6A - Site Review #SI-2000-19, Village at Boulder CreekCITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: January 25, 2001
Agenda Item Preparation Date: January 12, 2001
AGENDA TITLE:
Public hearing and consideration of Site Review #SI-2000-19 and Preliminary Plat #5-2000-
14 for the "Village at Boulder Creek" to permit development of 126 new units (44
Permanently Affordable and 82 three- and four-bedroom apartments) for a 6.66 acre property
located on Taft Drive between 28'h and Folsom Avenue, zoned High Density Residential
(HR-E). The proposal includes a request for height exception for buildings to 52'9", an
exception to the solar requirements of Section 9-3.3-19, and a parking reduction of 7.7%.
Applicant: American Campus-Titan LLC
Owner: Tony Patinella Jr.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT:
Planning Department
Peter Pollock, Planning Director
Bob Cole, Director of Project Review
Brent Bean, Senior Planner, Presenter
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #~0~7 Paee 1
OVERVIEW:
The Planning Boazd is being asked to consider a Site Review proposal for the addition of 126
new residential units along Taft Drive between 28th and Folsom Streets. Forty four
Permanently Affordable units (35% of the total units) and 82 student rental housing units
have been proposed. There are already 39 residential equivalents in use within the Good
Samaritan, which result in a total of 165 units within the Site Plan area. A height exception
has been requested to 52'9" for two buildings within the eastern end of the site and 39 feet for
all the other buildings. A parking reduction of 7.7% has also been requested. This Planning
Board considered the Concept Review and Comment Plan on June 1, 2000.
This site is located adjacent to an existing low density residential neighborhood along the
south property line. A steep sloping hillside is present between this housing area and the new
development. Concerns have been expressed about the density of the new development,
building heights, and stability of the existing hillside.
Staff is recommending approval of this request, finding that the request is consistent with the
policies of the Comprehensive Plan, zoning designation of the property, and Site Review
criteria.
STATISTICS:
Proposal: Site Review for a 165 unit development with 126 new units (44
Permanently Affordable and 82 three- and four-bedroom student
apartments)
Project Name: Village at Boulder Creek
Location: Taft Drive between Folsom and 28th 3treet.
Size of Tract: 289,600 square feet (6.65 acres) of developable azea
Zoning: HR-E (High Density Residential)
Comprehensive Plan: High Density Residential
Code Variations: - Height exception to 52'9"
- A parking reduction of 7.7%.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM # ~ Pa e 2
- Front and Reaz yard setbacks for the western lot are being requested to be
varied to 12'6" where 25' is required
- Parking within the front yards (all lots)
- Solar shadow varied for all lots to support the proposed building heights.
ICEY ISSIIES:
1. Is the proposed site plan consistent with the Site Plan Criteria?
2. Are the building heights and locations appropriate for this site?
3. Is the requested 7.7% parking reduction justified? Will adequate parking be provided for
the mix of building tenants?
4. Have sound design and construction practices been used to determine the buildability of
this site, in relationship to the steep hillside running along the southern side of the
hillside.
BACKGROUND:
Process
This request is the second step of the Site Review process. Planning Board reviewed the
Concept Review and Comment Plans in June. The applicant has been working with staff to
resolve the site issues since then. The plan has been reviewed twice by the staff during this time,
and, both times, the density has been reduced, building heights lowered, additional open space
provided and parking relocated in an efFort to meet city standards.
Existing Site/Site Context
This site is fairly difficult to work with because of the following constraints: (1) Taft Street
dedication requires removal of 30 feet of the southern portion of the site making tha depth of lots
140 feet, (2) there is a steep north facing hillside along the south property line, and (3) the
Boulder Creek floodplain covers all but the southwestern portion of the site. The high hazard
zone is prasent only within the northeastern portion of the site. No buildings have been proposed
to be constructed within this area. The conveyance zone covers the area where the existing Good
Samaritan center is located and the location of all the student housing units. The Permanently
Affordable housing units have been proposed for the southwestern portion of the site, outside the
floodplain,
The Harvest House and the Harvest Tennis club facilities aze located to the north of this site.
The Harvest ownership is bisected by Boulder Creek. Two apartment buildings are present along
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM # Pa e 3
the western property line, separating this site from Folsom Avenue. There are 12 single family
homes present within the University Heights Subdivision which run along the top of a steep
north facing hillside that runs along the south property line of this site. The majority of these
homes are 45 to 50 feet above Taft Drive, which is the general elevation level used for basing the
final height of the new buildings. Twenty Eighth Street runs along the east property line.
