May 6, 2026 — Landmarks Board Regular Meeting

Transcript

[0:00] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Michael is, virtual. He's in Chicago. [0:07] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Was that a yes? [0:08] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay. Sorry, I got… Okay. [0:15] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And Marcie and Claire, you're good. [0:18] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The May Landmarks Board meeting is called to order. [0:22] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Welcome to May 6, 2026 Landmarks Board meeting. It is… 6.03 PM. [0:30] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Marci will review the virtual meeting decorum. [0:34] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Alright, thank you. [0:36] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The city has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive. [0:42] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): 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. [1:01] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): 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. [1:10] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. Obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupts or otherwise impedes the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. [1:28] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): 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. [1:43] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And for those joining us over Zoom, here's, where you can find the raise hand function, which is under the reactions menu. [1:52] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Raise hand, and then the shortcuts there on the screen, Alt-Y on a PC or Option-Y on a Mac, or Star 9 if you're calling in on the phone. [2:02] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [2:05] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Mariah, do we have Michael on? Okay, good. [2:09] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I don't see his little picture, so… [2:12] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The recording of this meeting will be available in the records archive and on the YouTube within 20 days… 28 days of the meeting. [2:20] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We'll do a roll call and brief introductions. Chelsea? [2:26] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Hi, Chelsea Castellano, Landmarks Board Member. [2:30] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): John? [2:31] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): John Decker, member of the Landmarks Board. [2:34] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Alex? Alex Weinheimer, Landmarks Board Member. [2:37] Board & Commissions: Michael? [2:38] Michael Ray: Michael Ray, Vice Chair, Landmark Sport. [2:42] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And I am Renee Globeck, Vice, chair. [2:46] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Vice Chair. [2:47] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): 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. [2:54] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And have found it more productive if you are speaking to persuade us rather than to berate us, staff, or the applicant.

[3:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): As with the regular Landmarks Board meetings, you may speak at the appropriate time during the public hearing. [3:07] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Requests to speak outside of these times are denied. [3:11] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We request that the 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 all motions made. [3:23] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We are going to discuss chair and vice chair nominations. [3:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Each year after a new board member is appointed, the Landmarks Board appoints a chair and vice chair. [3:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The role of the chair includes facilitating board meetings, attending monthly agenda meetings, and occasionally representing the board at community events. [3:48] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): and public meetings. The vice chair also attends the agenda meetings and fills in when the chair is absent. Each term is for one year, and a board member can serve multiple terms. [3:58] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We appoint a chair and vice chair through a nomination process. Any member can make a nomination, and a nominee has an option of accepting or declining. Any number of board members may be nominated, and we will vote until we have… [4:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): three votes. I will first ask if anyone is interested in serving, and then I will ask for nominations. Once we hear each of the nominations, someone will make a motion, and we'll do a roll call vote. [4:26] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Is anyone interested in serving? [4:34] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Hmm… [4:35] Michael Ray: I'm… I'm interested in continuing as vice chair. [4:39] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Michael has, said he would like to continue as vice chair. I… [4:47] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I, I suppose I am still interested as chair. [4:51] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): by default. [4:53] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): How do we go about doing this? [4:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I nominate Renee. Oh, there we go. I'm, like, trying to read all these little things. And I'll second. [5:07] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, thank you, Alex, for the first thumb, and how do we… [5:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We will do… so you've made a motion? Alex is… Alex has made… He made a motion. …motion. [5:21] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Oh, do we have a motion? Oh, she's gonna come in and help us. [5:24] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): No, yeah, I'll help you. It's… we don't do this very often, and it's processed, so, Renee, do you accept the nomination? I accept the nomination. Great. Alex, would you like to speak to your nomination? [5:37] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): I've seen and participated in. You've been a great chair, and I look forward to 12 more months with you as our chair. [5:45] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Why, thank you. [5:46] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Great. And then, Alex would make this motion. [5:50] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Filling in the blanks. [5:52] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): On the screen. Okay, I move to make Renee Chair of the Landmarks Board. [5:57] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And then a roll call vote. [5:59] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Oh. [6:00] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We'll do a roll call vote. [6:01] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Sorry, need a second.

[6:02] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Oh, see? [6:07] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Go ahead. [6:07] Michael Ray: sec… second… [6:12] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Oh, Michael seconds it. [6:14] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So we'll do a roll call vote for the nomination of Renee as chair. [6:19] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Chelsea. Yes. John. Right. [6:23] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Alex. Yes. Michael. [6:25] Michael Ray: Bye. [6:27] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I suppose I vote aye. [6:30] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Now we get to nominate Vice Chair. I nominate Michael. [6:39] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Michael, do you accept the nomination? [6:41] Michael Ray: I accept the nomination. [6:44] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Renee, would you like to speak to your nomination? [6:47] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I would like to say that Michael has been an actual supporting vice chair for me, and we have been able to navigate a few things, and he's doing excellent work. [6:57] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Great. [6:58] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): So then you would make this motion, and someone would second it. [7:03] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): make a motion for Michael to be vice chair. [7:08] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Do I have a second? [7:10] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I'll second. [7:11] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): John seconds the motion. Now we will do a roll call vote for the nomination of Michael as vice chair. Chelsea? Aye. John? Aye. Alex? Aye. [7:23] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I vote aye. Michael? [7:25] Michael Ray: Bye. [7:27] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Hi. Congratulations, Renee is chair. And Michael is vice chair. [7:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We never knew Landmark Board could be so interesting. [7:40] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Does anyone have any changes or alterations to the April 8th meetings? [7:47] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): No. As I hear none… I move that we approve these meetings. Do I have a second? [7:54] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I'll second. [7:56] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, John, for a second. [7:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We'll do a roll call vote. Chelsea? Aye. John? Aye. Alex? Aye. Michael? [8:05] Michael Ray: Bye.

[8:07] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I… Choose I. [8:10] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We'll next move to public participation for non-agenda items. [8:15] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): This is to speak to topics other than the public hearing. As a reminder, we no longer swear people in for the open comment. [8:21] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Potential in-person participants, please speak [8:26] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): to Amanda to sign up, and please state your full name and proceed, and you will have 3 minutes. [8:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Amanda, do we have any virtual or in-person participants? [8:40] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): First up, we have Margo Smith. [8:44] Board & Commissions: Oh! [8:46] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Sorry, Tim Plass. [8:55] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Hi, Tim Plass, Executive Director of Historic Boulder. [8:59] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And I'm here tonight to speak about the old fire station number 3, and I'm very pleased that the Facilities Department has withdrawn their demolition permit application. [9:10] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): But still, the process we went through here at the Landmarks Board is important, and your action of putting a stay of demolition on this property, let the Facilities Department of the City know that this building is, in fact, historically significant. So, thank you for that. [9:27] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And also in the Modern Architecture Survey that was done, it was found to be National Register eligible as well. [9:34] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): So I'm excited to see this as potentially moving forward. Marcy told me that there have been, responses to the pre-application that have recently been completed, I think. Is that right, Marci? [9:44] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): Okay? So, things are moving along, and I know there's still lots of issues with the property. There are floodplain issues, hazardous materials abatement, access issues, parcel boundaries are confusing if they exist at all, and there will have to be a transfer to a private party at some point, just to name a few of the issues. [10:03] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): But we are hopeful at Historic Boulder that all of these can be worked out, and that we will see, the old fire station number 3… [10:10] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): become a local landmark, and also listed on the National Register. And here in Boulder, we actually have a history of taking old firehouses and adaptively reusing them. Think of the pottery lab up on 10th and Aurora, which has been so, so successful. [10:28] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And interesting, it's actually essential that the property become a landmark to allow the required level of investment in it due to its restrictions in the floodplain. Otherwise, you'd be so limited in the amount of money you could put into it that you couldn't do the necessary improvements. [10:41] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And I will also say that this is a project that Historic Boulder itself may be interested in undertaking, and if we get that opportunity, I will tell you there's one place that we might deviate from historic authenticity, and that is our deep disappointment that there's no fire pole in the inside of the building. And so, it would be really fun to see a fire pole in the building. [11:01] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): But, seriously, though, adaptively using Fire Station Number 3 for community benefit would be a big win for Boulder. So, thank you for your actions, and we'll see what happens with fire station number 3. [11:14] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And since I have a little bit of time left over, I'll just say to folks that… remind you that this is… May is Preservation Month, and thank you for all you do to protect our historic resources here in town. [11:25] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And that on May 18th, we have the Square Nail Awards, and I hope that you can make it there to Chautauqua, where we honor the people and projects that have done great things in historic preservation. So, that's all I have tonight. Thank you for your time. [11:45] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): And next up, we have Lynn Siegel. [11:54] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): I have a question, because I think I want to speak… I know I want to speak to the OT Jackson. [11:59] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): recommendation. Is this the appropriate time for me to say something about that? Yes. Okay, great. Len Siegel, Historic Boulder member. [12:08] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): And I'm speaking on behalf of the Preservation Committee in supporting the nomination for the OT and Sadie Jackson House at, 22… [12:22] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): let's see, 2228 Pine Street, for the National Register. Historic Boulder, as you know, has been in conversation with the, current owners of the house, and following conversations with members of the preservation planners about identifying this [12:40] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): property for the State Register related to the Colorado Heritage for All 150, and that is actually going forward. That house is going to be included as part of the State Register of Historic Places, and [12:55] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It's really significant also because while it's known as the O.T. Jackson House, Sadie Jackson is… was the owner of the house, and she, [13:05] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): bought the house in 1894, so it dates back to that time period. The original part of the house is intact, there was a small addition to it, but it still has great presence and significance

[13:17] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): for members of the Black community of Boulder, pioneering members of the Black community of Boulder, and pioneering members of the Black community of Colorado. So, we are… Historic Boulder's really proud to have been part of [13:30] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): bringing that, story to light, and working also with the History Colorado in that nomination process, and we, celebrate, that moving forward, and we hope that someday. [13:42] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): It could become a local landmark. [13:44] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Thank you very much. [13:52] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Okay, we're gonna move to virtual. [13:56] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): Please raise your hand if you're virtual and would like to speak. [14:06] Board & Commissions: Okay, first up we have Lynn Siegel. [14:14] lynn segal: Yeah, I'm mostly concerned about what's happening at [14:20] lynn segal: Presbyterian Manor and the Four Bungalows, and I really… was… [14:29] lynn segal: Trying to figure the logic of saving just one of the bungalows. [14:33] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, Lynn, I don't think we're allowed to speak on the, that agenda item, because it is an agenda item. [14:41] lynn segal: Oh, it's on the agenda tonight? [14:43] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, yes, so you will have open comment time at… [14:47] lynn segal: Okay, sorry, then… then my concern would be the economics of a lot of these demolitions, and just last night at Planning Board, I saw one for… [14:59] lynn segal: Unity Church. Now, it's built in 92, but… and this just reminds me, maybe we need to have Environmental Advisory Board involved in these demolitions. [15:16] lynn segal: I know, or I, I don't know that Unity Church is, [15:23] lynn segal: Not, you know, being 92, more contemporary, but it is a heavy brick structure, and it's really a lot of carbon intensity to, offload that, and it's… [15:37] lynn segal: being turned into a Coburn development of single-family homes on, Edgewood and Folsom. And… [15:46] lynn segal: It's all about the money, and it's always about the money, and it ends up… [15:52] lynn segal: Really affecting the ability of the… [15:56] lynn segal: the, Landmarks Board to preserve demolitions as the higher and higher, property values go up, and the pressures from the developers get greater and greater, and the pressure for affordable housing from that very [16:16] lynn segal: The very same development subsidies that happen as a result cause… The pressure to not [16:26] lynn segal: Or to demolish, and to cave in to the developers. And I think that's really sad. And I think it's really inappropriate. [16:39] lynn segal: And money drives everything. [16:42] lynn segal: And… The way that it's being done is the war in Iran. [16:48] lynn segal: In Gaza, in the West Bank, in East Jerusalem, in Lebanon. And coming up, Cuba. And so, the most powerful thing you can do as a board is make a statement to promote getting out of wars. [17:04] lynn segal: to the City Council, because it comes from the bottom up. [17:09] lynn segal: And the financial pressures are far too great for you to do anything else and have any other real impact than making a statement about war. [17:23] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Lynn. [17:26] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks, Lynn.

