02.07.24 LB Presentation•The city has engaged with community members to co-
create a vision for productive, meaningful and inclusive
civic conversations.
•This vision supports physical and emotional safety for
community members, staff and board/commission
members as well as democracy for people of all ages,
identities, lived experiences, and political perspectives.
•More about this vision and the project’s community
engagement process can be found here:
https://bouldercolorado.gov/services/productive-
atmospheres
Public
Participation
at Board
Meetings
The following are examples of rules of decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be upheld during this meeting.
•All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business.
•No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person.Obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited.
•Participants may raise their hand to speak during open comment and public comment periods during hearings. Individuals must display their whole name before being allowed to speak online. Currently, only audio testimony is permitted online.
Public
Participation
at Board
Meetings
Raise Hand:
Alt Y for PC
Option Y for Mac
*9 for phone
February 7, 2024
Landmarks Board
Meeting
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation
Agenda
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation
1.Call to Order - 6:00 pm
2.Approval of minutes from the Jan. 10, 2024, meeting – est. 6:10 pm
3.Public Participation for Non-Public Hearing Items – est. 6:15 pm
4.Discussion of Landmark Alteration, Demolition Applications issued and pending – est. 6:25 pm
•2111 Arapahoe Ave. – Stay of Demolition expires March 7, 2024
•1015 Juniper Ave. – Stay of Demolition expires March 25, 2024
•2260 Baseline Rd. – Stay of Demolition expires June 1, 2024
5.Public Hearings under the procedures prescribed by chapter 1-3, “Quasi-Judicial Hearings,” B.R.C. 1981:
A.2120 Bluebell Ave. – Individual Landmark Designation – est. 7:00 pm
B.Civic Area Historic District – Historic District Designation – est. 7:30 pm
6.Matters from the Landmarks Board, Planning Department, and City Attorney – est. 9:30 pm
7.Debrief Meeting / Calendar Check
8.Adjournment – est. 9:45 pm
*Estimated start times subject to change
6
Public Participation
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation7
2111 Arapahoe Ave.
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation8
Jan. 25 – Site visit
February 7 –
scheduling
decision
March 6 – Last regularly
scheduled meeting
before the stay expires
March 7 – Stay of
demolition expires
I move that the Landmarks Board schedule a hearing to
consider adopting a resolution to initiate the process for
landmark designation pursuant to Section 9-11-3 of the
Boulder Revised Code, 1981 or alternatively issue a
demolition permit pursuant to Section 9-11-23 B.R.C, 1981
for 2111 Arapahoe Ave.
Motion Template to Hold a
Hearing to Take Action
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation13
1015 Juniper Ave.
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation14
November 28 –
Meeting with
applicants
January 8 – second
meeting with
applicants & site
visit
February 7 –
scheduling
decision
March 6 – Last regularly
scheduled meeting
before the stay expires
March 25 – Stay of
demolition expires
1015 Juniper Ave Boulder,CO
LAN D M AR K BOARD U P DAT E
FE B .7 TH ,2 0 2 4
Say of Demo Background
•Owners/Applicant had open dialogue with Board and Staff
and accommodated all requested meeting
•2 meetings held to discuss alternatives to Demolition
–Workshop on November 28th and on-stie on January 8th
•Discussed the difficulties of this particular location in terms of
preservation.
•Onsite meeting to observe the home as well as neighborhood
context of Juniper Ave
•Discussed the financial hardship of renovating the existing
structure and some preservation alternatives.
Questions asked by
the Board
•Q.Can we take advantage of the exemption on in floodplain regulations for main level (7
inches below)?
–A.There are NO FEMA or City of Boulder exceptions to floodplain compliance.
•Q.Is it possible to raise the main level floorplate height?
–A.Would require lifting and moving the home.The foundation is not suitable per engineer.
Moving and lifting a home difficult and expensive.
•Q.Have you explored the building envelope and buildable space on the lot?Lends itself to an
addition on the rear of the lot without losing the historic character
–A.Given the floodway at the rear of the lot,there is limited room to relocate the home to
the north.
•Q.Gerwing asked about possible relocation
–A.The cost to relocate the is extremely cost prohibitive.We spoke to one party about
relocation to North Longmont,but did not make financial sense given the costs to frame a
new new structure.
Site Analysis for
Relocation
•The the home can not be located within
the rear 60’of the lot
•Current homes does not comply with
25’front yard set back.
•25’ total side yard setback.