This property is not within a recognized subcommunity planning area. The Boulder Urban
Renewal Area (Crossroads) is present immediately to the north of this site. This site is
designated "High Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) and zoned HR-E.
Project Description
The original application for this site proposed a development with a total of 181 units. The
project is now 165 units: 82 new student rental housing units, 44 new Permanently Affordable
units, and 39 existing congregate care units.
This site is in the Boulder Creek floodplain with the exception of the southwestern portion of the
site. The Permanently Affordable units have been proposed to be constructed within this area,
because federal funding cannot be used within a 100 year floodplain. The high hazard and
conveyance zones aze present only in the northeastern portion of the site, and no buildings have
been proposed in these areas.
All the buildings have been designed to have parking placed under all the buildings, which raises
the living spaces at least eight feet above grade. However, entrance elements and the common
building spaces are located at grade and will be flood proofed consistent with city requirements.
Portions of the parking lots will be within the floodplain areas, but water levels will not exceed
18 inches for all these lots.
A steep north facing hillside is present along the southern property line. This hillside has an
average slope of greater than 25%. South of building "D" retaining walls are required to stabilize
the existing hillside. Concerns have been expressed from the residents to the south that the
hillside is not stable and that cutting the hillside may cause movement of their homes and
improvements. The applicant has reviewed this concem with engineering firms and has
determined that development can occur without disturbing the residential lots along the hillside.
Final engineering plans are not required with a Site Review submittal. The applicant is
responsible for providing detailed engineering plans for this development. Based on visual
evidence that the hillside shows some movement in the past and concerns expressed from
neighbors about the stability of the hillside, the applicant will be required to provide detailed
engineering plans for any work on the hillside. The applicant has chosen not to have final
engineering plans completed for development adjacent to the hillside until after consideration of
the Site Review Plan by Planning Board. The final subdivision and site development plans will
not be approved until the applicant has provided final engineering drawings stamped by an
engineer competent in the field of soil sciences.
s:\plan~pb-items~memos\bbtaftvillage.p6m.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(+~~ Paee 4
When the Good Samaritan was built, parking requirements were more stringent, and a parking lot
was constructed south of Taft Drive and east of the facility. Today, pazking standards for
congregate care facilities have been relaxed considerably. The cunent use of the Good Samaritan
parking lots supports the 85 parking spaces groposed to be provided for the facility. A parking
reduction of approximately 7.7 % has been requested. Parking requirements for the student
housing will be met based on city standazds. However, the parking requirements for the
congregate care facility have been requested to be reduced by 20 spaces (20%) and the parking
for the "Permanently Affordable Units" reduced by 10 spaces (15%) for a total parking reduction
of 7.7% overall. The applicant will be providing 364 parking spaces where 394 are required.
The applicant has also requested building heights varying from 39' to 52'9". Buildings D and C
will be three-story buildings, 39' tall. The western half of building B(southeast portion of the
site) will be 39' tall and the eastern half, 52'9" or four stories. Building A, north of Taft Drive
will also be 52'9" tall. The existing Good Samaritan building is over 90 feet tall.
ANALYSIS:
L Is the proposed site plan consistent wit6 the Site Plan Criteria?
The plan concepts are consistent with the site review criteria. See the Site Review criteria
attachment for greater detail. The site is located within an HR-E zone district which
could permit up to 181 units on the site; however, due to site constraints such as the
floodplain, steep hillside, and parking/open space requirements for development, a plan
for 164 residential units has been proposed.
Variations to the permitted building height of 35' have been made for heights varying
from 39' to 52'9". Building placement has been very sensitive to the relationship of
building height and the hillside to the south of the site. The tallest buildings have been
placed in the eastern portions of the site, which will have the least impacts on the existing
residences to the south. The westem building heights will not be taller than the hillside to
the south, and in most cases, will be 10 or more feet below the top of the hillside.
The solaz requirements for an HR-E zone have been requested to be modified to support
the taller buildings proposed for this project. The buildings have been placed along the
southem portions of the site to reduce solar impacts to the northern portion of the site.
The northeasterly building (A) will shade portions of the property to the north, but this
area is within the Boulder Creek high hazard zone and not buildable.
