February 4, 2026 — Landmarks Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:02] Okay. The February Landmarks Board meeting is called to order. Welcome to the February 4th, 2026 Landmarks Board meeting. It's… 6.03 p.m. Yes. Marcy will review the virtual meeting decorum. Alright, thank you, and good evening. 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 and 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 online. 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.

[1:08] 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, or other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. And 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. Thank you. The recording of this meeting will be available in the records archive and on the YouTube within 28 days of this meeting. We will do a roll call and brief introductions. Michael. Michael Ray, Vice Chair, Landmark Sport.

[2:03] Chelsea. Hi, Chelsea Castellano, member of the Landmarks Board. Abby? Abby Daniels Landmarks Board? John Decker, member of the Landmarks Board. And I'm Renee Globick, Chair of the Landmarks Board. We have a quorum this evening. We know that people who are here to participate may have some strong emotions about these projects. We want to hear from you, and have found it more productive if you are speaking to persuade us, rather than to berate staff, us, or the applicant. As the regular Landmarks Board meeting, you will only be able to speak at the appropriate time during the public hearing. Requests to speak outside of those times are denied. We request that members of the public who wish to speak let us know by raising their virtual hand. As board chair, I will call for a roll call vote on any motions made.

[3:02] Approval of the minutes. Does anyone here have any changes or alterations to the January 7th meetings? I actually have a question. And that is, in the. first hearing item. Did… and I just can't remember, but I thought we had discussion about the stone material that was the trash enclosure? And that didn't show up on the meeting minutes, and I just don't know where we landed with that, but I… That would be an edit that I would… suggest. Sure. I do recall the board's discussion about the stone material in the trash enclosure of that accessory building, on 8th Street. We can go back and check that the motion… Is correct in that it may not have made it into the final, motion and conditions that was on the screen for the motion maker.

[4:01] So do we approve these minutes without those motions being changed? Hello! Any… board members, If we're gonna check to see if the minutes are accurate, then I would advise not approving these minutes and doing it at the next meeting. Okay. We can approve this meeting's minutes and the last meeting's minutes at the next meeting. Okay, sounds great. Thank you. You're welcome. So, Chris, with that, are we allowed to have an email? With everybody, and, checking into what the… what we think that should say, instead? You can't change it based on what you think it should say. We have to go back to the record and listen to the motion again and make sure it's reflected in the minutes, so we'll just report back at the next meeting. Okay. Yeah, thank you.

[5:01] We'll next move to the public participation for non-agenda items. This is to speak to topics other than the public hearings. We'll start with in-person speakers, and then move to virtual participants. As a reminder, we are no longer swearing people in for open comment. Great, so it looks like we've got 4 people signed up. In person, so far. for open comments, so we'll start with Fran Mandel Sheets. Followed by Catherine. Parse. And you'll each have 3 minutes. And yes. boy. Thank you. Is it working now? Yes. Sorry about that. I'm really concerned that this board is becoming a board of demolition. Rather than a preservation board. The decision to cut the 180 days to 150 days.

[6:03] on the four houses on Arapahoe is a prime example. The 180 days were carefully thought out to pause the process, and in the past, it was effective in carving out alternatives to demolition as it was the purpose of the stay. It was effective, giving everyone time to find alternatives in a number of cases. It wasn't until we were up against the deadline that the alternatives were found, and some houses were saved. The argument to cut the time, as you have done, when I was a board member, was always to help out the developer, but that's not your job. In the case of the four houses on Arapahoe, 180 days might well prove to be significant, but we'll never know. Too many old folks who were in Boulder at the time that the Presbyterian Manor was built in 1960 have told me, personally, that there was an agreement with the city that that tall building, when that tall building was approved, agreements concerning the open space and land surrounding that building, because it was important back then. It's written all over Carnegie.

[7:09] Looking through Carnegie Files, it's clear that back then, people were concerned about space, open space, as they called it, breathing space. Packing people into every square inch, as we do now, is not… was not the norm. I've spent a lot of time searching in Carnegie and trying to access the central records, but time is running out. Trying to work with the city to find these records is time-consuming, and it's a trying process, but the original 180 days would have been helpful. It's a shame that the board is letting four houses go, given their condition, the history, the location, and their ability to supply affordable housing. The board has plainly told developers that this is… and this is one example, that the board will sign off and even facilitate the demolition goals at the expense of even the possibility of preservation.

[8:00] Thanks. Thanks, Fran. Great. Next up is Catherine Barth, followed by Leonard Siegel. Hello. Oops, excuse me. I'm kind of going to be. Continuing Fran's thoughts about the Demolition… Cooling off period. And there have been times where we have really Been able to save a building because we had the full time. And it gives more time for there to be tours and on-site visits. And so I would suggest that you not be so… Willing to give away days in that 180. And I'd like to mention that there are some places in America, like the city of Wellesley, where it's one year.

[9:02] Before they can demolish a building. So, it doesn't seem to me that if we're trying to save Our wonderful city that… 180 days. That's too much. I sent you, I think I got it to Claire, did I send a photograph of the houses from San Francisco. Yeah, but maybe last month. The little houses in San Francisco that are so famous, the little historic houses, and then the city rises behind them. I think that we have a design opportunity. On this site near the Presbyterian. manner of… I don't know what… what we could do, but there is an opportunity there to do something very… Endearing. With these buildings that might have public, park space, or reading space, or places to walk and sit.

[10:07] And the other thing that… I have… haven't… I looked it up at Carnegie, is that fishing, the fish farm. And I'd like to know what the effect of all this is on the fish farm, which… has been there since, I think, 1920. And what I understand the purpose of, the continuing purpose was, was to grow fish. So that then they could be put in the children's fishing pond. In Boulder Creek. So it has a very long historic and social value. So I hope you will consider the fishing farm, too. So, thank you very much, and thank you for the work you do. Great, thank you. Next up is Leonard Siegel. Followed by Patrick O'Rourke.

[11:02] Leonard Siegel, speaking on behalf of Historic Boulder. Thank you, Landmarks Board members. I have 3 things I want to talk about, speak to you about tonight. One of them is Presbyterian Manor, and it's really not so much this particular issue, but the process. It seems like things are backwards, and we've talked about this before, that the demolition is happening, and the request is happening before Planning Board has had a chance. To review it, which forces you to do things like a planning board, and you're not. You only can give it the review as a historic preservationist. And even though we all want more affordable housing, and affordable senior housing. It's really just out of sequence. So, I know that you have another meeting scheduled sometime in February, and I just hope that you just keep thinking about, the process and how it's a little flawed, and maybe there's a way, to say… to improve it next time.

[12:01] But your role still is, to support the preservation And, in history of Boulder. And these houses, these four houses, even since the meeting in December, have been, found to be, to meet standards for a historic district. So, there's reason to… to fight for these houses. Historic Boulder, as a backup plan, has identified that we would work to help relocate them, if that's where we have to go, but hopefully the best thing would be to keep them in place. So thank you for that, and thank you for your historic preservation role. The second thing I want to talk about is the idea… the concept of legacy properties and businesses, and Mustard's Last Stand is going to be coming up as a demolition for you, if it hasn't already, as a part of the demolition of the Park Central building. And Mustard's Last Stand, like the Dark Horse, is a legacy property in town that is very endearing, to the community, and

[13:04] Historic Preservation should somehow get behind trying to find ways to to save these properties, or to help them relocate in an economical way to make… to allow them to continue on. So, Historic Boulder is going to be working on identifying legacy businesses in the community, and, maybe we can work together to come up with a way to support them. And, the last thing I want to say is, Historic Boulder is going to be having its annual membership meeting at the Odd Fellows Hall on the 26th of February, and you're all welcome to come. We'd love for you to be our guests at the meeting and, hear about what, our plans are for the next year coming up. So, thank you very much. And, take care. All right. Okay, I won't do it. Good evening.

[14:01] Good evening, everybody. My name's Patrick O'Rourke. This will be my last time talking as a member of Historic Boulder and a board member. Earlier today, I sent everybody here A link to a mapping system That is used in the community that I came from. Number one is I find it… Disheartening that when we designate these properties, all the history and all the notes and pictures and everything, where do they go? They go into a file someplace, never to be seen by the public again. The links I sent you, if you have a minute while you're looking, look at them, and that's from my hometown. As a matter of fact, the very first picture you'll see in the top left corner, and the reason I bring it up. It's the first project that I did. I relocated 3 houses there. That's the very first one I did in 1993. The reason it's important besides for being historically significant in the pictures there, it tells the story. It also…

[15:03] This is the reason why, in the community of Glenco, where I came from. we had special zoning variances permitted for historic properties, and that's a perfect example. I got a minute 50. The other one would be my own residence that I lived at, 220 Park Avenue, if you got a chance to look at it. I was able to move the Howard house, built by General Howard, which would have been in the garbage, if the city of Glencoe, the village of Glencoe, had a zoning ordinance that permitted historic properties to be moved onto lot sizes that were 80% of the zoning permitted in that area. the greatest variance for a property before that historic preservation ordinance was 10% or 90%. Those are the types of, mechanisms that this committee This board can get involved in to help save some of these houses, especially when we're talking about these cottages that are coming up.

[16:05] Zoning changes. The second thing I've asked is, 3 years ago, I requested the City Council, and Rachel Friend did it for us, because staff was not willing to do it, not this staff, but City staff, is to get a list of the 10, now 11, buildings after tonight that the city's planning to sell and or demolish. There's a list… That's… that is available, and I don't know where to find it, and I'm hoping this group will Including, you know, the art… the atrium might have been on that thing, but Mocha might have been on it, the firehouse that you're going to talk about in a little bit is going to be on it, but I know there were 10, if not 11, and… One of the buildings, obviously, is the storage building that's next to Bomoca, that's in the future plans to just get torn down. Nobody even discussed it. Granted, it's not a significant building. It should have been notified, and we should know about it. Thank you.

[17:03] Thank you. Great. I think, that's it for everybody that's signed up in person, so we can move to online participation. So if you're joining us online, now is the time to raise your hand. to speak to open comment tonight, and so far we have one hand raised, so we will start with Lynn Siegel. And Lynn, you'll have 3 minutes, and just state your full name. Lynn Siegel. Yeah, this is not to be rhetorical, but this is a landmark opportunity for you tonight, with these four bungalows. You know, I don't… I ride my bike. I don't commute out to Erie to look at a museum of houses that have been moved there out of the space they're at. To me, it's almost like I'd rather they just get demolished.

[18:02] then lose their sense of place, because Boulder has a sense of place, and Changing that. in this situation is not okay. This is the prime part of town where people from the library walk past it all the time and see and feel what this space has for them. And… Elders in this community, Have plenty of opportunity, On other spaces in town, On the perimeter. So that we can keep the sense of Boulder that people come here for in the first place, that people are going to come from Sundance for in the first place. People from Sundowns don't want to come and see another big new building. They want to see some integrity, some charm, some character.

[19:02] that Boulder had and is. And all the time, I go around this town, and I can't remember what was there, and there, and there that has been demolished. And… That doesn't help make Boulder what it is. What it was is what it is, and it needs to stay. So… I can't implore to you how much, how important this decision tonight is. To keep these four bungalows. But… The Landmarks Board can't be responsible for affordable housing in this community. That's the planning board, that's the City Council. The Landmarks Board is entrusted to preserve the character and the charm of this space, and you are compelled and implored to do that tonight.

[20:02] Thank you for your time. Great, thank you, Lynn. I don't see any other hands raised online. If there's anyone else that would like to speak, please raise your hand. I think that's it. Thank you. So… We will move on. Marcy, do we have any pending applications for discussion? Oops. Okay. Oh. There we go. Okay, we do have four pending demolition applications, though my update, for you this evening will be short. There are the four, applications at 976-986-990, and…

[21:01] 1004 Arapahoe Avenue, and this was, four demolition applications the board reviewed in December and put a stay of demolition on to look at alternatives. We met twice with the applicant group in December, and then at your last meeting. In January, the board voted to schedule a public hearing to consider whether to initiate designation or issue the demolition permit for the four buildings. And so, thank you for getting back to us with your availability. We have… scheduled that meeting for, February 25th. It'll be a virtual meeting, and, those will be the four public hearing items on that agenda. So, we are working on the staff memorandum and are aiming to get that to you all by February 20th. Thank you. We'll move on to the first public hearing.