•Achieving any type of reasonable
addition would be difficult given the lot
constraints and requirement to lift and
move the home
Financial and Partial Hardship
•Any repair or alteration of the building over
$104,855 would trigger FEMA and City of
Boulder Land Use Regulations to lift the home in
compliance with Flood Protection Elevation
•Lifting and moving the home is a significant
financial hardship on the owner.
Financial Hardship•Owners specifically purchased a
property outside of a historic district
to meet the needs of their family.
•Property was marketed on the MLS
as a tare down:“offers an
extraordinary chance for the buyer to
materialize their dream home”
•Designating this home would have a
large,negative impact in property
value and ability to improve the
home
BRC: Section 9-11-23:Consider Cost,Condition and
Relationship to Surrounding Area
•Extensive Cost to remodel due to several Factors:
–Flood Considerations—Floodplain Engineering Analysis provided by SiteWorks Engineering
–Entire site is located within the Zone AE also known as the 100-year flood plain
–Northern half of property sits in City of Boulder High Hazard and Conveyance Zone
•Existing and non-permitted structures sit within the Conveyance Zone...obstructing the floodway and further
endangering the home
•Poor condition of foundation of foundation and exterior materials
•Would not impact the surrounding as the majority of the homes significantly improved,
larger,or newer construction
Preservation
Alternatives
•The majority of this homes historical significance steams from being
the residence of Freda McIntosh:the second woman to serve as
Boulder Country Treasure.
•Owners have suggested installing an informational plaque on
the property to educate on the history of Freda McIntosh
•Sponsor documentation and pictures to be provided to the
Boulder Carnegie Library
•Reclaim and reuse relevant architectural elements in the new
home. Some identifiable elements include:
–The exposed rafter tails
Existing Structure
I move that the Landmarks Board schedule a hearing to
consider adopting a resolution to initiate the process for
landmark designation pursuant to Section 9-11-3 of the
Boulder Revised Code, 1981 or alternatively issue a
demolition permit pursuant to Section 9-11-23 B.R.C, 1981
for 1015 Juniper Ave.
Motion Template to Hold a
Hearing to Take Action
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation28
2260 Baseline Rd.
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation29
Meeting with
applicants – to be
scheduled
April 3 –
scheduling
decision
May 1 – Last regularly
scheduled meeting
before the stay expires
June 1 – Stay of
demolition expires
Agenda
Item 5A
Public hearing and consideration of an application
to designate the property at 2120 Bluebell Ave. as
a local Historic Landmark, 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. (HIS2023-00235).
Owner/Applicant: Susan Ely and James Hartman
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation30
1.All speaking are sworn in
2.Board members note any ex parte contacts
3.Staff presentation; Board may ask questions of staff
4.Applicant presentation; Board may ask questions of applicant
5.Public hearing opened for public comment; the Board may ask questions
6.Applicant response
7.Public hearing closed; Board discussion
8.A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass. Motions
must state findings, conclusions, and recommendation
9.A record of the hearing is available
Quasi-Judicial Hearing Process
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation31
Criteria for Review
The Landmarks Board “shall determine whether designation
conforms with the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1,
Legislative Intent, and 9-11-2, City Council May Designate
Landmarks and Historic Districts.”
Section 9-11-5(c), B.R.C. 1981
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation32
•Recommend Designation to City Council
•City Council will hold a public hearing within 100 days
•Disapprove Request for Designation
•Subject to a 45-day call up period
•Owners may file a notice of appeal within 21 days of the Landmarks
Board Decision
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation33
Landmarks Board Options
Application Process
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation
Nov. 16, 2023
Staff accepted an application
to designate the house as an
individual local landmark. A
hearing must be scheduled
between 60 and 120 days of an
accepted application (between
Jan. 15 and March 15, 2024).
Feb. 7, 2024
Landmarks Board hearing
34
Location Map
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation35
Property Description
36
Staff Analysis
9-11-5(c) B.R.C. 1981
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation37
Historic
Significance
Date of Construction
195601
Association with Persons or Events
The house was constructed for Wilson and Virginia
Fankboner and their two children; subsequent
owners include James Hartman and Susan Ely.
02
Distinction in Development of the Community
Modernist Architectural Movement, Interurban Park,
NIST
03
Recognition by Authorities
Featured in the Month of Modern Architecture Tour
led by Month of Modern and Historic Boulder, Inc.