[17:28] lynn segal: True. [17:28] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Anyone else virtual would like to speak, please raise your hand now. [17:36] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I don't see anyone else. [17:38] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Great. [17:42] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We will start the discussion. Marcy, do you have any pending applications for demolition, alteration certificates? [18:07] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Alright, so we've got one pending stay of demolition, and that is Fire Station 3 at 1585 30th Street. [18:16] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And, that is one that came in for demolition at the end of last year, and the Landmarks Board held a hearing on February 4th in place to stay of demolition. [18:27] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): To explore alternatives. Following that, the applicant, who's the city facilities, staff, submitted a pre-application to understand all of the regulatory requirements. It is in the floodplain. There are… [18:43] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): multiple property lines, it is currently a critical use, etc, etc. And so, typically we would have a meeting to discuss alternatives, but for this one, it was really trying to understand what the puzzle pieces were on the table before we spent time talking about [19:02] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): potential alternatives. And so those pre-application responses were provided to the facilities team about a week or so ago, and they're lengthy. There's a lot [19:17] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): of complexity to this site, and so facilities said, you know, they've got a lot of projects going on, they're going to kind of put the pause button on this one. They've withdrawn the demolition application, and then expect to pick it up again in the future. So, it's… [19:34] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): likely that the Landmarks Board will see it again. We don't have a timeline for when that is. [19:40] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): So this would have been your opportunity to, discuss scheduling a meeting for… [19:48] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): your June agenda, but since the application is withdrawn, there's really no action that's, needed from you all tonight. [19:57] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Great. [19:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, we'll move on to our first Public hearing? [20:03] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): This is item 5A, Public Hearing Consideration for an application designating the property of 990 Arapaho, HIS2026, [20:14] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): 00113 as an individual landmark pursuant to Section 9115 of the Boulder Revised Code of 1981. And under… [20:24] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The proceedings prescribed by Chapter 1 through 3, Quasi-Judicial Hearings, Boulder Revised Code of 1981. The owner is Boulder Presbyterian Senior Housing, Inc. [20:36] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And the applicant is the City of Boulder Landmarks Board. I'll hand it over to Marcy for the staff presentation. [20:45] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Alright, thank you. [20:46] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): So this is a quasi-judicial hearing, so all speaking to the item will be sworn in. That includes me. I'm Marcy Gerwing, Principal Historic Preservation Planner, and I affirm that I will tell the truth. [20:58] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): I'll pause here to allow board members to note any ex parte contacts, and, Chris Reynolds is here, [21:06] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): To help clarify if… [21:08] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Something is an ex parte contact, so help, clear them if you have them, so… [21:14] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): hand it over to you. Okay, so the ex parte context, I have a client who I am doing an addition on their house, and she is on the board of Presbyterian, Senior Housing, so we found that out after she watched the… she actually was… she spoke. [21:33] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): During the, public hearing. So, that was… [21:37] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): an ex parte that I just am volunteering information up. [21:45] Michael Ray: I also have ex parte in that. [21:47] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Sorry, sorry, Michael, can I… can I talk to Renee here quickly?

[21:52] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Just, we'll just kind of take them one at a time. [21:55] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: So, Renee, with that, having a client who spoke about this matter at a previous hearing. [22:03] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Are you able, from what you know now, to… [22:07] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Basically, set aside and put out of your mind. [22:11] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Anything that you learned from that conversation, and make any sort of determination based solely on the evidence that's presented here tonight, and applying the criteria? [22:24] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [22:26] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And, is there anything to give you any sort of pause that you can't be, the… [22:32] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Fair and, kind of neutral decision maker in this case. [22:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): No. [22:39] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Great. Well, thank you. [22:41] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I don't… I don't have any concerns about, your ex parte, contacts, but, [22:48] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Yeah, so, so I would not recommend recusal based off of those answers. [22:54] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And then Chris will just keep me going. I did talk to, the press. [23:00] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): that would be Reporting Lab. He called to ask questions about the meeting. I just had conversation and said, you know, I think it was a hard decision for all of us on the board, and, if he wanted details, to talk to Marcy. [23:16] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, that was my… [23:18] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I don't. [23:18] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Arte. [23:19] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And that conversation was about the initiation hearing? [23:23] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [23:25] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Similar questions, can you set that conversation to the side and… [23:30] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Base any decision that you make here, tonight, based solely on the evidence and the criteria? [23:37] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [23:39] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And is there anything about that contact that would lead you to believe that you can't be, fair and neutral here tonight? [23:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): No, I… there is nothing. [23:48] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Okay. Thank you. [23:53] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Michael? [23:57] Michael Ray: My ex parte is related to having, watched the entire planning commi… planning board [24:06] Michael Ray: meeting relative to the Presbyterian Manor Development, concept review, on their YouTube channel. [24:18] Michael Ray: Two weeks ago. [24:22] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And, thank you for that, Michael. Similar sort of questions here.

[24:28] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Are you… are you able to set aside the information that you may have learned from watching that landing board meeting? I think it was on… was it on April the 7th? [24:38] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: remembering… [24:39] Michael Ray: Sounds great, that sounds right. [24:40] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Basically, set that aside, and then, you know, just viewing the evidence that's presented here today, [24:49] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And make any decision based off… solely off of that evidence and the… and the criteria. [24:55] Michael Ray: Yes, I can set it aside. [24:59] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And… [25:00] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Knowing what you know about, you know, yourself, is there any reason to believe that you can't be a fair and neutral decision maker here tonight? [25:11] Michael Ray: No reason to think that I cannot be fair. [25:15] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Thank you. [25:19] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Should I go next. [25:21] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay. [25:22] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I have a couple. [25:25] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I did answer questions, like Renee, from the reporter at the Boulder Reporting Lab, [25:33] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): In which I expressed sentiments that I had already stated during our previous board deliberations. I did read that article when it came out, including the comments section. I watched the planning board meeting, the same one that Michael watched. [25:52] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And I also did receive some emails from, the public following the public participation. [26:02] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): At the last… the last time we discussed this, just thanking me for my comments. [26:11] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Thank you, Chelsea. Again, sort of similar questions. [26:18] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: you know, having… and I think you… you were… you said you talked to the… a reporter. I'm guessing… was that about the initiation hearing that occurred, at a previous Landmarks Board hearing for… [26:30] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I-90 Arapaho. [26:32] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [26:34] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And, are you able to set, that… [26:40] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: To the side, and base your decision here tonight. [26:44] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Solely on the evidence and criteria. [26:48] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [26:51] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And then you mentioned the… that you watched the, planning board meeting. Was that the one on April 7th about the concept to plan for this? [27:00] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Project. [27:02] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [27:02] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: That involves 990 Arapahoe. [27:04] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: But similarly, are you able to set that to the side and base your decision on the evidence presented here this evening and the criteria?

[27:13] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [27:16] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And then lastly, you mentioned you received, some emails from community members, [27:24] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Any information that was in those emails, Similarly, can you… [27:30] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Step to the side, and, [27:33] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Base your decision on the evidence presented here tonight, the criteria that, Applies to a designation. [27:45] Board & Commissions: Yes. [27:47] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And then… [27:48] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, yeah. [27:49] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Yeah, sorry, you were about to say something. [27:51] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Oh, no, I just wasn't sure about the beginning of your question. I wasn't sure if you were asking me if I could set it aside or not, I don't know. Yes, same answer as all the other questions. [28:01] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Great, and just to make sure the record is totally clear, you're saying you can step to the side. [28:07] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Correct. Yes, I can, I can. [28:11] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And then, you know, knowing what you know about, you know, yourself and the matter. [28:18] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: For this public hearing, is there anything that gives you pause [28:24] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: That you can't be the fair and neutral decision maker in this case. [28:31] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): No. [28:32] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Okay. [28:33] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Well, thank you. [28:43] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I think, all I've done is I read the Boulder Reporting Lab articles, that covered the plan. [28:49] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): or the Landmarks Board meeting. [28:51] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): That initiated the, landmark designation on this. [28:57] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And then are we supposed to note site visits? [29:01] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Yes. Okay, and then… [29:02] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I do recommend noting site visits. [29:05] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Visiting the librarians. [29:07] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Checked out the houses on Arapaho. [29:10] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And, [29:12] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Thank you for noting those things, Alex. Reading the news article about, you know, the subject matter for this public hearing, are you able to set any information that you learned from reading that news article to the side? [29:26] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): AM. [29:28] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And are you able to…

[29:29] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: base any decision that you make here tonight solely on the evidence presented in the… and apply the criteria, for… [29:37] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Individual landmark designations. [29:39] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [29:41] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Great. [29:44] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I don't have any concerns about, [29:46] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Your ex parte contacts or anyone's, because they've been able to state that they're going to base their decisions on the evidence presented, the criteria, and set any information to the side that they may have learned outside of this public hearing. [30:03] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: We have… [30:03] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We have one more, Chris. Oh, yeah. [30:06] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Great. John. [30:07] Speaker 5 (Board & Commissions): I also read the report. [30:09] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Reporting Lab article, and, in. [30:12] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Had a site visit. [30:15] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): The organized one with the board. [30:19] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And then… [30:23] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And, you know, the news article, John, that you read, are you able to set any information you learn there to the side and base any decision you make here tonight on the evidence and the criteria? [30:34] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Yep. [30:36] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I can. [30:38] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Great. [30:39] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And it is a somewhat standard practice for board members to do site visits, and so while that is… [30:47] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Once we note that and it is in the public record, as long as there aren't, like, other conversations going on at these site visits substantively, and it's really just observing and visually inspecting and all of that, then, it's good to note, but… [30:59] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I similarly do not have concerns about your… any ex parte contacts that you've had. [31:14] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Great. [31:16] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Alright, thank you. [31:18] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): So next we'll move to the staff presentation, followed by the owner's presentation. We'll then open the public hearing, and after each member of the public has made comments, the owner may respond to anything that was said. [31:34] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Board members may ask questions in between any of those steps to staff, the owner, or members of the public. [31:41] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): After, public comment, the discussion will turn to the board deliberation, which should be between the five of you, Landmarks board members. [31:50] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass, and motions must state findings, conclusions, and a recommendation. [31:58] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And a record of the hearing is available, typically in a few days as a video recording, and the official record will be added to Central Records within 28 days, typically sooner. [32:10] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The criteria for your review this evening is outlined in the Boulder Revised Code under 9-115C, and that is whether the designation meets the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11-1, Legislative Intent, and 9-11-2, Council may designate landmarks in historic districts. [32:30] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Looking at those two code sections, 911A defines the purpose of the Historic Preservation Code, which is to preserve, protect, and enhance historically significant buildings and areas of the city

[32:41] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Reminiscent of past eras, events, or people, and to develop and maintain appropriate settings to enhance property values, stabilize neighborhoods, promote tourist trade and interest, and foster knowledge of the city's living history. [32:55] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): 9-1-1 continues to say that City Council does not intend to preserve every old building in the city, but to instead draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest in preserving the city's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage by ensuring the demolition of significant buildings will be carefully weighed with alternatives. [33:16] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Section 911-2 provides the type of designations Council may pass, including individual landmarks on a single site containing special character and historical, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value. [33:30] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The options in front of you this evening are to either recommend designation to City Council, in which case Council will hold a public hearing within 100 days. [33:39] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Or the board may disapprove the request, which is subject to a 21-day appeals period and a 45-day call-up period. [33:49] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The application process began last fall, when the owner submitted four applications to demolish this building and the three adjacent buildings. [33:57] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The Landmarks Design Review Committee referred the applications to the Landmarks Board for review, and hearings were held on December 3rd. The Board placed days of demolition on the applications, finding the buildings eligible for landmark designation. [34:10] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Over the next two weeks, members of the Landmarks Board, ownership team, staff, and members of the public met to discuss alternatives to demolition. [34:18] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): On February 25th, the Landmarks Board held hearings to consider demolition or initiation of the designation process. [34:27] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The board voted to initiate the designation process for the subject property, and voted to take no action on the other three applications. [34:35] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The demolition applications for the other three houses were conditionally approved after the stays expired at the end of March. [34:42] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): On April 6th, the Planning Board, or 7th, the Planning Board held a public hearing to provide feedback on the concept plan for the overall redevelopment of the site. And that brings us to this evening's hearing, to consider landmark designation of the property at 990 Arapahoe Avenue. [35:00] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The property is located in Central Boulder on the south side of Arapaho Avenue between 11th Street and Lincoln Place, opposite the main branch of the Boulder Public Library. [35:11] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The house is a one-story frame house that was constructed in 1922. It was built in the craftsman bungalow style with a clipped side gable roof with overhanging eaves, exposed rafter tails, and tapered columns and trim. [35:24] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The house is clad in a combination of shingles and narrow horizontal wood siding. [35:29] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The house has an arched hood over the porch that is flanked by decorative pergolas that extend across the width of the facade. [35:37] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The building retains a high degree of integrity to its original construction, with minimal changes over the last century. The majority of the historic material and design remain, including the wood siding and trim, windows, stone foundation, concrete steps, and stoop. [35:53] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The following is a summary of staff's analysis of whether the proposed designation meets the purposes and standards in Sections 9-11.1 and 9-11-2, as well as its eligibility for landmark designation based on the significance criteria for individual landmarks, which the Landmarks Board adopted in 1975. [36:13] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): In both the December 3rd and February 25th public hearings, the Landmarks Board determined that this building is eligible for individual landmark designation. [36:22] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The property has historic significance based on its 1922 date of construction and its association with families that exemplify the cultural and social heritage of the community. [36:33] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The Klapp family purchased the house soon after it was built, and lived there for nearly 5 decades. [36:39] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Roy Clapp was a grocer and worked at the University Hill grocery store for 23 years. [36:44] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Jenny Clapp was highly involved in Boulder civic and social organizations, and their two sons, Robert and Charles, served in the United States military before and during the Second World War. [36:56] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Charles and his growing family with wife Ruby, lived in the basement apartments after they returned from service. [37:03] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Birdie Crowell and Virginia Campbell, who are sisters, purchased the house in 1970. [37:08] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): They were both independent professionals. Bertie Crowell worked as a court clerk at the Boulder District Court for more than 15 years, and Virginia Campbell was a secretary for a law firm. [37:19] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The property represents a distinction in the development of the community as a pre-war house that was later converted to multifamily use as the economy struggled to recover during the 1940s. [37:30] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Employment of women increased during the war years, but independent working women remained relatively rare until 1974, when the Equal Credit Opportunity Act was signed into law. [37:40] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Birdie Crowell and Virginia Campbell were ahead of this trend, working as independent professionals from 1953. [37:48] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The building was surveyed in 1990 and found to represent a type period or method of construction, noting that it is representative of Boulder's 1920s bungalow-style architecture. The property was included in a potential historic district around the same time.

