was in danger of being torn down, and she needed some help trying to save it. It was clear to me that the Bandshell was an elegant though neglected structure and certainly, that it should be declared a “Landmark” from an architectural point of view. And I wondered why folks would want to tear down the Bandshell? (I had recently moved from Washington DC, where I had worked as an architect at a firm that focused on historic preservation and restoration… along Pennsylvania Avenue, the Willard and Washington Hotels, The Old Post Office and projects for Georgetown University.) I became involved in preservation in Boulder, advocating to save the Bandshell, serving on the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board (LAPB) (1990-1994)… volunteering with Historic Boulder much of the time since then, serving as President, Board member several times, serving as a House Captain for Holiday Tours, and acting a character in the Meet the Spirits Tours in Columbia, Pioneer Cemetery. The Bandshell was brought forward for Landmarking in 1995 by the Modern Architecture Preservation League. (MAPL). On July 25, there was a LPAB meeting… at which I testified on behalf of Historic Boulder… that the Bandshell met the architectural and landscape criteria to be a “Landmark” and was an example of the uncommon and work of masters. I reported that Historic Boulder had voted unanimously to landmark the Bandshell on its site. After public testimony, the LPAB reconvened, continuing discussion among themselves concerning the appropriate size of the site to be included in the Landmark. After much discussion it was decided that the site should not include all of Block 13, only the northern most 170’, because of the presence of a three-car train, located on the southern 130’ of the site. Michael Holleran, a member of the LPAB (now Director of the Preservation Program at the School of Architecture at the University of Texas, Austin) had thoughtful comments as recorded in the Minutes. He recommended that in the future a “policy that the Board deal in complete parcels of land unless there is a good reason not to. He would like to avoid future arguments about whether a specific tree, walkway, tree stumps etc is significant or not. To draw specific boundaries in this case would be to take the entire park. … He felt the things around the Bandshell are important. The Board’s purpose … is to have a role in that planning and to protect this resource. If we don’t deal with anything that is around it we are not protecting the Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 31 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo resource…” It was his purpose to make sure that “the whole environs of the Bandshell are part of the scope of what was reviewed.” Michael’s advice was good then and it is good now. P.147, Minutes of LMPAB July 25, 1995 David Gehr was the City Attorney for the LPAB in 1995. His advice was that the Board could initiate a separate application for including the whole of Central Park including the Bandshell… “it would have a public hearing at some point in the future on the larger area” p. 149, Minutes of LMPAB July 25, 1995 Well, here we are… many years later, with that public hearing coming up on November 3, 2021. Some people who were present at the7/25/95 meeting so long ago… have passed away, some have moved away. A few of us are still here, and still care about the Bandshell. With the work of Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. creating Boulder’s “Central Park” as part of his recommendation of a green parkland from where Boulder Creek leaves the mountains to the eastern edge of City, and with the 1938-39 Landscape Plan by Saco R. DeBoer, realized as the Bandshell was being completed, there is a historic cultural landscape site that should be included in the landmark boundaries. I urge you to include all of Central Park (Block 13) in the Bandshell Site, Thank you, Kathryn Kathryn Howes Barth, AIA See ca.1940 aerial photo below, Also, See Figure 3, Olmsted’s map of Improvements. Aerial View ca 1940 of Block 13, the Glen Huntington Bandshell, Landscaping by Sacco DeBoer Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 32 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo HISTORIC MAPS RELATING TO THE BANDSHELL Figure 1: Original Block 13, Map of the City of Boulder 1878 Located at Highland School Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 33 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 2. Title Block for 1878 Map of Boulder Located at Highland School Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 34 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Figure 3. Map, Frederick Law Olmsted Jr 1910, Plan of Improvements Located at Highland School Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 35 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 36 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 37 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 38 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 39 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 40 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 41 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 42 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 43 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 44 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 45 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Attachment B - Public Comment received between Oct. 6, 2021 and Oct. 26, 2021 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 46 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Film 2088 Rec #01561053 Pate: 11-7-95 ORDINAL"I/CE NO. 5751 A,"1/ ORDINAt"IICE DESIGNATING THE STRUCTURE AND ITS SITE, LOCATED ON THE NORTHER.� 170 FEET OF BLOCK 13, ORIGINAL TO\.VNSITE TO THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO, A LANDMARK UNDER CHAPTER 10-13 OF THE REVISED CODE OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO 1981 A."1/D SETTING FORTH DETAILS IN RELATION THERETO. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO, THAT: Section L The council enacts this ordinance pursuant to its authority under Chapter 10-13 of the Revised Code of the City of Boulder, Colorado, 1981 to designate as a landmark a structure having a special character or special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value. Section 2. The council finds that: 1) on or about J\ifay 3, 1995 the applicant, :Vlodern Architecture Preservation League, applied to the City of Boulder Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board to designate said property as a landmark; 2) the board held a public hearing on the proposed designation on July 25, 1995; and 3) on July 25, 1995 the board recommended that the council approve the proposed designation. Section J. The council also finds that: 1) upon public notice required by law, the council held a public hearing on the proposed designation on September 19, 1995: and 2) continued the public hearing to October 17, 1995 and upon the basis of the presentations at these hearings finds that the structure and its site, located on the northern 170 feet of Block 13, Original Townsite to the City of Boulder, does possess a special char acter and special historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value warranting its designation as a landmark. Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 47 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Section 4. There is hereby created as a landmark the structure and its site, located on the northern 170 feet of Block 13, Original Townsite to the City of Boulcler, County of Bo ulder, State of Colorado, whose legal description is shown on Attachment B. Section s, The characteristics of the subject property that justify its desig- nation as a landmark are: 1) its historical significance for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of the city; for its importance in the history of park development; and for its association with the Boulder Lions Club; 2) its architectural significance as a rare representative of Art Deco style as reflected in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplified design: as Boulder's only example of park band shell construction and one of few such examples in the state; and as representative of the work of Saco DeBoer and Glen Huntington, noted landscape architect and architect; and, (3) its environmental significance for its planned and natural site characteristics; as a component of the central urban park; an d as an est ablished, familiar and prominent visual landmark. Section 6. The council further finds that the foregoing landmark designation is necessary to promote the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the city. Section 7. The council directs that the planning department give prompt notice of this designation to the property owner and cause a copy of this ordinance to be recorded as required by Section 10-13-6 ( d) of the Revised Code of the City of Boulder, Colorado 1981. Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 48 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo INTRODUCED, READ Ai'lD ORDERED PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this 5th day of September , 1995. Attest: Di Ex-officio City Clerk READ ON SECOND READING, Ai'\1ENDED, PASSED, ADOPTED, Ai'lD ORDERED PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY this 17th day of October , 1995. Attest: Director of Finance & Ex-officio City Clerk h: \data \comdev\hist\genlbandshe I. LMO b� Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 49 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo -- .J i r---.. ·, --£;--:(�: '' ' ·- <'>-- \ \ r-/ \ ... :­...-· ...c_ \ :r-1-----., �___ . -_._____, i __,.,---....;:•' ·,,..__...,, .. ,,. ��:-�< - I ' ________,� / ,..:;;---" / ' . / ' / , - / ' -, - \ ATTACHMENT B ,· ' '/ ,� \ V ' . , : " v -. -- I I \. ', ' " ii' = - ,; Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 50 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo STATE OF COLORADO) COUNTY OF BOULDER) SS. CITY OF BOULDER) ORDINANCE NO. 5751 CERTIFICATE I, Alisa D. Lewis, City Clerk of said City in the County and state aforesaid, do hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was introduced, read on first reading at a regular meeting of the City council thereof held on the fil;h_ day of September , liM, and that I caused the same to be published (by title only) on the 9th , day of September , 1995, in the official paper of said City (the same being paper of general circulation published in said city), and that said publication was mad e ten days before the passage of said ordinance. I hereby certify that the foregoing ordinance was afterwards duly and regularly passed and adopted as amended, by the city Council of said City on second reading at a regular meeting thereof held on the 17th day of October , 1995, and that I caused the same to be published (by title only) on the 21st day October , 1995, in the official paper of said city. WITNESS my hand and the seal of said City of Boulder hereto affixed, this 24th day of October ,�- Alisa D. Lewis City Clerk cert2.ord Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 51 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Proof of Publication D:1il�?J;i��:1111l'r:I P.0. Box 591 Boulder, CO 00306-0591 (Ue11m nl -One Pul1licnlio11) S 1/\1 E OF COLOll/\!JO } ss.COUN I Y UF BOIJLlJEl1 Uh\11 rouc\,er Ill, ol lawlul aye, he\11y fllsl duly SWIJ)ll ll\)011 oafl, deposes a11d says: 1.·1 hat he Is tl1e rlnancial Se1vlces neprese11lative ol Thi, Bould�r Dally Cmnera nm\ lrns pe1so1rnl lmowlmllje of all the \nets set fotlh in this aflmlavlt and Is a cornpetn11t person lo cerlily llrnt the facls stated hetein me accurate and he he,ehy CP.7 !iflAs: That ·11rn Rouk!P.t Ual\y Cm11e1a Is a puhllc dally newspaper ol yo.11eia\ chculatlon as delined hy law and Is printed and puhllslmd wholly \11 the City of Bouldet, County ol Roulder mul Slale ul Cr1luradu: l lral II hns heen ad1111t!od lo lf1q ll11lled Slates mails as ser;ond class nmtlet under lhe provisions ol lhe 11,,1 ol Congress ol Match 3, 187!!, a11rl an10111l111n11ls lherelo: /\11rl 11ml It lo, a lnyal 11ewspnpet duly qualllled lo puhllsh le11nl t1(1/ir:ns of ndvArl!�mrient wflld1 mo required to he published in said Clly ol Roultler and s*I Cou11ly ol Boulder ot hulh. �. 11 ml II re !luu\det IJally Cameta is duly qua\11\ed lo pul.Jlish l\10 m111exed public 1101\ce, which Is a full, hue and c01recl copy of lhe 01lylnal thereof, and 11,e same was pulJllshed In I he Boulder IJaily Came, a 011 lhe __ _'7.Lk ____ day or �j4ZJJ-r, c/4L U, 19 _ 9 _:;;.-: f"wll1e1 alllant sayelh 110I. ··14¾1 8-£:/. -_?"?<:&,;,,,_�� _fe'-'< ;;;✓-d,,,..,_;,.c..,. __ :"z-' 61-c..fl' ,,. /�C (/" /,.- / Suhsctihed a11d swo111 lo hefote ,;�,, this --�,6--a_,,._,_ day . _.-/ /,-,· . ,:;..-.-"' . ?f=,I-L-/�¼--n.1.£<+c..� -·-···- - , /1.IJ. rn /de--------- w1111es� n,y h�"';: __ �--­t�uhlic l'ns\e /\liver llsemenl Item ORPINANCE NO, 17111 AN ORDINANCE DES/GNAT• ING THE ST.RUCTURE AND ITS SITE, LOCATED ON THE NORTHERN 170 FEET OF BLOCK 13, ORIGINAL TOWNSITE TO THE CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO, ALSO KNOWN AS THE BOULDER BAND SHELL, A LANDMARK UNDER CHAP· . TEA 10·13· OF THe RE!VISED CODE OF THE CITY OF 1;1OULDf:R, COLORADO 1981 ANO SETTING . F,ORTH DE· TAILS IN RELATION THERE· TO (The published text of the above ordinance la a.vallalll• for i:iubllc lnepectlon and ac• qule\tlon In the Office of the City Clerk, Munlclpal Bulld· Ing, 1777 Broadway, Boulder, Colorado 80302). AMeNDeD INTRODUCED, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY TITLE ONLY THIS 5th DAY Of September, 1995. L.esna L, Durgin Mayor ATTEST: A!leaO.LewlS Cltv Clark Pub. Sap. 9, 1995 In the Dally Camera - 7 4 7 0 2 . Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 52 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Proof of Publication Da:!iiSE:r:nera P.O. Box 591 Boulder, CO 80306-0591 (General -One Publication) ------------r----__.,:======-� STATE OF COLORADO } ssCOUNTY OF BOULDER Laura Kistner, of lawful age, being first duly swam upon oath deposes and says: 1. That she is the Financial Services Representative ofThe Boulder Daily Camera and has personal knowledge of all the facts set forth in this affadavit and is a competent person to certify that the facts stated herein are accurate and she hereby certtties: That The Boulder Daily Camera is a public daily newspaper of general clrculation as defined by law and is printed and published wholly in the City of Boulder, County of Boulder and State of Colorado: That it has been admitted to the United States mails as second class matter under the provisions of the Act of Congress of March 3, 1879, and amendments thereto: And that ii is a legal newspaper duly qualified to publish legal notices of advertisement which are required to be published In said City of Boulder and said County of Boulder or both. 2.That The Boulder Daily Camera is duly qualified topublish the annexed public notice, which is a full, true and correct copy of the original thereof, and t�ame was published in The Boulder Daily Camera on the 'di._ I ,b-T day of0 c ,P:i.b1½ • , 1e.9.S,. Furth�er affi th not. a _A-__,ifj _ .kddc� l Subscribed and swam to before me this cwt-h dayof Qc..-\oboc .A.o.1e 9::::> . Witness? h�d and offic�I. 1 ) ..:,,j_/k_.� ,/;b-z: J./41_ .J-?1_.f'L,,-y,JNotary Public ! MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 10/25/98 Publication fee S ___ \�?-i""'""�· b-="-�--=---- Paste Advertisement Here Clly Clerk, MuplcJpal Bulld· Ing, 1777 Broadway, Boulder, ORDINANCE NO. 11711 Color-do, 80302}. AN ORDINANCE DESIGNAT· INTRODUCED, FIEAO AND ING THE STRUCTURE AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY ITS SITE, LOCATED ON THE TITLE ONL\' THIS 6th DAY NORTHERN 170 FEET OF OF Seplember, 1995. BLOCK 13 ORIGINAi,. READ ON SECOND READ· TOWNSITE TO THE CITY OF ING, AMENDED, PASSED, BOULDER, COLORADO, A · ADOPTED ANO ORDERED LANOMARK UNDER · CHAP· PUBLISHED BY TITLE C•NLY TEA 10-13 OF TH.I;: RE-VISED THIS 17TH DAY OF Ootober, CODE OF THE CITY OF 1996. SOUi.DEA, COLORADO 1981 Leslie L. Durgin AND SETTING FORTH DE· Mayor TAILS IN RELATION rHERE· ATTEST: TO. Allaa □. Lewis (The publfshad tellt of the Cltv Clark above ordinance la available Pub, Oct. 21, 1996 in the·Oal­for public Inspection and ac, ly Camera - 861M8. qulsltlon In the Office of the Attachment C - Ordinance 5751 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 53 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo BOULDER BANDSHELL HISTORICAL STUDY Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, Colorado Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 54 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo BOULDER BANDSHELL HISTORICAL STUDY Prepared for: City of Boulder Department of Community Design, Planning, and Development P.O. Box 791 Boulder, Colorado 80306 (303)441-3270 Prepared by: R.Laurie Simmons, M.A. and Thomas H. Simmons, M.A. Front Range Research Associates, Inc. 3635 West 46th A venue Denver, Colorado 80211-1101 (303)477-7597 14 July 1995 Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 55 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo Introduction and Methodology The Boulder Band Shell was erected in Central Park by the Boulder Lions Club in 1938 as an outdoor amphitheater for musical concerts and other forms of community entertainment (See Map 1 ). Architect Glen Huntington designed the structure and landscape architect and city planner Saco R. DeBoer selected the site and prepared the landscape plan. For over fifty years, the Band Shell was used primarily during the summer months to present outdoor concerts and other cultural programs for the local community. For many years, it was also the site of Christmas celebrations in December. In over fifty years of use, the Band Shell served as a focal point for Central Park and as the site of numerous social and civic events. Front Range Research Associates, Inc., performed this study of the history and significance of the Band Shell as cons�ltant to the City of Boulder Department of Community Design, Planning and Development in June and July 1995. Thomas H. Simmons conducted historical research, interviewed local citizens, photographed the structure, and coauthored this report. R. Laurie Simmons conducted research, interviews, and fieldwork, and coauthored the report. Judith Broeker, Preservation Unlimited, conducted background research on the Band Shell's history.· Lara Ramsey, City of Boulder Department of Community Design, Planning, and Development, coordinated the project, provided information from city_ files, researched the minutes of the Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, and reviewed the report. The study included examination of historical records, preparation of a Colorado Historical Society Historic Building Inventory Record form, preparation of an historical background of the structure, an architectural description, and an evaluation of the Band Shell's significance in terms of eligibility as a local landmark and for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. A search of the files of documented historic resources at the Colorado Historical Society Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation in July 1995 fo und that only one band shell, that in Mineral Palace Park in Pueblo, has bee□ recorded in the state. To provide comparative information for evaluation, some research was done concerning other band shells in the country, including the Hollywood Bowl in California, Grant Park orchestra shell in Chicago, and those in Chicago and Sioux City and Sioux Center, Iowa. Rodd Wheaton, Assistant Field Director of Cultural Resources and Partnerships, Intermountain Field Area, National Park Service, was consulted regarding band shells in other states and the significance of Boulder's Band Shell in terms of the national context. To find specific details about the construction and use of Boulder's Band Shell, the records of the Carnegie Branch Library for local history were consulted, including photographic, manuscript, and oral history collections. The records of the Western Historical Collections at Norlin Library, University of Colorado were consulted. The records of the Parks and Recreation Department and of the Planning and Parks Commission of the City of Boulder were examined in the Central Files of the Boulder Municipal Building. The City of Boulder Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 56 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo MAP 1 BOULDER BAND SHELL LOCATION MAP SOURCE: Base map provided by City of Boulder, Department of Community Design, Planning, and Development. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 57 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 2 Department of Community Design , Planning, and Development files regarding the Band Shell were provided by Lara Ramsey. The clippings files maintained by the Boulder Daily Camera were examined regarding the Band Shell. The Boulder Lions Club was contacted and information regarding the Band Shell, including an historic photograph, was copied. In Denver, the Western History Department of the Denver Public Library was consulted, including the papers of Saco R. DeBoer. A number of individuals were contacted for information about the Band Shell. Alex C. Cook, Secretary of the Boulder Lions Club, provided information and copies of documents from the Club's files for re'search. Unfortunately, no Lion's Club members of the era when the Band Shell was erected remain and the Club does not have any records relating to the construction of the Band Shell. Other individuals with information concerning Band Shell issues were contacted, including Betty Chronic, June Holmes, William E. Korbitz (former Boulder City Engineer), Ron Donahue, John Sewell, Robert McFarland, Diane Wray, and Leonard Segel. A Landmark nomination by the Modern Architecture Preservation League regarding the structure was examined. Copies of letters sent to the consultant in regard to the study are included in the appendix. No original drawings or specification s for the Band Shell were located. In 1968, Dwain Miller, director of Boulder Parks and Recreation, noted that the "band shell is of a rather archaic design and to my knowledge there are no plans available for it."1 In addition, very few records which described alterations to or maintenance of the structure were found. According to Ron Donahue, the Boulder Parks and Recreation Department has not maintained comprehensive files regarding its maintenance of the structure or any alterations to the site. Copies of some newspaper articles collected for research during the course of the study are included as an appendix to the report. Architectural Description The Band Shell is located in the north central portion of Central Park and is visible from Canyon Boulevard which forms the northern bounda ry of the park. Park lands surround the Band Shell site on the east, west, and south and are bounded by Broadway on the west and Thirteenth Street on the east. The facade of the wood frame Art Deco style Band Shell faces south and is semielliptical, nearly circular. The interior roof is composed of a compound paneled arch (six concentric arches) (See Figure 1). The structure's design conveys a sense of theatricality and reflects Art Deco elements in its streamlined, simplified form .. 1 Dwain Miller, Boulder Parks and Recreation, Letter to Marshall Bingham, City Manager, Montrose, Colo., 23 February 1968. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 58 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 3 Interior walls are clad with panels of acoustic wallboard. Flexboard, "a slick, hard surfaced composite material with tlre appearance of tile" was considered for the wall cladding by the builders, although it is not known whether that material was actually used.2 The flat rear interior wall is arched and has a double door. The lower sides of the facade exterior wall are buttressed. According to city records, the structure is seventy-eight feet wide, including buttresses, and has a forty-eight foot opening, while the height of the structure from the ground to the roof apex is thirty-one-and-a-half feet.3 The structure has a raised concrete foundation. The elevated stage has wooden flooring, which is now painted. According to city files, the flooring is portable so that the stage can be raised or lowered to varying levels.4 The stage is accessed from each side by concrete stairs with pipe railings and concrete stair walls. A series of four concrete piers are situated in front of the stage (See Figure 2). The conical roof of the Band Shell slopes toward the ground toward the rear. The exterior walls are covered with rolled roofing material with some patches. The rear exterior wall is arched and has utility boxes and a trellis covered with ivy. The eastern elevation of this rear section has double metal doors (See Figures 3 through 5). In front of the stage is a semielliptical, level area covered with small gravel. Behind this is a concrete paved, arched, bermed seating area sloping upward away from the stage. The seating pattern is arched facing the stage. The bench style seats are composed of concrete pier bases topped by large wooden boards (See Figures 7 and 8). Fifteen rows of seats are divided by aisles into five groups, with the three central groups having the longest benches (See Figures 9 and 10). Behind the seating is a level area extending to the edge of the berm, which has low stone retaining walls, stone walkways, and landscaped plantings, including grass,. low bushes, and trees. There are also plantings along the edges and to the rear of the Band Shell. Maintenance/ Alterations According to a 1937 Boulder Daily Camera article, a practice room in the basement of the structure, with toilet and heating facilities was tentatively included in the early design of the Band Shell, but was eliminated due to its cost.5 A small storage area was built at the rear 2"Report of the Boulder Train Depot Task Force," March 1987. 3"Report of the Boulder Train Depot Task Force," March 1987. 4"Report of the Boulder Train Depot Task Force," March 1987. 5 Boulder Daily Camera, 11 June 1937. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 59 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 4 of the structure, and has been identified as a later addition, date unknown.6City files indicate periodic maintenance was provided for the structure up to 1988, including the repair and replacement of wood flooring, replacement of some acoustic panels, and interior painting.7 In July 1961, City Engineer W.E. Korbitz reported to the City Manager that inspection of the Band Shell found that the structural arches were in excellent • condition, while the wood flooring was practically all deteriorated. Korbitz judged that "the basic structure of the existing bandshell is in good condition" and he recommended that the structure be repaired and painted. 8 The interior walls of the shell were originally covered with acoustic wallboard. Due to the reported presence of asbestos, the consultant did not attempt to examine the current wall panels although the paneled seams of the arches appear to compare favorably with those in historic photographs. In 1987, city workers found asbestos in fiber board in the shell. The Boulder Daily Camera reported that to keep the asbestos from becoming airborne it would be covered with plywood and sealed.9 No records regarding the completion of this mitigation were found in the course of this study. The Lions Club logo was originally on the rear interior wall and is no longer extant. Four concrete piers were added in front of the structure at an unknown date and appear in photographs dating to 1956. The tops of the benches were originally unpainted wood and they now exhibit peeling paint. The color scheme for the arches of the Band Shell has changed over the years and is currently painted in variegated colors for a rainbow affect. The original colors for the structure were "slightly mottled tan with a green roof."10 A 1960 document noted that the Band Shell's green and light beige color scheme was to be changed to gray and cream.11 Landscaping around the Band Shell was completed in 1939.12 Based on an examination of historic photographs, much of the landscaping appears unaltered, including the trees along the edges and to the rear of the Band Shell and seating area and the bushes behind the seating area on the south. Portions of the stone retaining wall behind the seating area are missing. Evergreen shrubs which appear in photographs as late as 1981 in front of the 6"Report of the Boulder Train Depot Task Force," March 1987; Ron Donahue, Boulder Parks and Recreation, Memorandum to Chris Dropinski, 23 March 1995. 7Boulder Central Files, Central Park, Boulder Band Shell. 8W.E. Korbitz, City Engineer, Memorandum to City Manager, 28 July 1961. 9Boulder Daily Camera, 16 April 1987. 10"Report of the Boulder Train Depot Task Force," March 1987. 11E. Robert Turner, Boulder City Manager, Correspondence, 20 June 1960. 12 Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, 11 May 1939. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 60 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 5 concrete piers ad jacent to the stage have been removed. In 1953, the Denver, Boulder and Western Railroad's Engine No. 30 was moved to the area south of the Band Shell.13 Originally, the setting of the Band Shell featured railroad tracks and Water Street to the north and a principal city streetcar line to the west along Broadway, which was then two lanes with parking on either side. The streetcar system ceased operation in 1931.14 Train service was discontinued by 1957. In the early 1960s, Canyon Boulevard was constructed north of the Band Shell as a four lane roadway, replacing Water Street and the railroad tracks.15 Today, Broadway is a four lane thoroughfare. Historical Background Selection of Site The Band Shell was erected by the Boulder Lions Club in Central Park and given to the city. To create the park, Boulder had acquired one parcel of the land in 1906, purchased more in 1915, leased portions from the railroad in 1921, and purchased the final sections in 1933.16 On 15 April 1937, City Manager H.C. McClintock reported to the Boulder Planning and Parks Commission that the Major Activity Committee of the Lions Club suggested they would undertake a project to construct a band shell for public concerts. The commission approved the band shell project and requested a recommendation for the site of the structure from consulting city planner S.R. DeBoer.17 In June 1937, S.R. DeBoer reported to the city manager that I have checked over every possible site in the city, and I believe that Central Park is the only location at the present time. With the location of the proposed City Hall in the east end of the park, I would suggest that the band stand be located on the north line against the railroad right of way, approximately in the middle of the park. If this site meets with your approval, I shall draw up a sketch showing my ideas in regard to the treatment 13Carnegie Branch Library, Boulder Daily Camera, Engine No. 30 in Central Park, 1950- 1953. 14Phyllis Smith, "A History of Boulder's Transportation, 1858-1984," March 1984, 18, 32. 15John Sewell, Boulder Transportation Department, Interview, 13 July 1995; Silvia Pettem, Boulder: Evolution of a City (Niwot, Colo.: University Press of Colorado, 1994 ), 50. 16 Phyllis Smith, A Look At Boulder From Settlement to City (Boulder, Colo.: Pruett Publishing Co., 1981), 150. 17 Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, 15 April 1937. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 61 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 6 of the band stand and the grounds around it.18 Based on DeBoer's recommendation, the commission chose Central Park as the site for the new band shell. The structure was to be the first permanent place for outdoor band concerts in the city. When the site at Central Park was approved, there was discussion as to whether the structure would interfere with the erection of a new city hall in the park and participants decided that there would be room for both.19 The Boulder Lions Club The Boulder Lions Club had been organized in the fall of 1917 and chartered on 20 June 1918 with twenty-five members. By 1938, the membership of the group had grown to seventy-four. One of the club's principal programs was the improvement of local parks, including the construction of shelter houses in Panorama Park, Blue Bell Canyon, and at the top of Flagstaff Mountain, and the erection of an electrically illuminated fountain designed by Glen Huntington on the courthouse lawn. By mid-1938, the Lions Club had spent over $20,000 on such improvements.20 Glen Huntington Architect Glen H. Huntington designed the Band Shell. In April 1938, the Boulder Daily Camera reported that "the entire plans for the shell, which will be erected solely by the Lions club, have been drawn up by Huntington."21 Glen H. Huntington, the son of Denver architect Glen Wood Huntington, was born in Denver in 1890 and attended the University of Colorado, receiving a degree in civil engineering in 1912. Huntington worked for the Illinois Central Railroad for five years and enlisted in the army in 1917. After service in France during World War I, Huntington established a practice in Boulder which he operated for the next forty years. Huntington designed some of the most important buildings in the city, including the Boulder County Courthouse (1932), Boulder High School (1937), and, in conjunction with Charles Klauder, several buildings at the University of Colorado. In addition, Huntington designed many of the city's finest private homes and fraternity and sorority houses. From 1940 to 1945, Huntington served as chief architect for the Federal Housing Authority in Denver. In 1945, he affiliated with the firm of Huntington, Brelsford and Childress, which designed projects such as Writers Manor in Denver. Huntington died 18Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, June 1937. 19Boulder Daily Camera, 11 June 1937. 20Boulder Lions Club, "Major Activities or Building Program of Boulder Lions Club," 20 Jan. 1918-26 June 1938. :nBoulder Daily Camera, 13 April 1938. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 62 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo in Denver on 29 January 1959.22Saco R. DeBoer 7 Noted Denver landscape architect Saco R. DeBoer recommended the site and planned the landscaping for the Band Shell, as well as reviewing other components of the project. In June 1937, the Boulder Daily Camera reported that DeBoer, as consulting city planner, had made recommendations to the planning and parks commission regarding the site for the new band shell.23 In July 1937, the Camera recorded that "S.R. DeBoer, landscape architect and consulting city planner...took preliminary sketches of the proposed band shell to be erected by the Lions club in Central park and photographs of similar structures at Sioux City and Sioux Center, Iowa, to prepare final drawings for the work here."24 At the same time DeBoer was working on the Band Shell project, the newspaper noted that "he also took back to Denver with him his preliminary plans for the new city park on University Hill [Beach Park] and will revise them in accordance with suggestions of the city planning and parks comrnission."25 Also in 1937, DeBoer worked on landscaping of the grounds, curbing, gutter, and sidewalks for Boulder High School.26 In 1926, DeBoer had drafted Boulder's first zoning ordinance.27 He designed the amphitheater on Flagstaff Mountain (1933) and also designed North Boulder Park. Saco Rienk DeBoer was born in Ureterp, Netherlands, in 1883. He studied engineering for three years until contracting tuberculosis and being advised by his doctor to pursue a different career. DeBoer stated that "I went in for landscape design because I had a feeling for beauty."28 He studied his new field in the Netherlands and Germany before opening a landscape design office in Ureterp. When his tuberculosis returned, DeBoer left for America in search of a cure. Denver during the early twentieth century was a mecca for those suffering from respiratory diseases and DeBoer moved to the city, where he lived until 22Comrnittee to Remember Glen Huntington, Huntington Biography; Thomas J. Noel and Barbara S. Norgren, Denver, The City Beautiful and Its Architects (Denver: Historic Denver, 1987), 207; Boulder Daily Camera biographical files. 23Boulder Daily Camera, 11 June 1937. 24Boulder Daily Camera, 27 July 1937. The band shell in Sioux City, Iowa, erected in 1934, was designed by local architect Henry. L. Kamphoefner. Ralph Christian, Iowa State Historic Preservation Office, Des Moines, personal communication, 7 July 1995 and Scott Sorensen and B. Paul Chicoline, Sioux City: A Pictorial History (Norfolk, Virginia: Donning Co., 1982), 179. 25Boulder Daily Camera, 27 July 19 37. 26Boulder Daily Camera, 27 July 1937. 27Saco R. DeBoer Collection, Western History Department, Denver Public Library, Denver, Colo. 28 Noel and Norgren, 144. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 63 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 8 the age of ninety-one. 29DeBoer's first effort in Denver transformed a former dump on Cherry Creek into Sunken Gardens Park. Mayor Robert Speer, in the midst of converting Denver into a "City Beautiful," appointed DeBoer the city's landscape architect in 1910 and reappointed him in 1916. He became a member of Denver's first zoning commission in 1925, the first city planner in 1926, and co-authored the ten-volume Denver Plan (1929-1947). In 1926, he developed a master plan for Grand Junction which received widespread attention and resulted in his being hired to plan the new town of Boulder City, Nevada, in 1930. DeBoer died in Denver in 1974.30 Design and Construction The Boulder Daily Camera stated in June 1937 that Hugh E. McMillen, band director, and one of his friends in Chicago who was an expert on the construction of band shells were to examine the detailed plans for the structure.31 In July 1937, the city manager presented to the Planning and Parks Commission preliminary sketches of the Band Shell prepared by Lloyd Lear of Chicago, who had been retained by the Lions Club. It was noted that "since the structure must be designed to provide the proper acoustics the commission must rely upon an expert in acoustics for details." The Commission approved the preliminary sketches subject to review by S.R. DeBoer.32 In August 1937, Commission minutes noted that "Mr. DeBoer's sketch had been sent to Mr. Lear of Chicago."33On 31 March 1938, a special meeting of the Planning and Parks Commission reviewed detailed plans for the Band Shell which had been prepared by Glen Huntington. Minutes of the meeting recorded that "the plans provide for a shell similar to one which has been erected in Grant Park, Chicago."34 The Grant Park Orchestra Shell was completed in 1931at a cost of $15,000 and was modeled on the Hollywood Bowl in California.35 Now called the Petrillo Music Shell, the Grant Park band shell has been substantially altered. A 1937 newspaper article suggests that the band shells at Sioux City and Sioux Center, Iowa, may have also influenced the design of Boulder's structure. 29Joyce Summers, "One Man's Vision" Colorado Heritage 2(1988): 29. 30 Noel and Norgren, 150; Summers, 36; and Smith, 179. 31 Boulder Daily Camera, 11 June 1937. 32Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, 15 July 1937. 33Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, 12 August 1937. 34Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, 31 March 1938.35Carl W. Condit, Chicago: Building, Planning, and Urban Technology, 1910-29 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973), 205 and Harold W. Mayer and Richard C. Wade, Chicago: Growth of a Metropolis (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969), 363. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 64 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 9 A number of elliptical band shells were erected in small towns in the United States during the 1930s. National Park Service Architect Rodd Wheaton analyzes that many of these structures were modeled after the Hollywood Bowl in an attempt to duplicate its "glitz and glamour."36 The Hollywood Bowl, an immense natural outdoor amphitheater where the Los Angeles Philharmonic presents summer concerts and well known musicians and singers perform, opened in 1922. A series of modifications were undertaken to improve acoustics of the original 1924 shell (i}esigned by Lloyd Wright. In 1929, the Allied Architects of Los Angeles designed the elliptical shell that exists today, composed of white painted transite on a steel frame. The design is one of Hollywood's best known landmarks and "served as a prototype for a great many of America's band shells."37 Boulder's Band Shell is reminiscent of the Hollywood Bowl in its compound arch design and streamlined appearance. Work on the Boulder Band Shell began shortly after the award of a construction contract to J.F. Nelson, the lowest of three bidders, in April 1938. The structure was completed in June 1938, at a cost of $3,825.38 Intended to amplify concert music and provide a setting for other types of entertainment, the structure faced south toward Boulder Creek and became a visual landmark to passersby. The original construction did not include the seating, which was built later. Dedication of the Band Shell The Band Shell was dedicated on 26 June 1938 at a ceremony in which Lions Club President Frank W. Thurman presented Mayor H.H. Heuston with the structure (See Figure 11). The Band Shell was "dedicated to the enjoyment of citizens of Boulder and to the advancement of music." Tbe "elaborate" dedication included a sixty-piece band led by Hugh McMillen, municipal band.director, and composed of musicians from the university, the high school, and townspeople.39 Richard J. Osenbaugh, past International president of Lions gave the dedication address. The Lions Club committee in charge of construction of the Band Shell included Francis J. Reinert, chairman, Frank S. Henderson, Alfred H. Allen, 36Rodd Wheaton, National Park Service, Denver, Interviews, July 1995. 37Charles Moore, et al, The City Observed: Los Angeles (New York: Vintage Books, 1984), 248; David L. Clark, Los Angeles: A City Apart (Woodland Hills, Ca.: Windsor Publications, Inc., 1981), 205; David Gebhard and Robert Winter, Los Angles: An Architectural Guide (Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, 1994), 148. Moore notes that the Hollywood Freeway was moved a few hundred feet away from the Hollywood Bowl in 1954, but the setting "is still magical." 38Boulder Daily Camera, 13 April 1938; Boulder Lions Club, "Major Activities of Building Program of Boulder Lions Club," 20 Jan 1918-26 June 1938. 39Boulder Daily Camera, 20 June 1938. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 65 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 10 Chester M. Hill, W.L. Beach, and Charles Dovalosky.4° Following the presentation andacceptance speeches, the program included a parade of colors and band concert selections. Mrs. Rudolph Johnson and a chorus sang selections with the band.41 The Boulder Daily Camera reported that more than two thousand people gathered for the dedication of the "handsome" Band Shell. The newspaper commented that "it became evident that an obligation rests with the city, or civic organizations to provide seats." (See Figure 12)42 Mayor Heuston congratulated the Boulder Lions on their service to the community and "stated that the city of Boulder accepted the obligation of taking care of the stand." He hoped that the structure would "be an inspiration for better music in Boulder."43 On 5 July 1938, Mayor Heuston presented a document from the Lions Clubtransferring all of its interests in the Band Shell to the City of Boulder. The City Council unanimously accepted the gift.44 Landscaping of Band Shell Area In the spring of 1939, a plan for landscaping around the Band Shell was prepared by S.R. DeBoer. The Planning and Parks Commission expressed a desire for a screening effect around the site and DeBoer's original plan to plant pine trees and evergreens was revised to include faster growing trees such as Chinese elms and Lombardi poplars. The Commission also suggested that paths in the vicinity of the Band Shell be design�d to eliminate people taking shortcuts through the site while walking through the park.45 DeBoer then revised the landscaping plan to include deciduous trees adjacent to the structure, with pines in front of those.46 The Commission voted to allocate $125 for shrubsand trees to be planted around the Band Shell in May 1939.47Activities in the Band Shell During more than fifty years of use, the Band Shell was the site of a variety of musical concerts, cultural programs, educational presentations, and civic gatherings. At the dedication of the structure, the Band Shell's role in promoting musical events in Boulder was emphasized. The scope of activities held at the Band Shell broadened over the years to include many forms of outdoor entertainment, although musical programs continued to 40Boulder Daily Camera 27 June 1938. 41Boulder Daily Camera, 27 June 1938. 42Boulder Daily Camera, 27 June 1938. 43Boulder Daily Camera, 27 June 1938. 44Boulder City Council, Minutes, 5 July 1938. 45 Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, Minutes, 1937. 46Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, 16 March 1939. 47Boulder Planning and Parks Commission, 11 May 1939.Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 66 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 11 be the primary usage for the structure. Following the Lions Club's donation of the Band Shell to the city, different service clubs in Boulder sponsored summer programs in the structure. Each club organized the program to be presented and guided it to a successful completion. In 1946, for example, the Rotary Club presented a program of dancing students and old-time couple dancing by the Haylofters.48 In the same year, the Woman's Club of Boulder presented choral selections of classical, sacred, and popular music.49 One of the principal uses for the Band Shell for many years came in the form of outdoor concerts by the summer band from the University of Colorado. Marie Sindt recalled that "we used to go down every week to wonderful programs in the bandshell."50 Summer concerts in the Band Shell were presented each week by the University of Colorado summer session band in cooperation with the City of Boulder.51 The band was composed of players from all departments at the university as well as local high school students. Concerts were held each Wednesday evening.52 In the 1950s and 1960s, children's musical programs were also offered in the Band Shell.53 In 1956, eight special Monday night programs were given for Boulder citizens and visitors. The free entertainments were arranged by different Boulder clubs, including the Optimists, Elks, Woman's Club, American Legion, Pow Wow and Rodeo, Soroptimists, Lions, Rotary, and Kiwanis Club.54 One of the more unusual programs resulted when sixty Oglala Sioux in full war paint and tribal attire entertained Boulder citizens at the Band Shell (See Figure 13). The Native Americans, emissaries of Cheyenne Frontier Days, were accompanied by Miss Frontier and her Ladies-in-Waiting and stopped for dinner at the Boulderado before their dance.55 Among the other programs presented in 1956 were the Woman's Club choral music and the Rotary offering of a fishing demonstration and music. The Kiwanis presented "Stars of Tomorrow" and a trampoline exhibition by students from the university. The Soroptimists sponsored the Civic Center Workshop's Gilbert and Sullivan opera, "Trial by Jury." The Lions Club presented Denver Talent to Boulder citizens. About 1,500 people attended the American Legion's sponsoring of the Centennial Grenadiers Drum and Bugle Corps of 48Boulder Daily Camera, 19 July 1946. 49Boulder Daily Camera, 27 July 1946. 5°Carnegie Branch Library, Marie Sindt, Interview by Jeanne Bensema, 20 June 1991, OH 565. 51 Boulder Daily Camera, 25 June 1968. 52Boulder Daily Camera, 26 June 1963. 53Carnegie Branch Library, Photographic Collection 511, Box 3, Envelope 8. 54Boulder Daily Camera, 6 June 1956. 55Boulder Daily Camera Clipping Files. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 67 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 12 Denver and the Elma Deane School of Dance.56 The Band Shell played an important role in Boulder's Christmas celebrations from the 1950s through the 1970s. Christmas decorations were placed inside the structure, banners wished passersby "Merry Christmas" and "Happy New Year," and the shell was surrounded by evergreen boughs.57 One photograph depicts a display of Santa and his sleigh with evergreen trees and a banner reading "Season's Greetings from the Boulder Lion's Club."58 The Christmas celebrations of the period included the excitement of local children being greeted in the Band Shell by Santa, Miss Merry Christmas, and Miss Noel (See Figure 14).59 Marie Sindt remembered that the Band Shell was "really in good shape" before the "hippie time," when the structure deteriorated. This view is confirmed by Boulder historian Phyllis Smith, who wrote that the young transients overran Central Park beginning in 1968. She noted that sanitary conditions in the park deteriorated so much that City Manager Ted Tedesco declared the park partially closed, claiming it was a potential health hazard. As Smith wrote, "Boulder risidents no longer used the parks, and band concerts were canceled."60 The 1970s were also viewed as a period of decline for the bandshell and Central Park by Juliane Brandauer. She noted that the bandshell became a hangout for hippies, transients, and drug use. In 1971-1972, the STP Family slept, begged, and dealt drugs in the bandshell area.61 During the early 1970s, amplified concerts resulted in many noise complaints from neighbors and a special ordinance was passed which required a permit for amplified music.62 The Band Shell survived the flower children and was utilized for a variety of community events during the 1980s. On Memorial Day 1980, the Citizens' Party and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom held a ceremony at the Band Shell featuring speeches by veterans of various wars, followed by a picnic lunch. The gathering was attended by approximately two hundred people.63 56Boulder Daily Camera clipping files. 57Carnegie Branch Library, Photograph Collection 504, Box 6, Envelope 17. 58Carnegie Branch Library, Photographic Collection 504, Box 6, Envelope 1. 59Carnegie Branch Library, Photographic Collection 504, Box 7, Envelope 6 60Smith, 201. 61Carnegie Branch Library, Juliane Brandauer oral history transcript. 62Ron Donahue, Boulder Parks and Recreation, Parks Division, Memorandum, 23 February 1995. 63Robert B. McFarland, Boulder, Colo. Letter to Front Range Research Associates, 16 June 1995. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 68 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 13 In 1981, the Boulder Daily Camera announced that "the Downtown Mall is alive with the sound of music ... and the Central Park bandshell, too." The report continued, "after a long dormancy, the bandshell has returned to civic prominence as more than a mattress for transients." The Boulder Musicians' Union and local music organizers, in association with the city and area merchants, produced a series of "Concerts in the Park."64 In 1983, the Band Shell was the site of a "Glen Miller Big Band Revival" series produced by professional bands from Boulder.65 In April 1985, the Boulder Parks and Recreation Department and the Colorado Music Association offered free springtime concerts in the Band Shell.66 In April 1985, problems arose when Boulder police confronted a crowd of about three hundred people after stopping a punk-rock concert at the facility. Several people were bitten by a sheriffs department dog during the confrontation and the police arrested members of the band for inciting the crowd.67 In 1992 four hundred elementary school children performed skits for the public at the Band Shell as part of the Boulder Parks and Recreation Department's summer Playground Program.68 In 1995, the Parks Division noted that it was not scheduling summer events in the Band Shell as the stage floor was not judged adequate to safely accommodate groups.69 Efforts to Remove and Retain the Band Shell In 1970, a proposal to move the Band Shell to another location and erect new municipal facilities in Central Park was rejected in a bond issue vote.70 During the late 1980s, plans to remove the structure gained momentum. In 1987, Boulder County Commissioners examined the idea of moving the Band Shell to the county fairgrounds in Longmont. However, the Commissioners were concerned about the dilapidated condition of the structure and whether it was compatible with the fairgrounds.71 In February 1988, the Boulder Train Depot Task Force, a group of local officials, business people, and historians recommended that the Train Depot be moved to Central Park and the Band Shell be 64Boulder Daily Camera, 31 July 1981. 65Boulder Daily Camera, 10 April 1983. 66Boulder Daily Camera, 12 April 1985. 67Boulder Daily Camera, 9 May 1985. 68Boulder Daily Camera, 23 July 1992. 69Ron Donahue, Boulder Parks and Recreation, Parks Division, Memorandum to Chris Dropinski, 23 February 1995. 70 Smith, 205. 71 Boulder Daily Camera, 11 November 1987. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 69 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 14 removed.72 On 22 February 1988, the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board also recommended removing the Band Shell and moving the depot to Central Park. This recommendation was approved by the Planning Board on 3 March 1988 and City Council on 17 May 1988. 73 The Civic Center Master Plan reaffirmed the recommendation to remove the Band Shell and noted that the structure prevented Central Park's "fullest utilization as an urban park amenity." Problems cited with the structure included deterioration of the structure, traffic on Canyon which makes it difficult to hear un amplified music, and the noise complaints from neighbors over amplified music.74 Subsequent to that decision, the City only provided enough maintenance to make the structure safe and usable. These actions included floor repair, some panel replacements, and interior painting.75 In 1990, a Freedom Festival was held in Central Park to promote local and national artists and promote preservation of the Band Shell in its Central Park site. In 1991, a "Save the Bandshell" concert drew several hundred people. The Save the Bandshell Campaign painted the Band Shell in rainbow colors and attempted to raise community awareness as to its significance.76 In 1993, the "Committee to Remember Glen Huntington" formed in Boulder and is currently seeking to have the Band Shell named in honor of its architect, Glen Huntington.77 In 1995, the Modern Architecture Preservation League (MAPL) announced its support of efforts to have the structure landmarked. Evaluation of Significance Colorado Historical Society Historic Building Form The Colorado Historical Society Historic Building Inventory form included in the Appendix contains a summary of the architectural description and historical background of the Band Shell. The form includes the following categories of significance for historic resources: architectural significance and historical significance. Under architectural significance, a property may be important if it: represents the work of a master; possesses high artistic 72Boulder Daily Camera, 19 February 1988.73 Ron Donahue, Boulder Parks and Recreation, Memorandum to Chris Dropinski, 23 February 1995. 74Boulder Daily Camera, 26 July 1992. 75Ron Donahue, Boulder Parks and Recreation, Memorandum to Chris Dropinski, 23 February 1995. 76Boulder Daily Camera, 23 September 1991 and 7 March 1995.778oulder Daily Camera, 16 January 1993; and Committee to Remember Glen Huntington, Memorial Service Flyer, January 1993. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 70 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 15 values; or represents a type, period, or method of construction. Under historical significance, a property may be important if it: is associated with significant persons; is associated with significant events or patterns; or contributes to an historic district. The Band Shell possesses architectural significance as it represents the work of a master and as it represents a type, period, or method of construction. The Band Shell possesses historical significance as it is associated with significant events or patterns. National Register of Historic Places Historic properties may be eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places if they meet National Register criteria. The criteria state that "the quality of significance in American history, architecture, archeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association, and: A.That are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; or B.That are associated with the lives of persons significant to our past; or C.That embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D.That have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important m prehistory or history." The Band Shell is individually eligible to the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A for its historical associations and Criterion C for its architectural significance.78 78Dale Heckendorn, Colorado Historical Society National Register Coordinator, concurred with this assessment of the Band Shell's eligibility on 7 July 1995. Heckdendorn further stated that previous alterations to the structure do not appear to have affected its historic integrity and that repair and replacement of materials, as long as they were consistent with the original design and materials, would not affect the structure's integrity. Heckendorn noted that, in dealing with asbestos concerns, encapsulation of the original material would be the preferred alternative, but if that was not feasible, replacement should be compatible with the original design. Dale Heckendorn, Colorado Historical Society National Register Coordinator, Denver, Interview, 11 July 1995. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 71 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 16 Criterion A The Band Shell is eligible under Criterion A for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of Boulder since 1938, as the site of numerous concerts and other varieties of community entertainment and social gatherings in its long history. The Band Shell is associated with the history of park development in Boulder and represents the multiple uses of Boulder's urban parks. Criterion CThe Band Shell is also eligible under Criterion C for its representation of the Art Deco style in Boulder, as an example of band shell construction, and as representative of the work of Glen Huntington and Saco R. DeBoer. The Band Shell reflects the Art Deco style in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplified design. Few Art Deco style buildings were erected in Boulder and the Band Shell is one of the best preserved examples of the style. The Band Shell is also significant as representative of a rather rare type of park architecture. Only one other band shell has been recorded in the state to date. Due to the integrity of the Band Shell's design and setting, it is an important representative of park outdoor entertainment facilities of the early twentieth century. In addition, the Band Shell is representative of the work of architect Glen Huntington and landscape architect Saco R. DeBoer. Although Huntington designed several important buildings in Boulder, this is the only example of band shell design by Huntington in the city and is important as it represents the variety of structures he designed and the variety of architectural styles in which he produced designs. DeBoer recommended the site for the Band Shell, designed the landscape plan, and reviewed the entire project. Although DeBoer designed several parks in Boulder, including North Boulder and Beach parks, this is the only known example of a Band Shell project on which he worked. Level of Significance Historic properties may qualify for National Register listing for their local, state, or national level of significance. Under National Register criteria, the Band Shell would qualify as locally significant for its historic associations and would have statewide significance for its Art Deco design, as an example of band shell construction, and as representative of the work of Huntington and DeBoer. Eligible Area The boundary of the eligible site includes the entire area embraced by the resource, including the Band Shell, the open area in front of the Band Shell, the seating area, and bermed area to the south, including stone pathways and retaining walls. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 72 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 17 Boulder Landmark The Band Shell qualifies as a Boulder Landmark for its Historical, Architectural, and Environmental Significance. Historical Significance 1.Date of Construction. The 1938 Band Shell has historic significance for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of the city, having served as a setting for musical programs, cultural entertainment, and civic celebrations for over fifty years. 2.Association with Historical Persons or Events. The Band Shell has historic significance for its association with the Boulder Lions Club and its program of improving Boulder parks. Since its construction in 1938, the Band Shell has been the scene of numerous musical presentations by local residents and visiting artists and has served as a stage for community celebrations and festivals. 3.Distinction in the Development of the Community of Boulder. The Band Shell is important in the history of park development in Boulder, having been erected by one of thecity's service clubs as an amenity for the community and given to the city, and reflecting the cooperation between the city and local citizens in park planning and usage. The variety of programs and events held at the Band Shell have been an important element in the social and cultural history of the city and have played an especially important role in the musical heritage of the city. 4.Recognition by Authorities. The Boulder Band Shell has been recognized as an element of Boulder's history by authorities such as Phyllis Smith (A Look at Boulder FromSettlement to City, 180) and Silvia Pettem (Boulder Evolution of a City, 65). Architectural Significance 1.Recognized Period/Style. The Band Shell is architecturally significant as a rare representative of the Art Deco style in Boulder. The Band Shell also represents park architecture of the early twentieth century in Boulder. 2.Architect or Builder of Prominence. The Band Shell is representative of the work of Glen Huntington, noted Boulder architect, who also designed the Boulder County Courthouse and Boulder High School. The Band Shell is also representative of the work of landscape architect and planner Saco R. De Boer, who recommended the site and created the landscape plan. DeBoer was the first landscape architect for the City of Denver, drafted Boulder's first zoning ordinance, and served as consulting city planner to Boulder. 4.Example of the Uncommon. The Band Shell is Boulder's only example of park band Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 73 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 18 shell construction and one of few such examples in the state. Only one other band shell is documented in the files of the Colorado Historical Society Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Environmental Significance 1.Site Characteristics. The Band Shell environment is significant for its planned and natural site characteristics. Landscape architect DeBoer recommended the site as the only suitable location for the Band Shell at the time of its construction. Important characteristics include the trees and bushes which were chosen to provide a screen around the edges of the site, the bermed seating area with stone retaining walls, and the pathways which were designed to prevent bypassers taking shortcuts through the amphitheater. 2.Compatibility with Site. The Band Shell was specifically designed to be compatible with its site. As a component of the central urban park, the Band Shell was situated to providepassersby with a glimpse of the intriguing features to be found within the park and encourage them to park their cars and walk into the site. The Band Shell faces south toward Boulder Creek and away from traffic on the thoroughfare on the northern edge of the park. The scale of the Band Shell and its associated seating area is in keeping with the size of the park and provides a comfortable gathering space for concerts and other cultural entertainment and is an open air amenity allowing users to enjoy the natural beauty of the park while attending Band Shell programs. 3.Geographic Importance. The Band Shell has environmental significance as an established, familiar, and prominent visual landmark for Boulder citizens due to its arched design, its location near major thoroughfares of the city, and its amphitheater setting. The Band Shell and its open air seating have long served as the focus of Central Park and as a civic center for social and cultural events in Boulder. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 74 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 19 BIBLIOGRAPHY Boulder Central Files. Department of Parks and Recreation. Boulder Municipal Building Boulder Chamber of Commerce. Christmas and Twelfth Night Activities Photographs. Carnegie Branch Library. Boulder Daily Camera. Boulder, Colo. Clipping Files. Central Park Bandshell. Boulder Finance Department. Central Files. Parks and Recreation Department. Central Park Photographs. Carnegie Branch Library. Boulder Lions Club. Clipping and Photograph Collection. Boulder Planning and Parks Commission. Minutes of Meetings, 1936-1939. Boulder Municipal Building. Brandauer, Juliane. Boulder, Colo. Interview by Stephen Gassaway. 1987. Central Park Photographs. Undated-1951. Carnegie Branch Library. Christian, Ralph. Iowa State Historic Preservation Office. Information on band shells in Sioux City and Sioux Center, Iowa. Des Moines, Iowa. Clark, David C. Los Angeles: A City Apart. Woodland Hills, Ca.: Windsor Publications, Inc., 1981. Condit, Carl W. Chicago: Building, Planning, and Urban Technology, 1910-29. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973. DeBoer, Saco R. Manuscript Collection. Western History Department, Denver Public Library. Donahue, Ron. Boulder Parks and Recreation. Interview by Laurie Simmons. 5 July 1995. Gebhard, David and Winter, Robert. Los Angeles: An Architectural Guide. Salt Lake City: Gibbs Smith, 1994. Hamm, Verna. Boulder, Colo. Interviewed by Sylvia W. Campbell. 1994. Carnegie Branch Library. Holmes, June. Boulder, Colo. Interview. 6 July 1995. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 75 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo 20 Huntington, Glen H. Collection. Carnegie Branch Library. Boulder, Colo. Korbitz , William E., Former Boulder City Engineer. Thornton, Colo. Interview. 6 July 1995. Mayer, Harold W. and Richard C. Wade. Chicago: Growth of a Metropolis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969. McFarland, Bob. Boulder, Colo. Interview. 6 July 1995. Moore, Charles, et al. The City Observed: Los Angeles. New York: Vintage Books, 1984. Noel, Thomas and Norgren, Barbara. Denver, The City Beautiful and its Architects. Denver: Historic Denver, Inc. 1987. Perrigo, Lyn I. A Municipal History of Boulder, Colorado. Boulder, Colo.: Boulder County Historical Society and City of Boulder, 1946. Pettem, Silvia. Boulder: Evolution of a City. Niwot, Colo.: University Press of Colorado, 1994. "Report of the Boulder Train Depot Task Force." March 1987. Segel, Leonard. Boulder, Colo. Interview. 6 July 1995. Sindt, Marie. Boulder, Colo. Interview by Jeanne Bensema. 1991. Carnegie Branch Library Smith, Phyllis. "A History of Boulder's Transportation, 1858-1984." Boulder: Transportation Division, City of Boulder, March 1984. A Look at Boulder from Settlement to City. Boulder: Pruett Publishing Co., 1981 Sniderman, Julia. Chicago Parks Department Preservation Division. Interview. 13 July 1995. Sorensen, Scott and Chicoline, B. Paul. Sioux City: A Pictorial History. Norfolk, Va.: Donning Co., 1982. Swallow, Anne. Tllinois Historic Preservation Office. Interview. 13 July 1995. Wheaton, Rodd. National Park Service. Interview. 5 July 1995. Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 76 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo ,--.��"����:� •·t,.,. : .. 4, ""l.;-\'l .:- -;.··� \. "· ' � ... ...__. ,, j ,v j <� "'·,, ·"-' -� " ' ;--� -� �-.;�'\ -----.:.__, ( <:.\ )\) ,-. \, '!,.; \i ,.J '\ . \j \I \� \ -,I "-'\J """ � I ,.., -::� /'I ,,j "·\ -..J " ,-.! •J "',---. "..i -� ' '-\_J . .____ I I ,_j i:---_ .-__, ... , ..... -...:;_- , .. i i i I I I I ----------------------------- (_ C r- ·.4:_-�_ __ £, (?7/4 ,J-f )' _,/4 _ /.,{. -;... \ ( � ,,;.�. PHOTO �JU/\16EH (__� -<-._L ___ c_.,,_ __ . -.. ,._:_ ' I l , Fo;---•�'!::CZ2'---: 37_ Attachment D - Boulder Bandshell Historical Study Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 77 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo To: Fax# • Jay Devereux, Daily Camera From: Lara Ramsey, Planning Dept. July 6, 1995 473-1144 441-3270 City of Boulder Pages including this one: 1 Please publish Sunday, July 9, 1995 (2 col. x 2 inches) Please charge to P.O. # 2042442 Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board Agenda CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS Municipal Building 1777 Broadway July 25, 1995 1 :00 p.m. -6:00 p.m. • The following items will be considered: I. • 2. 3. 4. Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council concerning a request for individual landmark status for the Central Park Bandshell. Applicant: Modem Architecture Preservation League. Owner: City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department. Public hearing and consideration of a request to approve a Landmark Alteration Certificate for a demolition of an outbuilding located at 2420 10th Street, within the Mapleton Hill Historic District. Owner and applicant: Paul Whiteside Public hearing and consideration of a demolition permit application for the structure located at 1045 Linden Avenue, pursuant to Section 10-13-23 for buildings over fifty years old or recognized as structures of merit. Owner and applicant: J. Lee Stevenson Matters from the Planning Department. *If time does not allow completion of all items listed above, the Landmarl<s Board meeting will continue from 7:00 p.m. -9:00 p.m. in the City of Boulder Library Auditorium, 1000 Canyon Boulevard. For further information contact Lara Ramsey in the Planning Department at 441-3270. •--------------- Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 78 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • City of Boulder LANDMARKS PRESERVATION ADVISORY BOARD ACTION MINUTES July 25, 1995 1:00 p.m City Council Chambers Municipal Building 1777 Broadway Board Members Present: Estella Cole, Chair; Monica Costello; Sharon Rosall; Michael Holleran Excused Absent Board Member: Bill Coburn Staff Members Present: Lara Ramsey; David Gehr; Lindsey Washburn; MaryAnn Weideman No Planning -Board Member Present Ms. Cole called the meeting to order at I: 15 p.m. l.PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A RECOMMENDATION TO CITYCOUNCIL CONCERNING A REQUEST FOR INDIVIDUAL LANDMARK STATUSFOR TIIE CEN1RAL PARK BAND SHELL. APPLICANT: MODERNARCHITECTURE PRESERVATION LEAGUE. OWNER: CITY OF BOULDERPARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT. Mr. Gehr reviewed the procedure for all three public hearing agenda items. He asked the Board to reveal any ex-parte contacts. Ms. Rosa)! stated she had received a couple phone calls. She spoke with Mr. Holleran and Ms. Cole briefly over matters in the packet. Mr. Holleran mentioned that he is a member of the Modern Architecture Preservation Leagi..e but not a member of the board and had no role in the decision to make the nomination nor any advance notice of the nomination. He did not feel that being a member created any conflict. His ex-parte contacts included a couple of conversations with Len Segel. He had a phone call from Steve Gady urging him to vote to designate the Band Shell as a landmark. He had a conversation with Dale Heckendon of the Colorado Historical Society on how individual resource boundaries are drawn for the National Register. His last ex-parte contact, which gave him information that was not available in the packet, was the 4th grade classes of the Flatirons Elementary School he met with during Preservation Week. The students were shocked to think there was even a question to not landmark the Band Shell. Ms. Cole had talked with Steve Gady urging her to vote in favor of designating the Band Shell as a landmark. Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 79 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 Page 2 Ms. Costello had also received a phone call from Mr. Gady. She did not have any other information that was excluded from the packet prepared by staff. Everyone who wished to speak to this item was sworn in. Ms. Ramsey clarified the Board's role in the landmark designation process and presented slides of the Band Shell and its site. Ms. Costello asked if the rear shed was original. Ms. Ramsey stated that it was determined that the back portion was a later addition. Ms. Costell o asked if that was included in the application. Ms. Ramsey replied that it was. Ms. Rosall asked if the asbestos that was found was in the fiber board and not loosely floating around. Ms. Ramsey stated that she believed it would be in the rear wall paneling of the Band Shell. Ms . Ramsey stated that based on the findings of the report, staff recommended that the Landmarks Board recommend to City Council that the Central Park Band Shell structure and its site, shown in Attachment A, be designated as an individual landmark. Staff also recommended that a full analysis of the Band Shell be done prior to forwarding the item to City Council in order to look at a number of other issues to help City Council balance out the preservation issues with other city goals as set forth in the ordinance. She outlined some of the issues and reiterated that this item be continued to the Board's November meeting in order to allow staff time to look at all of the issues and have them fully outlined for City Council. Mr. Holleran questioned Ms. Ramsey about how much of that analysis would be done by a consultant and if there was enough funding available. Ms. Costello asked if there were any comments from the neighborhood. Ms. Ramsey stated she received phone calls from people wanting to know the hearing date and gave out packets of information to reporters and people from the community but she didn't have any formal letters submitted. There were some letters submitted to the consultants and those were included in the packet. Ms. Costello asked how many phone calls were received. Ms. Ramsey replied four or five. Ms. Costello brought the issue back to the continuation suggestion and her concern that other landmark applicants aren't usually given this kind of an opportunity. She stated the Board has a specific time table to follow. She stated her concern due to the time consuming process that the acoustical and structural analysis would take. Ms. Ramsey stressed the point that staff was not asking the applicant to submit these studies that the City would hire a consultant to perform the work. Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 80 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 Page 3 Ms. Costello felt by continuing this item, it would put staff in a very awkward position by not following nonnal procedure. She wanted to discuss her concerns. Ms. Costello asked when the Parks and Recreation Department stopped maintaining the Band Shell. Ms. Ramsey believed it was in 1988. Tom Simmons, consultant working with staff, 3635 West 46th Avenue, Denver, stated that from the rather scanty records he found in Central Files, it appeared that in three of the late 1980's files, the Band Shell received fairly regular maintenance. After that it seemed as though anything that might be a direct safety concern was addressed, but no major refurbishing or renovation was done. The Board heard from the applicant. Leonard Segel 726 Pine Street, addressed the Board as the co-chair of the Boulder subcommittee of the Modern Architecture Preservation League, also known as MAPL. He stated MAPL's interest in preserving modern design in Colorado. MAPL reviewed the Band Shell and found it to be a worthy candidate for landmarking based on the Boulder ordinance. He was very pleased that their findings had been corroborated by the independent research group hired by the Board. He urged the Board to officially recognize the unique qualities of the Central Park Band Shell and recommend to City Council that it be designated as a local landmark. He asked that the Board consider this application in terms of landmark criteria only and let others study the periphery related issues such as flood plain, maintenance, and park master plans. It was time to begin the process to reverse the effects of demolition by neglect. Landmarking would be the first step. Mr. Holleran asked Mr. Segel who the other co-chairs were. Mr. Segel replied the other co-chair is Steve Chucovich. Ms. Cole asked if there was anyone from the Parks and Recreation Department that wished to address the Board. There was no response. The public hearing was opened. Betty Chronic, 4705 Shawnee Place, a long term resident of Boulder, gave a short presentation in favor of landmarking the Band Shell. She declared the unique qualities of the bandshell due to the history it represents. Kathryn Barth, 2940 20th Street representing Historic Boulder, spoke in agreement that the Band Shell meets all of the landmark criteria of architecture and landscape architecture for being an example of being uncommon and an example of masters. Historic Boulder had a unanimou� vote to landmark the Band Shell on its site now and requested that the acoustic and structural studies be completed after it has been landmarked . Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 81 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, I 995 Page 4 Roy Scott, 3105 Stanford Avenue, current president of the Lions Club in Boulder, had a copy of the Daily Camera from 1938 showing the dedication of the Band Shell. He gave a copy to the Board. The Club did not think it should be moved but should be dedicated a landmark on its current site. Ricky Weiser, living at 4020 North 75th Street, spoke in favor of designating the Band Shell on its site. Bob McFarland, 2300 Kalmia, concurred with what Ms. Weiser said in favor of designating the Band Shell today so it could be brought to City Council before November. He stated that repair was needed now. Philip Simpson, 890 Iris Avenue, is a Boulder native and licensed architect currently working at CU. He spoke in favor of landmark designation for the Band Shell. He stated that it was an important part of Boulder as well as a focal part of our community. He included that as an architect, he recognized it as an important piece of architecture as well as an era we do not have any more due to the uncommon structure. Phyllis Olsen, 1740 Sunset Boulevard, encouraged the Board to landmark the Band Shell. June Holmes, 541 Highland Avenue, urged the Board to make a decision today to landmark the •Band Shell. She felt it was important to landmark it before the political stand-off this November. • Steve Brown, 10462 Zuni Street in Northglenn, urged the Board to follow through withlandmarking the Band Shell today. Len Barron, 601 Canyon Boulevard, spoke in favor of landmarking the Band Shell. The public hearing was closed. A short recess was ordered. Ms. Cole recalled the meeting to order at 2:40 p.m. Ms. Cole stated for the record that Mr. Scott gave a copy of the letter and article of thededication of the Band Shell he mentioned in his statement to the Board. Before bringing thematter back to the Board for motion and discussion, staff had made a recommendation that theBoard consider continuing this item. To be able to do that, the applicant, the owner, and theBoard must all consent. She asked Mr. Segel, as the representative ofMAPL, if his organization,as the applicant, would consent to a continuance. Mr. Segel stated that MAPL would prefer notto consent, that the Board make a determination based on the landmark issues alone today andallow other bodies, perhaps City Council to handle the other issues. Ms. Costell o asked staff if this meant the Board could not discuss it because the applicant didnot concur. Ms. Ramsey replied yes . Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 82 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Pre;ervation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 The following motion was made by Mr. Holleran: Page 5 He moved to continue the item until the Board's regular October meeting. with the intention of recommending landmark designation of the Band Shell and requesting staff to arrange the structural and acoustical studies in order to bring a complete recommendation to Council. Ms, Costello seconded the motion, Mr, H ollerart agreed with staff's suggestion for a continuance in order to specify a greater area. He wanted to expand the boundaries at this time. He wanted the Board to be part of the discussion about what happens in the area around the Band Shell. Ms. Cole stated that the Board could approve, deny, or modify its recommendation based on evidence presented. She asked if the Board could modify the boundary as part of its recommendation to Council. Mr. Gehr stated that the practice, in the past, has been to minimize the boundari es, not to expand it. Ms. Cole asked specifically what the ordinance states. Mr. Gehr said that the problem would be that the Board may be doing things to affect real property and there is a notice issue. The fact that the City is the owner, he doubted that the City would object, but he had to defer to staff to object if they would so choose . Ms. Cole stated that this would not be like expanding a district boundary where new property owners are incorporated. Ms. Rosall supported moving forward today for a variety of reasons and at a later point to amend the designation if information is brought forward through further studies that a larger parcel should be included around the Band Shell. She stated that there are a lot of other possibilities but was very concerned in any delay She spoke to the other points of Mr. Holleran's motion. She felt the other issues of the acoustics, land use issues, and structural analysb are administrative items and that these are not in the Board's criteria. She felt very strongly that this item should not be continued. They can be given the time and attention at a later point. She felt that the boundaries were fine and could later be amended as the Board received more information. She saw no reason for a delay. Ms. Col e asked Mr. Holleran ifhe had strong feelings for where the boundaries should be drawn today and wh y he needed to continue this item until October. Mr, Holleran replied that he was continuing it in order to get the information gathering process underway. Ms. Cole stated that a continuance would mean another public hearing. Mr. Holleran agreed. He wanted to present a complete package of information to Council and the Parks Department. Ms. Cole mentioned that this discussion was mute if MAPL was unwilling to accept the continuance. Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 83 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 Page 6 Mr. Ho))eran wanted Mr. Gehr to make some suggestions of how to solve this problem. He said he would prefer to find a solution today. He was basing his motion on his understanding of the rules. Mr. Gehr stated that the notice had been satisfied. The other issue was the scope of the report and the scope of the information that has been presented to the Board, dealing with the context of the Band Shell and not looking at the larger area. Ms. Ramsey stated that the Board could expand the boundaries through a modification. Ms. Rosal! asked Mr. Holleran to state the boundaries he had in mind. She stated that because of the public's concern, she would like to arrive at a decision today. Ms. Cole asked Mr. Segel as the applicant's representative, ifhe was willing to agree to continue this matter. Mr. Segel responded that MAPL did not want this continued. Mr. Ho)leran withdrew his motion. Ms. Costell o made the follow ing motion: She moved that the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board recommend to City Counci l th at the Central Park Band Shell structure and its site, located on a portion of Block 13 Original Townsite, City of Boulder, further described in Attachment A, be designated an individual landmark under the City Historic Preservation Code, adopting the evaluation report and staff memorandum detailing the significance criteria as findings of the Board. Recommending the structure and its site be named the Boulder Band Shell. Ms. Cole seconded the motion. Ms. Cole stated that Ms. Costello, in her motion. has called out the site as described in Attachment A. She asked Mr. Holleran if he had alternative boundaries that he would like to propose that the Board might be able to consider. Mr. Holleran made the following amendm ent: He proposed that the northern most 250 feet of Block 13 also be included and that would give a line that is roughly 50 feet north of Boulder and Left Hand Ditch. He thought it would more accurately outline the Band Shell and the site associated with it including th e half which Mr. DeBoer sited to control the traffic pattern around it the plantings that were intended to mitigate the acoustic interfer ence from the roadways, and in general, all of the landscape issues, Ms. Ramsey said that in looking back at the report and the justification of expanding the •boundaries, based on the information in the report, she was not certain that the Board ought to Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 84 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 Page 7 be including the train. She recommended a boundary that would be well outside of the berrned area but not so far that it included the train. Ms. Cole stated that someone needed to second the amendment. Ms. Costello asked if it was supposed to be a friendly amendment. Mr, Ho))eran did not want to make it a friendly amendment. Ms. Costello suggested that before continuing deliberation, she wanted to see the proposed boundaries and what the extended boundaries would be. She said it is not very clear on Attachment A. Mr. Holleran stated that as far as the train, he was perfectly happy to not call it out as a contributing feature. His intention was to deal with the area that is immediately relevant to the Band Shell and that this area happens to include the train. Ms. Cole seconded the amendment. Ms. Rosall stated that her support of this motion in part, depended on whether the train is specifically mentioned as not being a feature of the site. Ms. Costello asked Ms. Rosall whether she wanted to include the train. Ms. Rosall felt it was a different issue and that it had not been addressed in the packet. Ms. Chronic asked the Chair for a point of order. She stated that the application before the Board was for the Band Shell and the boundaries as proposed. There are other elements of the park that may come before the Board in the following months for landmarking and they would be separate issues. She asked that the Board consider the application that was before it today and leave those matters for a future date when the public has a chance to prepare and present it to them. Ms. Ramsey commented that if the Board was thinking about modifying the boundaries, she would strongly recommend a boundary that did not include the train since it w as not a part of the report. Mr. Holleran stated that he made his boundary for a reason. The exact dimensions are arbitrary, but the logic of them was not. He specified that what he would like to propose after finishing with the Band Shell is a policy that the Board deal in complete parcels of land unless there is a good reason not to. He would like to avoid future arguments about whether a specific tree, walkway or tree stump is significant or not. To draw specific boundaries in this case would be to take the entire park. He understood Ms. Chronic's statement. He specifically selected the boundary away from the ditch. He would prefer to designate the ditch but knew that it would have an entirely separate set of historical and management issues. He felt the things around the Band Shell are important. The Board's purpose today ultimately is to have a role in that planning and to protect that resource. Going back to the train, it was addressed in here that if the Board Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 85 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25. 1995 Page 8 thought it was a contributing part of the site, it would certainly have received the information to make that detennination. If the rest of the Board wanted to specifically exclude it, he was willing to accept that as an amendment. It was not his purpose to prevent plans that involve moving the train. It was his purpose to make sure that the whole environs of the Band Shell are part of the scope of what was reviewed. Ms. Cole restated that there was an amendment to the motion. 'That amendment was to modify the boundary of the site of the Band Shell to the northern most 250 feet of Block 13. That is. the so uthern boundary would be 50 feet north of the Lefthand and Boulder Ditch. She wanted to know if the Board wanted to discuss it any further. Mr. Sc;gel questioned if the applicant had a voice in the discretion of the revised boundaries. Mr.. Gehr stated that the boundaries were already determined by the application submitted;. however, the Board could change those boundaries if it so chose. Ms. Cole stated that the Board would be willing to hear from the applicant on the issue. Mr. Sc;gel stated that his concern would be that expanding the boundary to the extent that had been suggested would open this discussion to scrutiny with the Parks and Recreation Department, the Planning Department, the master plan and perhaps step on more toes than MAPL had already done. His preference would be to keep to the smallest possible footprint that would include the majority of elements that make up this complex. He deferred to Mr. Simmons if there was more in his report that covers more area than he was aware of. Mr. Simmons stated that their mandate was to look at the Band Shell. He did not look at the rest of the park or the train. The train was mentioned in the report in the context of when it was moved into the park in 1953. He thought there would be some rational for including the areas to the rear of the Band Shell that includes some historic plantings. Since he did not look at the park as a whole. which he would have to look at as a district, he did not think about how far south that boundary should extend beyond what he had already specified. Ms. Rosal! stated that if the amendment failed, she would offer another amendment that would include the boundaries suggested by staff. It would start at Canyon and end just before the train area. Mr. Holleran stated that he would be happy to specifically exclude the train as a feature of his motion. Ms. Rosall asked Mr. Holleran if he would take that as a friendly amendment. Mr. Holleran agreed and then asked if Ms. Rosall would please specify that the area included the northern most 250 feet adding to the list of contributing features the trees and walks and not the train or its tracks Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 86 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, I 995 Page 9 Ms. Costello stated that if the Board were to include this entire boundary, the focus would be taken off the Band Shell. She felt the application before the Board was for the Band Shell and the rest of the park could be designated a district at a later date. Ms. Cole stated that she would like to take a vote on this motion and amendments. She stated that after hearing from Mr. Segel, she thought that he raised a very good issue that if the Board drew the boundary too large, the focus of the need to landmark the Band Shell might be lost. Mr. Gehr suggested that if the Board really wanted to look at the whole park, the proper process would be to go ahead with the original application and then initiate a designation for the whole park as a district if it thought that the whole park needed to be included. Ms. Cole was not sure if that was the spirit of Mr Holleran's suggestion. Mr. Holleran said his main concern was that this would be setting a bad precedent. Ms. Cole asked for a vote on the amendment to the motion. The amendment failed by a vote of two to two, with Ms. Costello and Ms. Rosall voting nay. Ms. Cole asked if the Board had any further comments about the motion before the Board . Mr. Holleran spoke in favor of the motion. Ms. Costello spoke in favor of the motion. Ms. Rosan spoke in favor of the motion. Ms. Cole questioned how the Board would feel if the boundary were to be amended to 130 feet north of the ditch. She also asked if the Board could vote on the application as submitted and then if the Board could amend this designation to include some larger portion of the site which could be heard at a later date. Mr. Gehr replied yes. Ms. Cole stressed that none of the Board members are talking about the whole park. Ms. Cole made the following friendly amendment: To modify the site boundao: to the northern most 170 feet so that the southern boundao: of the site would be 130 feet north of the Boulder and Lefthand Ditch. Mr. Holieran seconded the amendment. Mr. Gehr asked the chair to restate the amendment. Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 87 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 Page 10 Ms. Cole stated that the amendment to the motion was to modify the boundary to include the northern most 170 feet of Block 13, Boulder Original Townsite, to the City of Boulder. The amendment passed by a vote of three to one with Ms. Costello voting nay. The motion passed unanimously. The Chair did an agenda check and the Board decided to continue item 4, "Matters from the Planning Department" to its July 27, 1995 meeting. 2.PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO APPROVE ALANDMARK ALTERATION CERTIFICATE FOR A DEMOLITION OF ANOUTBUILDING LOCATED AT 2420 10TH STREET, WITHIN THE MAPLETONHILL HISTORIC DISTRICT. OWNER AND APPLICANT: PAUL WHITESIDE. Mr. Gehr stated that this was a quasi-judicial hearing. Everyone who wished to speak to this item was sworn in. Mr. Gehr asked the Board to reveal any ex-parte contacts Ms. Ramsey showed slides and gave a brief presentation on the application. Staff was unable to determine that this outbuilding has any historic significance. Ms. Costel)o asked how often the Board had ruled on a demolition without new construction replacing it. Ms. Ramsey said the Board had done this on a couple of occasions. Ms. Rosall asked staff if there was a garage on the site. Ms. Ramsey stated that there were two outbuildings. There is no access to either of the outbuildings. They were merely for storage and not used as garages. The Board heard from the applicant. Mr. Whiteside 2420 10th Street, did not wish to address the Board at this time. The public hearing was opened. No one from the public spoke to this item. The public hearing was closed. The following motion was made by Ms. Costello: She moved that the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board approve the application for an alteration certificate for demolition of the existing outbuilding located on the property Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 88 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 Page 11 at 2420 10th Street, adopting the staff memorandum with findinW! as listed, calling out that this is the outbuilding furthest from the house, with the stipulation that any new construction also come before the board, Ms, Cole seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimousl y. 3.PUBLIC HEARING AND CONSIDERATION OF A DEMOLITION PERMITAPPLICATION FOR THE STRUCTURE LOCA1ED AT 1045 LINDEN AVENUE.PURSUANT TO SECTION I 0-13-23 FOR BUILDINGS OVER FIFTY YEARS OLD ORRECOGNIZED AS STRUCTURES OF MERIT. OWNER AND APPLICANT:J.LEE SIBVENSON Mr. Gehr stated again that this was a quasi-judicial hearing. Everyone who wished to speak to this item was sworn in. ,Mr. Gehr asked the Board to reveal any ex-parte contacts Ms. Costello spoke with the applicant in design review . Mr Holleran spoke with the applicant in design review. Ms. Ramsey gave a brief slide show. Ms. Cole asked if the outbuildings were more than 50 year s old. Ms, Ramsey believed they were, although there was no documentation for that. Ms. Cole asked if this application was only for the main structure. Ms, Ramsey understood that the application was only for the main structure. If the applicant was interested in having the outbuildings demolished, they would need to have the design review committee review that as well. The Board heard from the applicant. Mr. Stevenson, 1045 Linden, did not wish to address the Board at this time. The public hearing was opened. No one from the public spoke to this item. The public hearing was closed . The following motion was made by Ms. Rosal!: Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 89 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25. 1995 Page 12 She moved that the Board issue a stay of demolition on this property and adopt the staff memorandum as finding,5 of the Board. Ms. Rosall stated that with the research before the Board, the building was definitely historically significant for its association with a person nationally, as well as locally known. She thought it looked like at this preliminary point, the building is a good intact example of the bungalow style particularly of a country and rural style. It was probably the last remaining intact example of this rural bungalow style on Linden Avenue. She wanted to see this studied further with the stay of demolition. Ms. Cole seconded the motion. Ms. Costello supported the motion She wanted more time for research, but it didn't mean it wouldn't be issued a demolition permit. She felt the structure was not very significant. She thought the significance was due to Ted Allen but was not necessarily tied to this structure. Mr. Holleran did not support the motion. He would be very sorry if this house gets demolished and hoped that whoever Mr. Stevenson finds to buy it will be someone who will appreciate this little house and its historical significance and do something good with it. It is a neighborhood where its significance is eroding. But, he pointed out that it is eroding for the reasons we see here today, none of them important enough in themselves to be designated. His feeling was that the Board was not going to designate this house and not learn anything in six months. All the Board was going to do was hold up the applicant. He planned to vote against the motion and vote to issue the permit. Then he would cross his fingers and hope that someone would see how important this house is to the neighborhood. Ms. Cole asked staff if the Board could require that the house be photo documented, even if the demolition permit were issued. Ms. Ramsey affirmed the preservation ordinance allows the Landmarks Board to record demolished and moved properties. Prior to the issuance of a permit, the City :Manager may require the applicant to provide information about the building including, without limitation, the date of original construction, significant events and occupants, architectural features, and a description of the building through photographs and maps. The City :Manager will determine where the documentation will be deposited. She pointed out that the Board could issue the permit with a condition of whatever it felt needed to be further documented. Ms. Cole agreed with Mr. Holleran. If this motion failed, she wanted to move that the applicant proceed under Section I0-13-23(h), of the B.RC. 1981, to give the Board photo documentation of the house, inside and out. Ms. Costello stated that because the house was in the forefront of the lot, she saw no reason for a builder to incorporate it into any proposed future plans. Ms. Rosall agreed with Ms. Costello . The motion passed by a vote of three to one, with Mr. Holleran voting nay. Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 90 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo • • • Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board July 25, 1995 4.MATTERS FROM TI-IE PLANNING DEPARTMENT This item was continued to the Board's July 27, 1995 meeting. With no further business to discuss, the meeting was closed at 6: 10 p.m. l:\data\comdev\hist\min\7-25-95.Lmk !'-age 13 Attachment E - LPAB Minutes July 25 1999 Item 5B - 1236 Canyon Blvd Initiation Memo 11.03.2021 Page 91 of 91 Attachment C November 2021 Landmarks Board Initiation Memo PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD Virtual Meeting 6:00 p.m., January 24, 2022 100 Years of Excellence Boulder Parks & Recreation Advisory Board Members 2022 Raj Seymour (Chair) Pamela Yugar (Vice Chair) Charles Brock Elliott Hood Mary Scott Jason Unger Mission Statement BPRD will promote the health and well- being of the entire Boulder community by collaboratively providing high- quality parks, facilities and programs. Vision Statement We envision a community where every member’s health and well- being is founded on unparalleled parks, facilities and programs. Goals of the Master Plan 1. Community Health and Wellness 2. Taking Care of What We Have 3. Financial Sustainability 4. Building Community 5. Youth Engagement 6. Organizational Readiness For more information on BPRD Master Plan visit the City of Boulder web site at: https://bouldercolorado.gov/pages/ parks-recreation-master-plan AGENDA All agenda times are approximate /͘ APPROVAL OF AGENDA (2 minutes) //͘ FUTURE BOARD ITEMS AND TOURS (2 minutes) ///͘ PUBLIC PARTICIPATION (15 - 30 minutes) This portion of the meeting is for members of the public to communicate ideas or concerns to the Board regarding parks and recreation issues for which a public hearing is not scheduled later in the meeting (this includes consent agenda). The public is encouraged to comment on the need for parks and recreation programs and facilities as they perceive them. All speakers are limited to three minutes. Depending on the nature of your matter, you may or may not receive a response from the Board after you deliver your comments. The Board is always listening to and appreciative of community feedback. A.PRAB Master Plan Study Session for March 2022 (verbal) (5min) B. PRAB Recruitment (5min) C.PRAB Community Engagement Updates (verbal) (5min) This portion of the meeting is for members of the board to report on PRAB’s annual work plan goal of each member: attending two or more parks and recreation-related community activities per month; promoting parks and recreation through social media; attending site tours; and supporting the department’s partnership initiatives. VII͘ NEXT BOARD MEETING: 6:00 p.m. Monday, February 28, 2022 VIII.ADJOURN s. MATTERS FROM THE DEPARTMENT A͘ Public Art Update -Nobel project (20min) B. Glen Huntington Bandshell: Proposed Amendment to Designation to Expand Landmark Boundary (20min) C. BPR 2022 Action Plan (20min) VI͘ MATTERS FROM BOARD MEMBERS IV.CONSENT AGENDA (5 minutes) A.Approval of Minutes from December 3, 2021 B.Parks and Recreation Development and Operations Update Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet PARKS AND RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD FUTURE BOARD ITEMS UPDATED: January 20, 2022 JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL PRAB MEETINGS January 24: • Public Art Update -Nobel project (md) 20m • Bandshell landmark (md) 20m • 2022 Action Plan(md) 20m • PRAB Master Plan Study Session for March 2022 (mb) 5m • PRAB Recruitment (mb) 5m • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 5m TOTAL MEETING TIME: 1hr 45mins (Includes 30 minutes for public participation and consent agenda) February 28: • Historic Preservation Plan (HiPP) (d/i) 90m • 2021 Year End Financial Review & 2023 Budget Planning (md) 30m • Park Names: Next Steps (md) 20m • Boulder Reservoir MOUs (Rocky Mountain Paddle, BCR, AVID, Community Sailing) (d/i) 45m • PRAB Orientation and Mentoring New Members (mb) 10m • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 10m March 28: • Boulder Reservoir MOUs (Rocky Mountain Paddle, BCR, AVID, Community Sailing) (a) 30m • 2023 Budget Strategy (d/i) 30m • Honoring Outgoing board members (mb) 10m • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 10m March TBD: • Study session for Master Plan Update: Final Implementation Plan April 25: • Board appointments (p) • Election of officers (p) • Community Events update – summer calendar/plans (md) • 2023 Budget Strategy Continued – Scenario Planning & Facility Fees, CIP 1st Touch (d/i) (60 mins) • New Member Orientation and Mentors (mb) • PRAB Community Engagement (mb) 10m • FIGC Restaurant Vendor RFP selection (DI) April TBD • Potential joint session with City Council to review draft Master Plan Update Department Events and Items of Interest • January 19-February 7: Master Plan Engagement online. • January 21-22: City Council Annual Retreat (cc)\ • B&C Recruitment Open • February 21: B&C Applications due • Thursday, February 3, 5:30-7:00 p.m.: Virtual Master Plan Public Workshop (e) • March 3, 8 and 10: City Council Interviews with Board Applicants (cc) • March 15: City Council Appoints New Board Members (cc) • March 20-26: BVSD and CU Spring Break AGENDA SETTING The PRAB Chair, PRAB Vice Chair and BPR staff set the agenda for the next month on the Thursday directly following the regular PRAB meeting. PRAB members can submit agenda requests to the Chair and Vice Chair by Wednesday following the PRAB regular meeting for consideration. If time-sensitive matters arise, PRAB Chair and Vice Chair may amend the agenda as needed. LEGEND Action Item (a): A public hearing item to be voted on by the Board (public comment period provided). Procedural Item: (p): An item requiring procedural attention. Consent Item (c): An item provided in written form for consent, not discussion by the Board; any consent item may be called up by any Board member for discussion following the consent agenda. Discussion/Information Item(d/i): An item likely to be a future action item (or council item) and/or that benefits from an in-depth discussion. Matters from the Department (md): Items that will be reviewed and discussed during the meeting but not requiring as much in-depth analysis. Matters from the Board (mb): Items initiated by the Board that will be reviewed and discussed during the meeting but not requiring as much in- depth analysis. City Council Item (cc) Other Boards and Commissions (obc) Community Engagement and/or Events (e) Holiday/Closure (h/c) Italics indicate a tentative date or plan. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board FROM: Ali Rhodes, Director, Parks and Recreation Department Bryan Beary, Community Building and Partnerships Manager Jackson Hite, Business Services Manager Megann Lohman, Recreation Manager Stephanie Munro, Regional Facilities Manager Dennis Warrington, Urban Parks Manager Regina Elsner, Interim Planning and Ecological Services Manager SUBJECT: Consent Agenda DATE: January 24, 2022 A. Approval of Minutes from December 13, 2021 Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet CITY OF BOULDER BOULDER, COLORADO BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING MINUTES To listen to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board meetings in their entirety, please go to the following link: www.boulderparks-rec.org Name of Board/Commission: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Date of Meeting: December 13, 2021 Contact Information Preparing Summary: Charlotte O’Donnell, 303-413-7223 Board Members Present: Charles (Chuck) Brock, Elliott Hood, Mary Scott, Raj Seymour, Jason Unger, Pamela Yugar Board Members Absent: Staff Present: Bryan Beary, Matt Gazdik, Jeff Haley, Jackson Hite, Megann Lohman, Stephanie Munro, Ali Rhodes, Charlotte O’Donnell Guests Present: Type of Meeting: Regular Agenda Item 1: Call to Order The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. A quorum was present for the conduct of business. Motion to approve agenda. Motion by Yugar. second by Hood. The motion passed 6-0 Agenda Item 2: Future Board Items and Tours Rhodes reviewed opportunities for community engagement coming in January for BPR’s master plan update and other upcoming PRAB items. Agenda Item 3: Public Participation There being no one signed up to speak. This portion Agenda Item 4: Consent Agenda A. Approval of Minutes from October 25, 2021 Motion to approve minutes. Motion by Scott. Second by Unger. The motion passed 5-0. Hood abstained from this vote due to his absence at this meeting. B. Approval of Minutes from November 15, 2021 Retreat/Study Session Motion to approve minutes. Motion by Brock. Second by Hood. The motion passed 6-0. C. Approval of Minutes from November 22, 2021 Motion to approve minutes. Motion by Hood. Second by Yugar. The motion passed 6-0. B. Development and Operations Update The Board had the following questions and/or comments: • Regarding the information on North Boulder Park, will the work being done be only for the playground or will the shelter and other improvements be made still? Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet • Sad to hear about the delays at North Boulder Park, but would like to help out even after PRAB term. • What is a class V boating permit? Is this something that BPR is thinking about eliminating or changing how they are managed? Agenda Item 5: Items for Action A. Boulder County Farmers Market Renewal This item was presented by Beary. The Board had the following questions and/or comments: There being no one who wanted to speak, the public hearing was closed. • How are the zero waste practices carried out? Often notice a lot of bins with varying kinds of waste in each. Would like to have a more robust conversation about this and how the farmer market can do better. • Has the Farmers Market lost any vendors due to the pandemic? Motion to approve the Non-Exclusive License Agreement between the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation and Boulder County Farmers Market and authorize the City Manager to make minor amendments prior to or during the term of this agreement in order to ensure that programming is provided in a manner that is consistent with applicable laws and the policies and regulations of the City of Boulder. Motion by Brock. Second by Hood. The motion passed 6-0. B. Creek Festival Contract Renewal This item was presented by Beary. The Board had the following questions and/or comments: There being no one who wanted to speak, the public hearing was closed. • The licensing fee seems low. How is this determined? • In terms of revenue generation, the fees for rides and amusement attractions have been high for a family. What portion of these fees go towards the different parties involved? • Moving forward it might behoove BPR to look at the licensing fee. It makes sense to not want to burden this contractor at this time. • What was last year’s revenue and profit? What is the anticipated revenue and profit this year? Motion to approve the License & Services Contract between the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation and Team Player Productions and authorize the City Manager to make minor amendments prior to or during the term of this agreement in order to ensure that programming is provided in a manner that is consistent with applicable laws and the policies and regulations of the City of Boulder. Motion by Unger. Second by Hood. The motion passed 6-0. Agenda Item 6: Matters from the Department A. Recreation Center Suspension Guidelines This item was presented by Lohman. The Board had the following questions and/or comments: • What does chronic sleeping mean? • Are these policies meant to address those experiencing homelessness? Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet • Appreciate the consistency with the Library and other city facilities. • How will BPR manage having a uniform response across staff? • This is a tough position to put staff in to approach those breaking the rules. What is the role of the security person? How has this been implemented? • Is there a deciding body or a specific metric to decide suspensions? • Are these consistent with other places in the city? • Surprised to hear you had to hire a security guard at North. How expensive is this? Is this coming from the general fund? • Where would non-compliance with a mask policy fit in? • Sorry to the staff for having to deal with this. • Appreciate staff dealing with this and glad to hear that training will be included. Appreciate that the leadership from the city, including from front desk staff. • Fully support suspension length guidelines. Agenda Item 7: Items for Discussion/Information A. Master Plan Update This item was presented by Haley and Elsner. The Board had the following questions and/o comments: • Support for the changes proposed. • There seems to be bureaucracy that can get in the way of responding to emerging needs or trends. Is there a way to make this plan more adaptive to future changes? • Discussion on wording of mission statement. Revisit mission and vision statements. • How did BPR decide to define resilience? • Support the key themes and the integration of resilience and equity. • For the statement on climate change statement, suggest adding “And our contribution to it” • How did the staff meeting on the master plan go? Was it a full-day meeting where all staff were invited? Org Readiness • Suggest adding active language which shows BPR’s identity such as: Responsive, Ready and Resilient • Recommend non-violent communication training. • Suggest adding training and other tools to make sure BPR is ready for the unexpected. COVID taught everyone the need to be able to adapt. • Would support condensing attracting and retaining staff in to one category. • Prefers attracting new staff and retention as different categories since these are distinct needs. • Suggested including safety and protection as part of retention. • What does improvements to onboarding mean? Taking Care of What We Have • There were no comments or questions for this theme. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Community Health and Wellness • Does this cover outreach to communities who aren’t yet using programs and parks yet or those who are underserved? • Is this where partnerships would fit in? Financial Sustainability • Enjoyed seeing teens at South Boulder Rec Center recently. Suggests adding a pathway for working with the schools. Building Community and Relationships • Is this where interdepartmental communications would fit? Transportation links folks to BPR facilities and programs and it would be great to coordinate more with that department and OSMP as well. Youth Engagement and Activity • Why is BPR focusing on teens? Are these spaces that adults or others could use at different times of the day or for different programs? • Support for the idea of creating leadership opportunities for teens. Agenda Item 8: Matters from the Board A. PRAB Community Engagement Updates No one reported any community engagements or updates. Agenda Item 9: The meeting was adjourned at 8:48 p.m. Approved by: Attested: _______________________ _________________________ Raj Seymour Charlotte O’Donnell Board Member BPR Staff Date _____________________ Date ____________________ Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet B. Parks and Recreation Development Update The following information is intended to provide the PRAB with relevant updates on specific projects as they reach major milestones. This section is not all inclusive of all current projects and only illustrates major project updates. For a complete list of all current projects and details, please visit www.BoulderParkNews.org. Planning and Design The following projects are currently in the planning and design process that involves research, alternatives analysis, public involvement and development of planning documents and design plans to guide decision making and future capital improvements. • Historical & Cultural Program: Historical and Cultural Volunteer Update Across 2021, staff managed a variety of volunteer projects where volunteers donated over 1500+ hours of service, mostly at Columbia Cemetery. Volunteers included regularly returning fraternities, court ordered community service, Park Partners, and standard annual Columbia Cemetery Conservation Corps (CCCC). Their impact helped maintain over 400 standard grave-markers, place graveside American flags on both Memorial Day and Veteran’s Day for 300 veterans, repair over 750 linear feet of road, and offset a variety of park operational work across 10 acres of burial ground at Columbia Cemetery. Historic Places Plan (HiPP) - Purchasing & Contracting Update From November 2021 through January 2022 staff worked to complete an amendment to the project agreement with consultants (Mundus Bishop) for their services to develop the Historic Places Plan (HiPP). The first amendment to their agreement accounts for two project changes. First, it amends the end date of Mundus Bishop’s agreement, extending it from December 31, 2021 to January 6, 2023. This change and extension aligns with the modified end date of the agreement between the city and project grantor- History Colorado, State Historical Fund (HC-SHF). The second change relates to additional scope and related expenses including: o Additional meetings with consultants, additional review of project deliverables and final work products. o Additional staff and consultant planning for remaining project phases, to more comprehensively integrate Pearl Street Pedestrian Mall (Pearl Street) and extensions in scope related to the proposed amendment for the Glen Huntington Bandshell (Bandshell) landmark designation to expand the landmark boundary (detailed in Matters from the Department.) Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet The additional expenses will be covered by contingency funding withheld from the original grant project budget from HC-SHF. Mundus Bishop’s contract will be increased by $24,430 for a new total of $218,107. The remaining contingency funds from HC-SHF will be utilized by BPR for additional grant administration expenses and unidentified project needs. The project is currently in Phase 4 ‘Treatment Recommendations, Prioritization and Implementation’ As the project approaches the next phase, prioritization and implementation planning, the PRAB will be updated on this project and consulted for input on strategies and frameworks to guide implementation of work identified for each site. Columbia Cemetery – Standard Change to Legislative Ordinance Update During the first half of 2022, BPR staff and staff from the City Attorney’s Office (CAO) will work on a standard legislative update to the ordinance for Columbia Cemetery. Since 1966, the city has maintained Columbia Cemetery as a cemetery and place for burial and/or internment of human remains. Individuals or organizations with legitimate deeds are still actively buried and/or interred in Columbia Cemetery. The current operations of Columbia Cemetery support interment for those with existing deeds. To better facilitate the community, health and safety benefits associated with the city’s ability to actively offer grave space(s), the city is planning to update the cemetery’s adopted legislation (Ordinance No. 7268). The proposed change would clarify the city’s ability to transfer deeds for unused plots to new individuals or organizations through a Quitclaim title. The proposed legislative change would also include additional definitions not currently included in the cemetery code, as well as a new subsection detailing that PRAB and the City Manager are authorized to adopt rules and regulations under chapter 1-4, "Rulemaking," B.R.C. 1981. Those new rules could potentially include the creation of new rights for burial/internment. The current codes and regulations would remain in place for those with existing deeds or rights. In addition to serving as outdoor passive activity spaces, cemeteries are essentially outdoor museums. Boulder’s Columbia Cemetery, situated on 10.5 acres at Ninth and Pleasant Streets, is a historic, cultural, and academic resource containing the remains of many of Boulder's founders and pioneers. The sale of unused plots has the potential to provide significant financial resources that could support the care and operations of this valuable city asset. This information for the PRAB is intended to provide background on work in progress with no formal action required at this time. Staff will continue to update PRAB of next steps and the board will be consulted for input and/or action as appropriate. Loan Agreement for Three Rollingstock/Railroad Assets Since the mid-2000s, BPR has successfully partnered with the Colorado Railroad Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Museum (CRRM) on a loan agreement that places three historically landmarked rollingstock/railroad assets for community use at the CRRM located in Golden, CO.. In 2022, the existing agreement will expire between BPR and CRRM. BPR staff will begin negotiating with CCRM on an extension of the loan with an additional three-year term starting in 2022. The extended loan agreement will secure the community benefit and use of these historically landmarked assets through continued placement and programing at the CRRM. site in Golden, CO. • Planning Projects Underway: Staff or contractors continue to work on the following projects and will update the PRAB as major milestones are achieved: o Flatirons Golf Course Facility Design Project Construction The following projects are scheduled for construction, under construction or have been recently completed. For additional details please visit www.BoulderParkNews.org. • Skate Park Improvement Projects – Boulder Public Library Underpass: In 2021, the Parks and Recreation Department completed and opened to the community three new skate parks at Scott Carpenter Park, Howard Heuston Park, and Valmont City Park. The addition of the new skate features at the parks was supported by community members and stakeholder groups and funded by BPR capital funds and Capital Impact Fees, with a key benefit being the adding features for skaters, scooters and cyclists in Boulder at a time when self-directed, outdoor activity for all ages is critical to support physical and mental health. In continuation of this effort to provide new skate opportunities to the community and to add skate features in the core of downtown, new features will be installed at the underpass of the main public library. This installation will be on the south side of Boulder Creek, adjacent to the Civic Park playground. Skate features will consist of a skate bank and rails and will meet skating needs of users of all skill levels, fulfilling a desire expressed during the Civic Area Master Plan, to activate this underutilized area of the park, and to add legitimate areas for skating downtown. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet During construction, which is anticipated to last from mid-February through early March, portions of the underpass will be closed to the public. East west access will still be provided. Detours will be shown on site. All access points to the library, Civic Park Playground, and nature play space will remain open to the public. The installation of the skate spot will not impact existing library activities in this area. The new skate parks and skate spots almost double the amount of skateable space in the city. The features provide much needed outdoor, socially distant recreation opportunities and beginner skate features for those starting to learn. Each of the four locations will be accessible to all community members. General information on the skate park improvements and pump track project can be found here. • East Boulder Community Park Restroom: A new, year-round restroom facility was installed at East Boulder Community Park in September of 2021. The restroom is currently closed to the public and is expected to be open in May of 2022 to support park and recreation activities. In addition to the restroom, a new shade shelter will be installed. Due to supply chain delays, the shelter was not able to be installed with the restroom facility. The shelter is expected to arrive and be installed in March of 2022. Updates will be provided on the actual installation and any construction related impacts. • Scott Carpenter Park, Playground Renovation: The department’s Capital Improvement Program (CIP) allows for yearly repairs and renovations of existing playgrounds and is focused on those that are over 20-years old. This funding provides asset maintenance throughout the system as well as a complete renovation of one neighborhood park annually to meet the goals outlined within the BPR Master Plan and Capital Investment Strategy. The playground at Scott Carpenter Park is scheduled for replacement as part of the current CIP, as the equipment is over 20-years old and is extended beyond its useful lifespan. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Staff is currently working with a playground designer and has developed a proposed list of playground equipment and a preferred layout plan for the equipment. The equipment includes age-appropriate 2 to 5 and 5 to 12 structures. This includes standard equipment for all playgrounds such as slides, climbers, swings, sand play, tunnels, etc. Equipment selection for this project is informed by community engagement conducted during the design for the refurbished Scott Carpenter Pool. Several existing play elements such as the rocket ship, sand crater, and asteroid will remain, guided by input from community members highlighting that these iconic features are still valued and will be integrated into the new design. Staff is also coordinating with Growing Up Boulder (GUB) on the design of a teen space adjacent to the playground. More information will be provided in future updates on final equipment selections, locations, and when the equipment is anticipated to be installed. C. Operations Update COVID-19     The latest information and results of recovery efforts can be found at https://bouldercolorado.gov/coronavirus.          • Facility Masking Requirements: On September 3, 2021, Boulder County Public Health (BCPH) issued a public health order requiring facial coverings indoors for all individuals two-years-and-older regardless of vaccination status. In line with this order, the department is currently requiring all staff and patrons to mask when indoors. • Staff Vaccine Mandate: To promote a safe and healthy workplace for staff and the community it serves, the city implemented a requirement for all employees be fully vaccinated by December 8, 2021. The city will comply with all legal requirements related to medical and religious accommodations. • Updates to Quarantine, Isolation and Meeting Guidelines: Based on recent updates to recommendations from BCPH, the city organization has aligned staff guidelines regarding quarantine and isolation. Despite these changes largely resulting in shorter periods away from work, department leadership is closely monitoring staffing levels to determine options for continuity of operations amidst the recent spike in cases. Additionally, guidelines are being adjusted to greatly restrict the size and necessity of in-person meetings by city staff. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Boulder County Farmers Market and Boulder Creek Festival Follow-up Last month, the PRAB discussed and approved agreements for the Boulder County Farmers Market (BCFM) and Boulder Creek Festival (BCF). Staff committed to follow-up with more detailed information regarding sustainability standards and compliance, along with financial responsibilities. Sustainability and Compliance Events for BCFM and BCF are subject to the same standards as other Special Events, requiring an annual application for permitted operation, despite being contracted and licensed by the department as multi-year agreements. The City of Boulder Special Event Review Team (SERT), which is comprised of nearly 20 staff members from departments across the city – including police, fire, climate initiatives, community vitality, city attorney’s office, and others – holds annual pre-production and debrief meetings with special event organizers. SERT members and department liaisons are considered subject matter experts and provide verbal and written feedback on relevant elements contained in a very comprehensive City of Boulder Special Events Guide and application. Pre-production meetings include a review of the event producer’s plan to comply with event standards, including sustainability. For example, the city requires three-bin collection systems with signage, for recycling, compost and trash at every location where there is a waste receptacle and have proper signage for each waste receptacle. Event Organizers must identify these zero waste locations on the site map. During these major events, city staff audit the event’s performance against the written plan and in required post-event reporting. As special event organizers, BCFM and BCF must provide a breakdown of sustainability efforts (including diversion rates) in their post-event reports. These reports are reviewed by the SERT sustainability liaison in accordance with the City of Boulder’s Zero Waste Policy. Events not in compliance may be subject to immediate cancellation of the event, penalty fees, denial of future special event permit applications or the requirement of a cash deposit or surety bond. Financial Responsibilities The city has a responsibility to the community to ensure that monies raised in the name of a city event are professionally managed and reflect the goals of the event. The Boulder Creek Festival is a city-owned event, produced by a third-party and to that end, within 60 days of the post event walk through, the event organizer must provide a financial report and records that follow standard accounting practices. Additionally, the contractor is responsible for all expenses. The events are intended to be free public events benefiting the community, and are also expected to include some paid activities, amusements, and items for purchase. While set by the organizer, pricing associated with vendor participation must include and favor Boulder-local businesses and nonprofits. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Both BCFM and BCF contractors also pay fees to the city. The fees increase on an annual basis. Fee development considers the fiscal risk and liability incurred solely by the event organizer. When developed in 2018 and 2019, the intent for these contracts was to evaluate fee structures at the end of the term based on fair market value and the event financial reports. Staff could not appropriately evaluate these metrics in 2021 based on the COVID-19 pandemic and its related event impacts, however, look forward to reassessing the fee structure and schedule in 2024 as new agreements are developed. Additionally, it should be noted that city support is provided in the form of in-kind contribution. There is no fiscal contribution to either event organizer, which differentiates the agreements from other city service agreements and purchasing processes. Memorial Donations - Stewardship Bench Program Update Boulder Parks and Recreation provides a variety of ways for members of our community to donate to the parks system in honor of loved ones. Guidelines for memorial donations have been developed based on research from best practices of similar agencies nationwide, the needs and resource capabilities of the department, and the desire of residents to recognize loved ones through monetary contributions providing for specific last memorials. Options include living legacy tree donations, stewardship bench donations, general donations, statues, fountains, plazas, gardens, and park naming opportunities. The most popular memorial donation program has been for stewardship benches within the park system. Stewardship bench donations support the purchase, replacement, or refurbishment of park benches and include a plaque commemorating a person for the life of the bench. In 2021, the department received over two dozen requests for stewardship benches. At least six requests were referred to other organizations (OSMP, Boulder County, etc.). In total, BPR received donations for 17 benches. Locations for bench replacements and refurbishment include Martin Park, Valmont City Park and Harlow Platts Park, among others. New benches will be installed in 2022 at sites such as Catalpa Park, the Chautauqua playground and next to the North Boulder Recreation Center Platform Tennis Courts. In total, these donations provided $41,000 towards the refurbishment and enhancement of the urban park system and providing important places for community members to rest and extend their time in the outdoors.. In 2022, staff will continue to use a streamlined online waitlist process with an order for benches being placed just once a year in Fall 2022. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Aquatics Update BPR is investing increased staff resources into solving the current lifeguard shortage with a three-pronged approach focusing on lifeguard recruitment, lifeguard retention, and resource optimization. The following are updates from each of the focus areas: • Lifeguard Recruitment: This team is focused on increasing interest in the position and making applying and being hired as easy as possible. Applications for lifeguard positions are significantly below what they have been in years past. In partnership with the city’s Human Resources department, BPR is working to increase interest in these positions through targeted recruitment, referral programs, and other incentives to fill these positions. The first team priorities include increasing position marketing efforts, hosting job fairs, and addressing a plan to ensure required trainings for the position are either offered free to prospective employees or via a reimbursement. • Lifeguard Retention: This team is focused on retention of aquatics teammates through competitive wages and a positive workplace. Since 2015, lifeguard wages have regularly and steadily been increased. In 2015, the starting wage for a non-standard (flexible hours, non-benefited position) was $9.00/hour, 110% of the state’s $8.23 minimum wage. Today, and after several increases in the past 12 months, the starting wage for non- standard lifeguards is $13.25/hour, or 108% of the state’s $12.32/hour minimum wage. In response to growing daytime needs, in 2019, BPR created several standard, benefited lifeguard positions. These positions begin at $17.42/hour and are available for those interested in regularly working 20, 30 or 40 hours/week. The labor market is changing rapidly, and these wages will be evaluated again against local data very soon. BPR recreation center operations are almost entirely funded by user fees. The increase in lifeguard wages in the past several years has been passed on to users through increased facility access fees with adults with an ability to pay charged nearly the full cost of the service for access. Subsidy from the city’s General Fund provides age-based discounts for youth and seniors and addresses financial barriers to ensure access for all, grants and philanthropy provide additional support for Financial Aid programs. Amidst the economic challenges of the pandemic, access fees will not increase in 2022. Should additional increases in pay be warranted, staff will need to identify funding, which may include reallocation of existing dollars – and thus deprioritizing or even discontinuing other services. As PRAB is aware, BPR is currently updating its master plan. Through that process and in the second quarter of 2022, staff will explore with PRAB and City Council the appropriate levels of subsidy to support recreation in Boulder. In addition to evaluating compensation, staff is focusing on how to ensure the lifeguard's overall working experience is positive. The team’s focus will be developing and implement ideas that create a cohesive, engaged, and fun work environment and are Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet gathering staff-driven short-term and long-term recommendations. The team intends to submit proposals for specified retention efforts in the coming weeks. • Resource Optimization: This team is focused on operating the appropriate levels of service for the community within the limited staffing. This work includes ensuring that pool schedules balance availability of amenities for target segments of the community (e.g. youth, older adults). it is for this reason that the natatorium at East is available Monday, Wednesday and Friday during the day as the lap pool and warm water exercise pool can both be provided with two lifeguards. This group is also exploring efficiencies in operations, such as studying the possibility of user groups self-guarding their activities with the City Attorney’s Office. Staff efforts to finalize a voluntary user group self-guarding agreement are nearly complete, with initial trainings were offered to select user groups on January 15. Collaborations with user groups also includes the hiring of select user group members to serve as city lifeguards during normal user group practice times. Additionally, select staff groups are being identified for cross training efforts. This may mean a youth camp counselor may be cross trained as a secondary lifeguard during summer camp operations, or that front desk staff may be trained as secondary responders for backboarding or other lifesaving exercises. Facility Suspension Process Update Following the PRABs feedback during the December 2021 meeting, staff adjusted some language on the proposed suspension length guidelines to be more clear in relation to suspendable offenses which may constitute lengths less than 30 days. Staff continue to develop training and process protocols to ensure equitable enforcement with a goal to establish full implementation before the end of the first quarter. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board FROM: Ali Rhodes, Director, Parks and Recreation Department Bryan Beary, Community Building and Partnerships Manager Jackson Hite, Business Services Manager Megann Lohman, Recreation Manager Stephanie Munro, Regional Facilities Manager Dennis Warrington, Urban Parks Manager Regina Elsner, Interim Planning and Ecological Services Manager SUBJECT: Matters from the Department DATE: January 24, 2022 A. Public Art Update Nobel Circle Donation This proposed donation has been included in the City of Boulder’s Public Art Implementation Plan since 2017, acknowledging preliminary approval from the City Manager and Arts Commission that the donor group, working with City of Boulder employees, will determine initial feasibility. This update is to Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) is the third formal project introduction to impacted City of Boulder Boards and Commissions: Arts Commission (Nov. 2021), Library Commission (Dec. 2021). The PRAB can anticipate to learn: What has been accomplished to date; how the donor group intends to gain community input; the current status and strategy to complete fundraising needs (project cost estimated ~$1-2 million); and feasibility of construction based on current concepts and preliminary feedback from the preapplication review process. More information about the project can be found on the project website. The current Letter of Intent is Attachment A. A summary of input from boards and commissions will be provided to the Arts Commission in February 2022. At that time, staff will seek a recommendation from the Arts Commission whether or not to extend the deadline for the Letter of Intent. Ultimately this is the decision of the City Manager, with this input influencing her decision. PRAB can anticipate to answer the following questions from the donor group: 1.From initial introduction, are you excited about this prospect? 2.As a member of the PRAB, what additional information would you need to know about this project to either endorse or oppose? 3.With the understanding that design is underway, are there any aspects of this project that cause you to pause? Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Attachment AAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Attachment AAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Attachment AAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 Matters from the Department (continued) B. Glen Huntington Bandshell: Proposed Amendment to Designation to Expand Landmark Boundary The Glen Huntington Bandshell (Bandshell) located in Central Park was designated as a Boulder Local Landmark in 1995 through the city’s Historic Preservation Program and Ordinance. Landmark designation of city-owned sites requires the city to preserve places with special historical, social, cultural, environmental, or architectural character. In August 2021, Friends of the Bandshell submitted a request to the Landmarks Board requesting that the landmarking boundary be extended to include the park area to the south. The landmarking program is led by the Landmarks Board (LB) and Planning and Development Services (P&DS) Historic Preservation staff. This item summarizes proposed changes and the approval process required to amend Glen Huntington Bandshell’s designation ordinance to enlarge the existing landmark designation boundary. In addition, this item outlines site history, amendment status, and implications. While Boulder Parks and Recreation (BPR) is considered the owner of the Bandshell, the decision-making power to initiate designations or amendments to landmarks, pursuant to Section 9-11-3(a)(1) B.R.C., may be done through the action of either the LB or City Council. BPR has operation and management responsibilities for the property. Neither the department nor the PRAB has formal decision-making powers regarding the approval process for the proposed amendment. PRAB’s role in the process is to provide input which staff will summarize and deliver to the LB and City Council for consideration during the next steps in the approval process. PRAB may also choose to submit an official memo for consideration in upcoming discussions of the proposed extension: • March 3, 2022 - Landmarks Board Designation Hearing • April/May 2022 - City Council, 1st Reading • May/June 2022- City Council, 2nd Reading If the LB recommends amending the designation, a new designation for the site will be drafted and City Council will review this for adoption. Input from PRAB will be considered by the LB and City Council in evaluating the proposed amendment. Site History The Glen Hunting Bandshell was designated as a Boulder Local Landmark in 1995 as an important part of the social, cultural, environmental, and architectural history. The existing landmark boundary encompasses the historic features previously defined in the original designation. The most recognizable features are: • an amphitheater and seating which recognize the importance of the architect Glen Huntington and the Art Deco architectural style • the use and setting of the structure within a park. On August 27, 2021, the LB received a letter from Friends of the Bandshell (Attachment A) requesting that LB consider amending the existing landmark designation to expand the current Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 boundary to include all of Block 13 from Canyon Blvd to the Boulder and Left Hand ditch. PD&S staff and LB have recommended the ditch not be included as a landmark in the proposed amended designation. Specifically, the expanded boundary will extend 130’ to the south of the existing boundary, a total of 300’ south of Canyon Blvd. A map of the current and proposed historical designation boundary may be found in Attachment B. The proposed expansion to the landmark boundary is intended to acknowledge parks as cultural landscapes and the notable Landscape Architect and City Planner, Saco R. DeBoer. In 1938, DeBoer was commissioned by the Boulder Parks and Recreation Department to develop a plan for the recently purchased property that encompassed all of Block 13 and surrounding Blocks/Lots. Many of the original Saco R. DeBoer plans showcase the location of an amphitheater and seats later designed by Huntington. In addition, examples of DeBoer’s plans and site aerials showcase park features beyond the current boundary. The evaluation by staff (Attachment C) provides exhibits that showcase many of the park's features beyond the existing boundary. Although some have changed and evolved to accommodate public use, these park features still exist today. An example of change from the original landscape design includes a flood mitigation berm that physically separates the Bandshell structure from the park and has done so since 1950. Before 1950, there was no berm, allowing for more open areas between the amphitheater and the park land to the south. The site features in the expanded boundary that are associated with DeBoer include, but are not limited to: • mature trees • anchored vegetation (vegetation surrounding the seating area) • sidewalks/pathways for circulation • light bollards • the open turf area Amendment Status To determine eligibility for the amendment, P&DS and BPR staff evaluated past work, research, various original DeBoer plans, current site conditions, planned future site use, and both current and former LB and community support. Based on research and support from BPR staff, PD&S staff made a recommendation to the Landmarks Board at the November 4, 2021 Initiation Hearing. The suggested motion language read as, ‘Staff recommends the Landmarks Board initiate the process for amending the designation boundary of the Glen Huntington Bandshell at 1236 Canyon Blvd., an individual landmark, and that the designation hearing be delayed until the Historic Places Plan (HiPP) is complete, or for 2 years, whichever occurs first.’ The LB did not approve the recommended motion language, allowing the approval process to continue to the designation hearing, rather than pausing the approval process to complete the HiPP. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 P&DS and BPR staff are working together to develop content for the LB designation hearing on March 3, 2022. BPR increased the scope of the HiPP to include the proposed boundary expansion in the Bandshell Resource Assessment Report. The report will include: • historical context • outline the historically significant features • assessment of existing site feature conditions • spatial patterns and circulation • document alignment between the site’s historical significance and a vision of a shared future • graphic representations An initial site visit occurred on December 30, 2022, followed by a draft report submitted on January 13, 2022. This report will be available once reviewed and finalized. The report may inform language in the designation memo and potential designation ordinance should this move to council. The language will influence how the site is evaluated and permitted for any future change requiring a Landmark Alteration Certificate. Additional research completed by BPR staff will be included in the final report to inform the approval process. Key points include: o The property (all of Block 13) serves the same purpose and use as intended: for a community park and community use. The amphitheater is for community use. o The property in its entirety (Block 13) may be recognized as one of two types of historic cultural landscapes according to National Park Service’s Preservation’s Protecting Cultural Landscapes Planning, Treatment and Management of Historic Landscapes: • Historic Designed Landscape: a landscape that was consciously designed or laid out by a landscape architect, master gardener, architect, or horticulturist according to design principles, or an amateur gardener working in a recognized style or tradition. The landscape may be associated with a significant person(s), trend, or event in landscape architecture; or illustrate an important development in the theory and practice of landscape architecture. Aesthetic values play significant role in designed landscapes. Examples include parks, campuses, and estates. • Historic Vernacular Landscape: a landscape that evolved through use by the people whose activities or occupancy shaped that landscape. Through social or cultural attitudes of an individual, family or a community, the landscape reflects the physical, biological, and cultural character of those everyday lives. Function plays a significant role in vernacular landscapes. They can be a single property such as a farm or a collection of properties such as a district of historic farms along a river valley. Examples include rural villages, industrial complexes, and agricultural landscapes. o The existing Bandshell landmark is eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) as documented in a letter from the State of Colorado Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation (SHIPO) and a letter from the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) in 2015. (Attachment D) Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 o Expanding the landmark boundary would require re-evaluating eligibility for listing on the NRHP. Block 13 has continually evolved through physical change over time to meet the public's needs and continue a variety of community uses, many of which were originally intended. The factors associated with identifying historical character, integrity, and overall designation for Block 13 are found in the built environment, planned natural environment, and evolving property uses over time with parallel changes in the built and natural environments. These evolving uses include community gathering and park space, arts and entertainment, public entertainment space, shade, space buffers, and site circulation. Implications Landmarking of any site naturally comes with additional oversight and process compliance implications. This means that any physical change within the proposed amended boundary (all of Block 13) would be subject to review through application of a Landmark Alteration Certificate (LAC). A LAC requires one or a combination of the following levels of review, depending on the scope of the change: • Administrative Review (approved by PD&S staff), • Landmark Design Review Committee (approved by two PD&S staff and two LB members, through an official hearing at LB meeting) • Landmarks Board Hearing • Call up by City Council Once the boundary amendment was initiated, all planned improvements in the proposed boundary extension are required to adhere to the oversight and process compliance outlined above, before any physical changes occur at the site. The oversight and process compliance are required throughout the approval process, even if is extended or delayed. Landmark status does not prevent changes or improvements but adds a layer of oversight and process compliance. While the goal is to assist in preserving the history of the site as changes may occur, this can naturally influence timelines, planning processes, and project cost. PRAB Input The next step in the approval process is for P&DS staff to draft a designation memo for the March 3, 2022 Landmarks Board Designation Hearing, in coordination with BPR staff. If the LB decides to proceed with designation at that meeting, City Council will review the amended designation with a first and second reading. Staff will include PRAB’s summarized input and any official memo from PRAB into the designation memo. Staff has the following questions for PRAB: 1. Do you have any questions about the approval process? 2. Are you in support of the amendment? a. Why or why not? Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 3. Does PRAB have a desire to submit an official memo from the board in addition to the staff’s PRAB discussion summary? Next Steps PRAB’s role in the process is to provide input which staff will summarize and deliver to the LB and City Council for consideration during the next steps in the approval process. As noted above, PRAB may also choose to submit an official memo for consideration. • March 3, 2022 - Landmarks Board Designation Amendment Hearing • April/May 2022 - City Council, 1st Reading • May/June 2022- City Council, 2nd Reading If the LB recommends the designated amendment, City Council will review the amendment for adoption. Input from PRAB will be considered by the LB and City Council in evaluating the proposed designation amendment. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet FRIENDS OF THE BANDSHELL (an unincorporated Colorado nonprofit association) P.O. Box 1001, Boulder Colorado 80306-1001 Dear Landmarks Board, August 27, 2021 Re: Glen Huntington Bandshell, Seating and Site, City Landmark # 95-4. Smithsonian Inventory Number 5BL.5680 Friends of the Bandshell requests that the Boulder Landmarks Board expand the boundaries of the Landmarked Glen Huntington Bandshell, including the bench seating, landscaping and entire site. The Bandshell, along with its seating, landscaping and site became a Boulder Individual Landmark in1995 (Ordinance 5751). The site was defined to be from Broadway on the West to 13th Street on the East, and from Canyon Boulevard on the North extending south 170’ in Block 13. The southern 130’ of Block 13 are not protected or included as part of the landmarked site. The Boulder and Left Hand Ditch is the border of Block 13 on the South. On July 25, 1995, the Landmarks Board met to evaluate a request by the Modern Architecture Preservation League (MAPL) to designate as a ‘Landmark’ what was commonly referred to as the Central Park Bandshell. But for the fact that, at the time, a train composed of Locomotive #30, Rio Grand Western Coach #280, and Rio Grande Southern Caboose #040 was located in the south part of the park, it is very likely that the Landmarks Board would have designated the site to include all of Block 13, (300’ x 300’). To carve out the train, so that in the future it could be moved away from the park, the southern 130’ portion of the block was not included as part of the site. As the train was moved some years ago, the reason to exclude this area no longer exists. We are asking that the whole of the historic Central Park (Block 13) be included as part of the Glen Huntington Bandshell landmarked site. This will ensure that the original 1938 Bandshell by Architect Glen Huntington, the1938 site plan/landscape design by Saco DeBoer, as well as the existing 1950 bench seating will be protected, While the Friends of the Bandshell concur that rehabilitation and improvements are certainly possible and desirable, at the same time we want to ensure that alterations will not damage the original Bandshell, trees and site features of Central Park, and that they will be reviewed and approved by Boulder’s Landmarks Design Review process. There is precedent for expansion of Landmark boundaries in both the Chamberlain and the Mapleton Hill Districts. Thank you so much for your consideration, .Karl F. Anuta Dan Corson Kathryn Barth On behalf of FRIENDS OF THE BANDSHELL ATTACHMENT A Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 1940 Aerial View of Boulder. Note front plantings, lawns, walkways, trees, seating, walls (levee?). 