(2023) including an award from Historic Boulder,
Inc. for an appropriate renovation of a Hobart
Wagener House; Identified as maintaining a “high
level of integrity” in a reconnaissance survey for the
Historic Context and Survey of Post-World War II
Residential Architecture (2010).
04
38
Real Estate Appraisal
Card photograph,
c.1957.
Façade before
additions, 1997.
Recognized Period or Style
Modernist style with Mid-Century custom ranch
form
01
Architect or Builder of Prominence
Hobart “Hoby” D. Wagener
02
Artistic Merit
Integration of internal and external design03
Indigenous Qualities
None observed.
04 Example of the Uncommon
05
Believed to be one of the first residences in Boulder
designed to be fully accessible.
39
Architectural
Significance
The vaulted wood ceiling on the
inside continues to the outside to
become the soffit under the
eaves.
40 Hobart Wagener’s original drawing of north elevation (top) and Jim Hartman/Susan Ely
section showing addition and entry modifications, 1997 (below).
Site Characteristics
Mature vegetation
Elaboration: The site includes many mature trees
and shrubs, creating a secluded and somewhat
hidden location.
Compatibility with Site
The house is compatible with its residential
setting.
Geographic Importance
None observed.
Environmental Appropriateness
None observed.
Area Integrity
The property is not located in an identified potential
historic district. Some features of the 1950s
development remain. 41
Environmental
Significance
01
02
03
04
05
The Landmarks Board recommends to the City Council that it
designate the property at 2120 Bluebell Ave. as a local historic
landmark, to be known as the Fankboner-Hartman-Ely House,
finding that it meets the standards for individual landmark
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.
Recommended Motion
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation42
Proposed Name & Plaque Language
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation43
Fankboner-Hartman-Ely House
1956
Wilson and Virginia Fankboner worked with architect Hobart Wagener
to design their house to include natural light and a ceiling that
continues from the outside to the inside. Subsequent owners Susan
Ely and James Hartman designed sensitive additions to complement
the original house.
Designated a City of Boulder Landmark in 2024
Proposed Boundary
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation44
The Landmarks Board finds, based upon the application and evidence presented,
that the proposed designation application is consistent with the purposes and
standards of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, in that:
1.The designation of the property at 2120 Bluebell Ave. will protect, enhance,
and perpetuate a property reminiscent of a past era of history in that the
building is architecturally significant as an exemplary example of Modernist
Mid-Century design; an important example of Boulder’s historic architecture
associated with architect Hobart D. Wagener, and constructed with skilled
craftsmanship;
2.The proposed designation will maintain an appropriate setting and
environment for the building, and enhance property values, stabilize the
neighborhood, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge of the
city’s living heritage.
Proposed Findings
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation45
Process
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation46
Staff Presentation
Applicant Presentation
Public Participation
Applicant Response
Board Deliberation
2120 Bluebell Ave.
47 Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation
**approx. 20 minutes scheduled for board deliberation**
Does this property meet the standards for individual
landmark designation?
If yes, recommend approval
If no, recommend denial
Board Deliberation
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation48
The Landmarks Board recommends to the City Council that it
designate the property at 2120 Bluebell Ave. as a local historic
landmark, to be known as the Fankboner-Hartman-Ely House,
finding that it meets the standards for individual landmark
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.
Recommended Motion
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation50
Next Steps
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation51
City Council first
reading (consent
agenda)
City Council second
reading (public
hearing); before May
17, 2024
Building designated;
City provides plaque
Agenda
Item 5B
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.
Owner: City of Boulder
Applicant: Historic Boulder, Inc., Friends of the
Bandshell, and Friends of the Boulder-Dushanbe
Teahouse
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation52
1.All speaking are sworn in
2.Board members note any ex parte contacts
3.Staff presentation; Board may ask questions of staff
4.Applicant presentation; Board may ask questions of applicant
5.Public hearing opened for public comment; the Board may ask questions
6.Applicant response
7.Public hearing closed; Board discussion
8.A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass. Motions
must state findings, conclusions, and recommendation
9.A record of the hearing is available
Quasi-Judicial Hearing Process
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation53
Criteria for Landmarks Board Review
Section 9-11-1, Legislative Intent, including determination whether the proposed
designation will:
Preserve, protect and enhance historically significant buildings and
sites or architectural styles of the past
Develop and maintain appropriate setting to enhance property values,
stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest and foster
knowledge of the city's living heritage.