[38:05] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The house has architectural significance for its craftsman bungalow design. The bungalow form was popular in Colorado from about 1900 and into the 1930s due to its simplicity and utility. [38:16] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Key characteristics include the gable roof, overhanging eaves, simple horizontal lines, and vertically proportioned double-hung windows. [38:24] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The house has a distinctive arched hood porch and pergolas, original to the construction of the house. [38:31] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The house has artistic merit in its design and detailing, and the hooded porch is an uncommon feature. [38:37] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): I would like to address a comment that the building may be a kit house. [38:42] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Kit houses are an important part of American architectural history, and numerous books have been written about them. [38:48] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Most popular in the 19-teens and 20s. [38:52] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): They standardized building components and made architectural design available to the masses. [38:57] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The most recently designated landmark, the Orchard House, is suspected to be a kit house. The fact does not diminish the building's significance, and in some cases strengthens it. [39:07] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And again, a building does not have to be commissioned by a wealthy family and designed by an architect to be significant. [39:17] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The property's environmental significance, will be diminished [39:22] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): I think I missed this one. [39:29] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The property's environmental significance will be diminished with the demolition of the surrounding houses. As it stands today, the house retains traditional characteristics of a residential lot, and the original setbacks from the properties to the east and west, and from Arapahoe Avenue. [39:45] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The building, along with the adjacent houses constructed during the same time period, are an established and familiar visual feature along Arapahoe Avenue, and visually prominent across from the Boulder Public Library. [39:56] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The property is located within an identified potential historic district, along with the three adjacent houses. [40:03] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): However, the removal of the adjacent houses, which are character-defining features of the area, significantly decreases the area's 1920s residential character. [40:15] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Section 911A considers whether the building is reminiscent of past eras, events, or persons important in local, state, or national history, or is in a significant example of architectural styles of the past. [40:28] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): It also considers whether it provides an appropriate setting for the building, enhances property values, stabilizes the neighborhood, promotes tourist trade, and fosters knowledge of the city's living heritage. [40:40] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Staff finds that as the four houses were constructed within a six-year period, they provide a cohesive residential character and notable examples of working-class houses constructed in the 1920s. The removal of the adjacent houses significantly diminishes the historic setting of the property at 990 Arapaho. [40:59] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The four houses were a unique grouping of residences in the area, and collectively conveyed an area reminiscent of a past era. [41:07] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Through the loss of this historic setting, the property's ability to convey its association with the past residents and this period of development in the neighborhood is diminished. [41:18] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Section 911 states that the City Council does not intend to preserve every old building, but instead draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest in preserving the city's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage. [41:32] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): This includes carefully weighing the demolition of eligible buildings with other alternatives. [41:37] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Staff considers preservation has been carefully weighed with other alternatives, including preservation in place on the individual lots, preservation incorporated into the larger site, on-site relocation, and off-site relocation. [41:52] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Staff considers that incorporation of the building into the redevelopment of the site is feasible, as the cost of rehabilitation is relatively low, the building is already elevated to meet floodplain requirements, and analysis from the owner is that the same number of units could be built while preserving the building. [42:10] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): However, the owners consider preservation of the building detrimental to the redevelopment plans, and have offered the building at no cost to anyone who would relocate the building off-site, and have verbally offered funding equal to the cost of deconstruction of the building to be applied towards the cost of relocation. [42:29] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): During the concept plan review, planning board members did not express interest in incorporating the four 1920s houses into the redevelopment of the property, but were generally supportive of off-site relocation of the buildings. [42:42] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Staff considers that in this case, designation over the owner's objection would not draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest in preserving the city's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage. [42:58] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): With that, staff finds that while the designation of the property in 990 Arapahoe would protect, enhance, and perpetuate a property reminiscent. [43:07] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): of a past era of history, and preserve an important example of Boulder's historic architecture, and foster knowledge of the city's living heritage, it would not maintain an appropriate setting and environment for the building, as the historic preservation demolition approvals have been conditionally issued for the three adjacent eligible buildings.

[43:26] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And that historic preservation of the building has been carefully weighed with other alternatives, and in this case, designation over the owner's objection would not draw a reasonable balance between private property rights and the public interest in preserving the city's cultural, historic, and architectural heritage. [43:44] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): With that, staff recommends that the Landmarks Board not approve the designation of the property at 990 Arapaho. [43:53] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And our findings are here on the screen. That concludes my staff presentation, and I welcome any questions you may have. [44:06] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): If any. [44:12] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I have a question for staff. [44:15] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Is it… I… this… this is kind of a procedural question. Is it… Legitimate to argue for… [44:25] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Off-site relocation in lieu of designation on-site. [44:32] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Those are separate processes and separate applications, so the decision in front of you tonight is whether to recommend approval or disapproval of the designation, and you could express [44:45] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): You know, encouragement for relocation, but that would be approved through a Non-designated demolition and relocation application. [44:57] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Okay. [44:57] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [45:01] Michael Ray: I also have a question. [45:04] Michael Ray: Is… so, if the decision tonight is… [45:08] Michael Ray: To either proceed with designation or… or not. [45:13] Michael Ray: what, then, is the status of the demolition application? Does it default into Approving the demolition application? [45:23] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): It depends on the outcome of the hearing, so if the, [45:29] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): if the board votes to recommend designation, it goes to the City Council for a public hearing within 100 days, and then the City Council has the ultimate decision of whether or not the property is designated. [45:42] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): If the board votes to, disapprove or not recommend designation, then after the appeal period and the call-up period, which is 45 days, then the demolition, approval would be issued. [46:01] Michael Ray: Thank you. [46:18] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, I see no further questions. We move to the owner's presentation. [46:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Please state your full name and swear to tell the truth. [46:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): My name is Catherine Bean, and I swear to tell the truth. [46:39] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Do you all want me on the Zoom to share my slides, or… [47:30] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Alright, everyone see that? [47:36] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Pure. [47:48] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Alright. [47:50] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Good evening. Here we are, a full human gestational period, into talking about these projects. [47:58] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): And, we appreciate all of the time and the months you all have [48:03] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Worked with us, on the project. [48:05] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): I'm Catherine Bean, and Mark Liebuttrau will also be speaking here tonight.

[48:10] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): So, in summary. [48:12] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): We support staff findings. We believe that the designation doesn't meet the intent of the code, it does not have a reasonable balance between private property rights. [48:23] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): And the public interest, and in fact, is more in the public… [48:26] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): interest if the affordable housing project moves forward, so… That's the big summary. [48:33] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): We also have some comments beyond the staff findings. 990 Arapaho is really representative of its era, but it's not significant. [48:42] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And we saw that comment from not one, but two third-party licensed experts. So Pinion Environmental provided. [48:50] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): A report that showed no evidence of national historic significance, and the 1990 Front Range Associates report found 990 Arapaho representative, whereas other buildings it called out as excellent or outstanding. [49:05] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And it actually checked the box to say, not eligible. So we have two third-party groups. [49:11] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): There are more notable examples of the bungalow elsewhere in the hill. And, I do want to clarify, the project is not feasible with 990 being kept. I spoke about that in the concept hearing with Planning Board. I'm happy to go into more detail. [49:26] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): If you all have additional questions on that, but it wouldn't work, and I can show you why. [49:32] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [49:33] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Something else that came up that Marci spoke to is that this may be a kit home, we don't know, but what's interesting to me is I did a quick Google search of the kit home, which is called the Ardara. [49:44] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And dozens of photos popped up. And so, these are houses all over the country and across the Front Range that all have this hooded. [49:55] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): pergola, [49:57] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And so, to me, if I can do a quick Google search, and it's everywhere, it's not actually uncommon. It's actually somewhat common. [50:05] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): So, we no longer have the grouping of homes. We no longer see this as really being uncommon. [50:11] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And then, this, this slide I also shared at Planning Board, and, [50:17] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): This isn't what the project actually would look like, it's a little ridiculous, but this does exist in Seattle. It's called the Up House, for obvious reasons, and I want to point it out for two reasons, though. One is, you see this three-story building surrounding this one-story home, and that's kind of what we're being asked to do. [50:36] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Because of the topography of the site and the flood, we can't, [50:45] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): we can't just leave it out there in the front by itself, so it would be surrounded on three sides, and that's not the feeling I think any of us want for this property. [50:53] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And then in addition, you can see this… the concrete walls surrounding the house. And this is to do with the International Building Code. So that's a fire protection wall. [51:03] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): Because the buildings are so close. So if we had a new building this close to the existing building, we would wind up with this… [51:13] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): not necessarily slightly concrete surrounding, the historic or the old home. And so, I wanted to point it out because this is building code. [51:25] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): They can't change it in Seattle, our planning board can't change it here. This is for everyone's safety, and so that if there's a fire in one building, it wouldn't jump to the other. [51:34] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I wanted to give you a recap, because I know not everyone got the 3 hours to watch that hearing, and I think it's important to hear what happened, because we heard from you all, you wanted to know what planning board thought, and they heard that message as well. [51:48] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The biggest thing is they took a stropole, and that stropole was, does anyone think that the houses should be preserved? [51:57] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And they voted unanimously. No one thought the houses should be preserved and designated. And the board chair even said, I hope this clears things up. [52:07] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): There was a second straw vote as to should the houses even be moved if possible. Not requiring it, which I think is important to the comments said before, but just, if it's possible, should they do it? And that was pretty split. [52:24] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): There are also a few comments that I wanted to give you all just a moment to read, and hear some of the actual words of the planning board members, so I'll let you read those quickly. [52:55] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I have to keep going so that we end on time.

[52:58] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): There are two other points I wanted to bring up. One is the demolition timeline, and I don't know if you have any control over this, but I'm kind of singing it from the rooftops, because it's really important. [53:08] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The demolition approvals for the other three houses expire in March of next year. And if we get approval on this one, it'll expire, I assume, in May of next year. [53:17] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And what that means is, in March of next year, we would have to come back and see you all again, and go through this process again, or we would have to apply for a demolition permit. [53:29] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And you might say, well, just go ahead and apply for the permit. The problem is, if we apply for the permit, then we have to disconnect all the utilities. No water, no sewer, no electricity, no internet, and so we can't use the houses. We would lose a housing resource for our community, and the people who live there wouldn't be able to have their leases extended. [53:48] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And it'd also lose an opportunity for the nonprofit to earn some income, and so we really think it's important to have that length of demolition approval extended. Denver does it for 5 years, and honestly, that's how long it takes [54:03] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): To get something done in this town. So we would really recommend that to save you all time, to save staff time, to save applicants worry and time and money, that they get extended to 5 years, and I hope you'll support us on that. [54:17] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): The other thing I hope you'll support us on is the documentation requested for the first three houses, and I assume it'll be requested for the last one. The code gives the city manager the ability to make requests of documentation, a year of construction, significant events, those all make sense. [54:36] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And pretty much without limitation, it says that in the code. [54:40] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And so we got, the proposal from staff, or the request from staff, the requirement from staff, of what we needed to do to document the houses before we could apply for that demo permit, going back to that timeline. [54:52] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And there was a site plan, and there were extensive architectural drawings, and professional photographs. And we went out and we got estimates for all of those things. [55:01] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And the cost came out to about $12,000 per house, so if we need to do that for all four houses, it's another $50,000 in documentation costs. That's a real burden on the nonprofit. And, you know, if we really say we support senior affordable housing, then… [55:17] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): let's… let's use that third-party historic report as the documentation. It has photos, and it has all the history, has a lot of information in it, and I think it would be enough to… to get us through. [55:29] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'll hand it over to Mark for the last couple minutes. [55:38] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): My name's Richard Mark Levitrau, I go by Mark. [55:41] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): And I swear to tell the truth. [55:43] Speaker 4 (Board & Commissions): Nice meeting you all again, Alex, nice meeting you, and you. [55:46] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): as well, Michael, on, virtual. [55:49] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): As you recall, part of… in an attempt for a win-win for both [55:56] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): the Landmarks Board, Historic Boulder, and Presbyterian Manor. [56:01] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): We offered to donate those 4 houses. To date, 3 individuals have toured or expressed an interest in relocation. [56:10] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): One of them declined after touring the homes. They weren't what she thought they might be. [56:16] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): Another one lives out of state and doesn't have any property secured. [56:21] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): A third person, was interested in 990, actually, but is likely unable to relocate due to some code and site constraints. And I believe, Marcy, that that person has spoken to you about… [56:35] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): That particular home. [56:37] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): Well, we will, so, so far, we've been unable to relocate one of them. [56:44] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): But we'll continue to field inquiries, and we do remain committed to working with Historic Boulder and trying to find a location for these houses. [56:53] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): In summary, our request is to deny the landmark designation for 990 Arapaho over our objections, and it will allow us to complete [57:05] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): A, permanently affordable, Senior Low Income Housing Project. [57:11] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): We would ask, and again, you may not be able to do this, but 5-year demolition approvals for all 4 houses, because by the time you get through… [57:22] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): a LIHTC application, site review, permitting, all the rest of those, that will never happen within a year, and it can't happen, really, through LIHTC funding.

