Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
02.20.24 PB Packet
CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD MEETING AGENDA DATE: February 20, 2024 TIME: 6 p.m. PLACE: Hybrid Meeting 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES A. The Planning Board minutes from January 16th, 2024 are set for approval. B. The Planning Board minutes from January 23rd, 2024 are set for approval. 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS/CONTINUATIONS A. CALL UP ITEM: 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave. Floodplain Development Permit (FLD2023-00026): Floodplain development permit application for the replacement of the Arapahoe Ave pedestrian bridge over South Boulder Creek by the City of Boulder Public Works. The call up period expires on February 26th, 2024. 5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY A. MATTERS: Proposed Civic Area Historic District B. MATTERS: Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update C. MATTERS: Letter to City Council Discussion 7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 8. ADJOURNMENT For more information call (303) 441-1880. Board packets are available after 4 p.m. Friday prior to the meeting, online at www.bouldercolorado.gov. * * * SEE REVERSED SIDE FOR MEETING GUIDELINES * * * CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD VIRTUAL MEETING GUIDELINES CALL TO ORDER The Board must have a quorum (four members present) before the meeting can be called to order. AGENDA The Board may rearrange the order of the agenda or delete items for good cause. The Board may not add items requiring public notice. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION The public is welcome to address the Board (3 minutes* maximum per speaker) during the Public Participation portion of the meeting regarding any item not scheduled for a public hearing. The only items scheduled for a public hearing are those listed under the category PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS on the Agenda. Any exhibits introduced into the record must be provided to the Board Secretary for distribution to the Board and admission into the record via email 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting time. DISCUSSION AND STUDY SESSION ITEMS Discussion and study session items do not require motions of approval or recommendation. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A Public Hearing item requires a motion and a vote. The general format for hearing of an action item is as follows: 1. Presentations • Staff presentation (10 minutes maximum*). • Applicant presentation (15-minute maximum*). Any exhibits introduced into the record at this time must be provided to the Board Secretary for distribution to the Board and admission into the record. • Planning Board questioning of staff or applicant for information only. 2. Public Hearing Each speaker will be allowed an oral presentation (3 minutes maximum*). The pooling of time will not be allowed. • Speakers should introduce themselves, giving name and address. If officially representing a group, homeowners' association, etc., please state that for the record as well. • The board requests that, prior to offering testimony, the speaker disclose any financial or business relationship with the applicant, the project, or neighbors. This includes any paid compensation. It would also be helpful if the speaker disclosed any membership or affiliation that would affect their testimony. • Speakers are requested not to repeat items addressed by previous speakers other than to express points of agreement or disagreement. Refrain from reading long documents and summarize comments wherever possible. Long documents may be submitted via email 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting time and will become a part of the official record. • Speakers should address the Land Use Regulation criteria and, if possible, reference the rules that the Board uses to decide a case. • Any exhibits introduced into the record at the hearing must be emailed to the Secretary for distribution to the Board and admission into the record 24 hours prior to the meeting. • Citizens can email correspondence to the Planning Board and staff at boulderplanningboard@bouldercolorado.gov, up to 24 hours prior to the Planning Board meeting, to be included as a part of the record. • Applicants under Title 9, B.R.C. 1981, will be provided the opportunity to speak for up to 3 minutes prior to the close of the public hearing. The board chair may allow additional time. 3. Board Action • Board motion. Motions may take any number of forms. With regard to a specific development proposal, the motion generally is to either approve the project (with or without conditions), to deny it, or to continue the matter to a date certain (generally in order to obtain additional information). • Board discussion. This is undertaken entirely by members of the Board. The applicant, members of the public or city staff participate only if called upon by the Chair. • Board action (the vote). An affirmative vote of at least four members of the Board is required to pass a motion approving any action. If the vote taken results in either a tie, a vote of three to two, or a vote of three to one in favor of approval, the applicant shall be automatically allowed a rehearing upon requesting the same in writing within seven days. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY Any Planning Board member, the Planning Director, or the City Attorney may introduce before the Board matters which are not included in the formal agenda. ADJOURNMENT The Board's goal is that regular meetings adjourn by 10:30 p.m. and that study sessions adjourn by 10:00 p.m. Agenda items will not be commenced after 10:00 p.m. except by majority vote of Board members present. VIRTUAL MEETINGS For Virtual Meeting Guidelines, refer to https://bouldercolorado.gov/government/board-commission/planning-board page for the approved Planning Board's Rules for Virtual Meetings. *The Chair may lengthen or shorten the time allotted as appropriate. If the allotted time is exceeded, the Chair may request that the speaker conclude his or her comments CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD ACTION MINUTES January 16, 2024 Hybrid Meeting A permanent set of these minutes and a tape recording (maintained for a period of seven years) are retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). Minutes and streaming audio are also available on the web at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Jorge Boone (virtual) Laura Kaplan Mark McIntyre Kurt Nordback ml Robles (virtual) Sarah Silver, Chair PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Lisa Smith STAFF PRESENT: Amanda Cusworth, Internal Operations and Board Support Manager Charles Ferro, Development Review Senior Manager Adam Olinger, City Planner Thomas Remke, Board Specialist Edward Stafford, Civil Engineering Senior Manager Chandler Van Schaack, City Planner Principal Laurel Witt, Assistant City Attorney II 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair, S. Silver, declared a quorum at 6:00 p.m. and the following business was conducted. 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION In Person: No one spoke. Virtual: 1) Lynn Segal 3. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES A. The draft Planning Board minutes from November 21st, 2023 are scheduled for approval. On a motion by L. Kaplan seconded by K. Nordback, the Planning Board voted to approve the November 21st, 2023 meeting minutes. B. The draft Planning Board minutes from December 5th, 2023 are scheduled for approval. On a motion by L. Kaplan seconded by K. Nordback, the Planning Board voted to approve the December 5th, 2023 meeting minutes. C. The draft Planning Board minutes from December 19th, 2023 are scheduled for approval. On a motion by L. Kaplan seconded by ml Robles, the Planning Board voted to approve the December 19th, 2023 meeting minutes. 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS / CONTINUATIONS A. CALL UP ITEM: Final Plat to subdivide the property at 1937 Upland Avenue to create three lots. Lot 1 is 19,575 square feet, Lot 2 is 9,724 square feet, and Lot 3 is 7,881 square feet. (Adams Subdivision, case no. TEC2022-00006). The Preliminary Plat was approved through case no. LUR2022-00003. This application is subject to potential call up on or before January 16, 2024. B. CALL UP ITEM: 2105 Mapleton Ave. Nonconforming Use Review (LUR2023-00047): Nonconforming Use Review for a 201 square foot addition to the attached dwelling unit at 2105 Mapleton Ave., including updated landscaping and architectural improvements. The call up period expires on January 16, 2024. C. CALL UP ITEM: Stream, Wetland and Water Body Map Revision (WET2023-00019) Gebhard ISP Mapping Revision. The call-up period expires on January 16, 2024. D. CALL UP ITEM: Standard Wetland Permit (WET2023-00014) Driveway Culvert Replacement at 8550/8600 Valmont. The call-up period expires on January 16, 2024. E. CALL UP ITEM: Standard Wetland Permit (WET2023-00020) Chapman Drive Trailhead and Pedestrian Bridge. The call-up period expires on January 16, 2024. This item was called up by K. Nordback. F. CALL UP ITEM: Standard Wetland Permit (WET2023-00021) Sawhill Ponds Improvements. The call-up period expires on January 26, 2024. 5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A. AGENDA TITLE: Concept Review proposal to redevelop the 448,668 sq. ft. site at 2952 Baseline Rd. with a mixed-use development consisting of residential, commercial, hotel, and restaurant uses. The existing buildings on site would be demolished and replaced with six new 4- 5 story buildings containing retail, restaurant and hotel uses as well as approximately 610 new dwelling units, and a mix of structured and underground parking. The unit type mix would include market rate units and student housing units. Reviewed under case number LUR2023- 00038. Staff Presentation: S. Silver introduced the item. C. Van Schaack presented the item to the board. Board Questions: C. Van Schaack answered questions from the board. Applicant Presentation: Andy Bush and Bill Holicky presented the item to the board on behalf of the applicant. Board Questions: Andy Bush and Bill Holicky answered questions from the board. Public Hearing: In Person: 1. Ken Farmer 2. Guillarmo Losvec 3. Harel Biggie 4. Dr. Michael Grayson 5. Kirill Kravchuk 6. Ben Herman 7. Sage Sherman 8. Matthew Jensen 9. Gregory Kates 10. Hunter Damiani 11. Adam Perry 12. Aiden Young-Sgoutas 13. Kurt Dageforde 14. Daniel Henderson 15. Chad Henderson 16. Lois LaCroix 17. Ana Melara-Whitman 18. Jacob Felltnor 19. Adam Garno 20. Louisa Ensor 21. Paul Whiteside 22. Thomas Sigler 23. Destin Woods Virtual: 1. Kimman Harmon 2. Em Fox 3. George Craft 4. David Pardo 5. Scott Woodard 6. Mike Marsh 7. Paula Moseley 8. Ron DePugh 9. Daniel Howard 10. Lisa Harris 11. Cecilia Girz 12. Lynn Segal 13. Hunter Miller 14. Rosemary Hegarty 15. Nick Aguilera 16. Brent Fontana 17. Dorothy Cohen 18. Macon Cowles Board Comments: Key Issue #1: Is the proposed concept plan generally compatible with the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP)? M. McIntyre stated that he believes that the project aligns with BVCP goals for neighborhood centers but commented on the thinness of the proposal. He indicated that this lack of design detail plays into community fears regarding development and gives the board very little to provide feedback on. Mark noted that he was aligned with staff’s comments about massing, overall design, and access. L. Kaplan agreed that this project is generally compatible with the goals and objectives of the BVCP. Laura stated her general preference for more retail space on the ground floor and commented that the purpose of a neighborhood center is to support a community. Laura stated that that this concept provides more retail space on the ground floor, as well as housing, and thus should be considered a win-win. K. Nordback agreed with L. Kaplan and M. McIntyre that neighborhood centers need to serve a neighborhood. He noted that CB land use is listed as being primarily business, and that parts of the plan do not meet this standard. Ml Robles stated that, as proposed, this plan does not meet the intent nor guidance of a neighborhood center as defined in the BVCP. She stated that BVCP and zoning both point to this having a stronger commercial and retail base than currently proposed. She recommended that the applicant take a deeper look at what the BVCP and the BC-2 Zoning District standards are asking for. J. Boone seconded ml Robles’s comments and expressed serious concerns about the development as proposed. Jorge thanked the public for coming out and providing comments on this proposal. He believes that this does not work with the BVCP and maximizes profitability for the owners and developers of this site rather than serving the community’s needs. S. Silver agreed with ml Robles and J. Boone’s comments regarding the excessive maximization of the proposed development. She suggested that the applicants decrease the size of their development and add more neighborhood-serving commercial space, perhaps with smaller retail footprints, when they return with their site plans. Sarah also suggested that the applicants consider diversifying the types of housing offered in the proposal. L. Kaplan made a comment regarding the inclusion of a hotel on the site, noting that one may not be ideal in this location as it is not a neighborhood-serving use, and it would be difficult to achieve given the current zoning. Key Issue #2: Does the Board have feedback for the applicant on the conceptual site plan and building design? J. Boone stated that he believes the conceptual design was put forth as a strategy to maximize revenue from the site and suggested that the applicant team review the board’s comments closely. ml Robles stated that the staff provided good input on the site and building design issues including access, open space, permeability, and scale. ml expressed that she would not support ground floor residential uses on any building facing Baseline or 30th St. She raised questions that a student population base would be able to support ground floor businesses year-round. ml advised the applicants to consider who they would be housing and how those residents would support the neighborhood center. K. Nordback made comments regarding the number and size of commercial units, noting that he likes to see more smaller spaces rather than fewer larger spaces. He also offered feedback on street design, access, minimizing curb cuts on Baseline, parking, and height issues. He disagreed with ml regarding the type of housing, opining that it is an ideal place for student housing. L. Kaplan agreed with most of the staff’s comments and noted that the plan includes a mix of student and non-student housing, which could help ease ml’s concerns. M. McIntyre noted that the design needs more articulation. He agreed that the development feels massive, and he sympathized with the community’s concerns. He noted that a lot of the proposed open space lies in the linear path that runs along Hwy 36, which he feels would not be utilized effectively as community space. S. Silver brought up neighbors’ concerns of increased sound pollution from the highway caused by these buildings. She suggested moving the parking structure along Hwy 36. Sarah commented on livability of the development. She also called for far more on-the-ground green space, including trees. She echoed M. McIntyre’s opinion, stating that it is difficult to comment on “Lego buildings”, given such incomplete design plans. Key Issue #3: Is the proposed building height of 55 feet in general proportion to the height of existing buildings and the proposed or projected heights of approved buildings in the area? M. McIntyre noted that the current site layout does not seem to take advantage of any view corridors. He commented that the height limit is not 35 feet, but 55 feet, given the proper community benefit. L. Kaplan reiterated that it is important for the community to understand that the “35 ft. height limit” is the by-right height limit, and that allowing a development up to 55 feet in this area is not breaking any rules or giving developers any special treatment. She feels that 55 feet is an appropriate height for this area but agreed with K. Nordback that the building heights need more variability. She supported staffs’ comments in the packet about the length of building frontages and variability of roof lines. K. Nordback agreed that a max height of 55’ is appropriate in this location, considering the proximity of much taller buildings at Williams Village, but he expressed other architectural concerns. Ml Robles stated that, as this project stands, it does not meet basic definition of a neighborhood center, so she would not see a benefit to allowing additional height. J. Boone noted that the Planning Board does not control CU’s zoning, and as such the Planning Board should not use the surrounding buildings that were developed by CU when planning the city’s future framework. S. Silver agreed with ml Robles and J. Boone that the city should not use buildings that are not compliant with the city’s height requirement when considering height requirements of buildings that are bound by the city’s code. Sarah agreed with K. Nordback that there needs to be more variation of building height. Key Issue #4: Other key issues as identified by the Planning Board. ml Robles noted that the site is subject to historic preservation review and that this should happen before further review by the planning board. Ml Robles pointed out that this plan should include keeping vital services operable during construction. She noted that this project highlights many of the problems associated with redeveloping long-standing sites and suggested a deep rethink on how to provide what the city needs at this site. K. Nordback noted that a historic preservation can protect the exterior of the building but cannot protect the business inside. He believed it might be politically wise for the applicant to consider a plan that keeps the existing Dark Horse building as is. He expressed concerns about the project phasing and encouraged a plan to minimize the time Sprouts and other businesses would be closes. He reiterated concerns about the amount of parking and suggested the applicant seek parking alternatives. He agreed with neighbors’ concerns for this to remain a lively community space. L. Kaplan echoed K. Nordback’s comments about the limitations of landmarking and historic preservation, noting that this process cannot help to preserve or sustain the business inside. She reminded participants that the city cannot require applicants to build affordable housing on site. She noted that determining whether the property meets the criteria for landmarking is the purview of the Landmarks Board. She noted challenges with sequencing the Landmarks Board review of the property with Site Review. She strongly encouraged staff to work with the Landmarks Board to determine whether Landmarks Board would be willing to landmark over the objection of the property owner before this project comes back for Site Review. M. McIntyre appreciated the public participation in tonight’s meeting, and reminded the public that there is no government mechanism to protect beloved businesses. He commented that it may take a lot more design work to convince the board that this plan has potential to become a beloved neighborhood center. S. Silver made additional comments about parking challenges and reducing sound issues. 6. ADDITIONAL MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY L. Smith announced her resignation from the board. The remainder of the board thanked Lisa for her time spent serving on the board. 7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 8. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 10:35 pm. APPROVED BY ___________________ Board Chair ___________________ DATE CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD ACTION MINUTES January 23, 2024 Hybrid Meeting A permanent set of these minutes and a tape recording (maintained for a period of seven years) are retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). Minutes and streaming audio are also available on the web at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/ PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Jorge Boone Laura Kaplan (remote) Kurt Nordback ml Robles Sarah Silver, Chair PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Mark McIntyre STAFF PRESENT: Amanda Cusworth, Internal Operations and Board Support Manager Charles Ferro, Planning Senior Manager Karl Guiler, Policy Advisor Senior Lisa Houde, City Planner Senior Brad Mueller, Planning & Development Services Director Hella Pannewig, Assistant City Attorney Thomas Remke, Board Specialist Vivian Castro-Wooldridge, Planning Engagement Specialist 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair, S. Silver, declared a quorum at 6:02 p.m. and the following business was conducted. 2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION a. Lynn Segal 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS / CONTINUATIONS 5. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS 6. ADDITIONAL MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY A. Process Streamlining Code Changes Introduction Staff Presentation: B. Mueller introduced the item. L. Houde presented the item. Board Questions: C. Ferro, B. Mueller, and L. Houde answered questions from the board. Board Comments: Key Issue #1: Does Planning Board support changing some call-up procedures, such as removing call-up requirements for floodplain and wetland development or requiring more than one member of Planning Board to call an item up? S. Silver stated that it makes sense to remove requirements for floodplain and wetland call-ups, but that site reviews and use reviews should remain. Sarah believes that only one member of the Planning Board should be required to call up an item. K. Nordback agrees that floodplain and wetland call-ups should be eliminated. Kurt stated his belief that more than one Planning Board member should be required to call up an item. J. Boone agreed with his colleagues that floodplain and wetland call-up requirements can be eliminated and that site review and use review are important. He believes that only one Planning Board memo should be required to call up an item. ml Robles agreed with J. Boone’s statements. L. Kaplan resonated with K. Nordback’s statements. She believes more than one board member should be required to call an item up. She supported not having call-up for floodplain and wetland permits and is open to staff suggesting additional categories of permits that might not need to be call-up items. J. Boone mentioned that it would seem odd to allow one member of the public to call an item up while requiring more than one Planning Board member to call up the same item. Key Issue #2: Does Planning Board support implementing changes that would reduce the number of required Use Reviews, such as allowing Conditional Use review for use types without proposed site changes that currently require Use Review? S. Silver noted that the Planning Board serves as a public forum and that it is important not to forget this in the process of streamlining. J. Boone mentioned that process changes that have already been made may dramatically reduce the number of use reviews. He believes that Use Reviews are a necessary part of the process that prevents developers from shifting what was intended to be community-serving retail space into additional housing. K. Nordback believes applications that don’t involve site changes should be reviewed administratively. He is supportive of limiting the types of use reviews subject to call-up. ml Robles echoed J. Boone’s concerns regarding losing community-serving spaces on the ground floor, which would change a development’s relationship with the public and its surroundings. S. Silver agreed with ml and Jorge’s comments, and mentioned Nonconforming Use Reviews, stating that they are a valuable process that she would not want to see minimized. L. Kaplan supported the idea of a lower level of review for uses that don’t change the physical site. She suggested keeping Use Review if there is a change from a commercial use to residential. Key Issue #3: Does Planning Board support removing the automatic Planning Board hearing requirement for Use Reviews of nonresidential uses in residential districts, with options for call- ups or appeals still available? S. Silver stated that if the automatic Planning Board hearing requirement is removed for Use Reviews for nonresidential uses in residential districts, and they are instead presented to the board as call-up opportunities, one member of the Planning Board should remain capable of calling up an item. J. Boone expressed concerns with an unintended consequence of losing housing inventory to alternate uses, which goes against the Planning Board’s efforts of balancing the supply and demand of workspace and housing. He agreed with S. Silver’s comment about ensuring that one Planning Board member is allowed to call up an item. ml Robles expressed her support for this change. K. Nordback strongly supported removing the automatic requirement while keeping opportunities for call-up or appeals available. In the event of this change, he maintains his belief that more than one board member should be required to call up an item. L. Kaplan agreed with K. Nordback’s comments and stated that it would not change her opinion on how many board members should be required to call up an item. Key Issue #4: Does Planning Board have any concerns related to potential changes to development review extensions, minor amendments, appeals, or public art? S. Silver noted that adding a fee for appeals may create an equity issue, and creating a barrier to a potential nuisance submitter may be a better solution, if that’s the potential problem that is being addressed. L. Kaplan suggested that a filed appeal could become a call-up for Planning Board rather than an automatic hearing. ml Robles agreed that adding a fee may present an equity issue. Regarding public art, S. Silver suggested reducing, but not eliminating, the setback requirement. ml Robles noted that if setback requirements are reduced or eliminated, public rights of ways must be protected. K. Nordback expressed his support for reducing requirements around public art, and he agreed with ml regarding preventing obstructions of public rights of way. Key Issue #5: Does Planning Board have any other key issues to discuss related to process streamlining improvements? L. Kaplan requested more information from staff regarding minimum submittal requirements in the application for Concept Review proposals. ml Robles appreciated staff’s analysis and appreciated their efforts to create predictability for planners and developers. She noted that clear definitions and criteria are a great way to achieve this. J. Boone acknowledged the progress that staff have already made in this area. K. Nordback mentioned the signage issue with Voodoo Doughnuts and suggested removing the word “colors” from the definition of a sign. L. Kaplan recognized the staff’s hard work that goes into bringing forward these suggested changes and appreciated their efforts to streamline processes and eliminate unnecessary red tape. S. Silver noted that the main point that the board seems to disagree on is how many people are needed to call up an item. She suggested setting this issue aside until the impacts of other changes can be seen. J. Boone suggested that, in the future, individuals that sign up for public comment should be required to disclose any financial relationship they have with the applicant. 7. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK 8. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 9:03 pm APPROVED BY ___________________ Board Chair ___________________ DATE M E M O R A N D U M TO: Planning Board FROM: Tom Pankau, Senior Civil Engineering Project Manager DATE: Feb 12th, 2024 CALL UP ITEM: Floodplain Development Permit (FLD2023-00026) 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave Arapahoe Avenue Pedestrian Bridge Replacement over South Boulder Creek The call-up period expires on Feb 26th, 2024 Key Dates Floodplain development permit approved by staff: Feb 12 th, 2024 The decision may be called up by Planning Board on or before: Feb 26 th, 2024 There is one Planning Board meeting within the 14 day call up period on: Feb 20th, 2024 Project Description The City of Boulder Transportation Department has proposed a project to replace the west-bound Arapahoe Avenue pedestrian bridge over South Boulder Creek. The bridge is parallel to and north of Arapahoe Avenue and is located within the City right-of-way. The existing bridge structure is in poor condition and the bridge will be replaced with a single-span 81.5-foot prefabricated bridge set on the existing abutments. The project is located within the High Hazard Zone, Conveyance Zone, and the bridge spans the South Boulder Creek. As a result, a floodplain development permit is subject to call-up by Planning Board according to Section 9-3-9(e)(2), B.R.C. 1981 and Section 9-3-6(h), B.R.C. 1981. Floodplain Compliance The applicant has demonstrated compliance with the City’s floodplain regulations, including High Hazard and Conveyance Zone restrictions. The project will not adversely impact nearby properties and a No-Rise certification has been provided with the application. The freeboard from the 100-year floodplain elevation underneath the bridge will not change. A copy of the floodplain development permit and application materials has been consolidated and attached for memorandum purposes. Item 4A - 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave Floodplain Development Permit Page 1 of 5 Associated Wetland Permits A separate conditional wetland permit was submitted for this project and subsequently approved. However, the project was not required to go through public process for wetland impacts. Additional Information The floodplain permit has been summarized and attached for memorandum purposes. The full application materials are available by request to Tom Pankau (pankaut@bouldercolorado.gov). Questions about the project should be directed to: Tom Pankau, PE Senior Civil Engineering Project Manager pankaut@bouldercolorado.gov Attachments: A. Vicinity Map B. Bridge Plan & Profile C. Project location within the floodplain Item 4A - 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave Floodplain Development Permit Page 2 of 5 r 0 690 1,380 ft © 2022 City of Boulder, Colorado For additional info, please visit https://boulderplandevelop.net Date: 1/31/2024 Boulder MapLink Attachment A - Vicinity Map Item 4A - 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave Floodplain Development Permit Page 3 of 5 Attachment B - Bridge Plan & ProfileItem 4A - 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave Floodplain Development PermitPage 4 of 5 Arapahoe Avenue Pedestrian Bridge Replacement, - 6 - Floodplain Development Permit Letter August 25, 2023 Civil, Transportation, & Water Resources Engineering Land Surveying • Geomatics • Mapping www.drexelbarrell.com Attachment C - Project Location Within the Floodplain Item 4A - 5900 BLK Arapahoe Ave Floodplain Development Permit Page 5 of 5 CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: FEBRUARY 20, 2024 AGENDA TITLE Consideration and reporting of the land use implications to City Council of a proposed historic district designation encompassing a portion of the area from 1777 Broadway to 14th Street and between Canyon Boulevard and Arapahoe Avenue (Civic Area Historic District). Applicant: Historic Boulder, Inc., Friends of the Bandshell, Friends of the Teahouse Owner: City of Boulder REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS Planning & Development Services Brad Mueller, Director of Planning & Development Services Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Senior Manager Marcy Gerwing, Principal Historic Preservation Planner Clare Brandt, Historic Preservation Planner Chris Reynolds, Deputy City Attorney, City Attorney’s Office OBJECTIVE 1. Hear staff presentation. 2. Planning Board discussion. 3. Planning Board report on any land use implications related to the proposed historic district designation per Section 9-11-5(e). 4. Staff includes Planning Board comments in City Council memo. Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 1 of 102 SUMMARY Project Name: Proposed Civic Area Historic District Location: 1236 Canyon Blvd., 0 13th St., 1300 Canyon Blvd., 1770 13th St., 1750 13th St., and a portion of 1777 Broadway Size of District: Approximately 387,200 square feet (8.9 acres) BVCP Land Use: Park - Urban and Other, Public/Semi-Public and Open Space - Other Zoning: Public, Downtown-1 and Downtown-5 KEY ISSUE(S) Staff has identified the following key issue to help guide the board’s discussion: 1. Will the proposed historic district designation result in any land use implications? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Section 9-11-5(e), B.R.C. 1981, requires that the Planning Board review any proposal for the designation of a new historic district within forty-five (45) days and report to the City Council on its land use implications. A portion of the Civic Area (see Figure 1) has been recommended for designation as a local historic district by the Landmarks Board, finding that it meets the purposes and standards described in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C., 1981. Figure 1. Proposed historic district boundary recommended by the Landmarks Board (solid blue line). Existing landmark designation boundaries shaded in blue with dashed blue outline. Contemporary property lines outlined with a solid red line. The proposed district includes Central Park, the 13th Street and Sister Cities plazas, five individually designated landmarks, and portions of Broadway, 13th Street, two ditches, Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 2 of 102 and Boulder Creek. The area’s history includes use by Indigenous People for millennia preceding the 1871 founding of Boulder; a neighborhood with residential and commercial uses from the 1870s until the 1920s; Central Park, an urban park formally established in 1924; and five surrounding buildings housing municipal uses constructed between 1906 and 1998 that represent a progression of architectural styles. As a whole, this area represents an eclectic municipal character that has evolved over time and is unique to Boulder’s history, location and climate. The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) land use designation is Park - Urban and Other, Public/Semi-Public and Open Space - Other. Current zoning is Public, Downtown-1 and Downtown-5. The area is characterized by an urban park with adjacent civic and commercial uses consistent with current land use and zoning standards. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Suggested Motion Language: In its report to City Council on the land use implications of the designation of the Civic Area Historic District, staff recommends that Planning Board state the following: 1.The proposed historic district is consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan land use designations. 2.The proposed historic district is consistent with the existing Public, Downtown-1 and Downtown-5 zoning. 3. The proposed historic district does not impact the uses permitted in the underlying zoning. BACKGROUND & PUBLIC FEEDBACK Please reference the Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board designation memo (Attachment A) for information on the project description, background, process, community engagement strategy and public feedback summary. BOARD FEEDBACK Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) On Jan. 22, 2024, the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) reviewed the proposal and had a robust conversation to understand the potential benefits and impacts of the proposed designation. At the end of the discussion, a board member requested an informal straw poll: The four members present all agreed that they do not support designation of a historic district. Their concerns can be summarized as thus: o Lack of understanding of a unifying element or overarching theme that would explain creating a district. o Lack of support for additional protection and outsized input by one city board, given that the buildings, bandshell and some areas of the park are already protected by designation. Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 3 of 102 o Disagreement that potential benefits of designation outweigh the added process, time and thus expense of a district. A video recording of the meeting is available online here. Key points include recommendations from PRAB board members (1:18:35) and PRAB Board Chair statement (1:06:30) Landmarks Board (LB) The Landmarks Board held a public hearing on Feb. 7, 2024. Twelve people spoke in support of historic district designation, including representatives from the three applicant groups (Historic Boulder, Inc., Friends of the Bandshell and Friends of the Teahouse) and NAACP Boulder County. The board made the following motions (draft minutes): On a motion by R. Golobic seconded by J. Decker the Landmarks Board voted (4-1, Castellano dissenting) to recommend to the City Council that it designate the area encompassing a portion of the area between 1777 Broadway to 14th Street and between Canyon Boulevard and Arapahoe Avenue, to be known as the Civic Area Historic District, finding that it meets the standards for historic district designation in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981, and adopt the staff memorandum dated February 7, 2024, as the findings of the board. On a motion by C. Castellano, seconded by R. Pelusio, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to recommend to the City Council that it consider naming the district to commemorate those who were displaced during the park’s development and other exclusionary actions and policies by the city, i.e. Water Street Historic District, Boulder Creek. On a motion by J. Decker, seconded by R. Pelusio, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to recommend to the City Council that it consider expanding the boundary to include Block 11 to recognize the historical significance of the displaced residential area and its importance to the site of Boulder’s first Black community. Note, Block 11 encompasses the area west of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building. On a motion by R. Pelusio, seconded by R. Golobic, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to recommend to the City Council that it consider expanding the boundary to include the southern and western banks of Boulder Creek. On a motion by C. Castellano, seconded by R. Golobic, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to recommend to the City Council that it consider expanding the period of significance to a date that includes the residential period (1880). On a motion by R. Pelusio, seconded by A. Daniels, the Landmarks Board voted (5-0) to recommend to the City Council that it consider Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 4 of 102 recognizing Olmsted’s plan as being intact, recognizable, and significant to the historic district. A video recording of the meeting is available online here. The item begins at 1:11:32. ANALYSIS Staff has identified the following key issue for Planning Board’s consideration: 1. Will the proposed historic district designation result in any land use implications? The Landmarks Board is required by ordinance to notify the Planning Board of its recommendation for the approval of a historic district. Planning Board shall review the proposal and report to the City Council on the land use implications of the proposed designation (subsection 9-11-5(e), B.R.C. 1981). Local historic designation recognizes and protects areas significant to Boulder’s history, “to enhance property values, stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest and foster knowledge of the city's living heritage” (Subsection 9-11-1(a), B.R.C. 1981). Physical changes within historic districts and on individually landmarked properties require design review by the historic preservation program to ensure the changes are compatible with the site’s historic character and designation. It is not intended to preclude future development or redevelopment. Historic district designation does not consider future uses of the property and buildings, and the Landmarks Board does not have authority to review or approve changes in use. The proposed historic district includes Central Park, the 13th Street and Sister Cities plazas, five individually designated landmarks, and portions of Broadway, 13th Street, two ditches, and Boulder Creek. The pattern of development and uses within the area are generally consistent with the current BVCP land use designations of Park - Urban and Other, Public/Semi-public and Open Space – Other (see Figure 2), and the existing zoning of Public, Downtown-1 and Downtown-5 (see Figure 3). Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 5 of 102 Figure 2. Current Land Use Designations. Area within boundary recommended by the Landmarks Board identified future land uses as Park, Urban and Other (Green; area west of 13th), Public (light blue; area east of 13th) and Open Space Other (Gray-Green; along Boulder Creek and Boulder Slough) Figure 3. Current Zoning Districts. Area within boundary recommended by the Landmarks Board currently zoned as Public (purple; area west of 13th Street) and Downtown – 1 and Downtown 5 (red; area east of 13th Street and portion along Broadway near Arapahoe). Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 6 of 102 NEXT STEPS The Planning Board’s report on any land use implications for the designation will be included in the City Council memos. The online feedback form on the project website will be open until mid-April and comments emailed to the Landmarks Board, landmarksboard@bouldercolorado.gov, will also be added to the public record. The designation is tentatively scheduled to be reviewed by City Council on March 21st (1st Reading, Consent Agenda) and April 11th (2nd Reading, Public Hearing). ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 7 of 102 MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD February 7, 2024 STAFF Brad Mueller, Director of Planning and Development Services Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Senior Manager Chris Reynolds, Deputy City Attorney, City Attorney’s Office Marcy Gerwing, Principal Historic Preservation Planner Clare Brandt, Historic Preservation Planner AGENDA TITLE Public hearing and consideration of an application to designate a historic district encompassing a portion of the area from 1777 Broadway to 14th Street and between Canyon Boulevard and Arapahoe Avenue, pursuant to Section 9-11-5 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981, and under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, “Quasi-Judicial Hearings,” B.R.C. 1981. Address: 1236 Canyon Blvd., 0 13th St., 1300 Canyon Blvd., 1770 13th St., 1750 13th St., and a portion of 1777 Broadway Owner: City of Boulder Applicant: Historic Boulder, Inc., Friends of the Bandshell, Friends of the Teahouse Case Type/Number: Landmark Designation (HIS2023-00081) Code Section: 9-11-5, B.R.C., 1981 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Landmarks Board will make a recommendation to the City Council on the proposed Civic Area Historic District at this hearing. The criteria for the board’s review is whether the designation meets the purposes and intent of Section 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. Staff requests the Landmarks Board’s feedback on the following: •Does the board recommend designation of the historic district to City Council? •Does the board have comments on the Draft Design Guideline Framework? Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 8 of 102 •Does the board have comments on the proposed ordinance language, including the boundary, district name, character-defining features and alterations that could have a significant impact on the character of the district? CONTENTS MEMORANDUM TO THE LANDMARKS BOARD ............................................................................................................... 1 Staff ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Agenda Title ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................................................... 1 Contents .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Staff Recommendation ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Recommended Motion Language ................................................................................................................................................... 3 Background ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 Effect of Local Designation ............................................................................................................................................................. 4 Board and Commission Feedback .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Public Process and Engagement Summary ................................................................................................................................... 6 Public Comment ................................................................................................................................................................................ 9 Description of the Proposed Historic District ............................................................................................................................. 11 History of Proposed District .......................................................................................................................................................... 12 Purpose and Criteria for the Board’s Decision ........................................................................................................................... 15 Staff Analysis of Criteria ............................................................................................................................................................... 15 Staff Analysis of Code Criteria – Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981 ................................................................. 15 Staff Analysis of Relevant BVCP Policies ........................................................................................................................... 19 Staff Analysis of Significance Criteria for District Landmarks ...................................................................................... 20 Cultural Landscape Assessment for Central Park ..................................................................................................................... 36 Significance – Cultural Landscape Assessment ................................................................................................................ 37 Integrity - Cultural Landscape Assessment ....................................................................................................................... 37 Integrity Findings – CLA ...................................................................................................................................................... 38 Staff Analysis of Integrity ............................................................................................................................................................. 39 Designation Ordinance ............................................................................................................................................................. 46 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 9 of 102 Preliminary Period of Significance and Character-Defining Features ................................................................................... 46 Preliminary District Name and Boundary .................................................................................................................................. 48 Draft Design Guideline Framework ............................................................................................................................................ 52 Proposed Findings .......................................................................................................................................................................... 52 Next Steps ....................................................................................................................................................................................... 53 Attachments .................................................................................................................................................................................... 53 STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the Landmarks Board forward the application to the City Council with a recommendation to designate the area, with a recommended boundary as shown in Figure 7), as a local historic district to be known as the Civic Area Historic District. RECOMMENDED MOTION LANGUAGE The Landmarks Board recommends to the City Council that it designate the area encompassing a portion of the area between 1777 Broadway to 14th Street and between Canyon Boulevard and Arapahoe Avenue, as shown in Figure 7, to be known as the Civic Area Historic District, finding that it meets the standards for historic district designation in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981, and adopt the staff memorandum dated February 7, 2024, as the findings of the board. BACKGROUND • 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 of the Glen Huntington Bandshell, an individual local landmark (Ordinance 5751), to include the entirety of Block 13 (1236 Canyon Blvd.). • In November 2021, the Landmarks Board initiated the process to expand the boundary and in April 2022, the Landmarks Board voted to recommend expansion of the boundary. The Parks and Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) requested that the decision be postponed in order to allow time for additional review and coordination with the forthcoming Civic Area Phase 2 planning and design process. • On June 14, 2022, City Council held a public hearing to consider expanding the designation boundary of the Glen Huntington Bandshell. The City Council gave a Nod of Five to “have Landmarks staff investigate and explore the creation of a downtown area historic district that Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 10 of 102 would include this area, saying they would work with the Landmarks Board and Parks Board moving forward.” See City Council 06.14.2022 recording (link). • Following Council’s direction at the June 14, 2022 meeting (item 4B, page 70), Historic Preservation and Parks and Recreation staff jointly established an approach to evaluate a Historic District in the Civic Area that included developing a Cultural Landscape Assessment, which will be integrated into the Civic Area Phase 2 process and timeline, and inform the next phase of park design for the Civic Area. See the April 24, 2023 PRAB Packet (link), the April 12, 2023 Landmarks Board Meeting (link) and the City Council 05.18.2023 information packet item (link). • On May 30, 2023, the Planning & Development Services Department accepted a complete application for a proposed historic district in the Civic Area from Historic Boulder Inc., Friends of the Teahouse and Friends of the Bandshell. • On July 12, 2023 the Landmarks Board voted (3-1, C. Castellano dissenting) to initiate the historic district process with the understanding that the applicants would extend the timeline defined in sections 9-11-4 and 9-11-5, BRC 1981. See Landmarks Board 07.12.23 Minutes (link). • On August 23, 2023, the applicant group and city signed an agreement to extend the public process and hold the designation hearing on February 7, 2024. See Attachment A: Tolling Agreement. • On December 18, 2023, the Landmarks Board and Parks & Recreation Advisory Board held a joint study session and reviewed the process to date, provided feedback on the draft design guidelines, and reviewed the draft CLA findings. See December 18, 2023 LB-PRAB Joint Study Session memo (link). • On January 22, 2024, staff attended a Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) meeting to provide an update on process and give an opportunity for PRAB members to provide comments. The final CLA report was included in the 01.22.2024 packet to the PRAB (link). • Prior to the public hearing, staff completed the public process outlined in Section 9-11-4, Public Process for Historic Districts, B.R.C. 1981, including meeting with members of city departments to explain the responsibilities and benefits of designation, community engagement efforts, and development of a draft design guideline framework. See “Public Process” section below for more information. EFFECT OF LOCAL DESIGNATION Local historic designation recognizes and protects areas significant to Boulder’s history, “to enhance property values, stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest and foster knowledge of Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 11 of 102 the city's living heritage” (Subsection 9-11-1(a), B.R.C. 1981). Historic district signs and landmark plaques identify designated areas recognized for their historic, architectural or environmental significance. The program shares the history of these places through its website and walking tours. Benefits of local designation include: • Qualification for a 20% Federal Tax Credit for income-producing properties listed on the National Register of Historic Places. • Qualification for a 20% Colorado State Income Tax credit for individually landmarked properties and those in a historic district. • Exemption from city sales tax on construction materials when applying for a building permit, as long as at least 30% of the material value is for the building's exterior. • Access to grants through the State Historical Fund, with projects needing to show a public benefit to be eligible. • Possible exceptions or variances to certain building, energy and zoning standards, like floodplain, height, solar, and residential growth management requirements in specific circumstances, allowances for historic buildings related to floodplain, height, solar, energy requirements. • Newly-designated landmarks receive a bronze plaque in a public ceremony. • Staff assistance for applicants going through development review, Landmark Alteration Certificate, and building permit processes. Physical changes within historic districts and on individually landmarked properties require design review by the historic preservation program to ensure the changes are compatible with the site’s historic character and designation. In 2023, 88% of Landmark Alteration Certificate (LAC) applications were approved, 11% are still in review, and only 1% were denied. Of the approved LAC applications, 90% were approved within two weeks. (Note, that very few applications are ‘denied,’ but rather applicants work with staff to resolve conflicts with the design guidelines, or the application is withdrawn and resubmitted with changes.) In the rare case the Landmarks Board denies an application, the decision is subject to review by City Council. There is no application fee, and there are three levels of review: • Administrative: Small-scale changes are reviewed by Historic Preservation staff on an ongoing basis (average review time and approval rate in 2023: 12 days, 99%). • Landmarks Design Review Committee (LDRC): A committee consisting of two Landmarks Board members and a historic preservation staff member meets weekly to review the majority of applications (average review time and approval rate in 2023: 3 weeks, 92%). Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 12 of 102 • Landmarks Board: The five-member board meets monthly to review applications for demolition, new construction over 340 sq. ft., and applications referred by the LDRC (average review time and approval rate in 2023: 3 months, 8 applications approved, 1 withdrawn). BOARD AND COMMISSION FEEDBACK The Landmarks Board and the Parks & Recreation Advisory Board held a joint study session on Dec. 18, 2023, to hear an update on the designation process, provide feedback on the draft design guideline framework, and review the preliminary Cultural Landscape Assessment (CLA) findings for Central Park. The Dec. 18, 2023 memo, minutes, and audio recording are available in the Central Records archive (link) and the video recording (link) is available online. On Jan. 22, 2024, PRAB board members had a robust conversation to understand the potential benefits and impacts of the proposed Civic Area Historic District designation. At the end of the discussion, a board member requested an informal straw poll: The four members present all agreed that they do not support designation of a historic district. Their concerns can be summarized as thus: o Lack of understanding of a unifying element or overarching theme that would explain creating a district. o Lack of support for additional protection and outsized input by one city board, given that the buildings, bandshell and some areas of the park are already protected by designation. o Disagreement that potential benefits of designation outweigh the added process, time and thus expense of a district. The staff memo (link to Jan. 22, 2024 PRAB Packet, page 13-62) and video recording (link) are available in the Central Records archive. The board chair’s statement begins at 1:06:30 and the closing board remarks for the PRAB meeting begin at 1:18:35 of the video recording. See Attachment B: Jan. 22, 2024, PRAB Meeting Summary. PUBLIC PROCESS AND ENGAGEMENT SUMMARY The historic district designation process is outlined in Section 9-11-4 Public Process for Historic Districts, B.R.C. 1981. The following is a summary of efforts between July 2023 through January 2024. Department and Agency Coordination In August, Planning & Development Services (P&DS) staff met individually with representatives from Transportation and Mobility, Parks & Recreation (BPR), Planning & Development Services, Public Works - Utilities, Community Vitality, Facilities & Fleet, City Manager’s Office, City Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 13 of 102 Attorney’s Office and Communications and Engagement. The purpose of the meetings was to provide information about the process, discuss the effects of historic designation, answer questions and listen to concerns. P&DS staff also solicited interest from departments to participate in the Technical Advisory Group to develop draft design guidelines (see additional information below). P&DS and BPR staff met bi-weekly to coordinate efforts on the development of the Cultural Landscape Assessment (CLA) and the overall project management of the historic district application. Public Works – Utilities staff facilitated coordination with the Boulder and White Rock Ditch, North Boulder Farmers Ditch and Boulder Left Hand Ditch companies, as the proposed boundary includes a reach of the Boulder Slough and Smith & Goss Ditch. Staff proposed utilizing the same approach as the landmark designation of the Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse, which includes language in the designation ordinance that acknowledges that use of the respective ditch easements will not require Landmark Alteration Certificate review. P&DS staff spoke with representatives of the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT), as a portion of Broadway (Highway 93) is included in the proposed historic district boundary. Similar to the ditch companies, management of Broadway will not require Landmark Alteration Certificate Review if the area is designated. Racial Equity Instrument This designation process is the first Historic Preservation project to use the Racial Equity Instrument. The process included elevating the voices of historically excluded peoples and amplifying the message that the historic narrative of the area has been dehumanizing and used to perpetuate dominant social structures. Research The designation process provided an opportunity to fill research gaps in the history of the area, in particular the history of residents and businesses that were displaced. Historic Preservation staff were able to access recently digitized information from the Library of Congress and National Park Service, and other state and local sources. Staff focused on primary sources (first-hand accounts, period newspaper articles, maps and photographs) for research, but additionally consulted local experts and contemporary secondary sources. Engagement Strategy The engagement levels for this project are consult for the general public; and involve for the key stakeholders, which include property owners and the applicants. To date, the project team has used different methods to: Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 14 of 102 • share information about the area’s historical significance, • raise awareness and understanding of the designation proposal, • gather feedback from historically excluded communities, • facilitate discussions from key stakeholders on draft design guidelines, and • solicit feedback on whether the proposed area should be designated a historic district. 1. Consultation with Community Connectors-in-Residence (CC-in-R): The city’s CC-in-R represent historically excluded communities. The project team met online with four CC- in-Rs representing Black, Latine, Indigenous and people living with a disability to answer questions about the designation process and to discuss the racial equity strategies for the project, including engagement. Following on these consultations, the main opportunity identified by the project team to advance racial equity is to explore and build more comprehensive narratives of our city’s development by researching, elevating and telling the stories of historically excluded populations. The CC-in-R agreed to participate in a ‘dry run’ of the walking tour to provide feedback on the script through a racial equity lens. 2. Walking Tours: The project team and applicants collaborated over the course of six weeks to refine a walking tour script for the public. The project team’s goal was to continue to tell the stories of Central Park and the five landmarked properties within the proposed district – while also telling a more complete and multi-dimensional history of the area. This included researching and telling the stories of people that once lived here. It included amplifying the message that the narrative about the area adjacent to the Boulder Creek, referred to as “The Jungle” from the 1920s, is dehumanizing and used to perpetuate dominant social structures. - The three tours were advertised on the city’s social media, the city calendar and website and by the applicant groups. - Twenty-three people signed up in advance and only eight people attended. The tours were held on Saturday, Oct. 14 at 10 A.M., Wednesday, Oct. 18 at 12 P.M. and 5 P.M. - The project team led a walking tour for city staff on Oct. 12 (about 20 attendees). - The project team also led a walking tour with Community Connectors-in-Residence (CC- in-R) (5) on Sept. 21 to help identify white, privileged bias in the script that could be exclusionary and hurtful. The applicants participated in this walking tour with CC-in-R as observers. CC-in-R feedback was used to update the script. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 15 of 102 3. Webpage, StoryMap 1 & online questionnaire: The project team developed a webpage, that has been available online since August 28. The webpage provides an overview of the project, background information, details of upcoming engagement opportunities and latest news, and an explanation of the timeline and process. Additionally, the webpage includes a StoryMap of the area’s history that seeks to tell a more inclusive history of the area. It has been available online since Nov. 28 and viewed by 1,404 people as of Jan. 28, 2024. The webpage also includes a questionnaire asking whether people support or do not support the designation. The questionnaire will be available until Jan. 15, 2024. It also provides the opportunity for people to share their own historic photos of the area. 4. Communications and Media Coverage: Media coverage of the project includes an update in the Winter 2023 issue of the Boulder Community Newsletter (p10); a press release announcing the publication of the StoryMap was issued on Nov. 29 and project manager Marcy Gerwing was interviewed for a Channel 8 segment that aired Dec. 1, and Dec. 8, 2024. Social media posts include Nextdoor on Dec. 5 and Facebook on Dec. 7. 5. What’s Up Boulder: The project team participated in the What’s Up Boulder event at Foothills Community Park on Sept. 10. The project team was available to share information about the project and answer questions. The project team handed out coloring postcards of the landmarked buildings within the proposed district, along with an aerial view of the park and surrounding buildings. 6. Carnegie Library for Local History “Boulder Rewind” event. The project team participated in a celebration of 40 years of local history at the Carnegie Library on Oct. 1, 2023, with a presentation on some of the research completed on the history of the proposed district. PUBLIC COMMENT The project team delivered walking tours and an online Storymap (link) to raise awareness and understanding of the layered history of the area, including stories of historically excluded persons and communities that have not been part of the dominant narrative to date. The goal was to provide 1 ArcGIS StoryMaps is a story authoring web-based application that allows you to share your maps in the context of narrative text and other multimedia content. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 16 of 102 the public with background information that could help people make a more informed decision on whether they support the proposed historic district designation. Staff provided two main channels for feedback from the community, in addition to mandatory hearings: (i) an online questionnaire and (ii) consultations with the Community Connectors-in- Residence (CC-in-R) as part of the project’s deliberate racial equity strategies. Online form The online form was added to the project website in mid-October. Thirty-six responses were received between Oct. 15 and Jan. 25, with 44% of respondents in opposition, 36% in support and 19% unsure of whether they support this historic designation. Staff recognizes that this is not a statistically valid survey and that the number of responses is relatively small, but that a diversity of viewpoints has been shared. Out of those respondents who support the designation, the justifications included: (i) it would be good for tourism and business; (ii) preservation is generally a valuable goal, (iii) this area represents the best of Boulder (besides the mountain backdrop), (iv) the designation could help improve public safety in this area; and (v) the history being told acknowledges impacts on historically excluded communities and supports the city’s equity aspirations. Out of those respondents who do not support the designation, the justifications included: (i) that the district is not aligned with the city’s equity and climate goals, (ii) a preference to focus on redevelopment and programming here instead of further restrictions; (iii) parking lots are not historic and should not be included; (iv) hope that parking lots could be used for community benefit such as affordable housing; (v) the need to ensure that our civic spaces meet the needs of our community today; (vi) insufficient benefit of a district, (vii) a desire for the city to focus on other priorities; and (viii) a need to effectively addresses issues related to public safety and the unhoused here before pursuing a district. Out of those who are unsure if they support the designation, the justifications include: (i) needing more information and understanding of the impacts, (ii) concerns that public resources would be spent with little return, (iii) skeptical that the collection of disjointed buildings warrants a historic district designation, (iv) likely to be more supportive if the use of current buildings can be reimagined; (v) concerns that the designation glosses over the presence of unhoused in the area; and (vi) a desire for the city to focus on public safety first and foremost. A more detailed overview and list of all feedback received through the online questionnaire is included as Attachment C: Public Input Received between October 16, 2023, and January 25, 2024. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 17 of 102 Letters to the Landmarks Board Between July 12, 2023, and January 29, 2024, the Landmarks Board received twelve letters from members of the public. All of the letters received within this time period were in support of the designation. See Attachment D: Letters Received between July 12, 2023, and January 29, 2024. Consultations with Community Connectors in Residence (CC-in-R) Staff consulted with CC-in-R twice. The first meeting focused on asking for input on the engagement plan from an equity perspective. The second meeting focused on gathering feedback on the walking tour script and the general narrative of the area’s history. Main feedback received by CC-in-R include: (i) concerns that written history is ‘white’ history; (ii) that any educational materials should be developed with or at least reviewed by people from diverse background to ensure it is inclusive and not offensive or hurtful; (iii) that preservation should expand beyond the traditional purview of buildings; and (iv) that negative impacts should be acknowledged. CC-in-R also had questions about how the proposed district benefits all members of our community and how it can help the unhoused in Boulder. Based on this feedback, staff undertook additional research to elevate the stories of historically excluded or marginalized peoples in this process. Although not directly related to this project, the feedback of CC-in-R has influenced the content of Landmark Board memos, which as of November 2023 now recognizes the pre-settler history when describing the area. Staff is also committed to further deepening the partnership with local people of color for the upcoming update of the Historic Preservation’s 10-year Strategy in 2024. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED HISTORIC DISTRICT The proposed boundary of the historic district as submitted in the application (Figures 1. and 5.) includes Central Park, the 13th Street and Sister Cities plazas, five individually designated landmarks, and portions of Broadway, 13th Street, the Boulder Slough and Smith and Goss Ditch, and Boulder Creek. The boundary extends from the west side of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building (1777 Broadway) to 14th Street, and from Canyon Boulevard to Arapahoe Avenue. The privately owned parcels on the northeast corner of Arapahoe and Broadway (1201 Arapahoe Ave. and 1724 Broadway) are not included in the proposed boundary. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 18 of 102 Figure 1. Map of proposed historic district area. Shaded areas indicate currently designated individual landmarks. The solid blue line indicates existing property lines that form the proposed boundary; dashed line indicates the proposed boundary that does not follow the property line. HISTORY OF PROPOSED DISTRICT The following section summarizes the area’s history. Explore the interactive StoryMap (link) to learn more. The history of the area extends much beyond the earliest constructed feature that remains today, the 1871 Boulder Slough. The creek side land is a sacred and essential part of the ancestral homelands of Indigenous Peoples who have lived on and travelled through them since time immemorial. Boulder has an archival silence, or gap, in its historical record, for the Native American/Indigenous perspective of history. Staff acknowledges that a majority of archival materials focus on the perspective of the white and European settlers of the Boulder Valley. The City of Boulder has recently embarked on an ethnographic study in collaboration with tribal nations to better document the history of indigenous peoples in this area. From the arrival of the train in about 1873, early industry in the area was predominately rail-based. Residences (no longer extant) were clustered within a two-block area between 10th and Broadway with a few scattered outside that area. The City Storage and Transfer Building (1906) was constructed during this period as a warehouse for moving goods in and out of the city. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 19 of 102 Land acquisition and development of Central Park was guided by the Boulder City Improvement Association (BCIA), a community group whose state purpose was “the improvements of Boulder in health, growth, cleanliness, prosperity and attractiveness through individual effort as well as through cooperation with other organizations engaged in similar work” and the Park Commission Board (later the Boulder Parks and Planning Commission), a City Council committee formed in 1918. The BCIA received advice from Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., in particular on flood control measures in the area, but also on plantings and general design. The establishment of Boulder’s municipal center included the removal of two blocks of buildings by 1928, leading to the displacement of people and businesses. The design for parkland along Boulder Creek was refined in plans developed by the Olmsted Brothers firm between 1917-1923 and published in 1923 2 in The Improvement of Boulder Creek in Boulder, Colorado.3 A number of failed attempts at municipal funding resulted in reducing the scope of the “Improvements of Boulder Creek” to grading of the area between Broadway (12th Street) and 13th Street from Boulder Creek to Canyon Blvd. (Water Street), completed by 1925. BCIA volunteers attempted to complete additional improvements suggested by Olmsted, including planting trees and perimeter vegetation, and grading paths through the park. The park was used informally by city residents with a few formal events planned, including an annual picnic held by the Girl Reserves from 1934 to 1937 for incoming students to the Preparatory School.4 A second phase of municipal area and park planning began in 1938, influenced by Saco DeBoer. DeBoer suggested Central Park as “the only suitable location for a bandshell” (Glen Huntington Bandshell, constructed in 1938) and a new city hall (Penfield Tate II Municipal Building, constructed in 1951) as part of a “city building group with flood protection, parking areas and farmer’s market.” The intent was to create a focal point for municipal activity. The Boulder Lions 2 Olmsted Plans and Drawings Collection “Olmsted Job #3300 Boulder, Colorado Improvement Association Boulder, CO Plan #3300-63 City of Boulder Preliminary Plan of Proposed Park Improvements Along Boulder Creek OBLA, October 1923.” National Park Service, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. https://www.flickr.com/photos/olmsted_archives/35378272173/in/album-72157683458369472/ 3 Olmsted Brothers. The Improvement of Boulder Creek in Boulder, Colorado. Brookline, Mass., 1923. Files; 3302; Boulder Creek; Boulder, Colo., 1917-1924. Olmsted Associates Records: Job Files, 1863-1971. Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Page 76-86: https://www.loc.gov/resource/mss52571.mss52571-02-186_0383_0484/?sp=76&st=image 4 “One Hundred Girls At G.R. Big-Sister Picnic.” September 20, 1935. The Prep Owl - BHS, Volume 23. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 20 of 102 Club funded the construction of the bandshell and gifted it to the city as the first permanent place for outdoor band concerts in Boulder. The bandshell was “dedicated to the enjoyment of citizens of Boulder and to the advancement of music.” 5 Between 1938 and 1974, the Municipal Building and Central Park were the site of a variety of political events, musical concerts, cultural programs, educational presentations, and civic gatherings. Events in the park were organized by different Boulder clubs, including the Optimists, Elks, Woman’s Club, American Legion, Pow Wow and Rodeo, Soroptimists, Lions, Rotary and Kiwanas Club.6 The Archuleta Family History recorded as part of the Boulder County Latino History Project provides an account of the daily use of the park: “A popular place to hang out was the band shell at Central Park. A group of kids would get together and put on shows and plays for each other. Exploring Mackey Auditory and Chautauqua Park were always options. Although off limits, per Mom, playing in Boulder Creek always seemed to happen. A chewing out by Mom was guaranteed after a day at the creek, but that didn’t stop the fun.” 7 From 1961, the area was the center of municipal government with the construction of the public library near 9th Street (Boulder Public Library, 1961), an expansion of the Municipal Building and a “mall” designed to connect them. The construction of the Midland Federal Savings and Loan bank branch (Atrium Building, 1969) utilized a pavilion design compatible with its setting across from Central Park. As the downtown area “decayed” and counterculture advocates confronted “the establishment,” the municipal area was the site of political protests and civic discourse. In 1969, the large gatherings of people led the City to ban “Rock Concerts” in the park, which the police enforced as the use of any instrument. When that failed to disperse the groups of people, the City Manager closed Central Park for two weeks due to sanitary concerns and passed laws to prevent camping and gathering in Central Park. The same year, Boulder Tomorrow hosted a design competition for the Civic Area.8 5 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, p.6-9. 1995. 6 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study, p.11. 1995. 7 The Archuleta Family History, 1932-2012, p.5. https://bocolatinohistory.colorado.edu/document/the-archuleta-family-history- 1932-2012-p5. Boulder County Latino History. 8 Taylor, Carol. “Design Competition in 1969 envisioned a Boulder Civic Center.” Oct. 12, 2014. https://www.dailycamera.com/2014/10/12/design-competition-in-1969-envisioned-a-boulder-civic-center/. Daily Camera. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 21 of 102 The connection between the public spaces and surrounding buildings continued into the 1970s with the adaptive reuse of the Larson Brother’s warehouse building (City Storage and Transfer Building, 1906) into a public arts center and future museum. In 1987, the city was gifted the Dushanbe Teahouse, which was constructed in Tajikistan and shipped in crates overseas. After a decade of deliberation, the Boulder–Dushanbe Teahouse was reconstructed south of the Civic Park Plaza and alongside the 13th Street Community Plaza. A public plaza dedicated to Boulder’s six sister cities was added east of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building in 2007. The area continues its public function as the site of the farmers’ market, festivals, concerts, and other planned community activities, and spontaneous gatherings in response to local, state, and national events throughout the year. PURPOSE AND CRITERIA FOR THE BOARD’S DECISION Section 9-11-5(c), Criteria For Review, B.R.C. 1981, specifies that Landmarks Board shall determine whether the proposed designation conforms with the purposes and standards in Section 9- 11-1, Purpose and Legislative Intent, and Section 9-11-2, City Council May Designate or Amend Landmarks and Historic Districts. The Significance Criteria for Historic Districts (link) was adopted by the Landmarks Board on Oct. 29, 1975. City Council will consider whether the proposed designation meets the criteria above, and also whether it is in balance with the goals and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). Additionally, staff utilized the National Park Service guidance, including National Register Bulletin 16: Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties (link) and National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation (link) to assess the area’s integrity and boundaries. As the proposed district includes Central Park, staff also utilized the research and analysis from the Cultural Landscape Assessment. STAFF ANALYSIS OF CRITERIA Staff Analysis of Code Criteria – Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981 A. Would the designation protect, enhance, and perpetuate a property reminiscent of a past era(s), event(s), and person(s) important in local, state, or national history in Boulder or provide a significant example of architecture of the past? Historic district designation of this area would protect an area historically, architecturally and environmentally significant to Boulder’s history. The proposed district includes an area with a Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 22 of 102 history that precedes the 1871 founding 9 of Boulder; had documented residential and commercial uses from the 1870s until the 1920s; includes Central Park, an urban park formally established in 1924; and includes five surrounding municipal buildings constructed between 1906 and 1998 that represent a progression of architectural styles. Furthermore, as described in the analysis below, the area retains integrity to a 1938-1974 period of significance, extending from the DeBoer/Huntington period of park design and the construction of the Glen Huntington Bandshell, to a point 50 years in the past to recognize the historic significance of the area’s social, cultural and political use. The proposed district is historically significant for its continued public function as the symbolic, political and municipal center of Boulder’s local government; as the site of numerous social, cultural and political events; for its significance in the history of Boulder’s park system development; and its contribution to the social and cultural life of the city for over a century. The proposed district possesses architectural significance for its notable examples of architectural styles of the past, including a 19th century commercial building, Art Deco bandshell, International style municipal building, a Rustic Modern bank building adaptively reused for city offices, and the Central Asian/Tajik teahouse. The district includes significant works by notable architects, landscape designers, builders, and urban planners representing a progression of styles. The proposed district is environmentally significant for its location at the historic center of Boulder, as an established and prominent visual feature of the community at the intersection of major transportation routes and adjacent to Boulder Creek, and for its planned and natural site characteristics that have resulted in its distinct character as an open central urban park space surrounded by municipal buildings. As a whole, this area represents an eclectic municipal character that is unique to Boulder’s history, location and climate. 9 Boulder City Town Company was formed on Feb. 10 1859 with sixty men as shareholders. Between 1861 and 1871, the area was governed by the County Commissioners. In November 1871, the first trustees were appointed to govern the municipality of Boulder. Source: Frink, Maurice. The Boulder Story: Historical Portrait of a Colorado Town. 1965. Pruett Press, Inc. Boulder, Colorado. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 23 of 102 B. Does the proposed application develop and maintain appropriate settings and environments for such buildings, sites, and areas to enhance property values, stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge of the City’s living heritage? Designation of the area will maintain an appropriate setting and environment for the historic area, enhance property values, stabilize the neighborhood, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge of the city’s living heritage. Furthermore, if the proposed boundary is modified as recommended below to exclude the non- historic parking lots along 14th Street and expanded to include the length of 13th Street between Canyon Boulevard and Arapahoe Avenue, and the area between the Atrium Building and Canyon Boulevard, the district will maintain an appropriate setting and environment for the historic area. See Boundary Analysis section below. Colorado Preservation, Inc.’s report, “Economic Benefits of Preservation 2017” (link) studies the direct and indirect economic impacts of historic designation. Key findings related to this proposed designation include: • Heritage tourism accounted for approximately half of tourist spending ($7.2 billion of a total $14.1 billion) spent in 2015. • The report provides five case studies on the impact of local historic district designation on property values, summarizing “the results of the analysis show that, for the most part, the values of properties located within a local historic district increased a similar or higher rate than in the comparison areas. Moreover, there is no evidence that local historic district designation has had a negative effect on either property values or sales prices within the five case study areas. In all cases, property values increased following designation mirroring the results of similar studies from other states.”10 • In a chapter on Effective Placemaking, the report states, “From small towns to big cities, preserving historic buildings provides a foundation for creating and sustaining memorable places.” 