[22:00] This is public hearing and consideration of an applicant to designate the property of 475 University Avenue as an individual landmark. Pursuant to Section 911-5 of the Boulder Revised Code of 1981, and under the presence of prescribed by Chapter 1-3, Quasi-Judicial Hearings, Boulder Revised Code of 1981, the owner and applicant Chelsea… oh, no. Celeste Landry, sorry, I was like… And Eric Cornell, are the applicants and owner, and I'll hand it over to Claire for staff presentation. Thank you, Renee. This is a quasi-judicial hearing, so all speaking will be sworn in. That includes me. I'm Claire Brandt, the Historic Preservation Planner, and I affirm that I will tell the truth. I'll pause here to allow board members to note any ex parte contacts, if you have any.

[23:06] Okay, seeing none, I'll move on to the staff presentation. After that, the board may ask questions. The applicant will have 10 minutes to present to the board. We'll then open the public hearing. After all members of the public have made comments, the applicant may respond to anything that was said. The board will then deliberate. A motion today requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass. The motions will state findings, conclusions, and a recommendation. And a record of this hearing is available in, In a couple of days, as a video recording, and the official record will be added to the archive within 28 days, usually much sooner. The criteria for review is outlined in the Boulder Revised Code under 9-115C.

[24:00] And the options today are for the Landmarks Board to approve the application and recommend designation to City Council. The council hearing would be held within 100 days, or the board may disapprove the request. This is subject to a 45-day call-up period, and the owners would need to file a notice of appeal within 21 days of today. This, application came from the owners of the property, at the end of November. A hearing must be scheduled between 60 and 120 days of an accepted application, so here we are today. We are, looking at 745 University Avenue. It's located mid-block between 7th and 8th Streets on University. The house faces south onto University, and the rear backs to an unnamed alley. Gregory Creek runs along the east property line for a short distance before cutting across the adjacent property.

[25:04] The property is located within the identified potential expanded Highland Lawn Historic District. This is the house. It was built in 1907. It's a one and a half-storey pressed red brick and frame house in a simple Edwardian vernacular style. It has a front-gabled roof with flared eaves. A shallow gable porch spans the width of the facade and includes half-timbering and stucco in the gable end. The frame portions are clad in painted scalloped shingle, and the building sits on a rubble stone foundation. The windows are original, with exterior aluminum storm windows installed. The non-symmetrical window and door openings on the lower level include stone lintels and arched brick headers. Staff analysis uses the Landmarks Board's 1975 significance criteria and also the National Park Service aspects of integrity to ensure the building retains the physical features that allow it to convey the significance.

[26:15] So, for the integrity, the house is in its original location, and much of the setting remains, with Gregory Creek following the east side of the lot, mature landscaping and trees. Unfortunately, the silver maples that you see in the left-hand picture In the front of the lot were damaged in those windstorms last December. However, the loss of the trees does not negatively impact the setting. The design, the form, plan, space, structure, and style of the original structure is generally the same. The porch on the east side was replaced in 1958 with a larger version, and a two-car attached garage was added to the rear in 1979, and modified with a deck in 1999.

[27:00] These changes have been completed with sensitivity to the house. Many of the original materials remain, including the, really awesome pressed brick, the decorative wood shingle in the gable ends, and the wood double-hung windows. I'm a brick nerd. You have to go and feel the brick. really nice. The original, workmanship of the building is apparent, and the historic character of the building conveys the feeling and association with the building's early history. The house was built in 1907, by the next-door neighbors, Alfred and Irene Wheeler. Over the last 118 years, it's had a number of owners and tenants, notably Leo and Lena Novak, who purchased the house in 1946 and lived there for 45 years. Leo Novak was a professor of civil engineering at the university. Lena was a teacher at Whittier Elementary School.

[28:03] The current owners, Celeste Landry and Eric Cornell, have owned the house since 1999. Eric was part of a team awarded the Nobel Prize for Physics in 2001. I don't think he's here tonight. Oh, he is! He is here tonight, so if you have any questions about physics, he's here. In keeping with the spirit of the House, Celeste is heavily involved in state and local politics, especially with the League of Women Voters. She brought the House forward as a landmark after she discovered that for two decades, it was used as a municipal polling place. In addition to being the place neighbors came to vote, the house also was the location for caucuses, both Democratic and Republican. And the registration location, for conscriptions into service for World War I. In 1917, the owners of the house hosted four municipal elections, the first to ask voters if the city should develop a charter.

[29:07] The second to choose 21 committee members to draft the charter, a third election to ask voters to adopt the charter. The Charter created an at-large council elected through the hair system of preferential voting, now commonly called proportional ranked voting, and in Colorado statutes as the single transferable vote. After the city charter was adopted, new council members were elected in the fourth municipal election of 1917, and Mrs. Ida M. Campbell was elected Boulder's first female council member. A 1989 survey considered the house significant for its architecture, considering the classical detailing a good example of Edwardian vernacular architecture. We don't know if it was designed by an architect. Alfred Wheeler was a man of many hobbies, including prospecting.

[30:04] gardening, taxiderming, and photography, so it would not surprise me if he also designed this house. But we may never know. We do know that he used quality materials, including the very fine-pressed brick, which was made locally. Gregory Creek follows the east property line at the front of the property, creating an unusual and unique site with a stone and concrete retaining wall. Staff recommends that the property be known as the Polls and Registration House to recognize the property's use as a voluntary election place for Ward 3 Precinct 3 for two decades. This is consistent with the Landmarks Board's guidelines for names of landmark structures and sites, and the National Register of Historic Places guidelines for designation. The boundary would follow the property lines of the lot. This boundary is supported by the property owners.

[31:05] So staff recommends that the Landmarks Board adopt the findings in the memo and recommend to the City Council that it designate the property at 745 University Avenue as a local historic landmark to be known as the Polls and Registration House. Finding that it meets the standards for individual landmark designation in sections 911.1 and 9-11-2 of the Boulder Revised Code. 1981. Staff's findings are that the designation of 745 University Avenue will protect, enhance, and perpetuate a property reminiscent of a past era of history, and preserve an important example of Boulder's historic architecture. The proposed designation will maintain an appropriate setting and environment for the building, and enhance property values, stabilize the neighbourhood, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge of the city's living heritage.

[32:02] That's the end of staff presentation. This is a reminder of the next steps in the process. We'll ask Celeste and Eric if they have anything to add. Then we'll move into public participation and then board deliberation. And the options today are for the Landmarks Board to approve the application and recommend designation to City Council, or recommend denial. Are there any questions for staff? Claire, those, since you're a brick nerd, were they made in Boulder, or are they from the Denver one? They were probably. probably made in Boulder. Oh, interesting. Yeah. We had a number of brickworks here during that period. Okay, so we move on to applicant participate… presentation. voice today.

[33:01] Celeste and Eric, are you… Great. I brought show and tell. My name is Celeste Landry, and I'm supposed to swear something? to tell the whole truth, or the truth. tell the whole… the truth as I know it. The whole truth as I know it, yes. So, I've been living in Boulder since 1994. And we used to live about 3 blocks from here. And then we wanted a bigger house, and even though this is an old house, it was a bigger house for us. We had been on a half-lot before. We raised our daughters here. And… We've been very happy in the house, and I have gotten involved with

[34:07] elections and voting methods with the League of Women Voters, and we even had a little sabbatical for a month in Cambridge, Massachusetts, where my husband grew up, where they used proportional ranked voting. And they've used it since 1941, but we beat them. We started using it in 1917. We were the second city in the nation to adopt what the single transferable vote slash hair system. And I've given talks on this. I've advocated for this in the state legislature, with the Secretary of State's office, etc. Not very many people know that we use this proportional ranked voting method in Colorado, and the city website under City Council says the City of Boulder conducted ranked choice voting for the first time to elect its mayor in 2023, but we used

[35:11] even before the word ranked choice voting had been invented, we used the proportional form of ranked choice voting in 1917. And I'm very proud of Boulder for being the second city to adopt that. I was very pleased when I was doing research in the Carnegie Library to discover that, my home was a polling place, and I went and looked at the other two polling places that were listed. Ours was definitely in the best shape. Later, Claire did some research, and I was very pleased to find out that when our house was a polling place in 1917 for the, adoption of the city charter, which, called for proportional ranked voting, our house was owned by the city clerk.

[36:05] So, I mean, it was… turned out it was a renter who opened up his home for voters to come in, but it was owned by the city clerk. So. I want to say that I've written an article that's been published in the Fulcrum, a national online news magazine, Opinion Magazine, too, called What is RCV Anyway? So there are lots of different kinds of RCV, and the kind that was used back in 1917 is not the kind that's used right now to elect our mayor, so I'm on a little bit of an education crusade on this. And I brought some… Items. Here's a 1925 city charter. Where it talks about how wonderful the hair system is, the proportional ranked voting, in the preparatory synopsis. So, I'd encourage everybody to look at that. Then it talks about, you know, the mechanics of how it works.

[37:12] And I actually showed that to the mayor in my house, so he… so he's got a little heads-up of this, application. And then, ca- Some of you may remember Betty Bramhall, she was on the school board, and she told me that her good friend from college, Kathleen Barber, had written about proportional representation, so I actually owned two of Kathleen Barber's books. Proportional representation and election reform in Ohio. Ohio… Ashtabula, Ohio was the first city to adopt the single transferable vote hair system. And then here's another book called A Right to Representation. So, I hope that you approve our application. I'm… I'm happy to learn about all the architecture, too, and the pressed brick, and I know old brick is much more valuable than new brick.

[38:10] So I've heard. And I'm happy to take any questions if people have any. And I don't think Eric's gonna talk, so you can ask me questions for him if you want. I guess I have two other things I wanted to say. We were affected by Gregory Creek, and in the packet, there's a picture of us in 2013, and you can see part of the creek wall was taken up down by the creek, and then also we were affected by the silver maples. There is, right now, a flood mitigation plan to expand the creek. I'm a little worried about the house's foundation when they go to work on the…

[39:01] Creek, but they say that it'll be fine. And they also paid us for the loss of a silver maple, the very one that lost half of its volume in the windstorm, so I was kind of proud of the Silver Maple for going on its own terms and not waiting for the city to take it down. It had kind of reached the end of its lifespan anyway. Thanks, everybody. I just have one question. It probably doesn't relate to the House, but can you just give, like, a couple-line definition of that kind of voting per, like, different voting that's in… Yeah, I knew your eyes would sparkle, because I'm… Like, just give, like, you know, this is… Just, I'm wondering what kind of voting that is, and why it's different. Okay, so… You have to be electing multiple people, filling multiple seats.

[40:04] In Cambridge, Massachusetts, they still use this. They fill 9 seats for City Council, and… 6 seats for their school board, school committee. You… when we were there in 2017, they had 26 candidates running for City Council for the 9 seats, and they had a single page for City Council, and Lots of bubbles. 1 to 26, and you could fill in, you could rank any candidate number one, a different candidate number 2, so it's a ranked ballot, just like the City of Boulder ballot, except they let you rank a lot more than the city does. And then, what happens is, to win a seat in Cambridge, you need 1 tenth of the vote, plus

[41:00] just over 1 tenth of the vote, because if you get 1 tenth of… if there are 100 voters, and everybody gets 11… and you need 11 votes to win, only 9 people can be elected, that'd be 99 votes. So, it's just… The minimum over… just over 1 tenth to win. So, that means that if you have support from a tenth of the population. You can elect somebody. So, it doesn't have to be a majority, a plurality, a renter would get selected there. A Republican gets elected in progressive Cambridge. it… you get a wide variety of voices, so… and then what happens is if somebody… if somebody gets 22 votes. They only need 11. They take half of every vote, and they give it to the next number 2 on the ballot, so that you don't have wasted votes. So, it's a… It's a great, great way to get better representation.

[42:05] Thanks. And another thing about it is that it has nothing to do with parties. Whereas a lot of the world uses a party-list kind of system. which is easy to use. This is a little more complicated, because you might… You know, you have to take parts of a vote and spread them out to the second and third choices if you've got extra votes. Yeah. Thank you. Now, let's move to public comment. Virtual attendees, please raise your hand or press star 9 if you'd like to speak. Do we have anyone in person to speak, Amanda? Yes, we do. We'll start with, Tim Plass. I believe you signed up to speak to this item, correct? Okay.