[57:33] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): And also ask that, you would reduce the documentation required for the demolition permit. We do have independent third-party [57:42] Speaker 11 (Board & Commissions): That talks about the site view elevation plans, and Thank you. [57:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [57:54] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): at this time, we're allowed to ask questions. [57:58] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Does anyone have any questions for our owners? [58:05] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, and as I see none, we can move to public comment. [58:11] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Renee, may I real quick, [58:13] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Catherine, I might have missed it, I heard Mark, but would you just affirm or swear that everything you testified to was the truth? [58:21] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): He said me. He said he heard you. [58:23] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I heard… I heard Catherine, but thanks. [58:26] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'll swear again, so… We don't let that happen in. [58:29] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): my house, but I will tonight. [58:30] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): I'm Catherine Bean, and I swear to tell the truth. Thank you, Catherine. [58:34] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Thank you. [58:37] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Now we can move to public comment. [58:40] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Virtual, if you are here to in person, please sign up. [58:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And, virtual attendees, please raise your hand. You will be required to state your full name and swear to tell the board the whole truth. [58:57] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Do we have any in-person? Yes, we've got Margo Smith. [59:07] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Margo Smith, Preservation Chair for Historic Boulder, I swear to tell the truth. [59:12] Speaker 9 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [59:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Good evening, I'm Mark's board. [59:16] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): It ended, you ended… you ended, thank you! That was, that was wonderful. Thank you so much. Good? [59:29] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [59:30] Board & Commissions: Right. [59:31] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): So the value of the four bungalows on Arapaho was in their group… is in their grouping, their contribution to the street… streetscape. [59:42] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): While we did advocate previously for saving the four group… the four bungalows, with the board's decision not to move forward with landmarking for three of the houses, we recommend that landmarking should not continue for 990 alone. [59:57] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Again, we believe their value is in their grouping, and given no changes were made to the plan for the proposed development, to include all of them, we do not consider it wise to have [60:08] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): One, sit outside of the grouping. All of these bungalows together contributed to a historical context of a neighborhood in Boulder. [60:17] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Historic Boulder also testified to this effect at the recent concept plan review by the planning… at the planning board for this site. [60:25] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Historic Boulder is committed to seeing the bungalows move to new homes. We very much appreciate the financial commitment.

[60:33] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Presbyterian Manor's development team has made to moving these bungalows to new locations by contributing the equivalent of their deconstruction to the relocation effort. [60:44] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): We've already had offers, and we're looking at more, continuing to put out the word. We look forward to continuing to work with Presbyterian Manor, on this until we find homes for them. [60:56] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Speaking for Historic Boulder, what occurred here is again made clear that the process of decision-making can be much improved, particularly when historic resources are involved in a larger discretionary review process, as has happened here. [61:14] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Our understanding from the developers on this… of this project is they also have concerns about the process. Historic Boulder is interested in seeing how we can contribute. [61:24] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): to improving this component of the City's planning process, so that consideration of redevelopment and of historic preservation are on a more level playing field. [61:34] Speaker 12 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [61:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Margo. [61:41] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I need more in person. [61:43] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): No. Any virtual? [61:48] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Virtual participants, please raise your hand if you'd like to speak. [61:54] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): First up, we have Lynn Siegel. [61:58] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Lynn, will you state your full name and swear to tell the board the whole truth? [62:02] lynn segal: Lindsayo, I swear to tell the truth the best as I know it, and I'm completely disgusted by this situation. It's horrific that this one house was saved. That's as well as planned to have all of them go. [62:17] lynn segal: If one was to remain. So, it was a very lame. [62:23] lynn segal: excuse for keeping that one. It's… it's so pitiful what Bolu's come to in… in being driven by this. [62:35] lynn segal: Humongous, massive. [62:39] lynn segal: financial interest in this town, by the developers, and by the development community, and by Claudia Thiem, and Chelsea Castellano, and the other folks at Planning Board. [62:52] lynn segal: that are just pushing growth as fast as they can do it, and under the name of LIHTC, and [63:01] lynn segal: it's just revolting. LIHTC pushes growth from the federal government down to this community, and this community is so lame, it cannot fight back. [63:13] lynn segal: It fights back with Sundance, and Area 3, and the airport, and CU South. [63:20] lynn segal: And see you, endless givings out to see you. [63:27] lynn segal: CU owns this town now, and it owns the… the character, and the charm, and everything else. I am… [63:36] lynn segal: So disgusted with this landmarks board, and with the staff, and with [63:43] lynn segal: the whole situation here. It's revolting. [63:47] lynn segal: It's so, so awful to have this happen to a town. And… [63:54] lynn segal: And it's pitiful the way one house was saved, as if that was gonna save it, the rest. And it was not. And you know what? I'm not from here. Thank God I'm not from here. I'm from Seattle, where the up house stayed in that one… [64:13] lynn segal: Huge composition around it. [64:19] lynn segal: I'm stuck here. [64:21] lynn segal: I'm freezing cold in my house because of non-profits that were helping me out with an energy retrofit that cost me $50,000. $50,000 was brought up in this… in this talk tonight. [64:34] lynn segal: $50,000 is a lot to a 73-year-old on Social Security, been saving for a geothermal heat pump for 25 years. Now, I can't do a geothermal heat pump because I've got a $50,000 cost from these non-profits that offered me this great energy retrofit without

[64:55] lynn segal: my civil rights to have anything to do with it. I had to even move off the property when a housemate from Munich was staying in my house. [65:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks, Lynn. [65:15] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Does the owner… the owner… oh, do we have any more? [65:18] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Sorry, if anyone else would like to speak online, please raise your hand. [65:26] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): I don't see anyone else. Okay. [65:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The owner may now have an additional 3 minutes if they'd like to have a comment on anything that's been said during public comment. [65:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Would you like to respond with what was said? [65:39] Speaker 10 (Board & Commissions): No response this evening, thanks. [65:43] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We're now going to move on to a board discussion. I ask that everyone else please mute your computer or phone for the duration of the discussion. We estimate 45 minutes for the discussion. [65:55] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Does anyone want to start? [66:05] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Okay, I have spoken a lot about this project. I feel like we've… [66:11] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Had 20 hearings at this point. And so I have already spoken to its merits, and so I'm not going to repeat those comments, and instead we'll just focus on the criteria, which is our charge tonight. [66:27] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So in my view, this, property does not meet our standards for landmark designation under the criteria. This appears to be as, [66:41] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): was mentioned a potential kit home, and while the builder did a great job putting it together, I mean, it's still here, so good job. [66:50] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I don't believe evidence was presented that they were a prominent builder, which is our criteria. Our criteria for the, [67:01] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): section of the architect or builder of prominence is defined as a good example of the work of an architect or builder who is recognized for expertise in this field nationally, statewide, or locally. It's possible that buildings can be landmarked without meeting all the criteria, but I find it hard [67:21] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): To come up with evidence that this kid house would qualify as meeting that criteria. [67:27] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And while the past residents played an important role within the community, I didn't see any evidence that the contributions made by these residents rise to the level of historical significance, that our criteria is meant to capture. [67:46] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): just as an example, you know, if simply having jobs, such as court clerks or grocers, makes a building eligible for designation, then one day, you know, all of our homes will be eligible for designation, and I don't think that is the bar we are intending to set with our criteria. [68:06] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I also remain unconvinced that the properties meet the threshold for environmental significance. Again, describing them as visually prominent doesn't [68:18] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): establish any contextual value. The fact that they're visible from the street does not mean that they're a defining character of a neighborhood. [68:27] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I lived in this area for 2 years, and… For me, it was… [68:33] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I didn't really notice them. That's just my personal anecdote as a community member who lived in this area, but, I think the, overwhelming majority of public speakers that showed up at our last meeting, [68:51] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): shared that same sentiment. And given the substantial evolution of this area, including adjacent multifamily development and other nearby changes, I don't believe this structure, anchors the setting in a way that justifies landmarking. [69:08] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And just to close, and then I won't talk again. Or at least, I can't promise that, but… When I think about historic preservation, I think about places that are truly exceptional buildings and spaces that [69:23] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Are celebrated as clear public good and whose preservation is unquestionably, [69:31] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): something that enriches future generations, and I don't believe that this… [69:38] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): property does that. I agree with staff and believe this application is inconsistent with the purposes and standards of the historic preservation ordinance. [69:47] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): And I also believe that to designate this property over a nonprofit's objection that provides affordable housing to seniors, would be an abhorrent step that I beg my fellow colleagues not to take. [70:04] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So, that is… those are my comments on… this project.

[70:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks, Chelsea. [70:15] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Does anybody else want? John is reaching. [70:19] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Go down the list. Okay. [70:23] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): In previous meetings, Regarding this project. [70:30] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We… Talked about what the significance of this… [70:36] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): This house, particularly inside the group of houses, was, even though we had to consider each one individually. [70:46] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): It was… as I stated in a previous meeting, impossible to really consider [70:53] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I guess the value of these [70:57] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): From the standpoint of their historic significance, if considered individually without the rest of the group, and what the meaning of the group was. [71:09] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): That being said, When we nominated this, For preservation, when we initiated. [71:22] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We, at least in my mind, were holding to the fact that this was going to be the remaining representative of a group that had urban significance. [71:35] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And… Was going to play the role For all the remaining houses. [71:44] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): All of that aside, I think that… It could be argued that this meets… [71:54] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): the criteria that we hold for historic preservation, however, And this has always been… [72:01] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I guess my case with viewing these things. This balance between the public good. [72:10] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And private property rights, And the community benefit of historic preservation [72:16] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): is such in this case, that I don't think It is the correct thing. [72:22] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): to… launch into preservation on this building over the objection of the owners of the property. And so. [72:33] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): from that standpoint, I have to support staff's recommendation. [72:42] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks, Jen. [72:44] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): michael, you wanna go, or am I in line? [72:48] Michael Ray: I… I can go. [72:49] Michael Ray: Bye. [72:53] Michael Ray: I guess I… I just hang my… I mean, I'm the arch… I'm an architect, right? So, for me, it's a… it's about… [73:01] Michael Ray: the house, and what I heard in the staff presentation is that this particular house has a high degree of integrity. [73:09] Michael Ray: for what it is as a… as a craftsman-style bungalow. Whether it's a kid home, or whether it was designed by Frank Lloyd Wright. [73:16] Michael Ray: It… it's… it's… I think that… [73:19] Michael Ray: is what drew me to this house in particular, out of the four. I… I… the same. [73:28] Michael Ray: tonight as I did when… when we looked at the properties individually. I suppose I'm… I'm interested in… [73:37] Michael Ray: Knowing a little bit more about the two requests.