Section 9-11-2, City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts.
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation54
Designation Ordinance
Section 9-11-6(c), Ordinance Designating Landmark of
District, City Council shall include:
•Description of characteristics of the landmark or district justifying its designation;
•Description of the particular features that should be preserved;
•Location and boundaries of the landmark site or district;
•Alterations that would have a significant impact upon or be potentially detrimental
to the landmark site or the district
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation55
•Recommend Designation to City Council
•City Council will hold a public hearing within 100 days (May 17)
•Disapprove Request for Designation
•Subject to a 45-day call up period (March 23)
•Owners may file a notice of appeal within 21 days of the Landmarks
Board decision (February 28)
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation56
Landmarks Board Options
Effect of Local Designation
•Local designation recognizes and protects areas significant to Boulder’s history
•Boulder’s Historic Districts
1.Floral Park (1977)
2.Chautauqua Park (1978)
3.Mapleton Hill (1982; 2002)
4.West Pearl (1994)
5.Chamberlain (1995)
6.Downtown (1999; 2003)
7.Hillside (2001; 2002)
8.Highland Lawn (2005)
9.University Place (2006)
10.16th Street (2006)
•214 individual landmarks
Effect of Local Designation
Benefits & Responsibilities
•Benefits include tax credits, grant funding, possible code variances, staff assistance and a bronze plaque
•Physical changes reviewed by the historic preservation program to ensure that they 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.
2023 LAC Review
Approved In Review Denied
Proposed Historic District Application
Map showing proposed historic
district boundary; extends from
behind 1777 Broadway to 14th
Street, and between Canyon and
Arapahoe Ave., excluding the
privately owned parcels at the
northeast corner of Broadway
and Arapahoe Ave.
Background
2021 Request to expand landmark boundary of Bandshell; LB vote to initiate
process
2022 LB vote to recommend expansion of boundary
2022 City Council hearing; CC vote to not expand boundary;
Nod of Five for BPR and P&DS staff to explore the creation of a historic district
Q1 2023 BPR and P&DS staff determine approach to explore a historic
district, including the development of a CLA
01 02 03 04 05
Submitted May 30,
2023 by three
community groups
LB vote to initiate
process on July 12
Tolling Agreement
to provide add’l
time
Opportunity to tell
complete history of
area (racial equity,
social and cultural
significance)
Coordination with 9
city departments, 3
ditch companies and
CDOT
Consultation with CC-in-R
Walking tours, webpage, online questionnaire, StoryMap, What’s Up Boulder, Communications & Media Coverage, Carnegie Library “Boulder Rewind” event
Technical Advisory Group
Dec. 18 –Joint SS Landmarks Board and Parks & Recreation Advisory Board
Department Coordination
Jan 22 – PRAB check in
Feb. 7 Landmarks Board Designation Hearing
February 20 – Planning Board (Land Use)
March 21 – City Council (1st Reading Consent Agenda
Mid-April - 2nd Reading, Public Hearing
Application &
Landmarks Board
Initiation Hearing
Research &
Department
Coordination
Community
Engagement
Draft Design
Guideline
Framework
Board & City
Council Review
61
Engagement Summary
•Department and Agency Coordination
•Consultation with Community Connectors-in-Residence
•Walking Tours
•Webpage, StoryMap and Online Questionnaire
•Communications and Media Coverage
•What’s Up Boulder
•Carnegie Library “Boulder Rewind” event
•14 letters received to date (all in support)
Online Form (Oct 15, 2023-Jan 25, 2024)
Support Oppose Unsure
Feedback Summary – Oct. 15, 2023 to Jan. 29, 2023
Support
•it would be good for tourism and
business;
•preservation is generally a valuable
goal,
•this area represents the best of
Boulder (besides the mountain
backdrop)
• the designation could help improve
public safety in this area; and
•the history being told acknowledges
impacts on historically excluded
communities and supports the city’s
equity aspirations.
Opposed
•that the district is not aligned with the city’s equity and climate goals;
•a preference to focus on redevelopment and programming here instead of further restrictions;
•parking lots are not historic and should not be included; hope that parking lots could be used for community benefit such as affordable housing;
•the need to ensure that our civic spaces meet the needs of our community today;
•insufficient benefit of a district
•a desire for the city to focus on other priorities; and
•a need to effectively addresses issues related to public safety and the unhoused here before pursuing a district.