Setback variations have been requested to the rear yard setbacks for building D to permit
a rear yard of 12.5'. This request has been made to permit development of the 44
Permanently Affordable units outside the Boulder Creek floodplain. Federal funding
cannot be used within a floodplain area. As a result, the applicant has made use of this
portion of the site to provide Permanently Affordable housing. Less land area could have
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #!O~ P~e 5
baen nsed, but this would have required fhe units to be taller, or smaller, neither of
is desirable for 1ow cost housing. City requires deyelo
20% of naw housing units as pe~ Amenfs to provide a minirrium o f h
provide 35% of the new housin anently Affordable, The a
wi11 provide three g U°~~ as PeTTnanentl PPlieaz~t ~3 proposing to
Rental(student hous~n s of kousing: pe~~entl y Affordable. As a result, this site
Comprehensive Housin ) ixnits, all support~d wiYh n the housinCongregate Care, and
g Strategy, g goals of the
2• Are the building heigbts aud ~acations a
Buildings C and D have re uested buildin Ppropr,a~e for this site7
heights to S2'9", Th~ e 9 g hai hts of 39
P rn~itted haight u,ithou ~ eviaw is 35'an theaHR-
is approximately 45' below the Universi g A~d B building
tY Heights nei This site
Buildings C and b wi11 ba beIow the first tloor alevations of the homes in Universi
Heights, Th~ eastern halfofBuildin B ~borhood ta the south ofthis site.
the residences in University Hei g~d all ofBuildin tY
heights to the north and ~ts. However, the ri ~ A~lt ~e slightly higher than
and A will block portions of thelv ews olthe north g,om a~ vieWS from University
Subdivision, but many of the ~pted by the new buildings. Buildings B
and biock more of the views to f e north t ~e University geighfs
S he Boulder Creek corridor ai.e ta7~er than 55',
~~ t~e prop°S~ buildings will,
The Good Samaritan has a h~i
the 60's. The ro Sht of more than 90' ~d has been present in this area since
There are n p p°sed building he1~hts will be '
and west from ~e height of this building.
umerous breaks in the building elev t ons thathwi 1 provide viaws to the north
~e University Heights area.
building "B" is 60 feet from the south ro eThe 18-foot buildin
tine to Building '<A>,, guildin $°° ,> p,p ~~' line g heighf increase for
property lina respectiveI g C~d D and over 200' &om the south property
Hei y~~t witl be below the tol be 17' and z2,5~ fr.om ~ke south
ghts homes) by approximately 16', AS a p°£~e ~11 ~location of University
neighborhoods have been T~sult, impacts to
reqnested setback v minimized tl~rough the p~acement of alle ~byild ngs and
ariations.
3• Is the reyuested 7.7% ~ar~ng reduction •
provided Far fhe mix of buildin Justified? W~p ade
g tenauts? quate parkiug ~e
A total of 394 parlting Spaces are required for this site and 364 ara
provide@. Concern w
be reduced for the rental uni s S The a the Plannin B proPosed to be
g~~'d and neighbors that p~gpng not
~oQ Sy the Congregate Care facility ~pd~pe t h~ prOposed reduciug the
~antan was built to ~anendyAffordable Ho~~ri ~king number
parking use of the s{fe shows meat the p~king requiraments of the ~ae. g elements, ~e
use. In addition, ci ~at the 80 apaces to be provided Studies of fhe
Pennanent] ty~nFO~ation supports a reduction of the meet the needs for this
y Affordable housing units. I,o~,er Income p~kin re
persons have been sho ents for
wn to ovvn
s: \planipb-ite~~e~s\bbtaftvillage.pbm, µ,pd
AGEND,a ITEM # ~9`g-
6
fewer cars than average income households. This site is adjacent to Folsom and 28ih
Streets where major transit corridors exist ar have been proposed. A new transit stop is
planned for the north side of Boulder Creek on 28th Street (east of the Harvest House).
This stop will be less than two blocks from this site and will provide transit connections
to most of Boulder and the U.S. 36 corridor. Folsom is on the Hop line, which has transit
---- service based on 20 minute intervals. Given these factors, the demand for pazking on this
site will be met.
4. Have sound design and construction practices been uses to determine the
buildiablity of this site; in relationship to the steep hillside running along the
southern side of the hillside.
Site Review criteria 904-11(i)(2)(E)(x) &(xi) state: (x) "The project incorporates the
natural environrrtent into the design and avoids, minimizes, or mitigates impacts to
natural systems" and (xi) "Cut and fill are minimized on the site, the design of buildings
conforms to the natural contours of the land, and the site design minimizes erosion, slope
instability, landslide, mudflow or subsidence, and minimizes the potential threat to
property caused by the geological hazards." The applicant has proposed cutting into the
existing hillside in the southwestern portion of the site £or building "C" and "D".
Building "D" is proposed for the Permanently Affordable housing units. The amount of
cut varies from 18 to 24 feet for portions of Building "D". The applicant has designed
the site to minimize the amount of cut and fill along the south property line, but due to the
constraints of the Boulder Creek floodplain and the federal requirement for subsidized
housing to be constructed outside a floodplain, portions of the southern hillside must be
cut. The buildings do conform to the limitations of the site, respecting the need to
stabilize the hillside and place the units in locations that least impact neighbors to the
south.