[73:42] Michael Ray: And maybe this is where Chris will have to chime in, or Marci, but the request for extending the demolition [73:51] Michael Ray: Permit durations. I… I don't really know if that's in our… [73:58] Michael Ray: if… if we… we do that. And then… and then secondly, what I'm kind of more… so that's an easy answer, and I don't think anybody… [74:09] Michael Ray: would fall on their sword about… about doing something like that, if we're capable. But… but I do want to zero in on the documentation [74:19] Michael Ray: And this is kind of a question for Marcy with respect to the protocols, because if we're saying that the important ingredient of this property isn't as much [74:33] Michael Ray: isn't as important as if it's grouped with the other three houses. I believe a concession that could be made with respect to the documentation, and I'm going to speak a little bit out of line, but Marci will put me right back in my place, hopefully, here. But I would expect, at a bare minimum. [74:53] Michael Ray: that the grouping of the four houses, even though we have treated them individually, as individual properties, I believe it's really important, if we're all saying that these four houses are important because there are four of them. [75:06] Michael Ray: That the documentation, at a minimum, needs to identify or, or, or… or record [75:15] Michael Ray: At least a detailed site plan, and maybe a street elevation of all four of them, that identifies the grouping as what we felt like was important. [75:25] Michael Ray: about the houses, as opposed to full-blown measure drawings for just this particular house, or all four houses. But I'll stop there. I think I'm just trying to put a little bit of a… [75:41] Michael Ray: Edit… [75:41] Michael Ray: Edit or a tweak on the requirement for documentation, since that was a request from the owner, that we consider that. [75:50] Michael Ray: And I do think, at a minimum, I wouldn't relieve them of full document… or of documentation altogether, but I do think that documentation of the four houses and their context in detail is really important. [76:06] Michael Ray: And I'll shut up. [76:10] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: So, Michael, I might, take it to start here. [76:14] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: In terms of what… authority the board has to address, [76:22] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: 2 out of the three requests by the owner. [76:26] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And to put it simply, the only… [76:29] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: of those three requests, the only one that the Landmarks Board has authority on to act on is whether to designate [76:38] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Or not. [76:40] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: has no ability to extend the timeline for how long a demolition permit is valid for, and the reason why that is, is because it's part of the code, and the code states that [76:56] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: An approval under this section shall expire if a deconstruction or building permit has not been applied for within one year from the date such demolition is approved. [77:07] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: there's no wiggle room there, and no role for the Landmarks Board to play in that. And so, regardless of the merit of that suggestion, there just isn't a legal way for the board to impact that timeline. [77:21] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And then, similarly, What, is required of… [77:28] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: applicants for demolition permits, if the demolition permit is condition… is approved by, the Landmarks Board. [77:38] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: then the, like, sort of supporting documentation, aspect of it is, the code states, that it's… that's a city manager decision, and so the landmarks Board wouldn't be able to essentially tell [77:55] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: The city manager, and then her authority flows down through staff. [77:59] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: what documentation to require. You could advise and say, we think that [78:06] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: we would, you can give your opinion and say, it's our opinion that such documentation shouldn't be required, but the Landmarks Board can't be the, one who… [78:18] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: forces, or requires…

[78:20] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Or says, we're not going to require you to supply architectural drawings or photographs, it's just not within the authority of the… [78:28] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Landmark Sports. [78:30] Michael Ray: I… I wish the owner would have… [78:34] Michael Ray: understood that before making the request of the Landmarks Board for those Two items. [78:41] Michael Ray: So that we wouldn't have to… I wouldn't even have brought it up if I… [78:44] Michael Ray: Had known it wasn't in our purview. [78:47] Michael Ray: I, I do… [78:49] Michael Ray: I do have one… one… so thanks for clarifying. I do have one final comment regarding the example of the… the Seattle house, and… and in case that comes up in the… in the… in future. [79:02] Michael Ray: where there's a singular house that we do feel that much strongly… that strongly about. I mean, that's… that's the most unimaginative solution you can… [79:13] Michael Ray: You could think of, and even the axonometric diagram [79:17] Michael Ray: Presented by the owner shows just a lack of… [79:21] Michael Ray: imagination and good faith in terms of trying to work with the house. I think it's… [79:28] Michael Ray: Kind of embarrassing, and… I'll leave it at that. [79:35] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Renee, if it's okay, I'd like to speak to the, requirement for the documentation, and just for the record, $50,000 to document 4 houses is unbelievable. So… [79:49] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): in my experience and in talking with a practicing architect, they charge about $2,500 to $3,500 for full as-belt drawings for their projects on a regular residential basis. That's floor plans, so measuring the interior as well as the exterior. [80:08] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): So, $50,000 is about 83 hours per building at $150 an hour, where it's… [80:18] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): estimated it might take 5 hours to document the exterior. So, I think there are probably many people who would love to get into the line of work of architectural documentation if it really did cost that much, but [80:32] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): That is, I just, for the record, a pretty standard requirement for a building that will be demolished, that is architecturally, and culturally significant. Once the building's gone, the only documentation we have is what [80:49] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): we require before the building is gone. And so, just wanted to put that in perspective. I know there's 3 practicing architects on the board who might also, have an idea of what that as-built cost might be. [81:08] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Marci, would you be willing to share the contact that gave you that quote to them? [81:14] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Since… it seems like… That's a good… A better deal. [81:22] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): I don't think he's looking for a job. My husband is an architect with 30 years of experience who regularly does as-built drawings. So, sounds like you also got quotes, but, you might keep, kind of looking, and if you need clarification about the level of documentation, [81:43] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So I would, just to… just to, you know, keep going on that thread for a minute, I mean, I am a practicing architect, and I get as-built drawings quite often. $50 a square foot… $50, sorry, 50 cents. [81:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): a square foot for the house. So I don't know what the square footage of those houses are. [82:05] Board & Commissions: Yeah. [82:06] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So… And I literally just looked at my text message. So… [82:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, so I think there's a way to make that smaller, and you can certainly… I think that if Ryan is still on the call, if they're allowed to reach out to me, that would be fine. [82:27] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): On my end. So, to… they can ask for that contact. [82:31] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I will go into just a little bit about these houses. I would like to say… [82:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): First and foremost, that I do agree with Historic Boulder. I think the four houses, all together really…

[82:47] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): make a merit for, the streetscape there. And it is sad that the way that, we as the Landmark Board had to look at each individual house. [83:00] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): knowing that there was not a different house next to it, it was… it was a little complex and a little different, and I think that we were all trying to figure out how to… [83:08] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): fumble through it. I do agree that the streetscape is what makes [83:14] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): that area, the four houses. So, I also want to say that, I do not think that us as a landmark board, we are here [83:26] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): we didn't actually prevent an affordable housing unit to be not built. I think that we, as a landmarks board, are here to take a look at [83:37] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): a structure and a building and see if it has any merit in historic, preservation, and we follow the guidelines, and I think [83:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): That, ultimately, I am proud of the Landmarks Board, and I'm proud of, us [83:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Speaking up a little bit about it, and then going into maybe a little bit of an extra… [83:58] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Month of the process to allow us to, [84:02] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): look through it, and also, I am in agreeance to the way the process was brought about, and so, knowing a little bit of the planning board on the side, and landmarks board, and if there was a way to look at the sequencing of events… [84:22] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I think that that would have allowed maybe for a better, movement for the applicant. [84:30] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I don't know how to fix that, I don't know, you know, where to go or who to talk to about that, but I do think that there was a little bit of, you know. [84:42] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): what can be done on this site as a whole, and then, hey, wait a minute, there's these four buildings that could be landmarked, now we gotta go this route. So, [84:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I think that maybe this was… I mean, Marcy can maybe speak to this, if this was the first of its kind, and so… and maybe the last of its kind, so we might not have to deal with it again. But, I do… [85:06] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): think that, what Presbyterian Manor is doing, I think that Boulder needs that. [85:12] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I also think that… I don't want to see all the houses scraped and a big… [85:20] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): box put up on every corner either within Boulder, because I don't think that's what makes [85:25] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): the City of Boulder. [85:27] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The reason why we all love it, and the reason why we're up here today. So, I… [85:34] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): do… I will support staff's recommendation to not designate this evening, but I do want to say that I… I think that we did… [85:44] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): as a whole Landmarks board, I think we did a good job. And I do appreciate everybody's opinion on this board, and I am interested to hear our new members' opinion. [85:56] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, interesting time to be stepping into this mid-project. [85:59] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): With regard to just 990, I think the historic significance is interesting, but not necessarily warranting landmark status, and same on the architectural front. [86:11] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And to me, what really stood out in the staff memo, the findings, and some of the testimony tonight is the environment really changes when the other three adjacent buildings go away. [86:23] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): As Margaret said, the value is in the grouping. [86:27] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): And so, I'll keep it short, I think, just based on that, I'm opposed to landmarking this over the, the owner's objection. [86:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Great. [86:39] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Anybody else wanna add anything in? [86:45] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, do we have a motion? [86:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Do you want to put… I'll do it.

[86:54] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, [86:55] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I move the Landmarks Board not approve the proposed designation of the property at 990 Arapahoe Avenue. [87:02] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): as a local historic landmark, finding that the proposed designation does not meet the standards for individual landmark designation in sections 9-11-1 and 9-11-2, BRC 1981, and adopt the staff memorandum dated May 6, 2006, [87:20] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): As the findings and conclusions of the board. [87:24] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Chelsea, and I will second the motion. [87:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, thank you, Renee, for seconding the motion. It's so weird. [87:33] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Additional discussion, we'll take a roll call vote. Chelsea. [87:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): John. Hi. [87:40] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Alex? Aye. Michael? [87:42] Michael Ray: Nope. [87:44] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I vote aye. Motion… Passes 4 to 1. [87:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Marci, can you please go over the next steps in the process? [87:55] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [87:56] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): So, what happens next is that there's a appeals period if the owner wanted to appeal the board's decision, to Council, and then Council has a 45-day call-up, [88:10] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Period, and so the demolition, application will be issued at the end of that call-up period, unless Council calls it up. [88:22] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I do have one question in terms of the, [88:26] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): the issue of potentially extending the permit, the demolition permit. I know, Chris, you mentioned we don't have authority to do that. I'm wondering if there… if Council has the authority to do that, or the city manager? Does anyone have the authority to do that? [88:44] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Thanks for the question, Chelsea. [88:47] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: To accomplish what they're asking for, it would require a code change. [88:51] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And the only body that can accomplish a code change is City Council, and so it would have to go through the… [88:58] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Code change process, for that to happen. [89:01] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Well, how hard could that be? [89:05] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: I mean, it's… it happens, you know, we change the code, [89:09] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: on a regular basis, but there is a process. It has to be identified, it has to essentially be sponsored by the department, and then, [89:20] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: you know, first, and then second reading. There's a public process, just like we're in a public process here this evening. [89:26] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Okay, thank you. [89:28] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: You're welcome. [89:29] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Sweet. [89:33] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): I forget what that one. [89:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, we will move on to the second public hearing.

[89:39] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): That is Agenda Item 5B, public hearing and consideration of an application to demolish a building constructed. [89:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Circa 1899 at 422 Arapahoe Avenue, HIS2026. [89:53] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): 0054, a non-designated property older than 50 years. [89:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): old, pursuant to Section 91123 of the Boulder Revised Code 1981, and under the proceedings prescribed by the Chapter 1 through 3 quasi-Judicial Hearings Boulder Revised Code 1981. The owner is D. Murray. Murray? [90:18] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Development 442 Alpine LLC, registered agent, Caroline. [90:24] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Murray, and the applicant is David Jensen. [90:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I'll hand it over to Claire for staff presentation, and to re-say their names if I said them wrong. [90:36] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Renee. Registered agent Caroline Murray-Clevenger, and applicant David Jen. [90:42] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): But other than that, you did great. [90:46] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Okay, so this is also a quasi-judicial hearing, so I will swear in. I'm Claire Bryant, Historic Preservation Planner. [90:53] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And I affirm that I will tell the truth, and I'll pause to allow the board members to note any ex parte contact. [91:03] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): I walked by the site briefly last weekend. [91:08] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Michael, I can't see you, so can you… Confirm. [91:13] Michael Ray: The… the only… if I'm not mistaken, Marcy, this… [91:19] Michael Ray: came up as part of LDRC, so that would be my only involvement, is sort of having [91:25] Michael Ray: I was on the… the team, or I had that assignment that… that day. [91:31] Michael Ray: So that would be my ex parte involvement with this. [91:36] Michael Ray: Property slash application. [91:41] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): That's correct, actually. Sorry, I forgot to mention that. Michael, Abby, and Marcy were members of the… [91:47] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Committee for, reviewing this. [91:51] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): So here is an overview of the process we'll go through today. I'm going to give the staff presentation, and the board may ask me questions. The applicant, who are here virtually, will have 10 minutes to present to the board, and the board may ask questions. [92:07] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): 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, and then the, the board will then deliberate. [92:19] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): A motion requires an affirmative vote of at least 3 members to pass. Motions will state findings, conclusions, and a recommendation, and a record of this hearing is available in a couple of days as a video recording. [92:31] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): With the official record added to the archive within 28 days. [92:39] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The criteria for review is outlined in the Boulder Revised Code under 9-1123. This is a demolition application, and the purpose of reviewing demolition applications is to prevent the loss of buildings that may have historic or architectural significance by providing time to consider alternatives to demolition. [93:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Claire, can I… [93:03] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I just looked at the elevations of this house, and so I will, do an ex parte. [93:11] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I know somebody that wanted to purchase this house and, like, fell in love with it, so… [93:16] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): She showed me pictures, and we talked about, like, what to do with the space. [93:22] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): But other than that, that was just it.