2015 Autumn at the Bandshell ATTACHMENT A Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Past, Current + Proposed Landmark Designation Boundary Map Glen Huntington Bandshell Key Black Solid-MAPL boundary (initially proposed by applicant) Black Dashed- LB 1995 adjusted boundary (current) Red Dashed – LB 2021 proposed amended boundary (currently temporary from initiation and will be permanent if designation goes through) ATTACHMENT B Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Glen Huntington Bandshell: Proposed Amendment to Expand Landmark Designation Boundary Snapshot of Plans and Evaluation by City Staff (with evolving use and physical changes over time a constant in the historically intact landscape to accommodate evolving community and space usages) Figure 1, "Proposed Boulevard & City Building Group, with Flood Protection, Parking Areas and Farmer’s Market., Boulder, Colorado. S.R. DeBoer, Consultant. February 1945.” from Denver Public Library, showcases that in 1947 DeBoer proposed a new plan for the Bandshell area which included amphitheater style seating and also addressed allocation of park and surrounding space for a public farmers market. The seating was constructed in 1950 with regrading to the south of the Bandshell to accommodate stepped amphitheater seating. The timeframe elapsed between the initial amphitheater design in the park setting and addition of additional site features for community use showcase changes made over time to the park and Ampitheater. ATTACHMENT C Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Figure 2., a cropped image of “Boulder Creek Boulevard Plan. S.R. DeBoer & CO City Planners.” Date unknown, from Denver Public Library, showcases the variety of park amenities that were proposed for construction during extended planning for Central Park and the current location of the Ampitheater. This rendering, specifically of the current Bandshell site and northern most portion of Central Park (all of Block 13) visually speak to how the overall layout of Block 13 has remained historically intact, while many site features have also evolved overtime through planned design and decision making – such as addition of seating, a berm separating the ampitheater and northern park, location of mature plantings, addition of planned vegetation, and removal of the proposed covering of the irrigation ditch bordering the southern-most edge of Block 13. Figure 3, “Sketch of Proposed Civic Center and War Memorial. War Memorial Committee of Boulder ATTACHMENT C Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Colorado. S.R.DeBoer & CO City Planners, Landscape Architects, Denver, CO, July 1947.” from Denver Public Library, showcases (in addition to the two renderings above) the retention of an open grass/turn area to retain a ’park at the core’ as a focal point of community use and space planning for Block 13. While the concept of ’park at the core’ was explored by staff and consultants as a priority from 2013-2015 and was extended to the West Bookend park as described in the Civic Area Master Plan, the original concept has roots in the original park planning for Central Park and can be seen as one of the features that has remained historically intact, though with many factors leading to evolving physical changes overtime with addition/removal of associated features and use planning factors. Snapshot of Aerials Evaluated by Staff: Planned Designed and Vernacular Landscape (with evolving use and physical changes over time a constant in the historically intact landscape to accommodate evolving community and space usages) Figure 4, Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1938, showcases the circulation patterns planned by DeBoer and present until physical changes occurred over a decade later to accommodate addition and removal of site features listed in Figure 3. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Figure 5, Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1958, showcases the physical changes that occurred over more than a decade from the 1940s to the 1950s to accommodate site alterations that met community needs at the time. The features noted as different from Figure 4, are described in Figure 3 (seating, removal of pathways, new planting locations for trees and vegetation, bearm, etc.,) Figure 6, Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1972, showcases that in just sixteen years additional site features such as pathways that transverse across the northern portion of Central Park (within the 130 foot proposed expansion area) were removed to meet community and site needs/usage, solidifying physical changes that evolved over multiple decades, yet maintained the open grass/turf area ’park at the core’, original ampitheater location, setting, associated features (even with planned new locations, such as trees/vegetation). ATTACHMENT C Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet Figure 7, Aerial Photograph of Central Park, 1984, showcases additional changes to circulation patterns and the physical features associated with them (pathways/sidewalks) as well as re -arrangement of bordering features to accommodate community use/circulation. Figure 8, Aerial Photograph of Central Park 2021/22, showcases changes to the landscape that occurred from 1984 to present day. Most of the physical changes account for regular operations, management, and maintenance of important, and once intact, park features. Specially, the sites topiary, canopy and quantity of mature trees. As landscapes evolve overtime, so does there non-permanent features that anchor their natural environments, such as trees. Trees must be maintained, which at times means regular pruning, limb removal, full removal of select trees (such as the one once present near where the figure says 1742, to the left of the Bandshell icon) due to declining heath and public safety. While the preservation of the ATTACHMENT C Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet physical built environment often allows for reconstruction and replacement of features, in-kind and in- situs, often, the preservation of planned natural environments (cultural landscapes) requires a sensitive and scientific approach to replacement of once living features such as trees. This show be considered in future planning of the park site and Ampitheater site, regardless of amending the boundary. Specifically, acknowledging that many trees can not be saved (they have purely just reached their life-span), saving them can be dangerous for the public. As an alternative, trees that are not safe and b eyond their life-cycle can of course be replanted, but for the future health of the tree, it can not be replanted in the exact location of the mature tree that was removed. Apply best practices such as these should be a key consideration for parks planning when assessing any future changes to the canopy of block 13. ATTACHMENT C Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet ATTACHMENT DAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet ATTACHMENT DAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet ATTACHMENT DAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet ATTACHMENT DAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet ATTACHMENT DAttachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 Matters from the Department (continued) C. BPR 2022 Action Plan Each year, in fulfilling a commitment to implement the 2014 Master Plan, the department develops an Action Plan to ensure the plan is a living document that does not sit on a shelf but is used to improve the overall system. Staff refer to this as the “Master Plan Promise” (see Figure 1). The intent of this item is to provide the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) an update on 2022 key action items. Figure 1: Boulder Parks and Recreation Master Plan Promise The key initiatives each year are outlined in the Annual Action Plan. The way various plans guide the work of department’s divisions and employees is outlined in Figure 2: Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 Figure 2: BPR Planning Framework Each year, the action plan outlines the key initiatives prioritized to best meet master plan goals and advance the department’s mission to promote the health and well-being of the entire community by collaboratively providing high-quality parks, facilities and programs. The action plan also considers team workplaces and resource availability. For 2022, like the year before, the Action Plan reflects the reduced resources of the department and the continued and significant resources required to support COVID-19 response and recovery efforts (such as implementing city or Boulder County Public Health guidance or adjusting operations based upon staffing levels). In addition, note that as advancing racial equity and addressing the climate emergency continue to be a focus for the City of Boulder, all major decisions and resource investments will be considered with a racial equity lens and considering how they contribute, or not, to the city’s resilience. • BPR 2022 Master Plan Update: The master plan update launched in the fourth quarter of 2020, and the project’s goal is to ensure BPR services and investments continue to align with community values and anticipate shifts in trends and demographics. This initiative provides a comprehensive update to the department’s 2014 master plan. The final plan will guide the delivery of services and capital investments in alignment with the community’s values and priorities for the next 5-7 years. The PRAB has been involved throughout the project, and key engagement in 2022 includes the review of the implementation plan in the first quarter and recommendation of the plan for City Council’s approval this summer. Success will be measured by unanimous recommendations from the PRAB and Planning Board to approve the plan in the summer, and a phased implementation plan that prioritizes BPR’s work – especially as it relates to furthering climate resilience and equity. • Responsive and Equitable Service Delivery: BPR services in 2022 will be focused on restoring and creating services that can be delivered safely within Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 public health guidelines. Community benefit programming that serves youth, individuals with disabilities, and under-resourced community members will be prioritized, with a special focus on total health – which the World Health Organization defines as the state of total physical, mental and spiritual well-being. • Asset Management: Managing BPR assets to ensure strategic investments and ongoing stewardship - regular maintenance, preventative maintenance, capital maintenance. This is an ongoing priority, and 2022 specific success measures are being drafted. • Systems Implementation: The City of Boulder is implementing several enterprise projects in 2022, including a new Human Resources Information System. Workday, the selected software, will facilitate improved workforce planning, time tracking, payroll, talent management, recruitment management, employee benefits administration and workforce analytics. Workday will provide a single source of truth for most human resources information – a significant advancement over the current state where multiple systems are records of information for the city’s human capital. BPR will also be implementing a new Recreation Management Software. The goal of this project is to ensure BPR’s portal for registration, membership, reservations and other recreation operations reflects modern technology and provides easy digital access for customers. • Organizational Readiness: Supporting an engaged and effective workforce continues to be a priority for the department, and there are three projects in this theme planned for 2022: • Organization Assessment: The intent of an organizational assessment is to ensure BPR is designed to best serve the community and foster a healthy workforce. The process will review and analyze all the functions of the Boulder Park and Recreation Department and involves staff input throughout the process. The intent is that as BPR rebuilds and adds positions, it does so with a larger strategy in mind and not on an ad hoc basis and that BPR is aligning human capital with community needs as expressed in the 2022 Master Plan Update • Work Standardization and Safety: Building on input from staff through master plan engagement, BPR is focusing on documenting Standard Operating Procedures, in line with standards outlined by the Commission for Accreditation of Park and Recreation Agencies (CAPRA). This documentation of SOPs, with an initial focus on safety, will support staff resilience, improve overall operations and efficiency, and create an environment for regular review of operations, policies and procedures. The intention is that 2022 work provides a foundation for CAPRA accreditation in 2023 or 2024. • Racial Equity: To support implementation of the city’s Racial Equity Plan, in 2022 BPR will: Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 • Support efforts to normalize and operationalize understanding of institutional and structural racism among people who work for represent City of Boulder through training; • To ensure the city takes action to end racial disparities in city services and evidence commitment at the department level, by the end of the year BPR will create a departmental Racial Equity Team and Plan. Staff will provide the PRAB updates and consult the board as appropriate to ensure work is aligned with community priorities and expectations. Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board SUBJECT: Matters from the Board DATE: January 24, 2022 A. PRAB Master Plan Study Session for March 2022 (verbal) B. Board and Commissions Recruitment Opens The application for PRAB and other boards is open now through Friday, Feb. 21. For more information and the online application visit: https://bouldercolorado.gov/government/boards-and-commissions PRAB is encouraged to share this opportunity with their networks. These positions are open to anyone 18+ years of age who lives in the city of Boulder. As a reminder, PRAB will have 2 spots available in 2022: One five-year April 2022- March 2027 and one three-year term (April 2022 - March 2025). C. PRAB Community Engagement Updates (verbal) Attachment D January 2022 PRAB Packet GLEN HUNTINGTON BANDSHELL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT DRAFT MARCH 2021 Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS GRANTOR History of Colorado, State Historical Fund • Jenny Deichman, Historic Preservation Grant Specialist • Korbin Pugh, Contracts Specialist & Property Protection Coordinator GRANTEE City of Boulder Parks and Recreation • Caitlin Berube-Smith, Historical and Cultural Assets Coordinator • Regina Elsner, Planner II • Jeff Haley, PLA, Planning, Design and Community Engagement Manager • Morgan Gardner, Associate Planner CONSULTANTS MUNDUS BISHOP • Tina Bishop, PLA, Principal • Rachel Scarborough, PLA, Associate Principal, Senior Landscape Architect • Josh Spinner, Associate, Landscape Designer • Brittany Schroeder, Landscape Designer RATIO Architects, Inc. • David Kroll, AAIA, Director of Preservation • Leanna De La Torre, AIA, Architect • Ashley Russell, Historic Preservation Specialist JVA Consulting Engineers • Ian Glazer, PE, Principal, Historic Preservation Director • Christine Britton, PE, Project Engineer • Riley Marshall, Design Engineer I IMAGE CREDITS Current-day (2020) photographs provided by Mundus Bishop, RATIO, and JVA. Historic photographs (pre- 2020) provided by the City of Boulder or from online archives at the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History and Boulder Historical Society Collection, unless otherwise noted. DISCLAIMER The Resource Assessment Report documents the history, signicance, integrity and current condition of the resource. It does not evaluate for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. If the resource has been previously listed or evaluated it is referenced and footnoted. This report is funded in part through a grant from History Colorado, State Historical Fund Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report Common Terminology ...........................................................4 Property Overview .................................................................5 Designation, Eligibility, & Classification Summary ...............5 Designation Boundary ...........................................................6 History & Significance ...........................................................7 Architectural Description ......................................................9 Integrity ..................................................................................12 Current Existing Condition ...................................................13 Landscape Condition ......................................................13 Architectural / Structural Condition ...............................18 Additional Images ................................................................24 Sketches ................................................................................28 Resources ..............................................................................30 TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 1-1. Glen Huntington Bandshell within Central Park in Boulder, Colorado, 1940s (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 4 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Integrity 3 Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its signicance. It is assessed to determine if the characteristics that shaped the property during the period of signicance are present as they were historically. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or conguration to form a historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. State/National Register Terminology1 2 Area of Signicance - an aspect of historic development in which a property made contributions for which it meets the National Register criteria, such as architecture, entertainment or recreation. Character-Dening Features - the elements that account for the overall shape of the building, its materials, craftsmanship, decorative details, interior spaces and features, as well as the various aspects of its site and environment. Contributing Resource - a building, site, structure, object, or feature adding to the signicance of a property. Designation Boundary - the boundary dened by the Landmarks Board and City Council that encompasses a historic property. This boundary represents a physical area in which any future alterations have historic preservation review associated with them. Eligibility - ability of a property to meet the State/National Register criteria. Evaluation Criteria - the established criteria for evaluating the eligibility of properties for inclusion in the State/ National Register of Historic Places. Historic Context - information about historic properties based on a shared theme, specic time period and geographical area. Landscape Characteristics - the tangible and intangible aspects of a landscape from a historic period; these aspects individually and collectively give a space its historic character and aid in understanding its historical importance. Local Landmark - a local area or building that has been determined to have a special character and historic, architectural, or aesthetic or value to the city. Period of Signicance - the span of time in which a property attained the signicance for which it meets the State and/or National Register criteria, and/or Local Landmarks criteria. Property Type - a grouping of properties dened by common physical and associative attributes. COMMON TERMINOLOGY 1 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, How to Complete the National Registration Bulletin (Washington DC: National Park Service Cultural Resources, 1997), Appendix IV. 2 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes (Washington DC: Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,1996). 3 Ibid. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 5 Areas of Signicance District(s) x Sites(s) Buildings(s) x Structure(s) Object(s) Feature(s) (SRHP) Property Types x Location x Setting x Design x Materials x Workmanship x Feeling x Association Property Integrity: Aspects Individual Character-Dening Features of Property Types District(s) Site(s) Central Park Building(s) Structure(s) G. H. Bandshell Object(s) Feature(s) (SRHP only) NRHP Evaluation Criteria 4 x Criteria A: The property is associated with event that have made a signicant contribution to the broad patterns of our history Criteria B: The property is associated with the lives of persons signicant in our past x Criteria C: The property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a signicant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction Criteria D: The property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history State Register of Historic Properties Determined Eligible Delisted National Register of Historic Properties Determined Eligible Delisted State & National Register Eligibility Recommended Period of Signicance Date Range: 1938 to 1968 PROPERTY OVERVIEW Current Designation Level x Local Landmark State Register of Historic Properties (SRHP) National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) Property Name: Location: Property Address: Latitude/Longitude: Legal Property Description: Parcel Tag: Acreage / Square Footage: Date of Construction: Designer(s): Glen Huntington Bandshell Central Park (northeast corner, north of Boulder Creek) 1212 Canyon Boulevard, Boulder, CO 80203 40.0056 / -105.1643 Block 13 Boulder OT 146330357003 1.1 Acres / 51,000 SF Bandshell (1938); Landscape (1939); Seating (late 1940s) Glen H. Huntington, Architect (1938) Saco Rienk DeBoer, Landscape Architect (1939) Ordinance & Listing Information City of Boulder Local Landmark No: Ordinance No: Ordinance Date: State ID: Smithsonian Trinomial: National Historic Landmark No: 95-4 5751 October 17, 1995 5BL5680 DESIGNATION, ELIGIBILITY, & CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY 4 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 16. Architecture Landscape Architecture Entertainment / Recreation Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 6 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Designation Boundary Designation Boundary Description: Central Park (Southeast Corner of Broadway and Canyon Boulevard) North 170 feet of Block 13, Original Townsite to the City of Boulder. The designation boundary includes the entire area embraced by the resource, including the Bandshell, the open area in front of the Bandshell, the seating area, and the bermed area to the south, including stone pathways and retaining walls (Figure 1-2). In July 1995, the City of Boulder Landmarks Board recommended the Bandshell for designation as a Boulder Individual Local Landmark and amended the boundaries of the site to include a larger portion of the park associated with DeBoer. In October 1995, the amended boundary was approved by City Council and the Bandshell was designated as a Boulder Individual Landmark by Ordinance 5751.5 • 5 Glen Huntington Bandshell- Endangered Places Nomination. August 29, 2015, 3. Figure 1-2. Designation Boundary of Glen Huntington Bandshell including adjustment by the Landmark’s Board, 1995. (source: Landmark Designation Submittal); Edited for clarity by Mundus Bishop, 2021. MAPL’S APPLICATION LANDMARK BOARD’S RESVISED BOUNDARY BOULDER BAND SHELL PROPOSED LANDMARK DESIGNATION Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 7 HISTORY & SIGNIFICANCE Historic Context See Appendix Statement of Significance The Bandshell is historically signicant for its importance to the “social and cultural life” of Boulder as a performance venue, for its role in the development of Central Park, and “for its association with the Boulder Lions Club and its program of improving Boulder Parks.”The structure is environmentally signicant for "its planned and natural site characteristics." The Bandshell acts as an established prominent visual landmark within an urban park. The Bandshell is "architecturally signicant as a rare representative of Art Deco style in Boulder, as reected in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplied design; as Boulder's only example of park bandshell construction and one of a few such examples in Colorado; and as representative work of Saco Rienk DeBoer and Glen H. Huntington, noted landscape architect and architect, who are associated with site design and design of the structure.”6 According to Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, the Bandshell is signicant under NRHP Criterion A for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of Boulder since 1938. It has been the site of numerous concerts, dances, festivals, and other varieties of community entertainment and social gatherings in its long history.7 The Bandshell expresses the cultural values of the City of Boulder and the Boulder Lions Club, and their mutual motivation to develop public parks and civic space throughout the City. According to Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, the Bandshell is signicant under NRHP Criterion C for its representation of the Art Deco style in Boulder; as an example of bandshell construction and park architecture from the twentieth century; and as a representative work of Glen H. Huntington and Saco Rienk DeBoer. The Bandshell reects the Art Deco style in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplied design. Few Art Deco style buildings were erected in Boulder and the Bandshell is one of the best preserved examples. It is one of only two Art Deco style bandshells in Colorado, the other is located in Pueblo.8 The Bandshell’s integrity of design and setting highlight it as an important representative of park outdoor entertainment facilities of the early twentieth century. The Bandshell is a representative work of two Colorado designers, architect Glen H. Huntington and landscape architect, Saco Rienk DeBoer. Huntington was a prominent Boulder architect who designed Boulder County Courthouse and Boulder High School. The design of the Bandshell is based on similar bandshells of the era, that were largely based on the design and success of the Hollywood Bowl. The site is representative of the work of DeBoer, rst landscape architect for City of Denver, who served as a consultant for City of Boulder. DeBoer designed the landscape to reect the urban form of the city and natural site characteristics.9 As a component of a central urban park, the Bandshell and its surrounding landscape became an established, familiar, and prominent visual landmark within Boulder, drawing people in with its arched design and its location near major thoroughfares.10 Recommended Period of Significance The recommended period of signicance for Glen Huntington Bandshell is from 1938 to 1968. The period begins with construction of the Bandshell and ends with the year Central Park was closed due to sanitary condition. 6 Dropinski, Chris to Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), “City Council Agenda for Landmark Designation", August 24, 1995, 3, 7 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 16. 8 Glen Huntington Bandshell- Endangered Places Nomination, August 29, 2015, 2-3. 9 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 17-18. 10 Dropinski, Chris to Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), “City Council Agenda for Landmark Designation", August 24, 1995, 3, Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 8 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Summary of Use Historic Use “During more than fty years of use, the Bandshell was the site of a variety of musical concerts, cultural programs, educational presentations, and civic gatherings. At the dedication of the structure, the Bandshell’s role in promoting musical events in Boulder was emphasized. The scope of activities held at the Bandshell broadened over the years to include many forms of outdoor entertainment, although musical programs continued to be the primary use for the structure.”11 Date Event 1930s to 1940s Native American Tribal Dances 1930s to 1960s Band Performances 1950s to 1960s Children's Musical Programs; Park Acquisition Festival 1950s to 1970s Christmas with Santa 1956 Community Entertainment Nights; Rotary Club Fishing Demonstration 1968 Summer Outdoor Concerts by CU Boulder 1985 Springtime Concerts 1995 Freedom Festival Current Use The Bandshell currently serves as an outdoor stage and backdrop for community use and performances. The Bandshell is offered as a venue for multiple City-sponsored programs and events throughout the year including: Date Event 1990s to present Ballet at the Bandshell; Boulder Creek Festival 2000s to present Boulder County Farmers’ Market; Green Beer Festival 2015 to present Snow Much Fun Present Annual Homeless Persons’ Memorial Vigil; Opera in the Park 11 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 10. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 9 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Architecture Summary The Bandshell's streamlined, simplied form possesses character-dening features of the Art Deco era such as a semi-elliptical opening at the theater stage and six concentric arches that taper towards the rear and allow the roof to slope down towards the ground. The theater is anked by two thick buttresses that terminate at the bottom of the front facing arch framing the opening. The theater stage is elevated and anked by steps containing pipe railings and wing walls. Primary Materials The Bandshell is situated on a raised concrete foundation. The buttresses and stair construction are made of concrete. There is also a series of four concrete, hollow lighting bollards positioned in front of the stage. The structure is wood framed with acoustical wallboard and wood panel nishing on the interior. The roong contains rolled asphalt and galvanized metal ashing. The stage ooring is wood (currently covered with painted plywood sheathing) and is of a exible construction so that the oor can be raised or lowered depending on the event. Figure 1-3. Bandshell, post-construction, c. 1938-1946 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 10 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Construction & Alteration History Date Event Source 1906 to 1933 The City of Boulder purchased the parcels of land to construct Central Park.Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 5 1907 to 1910 Fredrick Law Olmsted Jr. was hired by the City of Boulder to develop an improvement plan for the city. In his report, “The Improvement of Boulder, Colorado” he recommended developing civic spaces like Central Park along Boulder Creek. Endangered Places Nomination, 10 1921 The City of Boulder leases portions of Central Park land to the railroad Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 5 1937 The Boulder Planning and Park Commission received notice that the Major Activity Committee of the Lions Club sought to fund the construction a Bandshell for public concerts. Saco R. DeBoer, Landscape Architect for the City of Denver, was consulted on the location of the bandstand. He recommended the area north of the railroad right of way, with the location of City Hall at the east end. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 5 1938 Glen Huntington developed plans for the Art Deco style Bandshell. Construction of the Bandshell was completed in June of 1938. Trees were planted around the Bandshell site. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 9 1939 Saco R. DeBoer developed a landscaping plan for the site, which included planting trees to screen the structure. Paths were designed to the structure to prevent people from taking shortcuts to the site. DeBoer’s nal plan included both deciduous trees and pines adjacent to the structure. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 10 1947 DeBoer proposed a new plan for the Bandshell area which included amphitheater style seating.Saco R. DeBoer sketch, 1947 1949 to 1951 The landscaping around the amphitheater was redesigned to include a paved levee with raised amphitheater seating. The seats had concrete bases and wood tops. A concrete sidewalk was installed on the along the southern edge of the amphitheater. 1949 to 1953 aerial photography 1956 First photograph appearance of the rectangular concrete piers/electrical bollards in front of the stage. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 1953 The Western Railroad's Engine No. 30 was moved to the area south of the Bandshell.Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 5 1960s Color scheme changes from green and light beige (original) to cream and gray that can still be seen today. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 1970 First time the Bandshell is proposed for relocation. This year marks the beginning of the decline of the site and Bandshell’s use. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1980s General maintenance efforts took place and include: replacement of interior cladding, oor repair and replacement (not in full), and touch up painting. (The exact year(s) is non-determined). Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 1981 to 1985 Community events were once again held in the Bandshell, which helped revive it as a civic center. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1987 Boulder County Commissioners consider moving Bandshell to fairgrounds in Longmont.Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1988 Boulder Train Depot Task Force, local ofcials, business people, and historians recommended removing the Bandshell and relocating the Train Depot to its spot in Central Park. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1991 The "Save the Bandshell" campaign painted the Bandshell rainbow colors to raise community awareness in an effort to preserve the Bandshell. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1995 The Boulder Bandshell is designated as a local landmark. This was also the same year the bandshell had been ofcially renamed the “Glen Huntington” Bandshell. City of Boulder Landmark. L-95-4 Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 11 Date Event Source 1997 Parks and Recreation complete rehabilitation of Bandshell. Rehabilitation and stabilization efforts included: replacement of the roong and plywood sheathing, minor repairs to the framing and foundations, fresh coats of paint, waterproong the stage ooring, and removing of all cementitious panels due to asbestos. Structural Review and Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 2014 JVA performed a structural assessment at the Bandshell and research was conducted to determine if the Bandshell should be relocated. The railroad tracks south of Bandshell were removed. JVA Structural Assessment Memo Google Earth Aerial Imagery, 2013 - 2014 Figure 1-4. Bandshell aerial, 1949 (source: Colorado Aerial Photography Service) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 12 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report INTEGRITY Location The Bandshell has resided in its original Central Park location since completing construction in 1938. Setting Surrounding landscape of the park has been well maintained by the City. The original oval shape of the entire setting is not as legible as it was historically. Overtime, alterations to the walks, seating, and vegetation transformed the setting into a less elliptical form. Design Art Deco Bandshell design remains intact. No major modications have taken place since 1938. Previous rehabilitations in 1997 took place in order to maintained the stability of the structure but did not alter its original design and overall historic character. Materials Original materials were either maintained or replaced during the most recent rehabilitation in 1997. Materials replaced in-kind at that time include: asphalt roong, plywood sheathing, interior wallboard cladding, and wood ooring. The Bandshell's color scheme and paint nish has changed several times since its original construction. All of the materials (new and original) appear intact. Workmanship Workmanship is consistent with the type of Bandshell construction seen across the United States in the 1920-30’s. The Bandshell is most reminiscent of the Hollywood Bowl built in Los Angeles in 1928. Feeling The structure is open and creates the potential for community interaction and engagement. At present, the Bandshell is not fully utilized, and the structure and surrounding park have fallen into disrepair with a large transient population. Association The Bandshell retains its association and importance with Central Park and the greater Boulder Civic Area. It also maintains its associations with Boulder Lions Club and landscape architecture in Boulder. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 13 CURRENT EXISTING CONDITION LANDSCAPE CONDITION Landscape Condition Summary The Bandshell’s original setting, features, and spatial relationships remain largely intact. The Bandshell is set on the site’s north edge and oriented to the south. The setting is characterized by a sloped amphitheater (a concrete terrace with fteen rows of wood and concrete benches) that faces the Bandshell. A landscaped berm and remnants of a sandstone retaining wall remain along the south boundary of the Bandshell’s setting, separating it from the park and dening the southern edge of the amphitheater. The berm continues to mitigate seasonal ooding. Large mature trees frame the Bandshell on its east and west sides and dene the edges of the amphitheater and the Bandshell setting. Concrete paved sidewalks extend from the east and west sides of the park into the Bandshell’s setting. They end at a large level area between the Bandshell and amphitheater that is paved with loose gravel. Summary of Landscape Characteristics Topography Topography of the Bandshell site, including the sloped amphitheater, the berm of the ood control levee, and the large level area between the Bandshell and amphitheater contribute to the signicance of the Bandshell. The berm continues to mitigate ooding; however the oval shape is less legible. (Figure 1-5) Vegetation Groupings of mature deciduous and evergreen trees frame the east and west sides of the Bandshell. A band of vegetation denes the east, west and south edges of the sloped concrete terrace. Mature trees include Austrian Pine, Douglas Fir, Northern Red Oak, American Elm, Norway Maple, and American Linden. Understory vegetation is generally juniper and a mix of deciduous shrubs. Planting is consistent with DeBoer’s designed landscape of a backdrop of evergreen and deciduous trees for the Bandshell and amphitheater. (Figure 1-6) Photographs from the 1940s and 1950s indicate that the area in front of the Bandshell's stage was planted with small shrubs. It is unclear when these plantings were removed. (Figure 1-10, 1-39) Spatial Organization Historic setting and spatial organization of the Bandshell remain largely intact. The Bandshell is anked by trees, accessed by angled walks, and oriented towards the amphitheater. S.R. DeBoer’s design for Central Park remains as a functional setting for the Bandshell that also mitigates ood waters from Boulder Creek. Figure 1-5. Landscaped Berm, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop)Figure 1-6. Mature grove of trees along Canyon Boulevard, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 14 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Circulation Two primary circulation routes associated with the Bandshell remain in the same or similar alignments as the original. It is unclear if the walkways were always paved concrete or composed of another material. These routes contribute the signicance of the Bandshell. Historic aerial images indicate that there were additional paths to the southwest and southwest. It’s unclear how long these paths were in place or when they were removed. In place of a path to the southeast are sandstone pavers, which are a modern, non-contributing addition. Additionally, there is a remnant stone path on the south side of the landscaped berm. It is undetermined if this path is original to the circulation of the Bandshell. (Figure 1-7, 1-8, 1-9, 1-10) Accessibility The Bandshell does not currently have a designated accessible route or accessible seating. Concrete sidewalks appear to be compliant in slope for accessible pedestrian access. The slope of the amphitheater is greater than 5% and is not compliant for accessible access or seating. However, the large level area in front of the stage is compliant in slope. The nearest accessible parking space is approximately 525 feet from the Bandshell located on 13th Street. Figure 1-7. Primary circulation to the Bandshell, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-8. Level area in front of the Bandshell, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-9. Aerial of Central Park, May 1938 (prior to completion of the Bandshell) (source: CU Aerial Photographs of Colorado) Figure 1-10. Birdseye of the Bandshell, post-construction, 1940s (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 15 Structure Character-dening features of the Bandshell include its original location and focal point within Central Park. Located on the northern edge of Central Park, the structure is prominent landmark along Canyon Boulevard. Its placement and its prominence within the park draw people in from surrounding thoroughfares to the amphitheater and front of the stage. Character dening features of the amphitheater include its sloped concrete terrace with fteen rows, divided into three sections (Figure 1-11). The backside of the amphitheater is a planted berm/levee (Figure 1-12). Small Scale Features The sandstone retaining wall at the edge of the planting bed is a contributing feature (Figure 1-11). Views and Viewsheds Prominent views on site include the view towards Bandshell from within the park, views towards the Boulder Flatirons from the stage and the paved gravel area, and views from adjacent streets including Broadway Street and 13th Street. These views contribute to the signicance of the Bandshell. (Figure 1-13, 1-14) Figure 1-11. Seating at Bandshell, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-12. Sandstone retaining wall, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-13. View to Boulder Flatirons, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-14. View from Broadway, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 16 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Table 1-1: Character-Defining Features Feature Condition Contributing/ Non-Contributing Topography Berm / Flood control levee Good Contributing Vegetation Mature grove of trees surrounding the Bandshell Good Contributing Understory shrubs planted on berm Good Non-Contributing Circulation Concrete sidewalk (northeast)Good Contributing Concrete sidewalk (northwest)Good Contributing Sandstone pavers (southeast)Good Non-Contributing Remnant stone path Poor Undetermined Structure Glen Huntington Bandshell Good Contributing Amphitheater seating Good Contributing Small Scale Features Stone retaining wall along landscaped berm Poor Contributing Views and Viewsheds View to Boulder Flatirons from the stage Good Contributing Views from Broadway Street Good Contributing Views from interior of Central Park Good Contributing Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 17 Stage Canyon Boulevard 13th StreetBroadway StreetMunicipal Building Plaza Atrium Building Dushanbe Tea House Vie w t o B a n d s h e l l fro m B r o a d w a y 13th Street Plaza Central Park Vie w t o B o u l d e r F l a t i r o n s fro m B a n d s h e l l 2 7 8 6 10 3 5 4 91 9 Glen Huntington Bandshell | Existing Condition and Analysis 0 20 40 ft10 N Mundus Bishop | March 2021Figure 1-15. Bandshell Existing Condition, 2021 (source: Mundus Bishop) LEGEND Bandshell Landmark Primary Circulation Contributing Vegetation Glen Huntington Bandshell Ampitheater Seating Mature Grove of Trees Planting Bed Gravel Paving Stone Retaining Wall Remant Stone Path Flagstone Path Concrete Sidewalk Berm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 18 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report ARCHITECTURAL / STRUCTURAL CONDITION Foundation Architectural The crawlspace below the stage was unaccessible during eld review. Visual inspection of the exterior portions appear to be in good condition. Visible vertical cracks in the foundation and chipped paint were observed on the rear side of the Bandshell. Structural The structure is founded on a perimeter concrete stem wall that encloses a crawlspace area and extends above grade several feet. Although unknown with no available original structural drawings and no excavation included as part of this scope, given the age of the structure it is likely that the stem wall bears on a continuous concrete footing. On the interior of the structure, there are four tapered concrete pedestals that support the oor framing of the stage. At the southern or front end of the structure, two concrete buttresses support the southernmost roof arch. Overall, the foundation is in good condition. There is one vertical crack in the east foundation wall which is likely a naturally formed expansion joint (Figure 1-16) and the west foundation wall is covered in ivy which can be detrimental to the structure over time. There are relatively regularly spaced vertical cracks in foundation wall along the front of the stage that are likely natural formed expansion joints. The concrete buttresses on both sides of the largest arch have horizontal cracks at the same height; these are likely cold joints from the original concrete pour during construction. Both the vertical expansion joint cracks and the horizontal cracks at the cold joints are not of structural concern. Figure 1-16. Vertical foundation crack on the east side, 2020 (source: Ratio and JVA) Figure 1-17. Vertical foundation crack on the east side, 2020 (source: Ratio and JVA) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 19 Roofing Architectural The lower portions of the asphalt roong extend down to the concrete foundations and appear to have been subject to vandalism. The lower portions also show signs of blistering and separation from the surface below and are in fair to poor condition. The upper portions of the rolled asphalt roong appear to be in better condition with minor signs of blistering. On the east end of the roof, one area of the asphalt roong has been patched with a different material. Structural The shelter’s roof structure contains ve equally spaced three-point, glulam wood arches that decrease in size from the front (south) to the back (north) of the Bandshell. The roof framing was not exposed during this visit, however previous reports describe a hinged connection at the top of each arch and a tie rod within the depth of the stage framing that ties the bottoms of each arch together. 2x vertical lumber struts support the roof sheathing and 2x horizontal lumber extends between the glulam trusses to brace the structure. The wood arches bear on steel saddles that are anchored to the concrete foundation wall. The shelter’s roof structure contains ve equally spaced three-point, glulam wood arches that decrease in size from the front (south) to the back (north) of the Bandshell. The roof framing was not exposed during this visit, however previous reports describe a hinged connection at the top of each arch and a tie rod within the depth of the stage framing that ties the bottoms of each arch together. 2x vertical lumber struts support the roof sheathing and 2x horizontal lumber extends between the glulam trusses to brace the structure (Figure 1-17). The wood arches bear on steel saddles that are anchored to the concrete foundation wall. Figure 1-18. Renovation of the Bandshell framing, 1996 (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-19. View of rolled asphalt roong. Note the blistering at the lower portion of the roof, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 20 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Walls/Finishes Architectural The majority of the structural wood framing is concealed within the exterior nish materials and was unable to be observed. The oor access hatch did not appear to be operable, therefore the stage framing was also unable to be observed. Within the small storage room at the back of the stage the framing appears to be in good condition. The wood siding is in fair condition with some boards split along the grain. In general the exterior plywood nish panels appear to be in fair condition. The panels have minor weathering and mostly aesthetic damage due to frequent vandalism. At the top most proscenium arch, the rear-facing plywood appears to have more signicant weathering. The rear wall of the Bandshell, on the exterior, has plywood panels that are covered with ivy. Damage to the wood is anticipated beneath the vines. The plaster appears to be in fair condition. The vertical surfaces contain a variety of cracks across the surface. The angled surfaces along the tops of the plaster coated walls show signicant weather damage. Structural The original north wall of the structure, constructed of 2x4 dimensional lumber, was supplemented by an outboard 2x6 stud framed wall. Outside of the rear/north wall of the Bandshell, the arched roof system acts as both the roof and walls. The stud walls are in good condition. However, there is ivy growing on the wall at the rear of the Bandshell which can harbor moisture against the wood framing elements and encourage decay fungi to ourish. Figure 1-20. View of wood siding, 2020 (source: Ratio)Figure 1-21. View of exterior plywood nish panels, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-22. View of exterior plywood nish panels, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-23. View of ivy growing on rear wall, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 21 Flooring Architectural The stage ooring appears to be nished with a textured underlayment and a liquid polyurethane coating that acts as waterproong for the oor. The overall surface which is in good condition. There is evidence of previous vandalism damage in one location where the color of the surface does not match the rest of the ooring. Structural The stage oor is sheathed in plywood and covered with a traf c coating. Although the framing was not accessible during this visit, there is documentation that the oor was reconstructed in 1996, consisting of three bays of (2) 2x12 joists spaced at 16 inches on center that span in the east-west direction. Two north-south dropped steel W8 beam lines supported on the original isolated concrete pedestals divide the framing bays. Along the ared east and west sides of the building, the joists bear on a wood plate atop the foundation wall. Although the framing was not visible during the observation visit, no major issues such as excessive deection or signs of deterioration were observed on the oor surface. However, since the Bandshell is an open structure, it will be more prone to moisture damage This should be further investigated in the next phase of work to determine the current condition of the oor framing. Stairs Architectural The concrete at both stairs appears to be in good condition. The yellow safety nosing paint is in poor condition. The painted steel handrails are in good condition, with portions of the painted nish worn off. The handrails do not appear to be in compliance with current accessibility codes. Figure 1-24. View of stage oor, 2020 (source: Ratio)Figure 1-25. View of concrete stairs. Note the yellow safety nosing paint condition is poor, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 22 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Electrical Architectural The power and lighting bollards do not show any major cracking or damage. The metal cover plates are either missing or in poor condition with rusted and broken hinges. The receptacles within do not appear to be functional and contain two 2-pronged outlets with no ground wire. The lighting has been removed and the power boxes exposed. Other Architectural The top of the proscenium arch and the top of the rear wall have a galvanized cap covering the top surfaces. Structural The lateral force suspension system of the Bandshell consists of the roof sheathing and the wood framed roof/ walls. The LFRS is in good condition. It has performed well over the lifetime of the structure and previous analyses of the structure indicate that it has adequate lateral capacity for the lateral loads associated with the site. The site includes seating facing the Bandshell stage. The seating consists of a concrete slab that slopes toward the stage and rectangular reinforced concrete pedestals which support wood bleachers. Steel angle clips are used to connect the wood bleachers to the concrete. Many of the concrete pedestals have started to spall (Figure 1-26). In some spall locations, the exposed rebar appears to only have had 1/4-inch cover. Some pedestals have areas of spider-web cracking and areas where the cement binder has weathered, exposing the larger aggregate. The painted wood bleacher boards show signs of wear such as splitting, warping, and crushing at the connection locations. Figure 1-26. Interior view of lighting and power bollards. Note the cracking concrete forms, rusted and broken cover plates, as well as missing components, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-27. Seating showing spall at pedestal, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 23 Table 1-2: Condition Assessment of Architectural/Structural Features Primary Architectural/ Structural Features Description of Primary Materials Condition Foundation Concrete slab on grade Good Roong Rolled asphalt Poor Walls Dimensional lumber Good Finishes Plaster, paint Fair Flooring Sheathed plywood with polyurethane coating Good Stairs Painted concrete with painted steel handrails Good Lateral Force Suspension System Roof sheathing and wood framed roof/walls Good Additional Building Systems Mechanical (HVAC) Fire Protection & Suppression Irrigation (Backow preventer, spray heads, etc.)Existing (Not Assessed) Electrical Lighting (see summary)Poor Plumbing Structural Condition Definitions This structural condition assessment makes use of terms concerning the condition of building components which are dened as follows: Good - A structural element, component or system is considered in good condition when it is undamaged, structurally sound or functionally operational, and performing as intended. No specic repairs are required, and only minor or routine maintenance is needed. Fair - An element, component or system is considered in fair condition when there are signs of wear or deterioration, such as freeze-thaw deterioration, corrosion, or wood decay exceeding expectations based on the age and use of the element, that may be reducing the structural capacity of the member. Replacement or repair of the element may be required. Poor - An element, component, or system is considered in poor condition when it no longer performs its intended structural purpose. Deterioration or damage reduced the load carrying capacity of the element and simple repairs cannot be justied or are not expected to be effective. The element may show signs of imminent failure. Major repair or replacement will be required. Note: Condition ratings reported are based upon visual observations only. No material testing or exploratory observations have been made. Further investigation could result in modication to condition ratings. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 24 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report ADDITIONAL IMAGES Figure 1-28. Glen Huntington Bandshell Landmark Designation plaque, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-29. Front elevation view, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 25 Figure 1-30. Figure 12: Rear elevation view, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-31. Side elevation view, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 26 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report Figure 1-32. Existing benches, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop)Figure 1-33. Concrete walk from corner of 13th Street and Canyon Boulevard (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-34. Remnant sandstone path (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-35. View of Bandshell from the southeast corner (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-36. View to Boulder Flatirons from stage (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-37. Mature grove of trees adjacent to Bandshell (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 27 Figure 1-38. Dedication ceremony, 1938 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-39. Installation of seating, Travis Photo Collection: c. 1950 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-40. Ogala Sioux Dancers performing, 1956 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-41. Line to visit Santa, 1963 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-42. Proposed sketch of Bandshell, DeBoer, 1947 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 28 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report STORAGE STAGE GLEN HUNTINGTON BANDSHELL FLOOR PLAN © 2020 RATIO │2020-xx-xx Boulder MRPP-Glen Huntington Bandshell 1" = 10'-0" FLOOR PLAN EXISTING CONDITION N 0'5'10'20'40' 1-29 SKETCHES 1-19 1-20 1-30 1-25 1-27 1-23 1-24 1-28 1-16 1-18 Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 29 SOUTH (FRONT) ELEVATION NTS BUILDING SECTION (NORTH TO SOUTH) NTS Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report 30 Glen Huntington Bandshell| Resource Assessment Report RESOURCES Anuta, Karl. Final Bandshell Nomination. Friends of the Bandshell. Boulder, CO, 2015. Boulder (Colo.). Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, Central Park Bandshell Designation Papers. Boulder (Colo.). Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board. Boulder, CO, 1995. Dropiniski, Chris to Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), “City Council Agenda for Landmark Designation," August 24, 1995. Glen Huntington Bandshell-Endangered Places Nomination. August 29, 2015 Simmons, R. Laurie & Thomas H. Simmons. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, CO, 1995. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington DC: National Park Service Cultural Resources, 1997. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. Washington DC: Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,1996. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report Stage Canyon Boulevard 13th StreetBroadway StreetMunicipal Building Plaza Atrium Building Dushanbe Tea House Vie w t o B a n d s h e l l fro m B r o a d w a y 13th Street Plaza Central Park Vie w t o B o u l d e r F l a t i r o n s fro m B a n d s h e l l 2 7 8 6 10 3 5 4 91 9 Glen Huntington Bandshell | Existing Condition and Analysis 0 20 40 ft10 N Mundus Bishop | March 2021 LEGEND Bandshell Landmark Primary Circulation Contributing Vegetation Glen Huntington Bandshell Ampitheater Seating Mature Grove of Trees Planting Bed Gravel Paving Stone Retaining Wall Remant Stone Path Flagstone Path Concrete Sidewalk Berm 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report Boulder Parks Multiple Resource Preservation Plan Glen Huntington Bandshell Historic Context Statement of Context Glen Huntington Bandshell is a wood frame Art Deco Style bandshell located in the north-central portion of Central Park in Boulder. The Bandshell and its landscape are associated with the themes of Architecture in the Parks and Landscape Architecture for the works of prominent Colorado architect, Glen H. Huntington and landscape architect, Saco Rienk DeBoer. The recommended period of significance for the site begins with the structure’s construction in 1939 and ends with its decline and temporary closure to the public in 1968. The structure and its landscape were designated a local landmark by the City of Boulder Landmarks Board and City of Boulder City Council in 1995. The designated site boundary consists of the Bandshell and its amphitheater seating, as well as its adjacent circulation, vegetation, and landforms. The Bandshell is locally significant as a rare representative of the Art Deco style and park architecture from the twentieth century, its association with works of Huntington and DeBoer, its importance as a civic space within Boulder. It is one of only two Art Deco style bandshells in Colorado, the other is in Pueblo.1 Background History Glen Huntington Bandshell was completed by the Boulder Lions Club on June 26, 1938 and dedicated as a public space to be utilized by all Boulder citizens.2 Landscape architect Saco Rienk DeBoer selected the site for the Bandshell, and prepared initial plans and the landscape plan as part of his role as the City of Boulder’s consulting planner during the 1930s. DeBoer’s 1939 landscape plan, included reworked topography, walkways, and vegetation. The Bandshell was a popular entertainment venue in the years following its construction, acting as a site for musical concerts, cultural programs, educational presentations, and civic gatherings.3 In 1947, DeBoer proposed an updated plan for the site which included fixed rows of seating around the amphitheater. The site was updated in the late 1940s with new seating and circulation was implemented by 1950.4 In 1968 an influx of transients created unsanitary conditions and caused the park structure to fall into decline. The City Manager declared the park closed and all concerts were canceled. The Bandshell again rose to civic prominence in the early 1980s and multiple musical events were held thereafter. 5 This resurgence of community involvement and events lasted until about 1995 when the structural integrity of the performance stage was questioned as a safety concern for the public. Between 1970 and 1995 the Bandshell was under threat of being removed from the park and placed elsewhere. In 1990 a Freedom Festival was held at Central Park to promote local artists and the preservation of the Bandshell. This event kickstarted the formation of a committee to champion the preservation of the structure. The committee’s work, increased awareness within the community, and alliances made with prominent architectural groups led to the successful local Landmark Designation and in 1995. At this time, 1Friends of the Bandshell, Glen Huntington Band Shell- Endangered Places Nomination, August 29, 2015, 3. 2 Laurie R. Simmons & Thomas H. Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study (Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, CO, 1995), 5. 3 Ibid., 10. 4 Central Park Aerial, 1949 (source: Colorado Aerial Photography Service, 2021) 5 Laurie R. Simmons & Thomas H. Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study (Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, CO, 1995), 12. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report the structure was renamed Glen H. Huntington Bandshell. In 1997, the Bandshell was rehabilitated and stabilized. Definition of the Context Glen Huntington Bandshell and its setting are associated with the themes of Architecture and Landscape Architecture. The Bandshell located in Boulder’s Central Park represent an example of work by architect, Glen H. Huntington and landscape architect, Saco Rienk DeBoer. Huntington’s Bandshell design reflects the Art Deco style in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplified design. Few Art Deco buildings were erected in Boulder and the Bandshell is one of the best-preserved examples of this style. The Bandshell is also significant as representative of a rather rare type of park architecture. Only one other bandshell, in Pueblo, has been recorded in the state to date. Saco Reink DeBoer, a proponent of the early 20th century City Beautiful Movement, recommended the site and designed an elegant and functional setting for the Bandshell, as the whole site was designed to channel flood waters back into Boulder Creek. Due to the integrity of the Bandshell’s design and setting it is an important representative of park outdoor entertainment facilities of the early twentieth century.6 Development of the Theme or Area of Significance The introduction of the Bandshell to Central Park was part of a national trend of constructing outdoor civic spaces for music and entertainment during the New Deal era. Bandstands and bandshells were built by the Works Progress Administration across the nation, providing new civic spaces for local communities. During the New Deal era, the WPA installed 228 bandstands and bandshells across the country. In addition to these, local governments and civic groups also funded their own bandstands and bandshells. The number of independently constructed bandstands and bandshells is unknown.7 The Bandshell in Boulder is an example of an independently commissioned Bandshell gifted to the City of Boulder by the Boulder Lions Club. Based on the period at which it was built, the Lions Club could have been inspired by the national trend of bandshell construction in parks. The character-defining features of the bandshell are reminiscent of other prominent semi-circular concentric arched bandshells constructed during this time.8 When the bandshell was proposed, it was noted that the plans for the bandshell were like the ones for the Grant Park Bandshell in Chicago, which was completed in 1931 and modeled after the Hollywood Bowl in Los Angeles. A 1937 newspaper article noted that the bandshell in Sioux City, Iowa in 1937 may have also influenced the design of the Boulder Bandshell.9 Associated Property Types Glen Huntington Bandshell’s structural design is consistent with multiple types of bandshell construction that grew in popularity across the United States in the 1920s and 1930s. As a widely used performance space, the “American Bandshell” construction has ranged in styles from classical such as the Naumburg Bandshell in Central Park, New York, to modern, i.e., the new Pritzker Pavilion by Frank Gehry in downtown Chicago. 6 Friends of the Bandshell, Glen Huntington Band Shell- Endangered Places Nomination, August 29, 2015, 3. 7 Rachel Carey, Music in unconventional spaces: the changing music scene of the Great Depression America, 1929- 1938, (Harrisonburg, VA: James Madison University/ JMU Scholarly Commons, 2018), 26. 8 Laurie R. Simmons & Thomas H. Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study (Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, CO, 1995), 8-9. 9 Ibid., 8. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report However, the overall needs of the structure remain the same with each new bandshell construction - provide a structure that will enhance and project sound from the stage to an audience in an open air environment. Around the same time the Glen Huntington Bandshell was constructed, many other bandshell structures (such as the Hollywood Bowl in California and the Sioux City Bandshell in Iowa for example) were comprised of the iconic tapering concentric arches that were utilized as a method of projection with large concrete wing walls.10 The American Bandshell structures are not only unique in the way they provide a truly functional performance space and experience within the city but are also able to inform us of specific architectural styles captured during the period in which they were constructed.11 The Bandshell in Boulder is one of these examples and its one of only a handful of bandshells remaining within Colorado. Of the remaining bandshells in Colorado, it is one of only two Art Deco style bandshells, the other located in Pueblo, CO.12 Physical Characteristics and Integrity The Bandshell retains its streamlined, simplified form and other character-defining features of the Art Deco style including its semi-elliptical opening at the theater stage, six concentric interior arches, thick buttresses, and elevated stage. The landscape and amphitheater retain elements of original topography, circulation, and vegetation including the levee, historic grove, and the orientation of some of the sidewalks. Although a later addition, the fixed rows of seating also qualify as a character-defining feature. The Bandshell possess a high degree of integrity and retains integrity of location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. The Bandshell remains in its original location within Central Park. The setting has undergone several changes since DeBoer’s initial design was implemented, with the largest alteration being the addition of seating in the late 1940s; however, this modification falls within the site’s recommended period of significance and is a character-defining feature of the site. DeBoer proposed an updated sketch of Central Park in 1947 which also included a sketch of the Bandshell with seating.13 The Bandshell retains its original Art Deco design with no major modifications, giving it a high degree of integrity of design and workmanship. Many of the original materials of the Bandshell were replaced during the 1997 rehabilitation, but all were replaced in-kind, allowing the structure to retain its integrity of materials. As a structure within a park setting, the Bandshell remains as an open civic space, available for community events, retaining its association as a public space within Boulder. While still retaining its feeling as a civic space, some of this feeling is diminished by vandalism. Relationship to the National Register Criteria According to Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, the Bandshell is significant under NRHP for A and C for its association as civic space within Boulder and for its representation of Art Deco architecture within a park setting. The Bandshell is significant for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of Boulder since 1938. It has been the site of numerous concerts, dances, festivals, and other varieties of community entertainment and social gatherings in its long history.14 The Bandshell expresses the cultural values of the 10 Ibid., 8. 11Friends of the Bandshell, Glen Huntington Band Shell- Endangered Places Nomination, August 29, 2015, 3. 12Ibid., 2-3. 13 Saco Rienk DeBoer, Sketch of Proposed Civic Center and War Memorial, 1947. 14 Laurie R. Simmons & Thomas H. Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study (Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, CO, 1995), 16. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report City of Boulder and the Boulder Lions Club, and their mutual motivation to develop public parks and civic space throughout the City. The Bandshell is significant for its representation of the Art Deco style in Boulder; as an example of band shell construction and park architecture from the twentieth century; and as a representative workmanship of Glen Huntington and Saco Rienk DeBoer. Bibliography Carey, Rachel. Music in unconventional spaces: the changing music scene of the Great Depression America, 1929-1938. Harrisonburg, VA: James Madison University/JMU Scholarly Commons, Spring 2018. Central Park Aerial, 1949 (source: Colorado Aerial Photography Service, 2021) Friends of the Bandshell. Glen Huntington Band Shell- Endangered Places Nomination. August 29, 2015. Saco Rienk DeBoer, Sketch of Proposed Civic Center and War Memorial, 1947. Simmons, Laurie R. & Thomas H. Simmons. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Denver, CO: Front Range Research Associates, Inc., 1995. Attachment E Original Draft Glen Huntington Bandshell Resource Assessment Report HUNTINGTON-DEBOER BOULDER BANDSHELL & CENTRAL PARK RESOURCE ASSESSMENT REPORT DRAFT FEBRUARY 2022 Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS GRANTOR History of Colorado, State Historical Fund • Jenny Deichman, Survey Specialist • Korbin Pugh, Grant Contracts Specialist & Property Protection Coordinator GRANTEE City of Boulder Parks and Recreation • Caitlin Berube-Smith, Historical and Cultural Assets Coordinator • Regina Elsner, Planner II • Jeff Haley, PLA, Planning, Design and Community Engagement Manager • Morgan Gardner, Associate Planner CONSULTANTS MUNDUS BISHOP • Tina Bishop, PLA, Principal • Rachel Scarborough, PLA, Associate Principal, Senior Landscape Architect • Brittany Schroeder, Landscape Designer • Josh Spinner, Associate, Landscape Designer RATIO Architects, Inc. • David Kroll, AAIA, Director of Preservation • Leanna De La Torre, AIA, Architect • Ashley Russell, Historic Preservation Specialist JVA Consulting Engineers • Ian Glazer, PE, Principal, Historic Preservation Director • Christine Britton, PE, Project Engineer • Riley Marshall, Design Engineer I IMAGE CREDITS Current-day (2020-2022) photographs provided by Mundus Bishop, RATIO, and JVA. Historic photographs (pre-2020) provided by the City of Boulder or from online archives at the Carnegie Branch Library for Local History/ Boulder Historical Society Collection, unless otherwise noted. STATEMENT The Resource Assessment Report documents the history, significance, integrity and current condition of the resource. It does not evaluate for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. If the resource has been previously listed or evaluated it is referenced and footnoted. This project is / was paid for by a History Colorado State Historical Fund grant. The content and opinions contained herein do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of History Colorado. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 Common Terminology ...........................................................4 Property Overview .................................................................5 Designation, Eligibility, & Classification Summary ...............5 Designation Boundary ...........................................................6 History & Significance ...........................................................7 Architectural Description ......................................................9 Integrity ..................................................................................12 Current Existing Condition ...................................................13 Landscape Condition ......................................................13 Architectural / Structural Condition ...............................19 Additional Images ................................................................25 Structure Sketches: Bandshell .............................................33 Resources ..............................................................................35 TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 1-1. Glen Huntington Bandshell within Central Park in Boulder, Colorado, 1940s (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 4 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Integrity 3 Integrity is the ability of a property to convey its significance. It is assessed to determine if the characteristics that shaped the property during the period of significance are present as they were historically. Location is the place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred. Setting is the physical environment of a historic property. Design is the combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property. Materials are the physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property. Workmanship is the physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory. Feeling is a property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time. Association is the direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property. State/National Register Terminology1 2 Area of Significance - an aspect of historic development in which a property made contributions for which it meets the National Register criteria, such as architecture, entertainment or recreation. Character-Defining Features - the elements that account for the overall shape of the building, its materials, craftsmanship, decorative details, interior spaces and features, as well as the various aspects of its site and environment. Contributing Resource - a building, site, structure, object, or feature adding to the significance of a property. Designation Boundary - the boundary defined by the Landmarks Board and City Council that encompasses a historic property. This boundary represents a physical area in which any future alterations have historic preservation review associated with them. Eligibility - ability of a property to meet the State/National Register criteria. Evaluation Criteria - the established criteria for evaluating the eligibility of properties for inclusion in the State/ National Register of Historic Places. Historic Context - information about historic properties based on a shared theme, specific time period and geographical area. Landscape Characteristics - the tangible and intangible aspects of a landscape from a historic period; these aspects individually and collectively give a space its historic character and aid in understanding its historical importance. Local Landmark - a local area or building that has been determined to have a special character and historic, architectural, or aesthetic or value to the city. Period of Significance - the span of time in which a property attained the significance for which it meets the State and/or National Register criteria, and/or Local Landmarks criteria. Property Type - a grouping of properties defined by common physical and associative attributes. COMMON TERMINOLOGY 1 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, How to Complete the National Registration Bulletin (Washington DC: National Park Service Cultural Resources, 1997), Appendix IV. 2 US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes (Washington DC: Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,1996). 3 Ibid. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 5 Areas of Significance District(s) x Sites(s) Buildings(s) x Structure(s) Object(s) x Feature(s) Property Types x Location x Setting x Design x Materials x Workmanship x Feeling x Association Property Integrity: Aspects Individual Character-Defining Features of Property Types Site(s) Central Park Structure(s) G. H. Bandshell Feature(s) Amphitheater Seating Stone Retaining Wall Mature Groves of Trees Art Deco Lampposts Sidewalks/ Paths** Engraved Boulder Open Lawn Views** Berm NRHP Evaluation Criteria 4 x Criteria A: The property is associated with event that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history Criteria B: The property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past x Criteria C: The property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction Criteria D: The property has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history State Register of Historic Properties x Determined Eligible Delisted National Register of Historic Properties Determined Eligible Delisted State & National Register Eligibility Recommended Period of Significance Date Range: 1938 to 1968 PROPERTY OVERVIEW Current Designation Level x Local Landmark State Register of Historic Properties (SRHP) National Register of Historic Properties (NRHP) Property Name: Location: Property Address: Latitude/Longitude: Legal Property Description: Parcel Tag: Acreage / Square Footage: Date of Construction: Designer(s): Huntington-DeBoer Bandshell and Central Park Central Park (northeast corner, north of Boulder Creek) 1236 Canyon Boulevard, Boulder, CO 80203 40.0056 / -105.1643 Block 13 Boulder OT 146330357003 2 Acres / 88,694 SF Bandshell (1938); Landscape (1939); Seating (late 1940s) Glen H. Huntington, Architect (1938) Saco Rienk DeBoer, Landscape Architect (1939) Ordinance & Listing Information City of Boulder Local Landmark No: Ordinance No: Ordinance Date: State ID / Smithsonian Trinomial: National Historic Landmark No: 95-4 5751 October 17, 1995 5BL.5680 DESIGNATION, ELIGIBILITY, & CLASSIFICATION SUMMARY 4 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 16. ** Refer to Character-Defining Features list on Page 17 for referenced sidewalks/paths and views. Architecture Landscape Architecture Entertainment / Recreation Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 6 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Designation Boundary Designation Boundary Description: Central Park (Southeast Corner of Broadway and Canyon Boulevard) North 170 feet of Block 13, Original Townsite to the City of Boulder. The Modern Architecture Preservation League (MAPL) proposed the original landmark boundary for designation in May 1995. In July, the City of Boulder Landmarks Board amended the boundary to the 300'x170' site south of Canyon Boulevard. This boundary included the Bandshell and amphitheater seating along with a portion of the park associated with Saco R. DeBoer's design. In October, the amended boundary was approved by City Council and the Bandshell was designated as a Boulder Individual Landmark by Ordinance 5751.5 The original 1995 designation boundary included the Bandshell, the open space between the stage and the seating, the amphitheater seating, two sidewalks leading to the Bandshell, and the berm and retaining wall south of the seating. (Figure 1-2). The 2022 amended boundary includes the landscape area from the original designation and adds physical property to the designation boundary to include an additional 130’ south of the original northern-most boundary. This includes the following features that have evolved with use over time: open turf and lawn area; groupings of mature trees and shaded areas; established vegetation; multi-use paths along the west and south boundary of Block 13; Art-Deco style lampposts, and boulders with engraved text along Boulder Creek Path. In November 2021, the Landmark's Board initiated the process of expanding the landmark boundary to include all of Block 13, adding approximately 130 feet to the south. The purpose of expanding the boundary is to ensure Saco R. DeBoer's park design including the originally designated seating and surrounding park landscape will be protected (Figure 1-3). 