The applicant has provided preliminary engineering comments and reviews of the hillside
nxnning along the south property line. This information indicates that constnxction can
occur along the southern property line but must be completed based on sound engineering
principles. Engineered plans for conshuction on or adjacent to a hillside of this nature aze
not required for Site Review approval. However, this is a unique case in which the staff
has many of the reservations the neighbors to the south have expressed. There is
evidence that the hillside shows some slumping movements to the north. As a result, the
applicant contacted a soils engineer to review the site and make preliminary
determinations regarding development of the site. The preliminary investigations have
been substantiated in a letter from Yenter Companies, Inc. which states that the site is
buildable through the use of Micropile shotcrete with baggy wall development, which is
an accepted engineering construction method for hillside stabilization.
Prior to issuance of any building permits for the site or approval of the final site plan, the
final engineering plans for drainage and hillside stability will be required. These plans
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #!OA Paee 7
will be required to be stamped and certified by licensed engineers. The city will review
these plans, but will rely on appropriate engineering practices for hillside stability
recommended by the applicanYs engineer. Based on the information received from the
applicant, the city staff concludes that development can occur on this site with properly
engineered plans for cutting the hillside.
Housing:
Inclusionary zoning requires at least 20% of the units in a project be permanently
affordable to low income households. The applicant is proposing that 35% of the units in
this project be permanently affordable, for-sale housing. This is well in excess of the
required 20%, and all the units will be on-site. Additionally, the balance of the units will
be for student rental housing, another significant housing need in the community as
identified in the Comprehensive Housing Strategy.
PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS:
Staff has received many letters, comments, and a petition opposed to the request from the
neighbors to the south of this site. Concerns have been expressed about the loss of the open
space azeas to the north of their residences, location of the new buildings in relationship to
building height and setbacks, the effects of construction on the hillside stability, traffic impacts to
the neighborhood, and noise generated from the site. The neighbors have provided information
that indicates that the hillside is not stable. This condition is a major issue to the neighbors.
Staff has requested that the applicant obtain engineering studies and plans prior to development
of the site assuring that the hillside stability will not be affected by development of this sita.
This site is zoned for high density residential development, and the site is within walking
distance of the CU campus. The density proposed is less then the maximum density that could
be developed on this site, based on the existing land area. Given the constraints of the site, the
number of units proposed could be developed on this site without varying city requirements, but
the overall design and type of housing would be less desirable. The applicant is providing both
Permanently Affordable housing and student housing, which have been identified in the
Comprehensive Housing Strategy as needed housing types. As noted above, the concems from
neighbors that cutting the hillside will impact the stability of the hillside are well founded, but
the applicant will be using proper engineering methods to stabilize the hillside and making sure
that no impacts occur to existing residents. It also should be noted, that this site has never been
identified as an open space site. The site is not considered a functional part of the Boulder Creek
system and is not adjacent to other open space sites. Open space areas aze generally defined as
areas that are adjacent to the fringes of the city, not internal to the city.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(O~ Pase 8
STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION:
Planning staff finds that the Site Review, height exception, and setbacks requested for this site
are consistent with the criteria of Site Review (see the Site Review Criteria Check list,
Attachment A).finding:
1. The requested height exceptions meet the criteria for a height exceptions in that the
building heights will have minimal impacts on the adjacent residential uses to the south,
east and west of the site. The uses to the north are commercia] and contain a hotel use
with a height in excess of 55'.
2. Solar impact will not result to adjacent buildings.
3. Setback exceptions requested far building "D"will not unduly impact adjacent land uses.
The applicant has requested to vary the front and rear yard setbacks for this lot from 25' to
12.5'. (Buildings "C" and "D" have sideyard setbacks along the south property line of
12', due to the fact that 28"' Street is considered the front yard.)
Therefore, staff recommends that Planning Boazd approve Site Review # SI-2000-19 and
Preliminary Plat Review #5-2000-14 incorporating this staff inemorandum and the attached Site
Review Criteria Checklist as findings of fact, and using the following recommended conditions
of approval.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The Applicant shall be responsible for assuring that the development shall be in
compliance with all of the approved plans dated "September 5, 2000, revision submittal"
and on file with the City of Boulder Planning Department.
2. Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit the following items for
the review and subject to the approval of the Planning Department:
a. Final azchitectural plans, including materials and colors, to ensure compliance
with the intent of this approval. The architectural intent shown on the approved
plans dated September 5, 2000, revision submittal aze acceptable. Planning staff
will review plans to assure that the architectural intent is performed.
b A detailed landscape plan, including size, quantity, and type of plants existing and
proposed; type and quality of non-living landscaping materials; any site grading
proposed; and any irrigation system proposed, to ensure compliance with this
approval and the city's landscaping requirements. Removal of trees must receive
prior approval of the Planning Deparhnent. Removal of any tree in the city right-
of-way must also receive prior approval of the city forester.
c. A detailed lighting plan showing location, size, and intensity of illumination units,
showing compliance with Section 9-3.3-17, B.R.C. 1981.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM # lD f~ Paee 9
d. Building elevations for the trash enclosure, including materials, to ensure
compliance with this approval and compatibility with the surrounding area.
3. Prior to a building permit application or as a part of the Subdivision process, whichever
may first occur, the applicant shall submit the following items for the review, and subject
to the approval, of the City:
a. Detailed engineerining plans and drawings that are prepared by a registered
geotechnica] engineer that demonstrate that the cut and fill on the toe of the slope
of the hillside required for the construction of Buildings B, C and D, as shown on
the approved plans referenced above, will not further increase the chance for
instablility of the hillside or will improve the stability of the hillside. The detailed
engineerining plans and drawings shall include without limitation a soils analysis,
borings and engineered slope stabilization plans for cut and fill areas along the
existing hillside, assuring that the hillside will be stabilized and and that the cut
and fill will not cause additional adverse offsite impacts on adjacent properties.
b. Dedicate to the city, at no cost, a 30 foot right-of-way for Taft Drive as indicated
on the approved site plan.
4. Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit the following items for
the review, and subject to the approval, of the city:
a. A detailed final master utility plan showing proposed private and public utility
systems, including water, sewer, electric, gas, drainage, telephone,
telecommunications, and any other services that will supply the subject property.
b. Detailed engineering drawings and plans for erosion control
c, A detailed drainage plan and report meeting requirements of the city of Boulder
Design and Constnxction Standards.
d. A detailed storm water and flood management plan meeting the requirements of
the city of Boulder Design and Conshuction Sfandazds and the provisions of the
city's Master Drainage Plan.
e. Covenants, in a form acceptable to the City Manager, that secure the permanent
affordability of the 44 permanently affordable, on-site units.
5. Prior to requesting a final inspection on any building permit, the Applicant shall;
a. Construct and complete, subject to acceptance by the city, all public
improvements serving the site in conformance with the approved engineering
plans and with the city of Boulder Design Criteria and Construction Standards,
b. Design and conshuct fire lanes depicted upon the approved site plan in
conformance with the city of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
c. Install street trees as required by this approval; all trees in the public right-of-way
must have the approval of tha city forester prior to installation and must be
adequately watered by an irrigation system.
s:\plan\pb-items~tnemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM~F IOA Paee 10
6. Apply for and receive a floodplain development permit for all proposed construction
within the floodplain and conveyance zone. The subject property lies within the Boulder
Creek 100-year floodplain and conveyance zone. Construction on this site must conform
to all floodplain regulations as described in Chapter 9-9, B.R.C. 1981.
The Applicant shall convey drainage in a historical manner and which does not adversely
affect adjacent properties.
Approved By:
~ ~
Peter Pollock, Planning Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Site/Use Review Criteria Checklist
Vicinity Map
Conespondence Received
Development Review Results and Comments
Applicant's Written 5tatements and ApplicanYs
Proposed Plans
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm. wpd
AGENDA ITEM # ~ Paee il
ATTACHMENT "A"
Site Review Criteria Check List
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan:
ves The proposed site plan is consistent with the purposes and policies of the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan. The site is zoned HR-E (High Density Residential) which can permit up to
181 units on the site, 165 are currently proposed. Two types of needed housing as identified
within the Comprehensive Housing Study are being provided: Permanently Affordable and
Student Housing.
ves The proposed development shall not exceed the maximum density associated with the Boulder
Valley Comprehensive Plan residential Iand use designation. Additionally, if the density of existing
residential development within a 300 foot area surrounding the site is at or exceeds the density
permitted in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, then the maximum density permitted on the site
shall not exceed the lesser of:
(i) The density permitted in the Boulder Valiey Comprehensive Plan, 6.64
acres of developable land area exists on this property. This translates to a maximum of
181 units at one unit per 1600 square feet of per unit. The applicant is proposing to
develop the site with only 165 units.
(ii) the maximum number of units that could be placed on the site without
waiving or varying any of the requirements of Chapter 9-3.2, "Bulk Requirements," B.R.C. 1981.