Unsure
•needing more information and
understanding of the impacts
•concerns that public resources
would be spent with little return,
•skeptical that the collection of
disjointed buildings warrants a
historic district designation,
•likely to be more supportive if the
use of current buildings can be
reimagined;
•concerns that the designation
glosses over the presence of
unhoused in the area; and
•a desire for the city to focus on
public safety first and foremost.
Feedback Summary – July 12, 2023-Feb. 6
Letters Received July 12, 2023 – Jan. 29, 2024 (included in packet)
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
Letters Received Jan. 30-Feb. 6
1.Joe and Caroline Holmes Stepanek – Feb. 5, 2024
2.Kathryn Barth – Feb. 6, 2024
Feedback Summary – Board Feedback
Parks & Recreation Advisory Board (PRAB) Review – Jan. 22, 2024
Four members present agreed they do not support designation:
•Lack of understanding of a unifying element or overarching theme that would
explain creating a district.
•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.
•Disagreement that potential benefits of designation outweigh the added
process, time and thus expense of a district.
CRITERIA FOR
REVIEW
Significance
Integrity
Boundary
•Boulder Revised Code
•Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
(BVCP)
•Local Significance Criteria for District
Landmarks (1975)
•National Park Service Guidance
•Integrity
•Boundary
Designation Criteria – Boulder Revised Code
Section 9-11-1, Legislative Intent, including determination whether the proposed
designation will:
Preserve, protect and enhance historically significant buildings and
sites or architectural styles of the past
Develop and maintain appropriate setting to enhance property values,
stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest and foster
knowledge of the city's living heritage.
Section 9-11-2, City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts.
Designation Criteria – Boulder Valley Comp Plan
•2.27 Preservation of Historic &
Cultural Resources
•2.30 Eligible Historic Districts &
Landmarks
•2.28 Leadership in Preservation:
City-& County Owned Resources
•2.32 Preservation of
Archaeological Sites & Cultural
•2.14 Mix of Complementary Land
Uses
•2.15 Compatibility of Adjacent
Land Uses
•2.20 Role of the Central Area
•2.33 Sensitive Infill &
Redevelopment
•2.41 Enhanced Design for All
Projects
•5.09 Role of Tourism in the
Economy
•5.10 Role of Arts, Cultural, Historic
& Parks & Recreation Amenities
Designation Criteria - Historic Significance
HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE
1.Association with Historical
Persons or Events
2.Distinction in the
Development of the
Community of Boulder
3.Recognition by Authorities
4.Date of Construction
5. Other, if applicable
1960-1971
c.1951
Designation Criteria - Architectural Significance
ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE
1.Architectural Identity
2.Recognized Period(s)/Style(s)
3.Architect(s) or Builder(s) of Prominence
4.Artistic Merit
5.Example of the Uncommon
6.Indigenous Qualities
7.Other, if applicable
Designation Criteria - Environmental Significance
ENVIRONMENTAL SIGNIFICANCE
1.Site Characteristics
2.Compatibility with Site
3.Geographic Importance
4.Other, if applicable
CRITERIA FOR
REVIEW
Significance
Integrity
Boundary
Guidance: National Register Bulletin 15: How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation
Seven Aspects of Integrity
1.Location
2.Design
3.Setting
4.Materials
5.Workmanship
6.Feeling
7.Association
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, certified by nat’l experts;
•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.
Integrity | 1923-1937 Period
Comparison of March 1924 planting plan with 1938 and 2023 aerial photographs of Central Park.
Source Source
1.Location
2.Design
3.Setting
4.Materials
5.Workmanship
6.Feeling
7.Association
Integrity | 1938-1974 Period
Location; Design; Setting; Materials; Workmanship; Feeling; Association
CRITERIA FOR
REVIEW
Significance
Integrity
Boundary
Guidance: National Register Bulletin 16: Defining Boundaries for National Register Properties
•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 Analysis
•Contains the significant concentration of
contributing buildings and sites: the five
designated landmarks and Central Park.
•Utilizes Canyon and Arapahoe as visual
barriers
•Follows the rear of the existing landmark
boundaries of the contributing buildings
along 13th to recognize the decline of
concentration in the contributing
resources.
•The southern boundary follows the mid-
line of Boulder Creek, a contributing
feature and visual barrier.
Staff Recommended Boundary
Proposed Name
Staff Recommended Name
The official landmark name of the site or structure
should be based on one or more of the following
criteria:
A.Original owners, architect, or builder;
B.Historically significant persons or prominent
long-term residents;
C.A commonly accepted name;
D.Original or later event or use;
E.Unusual or architectural characteristic which
clearly which clearly identifies the landmark;
and
F.The contributions of both men and women.