[93:25] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So… Sorry to interrupt you. Thank you, Chris. [93:29] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Did you have any… Comments? [93:33] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Thank you, Renee. When did that, conversation take place? [93:40] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Two months ago, when I was at the pottery lab, that fire station. Another historic building? No. [93:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, 2 or 3 months ago. [93:53] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Okay. [93:55] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And, just to clarify what the facts are, is it, you… [94:00] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Know somebody who really liked this house, and you kind of talked about the house a bit with her a couple months ago? [94:06] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yeah, she wanted to, purchase the house as is. [94:13] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Just… You know, that sounds like a totally normal sort of interaction, [94:21] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Are you able to set that conversation to the side, and then base any decision that you make here this evening on the facts presented and the criteria and the code? [94:31] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Yes. [94:32] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Great. [94:33] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: And is there any reason that you have to believe that you can't be a fair and neutral decision maker here? [94:40] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): No. [94:42] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Amazing. Well, thank you. [94:47] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Sorry, Claire. Continue. Thank you, Renee. [94:50] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The criteria that can be considered are the eligibility of the building for designation as an individual landmark. [94:57] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): That's if it has historic or architectural significance. [95:00] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The relationship of the building to the character of the neighborhood as an established and definable area. [95:06] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The reasonable condition of the building and the projected cost of restoration or repair, although not deterioration caused by unreasonable neglect. [95:16] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The options for the board tonight are to approve the demolition request, or place a stay of demolition to allow time to consider alternatives. [95:25] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): A stay would not exceed 180 days from the day the review fee was paid, so, [95:32] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): would expire on… June 15th? [95:38] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): However… no, that's not right. Sorry. [95:43] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Do I have a date in there? [95:46] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. September 13th. However, the last regularly scheduled Landmarks Board meeting within the stay period would be September 2nd, which, practically speaking, makes it a 119-day stay. [96:01] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Obviously, that confuses us as well, so… [96:04] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The Planning and Development Services Department initially accepted the application to demolish the non-designated building on February 27th. [96:13] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Due to the age of the building, the initial review was undertaken by the Landmarks Design Review Committee, and they referred the application to the Landmarks Board in a public hearing, finding there was probable cause to believe the building may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark.

[96:28] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): On March 17th, the applicant paid the Landmarks Board hearing fee to proceed with today's hearing. [96:37] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The property is located on the south side of Alpine Avenue, which was historically 1st Avenue, mid-block between 4th and 5th Streets. [96:47] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The property is located within the identified expanded Mapleton Potential Historic District. [96:53] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): and faces north towards Alpine Avenue. The property is bordered on the south by an unnamed alley. [97:03] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): It's a one-storey frame structure with a hipped roof. The building has moderate eaves, and the roof is clad in asphalt shingles. [97:11] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The north elevation facing Alpine Avenue features a full-width enclosed porch addition and central hipped roof dormer at the ridgeline above. [97:24] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The porch includes multiple windows and beadboard siding. The original part of the building is behind the front porch addition, and the building sits on a stone foundation and is clad in narrow, horizontal laps siding. [97:41] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The porch addition, is about 110 square feet. It includes a new retaining wall and concrete foundation, and was added in about 1973 by Esther Clevenger. [97:53] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Clevenger is recognized as one of Colorado's most important artists, and likely constructed the north-facing enclosed porch as a painting studio, as the indirect light is important and sought after for painters. [98:10] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): For its integrity, the building is in its original location. It retains some of its historic materials, including the roof dormer, horizontal lap siding, window trim, and windows. The building appears to retain the original facade within the enclosed porch. [98:26] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The building demonstrates vernacular workmanship and ability to convey a feeling of its time. [98:31] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): While the setting of the house has changed over the last 126 years, the building has not lost its ability to convey its association with its early residence and early period of development of the neighbourhood. [98:44] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Or with its more recent residents. [98:50] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Staff analysis of the criteria looks at the eligibility of the building for designation as an individual landmark, its historic, architectural, and environmental significance. [98:59] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The Landmarks Board adopted significance criteria in 1975 to help evaluate buildings in a consistent and equitable manner. [99:08] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Staff analysis considers these criteria, and also the relationship of the building to the character of the neighbourhood as an established and definable area, and the reasonable cost. [99:18] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And condition of the building. [99:24] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The historic significance criteria considers the development, heritage, and cultural characteristics of the community. The Mountain Heights neighborhood was platted in 1903. [99:34] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): This property is an example of the earliest homes constructed in the neighborhood. [99:39] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The building was constructed in 1899, and the first known residents were the Reverend George and Kerry States. [99:48] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Subsequent residents of the house were short-term, until 1973, when it was purchased by Esther Clevenger. Esther was born on July 11th, 1939, in Plainsfield, New Jersey. [100:01] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): She moved to Boulder at the end of the 1950s to study art at the University of Colorado Boulder. [100:07] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): In the mid-1960s, she was part of an art collective called the Armory Group. [100:12] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The group were pioneers of new trends in contemporary art, and became some of the most influential artists in the state of Colorado. [100:20] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Esther's work was described as between Grandma Moses and Vincent van Gogh, with a touch of Chagall, by an art critic who wrote that her work combines Moses' flat, unpracticed drawing and skewed perspective [100:33] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): With Van Gogh's strong, crisp, country colors, choppy brushstrokes, and psychological intensity. [100:41] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Esther has been called a local treasure and a modest and barely sung art hero, and is recently recognized as one of Colorado's most important artists. She lived in the house for three decades until her death in 2003. [100:57] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The architectural significance criteria consider the distinguishing features of the architecture and the architect and builder. [101:05] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The house, is representative of vernacular frame construction of the early 20th century. The hipped roof form was, an economical building. [101:15] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): To construct, and was popular in Colorado due to its simplicity and utility. It was a precursor to the later, more refined classic cottage, which became popular around 1910.

[101:27] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Both the basic hipped roof cottage and classic cottage style include a hipped roof and central dorma on a one-storey building with a four-square plan. [101:38] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Vernacular buildings are, by definition, not architecturally defined, and rarely include artistic detailing. [101:46] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The builder of the house, Edward C. Porter, was a carpenter. [101:51] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): and purchased the lots that comprise the Mountain Heights plat. He typically built one, house to the specification of future owner, sold the property, and then purchased another lot. He owned all seven lots facing Arapahoe Avenue, sorry, Alpine Avenue at some point. [102:12] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The environmental significance criteria considers the sense of identity created by the unique natural or man-made environment. [102:21] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The property is located within the boundaries of expanded Mapleton Potential Historic District. [102:27] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Changes to the surrounding houses have not diminished the connection to the neighbourhood, and the property retains its historic character and fits the historic urban-edge character of this area of Boulder. [102:41] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The Mountain Heights neighborhood was established in 1903, and has retained its character as a definable area. Block 1, which was between Alpine Avenue and Valley View Road, and between 4th and 5th Streets of the Mountain Heights Platte. [102:58] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Developed as a residential area between, 1899 and 1904. [103:04] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The remaining areas of the Platte and the surrounding neighbourhood remained relatively undeveloped until the Second World War. During this time, ex-servicemen returned to Boulder for higher educational opportunities, and the student population more than doubled. [103:18] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): So the need for housing increased, and growth continued into the 1960s. [103:23] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The aerial image from 1966 in the center here illustrates the number of houses constructed during this period, especially at the center of the Mountain Heights plat, and just to the east of the area. [103:37] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The neighborhood is currently undergoing a third phase of development with contemporary houses replacing some of the existing buildings and new development on the western side of the plat. [103:51] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The applicant provided information about the condition of the building and the projected cost of repair, which was included in the packet. [104:00] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The applicant is here and can, answer any questions you may have. But in summary, the house is on its original rubble foundation. It has significant wood rot. [104:11] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Other, aspects of the condition result in it needing an estimated 50-75% remodel before it is habitable or code compliant. [104:21] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And the cost is economically inconsistent with the value of the house. [104:30] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Staff finds that the demolition of the house is appropriate based on the criteria set forth in Section 91123F, [104:37] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): In that while the building may be eligible for designation as an individual landmark, the building is in poor condition, and the cost of restoration is likely prohibitive. [104:47] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The condition of the building is not due to unreasonable neglect, but rather due to the age of the building, expansive soils, and a shallow foundation. [104:59] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Our recommended motion is that the Landmarks Board approve the application to demolish the building at 422 Alpine Ave. [105:10] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Should the board, choose to issue the demolition approval, staff will require that prior to any demolition. [105:17] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The following be submitted to staff for review, approval, and recording. Measured drawings of all external exterior elevations of the building, a site plan showing the location of all existing improvements, and high-quality digital photographs of the exterior of the building. [105:35] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): That's the end of the staff presentation. This is a reminder of the next steps. The applicant has up to 10 minutes to present to the board, followed by public participation, and an opportunity for the applicant to respond to anything that's said, and then board deliberation. [105:52] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Are there any questions for staff before we move on to the applicant's presentation? [105:58] Michael Ray: I have a question. [106:01] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Go ahead. [106:01] Michael Ray: Claire, did you… did you… I'm not sure that I heard it deliberately, but did you say that the porch was… [106:09] Michael Ray: Well, the roof expanded and then enclosed as a studio as a result of the artist who owned the house in 73? I mean, do we have a date on the enclosure? [106:21] Board & Commissions: We do, it is 1973.

[106:24] Michael Ray: Okay, so for her. [106:28] Michael Ray: I forget her name. Clevenger? [106:32] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Yes, it was, it was… the permit was pulled by Esther Clavanger, so we can assume that she built the porch, or had somebody build the porch on her behalf. [106:42] Michael Ray: Thank you. [106:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Renee. [106:53] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Now we can move to the applicant presentation. [106:58] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I think they're virtual. [107:02] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Connor and Steve, I just sent you a, request to promote to panelists, if you would like to speak. [107:15] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Mariah, could you also promote Amy and Bill as well, please? [107:25] Connor Manaker: Right there. [107:30] Connor Manaker: Is this working? [107:33] Connor Manaker: Okay. [107:34] Connor Manaker: I think Steve is trying to join on right now. [107:37] Steve Dodd: No, I'm… I'm here. [107:38] Connor Manaker: Okay. [107:39] Steve Dodd: Yep. [107:41] Steve Dodd: And if Amy… Wanted to summarize. I mean, I can easily summarize the, [107:49] Steve Dodd: the findings that we put together. I mean, the soils in that neighborhood… [107:56] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Just to clarify, we need to have you state your full name and. [108:00] Steve Dodd: I'm sorry. [108:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Truth, sorry. Apologies for interrupting, but thank you. [108:05] Steve Dodd: Forgot. [108:06] Steve Dodd: Steve Dodd, I'm an architect in Boulder, 35 years. [108:14] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And you swear to tell the truth. [108:16] Steve Dodd: I do. [108:17] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Great. [108:18] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [108:23] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Go right ahead. [108:24] Steve Dodd: Yeah, I mean, we have all of our documentations, really, you know, in part of our written submittal, but just to, you know, [108:33] Steve Dodd: point out a couple of those main items, which is that the soils in that neighborhood are quite expansive. We don't have soils tests for this property itself, but we do have soils tests from the adjacent property, which is required to put on caissons, and so…

[108:50] Steve Dodd: these rubble foundations are subject to a fair amount of movement in those soils conditions, and it appears that that building has had a fair amount of movement over the years. [109:05] Steve Dodd: And in addition, of course, there's all sorts of code-related requirements, wood exposure to soil and settlement and structural upgrades that would be required to bring that [109:17] Steve Dodd: that structure up to code. So it does seem like a fairly high burden to, place on that structure. [109:25] Steve Dodd: Particularly when the, you know, the original house has been covered with the [109:31] Steve Dodd: the later, edition, I do see that it was, [109:35] Steve Dodd: added by an artist, significant artist at the time, or I think that's a supposition. [109:42] Steve Dodd: That it was added as her art studio. [109:46] Steve Dodd: But our feeling is that the structure is in, [109:52] Steve Dodd: Is in quite poor condition, and, would be a significant burden to bring up to current stand… current code and standards. [110:03] Steve Dodd: We'll be happy to answer any questions that staff might… or that the board might have. [110:15] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Does anyone… is that the end of the presentation? [110:18] Steve Dodd: Yes. [110:19] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Great. Does anyone on the board have any questions? [110:25] Michael Ray: I… I have a question, and I… I see 3… 3 people representing the applicant. [110:31] Michael Ray: the owner, so I'm not sure, aside from Steve, who said he was the architect, is… [110:38] Michael Ray: Two… two questions that are related. Does… [110:41] Michael Ray: Does anybody live in the house currently? [110:44] Michael Ray: And… If not, when was the last time somebody did live in the house? [110:53] Steve Dodd: The house is not currently occupied. [110:56] Steve Dodd: And I… as far as I know, actually, I guess I should defer to Amy or… [111:03] Steve Dodd: Dave on that, they might have more accurate information. [111:08] Steve Dodd: Are they… I don't see them on the… Lister, were they promoted? [111:13] Amy Lamanuzzi: I'm here. Oh, good. [111:15] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, Amy, just state your name and swear to tell the truth. [111:19] Amy Lamanuzzi: Yes, Amy Laminuzzi, Director of Operations. I swear to tell the truth. [111:24] Amy Lamanuzzi: So, there… it is currently rented. The owner… Is also a clever. [111:33] Amy Lamanuzzi: It is currently rented, but it is not. [111:36] Amy Lamanuzzi: consistent with… It's not, you know, it's not up to code, so… It's, [111:43] Amy Lamanuzzi: It is currently inhabited with a renter, which is not planned to continue. [111:56] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, any additional questions?

