[bouldercouncilhotline] Hotline: Great Placemaking in and Around the Civic Center

[cmosupport at bouldercolorado.gov]

Sender: Cowles, Macon

After the Study Session last night, we received an email from Adrian Sopher that has some good ideas and criticism of our discussion last night. I would like to post it here so that the ideas can be widely shared. His ideas were better arranged in his email, but our own system saps the life out of formatting.


Macon Cowles
Boulder City Councilor


Dear David and members of the Council and Planning Board.

Fascinating topic and discussion last evening on the Civic Center.  It raised many thoughts for myself, as well as I'm sure, for everyone in the room.

I decided to jot a few of them down, and for what its worth, share them with you


In the beginning, make the funnel as broad as possible -- Great idea.  However you might consider how the funnel has already been narrowed by the very name you've chosen -- Civic Center Plan.  There seemed to already be a presumption in place, which may not be clearly stated but seemed implicit in some of the statements made regarding what this might mean (civic structures, staff facilities, area per staff member, FAM).  If on the other hand, it was presented simply as "What do we do with the area between the north side of Canyon and the south side of Arapahoe", it could provoke a different contemplation.  If however your goal is narrower, this needs to be clearly stated or we will all be making different assumptions about what this project is intended to be (...intended by whom?)

Have one discussion at a time -- Ms. Ageton's point regarding 'potential commercial' uses was an accurate one, given the way things were worded.  However I learned afterwards when speaking with Mr. Holicky, that the problem was not with the choice of words, but the context.  There was no clear distinction being made between studying what to do with the city owned parcels which are circumscribed within the large boundary of a possible area plan.  If you are talking solely about the city owned parcels, staff's comment was possibly a reasonable one.  However in the context of the larger area, it wasn't.  The problem with the statement was that the context of staff's comment wasn't clear -- possibly it was in the memo, but it wasn't in the discussion.  Hence the confusion.  The obvious solution is to separate the discussions within the context of a single plan for the entire zone.  If it isn't clear to council, it won't be to anyone else either.

Focus less on 'process' and more on making a great place -- You can include everyone in the world in a discussion and get everyone's opinion (and far be it from me to try and prevent that), but in the end, you've got to do something with it.  And quite honestly, that's what people are going to care about when it's done.  It won't matter how inclusive the process was if it isn't a great place to be.  So in my mind, that should be the focus.  And frankly, all of the comments regarding expressing how Boulder is a leader in sustainability, and how this should be a uniquely Boulder place, and so on -- they all should be circumscribed by the one overarching requirement of making a great place for people.  A place where people want to go to and be -- day time or night.  If we do this, it will be a uniquely Boulder place, as a matter of course, because that is what good public places are.  They are appropriate to their circumstance.  In that spirit, the following comments


Understand the constituent elements of great places -- What makes a great place?  If staff feels that this should be a Civic Center, show examples of great Civic Centers.  If Santa Fe has one, let's look at what makes it great -- understand the constituent elements that makes it work.  

What is the relationship between civic uses (buildings) and commercial uses?  
What is the population that supports it?  
How does it work year-round?
Is there a scale of building and use that supports this, and a scale that doesn't?
What is the relationship between both of these and public spaces?
What is the relationship between all of those and residential fabric? 
What kind of density supports good public spaces?
What mix of uses around the pubic spaces best support it?
What kind of access issues and parking needs support this?
Is it successful in the day time and night?  Is it safe at night, and for whom?  

And then we have to apply it here.

How do we keep the area safe -- is there a sufficient balance of uses to maintain a safe street after dark?  What and whom are we trying to attract?
What is an appropriate scale of green space and parks in relation to built form?
How do we make a district that supports both a daily activity and annual events on a massive scale in the context of our little town?
What is the relationship that we want to see between this area and the Pearl Street Mall?  Is there a potential conflict or synergy?  (Does the expansion of Pearl Street retail to the east and west undermine or enhance the Mall, and how might that apply here?).
How do we incentivize streets that knit the area back to the north?
How can we knit the area back towards the south across a major grade change and a pedestrian dead zone along Broadway?  Can we enliven Broadway from Pearl Street to University?  What can the University do to help bring this about? 
Are we done improving Boulder Creek from 9th to 15th as a civic green place for the next 100 years?
If we're talking 100 years, what population are we serving?
Has Boulder even taken a realistic look at this question (of the next 100 years) at all in a genuine and responsible way (
and I'm obviously not referring to the Civic Center alone here)?

In the end, it's an urban design problem -- What makes a great place and how do we get there?  To me that's the question.  The process should support that.


These are just some thoughts that come do mind from listening to the topic being discussed.  
If they were helpful, I'm glad.

I look forward to seeing this progress.


Thanks,


Adrian