[43:04] You swear? Do I have to say this? Will you swear to tell the truth? I will. And your name is? My name is Tim Plass. Thank you. And I am the. President of Historic Boulder, and I am so pleased to be here tonight to support the recommendation for landmarking on this house. We want to extend our gratitude from Historic Boulder to the homeowners, Celeste Landry and Eric Cornell, for coming forward to landmark their house. And it's truly a remarkable thing to hear the story, and I think that while clearly the landmarking status will protect the integrity of the house. I was really taken with, associated history. and the voting. And I'll say that I've known Celeste for quite a while, and many of our connections involve voting. And, And I think just from her comments today, you can see how passionate she is about the subject.

[44:01] So… I've known her through the Boulder County Democratic Party, the League of Women Voters and their work, advocating for ranked choice voting. She came to my house and knocked on my door a couple years ago, I think. get support last year, sorry, to get support for one of the things she was working on. And then I remember her lobbying me when I was on City Council, and Celeste was on the Library Commission about changes to the city charter, and it seems very appropriate now. And so, and so charter changes require a vote of, people in the City of Boulder. And that was to make the library function better. So anyway, the association of this house with elections and voting seems such a good fit with Celeste. I think it's just amazing. And even the proposed name, the Polls and Registration House, is so fitting as well. And I would say, just kind of more generally, that I think one of the underappreciated benefits of landmarking is how much you can learn about the history of your house.

[45:05] And its previous inhabitants. And I know that in this case, Celeste did a bunch of the research herself, and then Claire did some as well. And I'm also wondering if this is the first landmark in the city where a Nobel laureate has lived. I don't know. Maybe Claire can answer that, or… But anyway, so this is going to be our 222nd landmark, and we're very excited to see this move forward. And again, a big thank you to the homeowners for bringing this forward, to Eric Cornell and Celeste Landry. Thank you so much. Great, thank you, Tim. It looks like Celeste signed up to speak, but… I don't know that… I guess… What's that? That was for the applicant presentation. Yeah. I just mean that she signed a paper slip, so I didn't know if… If there was any additional comments, but I'm assuming not.

[46:03] Okay, if there's any virtual participants that would like to speak to this item, now is your opportunity. And we have one, and that's Lynn Siegel. Oops, sorry, let me restart our timer here. Lynn, and make sure that you state your full name and swear to tell the board the whole truth. And you will have 3 minutes. Yeah, Lynn Siegel. Yeah, clearly this beautiful house is landmarkable just on… on the physical… Loveliness of it, and… It's just friggin' uncanny. I didn't hear the whole narrative about this, because I'm at a water conference at CASE on the campus, but… It's just… surreal that this voting expert that that Celeste is.

[47:00] it is connected with the history of this house as having had the city clerk and voting stuff involved in its history. It's… it's just really fascinating, and I couldn't be more pleased to honor this house by recommending that you landmark it. I only wish that the landmarking could go down to the district to save the four bungalows by the library. And Celeste was on the Library Commission. Wow, I'm really just impressed. It's a beautiful place, and And Celeste and Eric just totally deserve this. And, you know, in the future, it's gonna get double landmarked for Eric living there. It's like…

[48:00] What else could there be with this? House. Like, it's neat. Thanks so much. Thank you. Great, thank you, Lynn, and I think that's it for our virtual participants. The applicant may now have an additional 3 minutes if they would like to make any additional comments on anything that was brought up during public comment. Would you like to respond to anything? We now are going to move to board discussion. I ask that everyone else please mute your computer or phone for the duration of the discussion. We'll estimate 20 minutes for the discussion. Abby? What? No. Can we go out. alphabetical by first name on the… no, I'm kidding. So, this is so, so thrilling, and I think that this just… Embraces so many. aspects of the preservation program. It's always been important to. recognition. what some people might think are Smaller homes where,

[49:03] moving on. might seem like an ordinary home where something extraordinary happened, and I think that, it's remarkable how intact this house is. I'm sorry about the loss of the silver maple, but I think that it's not just the charm of your house, but it's the story that you found. And, you know, Celeste, I don't know if you feel this way, but sometimes I think homes find its own owners, and this is, like, whether it's serendipity or whatever, but… but there… there couldn't be a better steward of this house than you and your family, and I think this is just such a joy for us to have before us, and to proceed with, landmarking it, I… I think that, Celeste, for your myriad contributions to the community, and even statewide, I think that you're giving one more gift back to Boulder by bringing this landmark to us tonight. So, thank you. I… I'll be supporting staff's recommendation.

[50:09] This one's a fun and easy one to talk about. It's the ideal situation when the owner comes to us. it's what… I think the spirit of the, of the program should be that people want to participate in it. It's not… you know, it's a type of a house which, in a lot of ways, epitomizes Boulder. It epitomizes a type that occurred multiple places, And… it was… yeah, it was not an exceptional house, but exceptional things were going on in it, and I think that kind of tells part of the story of what Boulder is. A not extremely exceptional place where

[51:03] exceptional things happen, and I think that's… This is a great add to the program. I'm very… pleased to… Be able to, support staff's recommendations on this one. And thank you to the owners for everything you've put into this. I think it is an exceptional house. I love this house, and it's as pure as it comes, architecturally, so I'm gonna take a little… umbrage with your… your comment about the exceptionality of the house. I do have a question. The… the garage is the… is it… Is it part of the… landmark, then? Will it become part of the landmark? It is. It's attached at the rear.

[52:05] Okay. I… I'm in support of the… the application. I am also in support of the application, and, find it just. beyond serendipitous that the house that, Celeste, who's known to be, you know, a huge advocate for… Ranked Choice Voting and other election reforms lives in now the polls and registration house, or soon to be. So it was truly meant to be, and I'm excited to be able to support. this application. So, I think that we, all in support. I think it… my colleagues say almost everything that needs to be said. The house is in great shape. You're doing a wonderful job with it. I'm excited to see that it's come to the Landmarks Board, and you're asking us to landmark it, and not the opposite.

[53:04] You know, this is… it truly is, you know, I mean, there's not much to say, and the fact that you're living in this house, and now it's going to be called the Polls and Registration House is really neat, and the story behind it. And, I got a little bit of education along the way, so that was great. And, you know, this is the… this is, I think Abby says this, you know, this is the easy part of the… the job, and, you know, not having to designate something without the owner's approval, is… it's just great when you bring it forth to us. So, and I'd like for… You know, it could be a good, To… for you as the homeowner, and, like, able to… You know, talk to other people to say what it is, like, you know, the value of being a historic landmark.

[54:01] You know, and, and… And not it being a negative thing. And, you know, I hope that other people can see what a positive thing it is to be the historic landmark, and, you know, not that it's just another hoop to jump through. So, when homeowners come, I think that it's really important to other homeowners to see that it is a positive thing, and it should be encouraged, and if we could get that voice out there a lot more, it would be very helpful. So, thank you. Do we have a motion? Yeah. Can I do? Abby would like to do it. Thank you. The Landmarks Board recommends to the City Council that it designate the property at 745 University Avenue as a local historic landmark to be known as the Polls and Registration House, finding that it meets the standards for individual landmark designation in sections 911.1 and 9…

[55:02] 11-2, Boulder Revised Code 1981, and adopt the staff memorandum dated February 4th, 2026, as the findings of the board. Thank you, Abby. Do we have a second? Thank you, John. John seconds the motion. Any additional discussion or amendments to the motion? There are none. We'll do a roll call vote. Chelsea? Aye. Michael? Aye. Abby? Aye. John? Aye. And I choose aye. Motion passes 5 to 1, unanimously. 5 to 5. Claire, 5 to 0. 5 to 5.0. It is unanimous, 5 to 0. Apologies. Claire, can you talk about the next steps in the process? Yes. will forward the application to City Council. For review, there's another public hearing within 100 days.

[56:04] So that would happen before May 6th? 15th? Is what I have in my notes? Yes. May 15th. City Council are the final decision makers, and after they approve the designation, we will work on making a plaque for you. So, thank you very much. We'll move on to the second public hearing. This is a public hearing in consideration of an application to demolish a building constructed In 1962 at 1585 30th Street, a non-landmark property older than 50 years, pursuant to Section 91123 of the Boulder Revised Code, 1981, And under the proceedings prescribed by Chapter 1 through 3, Quasi-Judicial Hearings, Boulder Revised Code 1981, owner, applicant, City of Boulder, represented by Leanna

[57:09] Everson Facilities Project Manager. The owner is the City of Boulder, represented by Leanna. Everson, I'll hand it over to Marcy. Did I get that? Yes. Nice job. All right, good evening for the second, public hearing. This evening. It's also a quasi-judicial hearing, so I'll recap the, process. So, all speaking to the item are sworn in. I'm Marci Gerwing, principal planner, and I affirm to tell the truth in this hearing. Board members will note any ex parte contacts, any, conversations you've had about this property, Fire Station 3, on 30th, any site visits or anything. I'll pause here for those.

[58:00] I was seeing a different address in… That is correct. We did not update this, slide, but the agenda is correct. Thanks. This is the fire station you haven't yet reviewed. On 30th and Arapaho. I'll pause for any ex parte contacts, hearing none. We'll go to the staff presentation, followed by board questions, and then the applicant, presentation, followed by board questions, and then the public hearing is open for public comment. Followed by board questions, and then after the last person speaks, that applicant has a chance to respond to anything that was said. And then the public hearing is closed, and the board discusses. A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass, and motions must state findings, conclusions, and a recommendation. And finally, a recording of the hearing, is available in this, Central Records.

[59:05] So the purpose for your review tonight, this is a non-designated demolition application, is to prevent the loss of buildings that may have historic or architectural significance, and provide the time necessary to initiate designation as an individual landmark, or consider alternatives for the building. The criteria for your review is found in 9-11-23F of the Boulder Revised Code, and that's that you will base your decision on the following criteria. The eligibility of the building for designation as an individual landmark. The relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area, the reasonable condition of the building, and the reasonable projected cost of restoration or repair. In considering the condition of the building and projected cost of restoration or repair, the board may not consider deterioration caused by unreasonable neglect.

[60:00] So the options in front of you this evening are to either approve the demolition request, and that approval would be good for one year until February 4th, 2027, Or, you may place a stay of demolition on the application in order to provide time to consider alternatives. The 180-day stay, which starts from the day the hearing fee was paid, not from the date of the hearing, so that would expire June 15th. And the last regularly scheduled Landmarks Board meeting within that stay period would be the June 3rd, meeting, which is If you're interested, 168 days into the stay. So the application process started actually, in May of last year, when an application to demolish the building was received. That application was referred to the Landmarks Board, finding there was probable cause to believe it was eligible for, landmark designation. But the application was withdrawn in order to allow time to discuss options and, come back to, the board when we were ready.

[61:06] So a new application was submitted on November 25th of 2025, and staff referred that application to the Full Landmarks Board on December 16th. The Landmarks Board hearing fee was paid the next day, and that takes us to this evening, February 4th, for the Landmarks Board hearing. This property is located on the southwest corner of 30th and Arapahoe. The triangular lot is adjacent to Scott Carpenter Park, and the building is oriented 45 degrees from the north-south alignment of the surrounding streets. The 29th Street Mall and other commercial areas are to the north, across Arapaho, and the University of Colorado properties are to the east, across 30th. The area surrounding the building is accessible as a public park and includes lawn and mature trees, and a baseball field to the south, is located to the south and west of the building.

[62:06] The building was designed by Thomas Nixon and Lincoln Harper Jones in 1964 as Fire Station Number 3. The building was surveyed as part of the 2000 Boulder Modern Architecture Survey, which determined eligibility. For National and State Register of Historic Places, and, found this was eligible for both of those levels based on its architectural significance. The one-story masonry building has a dominant front gable with wide overhanging eaves and exposed framing members. A central gable is divided into two symmetrical bays by projecting brick fins. Each of the two bays includes an oversized bay door and board paneling above. This central mass is flanked by two symmetrical flat-roof projections that emerge from underneath the eaves. They include a brick wall capped with a concrete sill, a line of inset windows above the

[63:01] We're just beneath the overheading eaves. The southwest elevation facing the interior of Scott Carmager Park includes a flat roof wing that has a cantilevered prow patio roof projected at the center. This elevation includes a low brick chimney at the west end with a concrete topper supported by four steel supports. There are full-height glazing and doors at the center of the prow, and groupings of verticals and horizontal windows. The area below the windows is filled with painted wood paneling, and the four sections of this elevation are divided by brick fins that shallowly project from the building. The northeast elevation facing the corner of Arapahoe and 30th has a similar flat roof wing with wide overhanging eaves, and the clear story band under the eaves includes a combination of awning windows and painted plywood paneling. The center of this elevation includes a single full-height window, and the brick that comprises the wall under the clear story is topped with a precast concrete trim that creates an additional horizontal band.