10 Colorado Preservation, Inc. Economic Benefits of Preservation 2017. https://issuu.com/coloradopreservation/docs/final_- _econ_study_preservation. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 24 of 102 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) policy 5.09 Role of Tourism in the Economy states that, “the city recognizes the importance of tourism (e.g. heritage, cultural, sports and open space) to the Boulder economy.” While less than 3% of properties in Boulder are locally designated, they are among the most iconic in the community. Seven out of the nine activities featured in the Boulder Convention & Visitors Bureau’s current list of must-see things to do in Boulder (link) are in and around historic places, a majority of which are either in or near the proposed civic area historic district: • Pearl Street Mall (located in the Downtown Historic District designated as a National Register historic district in 1980 and as a local historic district in 1999) • The Flatirons from Chautauqua (designated as a local historic district in 1976, as a National Register historic district in 1978, and as a National Historic Landmark in 2006) • Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse (designated as a local landmark in 2020) • Boulder Theater (designated as a local landmark in 1980 and as part of the Downtown Historic District in 1980 and 1999) • University of Colorado (Norlin Quadrangle designated as a National Register historic district in 1980) • The Museum of Boulder (designed as a local landmark in 2013) The list also includes the Boulder County Farmers’ Market, which is located on 13th Street adjacent to four locally designated landmarks and within the proposed historic district. The design review process stabilizes neighborhoods as physical changes are reviewed to ensure compatibility with the area’s historic character. Historic district designation anticipates change over time, and if designated, an effort will be undertaken to further develop district-specific design guidelines that recognize the unique character and features of the area and facilitate the review of proposed improvements, as well as to support and guide future changes to the area. Use and function of a site is not regulated through historic district designation; only the physical, exterior changes related to use are reviewed. The proposed historic district highlights the value of urban parkland at the heart of the city, and its contribution to the social, environmental, and economic activity in the area. If designated, the district design guidelines will anticipate changes to the immediately surrounding land uses over time to yield new opportunities for the district to serve the community in novel ways, while still maintaining its historic value and role in the on- going story of Boulder’s heritage. Historic designation fosters knowledge of the city’s living history through research and sharing stories of Boulder’s history through virtual and in-person activities. This designation application process provided an opportunity to fill research gaps in the history of the area, in particular the Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 25 of 102 history of displaced residents. Staff accessed recently digitized information from the Library of Congress and National Park Service, and other state and local sources. The research was shared with community members through in-person walking tours, events, and an interactive StoryMap (link). Historic Boulder, Inc. translated the walking tour script into a free app-based tour on PocketSights: Proposed Civic Area Historic District - Boulder (link). Community members and visitors learn about history of designated sites through the wayfinding signs and plaques, interpretive panels (e.g. Pearl Street Mall, Chautauqua and the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building), the city’s website and engagement events, such as walking tours during Historic Preservation and Archeology Month in May. Staff Analysis of Relevant BVCP Policies City Council will also be required to evaluate and consider whether local historic district designations are “in balance with the goals and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan” (Subsection 9-11-6 (b), B.R.C. 1981). The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) provides a general statement of the community’s desires for future development and preservation of the Boulder Valley. BVCP policies guide decisions about growth, development, preservation, environmental protection, economic development, affordable housing, culture and arts, urban design, neighborhood character and transportation. The following BVCP policies related to historic preservation are relevant to this application (emphasis added): • 2.27 Preservation of Historic & Cultural Resources – 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. • 2.30 Eligible Historic Districts & Landmarks – The city has identified areas that may have the potential to be designated as historic districts. The Designated and Identified Potentially Eligible Historic Districts map shows areas with designation potential as well as areas that are already designated as historic districts (see BVCP Figure 6-1 on page 136). These potential historic areas and historic survey information will continue to be assessed and updated. There are also many individual resources of landmark quality both within and outside of these eligible areas. Additional historic district and landmark designations will be encouraged in accordance with the Plan for Boulder’s Historic Preservation Program. Such resources may contribute to cultural and heritage tourism values. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 26 of 102 • 2.28 Leadership in Preservation: City-& County Owned Resources – 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. • 2.32 Preservation of Archaeological Sites & Cultural Landscapes – The city will develop a plan and processes for identification, designation and protection of archaeological and cultural landscape resources, such as open ditches (where practicable and in coordination with the irrigation ditch company), street and alley-scapes, railroad rights-of- way and designed landscapes. Additionally, the following BVCP policies are relevant to the proposed designation of this specific area of Boulder. Further analysis will be completed prior to Council’s review of the application to address its balance with the goals and policies of the BVCP. o 2.14 Mix of Complementary Land Uses o 2.15 Compatibility of Adjacent Land Uses o 2.20 Role of the Central Area o 2.33 Sensitive Infill & Redevelopment o 2.41 Enhanced Design for All Projects o 5.09 Role of Tourism in the Economy5.10 Role of Arts, Cultural, Historic & Parks & Recreation Amenities Staff Analysis of Significance Criteria for District Landmarks Significance – Local Criteria The Landmarks Board adopted the Significance Criteria for District Landmarks (link) in 1975 as additional specific criteria to be used in the review of historic district applications. This Significance Criteria should be used as an aid in applying the standards found in Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981. Three potential areas of significance are established by the Significance Criteria including (emphasis added): 1) Historical Significance: The district, as an entity, should show character, interest or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the community, state, or nation; be the site of historic or prehistoric event(s) that had an effect upon society; or exemplify the cultural, political, economic, or social heritage of the community. 2) Architectural Significance: The district should portray an environment in an era of history characterized by distinctive architectural period(s)/style(s); embody those distinguishing Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 27 of 102 characteristics of an architectural type specimen, a good example of the common; include the work of an architect or master builder, known nationally, state-wide, or locally, and perhaps whose work has materials or craftsmanship which represent a significant innovation; or include a fine example of the uncommon. 3) Environmental Significance: The district should enhance the variety, interest, and sense of identity of the community by the protection of the unique natural and man-made environments. The following provides staff’s analysis of the proposed district in relation to the Significance Criteria. HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The district, as an entity, should show character, interest or value as part of the development, heritage, or cultural characteristics of the community, state, or nation; be the site of historic or prehistoric event(s) that had an effect upon society; or exemplify the cultural, political, economic, or social heritage of the community. Summary: The proposed historic district is historically significance for the public function of the area as the symbolic, political and municipal center of Boulder’s local government, and as the site of numerous social, cultural and political events, for its significance in the history of Boulder’s park system development and its contribution to the social and cultural life of the city for more than a century. 1. Association with Historical Persons or Events: This association could be national, state or local. Summary: The proposed historic district is associated with numerous individuals and events that are locally significant, including multiple individuals (both protagonists and antagonists) and organizations involved in the formation of the area. The early uses of the park area matched the religious and “moral” views of these individuals and organizations, which focused events on self-improvement. The general type of events changed over time, becoming more nostalgic of “pioneer” times during the 1950s. The late 1960s and early 1970s saw an overall decline in maintenance of the park, and events held during that time period reflected the political and social change of the era, culminating in rallies, demonstrations and protests. Elaboration: The proposed historic district is associated with historical individuals and events. Individuals that were instrumental in the early formation of the area include: Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 28 of 102 • Maryette Kinglsey (c.1860-1902) owned four different properties in the area as early as the 1890s, and from which she ran thriving businesses.11 Her brothels were viewed by “civic improvers” including members of the BCIA as unsightly for tourists and visitors arriving or departing by train. • Jennie Johnson (c. 1866-unknown) owned two different properties in the area from 1900 until 1928. She owned a cleaning business, which she ran from her house near 11th Street north of Boulder Creek.12 Johnson was the last owner to sell her residence to the city for “park improvements,” refusing for many years to leave.13 • “Rocky Mountain” Joe Sturtevant (1851-1910) owned a studio at the approximate location of the Municipal Building from 1900 until Sturtevant’s death.14 Sturtevant made many photographs of the area, some of which were used to promote “improvements.”15 The Boulder City Improvement Association (BCIA) was a volunteer organization originally established in 1898 by Ira M. DeLong, H. O. Dodge, Fred L. Williamson and Neil D. McKenzie, with the purpose of “encouraging the culture of lawns and trees; improving and ornamenting the public highways; opening public parks and drives; maintaining a high standard of public neatness; and cooperating with every available agency to increase the beauty and healthfulness of our city.”16 They reincorporated in 1903 with a focus on “the 11 “Flood in Boulder.” Boulder Daily Camera, May 31, 1894. 12 “Cleaning Done.” May 8, 1906. Boulder Daily Camera, Volume 16, Number 37. 13 “City of Boulder Buys Property In Jungles To Clean Up and Beautify.” April 11, 1921. Boulder Daily Camera, Number 22. 14 “View of the buildings on the west side of Broadway between numbers 1763 and 1777. In the foreground is Joseph Sturtevant's photography studio with his wife, Anna Lyckman Sturtevant, standing in the doorway. A streetcar is visible in the distance (S- 673).” 1900. BHS 207-3-54. Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A37675 15 “Views of what was known as Cigarette Park and is now Central Park.” 1870-1920. Call No. 207-3-48. Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, CO. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A40011 16 “Constitution of the Public Improvement Association of Boulder.” 1898. BHS 328-193-(7-8). Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder. Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, CO. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A50763 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 29 of 102 improvements of Boulder in health, growth, cleanliness, prosperity and attractiveness through individual effort as well as through cooperation with other organizations engaged in similar work.”17 The BCIA acted as a de facto planning commission, strongly focused on the downtown creek area, until 1934 when they dissolved, noting that “the Boulder Parks and Planning Commission has almost identically the same purpose for which our Association exists.”18 Between 1903 and 1934, many business and civic leaders served as officers of the BCIA, including Junius Henderson, Eben G. Fine, Fred White, Herbert A. Shattuck, D. M. Andrews, Maud Gardiner O’Dell, and William J. Baird. Many of these members were particularly key to the development of the area as public space: • Ira M. DeLong (1855-1942) was professor of mathematics at the University of Colorado - Boulder from 1888 to 1925. DeLong was one of the founders of the BCIA in 1898 and drew connections between aesthetics and morality.19 • Junius Henderson (1865-1937) Practiced law and was a county judge until 1902 when he became curator of the University Museum. He became a professor of natural history in 1908. He was president of the BCIA in 1910, when the organization commissioned Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. to propose improvements for the city. • Herbert A. Shattuck was a civil engineer who briefly worked for Thomas Edison. He studied landscape design and designed “Shattuck’s Hillside Park” (now the Hillside 17 “Records of Boulder City Improvement Association.” 1903-1914. BHS 300-1-10. Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder. Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, CO.https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora:50763 https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A7574 18 White, Fred. “Letter preceding Minutes of Meeting of Boulder Improvement Association.” Feb. 27th 1934. Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder Colo. 19 DeLong, Ira B. “Aim of the Association - Public Improvement Association Papers.” 1898. BHS 328-193-(7-8). Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder. Carnegie Library for Local History, Boulder, CO. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A50763 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 30 of 102 Historic District). Shattuck was instrumental in promoting Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr.’s “plan for the city.”20 • William J. Baird (1861-1934) was a physician and surgeon. He corresponded with Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. between 1907 and 1934, mainly on the details for a creek- side park.21 Baird additionally organized volunteers 22 and donations 23 for Central Park. Penfield Tate II (1931-1993): The municipal building was named in honor of the former mayor in 2020, for his work advocating for civil rights and equality. Tate was the first, and to date, only, Black mayor of Boulder (1974-1976). He served on Boulder’s City Council from 1972-1976. Tate “sponsored an amendment to Boulder’s human rights ordinance that would ban discrimination based on sexual orientation. … due to a backlash from conservative elements in Boulder, Tate and fellow Councilman Tim Fuller were targeted for a recall effort.”24 While the recall of Tate failed, he did not win in the next election. Following the construction of the bandshell in 1938, Central Park became a focal point for social activities, typically based around musical or religious activities that were seen by the organizers as morally appropriate. In 1939, Central Park hosted a “Flander’s Field” memorial that involved filling the park with memorial crucifix grave markers. During the 1930s and 1940s, the Boulder Rotary Club sponsored events like dance exhibitions, educational talks and musical performances. The Boulder Lions Club was chartered in 1918 as a volunteer organization. By mid-1938, the Lions Club had spent more than $20,000 on the improvement of local parks, including the construction of shelter houses in Blue Bell Canyon and at the top 20 Carrigan, Beverly Halpin. “Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. Maker of Parks-Planner of Cities: Visits-Plans-Suggestions-Goals for Boulder, Colorado 1907-1927.” Carnegie Library for Local History. Call Number 998-11-9. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A100249 21 Files; 3300; City of Boulder Improvement Association; Boulder, Colo.; 1907-1909. Olmsted Associates Records: Job Files, 1863-1971. Library of Congress, Washington, DC.: https://www.loc.gov/resource/mss52571.mss52571-02- 185_0146_0316/?sp=6&st=image&r=0.014,0.392,0.684,0.336,0 22 “Local Personal News.” May 10, 1924. Boulder Daily Camera, Number 48. 23 “DR. O. M. GILBERT GIVES $100 FOR NEW PARK” May 22, 1924. Boulder Daily Camera, Number 58. 24 Museum of Boulder. “Proclaiming Colorado’s Black History.” 2023. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 31 of 102 of Flagstaff Mountain. In 1938, they donated the money to build the bandshell, and sponsored religious and musical events. The Lions Club donated picnic tables and a drinking fountain to Central Park in 1942. During the 1950s and early 1960s, the events became more nostalgic. “Singalong” concerts where “citizens of Boulder with any music ability” were invited to participate were popular.25 In 1952, the community raised $5,095 in 1952 to purchase an engine, passenger car, and caboose as a “monument to the pioneers of Boulder” and the Daughters of the American Revolution sponsored a commemorative plaque. In 1953, members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) sponsored the first “Huck Finn Day” fishing contest and pageant that included a march between the fishing pond and the bandshell. The annual event continued for most of the 1950s. “Santa Claus” events for children included crowning a “yule queen” or “Miss Noel”26 and the “lots” west of the Municipal Building were used for community bonfires celebrating Twelfth Night.27 The late 1960s and early 1970s saw a decline in the maintenance of the park, and multiple areas were fenced off, and the park closed for periods of time due to clashes between park users and the police. During the summer of 1969, Sunday concerts in Central Park welcomed “straights, hippies and unclassified” to “truck on down to the park.”28 Theatre in the Park formed in the 1970s specifically to present live performances in the bandshell that incorporated ambient and spontaneous noises of Central Park and surrounding streets.29 The 1970s also saw rallies and protests including a Chicano rally protesting police brutality and 25 “Boulder Summer Recreation Plans Include Swimming, Tennis Lessons.” May 14, 1948. The Owl - BHS, Volume 34, Number 26. 26 “Jingle Bell Miss Merry Christmas To Maintain Festive Tradition of Yuletide Season.” November 30, 1962. The Owl - BHS, Volume 49, Number 10. 27 “Tonight's Rally Features Bonfire and Snake Dance Cheerleaders to Lead Yells This Evening Directly West of the Municipal Building.” March 5, 1954. The Owl - BHS, Volume 40, Number 21. 28 “Sunday In The Park.” March 26, 1969. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 17, Number 108. 29 Kaiser, Kathy. “Free plays held in Central Park.” June 17, 1974. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 23, Number 8. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 32 of 102 racism in 1969;30 Martin Luther King Memorial Vigil in 1971;31 a candle-lit march commemorating the 17th Anniversary of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki, Japan in 1972;32 and bicycle rallies to demand safer bicycling.33 In 1972, Mahatma Krishnasukanand used “inspiring words” to “raise the vibration of Central Park.”34 A few months later, The World Family Church sponsored a community fair that spanned the length of the creek park from the public library to Central Park.35 2. Distinction in the Development of the Community of Boulder: This is the most applicable to institutions (religious, educational, civic, etc.) or business area, though in some cases residential areas might qualify. It stresses the importance of preserving those places which demonstrate the growth during different time spans in the history of Boulder, in order to maintain an awareness of our cultural, economic, social or political heritage. Summary: The proposed district has significance as the geographic focus of the community- led movement to eliminate the mining-centric industry and direct Boulder toward a health, education and tourist-based economy. Through the 1950s, Central Park was the location for events that civic leaders of the time considered physically and “morally” healthful and would develop a desirable community. The placement of the municipal resources after 1951 demonstrates the growth of the municipal identity of Boulder. A boom in population created conflict between those nostalgic for the “pioneer days” and counterculture advocates wanting to confront “the establishment” embodied in the municipal area. 30 “Chicanos Rally at Fountain March to Police Station.” September 8, 1969. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 18, Number 6. 31 “Storm chills King vigil, cuts turnout.” April 5, 1971. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 19, Number 124. 32 “Nagasaki memorial plans” August 9, 1972. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 20, Number 172. 33 Ham, Richard G. “Bikeways.” April 23, 1971. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 19, Number 138. 34 “Go Beyond Your Mind.” September 6, 1972. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 21, Number 4. 35 Photo caption. September 26, 1972. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 21, Number 18. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 33 of 102 Elaboration: Prior to the formation of Boulder, Colorado’s First Peoples relied on the natural environment of the creek and creek-side land. Indigenous knowledge, oral histories, and languages handed down through generations shaped profound cultural and spiritual connections. These connections are sustained and celebrated to this day. Land within the proposed district is considered sacred to the First Peoples and is associated with cultural beliefs, customs, and practices rooted in the community’s history and collective historic identity. After the formation of Boulder in 1859, distinct areas of residences and commercial interests developed adjacent to Boulder Creek. As the city grew, this area was the focus of the community-led movement to eliminate the mining-centric industry and direct Boulder toward a health, education and tourist-based economy: It uniquely demonstrates the growth of the municipal identity of Boulder. The working-class residents that lived in the area and much of the industry were considered counter to the health, education and tourist-based image that the “civic improvers,” including the Boulder City Improvement Association (BCIA), promoted. The BCIA hired Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. in 1910 to write a report on The Improvement of Boulder.36 The report proposed a park along Boulder Creek and to “group together main public buildings of a city.” Using the Olmsted report to validate and justify the displacement, residences and commercial interests were systematically removed by the city. The proposal for parkland along Boulder Creek was refined in Olmsted Brothers plans developed 1917-1923 and published in 1923 37 in The Improvement of Boulder Creek in 36 Olmsted, Jr. Frederick Law. The Improvement of Boulder, Colorado. Brookline, Mass., 1910. Google Books: https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_Improvement_of_Boulder_Colorado/Qx4UMxP33pUC?hl=en&gbpv=1&pg=PP9&pr intsec=frontcover 37 Olmsted Plans and Drawings Collection “Olmsted Job #3300 Boulder, Colorado Improvement Association Boulder, CO Plan #3300-63 City of Boulder Preliminary Plan of Proposed Park Improvements Along Boulder Creek OBLA, October 1923.” National Park Service, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. https://www.flickr.com/photos/olmsted_archives/35378272173/in/album-72157683458369472/ Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 34 of 102 Boulder, Colorado.38 By 1925 much of the land to create the park had been purchased by the city, but when a funding proposal failed to win community support the park itself was never formally created. Instead, BCIA volunteers, led by William Baird, planted trees and shrubs and graded the paths to create the park they considered worthy of Boulder’s new health, education and tourist-based image. The area was modified by 1932, and the “improvements” identified on a map created by George Hubbard (city surveyor and building inspector) for a Daily Camera article on Dec. 31, 1937. These amenities illustrate the slight shift in public sentiment and community needs: in addition to open lawns and gardens around which to promenade, the park included active recreation spaces like tennis courts and a softball field.39 Through the 1950s, the area was used for recreation to keep both mind and body healthful. The post WWII years in Boulder saw huge population growth. The general shift in the type of events held in the park and the proposed addition of monuments and memorials show a community nostalgic for “pioneer days” and simpler times. The construction of municipal resources including the “city hall” in 1952, which housed the police station and jail, newly centered the municipal identity of Boulder in the area. Through the 1950s and 1960s, counterculture advocates wanting to confront “the establishment” clashed with the nostalgia of the area, culminating in the vandalism of Central Park’s train “Memorial to Boulder’s Railroad and Mining Pioneers” in 1958. By the late 1960s, the area was firmly established as the municipal center of Boulder. As downtown was termed “decaying” and complaints about “hippies” living in Central Park rose, Boulder’s voters were asked to decide whether to redevelop Central Park with a second municipal building, exhibition hall, conference center, auditorium, science museum, and 38 Olmsted Brothers. The Improvement of Boulder Creek in Boulder, Colorado. Brookline, Mass., 1923. Files; 3302; Boulder Creek; Boulder, Colo., 1917-1924. Olmsted Associates Records: Job Files, 1863-1971. Library of Congress, Washington, DC. Page 76-86: https://www.loc.gov/resource/mss52571.mss52571-02-186_0383_0484/?sp=76&st=image 39 “Photo 4 - Boulder from Flagstaff Mountain taken 1937 or early 1938. 1933 courthouse at left center, Valmont Power Plant visible in the distance. Identified buildings are listed on the reverse of the photo.” C. 1937. Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A67946 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 35 of 102 theater. The bond issue failed and Boulder retained the institution of a public gathering space anchored by municipal buildings. 3. Recognition by Authorities: If a number of structures are recognized by Historic Boulder, Inc., the Boulder Historical Society, local historians (Barker, Crossen, Frink, Gladden, Paddock, Schoolland, etc.) F.L. Olmsted, or others in published form, as having historical interest or value. The proposed district includes five structures that have been previously designated as individual landmarks, recognizing their historic, architectural and environmental significance. In addition, the area has previously been considered potentially eligible for designation as a historic district. Previous determinations include: Glen Huntington Bandshell (eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (1995, 2016, 2022); Atrium Building (Eligible for the State Register, 2000), Penfield Tate II Municipal Building (eligible for the State Register, 2000; recognized in the December 1953 issue of Progressive Architecture), the Boulder– Dushanbe Teahouse (eligible for the National Register, 2005). Additionally, the Greenways Plan (2011) identifies Central Park as eligible for listing in the State and National Registers with comment “possibly eligible as component of a historic district”40 and a 2001 Historic Resources Survey Report prepared for the State Historic Preservation Office identified Central Park as a “cultural landscape.”41 4. Date of Construction: This area of consideration places particular importance on the age of the structure. 40 City of Boulder. Greenways Plan, 2011. https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/407/download?inline. Pg 116. 41 Hermsen Consultants. “Historic Resources Survey Report: Broadway Reconstruction, Boulder, Colorado.” October 2001. Prepared for State Historic Preservation Office. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 36 of 102 Summary: While the history of the site extends beyond the late 19th century, key dates within the proposed district include 1871 (construction of the Boulder Slough), 1906 (construction of the Storage & Transfer Building), 1925 (design and initial grading of Central Park), 1938 (construction of the Bandshell), 1950 (Amphitheater seating), 1951 (construction of the Municipal Building), 1969 (construction of the Atrium Building) and 1998 (placement and dedication of the Dushanbe Teahouse). Elaboration: Grading of Central Park began in late summer, 1924 42 and the park’s paths creating diagonal circulation patterns laid down by 1925.43 Between 1925 and 1938 the area developed informally as the city acquired additional land. Volunteers planted trees that included elm, oak, mountain ash, hawthorn, crab-apple, and pine.44 William Baird donated a white oak, and Mrs. Cheney and Eben G. Fine each donated red oaks.45 The bandshell was added to Central Park in 1938, and the area re-landscaped the following year, removing the perimeter hedges and adding a small lawn for seating in front of the bandshell. By 1940, 13th St. and the northeast side of Broadway included a sidewalk and boulevard of trees. Volunteers continued to modify Central Park, adding picnic benches and a water fountain in 1942 (no longer extant). A multi-year plan for relocating the municipal seat to the area was developed by Saco R. DeBoer and adopted by City Council in 1945. Implementation of the plan began in 1950 with the installation of an amphitheater seating at the bandshell. Construction on the new city hall (called the Municipal Building after 1952) began the following year after delays due to costs. The “master plan” included new circulation paths from the recreation areas west of the Municipal Building through Central Park. The City placed the train car monument next to the Boulder Slough in 1953. A honey locust tree was donated by Boulder High Students to 42 “Local News.” July 28, 1924. Boulder Daily Camera, Number 114. 43 “Boulder City Park from 12th Street bridge.” 1925. Call number BHS 141-2-48. Boulder Historical Society/Museum of Boulder. https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A30084 44 “Field Trip Is Made By Geography Class.” April 5, 1937. The Prep Owl - BHS, Volume 24. 45 “Local Personal News.” May 10, 1924. Boulder Daily Camera, Number 48. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 37 of 102 commemorate the tenth anniversary of the United Nations and planted in the lawn in front of the Municipal Building in 1955.46 The lawn area was re-landscaped in 1958.47 In 1961, the tennis courts, softball lots, and remaining building to the west of the Municipal Building were removed to create the municipal mall (no longer extant) and parking lot to connect the Municipal Building to the public library (constructed 1961). The City broke ground on an addition to the west side of the municipal building in 1962. The construction of the Midland Federal Savings and Loan bank branch (Atrium Building) in 1969 further established the streetscape character along 13th Street. ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE: The district should portray an environment in an era of history characterized by distinctive architectural periods or styles; embody those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural type specimen, a good example of the common; include the work of an architect or master builder, known nationally, state-wide, or locally, and perhaps whose work has materials or craftsmanship which represent a significant innovation; or include a fine example of the uncommon. Summary: The proposed historic district’s architectural significance includes multiple significant works by notable architects, landscape designers, builders, and urban planners representing a progression of styles. 1. Architectural Identity: The area should display common characteristics or continuity, and represent a distinguished entity that possesses integrity of appearance, and/or feeling (mood). The area is unique for its inclusion of a variety of distinct architectural styles spanning the twentieth century. The district’s architectural identity is unified by its setting, mass, scale and use of simplified geometric forms. The five individually landmarked buildings retain a high degree of integrity. 46 “BHS Students Give Donations for Tree.” December 9, 1955. The Owl - BHS, Volume 42, Number 12. 47 Photo caption. Aug. 1, 1958. Daily Camera, Boulder. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 38 of 102 Its character is defined by an urban park along the banks of Boulder Creek and bounded by major throughfares, with municipal buildings situated along the park edge. The Atrium Building, completed in 1969 and used as city offices for nearly 40 years, and the construction of the Boulder–Dushanbe Teahouse in 1998 contribute to the area’s historic character. 2. Recognized Period(s)/Style(s): It should exemplify specific elements of an architectural period/style, or contain good examples of more than one period/style, thereby preserving a progression of styles; i.e.: Victorian Revival styles, such as described by Historic American Building Survey Criteria, Gingerbread Age (Maass), 76 Boulder Homes (Barker), The History of Architectural Style (Marcus/Tiffin), Architecture in San Francisco (Gebhard et al), History of Architecture (Fletcher), Architecture/Colorado (Thorsen et al) and any other published source of universal or local analysis of “style”. The district uniquely exemplifies distinct architectural and landscape styles spanning the twentieth century. • The Storage & Transfer Building, constructed in 1906, is an example of the 19th century commercial style. • Central Park, designed by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr. in 1924 and modified by Saco DeBoer’s 1938 design, including the construction of the Bandshell, reflects planned and natural site characteristics representative of the 1938-1974 era. • The Bandshell, designed by Glen Huntington and completed in 1938, is a rare example of the Art Deco style in Boulder. • The Penfield Tate II Municipal Building, designed by James Hunter and completed in 1952, is an example of the International Style. Hobart Wagener’s 1962 addition was designed in the Formalist style. • The Atrium Building, designed by Hobart Wagener in 1969, is an example of the Rustic Modern style. • The Boulder–Dushanbe Teahouse is an exceptional example of a Central Asian (Tajik) Teahouse and reflects the political climate at the time. The Bandshell, Municipal Building, and Atrium Building reflect progressive and forward- looking styles and are significant for their association with the development of the Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 39 of 102 Modern movement in architecture in Boulder. As a whole, this area represents an eclectic municipal character that is unique to Boulder’s history, location and climate. 3. Architect(s) or Builder(s) of Prominence: A good example of the work of architect(s) or builder(s) recognized for expertise nationally, state-wide or locally. The district includes works by the following notable architects and designers: • Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., considered the forefather of the procession of landscape architecture in the United States,48 authored the 1910 report, “Improvement of the Boulder, Colorado,” which shaped not only this area in Central Boulder, but also influenced the broader development of the community related to flood mitigation, city planning and zoning. In 1924, his firm, Olmsted Brothers, designed plans for Central Park, followed by a grading plan and planting plan. • Saco R. DeBoer, Denver landscape architect and city planner, was commissioned in 1937 to select a site for the bandshell and design the landscaping around it. His designs for the amphitheater seating were realized in 1950. • Glen Huntington, locally prominent architect responsible for numerous historic buildings, including the Boulder County Courthouse and the Huntington Arms. • James Hunter, locally prominent architect who worked in Boulder between 1940 and 1973 and designed the Municipal Building (1777 Broadway; 1951), the Boulder Public Library (1001 Canyon; 1961) and the Masonic Lodge (2205 Broadway, 1948); • Hobart Wagener, locally prominent architect active in Boulder in the 1950s to the 1980s. Notable works include the Atrium Building (1300 Canyon; 1969), Fire Station No. 2 (2225 Baseline Rd; 1958); the Green Shield Office Building (900 28th St.; 1959), the Labrot House (816 6th St.; 1954) and the Methodist Student Center (1290 Folsom; 1957). 48 Kluas, Susan. Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. https://olmsted.org/colleagues-firm/frederick-law-olmsted-jr/ Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 40 of 102 • Teahouse architect Lado Shanidze, master woodcarvers Manon Khaidarov and Mirpulat Mirakhmatov along with plaster carver and painter Abdoukodir (Kodir) Rakhimov and a team of artisans, including five woodworkers and seven painters, worked for nearly four years to create the Boulder–Dushanbe Teahouse (1770 13th St.), which was gifted to the City of Boulder in 1987; local architect Vern Seieroe designed the rear addition to the Teahouse, and worked with Lado Shanidze to enclose the building and design the site (1988-1999). 4. Artistic Merit: A skillful integration of design, detail, material, and color which is of excellent visual quality and/or demonstrates superior craftsmanship. Central Park, including the Bandshell and its amphitheater seating, the Dushanbe Teahouse displays high artistic value as seen in its intricately hand-carved and brilliantly painted wood trim and decorative exterior “faïence” tile panels. The Atrium and the Municipal Building are significant for the high quality of stone work. 5. Example of the Uncommon: Elements of architectural design, detail, material, or craftsmanship that are representation of a significance innovation. Dushanbe Teahouse: The Teahouse ceiling was constructed using only traditional hand tools and without any electric tools. The Teahouse is significant as the only “chaikhona” (Central Asian/Tajik Teahouse) in the Western Hemisphere. The Bandshell is a rare example of the Art Deco style in Boulder and one of only two in Colorado. 6. Indigenous Qualities: A style or material that is particularly associated with the Boulder area. Local stone is utilized in the design of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building, Atrium Building, and landscaping walls within Central Park. ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE: The district should enhance the variety, interest, and sense of identity of the community by the protection of the unique natural and man-made environments. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 41 of 102 Summary: Its environmental significance for its planned and natural site characteristics, its distinct character, and its prominence as an established and visual feature of the community. 1. Site Characteristics: The site should be of high quality in terms of planned or natural vegetation, and streetscape objects, i.e.: lighting, fences, sidewalks, etc. The proposed district has environmental significance for its planned and natural site characteristics, including: • Spatial relationship of the civic buildings and Central Park • Boulder Creek and the Boulder Slough • Circulation Paths with the park creating a relatively flat central green • Mature trees planted in groves and lining the perimeter of the park • Views toward the Flatirons • The Teahouse was sited as part of the City of Boulder’s 1993 Civic Park Master Plan, a comprehensive plan of the civic use and public buildings in the downtown campus area. Plans for the area placed the Teahouse at the center of the Civic Park Plaza which included the Civic Plaza (north of the Teahouse site) used for Farmers Market exhibits and performances and the 13th Street Community Plaza (the street west of the Teahouse site) used for public events such as the Boulder Creek Festival and the Farmers Market. Changes within the proposed boundary, including the replacement of the Broadway Bridge (c. 2002), the addition of the Boulder Creek Path (1980s), tree and vegetation planting and removal, removal of commemorative train cars, the establishment of the Sister Cities and 13th Street plazas, and the addition of small scale features including decorative boulders, artwork and light fixtures, do not detract from the overall historic character of the area. 2. Compatibility with Site: Consideration will be given to scale, massing, placement, or other qualities design with respect to its site. The scale, massing and placement of structures in the proposed district is generally defined by one and two-story buildings surrounding a central urban park with mature trees and a green lawn. The Municipal Building is a prominent visual feature, sited appropriately for an important civic structure. The park surroundings provide an appropriate setting for the public use of the buildings, and area complementary to their functions. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 42 of 102 3. Geographic Importance: As an entity it represents an established and familiar visual feature of the community, having unique and irreplaceable assets to the city or neighborhood. The area is an established, familiar and prominent visual feature of the community, its location near major thoroughfares. Situated prominently along Broadway, Canyon and Arapahoe, major thoroughfares in Boulder, as well as 13th Street, a dedicated bike route (named for advocate Al Bartlett). CULTURAL LANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT FOR CENTRAL PARK The Cultural Landscape Assessment (CLA) is a tool to assist in the analysis of the potential creation of a district, particularly regarding the considerations of historic significance and integrity of a designed landscape. The CLA was developed using the 1998 National Parks Service Guide to Cultural Landscape Reports (link) and the full report is included in the Jan. 22, 2024 PRAB Packet, page 76-137 (link). The CLA found Central Park to have four periods of physical development: • Historic Period 1: 1903-1922 Acquiring Land for Central Park • Historic Period 2: 1923-1936 Olmsted Jr. Design for Central Park • Historic Period 3: 1937-1973 Huntington and DeBoer Designs for Bandshell Seating • Historic Period 4: 1970-2023 Modern Updates To evaluate the significance of these periods of development, the CLA utilized the National Register Significance Criteria:49 A) Association with historic events or activities, B) Association with important persons, C) Distinctive design or physical characteristics, or D) Potential to provide important information about prehistory or history. 49 PART 60—NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, Fed. Reg. (Nov. 16, 1981) (to be codified at 36 C.F.R. pt. 60). https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/36/part-60 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 43 of 102 Significance – Cultural Landscape Assessment The CLA determined two of the periods to be historically significant based on these criteria: the 1923-1936 Olmsted Jr. design for Central Park and the 1937-1973 Huntington and DeBoer designs for the bandshell seating. The CLA found the Olmsted, Jr. period to be significant under Criterion C (design), “as the work of a recognized master, landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted Jr.” The CLA acknowledges the previous determination in the 1995 Bandshell study 50 (link), and concurred the Huntington and DeBoer period is significant under “Criteria A (Events) and C (Design) for its role in the social and cultural life of Boulder and the design improvements implemented between 1938 and 1950 by Glen Huntington and Saco Rienk DeBoer, including the bandshell, the amphitheater, and the associated vegetation and grading. Staff agree that the park has significance for its design and association with prominent designers, and for its role in the social and cultural life of Boulder. P&DS staff also believe the period of development prior to 1924 has historic significance, including its potential to provide important information about prehistory or history. The CLA focused on the development of the park, and research prior to 1903 was out of scope of the assessment. Integrity - Cultural Landscape Assessment The proposed district may be eligible for landmark designation if it meets the criteria outlined in the Significance Criteria for Historic Districts (link). However, the proposed district must also retain physical features that allow it to convey that significance. The National Park Service provides standards 51 in the “aspects of integrity” that can be used to define whether a site retains enough integrity to convey appropriate historical associations or attributes. The historic integrity of an area relates to the ability of the landscape, buildings, sites and features to convey their historical significance. Where the CLA and city’s local historic preservation code differ 50 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Prepared for the City of Boulder. 14 July 1995. 51 U.S. Dept. of the Interior. “National Historic Landmarks Glossary of Terms.” National Park Service. Accessed November 2022. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalhistoriclandmarks/glossary.htm Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 44 of 102 on the criteria used to identify significance, both utilize the National Park Service Seven Aspects of Integrity 52 in its assessment: 1. Location 2. Design 3. Setting 4. Materials 5. Workmanship 6. Feeling 7. Association The CLA additionally evaluated Central Park’s landscape characteristics, including: • Topography • Vegetation • Circulation • Buildings and Structures • Views and Viewsheds • Land Use • Spatial Organization • Small-Scale Features (for the Huntington/DeBoer Period only) Integrity Findings – CLA The CLA summary of findings related to integrity includes: “Over the past century the Central Park landscape has experienced changes that include: • Physical changes to the landscape, such as the realignment and redesign of the vegetation and circulation systems, and substantial regrading of the topography. 52 How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation. U.S. Department of the Interior National Park Service. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB-15_web508.pdf Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 45 of 102 • A change in use through the construction of the bandshell and its evolution as an activated space for entertainment and performance. These changes have resulted in a lack of historical integrity of design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association, which are needed for Central Park to convey its 1923- 1924 design and association with Olmsted Jr. The character of Central Park relating to the Olmsted Jr.-era has been altered to the point where it is no longer visible in the landscape. Both historic significance and historical integrity are required to meet eligibility thresholds for listing in the National Register. While Central Park has its origins in the 1920s and the Olmsted Brothers’ recommendations and designs for a park system in Boulder, it is no longer able to tell that story through the existing landscape. As such, while the park’s history is significant the lack of integrity in the landscape disqualifies the park as a whole for listing in the National Register as the work of master landscape architect Olmsted Jr. However, the northern portion of park is still able to convey its historic significance and association with the 1938-1950 era of park development associated with Huntington and DeBoer. Therefore, Central Park remains eligible for the National Register under Criteria A and C for the period in which the bandshell and associated amphitheater seating were designed and built (1938-1950). The area associated with these improvements is roughly outlined in yellow in the graphic on page 3 of this memo; it does not constitute the full park boundary as no evidence exists linking the southern portion of the park to the Huntington- DeBoer improvements.” STAFF ANALYSIS OF INTEGRITY Methodology to Assessing Integrity of the Proposed Historic District P&DS staff’s approach to the integrity analysis included: • Researching the history of the area and assessing its historic, architectural and environmental significance; • Review of the CLA findings; • Multiple site visits; • Comparison of historic and current aerials, plans and photographs; • Use of NPS guidance to assess the area’s integrity, based on its local historic, architectural and environmental significance. • Consultation with the State and National Register Historians at History Colorado to review application of the guidance for determining integrity and boundary. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 46 of 102 Integrity Assessment – Proposed Historic District (1924-1937 Period) P&DS staff agree with the CLA findings that the Olmsted, Jr. design of the park (1924-1937) does not retain historic integrity due to the extent of changes over time. The following is an assessment utilizing the National Park Service’s Seven Aspects of Integrity: The location of Central Park has not changed. The design of the park was substantially changed by the introduction of the bandshell in 1938 and its seating in 1950, which interrupted the distinctive circulation pattern of diagonal walks that form a central green. The paths no longer cross at the northern end of the park and the interior paths curving from the northwest corner to the southeast corner of the park no longer exist. The Boulder Creek path introduced pavement north of the Boulder Slough that reinforces the bisected condition of the park and altered the paths along Boulder Creek at the southern end of the park to create the Arapahoe Avenue underpass. While many mature trees date to this period, and the overall vegetation pattern remains with mature trees along the perimeter and concentrated on the northeast, north and eastern boundaries of the site, some of the trees have been removed or replaced with trees of a different species. Shrub plantings have been planted around the Bandshell and its seating to help define the space and create screening from outside of the park looking into the event venue. While viewsheds toward the Flatirons are visible across the park green and along the perimeter of the park, the Bandshell is a prominent visual feature constructed outside of the 1924-1937 period. Trees along the Boulder Slough partially obstruct the view between the northern and southern portions of the park. Little material remains from the 1924-1937 period, except for the Boulder Slough infrastructure and the light pilasters (reportedly part of the 1920s Broadway Bridge repurposed as park light fixtures when the bridge was replaced in the early 2000s). The date of construction of the stone walls on the western edge of the park along Boulder Creek is unknown and may date to the 1924-1937 period. The paths have been repaved. Little remains related to the workmanship of Central Park dating to the 1924-1937 period. The Art Deco Bandshell has significantly altered the feeling of Central Park, as it is a prominent feature visible both within the park and from the surrounding area. Its distinct 1930s design, combined with the alteration of the original pattern of pathways, convey the sense of a later period of time. Central Park’s 1924 design is significant for its association with prominent landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., however, as described above, the park today does not retain the physical features to convey retain the integrity of association. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 47 of 102 Figure 2. Side-by-side images showing the planting plan for Central Park drawn by F.L. Olmsted, March 1924 53 (left); an enlarged aerial photograph from 1938 54 (middle) of Central Park, 12th Street (Broadway) on the left of the image and 13th Street on the right; and an image from 2023 (right) of Central Park and surrounding thoroughfares. Integrity Assessment – Proposed Historic District (1938-1974 Period) Planning & Development Services staff agree with the CLA finding that Central Park is significant under National Register criterion A (events) and C (design) for the 1938-1973 period of development. In addition, based on consideration of the local criteria above, the area as a whole meets local designation criteria for its architectural, historic and environmental significance. Staff considers that historic integrity is represented across the entire park, and not only the northernmost portion, for this period, for the following reasons: 53 Courtesy of the United States Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Frederick Law Olmsted National Historic Site. https://www.flickr.com/photos/olmsted_archives/29558307807/in/album-72157683458369472/ 54 United States Forest Service. Aerial Photographs of Colorado. Boulder. May 8, 1938. Photograph. https://cudl.colorado.edu//luna/servlet/detail/UCBOULDERCB1~17~17~33252~102550 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 48 of 102 • DeBoer was commissioned to recommend the site of the bandshell and planned its landscaping. In April 1937, he wrote “This is in regard to the matter of the location of a band stand. 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 of the band stand and the grounds around it.” • As described in the 1995 Bandshell Historical Study 55 prepared by Front Range Research, Associates, the bandshell was “specifically designed to be compatible with its site. As a component of the central urban park, the Band Shell was situated to provide passersby with a glimpse of the intriguing figures 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 scope 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 and open air amenity allowing users to enjoy the natural beauty of the park while attending the Band Shell programs.” • Central Park maintains its original boundary from its formal establishment in 1924 to encompass a roughly four-acre area bound by Canyon Boulevard, Arapahoe Avenue, Broadway and 13th Street. The bandshell was designed for its setting within Central Park, and features of the full park in DeBoer’s sketches have similar characteristics to the Olmsted Jr. 1924 plan with perimeter trees, contiguous circulation located on the outside of the park and open lawn. • The public function of Central Park and the surrounding municipal buildings and public spaces is historically significant and reflects the changing social, cultural and political activities of the Boulder community. Following the construction of the bandshell in 1938, Central Park became a focal point for social activities, typically based around musical or religious activities. During the 1950s and early 1960s, events in Central Park became more 55 Front Range Research Associates, Inc. Boulder Bandshell Historical Study. Prepared for the City of Boulder. 14 July 1995. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 49 of 102 nostalgic, including singalongs, the community-funded purchase of railcars as a memorial to “Boulder Pioneers”, an annual “Huck Finn Day,” and Christmas programs. Events in the late 1960s and early 1970s included experimental theater groups that presented live performances in the bandshell that incorporated ambient and spontaneous noises of Central Park and surrounding streets 56, protests and vigils including a Chicano rally protesting police brutality and racism in 1969;57 Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Vigil in 1971;58 a candle-light march commemorating the 17th Anniversary of the atomic bombing of Nagasaki, Japan in 1972;59 and bicycle rallies to demand safer bicycling.60 Consideration of the area’s eligibility for designation as a local historic district, the assessment of its integrity is based on its historic, architectural and environmental significance. The proposed historic district retains integrity to the 1938-1974 period of development as described below: The location of Central Park and the five landmarked structures has not moved since their establishment and therefore retains excellent integrity of location. The setting of the Civic Area is integral to its significance. Located at the prominent intersections of Broadway, Canyon, 13th and Arapahoe, the area is centrally located and is a prominent and visual feature of the community. The view of the Flatirons directly influenced its landscape and architectural designs and provides a mountain backdrop to the urban park, municipal structures, and the public spaces in between. Two waterways remain prominent features of the area: Boulder Creek creates the southwesterly edge of the park and runs south of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building, and the Boulder Slough bisects the central green of the park and runs north of the Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse. Additionally, the integrity of the five landmarked structures within the proposed boundary remain high and contributes to the area’s integrity of setting. Staff considers the changes 56 Kaiser, Kathy. “Free plays held in Central Park.” June 17, 1974. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 23, Number 8. 57 “Chicanos Rally at Fountain March to Police Station.” September 8, 1969. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 18, Number 6. 58 “Storm chills King vigil, cuts turnout.” April 5, 1971. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 19, Number 124. 59 “Nagasaki memorial plans” August 9, 1972. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 20, Number 172. 60 Ham, Richard G. “Bikeways.” April 23, 1971. Colorado Daily - University of Colorado Boulder, Volume 19, Number 138. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 50 of 102 to the park and public spaces, including the introduction of and improvements to the Boulder Creek Path and the realignment of paths within Central Park do not detract from the overall setting and feeling associated with the district’s historic significance. The spatial relationship between Central Park and the surrounding municipal buildings retains a high degree of integrity of design. Defining design characteristics of the district include but are not limited to the urban street grid of Broadway, Canyon Boulevard, Arapahoe Avenue and 13th Street; the park with its central green with trees planted in groves and along the perimeter of the park; Boulder Creek and Boulder Slough as prominent water features; five architecturally distinct structures in and adjacent to the park, many of which were designed and sited in relation to their park setting. The district’s historic workmanship is evident in the integration of art and architecture in the Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse, the high quality of masonry in the construction of the Atrium Building and the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building, and the construction of the bandshell and its seating. The district retains its integrity of materials. The five existing landmarks retain their historic material, with the exception of the Bandshell, which was rebuilt in 1995 using the same materials. However, that alteration does not diminish the structure’s historic integrity. The district retains sufficient integrity to convey its feeling of a historic urban park surrounded by unique structures representing distinct architectural styles and periods. As a result of the area’s historic physical features described above, the district retains historic integrity to convey its association with the design of the park during the 1937-1974 period, and the numerous social, cultural and political activities that occurred within the park and the surrounding public spaces. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 51 of 102 Figure 3. Aerial photograph from 1958 showing Central Park with the Bandshell and seating (top center of image), Broadway and the Municipal Building (left side), 13th Street and buildings on east side of 13th Street (right side of image). City of Boulder. Figure 4. Aerial photographs from 1972 (left) and corresponding image from 2023 (right) showing Central Park with the Bandshell and seating at the center of the images, Broadway and the Municipal Building with west addition (left side), 13th Street and the Atrium building (top right) on east side of 13th Street. City of Boulder. Summary of Integrity Assessment – Local Criteria In conclusion, P&DS staff agree with the CLA findings that the Olmsted, Jr. design of the park (1924-1937) does not retain historic integrity due to the extent of changes over time. P&DS staff considers the proposed historic district retains its historic integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and association from the 1938-1974 period of development. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 52 of 102 DESIGNATION ORDINANCE The designation ordinance may identify important aspects of the district. Section 9-11-6 (c) B.R.C. 1981 provides the following guidance on the designation ordinance: Ordinance Designating Landmark or District: In each ordinance designating a landmark or historic district, the city council shall include a description of characteristics of the landmark or district justifying its designation, a description of the particular features that should be preserved, and the location and boundaries of the landmark site or district. The council may also indicate alterations that would have a significant impact upon or be potentially detrimental to the landmark site or the district. Prior to City Council review, staff will draft an ordinance describing particular features within the district that should be preserved and identify alterations that would have a significant impact or be potentially detrimental to the district. PRELIMINARY PERIOD OF SIGNIFICANCE AND CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES Period of significance is the length of time when a property was associated with important events, activities or persons, or attainted the characteristics which qualify it for National Register listing.61 National Register Bulletin 16 provides the following guidance on determining the period of significance for a historic district: Usually begins with the date when significant activities or events began giving the property historic significance; this is often a date of construction. • For properties associated with historic trends, such as commercial development, the period of significance is the span of time when the property actively contributed to the trend. • The property must possess historic integrity for all periods of significance entered. • Continued use or activity docs not necessarily justify continuing the period of significance. The period of significance is based upon the time when the property made the contributions or achieved the character on which significance is based. • Fifty years ago is used as the closing date for periods of significance where activities begun historically continued to have importance and no more specific date can be defined 61 NPS Bulletin 16. https://www.nps.gov/subjects/nationalregister/upload/NRB16A-Complete.pdf. Pg 42. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 53 of 102 to end the historic period. (Events and activities occurring within the last 50 years must be exceptionally important to be recognized as "historic" and to justify extending a period of significance beyond the limit of 50 years ago.) The recommended preliminary period of significance for the district is from 1938 (when the existing historic character of Central Park was established through designs by Saco DeBoer and Glen Huntington) to 1974, a date fifty years in the past. During the period of significance, city leadership intentionally developed the area as a municipal center, physically anchoring it with modern architectural structures which, in turn influenced the civic use of the park and spaces between the buildings. While periods prior to 1938 are historically significant, including the earlier park planning and design (1903-1923; 1924-1937), the residential, commercial and industrial period (1880-1903); and the Indigenous history since time immemorial, the area no longer retains its historic integrity (physical features to convey that time) to justify an earlier period of significance. Opportunities to represent the area’s earlier history is encouraged by Draft Guiding Principle #4 (see Attachment E: Draft Design Guideline Framework): “The area is significant for its association with Boulder’s municipal, social and political history. As part of Boulder’s Civic Area, this district continues to have a symbolic, geographic, and functional importance and therefore should serve as an inclusive place where all feel welcome. Celebrate the diversity of our community and enrich our collective understanding of different periods of Boulder’s history by acknowledging stories of historically excluded populations.” If the Landmarks Board recommends designation, Contributing and Non-Contributing features will be finalized between Landmarks Board and City Council review,. A preliminary list of features includes: The open and natural character of Boulder Creek, the Boulder Slough (though changes within the easement do not require historic preservation review), the urban street grid, each of the five individually landmarked structures and their settings, Central Park’s open green with trees planted in groves and along the perimeter of the park, and the two State Champion Trees. Individually significant features outside the preliminary 1938-1974 period of significance include the Storage & Transfer Building (1906) and the Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse (1987-1988; 1997- 1998). A preliminary list of non-contributing features includes the Sister Cities and 13th Street Plaza (including paving, artwork and stone walls), the Boulder Creek Path and associated bridge and railings, Broadway Bridge (reconstructed c. 2003), light fixtures and engraved boulders, the Gilbert White Flood Memorial, and the B-Cycle stations. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 54 of 102 PRELIMINARY DISTRICT NAME AND BOUNDARY District Name The application received on May 30, 2023 proposed the historic district be named the Civic Center/City Park Historic District. Staff recommends the historic district be known as the Civic Area Historic District, to reflect the commonly known name of the area, and encompass a broad history and significance. District Boundary The Boulder Revised Code describes a contiguous historic district as an “area containing a number of sites, buildings, structures or features having a special character and historical, architectural or aesthetic interest or value and constituting a distinct section of the city.” Section 9-11-2(a)(2) B.R.C. 1981. P&DS staff additionally utilize the guidance in National Register Bulletin 16: Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties (link) in the analysis for determining historic district boundaries. The bulletin provides the following summary: Select boundaries that encompass the single area of land containing the significant concentration of buildings, sites, structures, or objects making up the district. The district's significance and historic integrity should help determine the boundaries. Consider the following factors: • Visual barriers that mark a change in the historic character of the area or that break the continuity of the district, such as new construction, highways, or development of a different character. • Visual changes in the character of the area due to different architectural styles, types or periods, or to a decline in the concentration of contributing resources. • Boundaries at a specific time in history, such as the original city limits or the legally recorded boundaries of a housing subdivision, estate, or ranch. • Clearly differentiated patterns of historic development, such as commercial versus residential or industrial. Boundary Proposed in Current Application The application received on May 30, 2023 (link) requested the designation boundary encompass the area west of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building (1777 Broadway) to the west side of 14th Street, and from the south side of Canyon Blvd. to the north side of Arapahoe Avenue, excluding the privately owned buildings at 1201 Arapahoe Ave. and 1724 Broadway (Yocom Building); and the Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 55 of 102 buildings on 13th Street south of the City Storage and Transfer Building (a combination of city- owned and privately-owned parcels). Figure 5. Historic district boundary proposed by the applicants outline in black on a Google Map image that identifies contemporary features and businesses in the area. The applicants provided the following boundary justification in their application: “This boundary incorporates five landmarked city-owned properties, the full extent of the historic Central Park, and the plaza between the Teahouse and the Atrium Building. The proposed historic district provides area integrity by combining these significant properties in a cohesive whole and celebrates the sense of place. The proposed boundary intentionally includes the parking lots to the east of the Atrium Building, Teahouse, and the City Storage and Transfer buildings. Proposed development on these properties should be reviewed for potential impact on the historic structures and features. The applicants do support change here that is sympathetic and respectful to the adjacent historic buildings, especially as the city begins to repurpose their buildings.” Boundary Recommended by Cultural Landscape Assessment The CLA finds Central Park is significant for two periods (1923-1936 Olmsted Jr. Design for Central Park and 1937-1973 Huntington DeBoer Design) but that only the northern portion of the site (currently designated as a local landmark), retains integrity. The Peer Review Draft Central Park CLA Report, states the area associated with the 1938-1950 improvements “does not constitute the full park boundary as no evidence exists linking the southern portion of the park to the Huntington- Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 56 of 102 DeBoer improvements. Therefore, a boundary encompassing only the northern 170 feet of Central Park is recommended to be included as part of a historic district. Figure 6. Boundary related to Central Park recommended in the Cultural Landscape Assessment (CLA) outlined as a dashed red line on an aerial image; contemporary property lines are shown in thinner solid red lines. The CLA recommended boundary includes the Bandshell, amphitheater seating and northernmost 170 ft of Central Park. Boundary Recommended by P&DS Staff P&DS staff recommend the historic district boundary encompass the area west of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building (1777 Broadway) to the east edge of the landmark boundaries for the Atrium Building (1300 Canyon Blvd.), Boulder-Dushanbe Teahouse (1770 13th St.) and the Storage & Transfer Building (1750 13th St.), including the 13th Street Plaza, and from the south side of Canyon Blvd. to the north side of Arapahoe Avenue, excluding the privately owned buildings at 1201 Arapahoe Ave. and 1724 Broadway (Yocom Building) and the buildings on the east side of 13th Street south of the City Storage and Transfer Building (a combination of city-owned and privately- owned parcels). The recommended boundary includes the extent of 13th Street between Canyon and Arapahoe Avenue, and the parking area between the Atrium Building and Canyon Boulevard. The proposed boundary would follow the midline of Boulder Creek. Staff considers this boundary to meet the NPS guidance, in that it: • Contains the significant concentration of contributing buildings and sites: the five designated landmarks and Central Park. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 57 of 102 • Central Park retains its original boundary from its formal establishment in 1924, and the full extent of the park is historically significant for its social, cultural and political use within the 1938-1974 period of significance. • Utilizes Canyon and Arapahoe as visual barriers that break the continuity of the district (note, Broadway has historically bisected Boulder’s civic center); • Includes portion of 13th Street • Includes the parking area between the Atrium and Canyon • Follows the rear of the existing landmark boundaries of the contributing buildings along 13th to recognize the decline of concentration in the contributing resources. • No buildings or features within the period of significance exist today, and the parking lot itself is not historic. Inclusion of the parking lot as a “buffer” is discouraged by NPS guidance. • The southern boundary follows the mid-line of Boulder Creek, a contributing feature and visual barrier. Figure 7. Proposed historic district boundary recommended by staff shown as a solid blue line. Existing landmarks are shown as the blue shaded areas with a dashed blue outline. Contemporary property lines are outlined with a solid red line. While this boundary includes areas, such as parts of Central Park, Broadway and 13th Street that are non-contributing, the grouping as a whole achieves significance within its historic Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 58 of 102 context and the majority of the components that add to the district’s historic character possess integrity. DRAFT DESIGN GUIDELINE FRAMEWORK The Landmarks Board adopts design guidelines as administrative regulations to help facilitate the review of proposed changes within a district. While the guidelines allow for flexibility and interpretation, all approvals must be consistent with the standards found in Section 9-11-18, B.R.C., 1981. If the Civic Area Historic District is designated, specific design guidelines would be developed to recognize the unique character of the area. These guidelines can be different for different parts of the district based on contributing and non-contributing features. Staff formed a technical advisory group to involve the application group and city departments in the development of a framework for the draft design guidelines. Comprising representatives from Community Vitality, Facilities & Fleet, Parks & Recreation, Planning & Development Services and Public Works – Utilities, and representatives from the three applicant groups, the Technical Advisory Group met over the course of three meetings to create a draft design guideline framework. Representatives from other city departments, City Manager’s Office, City Attorney’s Office, Community & Engagement, Transportation & Mobility, chose to review the draft design guideline framework once complete rather than participate in the technical advisory group. The framework (see Attachment E: Draft Design Guideline Framework) includes the intent and scope of the design guidelines, preliminary Table of Contents, and guiding principles. Staff chose to postpone the development of full design guidelines until after a final decision was made on the designation. The intent of the framework is to provide direction for reviewing alterations and for the development of district-specific design guidelines, should the district be designated. The framework for the proposed historic district is attached for review. If the City Council designates the historic district, a separate project will commence to develop district-specific design guidelines with additional opportunities to provide input on and refine those guidelines prior to adoption, per Chapter 1-4 “Rulemaking” and Chapter 9-11-24 “Landmarks Board and City Manager Authorized to Adopt Rules”.. PROPOSED FINDINGS The Landmarks Board finds, based upon the application and evidence presented, that the proposed historic district designation is consistent with the purposes and standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinances Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981, in that: Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 59 of 102 1. The designation of the Civic Area Historic District will protect, enhance, and perpetuate an area reminiscent of a past era of history and preserve important examples of Boulder’s historic architecture and site of historical interest. 2. The proposed designation will maintain an appropriate setting and environment for the site, and enhance property values, stabilize the neighborhood, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge of the city’s living heritage. NEXT STEPS Within 45 days of the hearing date, the Landmarks Board must adopt specific written findings and conclusions approving, approving with modifications, or disapproving the application. If the board approves or disapproves the application, the board must notify the City Council of its action within 30 days of the hearing date. City Council may call up a decision disapproving a designation. Additionally, should the board approve the application, within forty-five days of that decision, the Planning Board shall review the proposal and report to the City Council on its land use implications. Should an application be disapproved, the same application may not be submitted for a period of one year. If the board finds that the proposed designation conforms to Sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, B.R.C. 1981, it shall adopt specific findings and conclusions approving or modifying and approving the application. If the board approves the proposed designation, the application will be forwarded to the Planning Board (within 45 days) and City Council (within 100 days) for review. Tentative schedule: • Feb. 20, 2024 – Planning Board (Land Use) • March 21, 2024 – City Council, 1st Reading • April 11, 2024 – City Council, 2nd Reading and Public Hearing ATTACHMENTS A: Tolling Agreement B: Jan. 22, 2024 PRAB Meeting Summary C: Public Input Received between October 16, 2023 and January 25, 2024 D: Letters Received between July 12, 2023 and January 29, 2024 E: Draft Design Guideline Framework Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 60 of 102 DocuSign Envelope ID:4F4842B4-54A2-4304-B184-El1D780D9BC8 TOLLING AGREEMENT FOR CIVIC AREA HISTORIC AREA DESIGNATION Friends of the Boulder Dushanbe Teahouse, a Colorado unincorporated nonprofit association, Friends of the Bandshell, a Colorado unincorporated nonprofit association, and Historic Boulder, Inc., a Colorado nonprofit corporation(together, the "Applicants"), and the City of Boulder, a Colorado home rule municipality("City"), hereby enter into this Tolling Agreement regarding Applicants' application to designate the Civic Area as a contiguous historic district, number HIS2023-00081 (the"Application"). The City and Applicants may be referred to singly as a"Party"or collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS A. On May 30, 2023, the City accepted the Application. B. The City is the owner of the property proposed to be designated as a historic district in the Application. C. On July 12, 2023, the City of Boulder Landmarks Board(the "Board") held a public hearing pursuant to section 9-11-3(b), B.R.C. 1981, and voted to initiate the designation of the proposed historic district. D. Section 9-11-4, B.R.C. 1981, establishes a public process prior to the Landmarks Board designation hearing for historic districts. E. Section 9-11-5(a), B.R.C. 1981,provides that after the completion of the steps required by sections 9-11-3 and 9-11-4, the Board shall hold a quasi-judicial public hearing Designation Hearing") on the proposal no fewer than 60 days and no more than 120 days after the initiating resolution is adopted, which would be between September 10 and November 9, 2023. F. However, to provide time for the City to complete a Cultural Landscape Assessment CLA) and the steps required in section 9-11-4, including the research and community engagement necessary for a City-owned historic district, Applicants and the City have determined that the timeline in which to hold the Landmarks Board Designation Hearing described in section 9-11-5(a) should be extended by 90 days, from November 9, 2023 to February 7, 2024. AGREEMENT 1.Based on these understandings and acknowledgements, the Parties agree that the 120-day deadline for the Designation Hearing shall be tolled 90 days. Taking into account Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 61 of 102 DocuSign Envelope ID:4F4842B4-54A2-4304-B184-El1D780D9BC8 this tolling, the Parties agree that the deadline to hold a Landmarks Board Designation Hearing shall be February 7, 2024. 2.The City agrees to schedule the Designation Hearing for February 7, 2024. Applicants accept and agree to this schedule and agree to waive any legal objection or claim that the Designation Hearing is required to take place at any earlier time. 3.The Parties agree that the mutual promises in this Tolling Agreement constitute good and valuable consideration. 4.The Applicants agree not to raise any claims as to the invalidity or unenforceability of all or any part of this Tolling Agreement. 5.The undersigned representatives of each Applicant certify that they are fully authorized to enter into this Tolling Agreement and to legally bind the Applicant to all terms and conditions. This Tolling Agreement shall be binding upon each Party and its successors. HISTORIC BOULDER,INC. DocuSigned by: Signature ylMV Bob Muckle Name: President Historic Boulder Inc 8/22/2023 Title:Date: FRIENDS OF THE BANDSHELL Signature: Name: Title:Date: FRIENDS OF THE BOULDER DUSHANBE TEAHOUSE DocuSigned by: Signature: - Gf EDBfr7-5EEH74&._. 3oe Stepanek Name: Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 62 of 102 DocuSign Envelope ID:4F4842B4-54A2-4304-B184-E11D780D9BC8 Friends of the Boulder Dushanbe Teahouse 8/23/2023 Title:Date: CITY OF BOULDER ATTEST: 1 City Manager City Cler APPROVED AS TO FORM: Cit tt rney's ffice Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 63 of 102 DUcuSign Envelope ID:4F484284-54A2-4304-8184-E11 D780D98C8 this tolling,the Parties agree that the deadline to hold a Landmarks Board Designation Hearing shall be February 7,2024. 2. The City agrees to schedule the Designation Hearing for February 7,2024. Applicants accept and agree to this schedule and agree to waive any legal objection or claim that the Designation Hearing is required to take place at any earlier time. 3. The Parties agree that the mutual promises in this Tolling Agreement constitute good and valuable consideration. 1 4. The Applicants agree not to raise any claims as to the invalidity or j unenforceability of all or any part of this Tolling Agreement. N 5. The undersigned representatives of each Applicant certify that they are fully authorized to enter into this Tolling Agreement and to legally bind the Applicant to all terms and conditions.This Tolling Agreement shall be binding upon each Parry and its successors. HISTORIC BOULDER,INC. Signature: Name: Title: Date: FRIENDS OF THE BANDSHELL Signature: v Name: Title i L n`as a p Date: 2- 7? FRIENDS OF THE BOULDER DUSHANBE TEAHOUSE Signature: Name: Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 64 of 102 PRAB Meeting Summary Review of Proposed Civic Area Historic District January 22, 2024 PRAB Board Members Present: Charles (Chuck) Brock, Jason Unger, Andrew (Bernie) Bernstein, Anna Segur Staff Present: Ali Rhodes, Scott Schuttenberg, Rosa Kougl, Mark Davison, Bryan Beary, Jackson Hite, Regina Elsner, Jonathan Thornton, Jill Sobol-Kertz, David Choate, Tina Briggs, Shihomi Kuriyagawa, Marcy Gerwing, Kristofer Johnson, Brad Mueller, Clare Brandt In the preceding item, Davison presented an overview of the Central Park Cultural Landscape Assessment (CLA) methodology and findings and answered questions from the board. Rhodes and Mueller provided opening remarks. Gerwing presented an overview of the historic district application. Rhodes, Mueller, Davison, Johnson and Gerwing answered questions from the board. Questions •How would designation impact the Civic Area Phase 2 Park Planning project and any future developments? •Does anything change operationally with the park if it’s included in a historic district? •Would designation impact services to the unhoused using the park? •Would the parking lots along 14th Street be included? •Why is the Atrium Building designated? •What do you love about the park? •Are there tax benefits to designating the park? •Are there budgetary implications for the designation, i.e. in construction delays or redesigns? •Would designation lead to delays in permitting and approvals? •Are there other benefits to the potential designation? Comments PRAB board members had a robust conversation to understand the potential benefits and impacts of the proposed Civic Area Historic District designation. At the end of the PRAB discussion on the proposed designation of the Historic District, a board member requested an informal straw poll: The four members present all agreed that they do not support designation of a historic district. Their concerns can be summarized as thus: o Lack of understanding of a unifying element or overarching theme that would explain creating a district. o Lack of support for additional protection and outsized input by one city board, given that the buildings, bandshell and some areas of the park are already protected by designation. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 65 of 102 o Disagreement that potential benefits of designation outweigh the added process, time and thus expense of a district. The video section of the board chairs statement and the closing board remarks for the PRAB meeting are: • Recommendations from PRAB board members: 1:18:35 • PRAB Board Chair statement: 1:06:30 The link to the PRAB recording for the meeting is at: https://bouldercolorado.gov/government/board-commission/parks-and-recreation- advisory-board Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 66 of 102 Public Input Received between October 16, 2023 and January 25, 2024 CIVIC AREA HISTORIC DISTRICT Online feedback (as of Jan. 25, 2024) The project website has hosted an online form since Oct. 16, 2023 for community members to express their views on the proposed historic district. Thirty-six people have provided feedback through this channel as of Jan. 25, 2024. The project team recognizes that this is not a statistically valid sample for our community but it does reflect a range of views. The online form asked whether people support a designation. Out of the 36 respondents: -36% support the designation -44% do not support the designation -19% are unsure if they support the designation. The sections below summarize the main reasons provided as well as some supporting quotes. A table with the full list of input received is also provided. 1.Out of those who support the designation, the following reasons have been provided: -It’s good for business and for tourism. -Preservation is a valuable goal for our cities -This area represents the best of Boulder (besides the mountain backdrop) -It will help improve safety and allow people to use the spaces currently dominated by the unhoused and substance abusers -Central park is important for community gatherings -The history being told acknowledges the impacts on historically excluded peoples “Such a district will act as a deterrent against the spread of any radical changes…” “Perhaps this newfound designation could also help drive some of the seedier elements of that area out of the downtown area (or at least to a place that is not so visible or beloved).” “Why are we so eager to get rid of historical stories of Boulder? The Italians would never tear down an article of Art or History.” “Thank you to these organizations and the landmark committee for seeing the civic center as something that should be protected.” 2.Out of those who do not support the designation, the following reasons have been provided: -This area needs redevelopment and programming, not further restrictions. -Parking lots are not historic. Affordable housing should be built on the parking lots. -We need civic spaces that meet the needs of our community today. -There is limited benefit of a district designation. -The city should focus on other priorities. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 67 of 102 - This is not aligned with the city’s equity and climate goals. - Not worthwhile to pursue a district until issues of unhoused and public safety are addressed in the area. “There is no benefit to landmarking the parking lots and lawn areas around these already landmarked buildings.” “I think we can recognize the history without making this a historic district that would make future improvements harder to complete.” “The results are clear – landmarking these spaces has simply crystallized their nonfunctionality. Now it’s [the bandshell] a relic that has little relevance to the performing arts.” “..the plan seems aimed at preserving Olmsted’s exclusive version of this area…Why is his version of the use of this land the one that gets preserved? …Why do three groups that don’t include the communities or people with deeper historical ties to this area get to dictate the future of this area for generations to come?” “If we are going to spend taxpayer money on this area, it should be done in a way that repairs past harms and oppressions, rather than preserve them.” “Please do not do this. It was a good intention in the past, but not now. Especially because the City owns and manages the resources. Our Downtown needs more cultural interest and creative facilities that expand water related experience, entertainment, art and robust and diverse markets. But a HD designation at this point is a constraint.” “Pointless to do this until the issues around homelessness and safety are addressed – otherwise the designation is pointless window dressing and propaganda.” “Are you spending all of this money for the homeless to have a beautiful place to occupy?” 3. Out of those who are not sure if they support the designation, the following reasons have been provided: - Need more information and understanding of the impacts - Worried that significant public resources would be spent here with little return - Skeptical that the collection of disjointed buildings warrants designation of a historic district - Would support if the use of current buildings can be reimagined - Worried that the designation glosses over the presence of unhoused in the area and the impact on safety and access to this area for the general public - Worried that unless the challenges with the unhoused and substance abuse onsite are addressed, the positive impacts of a historic district cannot be realized - Desire for the city to prioritize public safety “I oppose the idea if the inclusion of certain buildings within the proposed historic district will prevent the possibility of replacing or reimagining some of the buildings within that district [reference Penfield Tate and Atrium].” “As far as I know the specific area on the map, it’s a lot of random generic buildings. If anything, Pearl St fits the bill and we already have that.” “One thing everybody hates, is a grand expenditure of resources on something that is not terribly important.” Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 68 of 102 “And I think as long as there are homeless encampments along that whole park area- which seem to be growing – it will never be a vibrant destination. Fact.” “If the area was cleaned and made safe I would support the designation.” “Advertising and promoting this area will increase the danger to citizens and visitors until this area is managed and drugs are banned from these sites.” “No desire to preserve the lawless, degraded and dangerous place this area has become.” “Total disconnect between lack of care and lack of law enforcement in downtown civic areas and this effort to create historical designation of an area the City has allowed to become trashed and dangerous….Is this an effort to obfuscate and detract from working on fixing the problem?” Table 1 is the full list of input received through the online form. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 69 of 102 Table 1 Feedback from the online form (as of Jan. 25, 2024) No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 1 Not sure Is that area really "historic"? It sounds like Boulder just wants to have a "historic district" like other cities. Historic districts are usually a focal destination for restaurants, shopping, walking. As far as I know the specific area on the map, it's a lot of random generic buildings. If anything, Pearl St fits the bill and we already have that. Boulder has MANY other things that could use improvement and development. One thing everybody hates, is a grand expenditure of resources on something that is not terribly important. And I think as long as there are homeless encampments along that whole park area - which seem to be growing - it will never be a vibrant destination. Fact. I think the band shell should be demolished (it's small, dirty, inadequate, and how often is it really used?) and a bigger stage area could be established for outdoor events. 2 No This area has so many opportunities for redevelopment that can anchor a variety of community focused and cultural mixed uses. Establishing a vital snd creative mixed use East Bookend will strengthen the urban downtown. By establishing a historic district it will prevent so many good things for an equitable downtown. The bandshell influence along the public front door to Boulder is an underwhelming civic experience. The stories and histories of the civic area Please do not do this. It was a good intention in the past, but not now. Especially because the City owns and manages the resources. Our doentown needs more cultural interest and creative facilities that expand water related experiences, entertainment, art and robust and diverse markets. But a HD designation at this point is a constraint. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 70 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. can be expressed so creatively without the constraint of a district. 3 No Why designate parking lots as historic? Most of the block between 13th St and 14th St is parking lots, which makes that block unworthy of designation as a historic district, particularly when the city can just landmark the existing buildings. Better to prioritize filling in those unattractive empty spaces with something useful (housing would be nice) rather than make it harder to develop anything by creating another historic district. Also, the Atrium building wasn't worthy of being landmarked, doubling down on that would compound the mistake. 4 No This area needs redevelopment and programming, not further restrictions on use Please invest in public use--including programming, infrastructure and public safety--in this area. 5 No This area is TRASHED - totally unsafe currently - certainly no longer "historic" Pointless to do this until the issues around homelessness and safety are addressed - otherwise this designation is pointless window dressing and propaganda. 6 No Not until it is safe and the 7 Not sure Concern for safety of area given drug use and resulting violent behaviors I have great concern over lack of acknowledgment that this area is unsafe to visit and enjoy based on out of control drug use and aggression of people on meth and similar stimulants that cause aggression. Advertising and promoting this area will increase the danger to citizens and visitors until this area is managed and drugs are banned from these sites. If the area was cleaned and made safe I would Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 71 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. support the designation. The history provided in the report is very beautiful and well done. 8 No no support until the area is safe on an ongoing basis. The civic area is disgusting and unsafe. All this beautiful accumulation of history yet, for the past few years, it has turned into a sh*thole with the City's blessing. The intersection of Broadway & Canyon, through which nearly every visitor to Boulder passes, is an embarrassment. Do better and stop normalizing the situation. 9 Yes Because hopefully if this happens, the area will be cleaned up and I can return to walking along the Boulder Creek in that area, as well as bringing guest and children to play. The sooner the better 10 No Are you spending all this money for the homeless to have a beautiful place to occupy? As a citizen of Boulder for over 50 yrs I do resent the intimidation I feel when I want to enjoy our lovely river walks. I am not referring to those who are unfortunate in losing their homes, I am referring to those who live that life by choice. They delight in getting as much as they can from society for free, as you well know. They regularly harrass the Boulder High students coming to and from school on their bikes, as you also well know. Untill you figure out a way to create these wonderful spaces for us the citizens to enjoy, why spend all that tax money? Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 72 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 11 No This area is currently an embarrassment to the city, designating as Historic will only elevate the hypocrisy in how this area is being managed This area is a complete embarrassment, one of many black eyes on the city of Boulder. Central Park is home to open drug use, open defecation, regular drug overdoses, a multitude of encampments, harassments, physical altercation, etc. etc. Designating as "Historic" may lead residents and visitors coming to the area under the presumption there is some significance/beauty to the area, cultural relevance, or just an enjoyable site with something to be gained (historical perspective). Visiting the area will not fulfill any of these things interests and will likely lead to visitors leaving the area with a less than stellar view of Boulder. Until the city takes a proactive approach to cleaning and maintaining any of the public spaces I am not in support of any of the efforts of this city to designate or elevate our public spaces to anything other than what they are, unsafe and unsanitary areas much of the public chooses to avoid. 12 Not sure I no longer feel safe in most of our public spaces and have stop enjoying our public spaces. I used to love taking my kids to Pearl Street, but we have been harassed by drug addicts (been yelled at) and the public bathrooms are not accessible (as meth users use these public spaces). We also wtiness someone defecating on Spruce Street. A civic area would not be enjoyed by most given that our public safety is precarious! The City's efforts need to prioritize public safety so that ALL can enjoy our public areas. I don't see how a civic area wouldn't just be plagued with drug addicts and unhoused citizens. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 73 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 13 No Get your priorities straight. This town is pathetic nowadays. How can this even be a consideration with the rampant meth, fentanyl, and violent crime that has plagued this area (and entire town). Needles all over the place. Feces in the river that's covered in trash. You guys really think meth addicts need affordable housing? Addicts need treatment, not housing. Addiction is the root of all of the problems here, and in 15 years of living here I'm repulsed by it nowadays. As a business owner I pay an ungodly amount of taxes and I can't even comfortably take my son to the majority of places downtown. People using meth in public bathrooms. Pathetic. The law only applies to taxpayers. Park your car and your parking goes 3 minutes over, you have a ticket within seconds. Meanwhile right around the corner a meth head is committing grand larceny and BPD just shrugs it off - back to harassing skateboarders and taxpayers. Your priorities are so far from reality. Everyone in Boulder is so fed up with this crap. 14 Not sure Will the designation insure that regular citizens can use it safely?? And the city will stop prioritizing the use of the are to the meth / fent head zombies that terrorize the passerbys? This area has been in rapid decline the last couple of years- open drug use, sex, violence, trashing of the land and structures. I don't go down there any more due to the lack of safety. Are you going to clean it up? have security guards? eliminate drug use? eliminate camping? pick up needles? feces? it is absolutely disgusting what has happened the this city in the last 30 plus years. 15 Not sure Only if the area is first returned to a safe, clean and actual civic place. No desire to preserve the lawless, degraded and dangerous place this area has become. Total disconnect between lack of care and lack of law enforcement in downtown civic areas and this effort to create historical designation of an area the City has allowed to become trashed and dangerous. It does not make sense that resources are being expended for this type of designation without first fixing it. Is this an intentional effort to obfuscate and detract from working on fixing the problem? Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 74 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 16 Yes to preserve the beauty of our civic center, and prevent the area from being turned into dense concrete apartment, blocks, or a larger, drug-filled homeless encampment Concerns: open air meth and fentanyl use. Encampments. Propane tank fires. Stabbings and shootings. Clean up this area. It's a disgrace. The current council majority that opposes the police and cleanup resources required to keep this area safe are turning Boulder into a dump. Thank you to these organizations and the landmark committee for seeing the civic center as something that should be protected. 17 No The designation totally ignores the current situation in this area: that citizens actively avoid the area due to crime and harrassment by transients. I and my neighbors with whom I have spoken are deeply offended by this. The city spends my time and money on this designation, but not on the unsafe coniditions there??? I am outraged by your tone deafness. This tells me my city staff are more effective with the past than the present. I am so sorry to see the decline in our city staff and elected officials mirroring the decline in our public spaces. I am now motivated -- after many years of support -- to work for an entirely new roster of all of you. You are supposed to LEAD. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 75 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 18 Not sure I oppose the idea if the inclusion of certain buildings within the proposed the historic district will prevent the possibility of replacing or re-imagining some of the buildings withing that district. It is clear to me that there are two problematic buildings within the district boundary: 1. The current functions of the Pennfield Tate building should be moved to the Western City Campus on Broadway, as that campus is built. Doing so will allow the Pennfield Tate location to be re-imagined or re- built into a facility that can serve various new public functions - including the function as a central hub for festivals held within the district boundary. 2. The current functions of the Atrium building should also be moved to the new Western City Campus on Broadway, as that campus is built. This would allow the Atrium location to be re-imagined or re-built as a year-round indoor/outdoor Boulder Farmers Market facility. Imagine a facility at the Atrium location with large opening overhead doors - open during the warmer months - and closed in the colder months - enabling a year-round Farmer's Market. Look to the success of the Santa Fe, NM Farmer's Market as a great example of such a facility. 19 No The area doesn't feel special anymore due to safety concerns. Would designation make it much more difficult and expensive for tax payers anytime a project occurs within the "landmark"? Will the "landmark" receive the extra help it already needs in terms of encampments and feeling safe? Once it becomes a "landmark", are there elements that would be restored to represent or educate visitors on the history of the area (not just a few signs)? How will the "landmark" designation work with the next phase of the implementation of the Parks department vision for the area? What has Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 76 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. recently been implemented seems to conflict with "landmark" implementation as well as other department visions for the future. 20 Yes After reading the StoryMap, it's apparent that the area was deliberately created. Unlike some other parks in Boulder where the land was donated, this was a decision by city leaders to make this space. It's the first time I've heard of Boulder acknowledging that the city displaced residents (a bit like Denver's Auraria neighborhood) and I think the district is a good way to acknowledge that. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 77 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 21 Not sure I support designation but with re-build of music/performing arts structure/infrastructure. I am in full support of designating this area Historic, with the caveat that we have the ability to upgrade the amphitheater design and infrastructure. We seem to be one of only a few towns in the state that has not invested in an outdoor performance area. This is low hanging fruit. I want to see a world-class outdoor music/performing arts stage and have the current "seating" area leveled, expanding all the way out across the ditch into our other grassy area so folks can spread out and enjoy live events under our beautiful trees and waterways. As it currently is, we don't have a lot of support from folks because the structure, sound quality, dance area, bathrooms/services, etc are so outdated. I can list a dozen small towns within a few hours drive from here who have invested in a complex and they thrive throughout the season. Please take some of the $ we now have designated for the arts and start planning. go see all these other towns where us Boulderites go to enjoy outdoor entertainment. We'd sure like to stay in our town and enjoy these events. 22 Yes Central part of Boulder - community, culture, and architecture 23 No The area is riddled with open drug use, addicts, encampments, overdoses- where do you propose these people go? They won't magically disappear after you dumps millions of tax dollars into this. And for who? I don't even go to that area anymore due to the needles and harrassment by those who live on the banks of the creek. See above. This is a big waste of money- no mention of the mess down there? Are you all BLIND? That money would be better spent on inpatient rehab treatment hospital for these people with mental health/ addiction disorder. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 78 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 24 Yes This area is the historic heart of the Boulder community. It has a rich and long history that has lessons that are relevant to our lives today. It supports the City's Comp Plan and 2015 Civic Area Masterplan to celebrate important city owned historic places. .The hitory here is inclusive of under-represented minority populations of Indigenous, Black and LGBTQ people. It is a positive, 'feel-good' action that can be accomplished 1) History has lessons for the issue of homelessness in the Park and the creation of this district. There have been transient people and illegal activities off and on here since the 1880's. Previous responses by the city government have been creating a shelter that was tied with a work program at the "Poor Farm", higher levels of policing, sweeps of the Park to clear it for community festivals, creation of homeless shelters, counseling services for homeless people and more. Some versions of these historic policies may be relevant today. 2) The creation of this historic district will shine even more attention on the problems in the civic area by bringing more understanding of the history of the use of the park and the high value as the heart of the Boulder Community. 3) The process of reviewing the merits of this historic district, has required that every department of the City has had to be consulted for impacts to their responsibilities. So while this historic district has no direct connection to social welfare programs, it has reinforced the discussion within the government about Central Park and homelessness. 25 Yes I am 100% in favor of creating the Civic Center Historic District. This area is a repository of Boulder history back in time, not only the last 200 years of Americans settling the area but also through centuries of indigenous peoples. What a gift to Boulder and from Boulder to the nation to specify this as an Historic sight! Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 79 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 26 Yes Historic Districts are support tourism and is good for business. 27 No A lot of this area needs to be redeveloped. Too many parking lots and empty buildings. Really need to build affordable housing on the parking lots. 28 Yes It's historic, and it reflects a Boulder that so many of us wish were still there. Such a district will act as a deterrent against the spread of any radical changes to a place that was already perfect. Perhaps this newfound designation could also help drive some of the seedier elements of that area out of the downtown area (or at least to a place that is not so visible or beloved). 29 Yes It is vital to preserve the history of Boulder and remember all of those who came before us. 30 Yes Central Park plays a huge role in Community Gatherings 31 Yes I remember going to the Bandshell as a child. There use to be a train engine there, that just amazed me. Why are we so eager to get rid of historical stories of Boulder? The Italians would never tear down an article of Art or History. https://youtu.be/xevBo6gfafA?si=4k4LYPwLr0uxVpnJ I suggest you watch this video done by Denver CBS on the Huntington Bandshell. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 80 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. 32 No It's a terrible idea... This is just an extension of PLAN's nimby reaction to the Civic Area Plan which contemplated improvements and construction of new buildings in the area to make space for civic uses such as an indoor farmers market...landmarking the bandshell, seats, atrium building, etc is a non- sensical approach to making civic spaces that can meet the needs of our community. The results are clear - landmarking these spaces has simply crystalized their nonfunctionally. When the city met with users of the bandshell, the main request was to add green room space. By moving it and adding that space, it could have had life. Now it's a relic that has little relevance to the performing arts. There is no benefit to landmarking the parking lots and lawn areas around these already landmarked buildings. 33 No I think we can recognize the history without making this a historic district that would make future improvements harder to complete. 34 Yes It has so much history and really represents the best part of Boulder besides the mountain backdrop. 35 Yes The buildings to be included in the historic district, because of their significance, need to have landmark protection. 36 No Not consistent with the city's equity and climate goals This area spent far more time in the hands of the Indigenous people who had stewarded it since time immemorial. After the Indigenous people were forcibly removed from their land, this area was dominated by workers, low-income people, and people of color. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 81 of 102 No. Do you support the proposed civic area historic district? Please explain the reason for your selection. Please share any other concerns, questions or comments you have related to this proposed designation. Yet the plan seems aimed at preserving Omlsted's exclusive version of this area. Olmsted is a noted racist whose plans for this area led to the displacement of those who had long used it for shelter, gathering, and other purposes. Why is his version of the use of this land the one that gets preserved? Why has there apparently been no input from BIPOC people and especially from those with much deeper ties to this area than any non-Indigenous people here now on the creation of this historic district? Why do three groups that don't include the communities or people with deeper historical ties to this area get to dictate the future of this area for generations to come? How does memorializing a racist's vision of Boulder's civic area align, created through traumatic displacement of Indigenous people, poor people and people of color, mesh with our city's racial equity goals? People from groups that have been and continue to be traumatized by displacement from this area ought to be the ones deciding how this area is used. Resources spent creating a historical area would be better used offering housing support or reparations to the descendants of those displaced by Olmsted's vision of a neat and tidy area that destroyed natural ecosystems and excluded BIPOC residents, low income people, and laborers. If we are going to spend taxpayer money on this area, it should be done in a way that repairs past harms and oppressions, rather than preserves them. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 82 of 102 Proposed Civic Area Historic District Letters Received from July 12, 2023 to January 29, 2024 1.Paul Levitt – Jan. 15, 2024 2.Catherine Cameron – Jan. 18, 2024 3.Robert Hohlfelder – Jan. 19, 2024 4.Steve Lekson – Jan. 20, 2024 5.Barbara Beasley – Jan. 20, 2024 6.M. Roselle Mullins George – Jan. 21, 2024 7.Susan Osborne – Jan. 24, 2024 8.Jane McKinley – Jan. 25 2024 9.Joe Stepanek - Jan. 25 2024 10.Margaret Ryder – Jan. 28, 2024 11.Charles Birnbaum – Jan. 29, 2024 12.Jenny Elkins – Jan. 29, 2024 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 83 of 102 Letters Received from January 16-29, 2024 Proposed Civic Area Historic District 1.Paul Levitt – Jan. 15, 2024 2.Catherine Cameron – Jan. 18, 2024 3.Robert Hohlfelder – Jan. 19, 2024 4.Steve Lekson – Jan. 20, 2024 5.Barbara Beasley – Jan. 20, 2024 6.M. Roselle Mullins George – Jan. 21, 2024 7.Susan Osborne – Jan. 24, 2024 8.Jane McKinley – Jan. 25 2024 9.Joe Stepanek - Jan. 25 2024 10.Margaret Ryder – Jan. 28, 2024 11.Charles Birnbaum – Jan. 29, 2024 12.Jenny Elkins – Jan. 29, 2024 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 84 of 102 From:Paul Levitt To:landmarksboard Cc:Paul Levitt Subject:FEB 7 LANDMARKS BOARD DESIGNATION HEARING. Date:Monday, January 15, 2024 5:33:59 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Dear Committe Members, We are what we remember. Memory makes a life. History ismemory. When that history can be experienced materially, wehave not only the story of its source, but the thing itself. Abeautiful home, for example, embodies a story, but when thehome is preserved, memory and reality become one. Preservationis the archaeology we bring to valuable sites. Good fortune has enabled me to live in the historic Hillsidedistrict, designated in the early 2000s. It was a fair andaesthetically rewarding experience owing to the helpfulsuggestions of the preservation staff. I know that I am justone of the descendants, one of the boarders, to enjoy this homeas originally designed. The same is true of my neighborhood. Ican see in a glance the relationship of my house to the others,which form a community once known as “Little Athens.” Living in a landmark district has drawn my disparate neighborsinto a close community and given them a common cause, united byties of architectural and environmental preservation andbeautification. Demolishing a memorable house and/or neighborhood is akin to adeath. The playwright Tom Stoppard calls death an absence. Theperson or object was once there and is now no longer. Manyabsences can be rectified. The missing part—or something likeit—can be found and substituted for the original. But when areplacement is inadequate, the absence is all the greater.Architecture is like life. Once lost, it can never beregained. And so I ask you to consider how important it is to retainmemory—a valuable part of Boulder’s life—by designating CentralPark and the five city-owned and already landmarked buildingsthat are in and surround the park as an historic district. I thank you for taking the time to read and consider my letter. Yours sincerel Paul M. Levitt Professor Emeritus Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 85 of 102 From:Catherine M Cameron To:landmarksboard Subject:Historic District for Boulder Central Park Date:Thursday, January 18, 2024 4:50:03 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Dear Landmarks Board: I am writing in strong support of the proposed landmarking of the BoulderCentral Park area as a Historic District. This area is the heart of downtownBoulder, it was designed by one of the earliest and best known landscapearchitects in the country (Fredrick Law Olmsted Jr.) and, at this point, it retainsits historic character. By this I mean that Olmstead’s design for Central Parkremains intact, including the open lawns that allow for public gatherings andevents, some of the original trees and other plans remain, the viewshed (to theFlatirons) is still open, and there are pedestrian paths, an irrigation ditch, andmore that were all part of Olmsted’s original design. I have been a resident of Boulder for almost 30 years. For a number of years inthe 1990s I was on the President’s Advisory Council on Historic Preservation. I know that well-designed and well-preserved historic places are of enormousvalue to cities economically, culturally, and with regard to creatingcommunity. I urge you to strongly consider designating Boulder Central Parkas an Historic District. This move will reap benefits for Boulder for decades tocome. Sincerely, Catherine M. Cameron Catherine M. Cameron Professor Emerita Department of Anthropology 233 UCB University of Colorado Boulder, CO 80309-0233 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 86 of 102 From:Robert L Hohlfelder To:landmarksboard Subject:In Support of the Proposed Central Park Historic District Date:Friday, January 19, 2024 5:33:49 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Our city is constantly evolving in ways that many in our community either like or dislike. Regardless of how Boulder changes, it should not be at the expense of our historic identity. Our landmarked buildings are the physical manifestation of that history. Preserving the integrity of the Central Park area, bounded by some of our more distinguished landmarks, as a historic district will ensure that the very heart of Boulder will remain as a monument to our community’s past regardless of how Boulder addresses the challenges of the future. But will the creation of this historic district honor the contributions of a man, Fredrick Law Olmsted Jr., who some think was a racist? I am aware of the criticism that his park designs were intended in some instances to exclude minorities from their use. If such restrictions were ever imposed, they were implemented by local ordinances and not by him. He was, of course, a product of his time when our country embraced institutional racism (i.e. segregation) and when white nationalism, embodied by the Klu Klux Clan, challenged our hopes and efforts to achieve racial equality even in Boulder. Like everyone then or now, his personal views on any and all subjects may have been inconsistent, changed or evolved over time. It is most important to note that there is nothing in his report to Boulder that supports the view that he was a racist. Rather his plans suggest quite the opposite. He was a progressive populist who wanted to make public spaces available and beneficial to all Boulder citizens. In this regard, he was a man ahead of his times, and we should recognize and honor him for helping preserve such a vital component of our city. I think Boulder is fortunate to have had one of the last century’s leading landscape designers originally plan our Central Park area, so much of which still reflects his intended design. The creation of a historic district that embraces, perpetuates, and expands his vision will guarantee that future Boulder citizens can be cognizant of our city’s past while experiencing the benefits of a natural oasis within the core of our city. Having been born in New York City, I know how NewYorkers acknowledge the important contribution Central Park, perhaps the most famous of the Olmsted family’s parks, makes to improving the quality of urban life. We also should be proud that our Central Park was FLO Jr.’s contribution to enhancing the landscape and life of our community, Bob Hohlfelder Robert L. Hohlfelder, PhD Professor Emeritus of History University of Colorado, Boulder robert.hohlfelder@colorado.edu Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 87 of 102 From:Steve Lekson To:landmarksboard Subject:Central Park Historic District Date:Saturday, January 20, 2024 11:15:03 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Dear Landmarks Board: I write in strong support of the proposal to designate as a historic district Boulder's Boulder’s Central Park Boulder between Canyon and Arapahoe, 13th Street. and the Municipal Building. As you know, our Central Park was designed by Fredrick Law Olmsted, Jr., which in itself should justify historic district status. It's very likely that the landscape would merit listing in the National Register of Historic Places under criterion C, "representing the work of a master" architect. I've lived in Boulder for almost 30 years. While not a native, I've been here long enough to value what makes Boulder unique, and Central Park is surely part of that. Listing it as a historic district will help retain a bit more of what made (and makes) Boulder the wonderful place it is. Thank you, Steve Lekson Stephen H. Lekson Curator of Archaeology, Jubilado University of Colorado Museum of Natural History Boulder CO Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 88 of 102 From:Barbara Beasley To:landmarksboard Subject:Central Park Date:Saturday, January 20, 2024 9:25:13 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. This note is to let you know that my husband and I fully support the designation of Central Park as Boulder’s 11th historic district. This park is a spot that can nourish our dear city as it moves through incredible change. It’s green, natural and designed by the Olmsted’s. What more could we want? Thank you. Barbara and Dean Beasley 695 Northstar Ct. Boulder CO 80304 Sent from my iPhone Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 89 of 102 From:roselle george To:landmarksboard Subject:Boulder’s Central Park Date:Sunday, January 21, 2024 5:44:21 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Growing up in Boulder in the 1960s and 1970s I was inspired by Boulder's leaders including my architectural designer mother who fought for Boulder’s specialness and uniqueness. Now after a long career as an urban planner and a continued presence over 60 years in Boulder I see a need to preserve the Central Park by designating it as a Historic District. The key design elements proposed by the Olmsted Brothers still exist. It has functioned as the heart of Boulder for so many years. Let’s preserve it so it continues to be a needed asset to the community while respecting the historical and cultural context. We need to preserve a key area that defines Boulder and makes it special. M. Roselle Mullins George 2686 4th St Boulder, CO 80304 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 90 of 102 January 24, 2024 Dear Landmarks Board members, Thank you for the time and energy you each contribute to making our city a good place to live. Keeping the history of our town accessible and alive is one piece of what makes it a joy to be here - whether long time resident, newcomer or visitor. I’m writing in strong support of the proposed Civic Area Historic District that you’ll be considering on February 7. In a way that Marcy Gerwing’s excellent memo on the project captures completely, Central Park, the landmarked bandshell and the four additional landmarked buildings included in the district represent important pieces of Boulder’s past. As an ensemble, they tell a story of our town’s evolution. I was the lucky city planner who led the project to develop a plan for a greenway and path along Boulder Creek in the mid-1980s. A team of the primary property owners along the creek (the City, the County, BVSD and the University) and the implementing city departments (Transportation, Parks, Flood Control and Real Estate/Open Space) was pulled together. During the course of five months, we researched and then walked each reach of Boulder Creek for the purpose of identifying obstacles, points of interest, capital projects and other possibilities. From the first, we were inspired by Frederick Law Olmsted Jr.’s ideas about keeping open “a simple piece of bottom-land” along the creek. And as written in his plan for Boulder, the creek would be “near the heart of the city” and “give a piece of recreation ground worth a great deal to the people.” As the City team considered plan details, it was certain that there would be a bike and walking path, but also flood mitigation, habitat restoration and historic site identification. The creek itself would be modified to provide pools for trout and to remove obstacles to rafting and kayaking. We envisioned a project that would connect city parks and important destinations- civic/library functions, educational functions and commercial functions. The plan was unanimously adopted by City Council in 1984. The creek path from Eben Fine Park to 63rd Street was completed (remarkably!) in about five years, although modifications and improvements continue to this day. It’s hard to imagine in 2024 when in Central Park or at the Farmer’s Market that both the Broadway and Arapahoe Bridges into Central Park had to be rebuilt - both to let walkers, runners and bikers under, as well as for improved flood control. Access to Central Park was made markedly better. I share this story by way of background. I see the proposal for a Civic Area historic district as absolutely in keeping with the plan done for Boulder Creek decades ago. It will provide a point of historic interest and a place (in fact the only place today) where the history of the creek is traced back to the indigenous people, through the early white settlers and the tale of our ever evolving place. Historic designation does not freeze either land or buildings in time. It rather assures that any new use or significant change will be reviewed for compatibility by you and the interested