[112:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Okay, now we can move to public comment. [112:04] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): If you are in person, please sign up, and any… [112:09] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Any virtual attendees, please raise your hand. [112:13] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Mariah will get us started. [112:18] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I will need anyone speaking at public comment to say your full name and swear to tell the truth. [112:25] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Okay, first up we have Lynn Siegel. [112:33] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Lynn, please say your name, and you may begin. [112:36] lynn segal: And Siegel, I swear to tell the truth to my best knowledge. I do never… I never swear to tell the truth, because there is no one truth. Sorry. [112:47] lynn segal: I think, first of all, that… [112:53] lynn segal: Renee Golubeck should decline from ruling on this case. I disagree with Chris Reynolds that she can divorce herself from talking to a party that was interested in the property, and [113:08] lynn segal: The situations with it, and also the relatives of the same people that had it in 1973, or was it 63, are still there, living in it. [113:21] lynn segal: You know, You know, Steve, my house at 538 Dewey, Also in mountain heights, Has expansive soils. [113:33] lynn segal: So does every house in this whole neighborhood, including going into Mapleton and everywhere else, have expansive soils. It's a pretty classic Colorado situation, clay, expansive soils. [113:49] lynn segal: So… To cavitate to the fact that That… [113:55] lynn segal: is existing on the property, is not saying much. It's also not saying much that the new house that's on there is not going to have the same problems. [114:03] lynn segal: And we're going to be demolishing things, like the Unity Church, which was built in 1992, and will be a huge carbon footprint to just take down. [114:13] lynn segal: Once again, I'm revolted. I'm disgusted. [114:18] lynn segal: by the level of development in this community that's pushing things to the max. You know, there's a house, between… on Alpine, across the street from this one, Steve, [114:32] lynn segal: You probably know the place. 10… 12 million, probably? [114:38] lynn segal: From a little house that was also demolished with this very landmarks board. [114:45] lynn segal: Disgusting. [114:46] lynn segal: You know, how much did that drive up my property tax? [114:50] lynn segal: What about my affordability? You know, I'm 73. [114:55] lynn segal: You're giving away tonight, you gave away. This reminded me of Central School, going back to historic Boulder days, the beginning of how historic Boulder started. [115:07] lynn segal: That… that school went down. [115:13] lynn segal: And… That's the state of affairs in Boulder. The higher you go, The lower you come. [115:23] lynn segal: The lower this place is as a nice, interesting place, with a fabulous artist who lived in there that has some… [115:32] lynn segal: really neat… Features with this house, with the sun porch and such. [115:39] Speaker 6 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Lynn. [115:42] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks, Lynn.

[115:45] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Do we have any additional public speakers? [115:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): No more. Great. [115:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): The applicant may have an additional 3 minutes if they would like to comment on anything that has been said during public comment. Would you like to respond to anything that was said? [116:02] Steve Dodd: Not at this time. I mean, I do live in the neighborhood, I've lived here for 35 years, and care a lot about what happens here. [116:10] Steve Dodd: But I… I disagree with Lynn on the… on the… any work that has to be done on this property will need to meet current codes, which are quite different than even were in place in 1975. So, those are all legitimate concerns that we have to, take into account. [116:29] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Great. [116:30] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We can now move on to a board, discussion. I ask that everyone else mute your computer or phone for the duration of the discussion. [116:39] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We'll estimate 45 minutes for the discussion. Would anyone like to lead the charge? [116:47] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Well, I was promised this meeting would end at 8.30, so I don't know. [116:53] Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): That's no. [116:55] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So just to… to that end, I will just say I agree with staff's recommendation. [117:03] Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [117:08] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I think it's great. Thank you, Marcy, for the staff presentation. It is really interesting to… I just find it [117:17] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): interesting to read all the documents and who you found to live there, and I think it's really neat to see the story of [117:24] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): the house, and even though, [117:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): the, a public member would like me to recuse myself, I do think that I can, speak to the merit of the, [117:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Building and, [117:41] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): to, what we are asked to do today. So, in saying that, in making it short and sweet, I will be supporting the staff recommendation. [117:56] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Also in support of the staff recommendation. [117:59] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): this block of Alpine Avenue is rather steep, and the house is starting to make its way down the hill, so I believe that the cost burden associated with bringing this up to code before even… or stabilizing the home before even [118:13] Speaker 8 (Board & Commissions): Improving it, is more burdensome than anyone should be put through. [118:24] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): I'll say up front that [118:27] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): because of the, geotechnical issues, which I'm familiar with in… [118:34] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): more than one instance, including a house I owned in another place. I agree with staff's recommendation. [118:44] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): However, I'm gonna make a plea for very thorough documentation, not so much of the physical house, but of the life around this house, because the story that I just heard… [118:58] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): found… I found very interesting, that it is… [119:02] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): a house that played a seminal role in Boulder's art community, at least through that period of time. [119:10] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): And there are probably [119:13] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Stories and artifacts and so on associated with that, that it would be nice to somehow Capture and document. [119:23] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): So, I'm throwing that out there.

[119:25] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): With my support for the… recommendation. [119:34] Michael Ray: So I'll… I'll dissent, and that's probably expected. I was on the LDRC that looked at this with… with Abby. Our concern at the time, and there was… there was… we were unable to… [119:48] Michael Ray: Conclude that the original [119:51] Michael Ray: elevation, exterior elevation was intact inside the sun porch, and by the way, it was Claire who gave that excellent presentation, so I want to thank her. [120:02] Michael Ray: For this presentation, but, I… Claire is… Claire is… [120:09] Michael Ray: Confirm that the exterior elevation is intact, [120:13] Michael Ray: I think that's meaningful. I… I think… I mean, I… [120:17] Michael Ray: I looked at the geotech report, I understand that there's expansive soils, but the house has been on that site for 140 years, and it, in my opinion, it hasn't [120:28] Michael Ray: You know, just looking at the cracks in the foundations and whatnot, it hasn't… [120:34] Michael Ray: moved significantly in 140 years, so I… I sort of… personally, I feel like the investment to stabilize the foundations would be [120:45] Michael Ray: there's value in that for keeping this house. And again, that's my personal take as an architect on a vanishing breed of… [120:56] Michael Ray: Humble Homes in Boulder, this one with an association to an artist that seems important to the history of Boulder. [121:06] Michael Ray: I am… A little confused about how the house can be [121:12] Michael Ray: portrayed as inhabitable, yet somebody is currently living in the house. So that… that also gives me a little bit of pause about the credibility of how [121:22] Michael Ray: what the condition actually is in this house, and that's… that's ultimately why I will dissent with [121:29] Michael Ray: My fellow board members and not agree with the staff recommendation. [121:40] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Michael. [121:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Do we have a motion, either… Correction? [121:55] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Let's see… [121:57] Michael Ray: I… I'd like to make a motion [121:59] Michael Ray: To… for a stay of demolition. [122:05] Michael Ray: I don't have the wording in front of me, but… [122:09] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Can you give me the answers? [122:10] Michael Ray: If they… [122:11] Michael Ray: If there… yeah, if there's… if there's no support for that, then it's not worth it for somebody to conjure up the… [122:18] Michael Ray: the text. [122:20] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): I… I'll just say I wouldn't support that, just because I feel like… [122:25] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): There's been a lot of evidence and research done [122:29] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): on this project, and I think just delaying the inevitable is not good practice. [122:35] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): So…

[122:38] Michael Ray: What are you saying is the inevitable? [122:42] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Well, we had several people say that they agreed with staff's recommendation. [122:50] Michael Ray: Okay. [122:51] Michael Ray: The inevitable is the vote. [122:54] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): That they agree with staff's recommendation. [122:56] Michael Ray: Right. Okay. [123:01] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: So I do want to point out that [123:03] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: anybody can make a motion, and then if there is no second, then the motion dies. And so any board member can make [123:12] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: any emotion that they desire, and so… [123:16] Chris Reynolds- Boulder City Attorney's Office: Just want to make sure that folks aren't being prevented from making a motion if they so desire. [123:22] Michael Ray: Okay, so for the record, just to reach the inevitable conclusion, I move that the landmarks Board issue a stay of demolition [123:30] Michael Ray: For the building located at 4422 Alpine Avenue for a period not to exceed 180 days from the date of the application was accepted by the City Manager in order to explore alternatives to demolishing the building. [123:47] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Michael, for the motion. Do we have a second? [123:55] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): as I hear… no seconds. [124:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Do we have a motion? [124:04] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): for… Approving the demolition. [124:11] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Oh, sure. I move that the Landmarks Board approve the application to demolish the building at 422 Alpine Avenue, and adopt as findings a staff memorandum finding that the building does not meet the criteria set forth in Section 9-11-23FBRC 1981. [124:32] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Chelsea. Do we have a second? [124:37] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): A second. [124:38] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, Alex. Seconds the motion. [124:41] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We'll do a roll call vote. Chelsea? Aye. John? Aye. [124:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Alex. Hi. [124:48] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Michael. [124:49] Michael Ray: No. [124:51] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): And I vote aye. Motion passes 4 to 1. Claire, can you please go over the next steps in the process? [124:59] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Yes, the board has approved the historic preservation demolition request. The approval expires in one year. [125:08] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Documents required, are usually determined by stuff, but are typically measured drawings of the exterior elevations of the building, site plan, and photographs of the building. [125:19] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Once the documents have been received, my staff, we'll issue the approval letter, which allows the applicants to proceed with obtaining a deconstruction permit. [125:33] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The deconstruction permit must be obtained within one year of today, or the applicant will need to resubmit the demolition request. [125:49] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): We can now move to matters.

[125:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Which will take approximately 30 minutes, and the start time is 8 o'clock. [125:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Let's move on to matters. [126:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Back to you, Marcy. [126:03] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Thank you, and just before we hand it over to Claire for our National Register nomination, I do also want to recognize May is Historic Preservation and Archaeology Month. [126:14] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And there is, as you heard under open comment, the annual Square Nails Awards Ceremony on Monday, May 18th, and we're just a little bit behind in advertising it, but please come if you'd like. It's at Chautauqua Auditorium. It's being a little, reimagined this year. It will probably, [126:33] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Be about from 6.30 to 8, and we'll send you all calendar appointments. [126:40] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): And I think the Colorado, like, theme in 2026 is a year to remember, because it's the 60th year of the National Historic Preservation Act, the Colorado 150, America 250, so… [126:56] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): Stay tuned for more events. [127:01] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): What was the time on that, Marci? It… [127:03] Speaker 2 (Board & Commissions): The program starts at 6.30, refreshments at 6 o'clock in the Chautauqua Community House. Okay, thank you. Yeah. [127:20] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Don't type fast enough. [127:21] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Okay! [127:27] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): So today, we have a special matters item. [127:31] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The historic home of Sadie and O.T. Jackson is being considered for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and Colorado State Register of Historic Properties. [127:42] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The Landmarks Board is asked to review the nomination and respond to whether it meets the criteria for inclusion on the National Register. [127:51] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The criterion is association with the lives of persons significant in our past in the areas of Black, African American history and social history, socio-economic history. [128:02] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The house is associated with Sadie and Oliver Toussaint Jackson, and served as a central location as they developed their business in Boulder. [128:10] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): It represents the economic achievements of both SADI and OT, in addition to exemplifying national patterns of African American home ownership, entrepreneurship, and economic self-determination. The period of significance is 1893 to 1899. [128:30] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The nomination was written by Dr. Janon Graham Russell, Fellow at History Colorado. She found the property has integrity, that it retains enough authentic, historic character to convey its significant associations. [128:43] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): That Sadie and O.T. Jackson made a significant contribution to Boulder and to the broader historical context, and that the property is an important representation of their accomplishments. [128:58] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): This presentation includes a summary of Sadie and OT Jackson's contribution to Boulder and beyond. [129:04] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): As a certified local government, we are required to determine whether the nomination meets the criteria for inclusion on the National Register. Staff has reviewed and added comments to the draft nomination, and the Mayor has written a letter of support. [129:19] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): If the Landmarks Board also supports the nomination, the State Historic Preservation Office forwards it to the Review Board for consideration. [129:27] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): If the Landmarks Board does not support the nomination, they must provide a written statement detailing the reasons, which will be considered by the State Review Board, which then makes a determination on whether to forward the nomination to the National Park Service. The keeper of the National Register of Historic Places makes the final decision. [129:51] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The owner is supportive of the nomination. Listing on the National Register automatically places the property on the State Register. Both are honorary and put no restrictions on what can be done with the property. It's a completely separate process from the one that makes a property an individual City of Boulder landmark. [130:09] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): If approved, the house will become the 14th property within the City of Boulder on the National Register. [130:20] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): OT was born Oliver Tucson Jackson in Oxford, Ohio, on April 6, 1862. [130:27] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): His business pursuits illustrate African American economic self-determination. After OT left Boulder, he pursued a career in politics and founded the town of Deerfield, Colorado. [130:39] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Deerfield is one of Colorado's most significant Black agricultural settlements. [130:49] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): This is OT at Chautauqua's Dining Hall with other staff members. OT was the first dining hall manager. And this is Sadie Jackson, standing right next to him. Sadie and OT were a power couple in the Black community in Boulder, and Sadie had a clear influence and impact on OT's success.