[64:05] The northwest elevation, which is the rear of the building facing the lawn area next to Arapaho, includes the continuation of the dominant front gable with wide overhanging eaves and exposed framing members. The central gable is flanked by the two-symmetrical flat roof projection, and the central gable is divided into two symmetrical bays by projecting brick fins. Mirroring that of the, opposite elevation. Each of the two bays include decorative board paneling in a Mondrian-style pattern. And the central and lower outside panels include, window openings. Moving next to, the assessment of historic integrity, which is the building's ability to convey its historical associations or attributes. A commonly accepted practice is that the building should retain physical features that allow it to convey its significance.

[65:00] The building is in its original location and retains the general original design, including the horizontal orientation, double-height central design, including the horizontal orientation. Oh, double-height central pavilion with shallow gabled roofs and overhanging eaves and flanking flat-roof wings. The building retains some of its original materials, including its red brick. The painted board and batten siding in some of the windows and doors have been replaced, including the iconic bay doors and clear story windows in the gable ends. The door and window pattern on the northwest elevation facing Arapaho was modified in 1985 to remove two existing overhead doors and replace with insulated walls and windows. The infill of these areas has changed the architect's original intent of transparency through the building, but was completed relatively sensitively to the design of the building with the general window pattern. retained. The building demonstrates exceptional workmanship in the execution of the masonry work with pattern detailing. The building's ability to convey a feeling of its time has not been diminished, and the setting of the building on a prominent quarter of a city park with mature trees has not changed.

[66:13] In general, the building has retained its ability to convey its association with earlier uses and architectural style. Next, we'll move to the staff analysis of the criteria that looks at the eligibility of the building for designation as an individual landmark. Including its historic, architectural, and environmental significance. The analysis also considers the relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area, and the reasonable condition of the building and projected cost of restoration or repair. The historic significance criteria considers the development, heritage, and cultural characteristics of the community. Boulder County Records records the date of construction as 1962. However, the Daily Camera article confirms that the groundbreaking ceremony was on October 27th, 1964, and the building was completed in July of 1965.

[67:12] This was the third fire station built during a period when the local modernist architectural movement flourished in Boulder. Boulder experienced a period of huge population growth after the Second World War, as returning service members moved to areas with employment and living opportunities. Additionally, scientific industry located to Boulder, including the National Bureau of Standards Central Radio Propagation Laboratory in 1954, Ball Brothers Research Corporation in 1957, and the National Center for Atmospheric Research in 1963. This led to Boulder's desire to be seen as a modern city. Architecture designed in the modernist style helped portray Boulder as progressive, forward-thinking, and futuristic, as recognized in the 2000 Historic Context Survey.

[68:00] Which determined the building eligible for listing on the National and State Register of Historic Places. The architectural significance criteria consider this distinguishing features of the architecture, the architect and builder. The building is a rare and exceptional example of Usonian style in commercial buildings in Boulder. Typical of Estonian architecture, the building achieves a strong connection between interior and exterior spaces. The location within a park setting and ability for the central pavilion of the building to be opened from each gable and exaggerated the integration of the building and setting. The low-pitched roof and dominant, wide, overhanging eaves are also characteristic of the Esonian style. The original trapezoid windows accentuated the bold geometrics, and the low brick wall that form an open, triangular outdoor patio to one side Play against the landscape of the severe geometric forms of the structure.

[69:01] The building was designed by the firm Nixon & Jones and constructed by the Broadway Construction Company. The 2000 Modernism Survey identifies Thomas Nixon as an acknowledged master of local modernist architecture. And the survey lists the most important architects in 66 of the Boulder's most significant buildings of that period. 5 of those were designed by Nixon, including this one. The building is stylistically similar to Fire Station Number 2, which is 2225 baseline, which was designed a decade prior by Hobart Wagner. Both buildings are examples of the Usonian style in Boulder, and the board approved the demolition of Fire Station Number 2 last July, finding that the building was not eligible for designation due to the extent of alterations. Moving to the environmental significance, the building is located prominently at the busy intersection of Arapahoe and 30th, and within a public park.

[70:03] It is set back slightly on the corner of the lot and surrounded by a heavily landscaped lot of mature trees and shrubs. The municipal baseball field, skate park, and public swimming pool are adjacent to the lot. And the building is visually prominent, providing an established and familiar feature. The location within the public park provides a setting appropriate for the building, which was the site of public events for many decades. Moving to the relationship of the neighborhood, the building is located at the southwest corner of Arapahoe and 30th, and the area was annexed into the city during the 1960s. The 20 acres to the southwest of the subject property was municipally owned open space since 1898 as Valverdan Park until it was renamed Scott Carpenter Park in 1962. This area is, was outside of city limits and was generally considered undesirable, so while other edges of Boulder were speculatively platted for residential uses, this area east of Boulder remained large lots.

[71:08] The Crossroads Mall, the precursor to the 29th Street Mall, started their development of commercial areas, which eventually covered the north side of Arapaho. From west of 28th Street to Foothills. This Usonian building at 1585 30th Street fits into the character of the park with its human scale, low mass, and surrounding lawn areas. Moving, to the condition of the building, the applicant and welcome to our colleagues and facilities, provided information primarily, or initially, about the, constraints to using this building as a fire station. The fire department has already vacated, this location into a new, fire station just up 30th Street. And so, the applicants are… will be here to speak more about the condition and the cost, but I wanted to cover some of the, main points. And so the,

[72:06] It's not suitable for use as a fire station in terms of the apparatus turnarounds, firefighter safety, and that… that original use is no longer, suitable for today's standards. Another key constraint is that it is located in the high-hazard flood zone, and so that, constrains the modifications that can happen, to the building. And so, The condition of the building, includes that the building envelope lacks sufficient thermal insulation, and the window designs limit natural light and ventilation. The interior of the building also does not have ADA-compliant restrooms, and no automated fire sprinkler system. As I mentioned, the property is located in the high-hazard conveyance and 100-year floodplain, and as such, the regulations in Section 933 through 936 of the Boulder Revised Code apply.

[73:10] And the, really, intent of the floodplain is to regulate certain areas of the city subject to flooding in order to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. And so, that is going to be a major consideration. In the discussions of if a stay is placed on the, application. I will let the applicant speak to, kind of, the cost that, they had gone through, but I will say that, the facilities colleagues have studied the fire station for about a decade before coming and really looking at, could this building be reused? And there's a real, kind of ethos of reuse and, kind of deconstruction if reuse isn't possible, and so this was really studied, could the fire department stay here at this location? But things like the apparatus bay, the sleeping quarters, the living and workspaces, and the site circulation were just too constrained and couldn't meet the needs of today.

[74:17] That being said, part of the reason that, The application was submitted last summer, and then paused, and then picked back up. in 2026 is that both, staff from P&DS and facilities in fleet see this as a real opportunity to say, the city, doesn't have a use for this building and doesn't want to maintain A building it doesn't have a use for. However, this building is remarkable, in terms of its Modernist design, its site and setting. Let's use the stay of demolition process to its potential, and really, partner together to find, is there any potential alternative to demolition?

[75:05] Could it be adaptively reused? There's some work to be done in terms of understanding the floodplain constraints, because if a property is landmarked, there's some flexibility, and the substantial improvements, which… would otherwise limit, improvements to $80 a square foot, which isn't going to get you very far. If a property is, landmarked, then that doesn't apply. However, the use would still need to be something that is suitable for the high hazard and couldn't be a critical facility, like a fire station, a daycare, senior housing, etc. So, we're approaching this as a collaborative effort to see what possibilities are out there, and so with that. Staff recommends that the Landmarks Board issue a stay of demolition for the building, located at 1585 30th Street.

[76:02] For a period not to exceed 180 days, in order to explore alternatives to demolition. And… Should the board choose to issue the demolition approval, staff will require that prior to any demolition, that the building be archivally documented, kind of as a… Last record of this, eligible building. So that concludes my staff presentation, and I'm happy to answer any questions you may have. I have a question about… could you go back to the slide that shows the high hazard floodplain? What is the effective elevation of that flood above the site? Do you know that? I do not know that. And is… is the high hazard… is that the zone that's defined where Fema and the Army Corps and so on want everything out of that zone.

[77:03] I'm not gonna pretend to be a flood engineer. Okay. Those are… but those are my questions. Is it… is it to be vacated completely? regulations are intended to protect health, life, safety, and the high-hazard floodplain is kind of the most, restrictive, and then even within the conveyance… zone, you know, parking is discouraged because those cars can wash down… downstream. So, you can go from the 500 to the 100 to the high hazard. They all have kind of different intensities of… of what you can and can't do. Okay. I also have a floodplain. question. It's a… it's a little bit of a tangent, but, Am I right in that the renovations to the Scott Carpenter Park pool complex just recently completed, are… look like they straddle that high hazard floodplain?

[78:03] That is something I would need to follow up on, because we… I didn't include the building footprint. Also a city-owned. Property, correct. Yeah. Yes. I will say redevelopment in the high hazard is possible, it's just the possibilities are reduced, but there's still some possibility. Any other questions? then I would welcome our colleague, Michelle Crane, from Facilities and Fleet. Go on? Good evening, hi, I'm Michelle Crane, I'm our Deputy. director in Facilities and Fleet, and I want to share a little bit more context about this project and the partnership. that Marci talked about, to just give you, again, some more context in what we're thinking about with… So, you have to switch.

[79:02] to tell the truth. Sorry. Oh, that's okay. Thank you. I just swear to tell. the truth. Thank you. And I may be able to help with a little color on the floodplain as we get in there as well. Do you have our… okay, great. So, I just… I want to provide just a little bit of background and context. Our department is tasked with really taking care of the city's buildings, and so that's roughly 75 buildings across all of our departments. And so in 2021, we actually brought forward a facilities plan to help better organize a lens with which we look at all of our city properties. And so this was sort of some of the key pillars that we look through, all of these properties with. We look through our environmental sustainability. Our social responsibility and our financial stewardship towards all these buildings. Under our environmental sustainability, Flood is actually a big consideration. It's one of our key performance indicators. As we think about city services and delivering city services, their location in the floodplain is a key consideration.

[80:06] The fire station, clearly, is a first response building. Coming out of the high hazard was a big motivator, was the motivator, really, to move the fire station originally. But we did assess this building and its potential for reuse for other city services. But again, delivering city services out of a building that is located in the high hazard floodplain is really in conflict with how we would want to be able to serve the city in time of crisis, and then be able to operate. And so. it, it is a challenge, for us to overcome. That said, within that same pillar, we're huge stewards or advocates of adaptive reuse. And so, we would like to try to find some sort of way of considering that as we look at this building and think about its next life. Likewise, under our social responsibility, we value this process, we value the community.

[81:06] and its value, this building's value, and what we could do. And so, we do want to use this process to understand if there is value, and other ways that we could use this building. Within the restrictions of that floodplain. And last, we do have to consider our financial stewardship, so with 75 buildings, many of which are… have critical needs, and where we have to invest to continue operations today in those buildings. it is very hard for us to consider investment in this building where we can't really identify a use. So these are the things that we're looking through as we're trying to assess this building for use, as a city building. And it really is with that that we've come to, we can't support investment of city dollars. in a future use of this building, we can't identify that, but we are very interested in exploring if the private sector could do something with this building, and going through that options analysis to present to others, and try to make that opportunity available.

[82:05] June, next slide. So I just have two slides, but this is just, I think as we think about this process, There are some major considerations we would want to undertake in exploring, really what it would take to reuse this building, given some of the constraints, and again, as Marcy mentioned. That we've looked at, the regulatory conditions are a key threshold, so just what can we do in the high hazard floodplain? How does, you know, that affect other uses? What makes sense in terms of life safety and preservation? There are land use constraints, zoning, things that we want to work through and make sure that if we made an opportunity available, that we could actually indeed, kind of define those boundaries. This is… a city parcel that doesn't actually have clear property lines right now, so we would have to work through that zoning process. And there are triggers for substantial improvement. And again. The landmarking process may relieve some of those, but still, there are a number of things that do need to be invested in this building, and so we want to navigate those and understand them thoroughly before we present an opportunity to the public to possibly make use of those.