public. As the “East Bookend” for the Civic area and as the obvious non-auto route from the University’s conference center to the downtown mall, this future historic district will undoubtedly be an important touchstone as changes to the area are proposed. Let’s use this Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 91 of 102 opportunity to designate and highlight an historic district that reflects in its buildings and green spaces the story of our town. Best regards, Susan Osborne Past City Council member and mayor, past Parks Board member and chair, past Historic Boulder president Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 92 of 102 From:J. MCKINLEY To:landmarksboard Subject:Please preserve the historic integrity of Central Park Date:Thursday, January 25, 2024 11:43:46 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Central Park is an anchor for personal memories and links me to the past of Boulder. The remarkably forward thinking design has kept it a gathering place for many decades for all who live in and visit Boulder. For those people who come and go from Boulder, Central Park is iconic. I urge you to proceed with the plan to preserve the integrity of this park. Thank you. Sincerely, Jane McKinley Sent from my iPad Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 93 of 102 From:Stepanek To:landmarksboard Cc:Sara Martinelli Subject:Re: Support for Central Park Historic District by Joe Stepanek - Jan 24 Date:Thursday, January 25, 2024 8:04:38 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. > Hi Sara > > I plan to use this draft, shortened, for my three minute verbal > presentation for the Feb 7 Land Marks meeting in the Muni building. > Please address a short note of support to the landmarks board as well > - stressing perhaps public access and sagfely, good businmess environment. > > My thanks, Joe > > > I write to support the establishment of this, Boulder's latest, > Historic District - in Central Park, the famed Band Shell and its > immediate area. Many have made the case for Council's approval of this > proposal and have sited the many benefits for doing so. > > Here I mention another, often over-looked, reason for doing so - > namely, as the City moves to it's new offices on Alpine and Balsam in > coming five years or so, it has already announced that it will vacate > its current downtown offices and perhaps sell already land marked > buildings, perhaps 2 or 3 (The Atrium Building, the Tea House, BMOCA > and even the Muni building itself), and even raze 1 or 2 buildings > (new Britain and Mustard Last Stand Buildings) in the current flood > plan. As these steps are taken, private investors will have an > opportunity to buy, design, and build a few new structures in the > downtown area. This governmental move will understandable create many > issues, even crises, as City officials and even the Boulder public > engages in this multi-year, complex process. > > This era of some turmoil, creates and underscores the necessary and > desirability of rethinking Boulder's historic heritage, its riches, > and today its many benefits. Protecting this history, written and > manifested by a few older Boulderites, a few structures and artifacts, > should concern us all. > > Imagine Neolithic man seeing Boulder Valley for the first time as > families walked over Davidson Mesa, and then leaving a stone tool > collection behind for next summer's use. Imagine dozens of First > Nation tribes settling and hunting in this rich valley, who speak to > us to this day. In more recent times, these early peoples were > followed by European explorers, hunters, trappers, miners and farmers; > then Black Americans seeking opportunity after the Civil War and > today, Latinos also seeking opportunity as well. Soon there after > Boulder voted for a university, and then, very recently President > Eisenhower with a nudge from Ed Condon, placed the Bureau of Standard > here as well. As a direct consequence, Boulder today is a hotbed of > globally significant R and D. And we keep on going - by welcoming a > Soviet era Islamic Tajik Tea House! Today this unique gift is Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 94 of 102 > Boulder's most popular retail business! Imagine that! > > Hence, creating an Historic District will set high expectations and > standards for preservation and for public agreement as building > permits, licenses etc are considered and approved for this central > part of Boulder and of Boulder's history. > > For my own part, having been raised overseas and savored a career > overseas as well, in a total of twelve Asian and Africa Countries > spread over thirty years, and having always returned to home in > Boulder, I have come to appreciate the remarkable riches in our global > diversity - here in Boulder and around the world. > > A Central Park Historic District can also, inform us, enrich us and as > we savor festivals, the arts, music, picnics and parties next to > Boulder Creek. Remember our roots as we enrich future generations. > > Thank you Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 95 of 102 From:Margaret Ryder To:Historic Preservation Subject:Historic designation for Central Park Date:Sunday, January 28, 2024 4:41:47 PM Attachments:Screen Shot 2022-10-07 at 3.04.50 PM.png External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. To the Landmarks Board, I am writing to support the City of Boulder creating an historic district in the heart of the city and landmark Central Park. The creation of an an historic district in Boulder’s Central Park Boulder between Canyon and Arapahoe, 13th st. on the East and the Municipal Building on the West, means preserving the intact design of Fredrick Law Olmsted, Jr. arguably the earliest and best known landscape architect in this country. No one is opposed to change. Preservation would like a seat at the table, to carefully consider changes that remain sensitive to the importance of this sight. Given the rapid change in Boulder and given this is historically the heart of Boulder, we would like to update the park, make necessary changes yet consider Boulder’s roots for now and the future. After all, what would Boulder be without the foresight of the residents who came before us, who had the foresight to save our architecture, save the mountains from development, create our open space program, and honor our view sheds? Please consider preservation of the sight. A collaboration between the City of Boulder and Preservation means the best outcome to remember and honor the past while preparing for the future. Best, Margaret Ryder 4 Goldenrod Boulder, CO 80302 214.773.2700 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 96 of 102 29 January 2024 RE: February 7, 2024, City of Boulder Landmarks Board Designation Hearing. Potential Designation, “Central Park/Civic Area Historic District” Dear City of Boulder Landmarks Board Members: I am writing in support of the proposed historic district in the Civic Center area of Boulder. This area has operated as the ‘heart’ of the community since its inception more than 100 years ago. In 1998, I founded the Cultural Landscape Foundation (TCLF) in Washington, D.C., to document cultural landscapes and advocate for their ongoing stewardship. The proposed district is a significant work of planning and landscape architecture aligned with other such landscapes that create a sense of place in communities across America and are represented in two of TCLF’s four major programs: What’s Out There (a database of more than 2,700 nationally significant landscapes), and Pioneers of American Landscape Design (which includes biographies of S. R. DeBoer, Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr., and Olmsted Brothers). We encourage the Landmarks Board to look favorably on this local historic district designation. The five city-owned buildings and Central Park taken together have the potential to tell an almost continuous story of the evolution of Boulder. The park itself is a remarkable example of the creation of a town center that suits the needs of a community and, to quote the great landscape architect Laurie Olin, “serve as a center of energy.” Initially founded by a grass roots, self-improvement committee of citizens, the Boulder City Improvement Association, Central Park has been the setting for many memorable events. It’s significant that in 1907 the Brookline, MA-based Olmsted Brothers, undertook the master plan for several parks and other improvements for Boulder, when the city’s population was barely 10,000. Like many Olmsted designed parks, there are layers of history and enhancements, and these , too, contribute to its significance when the Denver-based planner, S. R. DeBoer made additions (it’s worth noting that DeBoer and the Olmsted Brothers contributions can also be found in Denver’s Civic Center Park which was designated a National Historic Landmark in 2012). Taken together, these pioneering landscape architects and planners addressed such issues as flood control, an appreciation of the Boulder Creek’s riparian environmental context, opportunities for healthy recreation, and myriad opportunities for passive and gregarious enjoyment that would benefit all citizens. While changes have occurred over time, the integrity of their designs remain intact and serve as the critical “bone structure” for managing change today. With our mission to "connect people to places,” we strongly support the proposed portion of the Civic Area as a local Historic District. Yours sincerely, Charles A. Birnbaum, FASLA, FAAR President + CEO Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 97 of 102 From:Jenny Elkins To:Historic Preservation Subject:Historic District Central Park Boulder Date:Monday, January 29, 2024 3:22:20 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Hi. I am writing on behalf of your efforts to create an historic district in Boulder’s Central Park Boulder between Canyon and Arapahoe, 13th st. on the East and the Municipal Building on the West. I am fully in support. Thank you, Jenny Elkins 5 Chautauqua Park Boulder. CO 80302 Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 98 of 102 Civic Area Historic District Draft Design Guideline Framework February 7, 2024 Intent What is the purpose of these design guidelines? How will they be used? (Language from Boulder’s General Design Guidelines and University Place Historic District Design Guidelines) The purpose of the guidelines is to facilitate both the Landmark Alteration Certificate (LAC) application and approval of alterations proposed for design review by assisting owners and designers as they plan maintenance and changes to buildings and public spaces and to provide the Landmarks Board with a framework for evaluation of proposed improvements. The guidelines reflect the Landmarks Board’s philosophy that underlies all its decisions: to encourage the preservation and careful treatment of the city’s historically significant resources, while recognizing the need for continuing adaptation and improvements to these resources. The guidelines have been developed to recognize the unique character of the district and are intended to supplement the General Design Guidelines for Boulder’s Historic Districts and Individual Landmarks (the General Design Guidelines), which apply unless otherwise stated. Where the two guidelines conflict, the district-specific guidelines shall prevail. The design guidelines are intended to be used as an aid to appropriate design and not as a checklist of items for compliance. In some cases, unusual circumstances may allow for projects to deviate from them. Table of Contents What areas will the guidelines address? •Review Process •Roles and Responsibilities o Include review bodies, policies and regulations (i.e. floodplain, Park Plan for the Civic Area, Art Acquisition Policy, Downtown Urban Design Guidelines, plans and policies related to the list in Guiding Principal #2, etc.) •What Requires Review? Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 99 of 102 o Define what does and doesn’t require review in the design guidelines to streamline and clarify the review process (i.e. maintenance, emergency repairs, new work) o Clarify that improvement or maintenance work within the ditch easements and CDOT easement (Broadway) is exempt from LAC review • History of the Area o Summary of area history based on new research to tell more inclusive history of area. • Design Guidelines o Rehabilitation of Historic Structures o Additions to Historic Structures o New Construction o Coordination with Floodplain Development Regulations o Central Park o Boulder Creek o Public Art o East Bookend o 13th Street o Plazas Guiding Principles What values are important to inform the district-specific design guidelines? 1. The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are the foundation for the historic district design guidelines. Rationale: Adopted by the Landmarks Board in 1985 (revised in 1990), the Standards for Rehabilitation are the foundation of the General Design Guidelines and the eight district-specific design guidelines. As a Certified Local Government, design review is required to be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards. 2. Preserve maintenance access and align the design guidelines with management practices in adopted city plans and policies for utilities infrastructure, urban trees, park design standards, flood mitigation and transportation networks related to life safety and accessibility. Rationale: The City has established programs and professional staff that manage the many assets within the historic district. The design guidelines should reinforce the importance of life safety and accessibility within the Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 100 of 102 boundaries of the district. Additionally, defining what does and does not require review in the design guidelines will clarify and streamline the review process and ensure that emergency repairs and regular maintenance projects can be swiftly executed. 3. The area has character-defining features that contribute to its historic character and setting. Define these key historic features within the historic district and consider drawing inspiration from them. Key features include but are not limited to: • Boulder Creek as a living entity that is significant to Boulder’s past, present and future and provides critical public safety, health, flood conveyance, water supply, and environmental benefits. • The unique architectural character of the area as defined by five distinct, individually landmarked structures, each representing a forward-looking and progressive city identity. • The area is a place for recreation, gathering and play that contributes to the health and well-being for all and should continue to reflect the variety of community needs and desires for the enjoyment of the site. Rationale: The area has character-defining features that contribute to its historic character. While this is not a complete list, this guiding principle emphasizes the importance of Boulder Creek, the unique architectural character of the structures, and the importance of the area as a place for recreation, gathering and play. 4. The area is significant for its association with Boulder’s municipal, social and political history. As part of Boulder’s Civic Area, this district continues to have a symbolic, geographic, and functional importance and therefore should serve as an inclusive place where all feel welcome. Celebrate the diversity of our community and enrich our collective understanding of different periods of Boulder’s history by acknowledging stories of historically excluded populations. Rationale: The historic district process provided an opportunity to tell a more complete history of the area. While there is additional work to be done, it is evident that the area currently tells only a portion of Boulder’s history. As the civic center of Boulder, it is even more important that it be inclusive and welcoming, and broad representation through art, educational opportunities and programming is encouraged. This principle aligns with the Park Plan for Boulder’s Civic Area, which states “Preserve, reflect and celebrate the area's Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 101 of 102 fully inclusive history (e.g., Indigenous Peoples, mining, the railroad, Olmsted's linear park and landmarked structures).” 5. Encourage a vibrant mix of uses in the East Bookend through adaptive reuse and creative infill. New building design may reflect the character of its own time and have meaningful juxtapositions, while respecting the integrity, scale and massing of the surrounding historic buildings. (Park Plan and DUDGs) Rationale: The East Bookend is anticipated for redevelopment. Both the Park Plan and the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines provide guidance on how redevelopment should occur, and encourages a vibrant mix of uses, adaptive reuse and creative infill. As the East Bookend includes three individually significant buildings, care should be taken to respect the existing integrity, scale and massing of those buildings. 6. Align the selection of works of art within the Civic Area Historic District with adopted city plans and policies to encourage creativity, contribute to a sense of place, spark conversation, tell our shared stories and capture our moment in time, foster the enjoyment of diverse works of art, and be thoughtfully designed contributions to the urban environment of our vibrant city. Additionally, select artwork within the Civic Area to attract, inspire, educate and engage the community. Rationale: The Civic Area Park Plan identifies this area as one of the major art centers of Boulder, and new artwork within the proposed historic district is anticipated and encouraged in the future. This guiding principle repeats the mission of the Acquisition Criteria of the Public Art Policy, as well as language from the Park Plan for the Civic Area. Both of these statements are compatible with the intent of historic district designation, which among other things, seeks to promote tourist trade and interest and foster knowledge of the city's living heritage. Attachment A - Feb. 7, 2024 Landmarks Board Designation Memo Item 6A - Proposed Civic Area Historic District Page 102 of 102 CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: February 20, 2024 AGENDA TITLE Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS Planning & Development Services Brad Mueller, Director Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Manager Kathleen King, Principal City Planner Sarah Horn, Senior City Planner OBJECTIVE 1. Planning Board hears staff presentation. 2. Planning Board provides feedback on zoning strategy for East Boulder areas of change. KEY ISSUES: Staff is seeking input on the following key issues: 1. Does Planning Board support the proposed use table modifications? 2. Does Planning Board find the identified zones adequately implement the vision of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan? Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 1 of 22 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The East Boulder Subcommunity Plan (EBSP), adopted by Planning Board and City Council in 2022, includes the following recommendation for near-term implementation: D9. East Boulder Zoning and Form Based Code Study Implementing the vision of the East Boulder land use plan will require code updates, zoning changes and possibly, the creation of new zones. The East Boulder Place Types Map and Place Type Performance Standards will be used as a guide to develop code recommendations to implement the plan and deliver design quality and placemaking described in the EBSP. Form-based code will be considered as an implementation option. (page 83-84). Comprehensive Planning division staff began implementation of this recommendation in 2023, with the support of a consultant team. On October 3, 2023, staff presented initial community feedback on the form-based code (FBC) to Planning Board and the board provided feedback on FBC and the FBC review process. The consultant team is currently drafting an update to the city’s FBC regulations based on collected feedback, which will be presented to the board in the spring of this year. The purpose of this meeting is to review and provide feedback on proposed supported future zoning for East Boulder and associated recommendations for use table modifications to guide redevelopment in East Boulder to meet the Place Type performance standards described in the EBSP. Board feedback will be shared with City Council at the March 7, 2024 meeting. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends the following zone districts be considered ‘equivalent’ to the East Boulder Place Types, as described in the subcommunity plan: Place Type Equivalent Zone District 1 Parkside Residential MU -2 Mixed Use 2 2 Innovation TOD MU -4 Mixed Use 4 3 Neighborhood TOD MU -4 Mixed Use 4 4 Main Street Live -Work MU -4 Mixed Use 4 5 Innovation TOD (Non- Residential) IG Industrial-General 6 Hands -On Industrial IG Industrial-General 7 Destination Workplace IMS Industrial-Mixed Service The identification of these equivalent zones is intended to provide guidance to property owners, city staff, Planning Board and City Council as parties consider rezoning of area properties that are in line with the subcommunity plan. The recommendation could also help identify initial zoning for future annexations of land outside city limits, but within the boundaries of the subcommunity. Staff will further analyze whether additional tools Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 2 of 22 will be needed to ensure rezoning to these districts, such as through an amendment of the subcommunity plan, or a different approach. Staff also recommends modifications to Title 9, Chapter 6 “Use Standards” to align permitted uses in the supportive underlying zones with the subcommunity plan’s Place Type performance standards: Zone Use Current Status Proposed Revision MU-4 Brewery, Distillery, Winery Prohibited Allowed MU-4 Small theater or rehearsal space Use Review Allowed IG Brewpubs and Taverns Prohibited Allowed Staff recommends the following modifications to Conditional Uses to align permitted uses in the supportive underlying zones with the subcommunity plan’s Place Type performance standards: Zone Use Conditions Proposed Revision IG Brewery, Distillery, Winery Allowed by right if the use does not exceed 15,000 square feet in floor area and does not include a restaurant Allowed by right if the use does not exceed 15,000 square feet in floor area IMS Office Allowed by right if the floor area of the use does not exceed 5,000 square feet and is otherwise prohibited Allowed by right if the floor area of the use does not exceed 20,000 square feet BACKGROUND Purpose of the East Boulder Zoning Update The purpose of the East Boulder Zoning Update is to facilitate the realization of the community’s vision and direction outlined in the adopted East Boulder Subcommunity Plan. The intended outcome of the process is a rezoning strategy and updates to the city’s Form Based Code based on the adopted plan, which may be applied to areas of change identified in the Subcommunity Plan. This will: •Reduce barriers to achieving the types of places we heard community members want. •Promote the design of buildings to strengthen their relationship to public space. •Enhance the unique character of the East Boulder subcommunity. Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 3 of 22 •Nurture a more economically resilient, walkable place for businesses, workers and residents. •Provide more attainable and affordable housing opportunities to accommodate a growing region. •Encourage work spaces and commercial places for existing and new makers and merchants. Rezoning Criteria At the time the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan was adopted, City Council also adopted Ordinance 8544, amending Section 9-2-19 of the Boulder Revised Code (B.R.C. 1981) to specifically address criteria for rezonings in East Boulder. The purpose of this ordinance was to ensure that the city had regulations in place to manage redevelopment in East Boulder before rezoning applications would be considered: (g) Additional Criteria for Land within the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan and 55 th and Arapahoe Station Area Plan Boundaries. In the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan boundary and in the 55th and Arapahoe Station Area Plan boundary, for an application not incidental to a general revision of the zoning map, the city council shall also find, in addition to requirements in Subsection (e) above, that the land use code contains standards necessary to achieve the vision of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan for the area proposed for rezoning. The intent of this requirement is to ensure that the land use code contains standards that will result in development of the area proposed for rezoning consistent with the vision of the plan, to ensure the rezoning will not otherwise negatively impact the achievement of the vision of the plan, and to not prevent rezoning until all anticipated land use code projects and programs of the plan have been completed. In making this determination, council shall consider, to the extent applicable for the area proposed for rezoning: (1)The ability of the proposed rezoning to achieve the place types and meet the place type performance standards established in the plan, (2)The ability of the proposed rezoning to achieve new and upgraded transportation connections designated in the East Boulder Subcommunity Connections Plan concurrent with development or redevelopment, and (3)Whether the proposed rezoning may impact the city's ability to incentivize the creation of or participation in one or more general improvement districts, or an equivalent organization, proposed in the plan. To establish zoning that aligns with the EBSP’s Place Type recommendations, the East Boulder Zoning Update strategy includes four key components: 1.Use table modifications to permit Place Type preferred uses by-right 2. Establishment of supported “underlying” zones to align with Place Types 3.Application of Form-Based Code in appropriate areas through the update to Appendix L: Form Based Code Areas map. 4. Update of Appendix M: Form Based Code to reflect East Boulder Place Types Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 4 of 22 This memo addresses the first two of these components. Draft updates to Appendices M and L will be presented to the board in the spring of 2024. East Boulder Place Types The East Boulder Place Types included in the EBSP describe the design intent and performance expectations for evolving neighborhoods, or ‘areas of change,’ identified in the subcommunity plan. The Place Type map can be found on page 36 of the plan and performance standards are described on pages 37-43. Figure 1: East Boulder Place Types Map Zoning Districts and Form-Based Code The purpose of Boulder’s Form-Based Code is to establish building form and design requirements for development within the areas designated in Appendix L. The requirements for these areas implement the desired development, including functional characteristics, form, design character and quality, as guided by the plans for each designated area and the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. These requirements are considered supplemental to the underlying zoning provisions and supersede Title 9 regulations related to the intensity, form and bulk standards. However, the underlying zoning continues to regulate which uses are permitted, conditionally permitted, prohibited, or which may be permitted through use review. For ‘areas of change’ identified in the EBSP, some properties may need to pursue a rezoning in order to redevelop with the preferred uses described in the subcommunity plan. To support future rezoning processes, the project team evaluated the Place Type map and performance Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 5 of 22 standards of the EBSP against the existing zoning map and Chapter 6 of Title 9, “Use Standards.” See Attachment B for a zoning map of East Boulder. PROCESS The board will consider the proposed equivalent zones and Use Table modifications as conceptual. The project team will present the board’s feedback and additionally seek feedback from City Council on March 7. Pending board and council direction, staff will subsequently identify a tool to manage future rezonings, such as an amendment to the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan. Pending board and council direction, staff will also prepare an ordinance updating Title 9, Chapter 6 “Use Standards,” for Planning Board’s recommendation and Council adoption. These actions would take place over the summer calendar of 2024. PUBLIC FEEDBACK The East Boulder Subcommunity Plan process included three years of robust community engagement to help define a community vision for the future of the subcommunity. The plan describes community expectations for desired land uses, building character, street- level activation, streetscape character, access and mobility, and parking. As described in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, a key tool to manage the execution of that vision through redevelopment is the Boulder Revised Code (B.R.C. 1981). This phase of implementation includes a technical analysis of zoning options and the review process. To inform this process, the project includes engagement with the community through three channels: 1. A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) The TAC is composed of approximately 12 members of the local design and construction community. Members represent various disciplines and specialties in the design process and bring a critical eye to inform potential rezonings, code changes and the potential update to the city’s Form Based Code. Two TAC meetings have been held thus far, the first on September 12, 2023 and the second on December 12, 2023. Both of these meetings were focused on technical issues of the Form Based Code. 2. Focus Group Sessions The project team assembled four focus group sessions focused on key issues to inform future zoning recommendations. The four groups included participants representing area property and developers, local business owners, mobility service providers and advocates, and long-range planning advocates. Similarly, the Focus Group sessions introduced the project to participants and collected feedback on their interests, concerns and plans for zoning changes in the area. Key themes from these sessions included: Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 6 of 22 • Interest in ability to create more and wider variety of housing options in East Boulder • Concerns for affordability of commercial space and subcommunity’s ability to support small businesses in the face of redevelopment 3. Community-wide Communications Channels In addition to collecting targeted input from impacted community members and those working in the design and development industries, the project team has provided information about the project to the broader community through updates to the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan project webpage. ANALYSIS OF KEY ISSUES(S) Does Planning Board find the identified zones adequately implement the vision of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan? How were recommended zones selected? The vision for future neighborhoods described in Chapter 3 of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan drove the selection of recommended zones. Because the team anticipates the application of Form-Based Code to most areas of change in the subcommunity, the primary consideration for underlying zoning is by-right uses. Consistent with Planning & Development Services department-wide efforts to simplify the city code, the project team sought opportunities to employ existing zones, with modification, as opposed to creating new, additional zone districts. In general, the zoning districts proposed for each place type match the character desired for the place type; however, there are a few uses recommended to be revised. These recommended revisions to the existing zoning districts have been carefully vetted to request only those truly needed to achieve the goals of the Place Types described in the subcommunity plan. Uses allowed in the zoning district may also be managed further through the FBC. For example, the FBC may limit which floors the use may occur on within a particular building type within a particular location. For the full analysis of Place Types and Equivalent zones, see Attachment A. Does Planning Board support the proposed use table modifications? What is the reason for the proposed Use Table Modifications? Some of the recommended zones do not allow for the kinds of uses or activities that are described in the subcommunity plan. The proposed modifications would allow preferred uses described in the plan by right. Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 7 of 22 How will the proposed Use Table modifications impact other areas of the city? MU-4 Modifications Zone Use Current Status Proposed Revision MU-4 Brewery, Distillery, Winery Prohibited Allowed MU-4 Small theater or rehearsal space Use Review Allowed The MU-4 zone district is applied in two other locations in the city: (1) Boulder Junction. There are a little over twenty properties located in the Boulder Junction area that have MU-4 zoning. The mixed-use neighborhood includes residential, restaurants, retail, and office. A brewery, distillery or winery is more industrial in nature than the existing character of the neighborhood, however, this type of use is considered a valuable kind of “third place” that could, in the future, contribute to the social infrastructure in this denser part of the city. Staff considers the proposed use complimentary to the existing uses in the neighborhood. Similarly, allowing a small theater or rehearsal space in this area would provide additional entertainment and social options for the growing neighborhood. (2) 1100 Balsam. MU-4 is applied to the northeast corner of 1100 Balsam, commonly known as the Alpine-Balsam site. Staff does not anticipate that the proposed modifications would impact the use of this site, which is currently in the development review process. IG Modifications Zone Use Current Status Proposed Revision IG Brewpubs and Taverns Prohibited Allowed Zone Use Conditions Proposed Revision IG Brewery, Distillery, Winery Allowed by right if the use does not exceed 15,000 square feet in floor area and does not include a restaurant Allowed by right if the use does not exceed 15,000 square feet in floor area The IG zones are concentrated in three regions of the city: (1) The East Boulder Subcommunity. Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 8 of 22 (2) Foothills Corridor between Arapahoe and Jay Road. (3) Gunbarrel. The proposed modifications are intended to deliver the mix of uses community members described as desired during the East Boulder Subcommunity Planning process. In addition to this, as the city continues to consider the future of industrial zones, these modifications could create more opportunities to build in 15-minute neighborhoods for future workforce and potential residents of these areas as they evolve. Breweries, distilleries and wineries, in addition to manufacturing products with alcohol, also serve as important social places in industrial zones today. In East Boulder, these businesses host community meetings, put on neighborhood events like comedy or game nights and act as key meeting places for local workforce and nearby residents. The proposed modifications would permit existing businesses to expand into food service and allow other food and alcohol establishments to create new places within these neighborhoods for social activity and entertainment. IMS Modifications Zone Use Conditions Proposed Revision IMS Office Allowed by right if the floor area of the use does not exceed 5,000 square feet and is otherwise prohibited Allowed by right if the floor area of the use does not exceed 20,000 square feet The IMS zone district is applied in two other locations in the city: (1) Boulder Junction. Located just west of the MU-4 zoned properties in Boulder Junction, in an area commonly referred to as ‘Steel Yards,’ this neighborhood consists of residential, light industrial and some office uses. The proposed modification would allow for larger office space uses in the area, however, the approximately 115 properties in the zoned district are subject to Form-Based Code. Office uses can be limited by FBC to specified stories and/or frontages, should an increased office footprint in the neighborhood be a concern. (2) North Boulder. There are approximately ten properties, located west of Broadway and north of Rosewood Avenue with an IMS designation. The North Boulder Subcommunity Plan envisions this area as “a mix of uses in a lower scale of intensity than the uses along Broadway and Yarmouth. They should provide a transition between the main street and the adjacent residential and industrial areas.” Staff finds that the proposed revision would not impede this realization of this vision for the area. Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 9 of 22 NEXT STEPS The project team will share Planning Board’s feedback with City Council at a March 7, 2024 meeting. Planning Board is next scheduled to review the following components of the East Boulder Zoning Update in June, 2024: 1. Draft updates to Appendix L: Form Based Code Areas map. 2. Draft update of Appendix M: Form Based Code Approved By: ________________________ Brad Mueller, Director Department of Planning & Development Services ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Attachment B: East Boulder Zoning Map Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 10 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO1 This memo outlines recommended zoning districts for each of the Place Types generally where the form-based code will apply. See map, right. The recommendations include zoning districts currently on the books in the city's zoning (land use) code. The Flatiron Business Park area that is not currently proposed to be form-based code is also included to allow the mix of uses called for in the plan. FOCUS ONLY ON USE STANDARDS Because the form-based code supercedes any regulations in the zoning district related to the form and bulk standards and the intensity The City of Boulder adopted the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan in October 2022. Consistent with recommendations in the plan, the city is considering expansion and calibration of the existing form-based code for portions of East Boulder, including the station area at 55th and Arapahoe. The form-based code is an overlay, relying on the base zoning for land use information. Currently the parcels in these portions of East Boulder are zoned mainly with a mix of industrial zones (IG, IM, IS-1, and IS-2) with some business zoning, especially at 55th and Arapahoe (BC-1). These parcels will need to be rezoned in order to allow a mix of uses per the form-based code. REZONING RECOMMENDATIONS DOCUMENT ORGANIZATION This document is organized around the Place Types in the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan, and includes the following sections: Summary of Zoning Districts. On page 2, a summary table of proposed zoning districts is provided. Also, a discussion of some potential revisions with the application of certain districts to the Place Types is provided, titled Concerning Uses. Place Types. On pages 4 to 10, one the city's current zoning districts is recommended for each Place Type with an outline of the allowed uses, general limitations on allowed uses, and prohibited uses. The description of uses from the subcommunity plan is also provided. This information is for reference and comparison only. Refer to the code and plan for accurate information. standards, the use standards are key to determining which district is appropriate for application to each Place Type recommended for form-based code use. UTILIZING CURRENT ZONING DISTRICTS With the goal of simplifying, the recommendations included herein utilize the city's current zoning districts, instead of recommending the creation of new districts. In general, the zoning districts proposed for each Place Type match the character desired for the Place Type; however, there are a few uses recommended to be revised. These recommended revisions to the existing zoning districts have been carefully vetted to request only those truly needed to achieve the goals of the Place Types and the plan. REZONING Rezoning of a parcel would only be sought by request of the property owner for redevelopment or reuse of the parcel. Rezoning is not required to continue the current uses or if the owner is interested in redeveloping or rebuilding with a use or structure allowed by the current zone. Should a property owner be interested in redeveloping using the form-based code within the designated areas of East Boulder, rezoning would be required. ADDITIONAL USE LIMITATIONS THROUGH FBC Uses allowed in the zoning district may also be managed further through the form-based code. For example, the FBC may limit which floors the use may occur on with a particular building type within a particular location. Or, further, the FBC may require a particular use or set of uses within certain locations within a bulding type. Concerning Uses LIVE-WORK AND GROUP LIVING USES IN THE IG ZONE The Non-Residential Innovation Place Type described in the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan is in proximity to Ball Aerospace and specifically limits residential uses. The IG zoning district is both the current zoning district and Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 11 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO2 Summary of Zoning Districts Below is a summary of the zoning districts recommended for use within the East Boulder areas of change and form-based code areas. A list of recommended revisions or concerns related to the allowed uses wtihin the zoning districts are expressed for addiitonal discussion. Recommended District Applicable Place Types Concerns Remarks MU2 Parkside Residential None The scale of MU2 works well, limiting the size of most commercial uses.The zone allows for art workshops for small-scale manufacturing. Small-scale catering or commercial kitchens could also work, but would not be allowed. MU4 Innovation TOD None MU4 works well with larger offices (20,000 sf) allowed, though Research & Development is limited to 5,000 sf. Neighborhood TOD None Either MU2 or MU4 would work, however, MU4 allows light industrial uses and is more flexibile in terms of office space. Main Street LIve-Work None MU4 works well, allowing both art studios/workshops and light industrial uses up to 15,000 sf, in addition to typical mixed-use. IG Innovation TOD - Nonresidential Storage, Distribution, & Wholesaling IG works well, prohibiting residential and allowing the maximum amount of office space (50,000 sf) and unlimited R&D space.It does, however, also allow Storage, Distribution, & Wholesaling, however, most of this area is occupied by Ball Aerospace. Hands-On Industrial Storage, Distribution, & Wholesaling IG allows for unlimited services of vehicles as well light industrial and general industrial with Use Review.However, it does allow some uses that may be take large amounts of space away from more desired uses: sales or rentals of vehicles, lumber yards, and the category of Storage, Distribution, and Wholesaling.Ideally, Repair-Rental Services would be allowed by right. IMS Destination Workplace(PREFERRED: only if Office and R&D uses may be larger by right.) Residential;Storage, Distribution, & Wholesaling;Industrial Service The IMS zone would allow residential, but, unless modified, it would limit Office and R&D uses to 5,000 sf, which is inappropriate for this Place Type. The IMS zoning district has similar issues with Storage/Distribution and Industrial Service uses as IG, though outdoor storage, self-service storage, and lumber yards are prohibited. IG Destination Workplace(ALTERNATE: if Office/R&D uses are not expanded in IMS. Note that Residential uses are not allowed in IG.) Residential;Storage, Distribution, & Wholesaling; Industrial Services The main reason for choosing the IG zone (which is the existing zone in this location) is it is the only zone that allows up to 50,000 sf in office (unlimited through Use Review) with unlimited R&D. However, it does not allow residential uses, a key component of the Place Type.Further, Storage and Distribution uses and Industrial Service uses pose concerns, based upon large areas of land required and especially in terms outdoor storage (allowed through Use Review). is proposed to be maintained. While the IG district limits most residential, it does allow live-work and a wide range of Group Living uses. Live-work and transitional housing require a conditional use permit, which poses the most concern. Other Group Living uses require Use Review, which could catch those uses and not allow them. Recommendation: Ideally, these residentially oriented uses, live-work and Group Living, could be removed from IG zoning district or we could limit them within the form- based code. Alternatively, live-work and Group Living uses could be allowed with the same locational standards as residential in the IG district; however, the live-work standards should also apply. OFFICE USES The Destination Workplace Place Type is intended to allow both large offices and residential uses; however, there is no district that would allow both. The IG district allows the highest level of office space at 50,000 sf, but residential is not allowed by right. Recommendation: If office uses in the IMS district could be increased or unlimited in size, this district would work better for the Destination Workplace Place Type. BREWERY, DISTILLERY, WINERY USES While breweries, distilleries, and wineries are allowed in the IG zoning district, they are prohibited in the MU-4 zone. Recommendation: Allow in the MU-4 zone with a size limitation. While breweries, distilleries, and wineries are allowed in the IG zoning district, they may not occur with a restaurant1 without a conditional use permit and are limited to 15,000 sf in size. To be larger or have an attached restaurant requires a conditional use permit. There is no limitation on hours of operation, except restaurants approved must be closed from 11pm until 5am. Further, the restaurant is limited to no more than 30% of the floor area, including outdoor seating. 