Daily Camera (Boulder)

COUNCIL REJECTS CIVIC AREA HISTORIC DISTRICT

- By Amber Carlson acarlson @prairiemou­ntainmedia.com

Boulder’s City Council has almost unanimousl­y nixed a controvers­ial proposal for a new historic district in the heart of the city.

At a meeting Thursday evening, council members voted 7-1 to reject an ordinance that would have establishe­d a Civic Area historic district. Mayor Aaron Brockett was the only person present to vote against rejecting it. Councilmem­ber Mark Wallach was absent.

The Civic Area historic district’s boundaries would have stretched roughly from the west side of the Penfield Tate II Municipal Building to 14th Street and from Canyon Boulevard to Arapahoe Avenue. The district would have linked together a constellat­ion of existing historic landmarks near downtown, such as Central Park, the Glen Huntington Bandshell (informally known as the Boulder Bandshell), the Boulder-dushanbe Teahouse and the Municipal Building.

The plan has been divisive among community members and members of the city’s boards and commission­s. Supporters of the historic district have argued the area has historic significan­ce for Boulder and that it tells the story of marginaliz­ed communitie­s who lived there.

The purpose of the Civic Area historic district would have been to “appreciate and celebrate an era” in Boulder history, according to Leonard Segel, the executive director of Historic Boulder Inc. (one of the groups that applied to create the district). He has also previously said the area has been Boulder’s civic center at least since the early 1900s and is the “historic heart” of the city.

But in addition, the area was once home to Boulder’s early Black residents. Before Central Park existed, the area was an establishe­d neighborho­od where people had been living since the 1870s. According to a city memo, those homes were located mostly within a twoblock area between 10th and Broadway (formerly called 12th Street) along Canyon Boulevard (once called Water Street).

The block between 10th and 11th Streets, originally designated as “Block 11,” was the site of Boulder’s first Black neighborho­od. Some white residents lived in the area, as well. But according to Marcy Gerwing, a principal planner with the city, all of the homes there were torn down and the people in them displaced. It’s not clear where those displaced residents went.

Gerwing said part of the purpose of creating a historic district there would be to recognize this chapter in Boulder’s history.

“Historic designatio­n is not just about celebratio­n,” she said. “It can be, but it’s also

about acknowledg­ement and recognitio­n. And so, I think having this history just helps us as a community … to understand the history of Boulder a bit better.

The plan also has gotten support from the city’s Landmarks Board, which voted 4-1 to recommend approving the historic district. Chelsea Castellano gave the only dissenting vote.

Stuart Lord, a member of NAACP Boulder County, spoke at the Landmarks Board meeting on Feb. 7 about the importance of the area for Boulder’s Black community. He later said in a written statement that while the civil rights group was “not explicitly advocating” for the Civic Area to become a historic district, if the district were to move ahead, the group wanted to see it done in a way that “fully acknowledg­es and respects the diverse history” of the community.

Namely, he said, the group wanted to see Block 11 included in the district, and it also hoped for the city to consider naming the park Water Street Park in order to recognize “the contributi­ons of Boulder’s early Black residents.”

Opponents of the plan have voiced numerous concerns. For example, they worry a new historic district could slow the city’s efforts to make improvemen­ts to the area. They also ask whether the district is necessary given it would incorporat­e places already designated as landmarks, and they question the merits of preserving an exclusiona­ry part of Boulder’s history.

Andrew “Bernie” Bernstein, a member of Boulder’s Parks and Rec Advisory Board previously said he saw few benefits to the historic district and the potential for it to impede the city from making improvemen­ts in the area, such as the ones planned in the Civic Area project. He noted that all five members of the advisory board opposed the historic district at a meeting earlier this year.

Castellano of the Landmarks Board told the Daily Camera she had some similar concerns, but she also said she sees Civic Area as a “symbol of Boulder’s exclusiona­ry past.” She added, “I don’t believe we should lift it up as a symbol of what we want to celebrate in the community.”

After hearing presentati­ons on the project and listening to public testimony on it, council members on Thursday expressed reluctance about the plan for the district and said they didn’t believe it met necessary criteria for establishi­ng a historic district. Further, they said, they see other ways the history and heritage of the area can be honored.

“I find this historic district is not necessaril­y beneficial in preserving and transmitti­ng this important heritage,” said Councilmem­ber Lauren Folkerts. “… The city owns the land and should elevate the stories of historical­ly marginaliz­ed population­s, regardless of this designatio­n.” However, she added, she supports the idea of renaming the park Water Street Park.

Councilmem­ber Taishya Adams agreed with the idea of renaming the park and said it was “wonderful” to see Block 11 acknowledg­ed, but that she can “envision other ways we can honor the rich history we have here.” She also said she did not believe there had been enough engagement with the Indigenous community on the proposed district.

 ?? CLIFF GRASSMICK — STAFF PHOTOGRAPH­ER ?? A man fixes his bike at the Boulder Bandshell in February. The bandshell was built in 1938and has been a historic landmark since 1995.
CLIFF GRASSMICK — STAFF PHOTOGRAPH­ER A man fixes his bike at the Boulder Bandshell in February. The bandshell was built in 1938and has been a historic landmark since 1995.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States