[83:13] Same thing with some of the legal considerations. We do know it may include some disposal of parks lands to actually create a reasonable property here. Right now, that triangle actually Crosses the parking lot, and so thinking about how others might make use of this building, we would want to make sure we could explore that and redefine that property boundary, so we'd have to kind of cross those thresholds. As well as just understanding the financial implication. City's not really looking to get revenue so much from this building, as much as just not trying to further investment in this building, and so we want to take that into consideration as we understand others would have to make investments in this building. So that would be really the first part of our analysis, is to understand all those considerations

[84:01] Before we make this opportunity available. But, assuming that these are feasible and there is a path forward, we would then want to Essentially, establish a selection criteria and some way of presenting an opportunity to the community to make reuse of this building. And that's, yeah, that's about… what our process would entail, and as Marci said, we're fully in on trying to find another use for this building, and again, trying to cross those thresholds, but… Happy to answer any questions. on that. Can you answer the question about the… the pool construction, and… Yeah, I can answer that. I would want to confer with my colleagues, but I think if we went back to the map, so… As Marci stated, there are limited improvements you can make in the high-hazard floodplain. It really is intended to make sure we are, preserving life and not… and creating a threat.

[85:06] I believe the building itself is out of the high-hazard floodplain, so the improvements that were made to the actual pool and bathhouse, I believe that that is out of the floodplain, and so that allowed for investment in that building. I think the pools start to fall into a little different consideration, seeing as they're outdoor. They're not enclosed structures. And so, I do know it was a big consideration, but I… so… that's the color I can add. I would lean on other colleagues for more clarity to correct anything there, but… So, currently. because the building can no longer be used as a fire station, it essentially is completely without use at this point in time. It is. It's completely vacant right now, and it is without use. Okay, thank you.

[86:00] I'm curious, based on all of the work that you all have done looking at this building, and you went through an application process previously, What types of uses Do you think this building could have, based on what you and your team have. Disgust. About what's possible. Well, I think… So considering other uses outside of city uses, that's something we want to explore. So there are still kind of constraints, like Marcie, I think, mentioned, like, we can't have daycare facilities, there's a number of restrictions. That are placed on the property. So I think we want to more thoroughly understand what kind of other uses. We know that, for instance, you know, we don't want to provide city services from there, but that's part of our exploration, is to understand what could be a potential, on this lot. So I don't really have a good, clear… that would be part of our exploration, is what outside uses could be there. So to, again, make sure if we market this property, then, to be clear, you know, what is excluded from eligibility, if you will.

[87:07] I'm curious, what's the process to determine what's possible? Well, we have a couple. We work with our colleagues quite closely, and so we would do that. We would go through, kind of, a regulatory review. We use the pre-app process that the city has to actually surface these questions formally with our P&DS department, and then they do help. Answer a number of those threshold questions, including Digging up, kind of, the legal considerations, so we do have to understand how the city property was originally purchased, if it was ever purchased with restricted funds. You know, again, what are the legal boundaries right now? What kind of, Zoning restrictions are on the site, and so we use our own city process to surface those things in a formal way, and then we get a formal staff report from those, and then we also just work internally, you know, to discuss those opportunities.

[88:02] Okay, thank you. Yep. Just the… the first question I asked, do you have the engineering data? What the flood would be above the finish floor in that building? I don't offhand know what that is, but, you know, we certainly could get that, but yeah, I'm not sure what that elevation is. Thank you. Now let's move to public comment. Do we have anyone signed up in person? Yes, we do. have a few. We'll start with Tim Plass, I'm sorry, Platt. Followed by Patrick O'Rourke. Yeah, okay. I do, thank you. Well, I know, but I didn't… he had already been sworn in, so that's what I was questioning.

[89:05] to be sworn in twice. I'll tell the extra truth. Hi, Tim Plass again, and I'm here to support the stay of demolition for the fire station. But before I talk about, the old fire station number 3, I just would like to call out, what a fine building I think the new fire station number 3 is, and I think it's a landmark of the future. So, well done on that. With regard to the old fire station number 3, it's a wonderful mid-century modern building that deserves to be saved. And I'd also like to highlight, the city's commitment through the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan To be a leader in historic preservation, and we've already lost the old fire station number 2, let's not lose this one as well. So about a month ago, Leonard Siegel, the Executive Director of Historic Boulder, and I had a Zoom call regarding Fire Station Number 3, with Michelle Crane, who spoke here tonight, and, Leanna Evenson from the Facilities Department.

[90:04] And we were encouraged to hear that they would consider alternatives to demolition, including transferring the fire station to private ownership, and we've heard that again tonight, so we're… we're very optimistic about that. And of course, Boulder has a history of adaptively reusing fire stations. Just think of the pottery Lab, up on Aurora, which is a great old building. clearly, there are challenges with Fire Station Number 3. Flood plain issues. Asbestos, use limitations, access, but hopefully they'll be solvable. And I know when I was a member of City Council, I had a chance to tour the fire station when it was still being used as a fire station, and it clearly had real, limitations and challenges, so… so I get that. But I would like to say that within Historic Boulder, we've had initial discussions About this project, and it might be something that we would like to take on. Of course, there's significant investigation and due diligence that needs to occur.

[91:07] As Abby knows, Historic Boulder's tagline is preservation and action. And we just completed a successful project restoring the facade of the Boulder theater. And before that, we've had projects and ownership that have included the Highland School, the Hannah Barker House, and the Arnett Fullen House. Our strong relationship with the State Historical Fund would put us in a good position for receiving historic preservation grant funding as well. And we've already heard of interest Historic Boulder has from Create Boulder in the site, as well, so I think there could be great opportunities for community benefit here. And I don't know what that… those uses would be. So I would just say, in closing, that I can tell you that there is at least one group, and that's Historic Boulder, that's interested in looking for alternatives to demolition, which was what the time of the stay would allow for. So again, I ask you to please support the stay. Thank you.

[92:08] Great, thanks. Oh, next step is Patrick O'Rourke, followed by Leonard Siegel. I swear to tell the truth. what I think I just heard… Staff recommend is that This is a significant building. It's… it met all the requirements, the seven standards that you need to look at In order to make a decision. And it's pretty clear that the decision should be this… this stay should be. put in place. What's unique today is that we also heard the City Facilities Manager talk about the willingness to look at this building as an adaptive reuse. I think that's fabulous. You know, we've had situations where a city has not been supportive of historic preservation. In this particular case, I think I heard it loud and clear. that that's the case. Regarding the floodplain.

[93:03] There's probably $50 million worth of buildings immediately to the west of this. that are owned privately, that if you ask those owners, are they going to tear down their building because it's in a floodplain? The answer is absolutely not. Civic Plan, the future civic Plan, the building next to Pomoca in that area, those buildings are… they're planning to build in the… floodplain. So, I always take that into consideration when somebody uses an excuse of, it's in the floodplain, and it's legitimate that they can't invest in it, but other people can, and they can make it work. I walked around the building last week. I was surprised how good condition it was. The brick? Very, very little failure on the brick. It's in good condition. The roof is in good condition. From the back of the building, I can see they have already 400 amp electrical service, and whether the bathrooms are ADA, that's not a big problem to fix. It's just moving some walls around.

[94:04] Finally. Tim talked about it. We already had one fire station that's used as the pottery lab. What an opportunity something like that could be. You know, the other night, we were talking at Historic Boulder about Things that could go there, and… it went off in tangents, because there's probably 20 or 30 uses that could be done at that location. The use for the firehouse? Of course, it's, it's, it's worn, it's… its state, but it's a good building, it's in good condition. When they had the floods the last time, I don't think there was any water that ran down the street on Arapaho, so I'm a little concerned that that's even a concern. And, thank you. That's it. Thank you, Patrick. Next is Leonard Siegel.

[95:00] I swear to tell the truth. Thank you for, entertaining this, conversation about, demolition here. I actually have a question about the process, in a sense. If the city wants to have this building be adaptively reused, why go to the trouble to go through a demolition process? Why not go ahead and put it forward as, To request interest from potential buyers of the property. But I think the benefit of it is that it adds some cachet to the character and credentials of this property, because you will have a chance to weigh in on its historical and architectural importance. But… so I'm a little conflicted about this, and I… I hope it doesn't… impact how you determine its eligibility for a stay of demolition, since that's what's being put forward. But it's a little curious.

[96:04] I also would say that, I have an investment, in a sense, in this building, because I was one of the co-authors of that report back in 2000 on the survey of the best modernist buildings in Boulder, and Tom Nixon and Lincoln Jones designed several really important buildings in town, including the First Christian Church and the Mount Cavalry Church, which are both landmarks in the community. And very much influenced by the work of Frank Lloyd Wright and his Esonian era, or aspect of his career. So it's very Frank Lloyd Wrightian. It also has aspects of the Eichler houses from California. In its, lower sloping roofs and the overhangs, so it has some really interesting architectural, attributions to it. And, it certainly begs the question of elevating, again, that period of mid-century modernism as the innovation era that brought Boulder to its, kind of.

[97:12] point of being a progressive community. So, I… I just… I'm not sure what I'm encouraging you to do other than, do your job and weigh in on this, but thank you for considering this. Thank you. That is everyone that signed up here in person, so if anyone's online with us still, if you'd like to speak to this item, now's your opportunity to raise your hand. And, we've got Lynn Siegel. Lynn, you can go ahead and, you've got 3 minutes. Well… I'm not… I guess I'd almost… if I were on a board of people who had to be unbiased.

[98:05] and deliver, you know, an opinion on something, I guess you'd have to take me out, because For one, I'm not… Really a big fan of mid-century modern. And two, I… I… I don't have a peculiar attachment to this building. I see the value in what… Len and some of the others said, I'm not going to be real erudite about it, but… I don't know, with the… I just… I'm just not attached to this building a whole lot. And… I… I mean, Eichlers. I lived in Palo Alto, and I didn't like Eichlers.

[99:03] So, you know, it's just kind of a personal preference. But… Shouldn't really be part of the discussion. Because it's not about a personal thing, it's about… the integral value of something, so I can't be very objective. Unfortunately. But, I suppose you gotta do what you gotta do. Thanks for listening. Great, thanks, Lynn. I think that's it for our online participation, so that's it for all public participation. Oh, also, it was… it is a Nixon, and… That, you know… has some integral value, too. The one… the pointy church, and…

[100:03] His firm had a lot of Reputable people, art, you know, architects going through it, and there's that value also. That I wanted to throw in there. Thanks. Okay, thank you, Lynn. Now, the applicant may have an additional 3 minutes if they would like to comment on anything that was said during public comment. Would you like to respond? Okay, we're now going to move to board… to the board discussion. I ask that everyone else mute your computer or phone for the duration of the discussion. We'll estimate 30 minutes for the discussion. Anyone want to start it off? I can start it off.

[101:00] I think this is… this is an interesting one. And I think that… the issue… Of whether it has historic value Is, at least to me, fairly apparent. And that I think that the staff's recommendation for the stay of demolition is the appropriate response at this time. That is… Kind of amplified by the fact that the, the… petitioner is very amenable to this process, and I think to address the issue of our that Lynn brought up several times tonight, the issue of the inverted process The reason this… this process is happening this way, it is the one opportunity for there to be

[102:02] Broader engagement around a project where we can Bring our resources to bear. on the discussion Normally, we're… we're presented with a problem which we have to solve in terms of what we see In that one instance that night. And in the case of a stay of demolition, there's an extended process that Is started, which can be very useful in yielding an outcome. that… In some way, preserves the historic resource, and… Helps bring… some kind of higher community good out of the whole process. So, Yes, I support the, stay.

[103:04] So I want to thank everyone tonight speaking to this, including Leanne, and as someone who lives in Boulder Junction, I love fire station number 3, the new one, and it just… I just smile every time I go by it. There's something, that just really, is cool about it, and I appreciate that. I think I also want to thank Historic Boulder for really turning out tonight and speaking up multiple times. I think that we sometimes forget that when Historic Boulder or the president or the executive director speaks, they're really speaking for more than just themselves. It really reflects a much larger membership of a wide range of community members who care about these things. And I think that, with the applicant's willingness to explore creative alternatives to demolition, we could potentially be starting on a path of a win-win, and I just have to say that with Historic Boulder's track record, and now that they're done with the Boulder theater in plenty of time for Sundance.

[104:08] festival, you know, I know they really thrive when they're involved with projects, and I really think you might not be able to ask for a better partner, not only in exploring potential opportunities. but just however they could get involved, at any phase, at any way, shape, or form, I would definitely take them up on that offer. But I will be supporting, staff's recommendation, because this does meet the criteria. I know, John, you talked about the historic aspects, which it definitely has, but what I really see is the architecture. And even with the few modifications. the architecture as originally designed, it still really sings, and I think that for many of us, it is kind of on that prominent corner that many people travel, kind of already its own little identifying landmark. So, I will be supporting staff's recommendation.