If the buildings are lowered to 35' maximum height, the amount of required open space for
this site reduces from 2D% to 10%. The applicant has proposed developing the resldential
units on the second floor elevation of the site to keep them out of the floodplain. The
parking could be placed below grade and flood proofed, allowing the buildings to be
lowered. It is possible to achieve the density requested or greater if the buildings were
lowered and flood proofed.
II. Site Desican: It utilizes site design techniques which enhance the quality of the project. In
determining whether this subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the following
factors:
A. Open soace, including without limitation, parks, recreation areas, and playgrounds:
ves 1. Useable open space is arranged to be accessible and functional; Usable
common open space has been provided adjacent to all buildings. The
spaces are large enough to accommodate recreational actlvlties and
passive outdoor uses for the project.
na 2. Private open space is provided for each detached residential unit; No detached
units are proposed for this sfte.
ves 3. The project provides for the preservation of natural features, including without
limitation healthy long-lived trees, terrain, and drainage areas; This site is
located within the Boulder Creek Floodplain. Construction will be
consisten4 with the requirements for development within the floodplain.
Existing trees have been identlfied and will be preserved or relocated
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\bbtafriillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(O~ Paee 12
when possible on site. Many of the existing trees will be protected in their
current location or moved to a new location with the development of this
site (see the landscape and site improvement plans). Approved
engineering standards and practices will be used for development on
steep slopes present on this site. Drainage through and from this site will
be designed to meet city standards.
yes 4. The open space provides a relief to the densiry, 6oth within the project and from
surrounding development; The amount of open space provided on this site
exceeds the amount of open space required. The location of open space
could be adjacent to the southern portions of the site and better serve the
residents of the developmertt, hut thls would place the more active outdoor
areas of the site adjacent to the existing hillside and residential uses. The
applicant will move the active areas to the northern portions of the site to
reduce potential noise impacts to resldents. In addition, the impacts of the
taller buildings proposed for this site are reduced by placing them below
the top of the hill and closer to the south portfon of the site (hillside). The
further the buildings are moved to the north, the more they disrupt views
from the south. The placement of buildings on this site has been a
compromise to meet concerns expressed by the neighborhood to the
south. Open space areas are present along the north sides of buildings B,
C, & D.
ves 5. If possible, open space is linked to an area- or city-wide system. This site is
adjacent to the Boulder Creek trail system. Paths connecting this site to
the trail system have been proposed.
B. Landscapinp:
ves 1. The project provides for a variety of plant and hard surface materials, and the
selection of materials provides a variety of colors and contrasts; The proposed
landscape plan is consistent with this criterion. Parking lots will be
screened, and the landscaped area will exceed city standards for the
number and location of trees and landscape material.
ves 2. The project provides significant amounts of plant material sized in excess of the
iandscaping requirements of Sections 9-3.3-2 and 9-3.3-3, "Landscaping and
Screening Requirements;' and "Landscape Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981;
and many existing plants will be relocated on the site. The general
landscape plan submitted exceeds city requirements for size and number
of plant materials and type.
ves 3. The setbacks, yards, and useable open space along public rights- of-way are
landscaped to provide attractive streetscapes, to enhance architectural features,
and to contribute to the development of an attractive site plan. All front yard
areas will be landscaped to enhance the overall development and provide
useable open space areas for the residents of the site.
C. Circulation, includi~g without limitation the transportation system that serves the property,
whether public or private and whether constructed by the developer or not:
s;\plan\pb-items~memos\bbtafrvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(!7~/ Pase 13
~s 1. High speeds are discouraged or a physical separation between streets and the
project is provided; Parking will be maintained on Taft Drive, and curb
extensions have been proposed at specified locations within the
development to reduce traffic speeds and enhance pedestrian movements.
ves 2. Potential conflicts with vehicles are minimized; Curb cuts have been located
to reduce traffic conflicts, and curb extensions have been proposed to
improve pedestrian and car movements on site.
ves 3. Safe and convenient connections accessible to the public within the project and
between the project and existing and proposed transportation systems are
provided, including without limitation streets, bikeways, pedestrian ways and
trails; Sidewalks and trail connections will be provided to the Boulder
Creek trail system, and sidewalks along 28'h and Folsom Straets.
ves 4. On-site facilities for external linkage are provided with other modes of
transportation, where applicable; Connections to the future 281h Street transit
corridor wtll be available to this site through the Boulder Creek trail system
and sidewalk connections to 281b Street. Pedestrian access to the Hop
transit line along Folsom will also be available to this site.
ves 5. The amount of land devoted to the street system is minimized; Taft Drive will
be the minimum street width necessary to meet city standards and provide
safe traffic movements and parking on both sides of the street.