GUIDELINES FOR NAMES OF LANDMARKED STRUCTURES AND
SITES (1989)
Civic Area Historic District
Preliminary
Period of
Significance and
Character-
Defining
Features
Recommended Period of Significance: 1938-1974
•Existing historic character of Central Park established;
extending to a date 50 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
Preliminary List of Character-Defining Features
Preliminary Contributing Features
•The open and natural character of Boulder Creek
•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
•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).
Preliminary Non-Contributing Features
•Sister Cities Plaza and 13th Street Plaza (including paving, artwork and stone walls)
•Boulder Creek Path and associated bridge and railings
•Broadway Bridge (reconstructed c. 2003),
•Light fixtures
•Engraved boulders
•Gilbert White Flood Memorial
•B-Cycle stations
Design Guideline
Framework
Table of Contents
Intent
Guiding Principles
Design Guideline Framework
INTENT
What is the purpose of these design guidelines? How will they be used?
SCOPE OF DESIGN GUIDELINES
•Review Process
•Roles and Responsibilities
•What Requires Review?
•History of the Area
•Rehabilitation of Historic Structures
•Additions to Historic Structures
•New Construction
•Coordination with Floodplain Development Regulations
•Central Park
•Boulder Creek
•Public Art
•East Bookend
•13th Street
•Plazas
Design Guideline Framework – Guiding Principles
1.The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation are the foundation for the historic district design guidelines.
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.
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.
Design Guideline Framework – Guiding Principles
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.
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.
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.
Summary
•Proposed area meets the local criteria for designation based on its architectural, historic and environmental significance
•The area retains its historic integrity to the 1938-1974 period of development
•Recommended boundary encompasses the significant concentration of contributing features, and uses the street grid and Boulder Creek as visual and physical barriers
•Recommended name “Civic Area Historic District” and period of significance 1938-1974
•The designation ordinance and design guidelines will address contributing and non-contributing features
•The design guideline framework includes the intent, scope of guidelines and six guiding principles
Recommended Motion
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.
I move that the Landmarks Board recommends City Council
1.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.
2.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.
3.Consider expanding the boundary to include the southern and western banks of Boulder Creek.
4.Consider expanding the period of significance to a date that includes the residential period (1880)
5.Recognize Olmsted’s plan as being intact, recognizable and significant to the historic district.
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:
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.
Questions & Board Discussion
Meeting Procedure
Staff Presentation
Applicant Presentation
Public Participation
Applicant Response
Board Deliberation
Designation Criteria – Boulder Revised Code
Section 9-11-1, Legislative Intent, including determination whether the proposed
designation will:
Preserve, protect and enhance historically significant buildings and
sites or architectural styles of the past
Develop and maintain appropriate setting to enhance property values,
stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest and foster
knowledge of the city's living heritage.
Section 9-11-2, City Council May Designate Landmarks and Historic Districts.
**approx. 60-75 minutes estimated for board deliberation**
Does the board have comments on the Draft Design Guideline
Framework?
Does the board recommend designation of the historic district
to City Council?
Board Discussion
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?
Proposed Boundary
1937
•By 1932 the area was graded,
with softball field;
•Tennis and horseshoe courts
added by 1937;
•Used for bonfires and rallies c.
1949 - 1961
1962
•The mall and parking lots
between the Municipal Building
and library.
•Informal “park” uses.
1922
•Most of the residences removed
by 1922; all by 1928.
•No facilities visible, but
references to “horseshoe” court
in area in 1924.