[105:06] I have a few questions, just to, like, maybe discuss, like, the reason to land… like, we talk about landmarking and building, and what potential it has to… you know, somebody who is going to renovate it, or something like that. So, when… if… that… the… Landmarking of a building, a historic landmark, and we go for state funds. Does that… does those funds, can they be used for getting it, for the floodway? Are you talking about state tax credits? Yes. Yes, so I know that the, The legislation for both the commercial and residential, speaks directly to either elevating a building in the floodplain or, doing flood-related work, so those costs are eligible for, historic preservation tax credits if a building is designated. Okay. Not the residential ones, obviously, unless it's a residence, but the commercial ones. Okay.

[106:11] So, like, you know, we talk about, you know, what it is to have a landmark on the site, so if that would be potential… a positive thing to help with the cost of elevating that. And then, I don't know what the entanglement with a city-owned building, of course. tax credits of that, but, you know, if you brought it out of the floodway, are they then allowed to, develop it? So… And I don't know if there's really an answer, if that's more of, like, a discussion when we continue on with this stay, if that is what is approved, so… clarifying, that would be kind of the use of the stay, is to look at alternatives, including, funding, whether that's state tax credits or grant funding, because grant fundings are usually, out of

[107:00] bounds for individual property owners, but if there is a public good or public benefit, like the Boulder Theater received a State Historic Fund grant, as did the Hannah Barker House, because Historic Boulder was able to demonstrate a public, benefit. to the project, that would be part of the discussion during the stay. I don't… I don't foresee an alternative where this corner of land is out of the floodplain. It's more how do you develop safely within the floodplain. Unless you're talking about elevating this building or moving it, That's more going to be the conversation of how do you safely redevelop Within the floodplain regulations, not how do you get it out of the… Unless it's relocation off-site. Yeah, I mean, I think that, like, John was trying to make a point of, like, how far do you have to raise the floor level to get it out. Like, that's where he wanted to know the elevation, so… Well, I mean.

[108:05] There are other… there are some earthwork types of things that could be done on that site, looking at that floodplain map. that would… It wouldn't negate the flood, but it would diminish it in a way that could extend the The, safety of the building, or at least the utility of the building. And they would… but that's why the elevation issue was… what I was getting at. Yeah, so, I mean… I think it's probably a matter of 5 or 6 feet, that's why. Yeah, so I was just asking if the state tax credits… for commercial building could be used for that. Right. So, that was more or less just the quick question, but, and whether we, you know, public comment was whether we like this type of architecture or not. I don't think that's… I think that it's… I think it meets the requirement of, landmarking, and so I would propose not to decrease the stay and move forward with staff recommendation.

[109:16] What? Yeah, I think this is an easy one. We have a staff recommendation that aligns with what the applicant is wanting, and I think this is a great time for everyone, and all the stakeholders to explore what's possible. I love the idea of this building being able to, you know, be reimagined and have, like, creative spaces for people, and maybe even, you know, I know in Boulder there's often a very big lack of just community space in general, just to, you know, for nonprofits or other types of organizations to hold events or things like that, so it's not…

[110:00] having a ton of ongoing use. It's not critical uses that are required to, to be ongoing through types of, you know, natural disasters, things like that. So I love the idea of the exploration, and I'm excited to see what comes out of it. So I'm glad you mentioned the community aspect of the building, but if you look at the entire site, and I love the aerial photographs, you had three sort of in alignment, you know, where the 19… from the mid-60s, there's… there's a ballpark, there's a fire station, there's, some sort of pool complex on this site, and I think that's… that's really critical to, sort of, the… there's… do you have a… there's a slide that has three…

[111:00] In a row, early, maybe, part of the presentation. I mean, I can make my point without the slide, but, it even looks like it… in whatever that earliest photograph was, the black and white, that there… that there's, like, potentially a swimming hole with a diving board. on that site, I don't… I don't know if that… it's that, or a water treatment. cool. It's hard to say. I think you keep going earlier. It's, like, early part of the presentation. So, the point being that, it's… it's sort of really too bad that we're not talking about how the… how it can remain holistically a municipal site, right? Representing the community in all these different kind of ways and facets. I… I guess I'm… I've been thinking all along, If everybody's… As enamored with

[112:02] kind of the architecture of this building, and it's just the… the failings of the… of the city coffers to be able to really kind of take care of it and… and adaptively reuse it within… the… the ownership of the city, what… is it possible that we can just outright… outright reject the… the demolition permit at this point, and… and… as a motion? Or… why go through the motion… the… the antics of… of a stay if… Everybody in this room is talking about how to save it. Why put it in any danger at all? of demolition. Well, I don't think we could do that without designation. asking that question. Yeah, I mean… through the process. Yeah. I also think that I'm really excited to hear what this exploration time results in. And also, the result may be that

[113:02] there's no… like, based on all of the legal frameworks and all of the constraints, the result of the process may be that there is no good use for this building. That doesn't require resources that somebody doesn't have. And at that point. the city is then liable for this building, and is required to keep it with no use. So I think that it's important that we know what the outcome of this process is before we make any determination of what's to come of this building. Do we have a motion? I'll make it. If the language appears. Magical.

[114:00] Marcy, do you have the motion language? Oh, okay. Sentimental. Wild goo chase for the aerial. Sorry about that. Okay. Alright. Per staff's recommendation. I am moving that the Landmarks Board issue a stay of demolition for the building located at 1585 30th Street for a period not to exceed 180 days. From the day the application was accepted by the city manager in order to explore alternatives to demolishing the building. I second that. Thank you, Abby. Thank you, John. Let's do a roll call vote. John? Aye. Abby? Aye. I say aye. Michael? Aye.

[115:07] Chelsea? Aye. The motion pass… passes 5-0. Marci, can you please go over the next steps in the process? I think I can? Well, I'll tell you about the… oh, no, I'll tell you about them. So, the stay will go until June 15th, and so, as Michelle mentioned, there's a bit more kind of investigation that, that the city would like to do. We started the conversation with different disciplines, but starting to, now that… It's been confirmed that the Landmarks Board finds this building to be eligible, and it's worth the time during the stay, to do some investigative work. And then… that means it might be 3 or 4 weeks, maybe a little bit longer than a typical stay where we try and get around a table with Landmarks board members and

[116:08] community members and the applicant, to discuss alternatives, we'd like to be a little more prepared. So, this is the point where we would ask for two volunteers of the board to, represent the board during the stay. You could have more than two. Abby's time is slowly diminishing, but you're still welcome to be… on the board. Do I have two volunteers? John? And Michael, great, thank you. And we'll publicly notice those, so if others are interested, you're welcome. And then we'll give updates about this application at each of the regular board meetings, and, we'll see. As… has been said, what's possible? This is… this is one where I think it would be interesting to bring the Arts Commission in on it.

[117:00] Because it occurs to me that there could be some kind of art-cultural reuse of this building. And, I'm just throwing that out there. Thank you. Okay. And Michelle, I'm sorry for calling you by the wrong name. My apologies. Isn't it Liana? Do you have it? Let's move on to manners. Back to you, Marcy. And I am going to pass it… oh, no, first I'm going to announce… And congratulate Mariah, who joined us last, June as the Historic Preservation Trainee, and has now been hired permanently and full-time as the Historic Preservation Program Coordinator. So,

[118:08] I did not memorize Mariah's biography, but I know that she, went to school at Drury University as well as New York University for a degree in historical and sustainable architecture. And worked for the City of Cripple Creek before joining us. And so, in the first I'd say week of her trainee position, I think she just, we knew right away that she was a real keeper. So, when the opportunity, presented itself, we're just so grateful that she wanted to join our team full-time. So, you will see her, she'll be the board secretary for the Landmarks Board, so onboarding, the new member, helping with these meetings, lots of emails about scheduling and DRC rotations. So, welcome, Mariah.

[119:03] Yeah. let's see, the Landmarks Board, received 3 applications, 3 applicants for the Landmarks Board, position, And those appointments, the interviews were earlier, this week, and the appointments will be made by Council on March 5th, and so their first meeting will be April, which means Abby's last meeting is the March meeting, and so, We'll reach out and maybe get some ideas for how to do the impossible, and, send Abby off in style. The Saving Places Conference is… next week, in Denver on Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, there's some virtual, options as well, so just, for those who are registered, look forward to seeing you there. And, so the other matters.

[120:03] items tonight. We're going to turn it over to Claire for another history, presentation, and then pass it back and close out the evening with a year-end review for 2025. Marci, for the saving places, do we have to sign up for each, Do we… because we have decided to go, do we have to sign up for the classes we want to watch? Michael is saying… is nodding his head yes. I have not, and I usually just sneak in. But I think you're supposed to. You're, you're, encouraged to, I think. Consumerable. And we can send you. your confirmation links that will. allow you to log in to sign up, if you would like. They also have a real cool app I downloaded that, I mean, just… Walks you through everything. Mariah, what… You sent a link so that we can use our confirmation to sign up? I can send it, yes. She can. Okay.

[121:07] Yeah, please do, because I got kicked out yesterday trying to get… And they have this really cool app. this from CPI, I think. Did you? Did anybody else need a short break before I start? Couple of minutes. Yeah. Quick break, back in… 5 minutes? Yeah, at 8, 10. Oh, are we… have we got a break?

[123:20] Fantastic. For sure. Just like that. Closest to it.

[124:04] Beautiful. Pardon me. Not just look. It's supposed to be. That's not like that. results. interior. I know. I forgot that.

[125:00] Yes. And that's what… Okay. Yay! It's this cycle. Legion. That's great. I gotta quit watching the news? That's a… that's an interesting. Interesting one, what Claire did. Because I used to… to Miami University for 2 years, and that was about the ground rail at City Austin. Ohio, not University High. Yeah, it was on… Yeah, on the Erie Canal. Oh, was it? Well, no, it's the Erie Canal. float was down the hill from Oxford in Indiana. They're. There used to be a woman who worked at Historic Boulder for,

[126:01] probably 6 or 7 years, part-time, and she was originally from Jackson, Mississippi, but her parents bought a house in the Berkshires, and it was actually on an underground river, and you could still see where some of the slaves would hide upstairs. But it's cold. Because the trees on the property, they make buttons for the soldiers. So, sage or something like that. Yeah, I don't… That's the funny thing, is I want to find out what the tree was, the trees. That they used. But, you know, it obviously was a story code. Yeah, there was… in… in Oxford, there was… it was an active part of the underground version, because Miami was there in 1806. Her brother went to Ole Miss, so, you know, but… Well, that's Oxford, Mississippi. Yeah, oh, yeah. And she… but just some of the things about it is just, you know…

[127:01] Yeah. When I grew up and I had to do a presentation on it. It was always either Amelia Earhart or Harriet Tubman, because, you know, those two… Alright, we're gonna, go ahead and get started with, this presentation on, following the Underground Railroad to Boulder by Claire Brandt. Yes. This sensitive. Alright. Oh, look at the font. Over there. Yeah. Alright, we ready? Yes. Okay. John, turn off your mic. Oh. Thank you. Okay, so today, my story is about the power of place to honor, acknowledge, and memorialize people in our history. Places have a tremendous amount of power to connect history with real lives that were lived there.

[128:00] This series is about telling a more complete history of Boulder, but also about ensuring we protect the four walls of a building, as well as the stories of the people who lived, labored, achieved, accomplished, and maybe also suffered within them. This may be a familiar image to you. It's one of the few pictures of members of Boulder's black community in a relatively candid setting. It's the flood of 1894, and everyone is posing for the picture on the corner of 22nd and Goss Streets. The house in the background is 2202 Goss Street, the home of Oscar and Mary White. About 8 African American families lived in the area at the time of the flood, in addition to many other working-class families. I was curious, who are the people pictured here, and why did they pose for this picture on maybe the worst day of the worst week of a bad year?

[129:01] I started my research with Oscar White. I believe this is him. Then I noticed that this woman bears a striking resemblance to Oscar's sister, Frances. And this woman could very well be Oscar's niece, Jenny. If these are indeed members of the extended white family. This image tells a compelling story of one day in their lives. But one day and one image doesn't tell the full story, and what I uncovered about Oscar and his family is a story that needs to be told and remembered. Oscar's story can be traced back to his grandmother, Millie. Benjamin Stevens, who was white, enslaved Milley. Stevens moved his family and his enslaved workforce to Kentucky from Virginia in 1802. They settled here, in Rabbit Hash, Kentucky, next to the Ohio River.