~s 6. The project is designed for the rypes of traffic expected, including without
limitation automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians, and provides safety,
separation from living areas, and control of noise and exhaust; and Taft has
been designed to meet city design standards, which will support the type
and nature of traffic expected to use the street.
ves 7. City construction standards are met, and emergency vehicle use is facilitated.
City design and construction standards will be met with the planned
improvements to Taft Drlve.
D. Parkina:
ves 1. The project incorporates into the design of parking areas measures to provide
safety, convenience, and separation of pedestrian movements from vehicular
movements; The parking lots have been designed to meet city design and
construction standards. Much of the parking wfll be under planned
buildings.
ves 2. The design oF parking areas makes eff+cient use of the land and uses the
minimum amount of land necessary to meet the parking needs of the project;
most of the parking has been placed under planned buildings rather than
on other portions of the slte.
ves 3. Parking areas and lighting are designed to reduce the visual impact on the
project, adjacent properties, and adjacent streets; and Light of parking lots
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtafrvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(D~ Paee 14
will be required to meet city standards. All lighting is required to be
directed onto the site.
ves 4. Parking areas utilize landscaping materials to provide shade in excess of the
requirements in Section 93.3-12, "Parking Area Design Standards;' B.R.C.
• 1981. The majority of parking proposed for this site will be under
buildings. However additional landscaping adjacent to the uncovered
parking portions of the parking lots will be provided.
E. Buildina Desiqn. LivabfliN, and Relationshio to the Existina or Prooosed Surroundina Area:
ves 1. The buiiding height, mass, scale, orientation, and configuration are compatible
with the existing character of the area or the character established by an
adopted plan for the area; There is no adopted neighborhood plan for this
site, it is adjacent to the Boulder Valley Regional Center, which supports
large-scale buildings with height of up to 5S feet. The proposed buildings
will generally be lower than the top of the hiflsfde that runs along the
southern property line of the site. Homes in the University Heights
neighborhood w111 continue to have uninterrupted views to the northwest.
Views from this neighborhood to the Boulder Creek area will be reduced in
some cases. The existing trees along Boulder Creek are taller than 55 feet
and impact the views from the University Heights development more than
the proposed buildings.
ves 2. The height of buildings is in general proportion to the height of existing buildings
and the proposed or projected heights of approved buildings or approved plans
for the immediate area; Buildings to the north, east and west of this site
have comparable hefghts to the buildings proposed. The Good Samarltan
and Harvest House have heights in excess of 55 feet, which are not
permltted under current standards. The maxtmum height of building
proposed for this site is 52'9".
ves 3. The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from
adjacent properties; As noted above, views to the north from the University
Heights neighborhood may be disrupted, but this area is on a hillside that
has a height of up to 54 feet above the proposed development site. The
buildings withln the central and western portions of the site will not
exceed 39 feet in height. The buildings in the northeastern portion of the
site will have heights of up to 52'9" and will disrupt views down toward the
Boulder Creek corridor for some of the residents within the University
Heights neighborhood, but it should also be noted that existing trees in the
Boulder Creek corridor exceed 55 feet in height within this area and
already Iimit view through the creek corridor. Development on the north
side of Taft Drive at permitted heights of 35 feet would block the
neighbors' views to the creek corridor almost as significantly as the
proposed buildings.
Solar shadows will be cast onto the land north of this site, but this area is
within the Boulder Creek "High Hazard" zone, which does not permit
development of new buildings. Solar access regulations are intended to
protect buildings only.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaRvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #~v~ Paee 15
ves 4. If the character of the area is identifiable, the project is made compatible by the
appropriate use of color, materiais, landscaping, signs, and lighting; There is
no identifiable character in this area. The site is not within a designated
planning area. The proposed colors of the new buildings will blend with
colors currently used within the CU campus. Lighting is required to be
directed internal to the site and not outward toward adjacent
neighborhoods.
ves 5. Buildings present an attractive streetscape, incorporate architectural and site
design elements appropriate to a pedestrian scale, and provide for the safety
and convenience of pedestrians. The basic design elements of the buildings
proposed are appropriate for this site. Tha buildings have parking placed
at the first floor elevations of tha buildings, raising the habitable floor area
for most of the buildings to the second level, raising them out of the
Boulder Creek floodplain. Pedestrian connections for all of the buildings
have been designed to provide pedestrian movements within and exterior
to the site. Curb extensions have been proposed at logical locations to
promote saPe pedestrian movements across Taft Drive.