1 Perhaps this is a good thing for supporting food trucks and entrepreneurs? Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 12 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO3 Recommendation: Allow larger breweries, distilleries, and wineries by right, and allow them to occur with a restaurant without limitation. RESTAURANT/BREWPUB/TAVERN USES In the industrial zoning districts, including IG, brewpubs and taverns are prohibited. Restaurants are allowed only if they occur within mixed-use buildings, including industrial, residential, or office uses. In most cases, the restaurant limitation will not be a concern in the IG zoning district as the goal is for these builidngs to be mixed-use. Recommendation: If the limitations are removed or managed differently for the brewery, distillery, and winery use category, the limitation on brewpubs and taverns in the IG zoning district should be revised as well. Perhaps brewpubs and taverns could be managed similarly to restaurants and even perhaps limit their size. STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION AND INDUSTRIAL SERVICE USES Storage and distribution uses, including cold storage lockers and warehouses are generally allowed in all of the industrial districts. Outdoor storage and self-service storage facilities require Use Review in IG zoning districts and are not allowed in IMS zoning districts. The concern in East Boulder is those storage facilities can be quite large and may reduce the land avaialble for more desirable employment uses. Similar concerns exist for the industrial service category of uses, which typically focus heavily on outdoor storage of goods and equipment. Recommendation: In IG, hopefully Use Review will limit outdoor storage and self-storage facilities. Cold storage facilities and warehouse and distribution facilities could be limited in IMS to a maximum floor area size geographically, only in the East Boulder subcommunity area. SMALL THEATER AND INDOOR COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES Small theater or rehearsal space uses and indoor commercial recreation uses require Use Review in MU-4 zoning districts. While this is not listed as a concern in the table, small theater or rehearsal space uses are highly desirable in East Boulder, since several currently exist within the areas of change. If that use could be allowed by right, the costs associated with installing the use could be reduced, especially since many are non-profit organizations. Indoor commercial recreation uses, such as a bowling alley or kid's gym, also seem desirable. Recommendation: While this is not listed as a concern in the table, ideally small theater or rehearsal space and indoor commercial recreation uses would be allowed by right in the MU-4 district, perhaps limited in size, if this a concern. Zoning Districts to Apply with FBC MU2 MU4 IMS IG To Remain IG BURLINGTON NORTHERN R A I L R O A D BURLINGTON NORTHERN R A I L R O A D ARAPAHOEARAPAHOE WESTERNWESTERN CENTRAL AVECENTRAL AVE CENTRAL AVECENTRAL AVE VALMONT RDVALMONT RD STERLING DRSTERLING DR IMSIMS currently currently IG IG currently currently IG IG MU2MU2MU4MU4 MU4MU4 MU2MU2 MU4MU4 MU4MU4 MU4MU4 MU4MU4 MU4MU4 GOOSE CREEKGOOSE CREEK W O N D E R L A N D C R E E K W O N D E R L A N D C R E E K SOUTH BOULDER CREEKSOUTH BOULDER CREEKDRY CREEK NO. 2 DITCHDRY CREEK NO. 2 DITCHBOULDER CREEKBOULDER CREEK PEARL STPEARL ST VALMONT RDVALMONT RD STERLING DRSTERLING DR PEARL PKWYPEARL PKWYPEARL P K W Y PEARL P K W Y FLATI R O N P K W Y FLATI R O N P K W Y CONESTOGA CTCONESTOGA CT CONESTOGACONESTOGARANGERANGE55TH ST55TH ST55TH ST55TH STSTERLING CTSTERLING CTFOOTHILLS PKWYFOOTHILLS PKWYSTERLING CTSTERLING CT56TH ST56TH ST57TH57THFLATIRON CTFLATIRON CTIG IG (currently (currently outside outside city city limits)limits) IGIG IGIG currently currently IGIG IGIG currently currently IGIG post officepost office hospitalhospital Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 13 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO4 Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✔All are allowed, except Detached Dwelling Units (single-family houses) are allowed only if existing and Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through a CU or Use REview, except Boarding Houses are allowed by right and Sororities, Fraternities, and Dormitories are prohibited. Commercial Uses LODGING ✔Bed and Breakfast is allowed with a conditional use permit. ✔Hostels are allowed only through Use Review ✘Hotels are prohibited. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✘Brewery, Distillery, Winery is prohibited. ✘Commercial Kitchen and Catering is prohibited. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but limited to 4,000 sf, closing no later than 11pm. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed, but limited to 1,000 sf. ✘Indoor and Outdoor Commercial Recreation uses are prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed through Use Review. OFFICE ✘Administrative Office is prohibited, but this use is associated with industrial uses. ✔Medical Office is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Research & Development is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✘Building Material Sales are prohibited. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed through Use Review. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf (recent update) . SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed only through Use Review. ✘Animal Kennel uses are prohibited. ✘Business Support Service uses are prohibited. ✔Financial Institution uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Media Production is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✘Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses are prohibited. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Personal Service uses are allowed. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✘Full Service Station uses are prohibited. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✘Sales or Rental of Vehicles is prohibited. ✘Service of Vehicles is prohibited. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✘Cold Storage Locker uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Storage uses are prohibited. ✘Self-Service Storage Facility is prohibited.. ✘Warehouse or Distributions Facility is prohibited. ✘Wholesale Business is prohibited. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✘General Manufacturing uses are prohibited. ✘Light Manufacturing uses are prohibited. ✘Recycling Center uses are prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Large is prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Small is prohibited. ✘Recycling Processing Facility is prohibited. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✘Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are prohibited. ✘Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are prohibited. ✘Equipment Repair and Rental uses are prohibited. ✘Lumber Yard is prohibited. Parkside Residential Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✔Crop Production uses are allowed. ✘Firewood Operation uses are prohibited. ✘Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is prohibited.. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✔Club or Lodge uses are allowed. ✔Community Services uses are allowed. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum are allowed through Use Review. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✘Private College or University is prohibited. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✔Religious Assembly is allowed through Use Review.. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed through Use Review.. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed. ✔Daycare Homes are allowed. ✔Day Shelter are allowed. ✘Emergency Shelter use is prohibited.. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed through Use Review. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed through Use Review. 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF RailroadPearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E CirWalnut StWalnut StSterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral AveCentral AveCentral Ave S Flatiron CtS Flatiron CtN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103452CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParkingPublic or InstitutionalTransparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside Residential Main Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. 37 38EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS Description The Park-Side Residential Place Type takes advantage of adjacencies to public green space and outdoor recreation sites to provide new/potential residents with the benefits of access to the outdoors. This adjacency allows for a reduction in on-site open space requirements. Park Side Residential neighborhoods will accomodate a mix of unit types, provide affordable housing options and integrate visual and physical access to the outdoors as much as possible. Density allowances are intended to offer new opportunities for a mix of unit types and income levels great access to a city park. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Residential such as townhomes, triplex and fourflex, courtyard apartments and multiplex units; • Dining and Entertainment that would support local neighborhood and park users such as restaurants, coffee shops, deli, icecream shop • Retail Sales and Personal Services that would support local neighborhood and park users such as gyms, dog wash/grooming, recreation-oriented shops (bikes, disc golf, etc.), barber shops, alcohols sales; • Commercial Service Non-residential ground-floor uses should provide an active and transparent environment that visually engages pedestrians. Mix of uses is allowed. Conditional Uses Ground Floor Retail must be street-facing or park-facing; Uses must be engaging to users of the park and residents in the neighborhood; Encourage ground floor uses that will be open in evenings and on weekends to contribute to neighborhood vitality Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Attached residential Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Buildings should be treated as “four-sided” architecture. Park-side building faces should have similar treatments to street-side building face. Key design features in this place type include a varied roofline and consistent set-backs from the street. Street Level Activation Residential homes should provide “eyes on the street,” facilitate front-porch conversations and offer sense of activity. Buildings with commercial and/or retail on the ground-floor should provide transparency and create social exchange between ground-floor spaces and passers-by. Streetscape Character Streetscapes should offer a park-like atmosphere, with consistent tree canopy and high quality landscape material contributing to stormwater management. Streetscape amenities may include places to “park” with benches, recepticles and dog clean-up stations or bicycle parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. MAIN STREET LIVE/WORK Description The Main Street Live/Work Place Type creates opportunities for a greater exchange between local Boulder business customers and workforce by infusing new residential opportunities into working, light industrial neighborhoods. Adaptive reuse of existing buildings and redevelopment should offer new living and office spaces as well as a “front-door” to great, local businesses located along key streets, trails or greenways in East Boulder. These areas are envisioned to include a mix of light-industrial, retail, arts studios and education spaces, office and residential uses along active passageways. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light Industrial such as arts studio and maker space, performance, breweries or distilleries, coffee roasters and small-scale manufacturing; • Dining and Entertainment such as restaurants, cafes and taverns; • Service uses such as autobody repair, computer repair, and bicycle mechanics; • Personal services such as salons, indoor recreational or athletic facilities; • Professional office Conditional Uses Ground Floor The following uses should not exceed 4,000sf in floor area: Retail sales; Professional Office Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Residential (attached); Office; Personal services; Retail Sales; Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be industrial in nature with large ground-floor openings for loading/unloading that may serve multiple purposes. Buildings should orient “front-door” facades to adjacent trails or greenways, when present. Expect tall ground floor ceiling heights to accommodate industrial uses. Accommodate height flexibility to allow for residential above the ground floor. Street Level Activation Building frontages along streets should offer front-door environments, transparency along block-faces and interactive exchanges between buildings and the street, which may include café space, outdoor retail space, market space, etc. When development is adjacent to trails or greenways, prioritize the trail-facing sides of buildings for activation. Streetscape Character Streetscapes will support the industrial context of these places and facilitate ease of movement for goods and services in the area. Incorporating tree planting and landscape that will make positive climate impacts into streetscapes where possible is strongly encouraged. Access + Mobility Street-side access should balance vehicular access and needs with a supported environment for pedestrians and cyclists. Trail-side access is prioritized for pedestrians and cyclists. Particular attention required to connecting this place type between trail access and on-street networks in the area. Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses Parking On-street parking for ROWs that can accommodate; Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION PARK SIDE RESIDENTIAL Recommended ZoneMU2 Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 14 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO5 Innovation TOD 41 42EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Dining and Entertainment; • Light Industrial; • Residential such as attached dwellings, townhomes, and live-work units; • Retail; • Personal services Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Attached Residential; Structured parking Conditional Above Ground Floor Second stories may incorporate a mix of office (including medical office) and residential; third, fourth and if plausible, fifth stories, should be reserved for residential uses FAR Range 1.0 - 3.5 Useable Open Space Minimum 20% of total land area Building Character Buildings may have large ground-floor openings for loading/unloading that may serve multiple purposes. Architecture should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation and activation. Street Level Activation Building frontages along arterial and collector streets should offer transparent and engaging front-door environments, which will likely include roll-up doors, loading and unloading areas, outdoor dining, etc. Traditional window displays should be limited in favor of sharing what is happening inside the spaces. Streetscape Character Streetscapes accommodate small, medium and some large sized delivery trucks while also encouraging a transit- supportive and active pedestrian and bicycle environment. Consistent elements should include landscape with integrated stormwater elements, street trees, seating, and designated areas for bike/scooter parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or deliveries/ loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses; pedestrian paseos (especially through larger blocks) enhance pedestrian connectivity Parking On-street parking for ROWs that can accommodate; rear or alley parking; Promote structured parking and transition away from large surface parking lots; Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION INNOVATION TOD (RESIDENTIAL) Description The Innovation Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Residential Place Type intends to maintain opportunities for light industrial and flex uses while integrating public-facing retail and providing transit supportive, attainable housing options. The area should prioritize energy conservation, urban rewilding strategies and creativity in new and re-development. INNOVATION TOD (NON-RESIDENTIAL) Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light industrial; • Office; • Dining and Entertainment Conditional Uses Ground Floor Retail uses should be accessory to on-site businesses Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Light industrial; Office; Structured Parking FAR Range 1.5 - 4.0 Useable Open Space Minimum 15% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be both of industrial in nature with large ground-floor openings for loading/unloading that may serve multiple purposes and/or more commercial with active office, retail, lobby or studio space on on ground floor. Architecture should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation, building rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of existing buildings. Street Level Activation Building frontages along arterial and collector streets should offer transparent and engaging front-door environments. Street facing ground floor space prioritize active use. Work places should offer on-site outdoor space for employee use as work space and non-work space. Streetside dining and entertainment space is encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscapes accommodate small, medium and some large sized delivery trucks while also encouraging a transit- supportive and active pedestrian and bicycle environment. Consistent elements should include high quality landscape treatments with integrated stormwater management features, street trees, seating, and designated areas for bike/scooter parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; pedestrian paseos (especially through larger blocks) enhance pedestrian connectivity Parking On-street parking for ROWs that can accommodate; rear or alley parking; Promote structured parking and transition away from large surface parking lots; Improve remaining surface lots with landscape stormwater features and pedestrian pathways; Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. Description The Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Place Type prioritizes opportunities for light industrial and commercial uses. These areas are envisioned to integrate public-facing retail for light industrial, office, and commercial users. What is FAR? Floor area ratio (FAR) means the ratio of the floor area of a building to the area of the lot on which the building is situated. B.R.C. 9-16-1 Recommended ZoneMU4 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES1034 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✔All are allowed, except Detached Dwelling Units (single-family houses) are allowed only if existing and Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through a CU or Use REview, except Boarding Houses are allowed by right with standards, and Custodial Care Facilities and Sororities, Fraternities, and Dormitories are prohibited. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✔Hostels are allowed with standards. ✔Hotels are allowed through Use Review. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✘Brewery, Distillery, Winery is prohibited. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but limited to 4,000 sf, closing no later than 11pm. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed. ✔Indoor Commercial Recreation uses are allowed through Use Review. Outdoor Commercial Recreation is prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed through Use Review. OFFICE ✘Administrative Office is prohibited, but this use is associated with industrial uses. ✔Medical Office is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. ✔Research & Development is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✘Building Material Sales are prohibited. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed with Conditional Use. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. ✔Financial Institution uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✔Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Personal Service uses are allowed. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✘Sales or Rental of Vehicles is prohibited. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed through Use Review. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✘Cold Storage Locker uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Storage uses are prohibited. ✘Self-Service Storage Facility is prohibited.. ✘Warehouse or Distributions Facility is prohibited. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✘General Manufacturing uses are prohibited. ✔Light Manufacturing uses are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✘Recycling Center uses are prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Large is prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Small is allowed with Conditional Use. ✘Recycling Processing Facility is prohibited. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✘Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are prohibited. ✘Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are prohibited. ✘Equipment Repair and Rental uses are prohibited. ✘Lumber Yard is prohibited. Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✘Firewood Operation uses are prohibited. ✘Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is prohibited.. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✔Club or Lodge uses are allowed. ✔Community Services uses are allowed. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum are allowed through Use Review. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✘Private College or University is prohibited. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✔Religious Assembly is allowed through Use Review.. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed with Conditional Use. ✘Emergency Shelter use is allowed with Conditional Use. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed with Conditional Use. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed. Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 15 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO6 Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✔All are allowed, except Detached Dwelling Units (single-family houses) are allowed only if existing and Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through a CU or Use REview, except Boarding Houses are allowed by right with standards, and Custodial Care Facilities and Sororities, Fraternities, and Dormitories are prohibited. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✔Hostels are allowed with standards. ✔Hotels are allowed through Use Review. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✘Brewery, Distillery, Winery is prohibited. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but limited to 4,000 sf, closing no later than 11pm. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed. ✔Indoor Commercial Recreation uses are allowed through Use Review. Outdoor Commercial Recreation is prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed through Use Review. OFFICE ✘Administrative Office is prohibited, but this use is associated with industrial uses. ✔Medical Office is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. ✔Research & Development is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✘Building Material Sales are prohibited. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed with Conditional Use. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. ✔Financial Institution uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✔Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Personal Service uses are allowed. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✘Sales or Rental of Vehicles is prohibited. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed through Use Review. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✘Cold Storage Locker uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Storage uses are prohibited. ✘Self-Service Storage Facility is prohibited.. ✘Warehouse or Distributions Facility is prohibited. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✘General Manufacturing uses are prohibited. ✔Light Manufacturing uses are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✘Recycling Center uses are prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Large is prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Small is allowed with Conditional Use. ✘Recycling Processing Facility is prohibited. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✘Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are prohibited. ✘Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are prohibited. ✘Equipment Repair and Rental uses are prohibited. ✘Lumber Yard is prohibited. Neighborhood TOD Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✘Firewood Operation uses are prohibited. ✘Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is prohibited.. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✔Club or Lodge uses are allowed. ✔Community Services uses are allowed. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum are allowed through Use Review. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✘Private College or University is prohibited. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✔Religious Assembly is allowed through Use Review.. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed with Conditional Use. ✘Emergency Shelter use is allowed with Conditional Use. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed with Conditional Use. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed. 43 44EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS FUTURE OPPORTUNITIES Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Dining and Entertainment such as restaurants, taverns, cafes, performance space; • Neighborhood-hood serving retail such as grocery store, convenience store, pharmacy; • Residential such as attached dwellings, townhomes, condos and apartments • Neighborhood-serving public or institutional uses such as daycare, nonprofit offices Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Attached residential; Retail sales; Office FAR Range 1.0 - 3.0 Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Building facades should have a high level of articualtion and transparency, especially facing pedestrian and bicycle facilities (sidewalks, pathways, paseos and breezeways). Building materials may be eclectic, but of high quality. Varied rooflines and architectural detail are important design considerations to align with community vision for the area. Street Level Activation Building frontages along streets should offer front-door environments, transparency along block-faces and interactive exchanges between buildings and the street, as well as pedestrian-oriented internal circulation. Buildings in this place-type will orient “front door” facades to higher order streets and pedestrian paseos/courtyards. It is anticipated that most “back of house” loading, service and parking are provided in the rear of properties. Streetscape Character Streetscapes should encourage a safe and active pedestrian environment, including consistent tree canopies, landscaping and green infrastructure, seating and designated areas for bike/scooter parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe and comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access separated and buffered from vehicular movement when possible; curbcuts should be managed and consolidated where possible to limit potential conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians/cyclists; pedestrian and bicycle connections should provide access to nearby residents and employees. Parking Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use; manage parking supply to encourage use of transit and active transportation. Valmont Butte Valmont Butte is a basalt dike that runs east-west above Valmont Road. The ridge and rocky outcrops are a unique natural feature in the area. The site is located in Area III of the BVCP’s Comprehensive Planning areas. In 2000, the City purchased the land. The city recognizes the significant spiritual, cultural and historical importance of Valmont Butte and intends to discuss the future of the site in consultation and collaboration with the community including American Indian Tribal Nations, Indigenous community members, Valmont community descendants and the local historic community. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION Valmont Butte NEIGHBORHOOD TOD Description The Neighborhood Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Place Type reimagines existing auto-oriented commercial and retail areas as highly walkable and transit-supportive environments. Active ground floors may have mixed income housing above when development is multi-story. East Boulder is home to a number of unique sites within the city that offer future opportunities for implementing citywide goals. In concert with the proposed land use changes described for East Boulder, the following areas have been identified by community members as important sites for continued discussion: Boulder Municipal Airport This is a general aviation airport that began operating in 1928. The airport serves business, private, recreational and emergency aviation services to the City of Boulder and surrounding communities. The airport facilities include runways, underground fuel storage tanks, hangar space and tie-down space for aircraft. The City’s relationship with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and the Boulder Municipal Airport includes periodic access to grant funding from the FAA and the Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) for capital funding or for the historic purchase of land at the airport. Contracts with the FAA and CDOT for capital funding requires a legal agreement to keep the airport open for the useful life of the improvements, designated as 20 years. If actions were taken by the City which denied the public access to the airport, then the contract requires that the City must repay the FAA or CDOT for the unused useful life of the funding on a pro-rata basis. Key Map: Boulder Municipal Airport Recommended ZoneMU4 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPESValmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF RailroadPearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E CirWalnut StWalnut StSterling DrSterling DrSterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral AveCentral AveCentral Ave S Flatiron CtS Flatiron CtN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103452CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParkingPublic or InstitutionalTransparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 16 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO7 Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✔All are allowed, except Detached Dwelling Units (single-family houses) are allowed only if existing and Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through a CU or Use Review, except Boarding Houses are allowed by right with standards, and Custodial Care Facilities and Sororities, Fraternities, and Dormitories are prohibited. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✔Hostels are allowed with standards. ✔Hotels are allowed through Use Review. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✘Brewery, Distillery, Winery is prohibited. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but limited to 4,000 sf, closing no later than 11pm. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed. ✔Indoor Commercial Recreation uses are allowed through Use Review. Outdoor Commercial Recreation is prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed through Use Review. OFFICE ✘Administrative Office is prohibited, but this use is associated with industrial uses. ✔Medical Office is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. ✔Research & Development is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✘Building Material Sales are prohibited. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed with Conditional Use. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. ✔Financial Institution uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✔Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Personal Service uses are allowed. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✘Sales or Rental of Vehicles is prohibited. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed through Use Review. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✘Cold Storage Locker uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses are prohibited. ✘Outdoor Storage uses are prohibited. ✘Self-Service Storage Facility is prohibited.. ✘Warehouse or Distributions Facility is prohibited. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✘General Manufacturing uses are prohibited. ✔Light Manufacturing uses are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✘Recycling Center uses are prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Large is prohibited. ✘Recycling Collection Facility - Small is allowed with Conditional Use. ✘Recycling Processing Facility is prohibited. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✘Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are prohibited. ✘Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are prohibited. ✘Equipment Repair and Rental uses are prohibited. ✘Lumber Yard is prohibited. Main Street Live-Work Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✘Firewood Operation uses are prohibited. ✘Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is prohibited.. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✔Club or Lodge uses are allowed. ✔Community Services uses are allowed. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum are allowed through Use Review. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✘Private College or University is prohibited. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✔Religious Assembly is allowed through Use Review.. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed with Conditional Use. ✘Emergency Shelter use is allowed with Conditional Use. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed with Conditional Use. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed. 37 38EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS Description The Park-Side Residential Place Type takes advantage of adjacencies to public green space and outdoor recreation sites to provide new/potential residents with the benefits of access to the outdoors. This adjacency allows for a reduction in on-site open space requirements. Park Side Residential neighborhoods will accomodate a mix of unit types, provide affordable housing options and integrate visual and physical access to the outdoors as much as possible. Density allowances are intended to offer new opportunities for a mix of unit types and income levels great access to a city park. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Residential such as townhomes, triplex and fourflex, courtyard apartments and multiplex units; • Dining and Entertainment that would support local neighborhood and park users such as restaurants, coffee shops, deli, icecream shop • Retail Sales and Personal Services that would support local neighborhood and park users such as gyms, dog wash/grooming, recreation-oriented shops (bikes, disc golf, etc.), barber shops, alcohols sales; • Commercial Service Non-residential ground-floor uses should provide an active and transparent environment that visually engages pedestrians. Mix of uses is allowed. Conditional Uses Ground Floor Retail must be street-facing or park-facing; Uses must be engaging to users of the park and residents in the neighborhood; Encourage ground floor uses that will be open in evenings and on weekends to contribute to neighborhood vitality Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Attached residential Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Buildings should be treated as “four-sided” architecture. Park-side building faces should have similar treatments to street-side building face. Key design features in this place type include a varied roofline and consistent set-backs from the street. Street Level Activation Residential homes should provide “eyes on the street,” facilitate front-porch conversations and offer sense of activity. Buildings with commercial and/or retail on the ground-floor should provide transparency and create social exchange between ground-floor spaces and passers-by. Streetscape Character Streetscapes should offer a park-like atmosphere, with consistent tree canopy and high quality landscape material contributing to stormwater management. Streetscape amenities may include places to “park” with benches, recepticles and dog clean-up stations or bicycle parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. MAIN STREET LIVE/WORK Description The Main Street Live/Work Place Type creates opportunities for a greater exchange between local Boulder business customers and workforce by infusing new residential opportunities into working, light industrial neighborhoods. Adaptive reuse of existing buildings and redevelopment should offer new living and office spaces as well as a “front-door” to great, local businesses located along key streets, trails or greenways in East Boulder. These areas are envisioned to include a mix of light-industrial, retail, arts studios and education spaces, office and residential uses along active passageways. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light Industrial such as arts studio and maker space, performance, breweries or distilleries, coffee roasters and small-scale manufacturing; • Dining and Entertainment such as restaurants, cafes and taverns; • Service uses such as autobody repair, computer repair, and bicycle mechanics; • Personal services such as salons, indoor recreational or athletic facilities; • Professional office Conditional Uses Ground Floor The following uses should not exceed 4,000sf in floor area: Retail sales; Professional Office Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Residential (attached); Office; Personal services; Retail Sales; Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be industrial in nature with large ground-floor openings for loading/unloading that may serve multiple purposes. Buildings should orient “front-door” facades to adjacent trails or greenways, when present. Expect tall ground floor ceiling heights to accommodate industrial uses. Accommodate height flexibility to allow for residential above the ground floor. Street Level Activation Building frontages along streets should offer front-door environments, transparency along block-faces and interactive exchanges between buildings and the street, which may include café space, outdoor retail space, market space, etc. When development is adjacent to trails or greenways, prioritize the trail-facing sides of buildings for activation. Streetscape Character Streetscapes will support the industrial context of these places and facilitate ease of movement for goods and services in the area. Incorporating tree planting and landscape that will make positive climate impacts into streetscapes where possible is strongly encouraged. Access + Mobility Street-side access should balance vehicular access and needs with a supported environment for pedestrians and cyclists. Trail-side access is prioritized for pedestrians and cyclists. Particular attention required to connecting this place type between trail access and on-street networks in the area. Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses Parking On-street parking for ROWs that can accommodate; Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION PARK SIDE RESIDENTIAL Recommended ZoneMU4 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF RailroadPearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E CirWalnut StWalnut StSterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral AveCentral AveCentral Ave S Flatiron CtS Flatiron CtN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103452CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParkingPublic or InstitutionalTransparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside Residential Main Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF RailroadPearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E CirWalnut StWalnut StSterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral AveCentral AveCentral Ave S Flatiron CtS Flatiron CtN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103452CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParkingPublic or InstitutionalTransparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside Residential Main Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 17 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO8 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont Rd Pearl Pk wy Pearl Pk wy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence Rd Foothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St 48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlati r o n P k w y Flati r o n P k w y Central AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103 4 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOffice Greenhouse Parking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Non-Residential Innovation TOD 41 42EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Dining and Entertainment; • Light Industrial; • Residential such as attached dwellings, townhomes, and live-work units; • Retail; • Personal services Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Attached Residential; Structured parking Conditional Above Ground Floor Second stories may incorporate a mix of office (including medical office) and residential; third, fourth and if plausible, fifth stories, should be reserved for residential uses FAR Range 1.0 - 3.5 Useable Open Space Minimum 20% of total land area Building Character Buildings may have large ground-floor openings for loading/unloading that may serve multiple purposes. Architecture should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation and activation. Street Level Activation Building frontages along arterial and collector streets should offer transparent and engaging front-door environments, which will likely include roll-up doors, loading and unloading areas, outdoor dining, etc. Traditional window displays should be limited in favor of sharing what is happening inside the spaces. Streetscape Character Streetscapes accommodate small, medium and some large sized delivery trucks while also encouraging a transit- supportive and active pedestrian and bicycle environment. Consistent elements should include landscape with integrated stormwater elements, street trees, seating, and designated areas for bike/scooter parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or deliveries/ loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses; pedestrian paseos (especially through larger blocks) enhance pedestrian connectivity Parking On-street parking for ROWs that can accommodate; rear or alley parking; Promote structured parking and transition away from large surface parking lots; Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION INNOVATION TOD (RESIDENTIAL) Description The Innovation Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) Residential Place Type intends to maintain opportunities for light industrial and flex uses while integrating public-facing retail and providing transit supportive, attainable housing options. The area should prioritize energy conservation, urban rewilding strategies and creativity in new and re-development. INNOVATION TOD (NON-RESIDENTIAL) Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light industrial; • Office; • Dining and Entertainment Conditional Uses Ground Floor Retail uses should be accessory to on-site businesses Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Light industrial; Office; Structured Parking FAR Range 1.5 - 4.0 Useable Open Space Minimum 15% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be both of industrial in nature with large ground-floor openings for loading/unloading that may serve multiple purposes and/or more commercial with active office, retail, lobby or studio space on on ground floor. Architecture should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation, building rehabilitation and adaptive reuse of existing buildings. Street Level Activation Building frontages along arterial and collector streets should offer transparent and engaging front-door environments. Street facing ground floor space prioritize active use. Work places should offer on-site outdoor space for employee use as work space and non-work space. Streetside dining and entertainment space is encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscapes accommodate small, medium and some large sized delivery trucks while also encouraging a transit- supportive and active pedestrian and bicycle environment. Consistent elements should include high quality landscape treatments with integrated stormwater management features, street trees, seating, and designated areas for bike/scooter parking. Access + Mobility Side and rear vehicular building access; Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; pedestrian paseos (especially through larger blocks) enhance pedestrian connectivity Parking On-street parking for ROWs that can accommodate; rear or alley parking; Promote structured parking and transition away from large surface parking lots; Improve remaining surface lots with landscape stormwater features and pedestrian pathways; Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. Description The Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Place Type prioritizes opportunities for light industrial and commercial uses. These areas are envisioned to integrate public-facing retail for light industrial, office, and commercial users. What is FAR? Floor area ratio (FAR) means the ratio of the floor area of a building to the area of the lot on which the building is situated. B.R.C. 9-16-1 Recommended ZoneIG 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont Rd Pearl Pk wy Pearl Pk wy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence Rd Foothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St 48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlati r o n P k w y Flati r o n P k w y Central AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103 4 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOffice Greenhouse Parking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✘All are so limited as to not be allowed in East Boulder IG zones, except Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through Use Review except Group Home Facilities. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✔Hostels are allowed only through Use Review ✘Hotels are prohibited. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✔Brewery, Distillery, Winery are allowed, but limited to 15,000 sf. Restaurant allowed only wiht a CU & closed 11pm-5am. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but brewpubs & taverns are essentially prohibited. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✘Indoor and Outdoor Commercial Recreation uses are prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed. OFFICE ✔Administrative Office is allowed. ✔Medical Office is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 50,000 sf. (Can limit location within building in FBC.) ✔Research & Development is allowed. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✔Building Material Sales are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed with Conditional Use Permit. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. and must be mixed-use. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Financial Institution uses are prohibited. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✘Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses are prohibited. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed through Use Review ✔Personal Service uses are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed. ✔Sales or Rental of Vehicles is allowed. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✔Cold Storage Locker uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Storage uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Self-Service Storage Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✔Warehouse or Distributions Facility is allowed. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✔General Manufacturing is allowed through Use Review. ✔Light Manufacturing is allowed. ✔Recycling Center is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Large is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Small is is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Recycling Processing Facility is allowed through Use Review. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✔Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are allowed. ✔Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are allowed. ✔Equipment Repair and Rental uses are allowed. ✔Lumber Yard is allowed. Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✔Firewood Operation uses are allowed. ✔Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is allowed. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✘Club or Lodge uses are prohibited. ✔Community Services uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum uses are allowed. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✔Private College or University is allowed through Use Review. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✘Religious Assembly is prohibited. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Emergency Shelter use is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed through Use Review. Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 18 of 22 EAST BOULDER ZONING UPDATE February 13, 2024 | REZONING RECOMMENDATION MEMO9 Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✘All are so limited as to not be allowed in East Boulder IG zones, except Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through Use Review except Group Home Facilities. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✔Hostels are allowed only through Use Review ✘Hotels are prohibited. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✔Brewery, Distillery, Winery are allowed, but limited to 15,000 sf. Restaurant allowed only wiht a CU & closed 11pm-5am. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but brewpubs & taverns are essentially prohibited. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✘Indoor and Outdoor Commercial Recreation uses are prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed. OFFICE ✔Administrative Office is allowed. ✔Medical Office is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 50,000 sf. (Can limit location within building in FBC.) ✔Research & Development is allowed. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✔Building Material Sales are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed with Conditional Use Permit. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. and must be mixed-use. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Financial Institution uses are prohibited. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✘Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses are prohibited. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed through Use Review ✔Personal Service uses are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed. ✔Sales or Rental of Vehicles is allowed, unlimited except within 500 feet of a residential district. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✔Cold Storage Locker uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Storage uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Self-Service Storage Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✔Warehouse or Distributions Facility is allowed. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✔General Manufacturing is allowed through Use Review.. ✔Light Manufacturing is allowed. ✔Recycling Center is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Large is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Small is is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Recycling Processing Facility is allowed through Use Review. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✔Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are allowed. ✔Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are allowed. ✔Equipment Repair and Rental uses are allowed. ✔Lumber Yard is allowed. Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✔Firewood Operation uses are allowed. ✔Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is allowed. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✘Club or Lodge uses are prohibited. ✔Community Services uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum uses are allowed. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✔Private College or University is allowed through Use Review. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✘Religious Assembly is prohibited. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Emergency Shelter use is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed through Use Review. Hands-On Industrial Recommended Zone 39 40EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS DESTINATION WORKPLACE Description The Destination Workplace Place Type incorporates modern principles of creating flexible, active and engaging work places to serve Boulder business and industry. These places will offer industrial and office space with indoor/outdoor work space, excellent connections to a variety of mobility options and local destinations dining and entertainment. This place also expands opportunities for existing or new industrial businesses to create retail space and engage potential customers in an exciting environment. Flexibility in these neighborhoods also includes allowing for residential infill providing area employees with local housing options. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Office such as technical, financial, professional; • Light Industrial such as small-scale manufacturing, flex- space, breweries, distilleries, coffee roasting; • Dining and Entertainment such as restaurants, cafes and taverns; • Retail sales such as on-site retail for manufacturing businesses or other industrial businesses Conditional Uses Ground Floor n/a Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Office; Light Industrial; Attached Residential Useable Open Space Minimum 20% of total land area Building Character Buildings should offer modern amenities to Boulder employers and employees that support an indoor/outdoor exchange of air and light. Aesthetic choices should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation in both new and re- development. Street Level Activation Transparency along both streets and key pedestrian pathways should create an active ground-floor environment. Work places should offer on-site outdoor space for employee use as work space and non-work space. Streetside dining and entertainment space is encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscape environments should incorporate high quality landscaping including a consistent tree canopy and green infrastructure, offer off-street space for pedestrians and cyclists and provide moments for pause and repose. Access + Mobility Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Parking in the Destination Workplace Place Type should strive for consolidation. It is envisioned that parking structures are well-connected to local work places and retail/dining destinations through a network of the highest quality pedestrian environment. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION HANDS ON INDUSTRIAL Description The Hands-On Industrial Place Type are key places for Boulder’s makers, artists, mechanics, musicians and fixer-uppers. The place type is envisioned to be a little gritty, a little funky and build opportunities for the collective of local artisans and specialists. Adaptive reuse and redevelopment should provide affordable commercial space when possible and provide an interactive ground floor environment that contributes to neighborhood character. What is Unbundled Parking? Unbundled parking is the practice of selling or leasing parking spaces separate from the purchase or lease of a commercial or residential use. Detaching the cost of a home or commercial space from associated parking spaces allows buyers or renters to pay for parking only if they need it. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light Industrial such as manufacturing, maker space, performance, breweries or distilleries, coffee roasters • Vehicular Services and Auto-related businesses • Personal services • Indoor recreation • Retail sales • Arts/Performance Studio • Maker Space Conditional Uses Ground Floor Greenhouse and plant nurseries Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Accessory or administrative office Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be industrial in nature. Smaller scale buildings are anticipated. Expect tall ground floor ceiling heights to accommodate industrial uses. Street Level Activation Building facades should have clear “front-door” entries. Creative facades and signage are encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscape character and local wayfinding should feature and celebrate local businesses, integrate local art, increase canopy and incorporate a pedestrian environment that welcomes customers and visitors to the experience of Boulder’s community of makers. Access + Mobility Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF RailroadPearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E CirWalnut StWalnut StSterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral AveCentral AveCentral Ave S Flatiron CtS Flatiron CtN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103452CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParkingPublic or InstitutionalTransparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside Residential Main Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont RdPearl PkwyPearl Pkwy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence RdFoothills PkwyBNSF RailroadPearl StPearl St48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E CirWalnut StWalnut StSterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlatiron PkwyFlatiron PkwyCentral AveCentral AveCentral AveCentral Ave S Flatiron CtS Flatiron CtN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103452CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USEMOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOfficeGreenhouseParkingPublic or InstitutionalTransparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside Residential Main Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. IG Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 19 of 22 Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✔All multi-unit housing types are allowed, except townhouses and duplexes are allowed in a building only if 50% of the floor area is nonresidential. Live-work is a conditional use. Detached household living is not allowed. GROUP LIVING USES ✘No group living uses are allowed except transitional housing is a conditional use. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✘Hostels are prohibited. ✘Hotels are prohibited. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✔Brewery, Distillery, Winery are allowed, but limited to 15,000 sf. Restaurant allowed only with a CU & closed 11pm-5am. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but brewpubs & taverns are essentially prohibited. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✘Indoor and Outdoor Commercial Recreation uses are prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed. OFFICE ✘Administrative Office is prohibited. ✘Medical Office is prohibited. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✔Research & Development is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✔Building Material Sales are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed only through Use Review. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. and must be mixed-use. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. ✘Financial Institution uses are prohibited. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✘Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses are prohibited. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed. ✔Personal Service uses are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✘Sales or Rental of Vehicles is prohibited. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✔Cold Storage Locker uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses is allowed. ✘Outdoor Storage uses is prohibited. ✘Self-Service Storage Facility is prohibited. ✔Warehouse or Distributions Facility is allowed. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✘General Manufacturing is prohbited. ✔Light Manufacturing is allowed. ✔Recycling Center is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Large is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Small is is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✘Recycling Processing Facility is prohbited. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✔Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are allowed. ✔Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are allowed. ✔Equipment Repair and Rental uses are allowed. ✘Lumber Yard is prohbited. Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✘Firewood Operation uses are prohibited. ✔Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is allowed. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✘Club or Lodge uses are prohibited. ✔Community Services uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum uses are allowed. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✔Private College or University is allowed through Use Review. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✘Religious Assembly is prohibited. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed through Use Review. ✔Emergency Shelter use is allowed through Use Review. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed through Use Review. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✔Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed through Use Review. Destination Workplace 39 40EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS DESTINATION WORKPLACE Description The Destination Workplace Place Type incorporates modern principles of creating flexible, active and engaging work places to serve Boulder business and industry. These places will offer industrial and office space with indoor/outdoor work space, excellent connections to a variety of mobility options and local destinations dining and entertainment. This place also expands opportunities for existing or new industrial businesses to create retail space and engage potential customers in an exciting environment. Flexibility in these neighborhoods also includes allowing for residential infill providing area employees with local housing options. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Office such as technical, financial, professional; • Light Industrial such as small-scale manufacturing, flex- space, breweries, distilleries, coffee roasting; • Dining and Entertainment such as restaurants, cafes and taverns; • Retail sales such as on-site retail for manufacturing businesses or other industrial businesses Conditional Uses Ground Floor n/a Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Office; Light Industrial; Attached Residential Useable Open Space Minimum 20% of total land area Building Character Buildings should offer modern amenities to Boulder employers and employees that support an indoor/outdoor exchange of air and light. Aesthetic choices should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation in both new and re- development. Street Level Activation Transparency along both streets and key pedestrian pathways should create an active ground-floor environment. Work places should offer on-site outdoor space for employee use as work space and non-work space. Streetside dining and entertainment space is encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscape environments should incorporate high quality landscaping including a consistent tree canopy and green infrastructure, offer off-street space for pedestrians and cyclists and provide moments for pause and repose. Access + Mobility Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Parking in the Destination Workplace Place Type should strive for consolidation. It is envisioned that parking structures are well-connected to local work places and retail/dining destinations through a network of the highest quality pedestrian environment. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION HANDS ON INDUSTRIAL Description The Hands-On Industrial Place Type are key places for Boulder’s makers, artists, mechanics, musicians and fixer-uppers. The place type is envisioned to be a little gritty, a little funky and build opportunities for the collective of local artisans and specialists. Adaptive reuse and redevelopment should provide affordable commercial space when possible and provide an interactive ground floor environment that contributes to neighborhood character. What is Unbundled Parking? Unbundled parking is the practice of selling or leasing parking spaces separate from the purchase or lease of a commercial or residential use. Detaching the cost of a home or commercial space from associated parking spaces allows buyers or renters to pay for parking only if they need it. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light Industrial such as manufacturing, maker space, performance, breweries or distilleries, coffee roasters • Vehicular Services and Auto-related businesses • Personal services • Indoor recreation • Retail sales • Arts/Performance Studio • Maker Space Conditional Uses Ground Floor Greenhouse and plant nurseries Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Accessory or administrative office Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be industrial in nature. Smaller scale buildings are anticipated. Expect tall ground floor ceiling heights to accommodate industrial uses. Street Level Activation Building facades should have clear “front-door” entries. Creative facades and signage are encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscape character and local wayfinding should feature and celebrate local businesses, integrate local art, increase canopy and incorporate a pedestrian environment that welcomes customers and visitors to the experience of Boulder’s community of makers. Access + Mobility Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. Recommended Zoneonly if office uses are expanded. IMS 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont Rd Pearl Pk wy Pearl Pk wy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence Rd Foothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St 48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlati r o n P k w y Flati r o n P k w y Central AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103 4 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOffice Greenhouse Parking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont Rd Pearl Pk wy Pearl Pk wy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence Rd Foothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St 48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlati r o n P k w y Flati r o n P k w y Central AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103 4 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOffice Greenhouse Parking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 20 of 22 Residential Uses HOUSEHOLD LIVING USES ✘All are so limited as to not be allowed in East Boulder IG zones, except Live/Work with use specific standards. GROUP LIVING USES ✔All are allowed through Use Review except Group Home Facilities. Commercial Uses LODGING ✘Bed and Breakfast is prohibited. ✔Hostels are allowed only through Use Review ✘Hotels are prohibited. FOOD & BEVERAGE USES ✔Brewery, Distillery, Winery are allowed, but limited to 15,000 sf. Restaurant allowed only wiht a CU & closed 11pm-5am. ✔Commercial Kitchen and Catering is allowed. ✔Mobile Food Vehicle is allowed with use specific standards. (Would not be in RH-7.) ✔Restaurant, Brewpub, and Tavern uses are allowed, but brewpubs & taverns are essentially prohibited. RECREATION & ENTERTAINMENT ✔Art Studio or Workshop is allowed. ✔Indoor Athletic Facility is allowed, but limited to 5,000 sf. ✘Indoor and Outdoor Commercial Recreation uses are prohibited. ✔Small Theater or Rehearsal Space is allowed. OFFICE ✔Administrative Office is allowed. ✔Medical Office is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Office is allowed, but limited to 50,000 sf. (Can limit location within building in FBC.) ✔Research & Development is allowed. RETAIL SALES USES ✔Accessory Sales are allowed. ✔Building Material Sales are allowed, but limited to 15,000sf. ✔Convenience Retail Sales are allowed. ✔Fuel Sales are allowed with Conditional Use Permit. ✔Retail Sales are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. and must be mixed-use. SERVICE USES ✔Animal Hospital or Vet Clinic uses are allowed. ✔Animal Kennel uses are allowed. ✔Business Support Service uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Financial Institution uses are prohibited. ✔Media Production is allowed. ✘Mortuary & Funeral Chapel uses are prohibited. ✔Repair-Rental Service (non-vehicular) uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Personal Service uses are allowed, but limited to 2,000 sf. VEHICLE-RELATED USES ✘Car Wash uses are prohibited. ✘Drive-Thru uses are prohibited. ✔Full Service Station uses is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Principal Parking Facility is allowed. ✔Sales or Rental of Vehicles is allowed. ✔Service of Vehicles is allowed. Industrial Uses STORAGE, DISTRIBUTION, WHOLESALING ✔Cold Storage Locker uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Display of Merchandise uses is allowed. ✔Outdoor Storage uses is allowed through Use Review. ✔Self-Service Storage Facility is allowed through Use Review. ✔Warehouse or Distributions Facility is allowed. ✔Wholesale Business is allowed. PRODUCTION & PROCESSING ✔General Manufacturing is allowed through Use Review. ✔Light Manufacturing is allowed. ✔Recycling Center is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Large is allowed through Use Review. ✔Recycling Collection Facility - Small is is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Recycling Processing Facility is allowed through Use Review. INDUSTRIAL SERVICES ✔Building and Landscaping Contractor uses are allowed. ✔Cleaning and Laundry Plant uses are allowed. ✔Equipment Repair and Rental uses are allowed. ✔Lumber Yard is allowed. Agriculture and Natural Resource Uses ✔Community Garden uses are allowed. ✘Crop Production uses are prohibited. ✔Firewood Operation uses are allowed. ✔Greenhouse and Plant Nursery is allowed. ✘Mining Industries are prohibited. ✘Oil and Gas Operations are prohibited. ✘Pasture is prohibited. Public and Institutional Uses COMMUNITY , CULTURAL, EDUCATIONAL ✘Club or Lodge uses are prohibited. ✔Community Services uses are allowed through Use Review. ✔Government Facility are allowed. ✘Hospital use is prohibited.. ✔Museum uses are allowed. ✔Open Space, Park, Recreation Uses are allowed. ✔Private College or University is allowed through Use Review. ✔Private Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed through Use Review. ✔Public College or University is allowed. ✔Public Elem., Middle, or High School is allowed. ✘Religious Assembly is prohibited. ✔Specialized Instruction Facility is allowed, but limited to 20,000 sf. CARE AND SHELTER ✔Daycare Center uses are allowed through Use Review. ✘Daycare Homes are prohibited. ✔Day Shelter are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Emergency Shelter use is allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. ✔Overnight Shelter uses are allowed with a Conditional Use Permit. INFRASTRUCTURE AND UTILITIES ✘Airport and Heliport uses are prohibited. ✔Essential Municipal and Public Utility uses are allowed through Use Review. Destination Workplace 39 40EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS DESTINATION WORKPLACE Description The Destination Workplace Place Type incorporates modern principles of creating flexible, active and engaging work places to serve Boulder business and industry. These places will offer industrial and office space with indoor/outdoor work space, excellent connections to a variety of mobility options and local destinations dining and entertainment. This place also expands opportunities for existing or new industrial businesses to create retail space and engage potential customers in an exciting environment. Flexibility in these neighborhoods also includes allowing for residential infill providing area employees with local housing options. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Office such as technical, financial, professional; • Light Industrial such as small-scale manufacturing, flex- space, breweries, distilleries, coffee roasting; • Dining and Entertainment such as restaurants, cafes and taverns; • Retail sales such as on-site retail for manufacturing businesses or other industrial businesses Conditional Uses Ground Floor n/a Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Office; Light Industrial; Attached Residential Useable Open Space Minimum 20% of total land area Building Character Buildings should offer modern amenities to Boulder employers and employees that support an indoor/outdoor exchange of air and light. Aesthetic choices should express innovation, creativity and Boulder entrepreunerism. This place type prioritizes energy conservation in both new and re- development. Street Level Activation Transparency along both streets and key pedestrian pathways should create an active ground-floor environment. Work places should offer on-site outdoor space for employee use as work space and non-work space. Streetside dining and entertainment space is encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscape environments should incorporate high quality landscaping including a consistent tree canopy and green infrastructure, offer off-street space for pedestrians and cyclists and provide moments for pause and repose. Access + Mobility Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Parking in the Destination Workplace Place Type should strive for consolidation. It is envisioned that parking structures are well-connected to local work places and retail/dining destinations through a network of the highest quality pedestrian environment. 1 0 3 4 5 2 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS WELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESS THE VISION FOR EAST BOULDER EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION HANDS ON INDUSTRIAL Description The Hands-On Industrial Place Type are key places for Boulder’s makers, artists, mechanics, musicians and fixer-uppers. The place type is envisioned to be a little gritty, a little funky and build opportunities for the collective of local artisans and specialists. Adaptive reuse and redevelopment should provide affordable commercial space when possible and provide an interactive ground floor environment that contributes to neighborhood character. What is Unbundled Parking? Unbundled parking is the practice of selling or leasing parking spaces separate from the purchase or lease of a commercial or residential use. Detaching the cost of a home or commercial space from associated parking spaces allows buyers or renters to pay for parking only if they need it. Allowed Uses Ground Floor • Light Industrial such as manufacturing, maker space, performance, breweries or distilleries, coffee roasters • Vehicular Services and Auto-related businesses • Personal services • Indoor recreation • Retail sales • Arts/Performance Studio • Maker Space Conditional Uses Ground Floor Greenhouse and plant nurseries Allowed Uses Above Ground Floor Accessory or administrative office Useable Open Space Minimum 10% of total land area Building Character Aesthetic choices will be industrial in nature. Smaller scale buildings are anticipated. Expect tall ground floor ceiling heights to accommodate industrial uses. Street Level Activation Building facades should have clear “front-door” entries. Creative facades and signage are encouraged. Streetscape Character Streetscape character and local wayfinding should feature and celebrate local businesses, integrate local art, increase canopy and incorporate a pedestrian environment that welcomes customers and visitors to the experience of Boulder’s community of makers. Access + Mobility Transportation connections should offer safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle access and slower speed vehicular movement to minimize conflicts with vehicles; centrally placed mobility hubs with high frequency transit should offer micromobility (e-bike, e-scooter) options for first and last mile connections; curbs should be managed to allow for different uses by time of day and/or loading/drop off based on adjacent land uses. Parking Promote efficient use of parking areas through unbundled, paid, flexible and shared use. Alternate Recommended Zoneonly if Office uses are not expanded in IMS. Note that Residential Uses are not allowed. IG 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont Rd Pearl Pk wy Pearl Pk wy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence Rd Foothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St 48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlati r o n P k w y Flati r o n P k w y Central AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103 4 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOffice Greenhouse Parking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. 35 36EAST BOULDER SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN EVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS GUIDING REDEVELOPMENT: EAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES Valmont RdValmont Rd Pearl Pk wy Pearl Pk wy 55th Street55th StreetArapahoe AveAirport RdAirport Rd63rd StIndependence Rd Foothills PkwyBNSF Railroad Pearl StPearl St 48th Ct48th Ct49th St49th StPearl E CirPearl E Cir Walnut StWalnut St Sterling DrSterling Dr Sterling CtSterling Ct47th ST47th STAirport BlvdAirport BlvdAirport RdAirport RdSterling DrSterling DrSterling CirSterling CirFlati r o n P k w y Flati r o n P k w y Central AveCentral Ave Central AveCentral Ave S F l a t i r o n C t S F l a t i r o n C tN 57th CtN 57th Ct56th St56th StConestoga Conestoga CtCt Conestoga StConestoga StWestern AveWestern Ave Range StRange StCommerce StCommerce St48th ST48th STPeak AvePeak Ave Old Tale RdOld Tale RdCherryvale RdCherryvale RdOreg AveOreg AveEisenhower DrMacArthur MacArthur DrDr Patton DrPatton Dr55th St55th St63rd St63rd StValmont RdValmont RdEAST BOULDER PLACE TYPES103 4 5 2CONTENTSACKNOWLEDGEMENTSWELCOME TO EAST BOULDER: BACKGROUND AND PROCESSTHE VISION FOR EAST BOULDEREVOLVING NEIGHBORHOODS: LAND USE MOBILITY AND CONNECTIONS: TRANSPORTATION ACHIEVING THE VISION: IMPLEMENTATION ResidentialRestaurants and DiningRetailPersonal ServicesManufacturingAuto ServiceIndoor RecreationOffice Greenhouse Parking Public or Institutional Transparent icon indicates conditional use PLACE TYPE USES Hands On IndustrialParkside ResidentialMain Street Live/Work Destination Office Park-Side ResidentialMain Street Live/WorkDestination WorkplaceHands-On IndustrialInnovation TOD (Residential)Neighborhood TOD Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Innovation TOD (Residential) Innovation TOD (Non-Residential) Neighborhood TOD WHAT ARE PLACE TYPES? What are Place Types? The East Boulder Place Types describes the design intent and performance expectations for these evolving neighborhoods. The Place Type descriptions and performance measures can be used to guide redevelopment options and help future phases of implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan through the adoption of potential land use code amendments, re-zonings and the creation of new zones. The Place Type performance standards also describe elements that tie land use to important mobility features, such as access and parking and streetscape character. Attachment A - Rezoning Memo by Codametrics Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 21 of 22 ARAPAHOE 55TH33RDDIAGONAL CHERRYVALE47THPEARL 63RD VALM O NT 61STVALMONT FOOTHILLSWALNUT32ND BUTTE MILL KALMIA INDEPENDENCE Hayden Lake Pit D Hillcrest Lake Lower Cline Fish Pond Valmont Reservoir Leggett Owen Reservoir Upper Cline Fish Pond P IG RL-2 BR-1 RM-1 BT-2 IS-2 P P IS-2 PIS-2 BT-1 IS-1 P IS-1 P IG P P MH IG IM IG IS-1 MH E P E A RE P P RR-2 IM RH-3 P IG P RH-4 E E RM-1 IM RM-1 P IS-2 RM-1 BC-1 IG P RH-4 E RL-2 IG P IG BT-1 IG PSources: Esri, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap and the GISuser community, Esri Community Maps Contributors, UCB CAD/GIS Office, City of Boulder, Boulder County, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, GeoTechnologies, Inc,METI/NASA, USGS, EPA, NPS, US Census Bureau, USDA, USFWS ¯ 0 1,000 2,000 3,000500Feet East Boulder Subcommunity Zoning Map 2024 Not To Scale Attachment B - East Boulder Zoning Map Item 6B - Progress Update on the Implementation of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan: Zoning Update Page 22 of 22