[130:03] Stevens sexually assaulted and impregnated Millie, likely as a way to increase his enslaved workforce. In the 1810 federal census, Stevens listed two enslaved people. By the 1820 census, he listed 6 enslaved people, including Millie and her young child, Janie. Janie grew up on the Stevens land near Rabbit Hash. When she was about 17, Janie gave birth to the first of the five children she had with her partner, Felix. Felix was also enslaved, and the couple were probably never legally married, since they were not considered to have personhood. Regardless, they considered themselves husband and wife. Their fourth child, Oscar, was born in 1841. In 1844, when Oscar's father Felix was about 26 years old, and Oscar was a toddler, Felix was sold to slave trader George Washington Brasher.

[131:10] Brash's business was well known to involve selling slaves downriver to Louisiana, where they experienced the worst conditions of the plantations of the Deep South. Felix escaped. He ran away. He traveled nearly 250 miles north to Michigan, where he found Laura Smith Haviland, an abolitionist. He was admitted to her Raisin Institute, a racially integrated school, and stayed there for 3 years, saving money and working with Laura on a plan to free his family. Although Felix had adopted the name John White to try to evade capture, slave hunters found him. Fortunately for Felix, Laura's network helped him escape again, this time to Canada. Brasher threatened Laura physically. When that didn't work, he promised to financially ruin her and the school.

[132:04] She was scared by the experience and wrote the story in her autobiography. However, from her writing, Laura seemed more worried about what would happen to Felix's family. She sought help from Joseph and Mary Eddington, who were conductors for the Underground Railroad. Joseph and Mary lived in Rising Sun, Indiana, across the river from Rabbit Hash, and were free blacks. Laura made a bold decision to disguise herself as Mary's aunt, who was as fair-skinned as Laura and had blue eyes. She risked her life to visit Oscar's mother, Janie, to give her the news of her husband's freedom. With help from local friends and the Underground Railroad operatives, they planned an escape for Janie and her five children. Laura Haviland wrote this about the rescue attempt. They secreted themselves during the day in the woods and made a raft upon which they were about to cross a creek to reach the team on the opposite side.

[133:07] Suddenly, six armed men pounced upon them and captured the family. To save John Felix from the hazardous attempt to defend his family, his friend held him back in the thicket, knowing the effort must fail. As he was not allowed to move, he sank back in despair in the arms of his friend. He had risked his own life and liberty in his attempt to rescue them. Following the failed escape, Benjamin Stevens sold his daughter, Janie, and his grandchildren, including 8-year-old Oscar. Although Laura Haviland wrote that Benjamin Stevens insisted they be kept together, he sold them to a slave trader that was well known for selling enslaved people to plantation owners. This advertisement is not for the family, but a similar one would likely have been posted. Slave traders and owners viewed the men, women, and children listed as inventory.

[134:04] And they were traded no differently than a piece of farming equipment, livestock, or commodity crops. Oscar's two older sisters, Cicely and Lucy Ann, were sold to a cotton plantation owner in Washington, Mississippi. In 1850, this plantation's workforce included about 350 enslaved men, women, and children. Oscar's older brother, George, was sold to a slaveholder in Memphis, Tennessee. We don't know what happened for the next dozen years, but near the start of the Civil War, George enlisted in the 79th USC Infantry in Kansas. Oscar and his younger sister, Emily Francis, were purchased by Marcus Broadwell and taken to Cynthiana, Kentucky. Broadwell sold Oscar, and he was separated from his sister.

[135:01] Oscar's mother, Janie, was taken to Lexington, Kentucky. We don't currently know how she emancipated, but she married the Reverend Dudley Carter during the war years, and they moved to Kansas. Throughout the 1860s, Oscar's mother, Janie, and the Reverend Carter traveled throughout Canvas providing ministry to the Black community. We can only guess how they found their oldest child, George, after he was discharged from the army at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, in 1865, but they reunited with him soon after. However, the work to try and find Oscar and his other siblings would continue for many more years. Oscar's sister, Emily Francis, was enslaved by the Broadwell family in Cynthiana, Kentucky for nearly two decades. She had not been taught to read or write, so did not record any aspect of her life.

[136:03] When she was about 16 years old, she took Nick Vince's last name. Together, they had 5 children. President Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation on January 1st, 1863. Legally, Emily, Frances, Nick, and their children were free. But they had to escape the control of their enslavers to be actually free. Nick died sometime between 1864 and 1865, and Emily Francis and her children had no choice but to stay with the Broadwell family. Her opportunity came on April 14th, 1868, three years after the end of the war, when Emily Forrences married Harrison Black in Cynthiana, Kentucky. Their two children were born free in Frankfort, Kentucky. A few years later, the whole family moved to Louisville.

[137:03] But Kentucky was experiencing an uncontrolled outbreak of smallpox. Smallpox is highly contagious through airborne droplets, and it kills about 1 in 3 people it infects. Although there was an immunization, for decades, the treatment was quarantine. As soon as the pox began to appear on a person's skin, they were removed to isolated locations called pest houses. Harrison contracted smallpox and was removed to the pest house in early November 1872. He died 10 days later. He was one of 125 people to die of smallpox in the Louisville Pest House that month. Harrison was buried at the pest house. Miraculously, Emily Francis, who was pregnant, and the seven children in the household, did not die of the disease. Emily Francis named her youngest child Oscar after her brother, whom she had not seen since they were 8 years old.

[138:05] Meanwhile, the baby's namesake, Oscar, enlisted into the 44th Infantry under Commanding Officer 2nd Lieutenant Morris Hall. Hall commanded two regiments of black men, most of whom were formerly enslaved, and he made it a focus that the men under his command learned to read and write during their service. Oscar was no exception. There's more to uncover about Oscar's war service. He was captured and held as a prisoner of war by the Confederates. He was likely injured. As after his release, he was reassigned to the 42nd Infantry, a regiment of men too injured or too old to fight. also commanded by Hall. This regiment was assigned guard and garrison duty in Chattanooga, Tennessee, where they practiced reading and writing during their service. After the war, Oscar moved to Huntsville, Alabama to try and make a living farming. He registered to vote in Huntsville in 1867, although he was likely never allowed to vote.

[139:11] The following year, he applied for a bank account with the Freedman's Savings and Trust Company. He married Adeline, and they had two children, Ellen and Oscar Jr. We don't know what happened to Adeline, Ellen, and Oscar Jr, but in 1876, Oscar left Alabama. He traveled to Kentucky and found his sister, Emily Francis, and her children, his nieces and nephews. The 10 members of the family headed west to find Janie. Oscar's mother. We might never know what precipitated Oscar leaving his farm in Alabama. The conditions were harsh and unpleasant in the South for Black members of the community as reconstruction unraveled, and likely were for Oscar.

[140:06] The eventual reunion of the family may have been connected to Oscar's commitment to the church, and his mother's marriage to Reverend Dudley Carter. After the Civil War, churches became a clearinghouse for information as people began searching for loved ones. Newspapers, mainly connected with the African Methodist Episcopal churches, ran advertising trying to connect people. Black ministers like the Reverend Carter not only wrote ads for their congregants, they read the ads out loud for people who had not had the privilege of learning to read or write. The Reverend Dudley Carter and Janie placed ads in the newspapers, searching for Janie's lost children. Oscar may have read one of the ads. Amazingly, and against all odds, Oscar reunited with his mother Janie, and two of his siblings, George and Emily Francis.

[141:03] After sitting for this family photograph, Oscar and Emily Francis and her children, including Jenny, moved to Boulder. Although the federal census from 1880 doesn't include the street address, Oscar and Emily Francis are listed one after the other. Oscar at dwelling number 26, and his sister, nieces and nephews at dwelling number 27. I was recently honored to hear Dr. Ibram X. Kendi speak at CU, and one of the things he said made me think of this family. He professed that in 1860, there were 4 million enslaved Black people that believed one day the Jubilee would come, that they would be free. They believed that the impossible was possible. This was Oscar's home in 1894. It's still standing, 135 years after it was built, on the corner of 22nd and Goss Streets. Amazing in itself. But the stories this house could tell might make us believe that the impossible was possible.

[142:11] The House speaks to the history of the United States. We cannot tell Oscar's story without including this house, where he lived for the last three decades of his life. And we cannot tell Oscar's story without including his story of enslavement and freedom. And however inconvenient, uncomfortable, or seemingly expendable it might seem, we cannot tell the story of the United States without telling the story of enslavement. But we also need to confront this painful history with humanity, and how Oscar shares his values and his humanity with the people of Boulder, even today. As an enslaved child, Oscar did not have the privilege of learning to read or write. But once he had that opportunity, as an adult, he made sure his family members did too.

[143:04] This is Miss Holbrook's central school class in 1886. Oscar's youngest nephew, his namesake Oscar, would have been 12 or 13, and I don't know if this is little Oscar in the center of the group, but it might be. Even if it's not, African American children in Boulder had the opportunity of going to school in part because of Oscar and his family's leadership. Between 1880 and 1900, Oscar's sister, Emily Francis, learned to read. She bought 2002 Spruce Street and claimed homestead rights on the property. The whole family worked to keep the house. They sometimes needed loans from non-traditional sources within the Black community. But the impossible was possible because of the community they had helped build. And they really were instrumental in building the community. Oscar married Mary, and together they bought land in Boulder, but not for themselves. The first parcel they bought were the lots for the future Allen Chapel of the African Methodist Episcopalian Church.

[144:15] Oscar, his nephews, and the husbands of his nieces, Francis' children, built the church with other community members. They likely continued the tradition of sending and receiving newspaper notices through the church network to try to reunite lost family. The church became the foundation for the black community in Boulder. It's a wild guess on my part, but I think this is Mary White, Oscar's wife. Mary taught Sunday school at the Allen Chapel for the rest of her life. She ran the Sunday school to support the education of the young members of the black community, because it's really hard to learn to read and write if your parents or siblings cannot. Oscar and Mary eventually purchased 2202 Goss Street in 1890. They borrowed money to build the house, but also purchased other lots in the neighborhood, and rented out houses to help other members of the black community.

[145:14] Aspects of Oscar's former life may have been hidden from the people of Boulder, but Oscar made sure everyone in Boulder knew one thing. He proudly joined the Nathaniel Lyon Post No. 5 of the Grand Army of the Republic, an organization of Civil War veterans. He may have joined the parade at the back of the group, but he marched and he participated. Through this series, we've been looking at how historic places give context to events that have shaped history in Boulder and beyond. The story of Oscar White and his family shows how physical places can honor, preserve, and humanize history. Oscar's family story is one of enslavement in Kentucky, separation through slave sales, escape attempts via the Underground Railroad, and eventual emancipation and reunion.

[146:08] When the extended family settled in Boulder, they became foundational figures in the black community. There are still standing homes at 2202 Goss Street. and 2002 Spruce Street. Connect national histories of enslavement and freedom, and ask us to confront painful truths. But they also honor the humanity, resilience, and the belief, against all odds. That the impossible can be possible. Any questions?

[147:03] I actually don't know. I believe it was probably for education. Because they had the schools here. Yeah. I mean, Claire, you… I mean, to me, you leave me speechless, so thank you for my… Yeah, like… You know, it's just… I think it's so interesting to listen to your, Those things, and so eloquently said, and the way you… tie things together is really great, so I thank you. Do you have other opportunities to share this? Story locally, or… I assume you're not… Presenting in the conference next week, but… We are, working with our communications, person within the city to try and promote These.

[148:01] To get the information more widely circulated. Claire, I've said it before, you should explore doing a documentary of this. with Sundance. Sundance, right. There's a half a dozen documentary filmmakers that live in Boulder. That's a great idea. One of them's sitting here. Oh. I've worked on more than one, so… We're all late. Did you win the Nobles? No. The guy that taught me won an Oscar for… Per, his Ginsburg movie. Dave's hurt. That's fine. parents, and… Is your voice recorded on it? These ones are… so we're… we're working to have these, which is now, I think, enough to call a series on our website, and so it'll be a snip from these Landmarks Board meetings where Claire starts the presentation, and then they're, you know, 20 to 25 minutes long. But then trying to get, you know.