Recommended Boundary
Next Steps
February 7, 2024 – Landmarks Board Designation Hearing
February 20, 2024 – Planning Board (Land Use)
March 21, 2024 – City Council, 1st Reading
April 11, 2024 – City Council, 2nd Reading and Public Hearing
Public Comment
Open until City
Council Review
(Mid-April:
https://bouldercolorado.gov/projects/proposed-civic-area-historic-district
This site is the Heart of Boulder ( photo from 1938 )
Redevelopment of the
East “Bookend” of the
Civic Area is underway:
2015 Civic Masterplan
2021 Civic Area Phase I
2024 Civic Area Phase II
Policies that declare
the importance of
valuing City-owned
historic properties:
2011 Greenways Masterplan
2015 Civic Area Masterplan
2019 Preservation Plan
2020 Comp Plan
Comparison :
2024 Central Park1938 Central Park
Comparison : Topography
2024 Central Park1938 Central Park
Comparison : Vegetation
2024 Central Park1938 Central Park
Comparison : Views
2024 Central Park1938 Central Park
Comparison : Spatial Organization
2024 Central Park1938 Central Park
Olmsted Masterplan for Boulder : 1910 “Plan of Improvements”
Detail of the Plan with 5 park areas depicted
Slum Clearance or Discrimination
"The section...was once a disgrace to the city, and a gathering place of undesirable people. In the
early days, it was a red light district, later became the tramp quarters of Boulder. The most
undesirable section of the district [present day Central Park] was wiped out by the city in purchases
made several years ago.... The acquirement [of this area] completes the task that was inaugurated a
few years ago of cleaning up the "jungle".... (Boulder Daily Camera, 13 April 1928).
A New Historic District in the Heart of Boulder
The designation of the Civic Historic District will enlighten citizens with stories from the past
and ensure that changes to the properties in the area will be grounded in the remarkable
historic spirit of Boulder.
Public Comment – Fran Sheets
Public Comment – Fran Sheets
Public Comment – Fran Sheets
Public Comment –Kathryn Barth
Public Comment –Kathryn Barth
Public Comment –Kathryn Barth
Public Comment –
Payson Sheets
720-347-0556
Public Comment – Joe Stepanek
Olmsted Masterplan for Boulder : 1910 “Plan of Improvements”
Detail of the Plan with 5 park areas depicted
Public Comment – Patrick O’Rourke
Olmsted Masterplan for Boulder : 1910 “Plan of Improvements”
Detail of the Plan with 5 park areas depicted
Public Comment – Dan Corson
Public Comment – Bob Muckle
Public Comment – Kristen Lewis
Public Comment – Deborah Yin
Statement in support of the
Historic District designation HIS2023-00081
Andrew Brandt
andrew@electmorehackers.com
Proposed historic district, 2024
Excerpt, February 2021 Racial Equity Plan
Boulder City Council passed Resolution 1275 in December, 2019
1873 map highlighting Block 11
1906 map overlaid on present-day area
Removal of residents
1910 Federal Census page.
https://www.ancestry.com/discoveryui-
content/view/1964901:7884?tid=&pid=&
queryId=a1efa545d01510abb31f74281b3
d7d71&_phsrc=eTX2&_phstart=successS
ource
Houses on Block 12 are
demolished in 1910
Houses on Block 11 are
gone by 1922
Majority of remaining
Black residents move to
Goss Grove area
WARNING
The next slide includes offensive language
Removal of residents
Boulder Daily Camera, April 11, 1921.
https://www.ppc-
historicnewspapers.org/?a=d&d=BDC
19210411-01.2.15&e=-------en-20--1--
img-txIN%7ctxCO%7ctxTA--------0------
Olmsted Central Parks’ bleak realities
•Academics now recognize that while Olmsted’s ideas
were sound, how communities implemented them were
destructive to the marginalized people who were
displaced
•Parks built to Olmsted specifications in New York,
Boston, Baltimore, Chicago, and the other great cities
resulted in neighborhoods destroyed and lives uprooted
Blocks 11 and 12, 1887. Carnegie Library.
https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A67940
Homes in 1887
Homes in 1897
Blocks 11 and 12 from railway bridge, 1897. Carnegie Library.
https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A22471
Block 11 from 9th Street bridge, 1897. Carnegie Library.
https://localhistory.boulderlibrary.org/islandora/object/islandora%3A7939
Homes in 1897
REQUESTS TO LANDMARKS BOARD
•Acknowledge the displaced residents and
that history does not begin in 1938.
•Propose a name other than “Civic Area”
•Consider naming pedestrian bridge after
Jennie Johnson or other residents
•Extend the District boundaries to include
Block 11
Public Comment – Stuart Lord
Public Comment – Glenda S. Robinson
Matters
Planning & Development Services | Historic Preservation48
•2024 Saving Places Conference Recap
•2024 LDRC & LB Meetings
•March 6, April 3, May 1, June 5,
[July 3], August 7, September 4,
Oct. 2, [Nov. 6], Dec. 4
•Board & Commission Appointments –
March 21
•Looking Ahead
•2025 – Ronnie
•2026 - Abby
•2027 – Chelsea
•2028 – John