5 Glen Huntington Bandshell- Endangered Places Nomination. August 29, 2015, 3. Figure 1-2. Original designation Boundary of Glen Huntington Bandshell including adjustment by the Landmark’s Board, 1995. (source: Landmark Designation Submittal) MAPL’S APPLICATION LANDMARK BOARD’S RESVISED BOUNDARY BOULDER BAND SHELL PROPOSED LANDMARK DESIGNATION Figure 1-3. Expanded designation boundary, 2022 (blue), (source: Google Earth Imagery) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 7 HISTORY & SIGNIFICANCE Historic Context See Appendix Statement of Significance The Bandshell is historically significant for its importance to the “social and cultural life” of Boulder as a performance venue, for its role in the development of Central Park, and “for its association with the Boulder Lions Club and its program of improving Boulder Parks.”The structure is environmentally significant for "its planned and natural site characteristics." The Bandshell acts as an established prominent visual landmark within an urban park. The Bandshell is "architecturally significant as a rare representative of Art Deco style in Boulder, as reflected in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplified design; as Boulder's only example of park bandshell construction and one of a few such examples in Colorado; and as representative work of Saco Rienk DeBoer and Glen H. Huntington, noted landscape architect and architect, who are associated with site design and design of the structure.”6 According to Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, the Bandshell is significant under NRHP Criterion A for the role it has played in the social and cultural life of Boulder since 1938. It has been the site of numerous concerts, dances, festivals, and other varieties of community entertainment and social gatherings in its long history.7 The Bandshell expresses the cultural values of the City of Boulder and the Boulder Lions Club, and their mutual motivation to develop public parks and civic space throughout the City. According to Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, the Bandshell is significant under NRHP Criterion C for its representation of the Art Deco style in Boulder; as an example of bandshell construction and park architecture from the twentieth century; and as a representative work of Glen H. Huntington and Saco Rienk DeBoer. The Bandshell reflects the Art Deco style in its streamlined composition, compound arch, and simplified design. Few Art Deco style buildings were erected in Boulder and the Bandshell is one of the best preserved examples. It is one of only two Art Deco style bandshells in Colorado, the other is located in Pueblo.8 The Bandshell’s integrity of design and setting highlight it as an important representative of park outdoor entertainment facilities of the early twentieth century. The Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park is representative work of two Colorado designers, architect Glen H. Huntington and landscape architect, Saco R. DeBoer. Huntington was a prominent Boulder architect who designed Boulder County Courthouse and Boulder High School. The design of the Bandshell is based on similar bandshells of the era, that were largely based on the design and success of the Hollywood Bowl. Central Park is representative of the work of DeBoer, an early proponent of the City Beautiful Movement and the first landscape architect for City of Denver, who served as a consultant for City of Boulder. DeBoer designed the park's landscape to reflect the urban form of the city and natural site characteristics.9 As a component of a central urban park, the Bandshell and its surrounding landscape became an established, familiar, and prominent visual landmark within Boulder, drawing people in with its arched design and its location near major thoroughfares.10 Recommended Period of Significance The recommended period of significance for Huntington-DeBoer Bandshell and Central Park is from 1938 to 1968. The period begins with construction of the Bandshell and ends with the year Central Park was closed due to sanitary condition. 6 Dropinski, Chris to Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), “City Council Agenda for Landmark Designation", August 24, 1995, 3, 7 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 16. 8 Glen Huntington Bandshell- Endangered Places Nomination, August 29, 2015, 2-3. 9 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 17-18. 10 Dropinski, Chris to Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), “City Council Agenda for Landmark Designation", August 24, 1995, 3, Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 8 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Summary of Use Historic Use “During more than fifty years of use, the Bandshell was the site of a variety of musical concerts, cultural programs, educational presentations, and civic gatherings. At the dedication of the structure, the Bandshell’s role in promoting musical events in Boulder was emphasized. The scope of activities held at the Bandshell broadened over the years to include many forms of outdoor entertainment, although musical programs continued to be the primary use for the structure.”11 Date Event 1930s to 1940s Oglala Sioux Tribal Dances 1930s to 1960s Band Performances 1940s Memorial Day Celebrations 1950s to 1960s Children's Musical Programs; Park Acquisition Festival 1950s to 1970s Christmas with Santa 1954 to 1975 Art Shows in the Park 1956 Community Entertainment Nights; Rotary Club Fishing Demonstration 1968 Summer Outdoor Concerts by CU Boulder 1985 Springtime Concerts 1990 Freedom Festival Current Use The Bandshell currently serves as an outdoor stage and backdrop for community use and performances. The Bandshell is offered as a venue for multiple City-sponsored programs and events throughout the year including: Date Event 1990s to present Ballet at the Bandshell; Boulder Creek Festival 2000s to present Boulder County Farmers’ Market; Green Beer Festival 2015 to present Snow Much Fun Present Annual Homeless Persons’ Memorial Vigil; Opera in the Park 11 Simmons & Simmons, Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 10. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 9 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION Architecture Summary The Bandshell's streamlined, simplified form possesses character-defining features of the Art Deco era such as a semi-elliptical opening at the theater stage and six concentric arches that taper towards the rear and allow the roof to slope down towards the ground. The theater is flanked by two thick buttresses that terminate at the bottom of the front facing arch framing the opening. The theater stage is elevated and flanked by steps containing pipe railings and wing walls. Primary Materials The Bandshell is situated on a raised concrete foundation. The buttresses and stair construction are made of concrete. There is also a series of four concrete, hollow speaker boxes positioned in front of the stage. The structure is wood framed with acoustical wallboard and wood panel finishing on the interior. The roofing contains rolled asphalt and galvanized metal flashing. The stage flooring is wood (currently covered with painted plywood sheathing) and is of a flexible construction so that the floor can be raised or lowered depending on the event. Figure 1-4. Bandshell, post-construction, c. 1938-1946 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 10 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Construction & Alteration History Date Event Source 1894 to 1909 Floods occurred during the following years in Central Park and Boulder leading to structural, sewage, and beatification efforts. The reoccurrence of floods influenced the placement of the Bandshell. Boulder’s Floods & Flood Management, 12-23 1903 Boulder City Improvement Association (BCIA) was established to develop park lands and encourage city improvements. 5-Year Update to Historic Preservation Plan, 2019 1906 to 1933 The City of Boulder purchased the parcels of land to construct Central Park. The park was originally owned by the railroads and called Railroad Park. Greenways Master Plan, 2011 1907 to 1910 Fredrick Law Olmsted Jr., a proponent of the City Beautiful Movement, was commissioned by BCIA to develop a plan of improvements and flood management plan for the city. BCIA and Olmsted Jr sought to improve the city through "Civic betterment" by improving its parks and boulevards. In his report, “The Improvement of Boulder, Colorado” he recommended develop- ing civic spaces like Central Park along Boulder Creek. Boulder’s Floods & Flood Management,ii FLO Jr & Improvement of Boulder 1921 The City of Boulder leased portions of Central Park land to the railroad.Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 5 1926 to 1928 Saco R. DeBoer drafted Boulder's first zoning ordinance for the City of Boulder. He recom- mended that the lands along Boulder Creek "should be acquired for park purposes along the full length of the creek throughout the city." The city approved the zoning plan in 1928. Daily Camera Article, 2012 1937 The Boulder Planning and Park Commission received notice that the Major Activity Committee of the Lions Club sought to fund the construction a Bandshell for public concerts. Saco R. DeBoer, Landscape Architect for the City of Denver, was consulted on the location of the Bandshell. He recommended the area north of the railroad right of way, with the location of City Hall at the east end. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 5 Landmarks Board Memo, 12 1938 Glen Huntington developed plans for the Art Deco style Bandshell. Construction of the Bandshell was completed in June of 1938. Trees were planted around the Bandshell site. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 9 1939 DeBoer developed a landscaping plan for the site, which included planting trees to screen the structure. Paths were designed to the structure to prevent people from taking shortcuts to the site. DeBoer’s final plan included both deciduous and evergreen trees adjacent to the structure. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 10 1947 DeBoer proposed an updated plan for the Bandshell area which included amphitheater style seating. Saco R. DeBoer sketch, 1947 1949 to 1951 The landscaping around the amphitheater was redesigned to include amphitheater seating. The seats had concrete bases, wood tops, and were reinforced with rebar. A concrete sidewalk was installed on the south edge of the amphitheater (Figure 1-5). Aerial Photography, 1949 to 1953 1952 to 1953 Locomotive #30, Caboose #401, and Coach #280 were put on display in Central Park, north of Boulder and Left Hand Ditch. A train dedication ceremony was held in the park. City of Boulder Train History, 1 1956 First photograph appearance of the rectangular concrete piers/electrical bollards in front of the stage. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 circa 1960s Color scheme changed from green and light beige (original) to cream and gray that can still be seen today. Sidewalks at the west edge of the site were realigned. A diagonal path in the south lawn was removed. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 Aerial Photography, 1958, 1966, 1972 1968 Marks the beginning of decline of the Bandshell and surrounding site in relation to previous decline of surrounding Central Park. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1970s Bandshell was proposed for relocation.Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 11 Date Event Source 1980s General maintenance efforts took place and include: replacement of interior cladding, floor repair and replacement (not in full), and touch up painting. (The exact year(s) is non-determined). Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 1981 to 1985 Community events were once again held in the Bandshell, which helped revive it as a civic center. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1982 Trains were relocated to the area behind the Bandshell berm with the help of the Boulder Model Railroad Club. City of Boulder Train History, 1 1984 to 1987 Boulder Creek Path was built along the south edge of the site boundary, north of Boulder and Left Hand Ditch. Greenways Master Plan, 2011 1987 Boulder County Commissioners consider moving Bandshell to fairgrounds in Longmont.Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1988 Boulder Train Depot Task Force, local officials, business people, and historians recommended removing the Bandshell and relocating the Train Depot to its spot in Central Park. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1991 The "Save the Bandshell" campaign painted the Bandshell rainbow colors to raise community awareness in an effort to preserve the Bandshell. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 13 1995 The Boulder Bandshell is designated as a local landmark. The same year the Bandshell had been officially renamed the “Glen Huntington” Bandshell. City of Boulder Landmark. L-95-4 1997 Parks and Recreation completed rehabilitation of Bandshell. Rehabilitation and stabilization efforts included: replacement of the roofing and plywood sheathing, minor repairs to the framing and foundations, fresh coats of paint, waterproofing the stage flooring, and removing of all cementitious panels due to asbestos. Structural Review and Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, 4 2003- 2004 The southwest section of Block 13 was redesigned to accommodate a bus stop adjacent to the Block 13 boundary and access to the Boulder Creek Path. A curvilinear sidewalk and staircases were constructed in between the western walkway and the Boulder Creek Path. Aerial Photography, 2003 & 2004 2003 to 2008 Trains adjacent to the Bandshell were relocated off-site. Landmarks Board Memo, 9 2013 to 2015 City of Boulder prepared the Civic Area Master Plan with recommendations to improve civic spaces between 6th Street and 14th Street bordered by Arapahoe St. and Canyon Boulevard to the north and south. During this public process community support was documented for improvements to increase activation around the Bandshell and throughout Central Park. City of Boulder correspondence 2014 JVA performed a feasibility study at the Bandshell and research was conducted to determine if the Bandshell should be relocated. The study determined that relocating the structure would jeopardize its physical integrity. The railroad tracks and fence associated with the trains were removed from the site. JVA Feasibility Study Memo Google Earth Aerial Imagery, 2013 - 2014 2015 Friends of the Bandshell successfully nominated the Bandshell for the Colorado Endangered Places List due to urgencies associated with proposed moving of the Bandshell and/or removal of seating through the Civic Area planning process. City of Boulder correspondence 2019 A sandstone paver path was added at the southeast corner of the amphitheater. Google Aerial Photog- raphy, 2019 2021 Friends of the Bandshell wrote a letter to Landmarks Board requesting that Landmarks Board consider initiating amendment to the existing landmark designation boundary, expanding the boundary to include all of Block 13. City of Boulder correspondence 2022 The Landmarks Board considers recommendation to City Council to approve amended designation, expanding the individual landmark boundary to include all of Block 13. City of Boulder correspondence Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 12 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Figure 1-5. Historic Aerial, 1938 (source: Colorado Aerial Photography Service) Figure 1-6. Historic Aerial, 1949 (source: Colorado Aerial Photography Service) Figure 1-7. Historic Aerial, 1958 (source: City of Boulder) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 13 Figure 1-8. Historic Aerial, 1966 (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-9. Historic Aerial, 1984 (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-10. Historic Aerial, 1993 (source: City of Boulder) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 14 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment INTEGRITY Location The Bandshell has retained its original location within Central Park since construction was completed in 1938. Setting Central Park has been well maintained by the City of Boulder. The park is defined by its topography, pathways, vegetation, and the placement of the Bandshell. The original oval shape of the Bandshell and amphitheater is not as legible as it was historically. The circulation within Central Park has been altered with the park's changing civic use. The open south lawn and groves of trees on the north and east sides remain from DeBoer's original design for Central Park. Design Glen Huntington's Bandshell remains as an integral component within Saco R. DeBoer's designed landscape. The design of the Bandshell and Central Park remain largely intact from the period of significance. No major modifications have taken place since 1938. When the Bandshell was rehabilitated in 1997 to stabilize the structure it did not alter its original Art Deco design and overall historic character. Central Park's circulation has evolved with time, but has retained its open lawn and mature groves of trees. Materials The Bandshell's original materials were either maintained or replaced during the most recent rehabilitation in 1997. Materials replaced in-kind at that time include: asphalt roofing, plywood sheathing, interior wallboard cladding, and wood flooring. The Bandshell's color scheme and paint finish has changed several times since its original construction. All of the materials (new and original) appear intact. Workmanship Workmanship is consistent with the type of Bandshell construction seen across the United States in the 1920 to the 1930s. The Bandshell is most reminiscent of the Hollywood Bowl built in Los Angeles in 1928. Feeling Central Park retains its feeling as a urban park used routinely for events and public day-use. The Bandshell is open and creates the potential for community interaction and engagement. At present, the Bandshell is not fully utilized. The structure and surrounding park occasionally fall into disrepair and have a large transient population. Association The Bandshell and Central Park retain their importance within the greater Boulder Civic Area. The Bandshell and Central Park retain their associations with Boulder Lions Club and landscape architecture in Boulder. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 15 CURRENT EXISTING CONDITION LANDSCAPE CONDITION Landscape Condition Summary The Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park's original setting, features, and spatial relationships remain largely intact. The Bandshell is set on the site’s north edge and oriented to the south. The setting is characterized by a sloped amphitheater (a concrete terrace with fifteen rows of wood and concrete benches) that faces the Bandshell and a large open lawn to the south. A landscaped berm and remnants of a sandstone retaining wall remain south of the Bandshell's seating define the southern edge of the amphitheater. South of the amphitheater is a large open lawn that stretches to the Boulder Creek Path. Mature trees frame the site on its north east sides and screen its edges from the adjacent streets, similar to DeBoer's original plans for site. Concrete paved sidewalks frame the site on all sides, acting as thoroughfares, proving connections to the surrounding city context. Two sidewalks extend from the northeast and northwest corners of the park towards the Bandshell. These paths terminate at a large level area between the Bandshell and amphitheater that is paved with loose gravel. Numerous small scale features serve typical park functions including lighting, wayfinding, and trash/ recycling. Summary of Landscape Characteristics Topography Topography of the site including the sloped amphitheater, berm, large level area between the Bandshell and amphitheater, and the sloped south lawn contribute to the significance of the Bandshell and Central Park. The berm continues to mitigate flooding; however the original oval shape is less legible (Figure 1-11). The south lawn gradually slopes down to the Boulder Creek Path before dropping off at the Left Hand and Boulder Ditch. The Boulder Creek Path slopes downward at the southwest corner of the site to cross under the Broadway Street Bridge. Retaining walls and steps were added north of the Boulder Creek Path between 2003 and 2004 to accommodate this change in topography (Figure 1-12). Vegetation Groupings of mature deciduous and evergreen trees frame the north, east and west sides of the site. At the Bandshell, mature trees define the edges of the sloped concrete terrace. A planting bed of low shrubs along the amphitheater berm defines the southern edge. The south lawn remains mostly open aside from the shade trees that frame the amphitheater. Mature trees around the site include Austrian Pine, Douglas Fir, Northern Red Oak, White Oak, English Oak, Shumard Oak, American Elm, Norway Maple, Silve Maple, Honeylocust, Crabapple, Rocky Mountain Juniper, and American Linden. Low grass is planted around the amphitheater and at the south lawn. Figure 1-11. Landscaped Berm, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop)Figure 1-12. Topography at the southeast corner, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 16 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Vegetation is consistent with Saco R. DeBoer’s landscape design with a backdrop of evergreen and deciduous trees around the Bandshell amphitheater and at the north and east edges of the park (Figure 1-13,1-30). The groves of trees frame the amphitheater and screen the park from Canyon Boulevard, Broadway Street, and 13th Street. Photographs from the 1940s and 1950s indicate that the area in front of the Bandshell's stage was planted with evergreen shrubs. It is unknown when these were removed, but these plantings appear in aerial photographs as late as 1984 (Figure 1-14). Spatial Organization The historic setting and spatial organization of the Bandshell and Central Park remain largely intact since the end of the period significance. During the period of significance, the spatial organization of the site was altered to meet changing needs. Saco R. DeBoer revisited Central Park's design and proposed amphitheater seating around the Bandshell. The inclusion of the amphitheater seating created a defined space for entertainment and performance apart from south lawn, allowing it to remain open for flexible use. The Bandshell is sited at the north edge of the site with amphitheater seating oriented towards it. The amphitheater's berm gradually transitions into the south lawn creating a visual connection between the spaces (Figure 1-16). The south lawn gradually extends towards the Boulder Creek Path and the ditch. The lawn remains intact but has been reduced over time by the realignment of the ditch and changes in circulation. Sidewalks enclose all four sides of the site and connect the site to the larger context of the city. Sidewalks at the northern corners connect the perimeter walks to the Bandshell's amphitheater. The overall appearance of the landscape reflects a functional urban park and the original design by Saco R. DeBoer. Figure 1-13. Mature grove of trees between the Bandshell and Canyon Boulevard, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-14. Oglala Sioux Dancers performing, 1956 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-15. Birdseye of the Bandshell and landscape design, post-construction, 1940s (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-16. South lawn , 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 17 Circulation Circulation across Central Park has been altered to meet the changing needs of the park and the surrounding urban context. During the period of significance, the park's pathways were realigned to access the Bandshell. The two diagonal pathways that extend from the northern corners of the site to the Bandshell remain in a similar alignment to the ones constructed in the 1940s (Figure 1-17). It is unclear if any of the walkways were always paved concrete or composed of other materials. Historic aerial images indicate that there were paths at the southern corners of the amphitheater, a diagonal path across the south lawn, and two parallel paths along the west walk. These walkways were removed when pathways were realigned across the park in the 1960s. Circulation at the Bandshell and within Central Park has changed since the period of significance. A section of the Boulder Creek Path was built along the south edge of the site in the mid-1980s (Figure 1-20, 1-31). The western walkway along Broadway has been modified to accommodate a bus shelter and seating area between 2003 and 2004 (Figure 1-32). At this time, a series of staircases with handrails and a curvilinear path were constructed to connect the Boulder Creek Path to the western sidewalk. A diagonal flagstone paver path was constructed at the southwest corner of the amphitheater in 2019 (Figure 1-24). A remnant stone path on the berm south of the amphitheater connects the south lawn to the amphitheater seating (Figure 1-18). It is undetermined if the path is original to amphitheater or an addition after the period of significance. Accessibility The Bandshell amphitheater does not currently have a designated accessible route or accessible seating. Concrete sidewalks appear to be compliant in slope for accessible pedestrian access. The slope of the amphitheater is greater than 5% and is not compliant for accessible access or seating (Figure 1-23). However, the large level area in front of the stage is compliant in slope (Figure 1-26). The nearest accessible parking space is approximately 525 feet from the Bandshell located on 13th Street. The curvilinear sidewalk connecting the western sidewalk to the Boulder Creek Path provides an accessible route Broadway Street and the bus shelter. Figure 1-17. Sidewalk at the northeast corner connecting to the Bandshell amphitheater, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-18. Remnant sandstone path connecting amphitheater to south lawn, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-19. Curvilinear sidewalk and engraved landscape boulder, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-20. Art Deco style lampposts framing the Boulder Creek Path, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 18 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Structures Character-defining features of the Bandshell include its original location and focal point within Central Park. Located on the northern edge of Central Park, the structure is prominent landmark along Canyon Boulevard. Its placement and its prominence within the park draw people in from surrounding thoroughfares to the amphitheater and front of the stage. Character defining features of the amphitheater seating include its sloped concrete terrace with fifteen rows, divided into three sections (Figure 1-21). The backside of the amphitheater seating is a planted berm (Figure 1-25). Between 2003 and 2004, low concrete cheek walls with red sandstone caps are added to the site to accommodate the addition of a bus shelter and seating area adjacent to the western boundary. Similar red sandstone/concrete cheek walls frame the two staircases that connect the bus shelter area to the Boulder Creek Path. A stacked stone retaining wall along Boulder Creek Path and one of the staircases also incorporates red sandstone (Figure 1-22). While non-contributing, these features are compliment the red benches and low sandstone retaining wall featured at the Bandshell amphitheater. Small Scale Features The Bandshell's low sandstone retaining wall at the edge of the Bandshell amphitheater berm (Figure 1-25), engraved landscape boulders, and Art Deco style lampposts are contributing features. A series of engraved landscape boulders are located along the western sidewalk and act as wayfinding features (Figure 1-19). The two Art Deco concrete lampposts with metal/glass fixtures that frame the Boulder Creek Path are contemporary features that compliment the Art Deco appearance of the Bandshell (Figure 1-20). Similar lampposts are featured along the Broadway Bridge nearby. Contemporary, non-contributing small scale features across the site support daily park functions include regulatory signage, trash/recycling bins and lampposts. Views and Viewsheds Prominent views on site that contribute to the significance of Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park include the view towards Bandshell from the south lawn and other areas within Central Park; views towards the Boulder Flatirons from the stage, paved gravel area, and south lawn; views from adjacent streets including Broadway Street and 13th Street (Figure 1-26, 1-27, 1-28, 1-29). Figure 1-21. Seating at Bandshell, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-22. Concrete cheek wall at stairs with sandstone caps, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 19 Figure 1-23. Existing benches on a sloped concrete amphitheater, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-24. Flagstone pavers at the southeast of the Bandshell, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-25. Sandstone retaining wall at berm, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-26. Views to Flatirons from the south lawn, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-27. View of Bandshell and south lawn from the southeast corner of the site, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-28. View to Boulder Flatirons from stage (source: Mundus Bishop) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 20 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Figure 1-31. Boulder Creek Path adjacent to the south lawn and ditch, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-30. Mature trees along the east edge of Central Park, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-29. View to Boulder Flatirons, 2020 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-32. Western sidewalk adjacent to bus shelter and seating area, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) Figure 1-33. Plan for Central Park, DeBoer, 1940s c. (source: Denver Public Library) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 21 Table 1-1: Character-Defining Features Feature Condition Contributing/ Non-Contributing Topography Sloped amphitheater Good Contributing Berm behind amphitheater Good Contributing Sloped south lawn Good Contributing Level area between Bandshell and Amphitheater Good Contributing Vegetation Mature grove of trees Good Contributing Understory shrubs on berm Good Non-Contributing South lawn Good Contributing Circulation Concrete sidewalk (northeast)Good Contributing Concrete sidewalk (northwest)Good Contributing Concrete sidewalk (west)Good Non-Contributing Curvilinear sidewalk (southwest)Good Non-Contributing Concrete sidewalk (east)Good Non-Contributing Section of Boulder Creek Path and Multi-Use Path (south)Good Non-Contributing Sandstone pavers (southeast of Bandshell)Good Non-Contributing Remnant stone path Poor Undetermined Structure Glen Huntington Bandshell Good Contributing Amphitheater seating Good Contributing Concrete cheek walls with sandstone caps at stairs Good Non-Contributing Sandstone retaining wall at southwest corner Good Non-Contributing Small Scale Features Stone retaining wall along landscaped berm Poor Contributing Engraved landscape boulders (2)Good Contributing Art Deco style lampposts (2)Good Contributing Views and Viewsheds View to Boulder Flatirons from the stage, paved gravel area, and south lawn Good Contributing View to Bandshell from the south lawn and other areas within Central Park Good Contributing Views from Broadway Street to the Bandshell Good Contributing Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 22 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Stage Canyon Boulevard 13th StreetBroadway StreetMunicipal Building Plaza Atrium Building Dushanbe Tea House Vie w t o B a n d s h e l l fro m B r o a d w a y 13th Street Plaza Central Park Vie w t o B o u l d e r F l a t i r o n s fro m B a n d s h e l l 2 7 8 6 10 3 5 4 9 9 11 1 Left Hand & Boulder Ditch Boulder Creek Path Multi-Use Trail 11 11 9 9 Boulder Museum of Contemporary Art 12 View to Bandshellfrom Open Lawn Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell & Central Park | Existing Condition and Analysis 0 20 40 ft10 N Mundus Bishop | February 2022Figure 1-34. Bandshell Existing Condition, 2022 (source: Mundus Bishop) LEGEND Bandshell Landmark Canyon Blvd Right of Way High Hazard Flood Zone Primary Circulation Contributing Vegetation Lamppost Art Deco Lamppost Landscape Boulder Retaining Wall or Cheek Wall 10 11 12 Glen Huntington Bandshell Amphitheater Seating Mature Grove of Trees Planting Bed Gravel Paving Stone Retaining Wall Remnant Stone Path Flagstone Path* Concrete Sidewalk Berm Stairs* Open South Lawn 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 * Denotes non-contributing feature Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 23 Figure 1-35. Vertical foundation crack on the east side, 2020 (source: Ratio and JVA) Figure 1-36. Vertical foundation crack on the east side, 2020 (source: Ratio and JVA) ARCHITECTURAL / STRUCTURAL CONDITION Foundation Architectural The crawlspace below the stage was unaccessible during field review. Visual inspection of the exterior portions appear to be in good condition. Visible vertical cracks in the foundation and chipped paint were observed on the rear side of the Bandshell. Structural The structure is founded on a perimeter concrete stem wall that encloses a crawlspace area and extends above grade several feet. Although unknown with no available original structural drawings and no excavation included as part of this scope, given the age of the structure it is likely that the stem wall bears on a continuous concrete footing. On the interior of the structure, there are four tapered concrete pedestals that support the floor framing of the stage. At the southern or front end of the structure, two concrete buttresses support the southernmost roof arch. Overall, the foundation is in good condition. There is one vertical crack in the east foundation wall which is likely a naturally formed expansion joint (Figure 1-19) and the west foundation wall is covered in ivy which can be detrimental to the structure over time. There are relatively regularly spaced vertical cracks in foundation wall along the front of the stage that are likely natural formed expansion joints. The concrete buttresses on both sides of the largest arch have horizontal cracks at the same height; these are likely cold joints from the original concrete pour during construction. Both the vertical expansion joint cracks and the horizontal cracks at the cold joints are not of structural concern. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 24 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Figure 1-37. Renovation of the Bandshell framing, 1996 (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-38. View of rolled asphalt roofing. Note the blistering at the lower portion of the roof, 2020 (source: Ratio) Roofing Architectural The lower portions of the asphalt roofing extend down to the concrete foundations and appear to have been subject to vandalism. The lower portions also show signs of blistering and separation from the surface below and are in fair to poor condition. The upper portions of the rolled asphalt roofing appear to be in better condition with minor signs of blistering. On the east end of the roof, one area of the asphalt roofing has been patched with a different material. Structural The shelter’s roof structure contains five equally spaced three-point, glulam wood arches that decrease in size from the front (south) to the back (north) of the Bandshell. The roof framing was not exposed during this visit, however previous reports describe a hinged connection at the top of each arch and a tie rod within the depth of the stage framing that ties the bottoms of each arch together. 2x vertical lumber struts support the roof sheathing and 2x horizontal lumber extends between the glulam trusses to brace the structure. The wood arches bear on steel saddles that are anchored to the concrete foundation wall. The shelter’s roof structure contains five equally spaced three-point, glulam wood arches that decrease in size from the front (south) to the back (north) of the Bandshell. The roof framing was not exposed during this visit, however previous reports describe a hinged connection at the top of each arch and a tie rod within the depth of the stage framing that ties the bottoms of each arch together. 2x vertical lumber struts support the roof sheathing and 2x horizontal lumber extends between the glulam trusses to brace the structure (Figure 1-20). The wood arches bear on steel saddles that are anchored to the concrete foundation wall. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 25 Figure 1-39. View of wood siding, 2020 (source: Ratio)Figure 1-40. View of exterior plywood finish panels, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-41. View of exterior plywood finish panels, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-42. View of ivy growing on rear wall, 2020 (source: Ratio) Walls/Finishes Architectural The majority of the structural wood framing is concealed within the exterior finish materials and was unable to be observed. The floor access hatch did not appear to be operable, therefore the stage framing was also unable to be observed. Within the small storage room at the back of the stage the framing appears to be in good condition. The wood siding is in fair condition with some boards split along the grain. In general the exterior plywood finish panels appear to be in fair condition. The panels have minor weathering and mostly aesthetic damage due to frequent vandalism. At the top most proscenium arch, the rear-facing plywood appears to have more significant weathering. The rear wall of the Bandshell, on the exterior, has plywood panels that are covered with ivy. Damage to the wood is anticipated beneath the vines. The plaster appears to be in fair condition. The vertical surfaces contain a variety of cracks across the surface. The angled surfaces along the tops of the plaster coated walls show significant weather damage. Structural The original north wall of the structure, constructed of 2x4 dimensional lumber, was supplemented by an outboard 2x6 stud framed wall. Outside of the rear/north wall of the Bandshell, the arched roof system acts as both the roof and walls. The stud walls are in good condition. However, there is ivy growing on the wall at the rear of the Bandshell which can harbor moisture against the wood framing elements and encourage decay fungi to flourish. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 26 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Figure 1-43. View of stage floor, 2020 (source: Ratio)Figure 1-44. View of concrete stairs. Note the yellow safety nosing paint condition is poor, 2020 (source: Ratio) Flooring Architectural The stage flooring appears to be finished with a textured underlayment and a liquid polyurethane coating that acts as waterproofing for the floor. The overall surface which is in good condition. There is evidence of previous vandalism damage in one location where the color of the surface does not match the rest of the flooring. Structural The stage floor is sheathed in plywood and covered with a traffic coating. Although the framing was not accessible during this visit, there is documentation that the floor was reconstructed in 1996, consisting of three bays of (2) 2x12 joists spaced at 16 inches on center that span in the east-west direction. Two north-south dropped steel W8 beam lines supported on the original isolated concrete pedestals divide the framing bays. Along the flared east and west sides of the building, the joists bear on a wood plate atop the foundation wall. Although the framing was not visible during the observation visit, no major issues such as excessive deflection or signs of deterioration were observed on the floor surface. However, since the Bandshell is an open structure, it will be more prone to moisture damage This should be further investigated in the next phase of work to determine the current condition of the floor framing. Stairs Architectural The concrete at both stairs appears to be in good condition. The yellow safety nosing paint is in poor condition. The painted steel handrails are in good condition, with portions of the painted finish worn off. The handrails do not appear to be in compliance with current accessibility codes. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 27 Figure 1-45. Interior view of speaker boxes. Note the cracking concrete forms, rusted and broken cover plates, as well as missing components, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-46. Seating showing spall at pedestal, 2020 (source: Ratio) Electrical Architectural The power and speaker boxes do not show any major cracking or damage. The metal cover plates are either missing or in poor condition with rusted and broken hinges. The receptacles within do not appear to be functional and contain two 2-pronged outlets with no ground wire. The speakers have been removed and the power boxes exposed. Other Architectural The top of the proscenium arch and the top of the rear wall have a galvanized cap covering the top surfaces. Structural The lateral force suspension system of the Bandshell consists of the roof sheathing and the wood framed roof/ walls. The LFRS is in good condition. It has performed well over the lifetime of the structure and previous analyses of the structure indicate that it has adequate lateral capacity for the lateral loads associated with the site. The site includes seating facing the Bandshell stage. The seating consists of a concrete slab that slopes toward the stage and rectangular reinforced concrete pedestals which support wood bleachers. Steel angle clips are used to connect the wood bleachers to the concrete. Many of the concrete pedestals have started to spall (Figure 1-30). In some spall locations, the exposed rebar appears to only have had 1/4-inch cover. Some pedestals have areas of spider-web cracking and areas where the cement binder has weathered, exposing the larger aggregate. The painted wood bleacher boards show signs of wear such as splitting, warping, and crushing at the connection locations. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 28 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Table 1-2: Condition Assessment of Architectural/Structural Features Primary Architectural/ Structural Features Description of Primary Materials Condition Foundation Concrete slab on grade Good Roofing Rolled asphalt Poor Walls Dimensional lumber Good Finishes Plaster, paint Fair Flooring Sheathed plywood with polyurethane coating Good Stairs Painted concrete with painted steel handrails Good Lateral Force Suspension System Roof sheathing and wood framed roof/walls Good Additional Building Systems Mechanical (HVAC) Fire Protection & Suppression Irrigation (Backflow preventer, spray heads, etc.)Existing (Not Assessed) Electrical See summary Poor Plumbing Architectural/Structural Condition Ratings This structural condition assessment makes use of terms concerning the condition of building components which are defined as follows: Good - A architectural/ structural element, component or system is considered in good condition when it is undamaged, structurally sound or functionally operational, and performing as intended. No specific repairs are required, and only minor or routine maintenance is needed. Fair - An element, component or system is considered in fair condition when there are signs of wear or deterioration, such as freeze-thaw deterioration, corrosion, or wood decay exceeding expectations based on the age and use of the element, that may be reducing the structural capacity of the member. Replacement or repair of the element may be required. Poor - An element, component, or system is considered in poor condition when it no longer performs its intended architectural/ structural purpose. Deterioration or damage reduced the load carrying capacity of the element and simple repairs cannot be justified or are not expected to be effective. The element may show signs of imminent failure. Major repair or replacement will be required. Note: Condition ratings reported are based upon visual observations only. No material testing or exploratory observations have been made. Further investigation could result in modification to condition ratings. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 29 ADDITIONAL IMAGES Figure 1-47. Glen Huntington Bandshell Landmark Designation plaque, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-48. Front elevation view, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 30 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Figure 1-49. Figure 12: Rear elevation view, 2020 (source: Ratio) Figure 1-50. Side elevation view, 2020 (source: Ratio) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 31 Figure 1-51. Proposed sketch of Bandshell, Saco R. DeBoer, 1942 (source: Denver Public Library) Figure 1-52. Proposed sketch of Bandshell, Saco R. DeBoer, 1947 (source: Denver Public Library) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 32 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment Figure 1-53. Central Park before Bandshell (looking south from Water St/Canyon Blvd), 1929 (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-54. Dedication ceremony, 1938 (source: Carneige Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-55. Bandshell prior to the installation of seats, 1940c (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-56. Memorial Day Service, circa 1940s (source: Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder) Figure 1-57. Installation of seating, 1950c (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-58. Installation of seating, 1950c (source: City of Boulder) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 33 Figure 1-59. Oglala Sioux Dancers performing, 1956 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-60. Line to visit Santa, 1963 (source: Carnegie Branch Library for Local History) Figure 1-61. Concert performance, 1982 (source: City of Boulder) Figure 1-62. Train #30 behind the Bandshell amphitheater, post-1982 (source: City of Boulder) Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 34 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment STORAGE STAGE GLEN HUNTINGTON BANDSHELL FLOOR PLAN © 2020 RATIO │2020-xx-xx Boulder MRPP-Glen Huntington Bandshell 1" = 10'-0" FLOOR PLAN EXISTING CONDITION N 0'5'10'20'40' 1-29 STRUCTURE SKETCHES: BANDSHELL 1-19 1-20 1-30 1-25 1-27 1-23 1-24 1-28 1-16 1-18 Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 35 SOUTH (FRONT) ELEVATION NTS BUILDING SECTION (NORTH TO SOUTH) NTS Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 36 Huntington-DeBoer Boulder Bandshell and Central Park| Resource Assessment RESOURCES Anuta, Karl. Final Bandshell Nomination. Boulder, CO: Friends of the Bandshell Boulder, 2015. Boulder (Colo.). Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, Central Park Bandshell Designation Papers. Boulder, CO: Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, 1995. City of Boulder, City of Boulder Train History. Boulder, CO: City of Boulder, 2012. City of Boulder, Greenways Master Plan. Boulder, CO: City of Boulder, 2011. City of Boulder, Bandshell Boundary Expansion Memorandum to Landmarks Board, Boulder, CO: City of Boulder, November 2021. City of Boulder and HistoryMatters LLC, A Sense of Purpose, A Sense of Place - A Plan for the City of Boulder's Historic Preservation Program. Boulder, CO: City of Boulder, 2013-2019. Dropiniski, Chris to Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB), “City Council Agenda for Landmark Designation." Boulder, CO: PRAB, August 24, 1995. Glen Huntington Bandshell-Endangered Places Nomination. Boulder, CO, August 29, 2015 Petterm, Silvia. Boulder's Floods and Flood Management: Past and Present. Boulder, CO: City of Boulder, 2016. Polluck, Peter. "Fredrick Law Olmsted, Jr. and the Improvement of Boulder, Colorado." Fredrick Law Olmsted National Historic Site Online, Accessed February 2017, https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/frederick-law- olmsted-jr-and-the-improvement-of-boulder-colorado-peter-pollack-faicp-lincoln-institute.htm Simmons, R. Laurie & Thomas H. Simmons. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Denver, CO: Simmons and Simmons, 1995. Taylor, Carol. "Saco DeBoer hired for zoning study in 1927." Boulder, CO: Daily Camera Online, 2012. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. Washington DC: National Park Service Cultural Resources, 1997. United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for the Treatment of Cultural Landscapes. Washington DC: Cultural Resource Stewardship and Partnerships,1996. Attachment F Updated Bandshell Assessment 2022 02 21 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 TO:Parks and Recreation Advisory Board FROM: Ali Rhodes, Director, Parks and Recreation Department Bryan Beary, Senior Manager, Community Building and Partnerships Dennis Warrington, Senior Manager, Urban Parks Manager Jackson Hite, Senior Manager, Business Services Megann Lohman, Senior Manager, Recreation Regina Elsner, Interim Senior Manager, Planning and Ecological Services Stephanie Munro, Senior Manager, Regional Facilities SUBJECT: Matters from the Department DATE: February 28, 2022 A.History of Park Names Project: Next Steps Staff recognize that the names of parks and facilities in Boulder are special and want to also ensure that public spaces -and their names- represent the community and the current values of Boulder. The City of Boulder Parks and Recreation (BPR) department embarked on this History of Park Names project to document the rich history of park naming in Boulder, to identify existing park names that by contemporary community standards may not reflect city values and to use this data to further the City's Racial Equity Plan goals and strategies. Staff shared preliminary information about this project with PRAB in August 2020 (starting on page 20 of the meeting packet). Over the course of the following year, University of Colorado History Department students and faculty, led by Professor Paul Sutter, Professor Phoebe Young and PhD candidate Kim Jackson, preformed and vetted research about the namesakes for Boulder parks. Along with partners from CU, staff brought this item to PRAB again in June 2021 (starting on page 65). This presentation included information on the evolution of park naming practices in Boulder, a summary of Boulder’s park namesakes by demographic information (gender, race, etc.) and recommendations for communications and further research. The intent of this item is to provide the PRAB with updates on progress since the last discussion of this item, and in advance of planned communications celebrating this partnership with the university. Since August 2021, BPR staff and the CU History Department have continued to partner by reviewing research with internal sources, additional sources from Carnegie Library for Local History and some stakeholders. Student interns with the CU History Department compiled research including biographical data for the namesakes as well as newspaper articles, photos, first person accounts and other unique media. The compilation of this research demonstrates Boulder’s strong history of developing and naming public lands and will serve as a 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 comprehensive database for staff and community members. CU student interns also helped create a first draft of a Geographic Information System (GIS) story map which will help bring these stories to life for the community in an online, interactive platform in the near future. The story map format includes an online map of park locations coupled with photographs and historic information about each park’s name. Community members will be able to take a virtual tour of Boulder’s parks and learn about their namesakes. An example story map from the National Park Service can be viewed here. With help from CU graduate students, staff hopes to refine the first draft of the story map and publish this online in the second quarter of 2022. In some cases, further research might be appropriate. For example, while we have confirmed that certain members were elected officials, their legislative actions and history have not been explored to determine how their record aligns with modern values. Picture 1: Screenshot of draft story map showing overview of Andrews Arboretum. Picture 2: Screenshot of draft story map showing overview of Burke Park. Next Steps Staff intend to devote adequate time and attention to these important conversations around park naming. Park naming – or renaming – should not happen in a vacuum and thoughtful engagement is required to: ensure broad perspectives are heard, include key stakeholders and community members, carefully consider larger community goals, and consider impacts through a racial equity lens (who benefits and who is impacted by our choices). As a reminder, the current process for park naming is guided by several policies the Park and Plaza Naming and Dedication Policy (Attachment A) and, in cases where a proposed name commemorates an individual or organization, the Policy of Commemorative Naming of City 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 Facilities (Attachment B). Staff and PRAB use these policies to support the renaming processes when community members bring forward a potential name. Staff intend to continue this work with thoughtful consideration and community conversation related to park names; these considerations would be included during the engagement process for capital improvements at each site to hear from the largest amount of community members and directly from those in the impacted neighborhoods, as well as groups historically excluded from engagement and/or government. The six parks identified in the August 2021 PRAB presentation by CU History Department for further equity evaluation would be considered individually at the time of their next capital improvement: Tom Watson, Elks, Keewaydin, Hiram Fullen, Andrews Arboretum, and Columbia Cemetery. As these sites each have key stakeholders and/or neighbors vested in their naming, it is critical to point out that further consideration of the park name does not mean that a park is being recommended for renaming. Instead, impacts of the park name and its larger systematic impact will be discussed and a community conversation would be hosted to evaluate the information and options. Potential outcomes may include: • Renaming (i.e. renaming of Canyon Park to Emma Gomez Martinez Park in 2014) • Alterations to existing name (i.e. addition of others who were significant to the site) • Added interpretation or information about the name at the site or online (i.e. a plaque at the site with more information about how the site got its name and the significance) • No action Given limited capacity, staff is prioritizing racial equity initiatives related to service delivery and those outlined in the citywide Racial Equity Plan. Park naming work is important but work which will have more immediate and direct impacts on the city’s equity goals is a higher priority as the city wants to thoughtfully distribute resources to make the biggest impact in addressing systemic racism and inequity. In 2022, this will include supporting efforts to normalize and operationalize understanding of institutional and structural racism among people who work for the City of Boulder through training. BPR will also work to ensure the city takes action to end racial disparities in city services and evidence commitment at the department level - by the end of the year BPR will create a departmental Racial Equity Team and Plan. As BPR develops its Master Plan update, equity is woven through the implementation plan and six key themes. Currently in development, staff intend to include an initiative in the implementation plan to update the park naming policy to ensure it furthers the city’s equity goals. The work would then be considered and prioritized appropriately as the department develops annual work plans. Questions for the PRAB • Does PRAB support the suggested direction for this project? • Are there other items staff should consider when approaching this project or topic? Attachment A: Park Naming Policy CITY OF BOULDER DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION *** POLICIES AND PROCEDURES Park and Plaza Naming and Dedication Policy EFFECTIVE DATE: September 2007 ADOPTION DATE: September 2007 Jan Geden, CPRP, Director of Parks and Recreation I. POLICY It is the policy of the Parks and Recreation Department to provide community members with the opportunity to name and dedicate city parks and plazas owned and operated by the Parks and Recreation Department. II.PURPOSE The purpose of the park and plaza naming and dedication policy is to provide a clear process for naming and dedicating parks and plazas owned and managed by the Parks and Recreation Department. III.PROCEDURES Park and Plaza Naming •Considerations for naming a park or plaza include one or more of the following: 1.Historic names relevant to the park or plaza; 2.Geographic names descriptive of the location or significant natural features (including flora, fauna and geography in or near the park or plaza); 3.Cultural names relevant to the park or plaza; 4.Person(s) or organizations who made significant contributions to the park or plaza being named; 5.Persons (or organizations) who made a significant contribution to the community over an extended period of time; and/or 6.Person(s) or organizations donating land to be used for park or plaza purpose(s). Park and Plaza Naming and Dedication Policy PAGEl •Considerations for park or plaza name changes must be made through the completion of a Park and Plaza Naming/Renaming Application (to be developed) to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (through the Parks and Planning Superintendent). •Prior to the Board's consideration, the department will notify the impacted neighborhood of the proposed park name or name change to allow time for comments prior to the Board meeting. Staff will review the naming application and supporting documentation, along with the public input and make a recommendation to the PRAB. •All proposed names for Parks and Recreation Department owned and managed parks and plazas must be considered and approved by a majority of the members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) at a regular business meeting. •Upon approval by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, a Weekly Information Packet (WIP) item will be provided to City Council for their review and consideration (through a City Council call-up), of the recommended name. Park and Plaza Dedications Areas within a named or unnamed park or plaza owned and managed by the Parks and Recreation Department may be dedicated according to the following criteria: •Considerations for dedicating a park or plaza include one or more of the following: 1.Persons ( or organizations) who made significant contributions to the park or plaza being named 2.Persons (or organizations) who donated the land for the park or plaza; and/or 3.Persons (or organizations) who made a significant contribution to the community over an extended period of time. •Considerations for park or plaza name changes must be made through the completion of a Park and Plaza Dedication Application (to be developed) to the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (through the Parks and Planning Superintendent). •Prior to the Board's consideration, the department will notify the impacted neighborhood of the proposed park name or name change to allow time for comments prior to the Board meeting. Staff will review the naming application and supporting documentation, along with the public input and make a recommendation to the PRAB. •All proposed names for Parks and Recreation Department owned and managed parks and plazas must be considered and approved by a majority of the members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) at a regular business meeting. •Upon approval by the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, a Weekly Information Packet (WIP) item will be provided to City Council for their review and consideration (through a City Council call-up), of the recommended name. Park and Plaza Naming and Dedication Policy PAGE2 Park and Plaza Naming and Dedication Policy Criteria 1.Name of the person/organization submitting the application _________ _ 2.Current or working name of the park under consideration _________ _ 3.Physical location of the park under consideration _________ _ 4.Proposed name for the park under consideration _________ _ 5.Is this a new name for an existing park? _________ _ 6.Rationale for the name being proposed for park under consideration (may be as long as applicant desires. Please provide supporting documentation if appropriate): Park and Plaza Naming and Dedication Policy PAGE3 Attachment B: Commemorative Naming Policy CITY OF BOULDER *** POLICIES, PROCEDURES AND GUIDELINES Policy on Commemorative Naming of City Facilities Jane S. Brautigam, City Manager I. POLICY EFFECTIVE DATE: December 1, 2010 It is the policy of the City of Boulder ("City") to allow, in appropriate circumstances, the naming or renaming of facilities, owned and operated by the City, in commemoration of persons that have made unusually significant contributions to the City. This allowance extends to facilities that are owned by the City but leased to, and used by, another entity. II.PURPOSE City facilities are built and maintained at public expense and for the purpose of carrying out city business. The naming of such facilities can have long lasting implications and raise political, legal and equity concerns both within the City organization and with the public at large. The purpose of this policy is to attempt to anticipate these concerns and to provide a uniform, transparent and citywide process for addressing them. III.SCOPE A.Policy Limited to Naming in Response to Commemoration of Persons -The scope of this policy does not extend to other practices of naming city facilities, including: 1)Naming of facilities in response to sponsorship (addressed in Policy on Sponsorship Naming of City Facilities). 2)Naming for purposes of public identification (i.e., "North Boulder Park" and "East Boulder Recreation Center"), or 3)Naming after landmarks, including naming after local resources, geographic feature, or identifiable community characteristics. 4)Naming after past or present owners of the property, property donors, or after the name historically used for identification of the property. B.Applicability of Existing Department Policies -Some City departments, including the Parks and Recreation and Community Planning and Sustainability, have policies and procedures already in place that guide the consideration of naming of City facilities within their purview. To the extent that such policies incorporate requirements that are at least as strict as this policy, including specific adherence to all five procedural steps outlined in Section VI of this policy, such department-specific policies shall continue to take precedence over this policy and be the sole documents to be adhered to with regard to naming. III.DEFINITIONS The following terms are used in this policy: Commemorative: The tenn "commemorative" or "commemoration," as used herein, refers to the practice of naming a facility to honor persons who have over an extended period of time: demonstrated excellence, courage or exceptional service to the citizens of the City, the State of Colorado or the nation; provided extensive community service; worked to foster equality and reduce discrimination; made a significant financial donation or in-kind contribution to a City facility with such contribution significantly benefiting the community that the facility serves (i.e. the facility may not have otherwise been possible without the financial assistance), or who have; historical significance to the community, the City of Boulder, the State of Colorado or the nation. Donation: The term "donation" describes financial or in-kind contributions that are made without restrictions on how the money or resources are to be used and without expectation of reciprocal benefit by the donee. When a contribution is made with a clear expectation that an obligation is created or that the recipient will provide something of value in return, the contribution is considered a "sponsorship," not a donation. Facility: The tenn "facility, as used herein, means any City-owned land and buildings, and any features affixed to the land including components of the property such as rooms, parks, fields, trails, shelters and other components of the facility. The term "facility," however, does not extend to city streets, alleys or amenities such as trees, benches and fountains. Person -The term "person," as used herein, refers to any living or deceased human being. It does not extend to the name of any organization, including but not limited to, a business, sole proprietorship, partnership, or corporation. IV.CITY RETENTION OF RIGHT TO RENAME The City retains the right to rename facilities at any time. V.LIMITATIONS A city facility cannot be named or renamed: A.After an elected or appointed City official, or family member thereof, that is currently serving, at the time of application or consideration of such application. POLICY ON COMMEMORATIVE NAMING OF CITY FACILITIES 2 Commemorative naming immediately after termination of a city official's terms of service, while not prohibited, is discouraged. B. After a currently employed City staff member or volunteer, that is currently employed or volunteering, at the time of application or consideration of such application. Commemorative naming immediately after termination of a city staff member's employment, or volunteer's tenure, while not prohibited, is discouraged. Furthermore, commemorative naming for former City staff members is not appropriate when based only on tenure or performance of normal job duties. C.After a person which has a quasi-judicial matter pending, or expected to be pending, before the City at the time of application or consideration of such application. VI.PROCEDURES Step 1 Consideration for naming or renaming of a City facility begins with the completion of a Commemorative Naming Application Step 2 The proponent of the naming/renaming will be required to solicit and summarize feedback from impacted stakeholders in order to capture controversies associated with the proposal. Depending on the nature of the facility and whether the proposed name would replace a previous commemorative name, this process could include extensive outreach to nearby property owners or constituency groups associated with the facility. Step 3 The Commemorative Naming Application, along with a summary of public comment, must then be submitted to the City Manager's Office for consideration. Step 4 The application will first be reviewed by the city's naming committee; a standing committee created by this policy composed of representatives from the City Manager's and City Attorney's Office, along with a representative of the facility to be named. The focus of the committee's work can include developing a recommendation for the City Manager's consideration and documenting that recommendation. Step 5 After reviewing all information provided, the City Manager will make a determination on whether to approve or disapprove the naming proposal. The city manager will then submit his or her decision, along with all supporting documentation, to the city council in a Weekly Information Packet (WIP) as a call-up item that allows council the ability to reconsider the city manager's decision. Until council has had that opportunity, a decision on the naming or renaming shall not be considered final. VII.CONSTRUCTION AND INTERPRETATION POLICY ON COMMEMORATIVE NAMING OF CITY FACILITIES 3 Employees who have questions concerning the interpretation or application of this policy are directed to contact the City Manager or his/her designee. VIII.EXCEPTIONS/CHANGE These guidelines may be reviewed and changed at any time. IX.CITY MANAGER DESIGNEE December 1, 2010 -Carl Castillo, Policy Advisor POLICY ON COMMEMORATIVE NAMING OF CITY FACILITIES 4 3198 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80304 | www.boulderparks-rec.org | O: 303-413-7200 TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board SUBJECT: Matters from the Board DATE: February 28, 2022 A. PRAB Orientation and Mentoring In 2019-2020, PRAB members led by Mary Scott developed an onboarding letter to welcome new members and help acquaint them with important parks and recreation information. The letter was updated for 2021 (see Attachment A). PRAB may choose to update this letter or provide other information to a new member joining in April 2022. For several years, PRAB has also designated a current board member to serve as a mentor to incoming board members. B. PRAB Community Engagement Updates (verbal) \ Dear Name, A warm welcome to the City of Boulder PARKS & RECREATION ADVISORY BOARD! We hope this welcome packet will help to start a foundation for your five years of service and ease the transition to your new position. We, your fellow Board Members and City of Boulder Parks & Recreation Staff, are eager to meet and work with you! Your staff liaison is Charlotte O’Donnell, the Administrative Specialist in the Director’s Office. She can be reached at: PRABAdmin@bouldercolorado.gov or 303-413-7223. She will be the best point of contact for your questions. As you will learn in the Board & Commission orientation, we do not use “reply all” or group email chains to ensure that public business is conducted publicly; rather, the staff liaison can be a common point of contact. Your fellow board members are: (in order of term end date) Raj Seymour rseymour35@gmail.com April 2017 - March 2022 Mary Scott msboulderprab@yahoo.com April 2018 - March 2023 Pamela Yugar tapatiochick@gmail.com 626-407-7144 April 2018 - March 2023 Charles Brock Charles.a.brock@comcast.net 303-887-2523 April 2019 - March 2024 Jason Unger junger29@yahoo.com April 2020 - March 2025 Tara Winer tara.winer@gmail.com 609-707-8385 April 2020 - March 2025 We look forward to connecting with each of you; please reach out at your convenience. As you will find, we all have different approaches to PRAB, and know that you will bring your own. Several guiding questions we might consider to support our first conversation: What moved us to apply to PRAB? How would we describe the role of a PRAB member? We also are currently setting up a PRAB mentor process, which we will discuss at your first PRAB meeting. ATTACHMENT A - PRAB Orientation Letter 2021 Our meetings are generally held on the fourth Monday of each month. Due to the pandemic the PRAB meetings will be held on Zoom until further notice. Your first PRAB meeting will be on Monday, April 26. Please pay attention to your calendar appointments from PRABAdmin@bouldercolorado.gov which will include a link to access the virtual meetings. We look forward to resuming in-person meetings, typically held in Council Chambers. There will be months in which we start early, with a tour of a park or facility, and some months we will meet in different locations. Dinner will be provided once we resume in person meetings; please notify the staff liaison about any dietary restrictions so that our meals can be inclusive. Parks and Recreation is a large department serving the needs of the people and the environment in our city. As you begin to acquaint yourself with all of the services provided, please feel free to ask questions and explore resources like the Parks and Recreation website as well as the PRAB website. Our community outreach toolkit will help you navigate upcoming meetings and potential communications from community members. Being on a board will often require reviewing somewhat large volumes of information. Foundational materials for PRAB include the PRAB Handbook and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. As we begin working on the Master Plan update, please familiarize yourself with this document as quickly as possible as it will be very helpful for you feeling included in the issues that will be discussed in the coming years. Parks and Recreation has excellent social media accounts (this page has the various platform information as well as email lists to which you can subscribe). You are invited to follow the accounts on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram, as well as BPR’s official philanthropic partner, the Play Boulder Foundation, to learn more about events and the work of Parks and Recreation. We look forward to collaborating with you, soon! PRAB ATTACHMENT A - PRAB Orientation Letter 2021 Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Member Bios: Chuck Brock lives in the Newlands neighborhood near North Boulder Park; he grew up in Denton, TX and lived in Seattle and Arvada before moving to Boulder in 1997. He is a scientist at NOAA in Boulder, where he studies air quality and climate change. Mary Scott lives in the Sobo-Table Mesa hood, moved to Boulder from Santa Fe,NM in 2003 & was raised in Washington, DC. She works as a family nurse practitioner at an urgent care in Boulder County. Raj Seymour lives in the Whittier neighborhood. He moved to boulder in 1992 and is originally from Southern California. He works as a movement coach. Jason Unger lives in the Lower Chautauqua neighborhood, moved to Boulder from Washington DC in 2019 but is originally from Southern California. He works as a public policy consultant. Tara Winer lives in the Chautauqua neighborhood, moved to Boulder from Philadelphia, PA in 2010. She works remotely in sales and account management with ePromos. Pamela Yugar lives in the Newlands neighborhood & moved to Boulder in 2012 from Long Beach, CA. Pamela works as consultant Interwest Consulting Group in Boulder working in the field of staff augmentation as an Interim Parks & Rec Director for local municipalities & is the Director of the Interwest Community Foundation. ATTACHMENT A - PRAB Orientation Letter 2021 PRAB ORIENTATION CALENDAR 2021 Date / Time Event / Task Location Details March 30, 6-9pm OR April 10, 9am-12pm Attend Orientation with City Clerk and Attorney Virtual •Meet with City Attorney and various other officials regarding your duties and obligations as a Board Member • Required for your tenure on PRAB Monday, April 26, 2021, 6pm Attend your first PRAB meeting Virtual •Please review the agenda and meeting packet emailed to you in advance of the meeting. •PRAB meetings will run from 6-8:00pm (may go as late as 9:30 pm depending agenda). Mondays, 6pm Attend PRAB Meetings Virtual until further notice. Details will be emailed in advance and posted online here. •Location changes, so please check your email each month. •For in-person meetings, dinner is provided from 5:30- 5:55pm. •PRAB meetings will run from 6-7:30pm (meetings may go as late as 9pm depending agenda). •Remaining Regular PRAB meetings for 2021 are as follows. Study Sessions may be scheduled as needed. •April 26, 20201 •May 22, 2021 •June 28, 2021 •July 26, 2021 •August 23, 2021 •September 27, 2021 •October 25, 2021 •November 22, 2021 •December 27, 2021 TBD Meet with Director of Parks and Recreation TBD •Please check email for contact from Charlotte O'Donnell, your liaison between PRAB and the Parks and Recreation City Staff •Time to be arranged to answer questions that you and the Department may have for each other: Please bring your questions to this meeting! •Staff will order your meeting name plate, t-shirt or baseball cap and official name badge for events and note any dietary restrictions. ATTACHMENT A - PRAB Orientation Letter 2021 PRAB ORIENTATION CALENDAR (continued) Date / Time Event / Task Location Details Spring 2021 Self- orientation •Meet fellow board members individually. •Meet with your board mentor. •Submit your bio to be distributed to fellow PRAB members and PR staff. •Please familiarize yourself with the following resources: •City of Boulder Website •Parks and Recreation Advisory Board Website •Parks and Recreation Master Plan •Master Plan Update Project Page •2020 Progress Report •PRAB Handbook •PRAB community outreach toolkit •Parks and Recreation social media accounts Summer 2021 Meet with City Staff Please reach out to the following City Staff to arrange meetings. Contact information can be found here. •Jeff Haley, Planning, Design & Community Engagement Manager •Jackson Hite, Business Services Manager •Stephanie Munro, Regional Facilities Manager •Megan Lohmann, Recreation Manager •Dennis Warrington, Park Operations and Assets Manager •Bryan Beary, Community Partnerships & Outreach Manager Autumn 2021 TBD PRAB Retreat TBD •Members volunteer to begin annual letter to Council •Board annual check-in TBD Welcome Party TBD •Mingle with incoming and outgoing Board and Commission members and City Council Members TBD Tour Sites TBD •Please check email and listen for discussion at your meetings for dates for this tour of select locations •Opportunity for new and sitting board/commission members to take a tour of select sites of interest associated with the work that you will do on this board Ongoing Participate in Additional Opportunities TBD Examples include: joint board meetings with other boards and commissions, new committee work and attendance at Parks and Recreation community engagement and masterplan engagement events, email categories for responses to citizen messages and inquiries. ATTACHMENT A - PRAB Orientation Letter 2021