[149:13] into even smaller, bite-sized pieces and just get it out there. And so, I think what we're kind of hoping is, this just plants a seed somewhere, and then these stories kind of take a life of their own. So, I think the awareness piece is, is kind of a primary objective, and I just continue to learn So much. I mean, wouldn't it be cool if, like, at the library there was, like, a map, right? And you pressed the button on… 2202 Goss Street, and this came up. You know what I mean? Like… That would be pretty cool. Thanks. Oh, do I have to say something? 12… We're gonna end… we're gonna wrap up this,

[150:04] meeting with a year in review for 2025. This should be about 10 minutes or so, and welcome your questions. At the end or along the way. But we've done some iteration of a year in review, trying to do it every year, and just kind of mark the time, look back, see what the themes were, and then use that to look forward and see where we're going next. So, 2025, We're calling a transformational year. That includes the meaningful process improvements that were only made possible through this board and you all, the expanded research, like we just heard from Claire, and then a lot of projects, across departments that required the collaboration and kind of these big projects that, That happened in 2025 and into 2026. So…

[151:00] The mission of our program, is to advance community goals by protecting significant sites, shaping how historic places change over time, and telling a more complete community history. Together with applicants and community members, staff and the Landmarks Board create meaningful connections to Boulder's past. A Sense of Place, A Sense of Purpose, which is our historic preservation plan, guides our program. It was adopted in 2013 and last updated in 2018, and it identifies three program areas. Historic resource protection, community engagement and collaboration, and program operation. So… We organized our highlights and accomplishments within those three buckets. So, looking at historic resource protection, we reviewed 220 landmark alteration certificates, which was a 36% increase from the previous year, about a 30% increase from the 5-year average.

[152:02] we saw 144 demolition applications, which was actually the same, from the previous year, and the 5-year average. So those have been, pretty steady, where the landmark alteration certificates are really increasing. You all reviewed and recommended, designation for 3 owner-nominated, landmarks. And we better publicized incentives for historic preservation, resulting in a 60% increase in state tax credit applications. That's also due in part because the tax credit program really expanded. So, rather than $50,000 max credit, it's now $100,000. We also wrote 5 letters of support for modifications to the building and zoning codes, and for those tax credits, we estimated a quarter of a million dollars approved for, Boulder, owners of historic properties. We are also a core team member of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update, which you all will see at your next regular meeting in March, the Civic Area Phase 2, and the Wildland Urban Interface Implementation, among others.

[153:15] Here's a look at the case volume over the last, 6 years, and so you can see in 2020, we received about 204 landmark alteration certificates. That really dipped, kind of bottoming out in, 2023, and then it's been increasing since Since 2023, but really a pretty significant, jump between 2024 and 2025. Whereas the demos, while there was, you know, seemingly a bit of a spike in 2022 and a dip in 2023, the average has remained, pretty much the same, around 140, non-designated demolition applications each year. here's your pie chart. This is the one that is just remarkable. So this is the result of the process improvements that shifted the majority of landmark alteration certificate, so changes to historic properties.

[154:13] from the committee level to staff level. And so, in 2024, the Landmarks Design Review Committee reviewed the majority of those LACs, 63%, about 100 of them, and staff reviewed about 30%, the Landmarks Board reviewed about 10% of the LACs. Once the, changes were made, in 2025, you see a significant shift so that staff reviewed almost 70% of those landmark alteration certificates. The LDRC reviewed 30%, down from 63% the year before, and the Landmarks Board only reviewed 2 LAC applications last year. And those are both code-required. They didn't go to the LDRC first, they were both

[155:01] Either relocations or new buildings over 340 square feet. So, what this tells me is that because we've taken kind of the simpler basic LAC reviews off of the plate of the LDRC, those meetings really are able to focus on the problem-solving and design of these trickier cases, but in a more iterative, kind of across the table from the applicant sort of process, and that's resulted in fewer LACs getting called up for full board review, so… That's exciting. Going to, community engagement and collaboration, we said yes to a lot of opportunities. Claire really took the lead in presenting research on Boulder's African American and Japanese American history to elevate underrepresented histories and bring greater visibilities to Boulder's untold stories. We had 6 public speaking engagements, from conferences to community events to historic Boulder's wonderful film festival at Chautauqua.

[156:07] And we celebrated the successes and co-hosted the annual Historic Preservation Month award ceremony, in May up at Chautauqua, and the board recognized four exemplary projects. Claire served on a statewide working group to identify historic sites that tell stories of Colorado's LGBTQ plus history. And we also collaborated with community members to write a state register nomination for the Second Baptist Church. That one's unfortunately paused, as the owner is not yet on board. The property, at 19th and Canyon is already locally designated as part of the Chamberlain Historic District, but the state Register designation has to be owner-supported, and they're not quite, there yet. Then a lot of focus was on program operations. So, we provided timely and responsible customer service with an average initial review time of 8 days. So, 83% of applications, ranging from simple to complex were approved within 21 days.

[157:13] Fewer than 20% of applications were complex enough to take more than 3 weeks to review, and that captures both landmark alteration certificates and demolitions. We moved all applications online to streamline the intake process, clarify requirements, and increase accessibility, and we shifted the majority of design review cases from committee to staff. We held various team retreats and did some work to clarify roles and key responsibilities within our small team. And we supported the adoption of the Wildland Urban Interface Regulations, shadowed two detailed home assessments, drafted guidance for historic properties, and presented at a Mapleton Hill Wildfire Resilience Neighborhood Preparedness Event.

[158:01] And… couldn't have done it without you all, and so I wanted to highlight that in 2025, you all dedicated a collective 250 hours of volunteer time. Breaking that down to each board member, that was an average of 29 hours in Landmarks board meetings, plus the time to prepare, between 14 and 22 hours as rotating members of the Landmarks Design Review Committee, and about 3 to 5 hours on site visits and writing the letter to Council. Because of the process improvements, the volunteer time commitments decreased last year with 60% fewer public hearings, and 50% fewer LDRC cases. I think this year, I'll be very interested in seeing if that trend holds, or if it was just happened to be fewer LACs or fewer demos that got called up, or if this really is, kind of the new normal of generally an average of two and a half hours, per board meeting. Though I don't think we've ever had…

[159:09] so few, LAC applications. we had something like… well, I won't make up numbers on the spot. We had a lot more LACs, in 2024. So, with that, we look ahead to 2026, And, we are still ironing out our priorities, but we know that we're going to be, they'll include some version of these. So, the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update will help shape the policies related to historic preservation. As I mentioned, you all will see that at your March meeting. As it goes towards adoption, mid-year. We have applied for a grant for a historic preservation plan audit, so that is to assess the current plan for alignment with the sustainability, equity, and resilience Framework, track the progress towards goals since 2013, and then inform the scope of a future update.

[160:11] We'll continue the equity research by creating a framework for advancing racial equity by telling a more complete history of Boulder, and then along with, I think. everybody will be preparing for the Sundance Film Festival. We're on a team that, is looking to create a comprehensive and streamlined review process for those festival, permits. And then, due to the substantial increase in the tax credit applications, we've started work, but we'll need to continue, improving our state tax credit review process, and clarifying those application requirements, so… There's… A lot else happening in 2026, but we know that these five will be, big ones.

[161:01] So… With that… Any… Comments, reflections, or questions? Thank you, that's so much stuff. One question I have about the historic preservation plan audit, I know since we're in 2026 and the plan was less updated in 2013, does this mean that we're not going to be updating the plan this year? Right. We'll be doing the audit this year. Oh, wow. And our thinking on that is that the city is in a financial, kind of, very conservative place. And… We've done an enormous amount of work, especially over the last 3 years, in terms of process improvements, the equity research, etc. And the plan, I think, is generally a good document that has more recommendations than a three-person team could do in 20 years. And so, rather than going out

[162:06] Hiring a consultant to do a project that might cost $80,000 to $100,000 in taxpayer money is to have a consultant through a no-match grant, come in and assess where is the plan aligned with the SARE framework, the Sustainability, Equity, and Resilient Framework. the State Historic Preservation Plan, and then scope. Is this a giant overhaul of the historic preservation plan, or is it more of an adjustment, so that we can be strategic as we go into scoping a bigger plan update? Will the… will we… the board, have any, involvement in that process? Yes. Yep. So, it'll likely, if we get funded, it will include that assessment of progress towards goals, and then the alignment between these other policies, and then scoping it as well. So…

[163:07] We've… scoped the… Project in terms of this grant, application, but we'll work farther, but would definitely see you all having a role to play in that. And one other question is, is it possible that the process of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update also shapes the future of the Historic Preservation Plan? Yeah. There's a great graphic that I wish I had, but it's, like, the SARE framework is at the top, and then the comp plan is next. And then the, citywide strategic plan… this is like a pop quiz for us. The citywide strategic plan, and then the, kind of program plan and work plans are under that, so… you know, having the comp plan policies around historic preservation and the whole plan be updated before we then say, where is it aligned and where is it not, is also strategic. Yeah, I think that…

[164:12] That makes sense, too. Okay, thanks. Can you go back to the pie charts? You know I will. So, I… I mean, I love this. And… and I… I think it's worth pointing out if no one else is reading between the lines, a couple things. One is, the capacity to… to serve the community, the citizens, is a story being told in this pie chart. I mean, and the efficiency, I think, that goes with that, moving from, you know, the board, you know, reducing the load that the board sees, reducing the load that the committee sees.

[165:00] And so I'm… I'm thankful for… for those things, for sure, but I… And I'm… I'm sure I'm speaking out of turn, but that's okay. Wouldn't this demonstrate a need for… Funding for, like, an additional position in the city. To say, like, hey, we're doing all this stuff, we haven't, like… We need another body to… to really make it, you know. Sing. Well, I will harken back to our process improvements at the beginning that said the shift from the LDRC to staff cannot result in, like, an increased need for capacity, and so our approach, which we found to be true, is that… these LACs that we were taking to the, committee level would take about 4 hours to prepare, do the intake, prepare the slides that we put together, host the meeting with, you know, two staff members, follow… well.

[166:04] plus the four… or, sorry, plus the two Landmarks board members' time. Plus the notes to follow up. 4 hours for, let's say, storm windows or something like that. That same case takes 30 minutes at the staff level, so it is actually a reduction Or, like, we haven't felt overwhelmed. I will say where that isn't the case is the state tax credits, because before we had this venue where we put together the materials, we invited them in, and it was, like, this very… methodical, predictable sort of thing, and now with the increased volume, we're kind of, like, recalibrating, like, how we do those reviews, but I still think it was the right move, because… you know, for two Landmarks Board volunteer members to sit and watch us go through a spreadsheet was, like, not a great use of your time. But I think that's the one that it feels like state tax credits take longer, but everything else takes less time.

[167:09] And we're not… what's that? I know, I did… that was one of the… that was one of the ideas I had, is like, can we just have a DRC that's not with board members? But I think what… what this story could also, like, lead to an assumption is that, We're just, like, rubber stamping stuff, because the increased volume at, what was that, 30… 8%, 36% increase, and yet our review time is reduced down from estimated 2 weeks before to 8 days now. I would say the quality of the review is still there, and so it'd be interesting to look at, you know, the rate of approval between the two years, but I know from Claire's work, and my work, and Mariah's work, there's a lot of picking up the phone and working through with

[168:04] With an owner to find a solution within that average 8 days. And with the process improvements to clarify those application materials, we're setting People up well, so that they're proposing things that we approve. Yeah, John. Doesn't the, state's Department of Revenue give you a really strict set of criteria for reviewing tax credits? I mean… They… Or is it completely discretionary? They give us… an application that we have to use that I would redesign tomorrow, but then their guidance is… a little bit less concrete than I would like, and I'm not a tax professional, and so it is, it's been a learning curve, even though I've reviewed a few in the past over the years. It really is a learning curve of, like,

[169:03] you know, what… what are the criteria, what are we looking at? And so, one of the most helpful, things in 2025 we did was call… set up a meeting with the planners in Denver who review the highest volume in the state, and they've got it down. And their website is great, and their materials are great. So. We are attending a state tax credit training tomorrow that the state is, providing, but I found, like, that peer-to-peer, how are you guys doing it, is really helpful. Yeah. Oh, she's done. Okay, any other questions before we… we look ahead? The other thing I do, and I've said it already, that, one of the big shifts in the board… in the dynamic always changes when we, when we say goodbye to a member, but one of the things that we will be…

[170:00] Doing in a short time is, saying goodbye to Abby and welcoming a new board member, and then we'll look for, time for a team retreat, either in the summer or the fall this year, so… Lots going on. Can we move to adjourn? I second that. Meeting is adjourned. At 8.53. Thank you, everyone. Thank you, Silver. I don't have… Again, Claire.