[131:10] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie was born Sarah Condetta Cook in 1856 in Michigan. She was born free, as were her parents, Priscilla and Major, who worked as a shoemaker. [131:20] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Outside the bonds of slavery, Major and Priscilla were able to grow wealth. They also chose to prioritize education for their children. [131:31] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie's family connections likely influenced OT's pursuits and success. Her older brother, John Hartwell Cook, attended Oberlin College, where he received both bachelor's and master's degrees. He graduated in the first class of students at Howard University Law School in Washington, DC, and became a lawyer. [131:51] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): His son, Sadie's nephew, was Will Marion Cook, considered one of the foremost American musicians of his generation, and regarded by many as its leading composer. [132:02] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The family lived in Washington, D.C, where W.E.B. Du Bois considered them amongst his talented tenth. [132:12] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie and her sister Lucinda also attended Oberlin College. The girls were allowed to attend the preparatory department, which provided the equivalent of a high school diploma that qualified them to teach. [132:24] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Lucinda became a teacher after graduating Oberlin in 1877. [132:29] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Although she lived in Washington, D.C. with her brother and his family. [132:33] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): She contributed financially to Sadie and OT's business pursuits. [132:38] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie graduated from Oberlin in 1878 after successfully completing PrEP. [132:45] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): She followed her sister and brother East, and also found a teaching position. [132:54] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie's older sister, Virginia, chose to marry rather than teach, as they were not allowed to do both. [133:00] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Virginia married OT's older brother, James Harvey Jackson, known as J.H. [133:06] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): J.H. and Virginia also prioritized education. Their daughter, Cora, became the first Black person to graduate from the University of Chicago. [133:20] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): JH and Virginia also contributed to Sadie and OT's businesses, including helping OT get a start in the service industry. [133:29] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): A few years after their marriage, JH and Virginia moved to Cleveland. [133:33] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And OT followed shortly after. By 1883, both JH and OT lived in Cleveland, working as waiters. OT learned the business from the ground up, under the watchful eye of J.H. [133:49] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): When Sadie's father, Major, died, he left about $6,000 to his nine children. With a college education, the young ladies were allowed to manage their own inheritance with the oversight of their brothers. [134:02] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Although a relatively small amount of money, this gave them some financial independence and flexibility with their choices. [134:09] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie chose to give up teaching and married OT on September 5th, 1889. They moved west to Denver, where OT started a catering business. [134:21] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): By 1892, the couple moved to Boulder to open the Stillman Cafe and Ice Cream Parlour on 13th Street between Pearl and Walnut, right behind Streamer's drugstore at 1242 Pearl Street, which is where the National State Bank Building is today. [134:39] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): During the summer of 1893, Sadie and OT's successful Stillman Cafe was reportedly making and selling 1,000 gallons of ice cream per day. [134:50] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And was called one of the most select dining resorts, and one not usually found outside of metropolitan cities. [135:00] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): At the end of the season, Sadie's sister, Lucinda, purchased the lot at 2228 Pine Street for her sister and brother-in-law. [135:08] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): She sold it to Sadie 3 months later, making $50 profit on the transaction. We don't know why Lucinda and Sadie made this deal. [135:16] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): At the time Lucinda bought the lotch, she was visiting Sadie from Washington, D.C, where she still worked as a teacher. It's possible that all of Sadie's money was tied up in the business. [135:30] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Or it could have been that Sadie and OT had big plans in the works. On July 13th, 1894, the Daily Camera announced that the Brainard Hotel would be changing proprietor. [135:41] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The Jacksons officially renamed the hotel the Stillman Hotel and Cafe, and closed the nearby Stillman Cafe and Ice Cream Parlor to focus on this new venture. The hotel included 40 bedrooms, a large dining room, parlors, and a reading room. Sadie and OT managed all of it. [136:02] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): They partnered with JF Lyman at the stables opposite the Stillman Hotel to provide guests with a modern hack service around town, and advertised the best accommodations in Boulder. [136:16] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): But when building owners Anthony and Mary Arnett retired to California, they left the hotel in the hands of their daughter, Jenny Develine, whose husband ran a competing stable and hack service. She didn't renew OT and Sadie's contract for 1896, and changed the name back to the Brainard Hotel.

[136:34] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The building stood until 1978, when it collapsed during renovations. [136:44] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Evicted from their hotel, Sadie and OT opened the Stillman lunch counter. The business was on Pearl Street, opposite the courthouse. From the address, the building is where Falafel King is today. [137:01] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The restaurant served all the meats, including oysters in season, as well as sandwiches and cakes. [137:07] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Mrs. Sadie C. Jackson is listed in the city directory alongside her husband as the proprietor, and the Daily Camera called her a fixture at the cafe. [137:20] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie and O.T. Jackson's success in Boulder was directly connected to their ability to see business opportunity and take a chance, even when the opportunity was unexpected, like running a hotel. [137:32] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): This idea of social progress through entrepreneurship is what W.E.B. Du Bois called a step in social progress worth measuring. [137:45] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): But they were leaders in the advancement of the Black community in Boulder in other ways, too. [137:49] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): During the 1880s and 1890s, one of the ways women with a small inheritance could help support their family was to loan out their money. [137:57] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): They charged interest to take on the risk, but they also provided a service to the community, as many people, women, people of color, the working class, were often shut out of traditional banking. [138:13] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie provided this service to members of the Black community, whom she met through the African Methodist Episcopal Church. She befriended Emily Frances Vince Black, who, together with her brother, Oscar White, had escaped enslavement in Kentucky and reunited with their mother in Kansas before moving to Boulder. [138:32] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie purchased multiple lots on the 2200 block of Pine Street for Emily Francis' adult children and their husbands. She also loaned them money so they could afford to build houses on the lots. Sadie's actions allowed these families to own property and begin to build wealth, and it helped to strengthen the black community. [138:54] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And as the next few years challenged the couple, Sadie relied heavily on the AME Church and the community she had built around herself. [139:02] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie and OT had a child who died very young. Likely grieving in 1898, OT abruptly sold the Stillman lunch counter and moved to Colorado Springs. He returned 3 months later and purchased the Downtown Pearl Cafe. He closed that business within 3 months. [139:23] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Their luck seemed to change with the opening of the Colorado Chautauqua. The Chautauqua was founded by the University of Texas to provide teachers with summer school and continuing education in a cooler location. [139:35] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): By May 1898, the city began construction of the auditorium and dining hall. The dining hall was finished less than a month later. [139:47] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): During the first year, facilities were basic, and most visitors lodged in tents. By the second season, the Chautauqua had added cottages, and two dozen visitors decided to stay into the fall. OT was awarded the contract to provide them with meals during their extended stay. [140:06] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The following season, both Sadie and OT were employed to run the Chautauqua Dining Hall. OT was the steward, the manager. [140:13] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The chef in this image appears to be JH, his brother. [140:21] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): That same year, Sadie and OT opened Jackson's Resort at 55th and Arapahoe. OT advertised it as a roadhouse without strong drinks, nothing to intoxicate, dinner parties a specialty. [140:37] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The resort welcomed all. Within a few years, they had expanded the facility with a dance floor, a banquet hall, and added a baseball diamond on the grounds. [140:50] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): By 1899, they lived at the resort year-round and farmed some of the land. [140:55] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): J.H. and his youngest daughter lived with them and helped run the resort and the farm. Sadie rented out the family home at 2228 Pine Street for a few years before selling it in 1902. [141:11] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): In November 1903, the Daily Camera reported that Sadie Jackson was very ill. Sadie traveled to her older sister Virginia's home in Detroit. She must have known that she was dying, as before she went, Sadie and OT transferred the deed to Jackson's resort to Sadie's younger sister, Lucinda, for $1. [141:30] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Sadie died just 3 months later. She's buried in Detroit. [141:38] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Lucinda eventually sold the resort land back to OT, again for just $1. [141:43] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): His second wife, Minerva, bought a parcel just north of the original resort, and they continued farming there until they sold the land to support Deerfield. [141:56] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The business pursuits in Boulder represent only a portion of OT's economic vision. By 1910, inspired by Booker T. Washington's ideas of self-sufficiency and economic empowerment, OT planned Deerfield, the black settlement that joined a larger movement of post-Reconstruction settlements in the American West. [142:15] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): From its emergence to its decline in the 1930s, OT remained steadfast in promoting Deerfield as an economic and civic opportunity for Black people in the region. [142:29] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): OT Jackson was a prolific businessman. His wife, Sadie, provided wealth, knowledge, and family connections to their partnership. The story highlights the power of entrepreneurship, community building, and resilience within the Black community. [142:43] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And their house at 2228 Pine Street has the strongest association with both of their lives in Boulder.

[142:53] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): Honouring Sadie and OT Jackson's house ensures that there's a place connected to the history of the Black community in Boulder, but also the broader history of economic advancement of African Americans throughout the West. [143:05] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): The stories of Sadie and O.T. Jackson's lives in Boulder and beyond contribute to an understanding of the historical and cultural foundations of the United States. [143:14] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): I'd like to thank and acknowledge the property owners who are supporting the nomination, Historic Boulder through whose advocacy made the nomination possible, Janan and History Colorado staff for advancing the nomination, and Mayor Brockett for his support. [143:29] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): And offer the Landmarks Board an opportunity for questions and comments before you consider a motion. [143:36] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): If the board supports the nomination, we have language prepared for you. [143:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. Does anybody have any questions or comments? [143:55] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I want to say thank you so much. It's so amazing to, like, Look. [144:00] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): at this. [144:02] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): How old was Sadie when she died? [144:05] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): I believe she was 46. [144:08] Speaker 13 (Board & Commissions): To do all that. [144:09] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): in just 46 years. My only, note here is that they, they mentioned oysters in season in Colorado, so I would have to say that would be my only rebuttal. [144:22] Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Weird. [144:22] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): We have a different definition of oysters in Toronto. [144:26] Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): It was Rocky Mountain. Rocky Mountain Oysters. [144:29] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): But it was right next to fish, so I don't know. But, and they're always in season. [144:33] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): in somewhere. [144:34] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Yeah. [144:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): It took a while to get here. [144:38] Michael Ray: For old school, they're in season in a month with an R, but no other time. [144:45] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): That's true. That's the old… [144:48] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): the old way. The old way. That would probably be my only question mark on this situation. [144:53] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I think it's super interesting, all these little, telltale signs, and, I 100%, support the motion. [145:03] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): To, make this a… This is for state landmark. [145:08] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): It's national. There is no state. [145:12] Michael Ray: Could you, Renee, could you make a motion to support it? [145:17] Michael Ray: Bye. [145:18] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I would love to make a motion. [145:21] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I move that the Landmark Board finds that 20… 2228, right? [145:30] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Pine Street meets the criteria for inclusion of the National Registry of Historic Places and recommends that the State Historic Preservation Office forward the nomination to the State Review Board for consideration.

[145:43] Michael Ray: I second that motion. [145:46] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So, with the… with the two seconds from Michael and… [145:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): John, can I take a roll call vote? Chelsea? Aye. John? Aye. Alex? Aye. Michael? [145:59] Michael Ray: Bye. [145:59] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I, and I, choose I, so motion passes. [146:04] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): unanimously. [146:06] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): 5 to 0. [146:10] Board & Commissions: Wait, good. Anyone else have any more comments? [146:14] Speaker 7 (Board & Commissions): Thank you for putting that together. It was really well done, and I feel like really told the story in a way that I felt like I was going along the journey with them through all those trials and tribulations, and I just think you told it in a really beautiful way, and all that research paid off. I feel like you did their lives justice, so thank you. [146:35] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. And bringing it circle, full circle, with another presentation that you did about how… [146:41] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): how they tied in with that other presentation about them moving from Kansas, wasn't it? Yeah, to Deerfield. Yeah, so… [146:50] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thanks. [146:52] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Thank you. [146:58] Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Okay. [147:00] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): So meeting is adjourned. [147:03] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): At 8.29. [147:06] Speaker 14 (Board & Commissions): Early! Thank you, everyone. [147:10] Michael Ray: Well done. [147:11] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Officially, you're old. Officially. [147:20] Speaker 1 (Board & Commissions): Excellent. [147:20] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): I know the next steps. [147:28] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): That's very soothing. [147:33] Speaker 3 (Board & Commissions): Bye now.