ves 6. To the extent practical, the project provides public amenitles and
planned public facilities; Not applicable to thls site. Connections
to the Boulder Creek Trail have been provided.
ves 7. For residential projects, the project assists the community in producing a variety
of housing types, such as multi-family, townhouses, and detached single-family
units as well as mixed lot sizes, number of bedrooms, and sizes of units; This
site will provide student housing and 49% of the new units in the low
"permanently affordable" housing category. The maxlmum amount of
Permanently Affordable housing is 20%. The elderly housing project is
also present on th(s site, which results in three types of housing being
provided on this site that have been identified as needed within Boulder.
ves 8. For residential projects, noise is minimized between units, belween buildings,
and from either on-site or off-site external sources through spacing,
landscaping, and building materials; The more active open space elements
of thls site have been located along the north sides of buildfngs along the
south side of Taft Drive to reduce noise to residents south of this site. The
vast maJority of parking has been placed under the proposed bufldings.
ves 9. A lighting plan is provided which augments security, energy conservation,
safety, and aesthetics; A final Iighting plan will be provided at the time of
building permit application. The Ilghting plan will be required to meet city
standards for design and construction.
yes 10. The project incorporates the naturai environment into the design
and avoids, minimizes, or mitigates impacts to natural systems;
The site is in the Boulder Creek Floodplain and the southern
hillside has been identified as a potential issue. The floodplain
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtafriillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(O~ Paee 16
requirements will be met with the new buildings being flood
proofed to met city requirements. Final engineeri~g plans will
be required to show that the south hilislde will not be impacted
by the development of new along the south property line.
No 11. Cut and fill are minimized on the site, and the design of buiidings
conforms to the natural contours of the land. The amount of cut
and fill has been minimized on site, but there will be some
cutting of the hiliside running along the south property line to
reduce the height of new buildings running along the south
property line, which reduce impacts on the neighbors to the
south. The hillside will also be cut to keep the low cost
housing (Permanently Affordable) out of the Boulder Creek
floodplain. Funding requirements for federal subsidized
housing requires the building to be placed outside the
identlfied floodplain for Boulder Creek. All hillside cuts will be
required to meet engineering standards assuring stability of the
existing hillside.
F. Solar Sitina and Construction: For the purpose of ensuring the maximum potential for
utilization of solar energy in the city, all applicants for residential site reviews
shall place streets, lots, open spaces, and buildings so as to maximize the
potential for the use of solar energy in accordance with the following solar siting
criteria:
ves 1. Placement of Ooen Soace and Streets. Open space areas are located wherever
practical to protect buildings from shading by other buildings within the
development or from buildings on adjacent properties. Topography and other
natural features and constraints may justify deviations from this criterion. The
buildings within this site have been placed on an easUwest orientation
adJacent to the southern portions of the site. Placing the buildings Into or
adJacent to the south hillside reduces the impact of building height on the
residential neighborhood south of this site. Placing the buildings along the
south property Iine also reduces the solar impacts of the southern portion of
the development on the congregate care facility and building "A", within the
development.
ves 2. lot Lavout and Buildina Sitinst. Lots are oriented and buildings are sited in a way
which maximizes the solar potential of each principal building. Lots are designed
to facilitate siting a structure which is unshaded by other nearby structures.
Wherever practical, buiidings are sited close to the north lot fine to increase yard
space to the south for better owner control of shading. This site is adjacent to a
steep north facing hillside, which limits solar access for the southern portion
of the site. The buildings have been placed closer to the south property line
to reduce nolse and building height impacts on the University Heights
development. The new building north of Taft Drive retains most of their solar
aspects as a result of placing mast of the new buildings along the southern
properry line.
s:\plan\pb-items~memos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA 1TEM #(,~A Paee 17
Exce~tion 3. Buildinq Form. The shapes of buildings are designed to maximize utilization of
solar energy. Buildings shall meet the solar access protection and solar siting
requirements of Chapter 9-8, "Solar Access," B.R•.C. 1981. The buildings have
been designed to make use of the solar requirements, but the northeastern
building does encroach into the solar area for the property to the north. This
area is within the High Hazard and Conveyance zone for Boulder Creek and
no new buildings can be constructed in this area. There are three bungalows
in this area that wiil not be shadowed by the new buitdings.
ves 4. Landscaoina. The shading effects of proposed landscaping on adjacent buildings
are minimized. Landscaping along the north, east and west property lines
conform with this provtsion. Residential units within the Universlty Heights
neighborhood (south of the site) will not be impacted by proposed or existing
landscaping.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\bbtaftvillage.pbm.wpd AGENDA ITEM #~A Pa¢e 18
• mm ~ rv~~~ ~r~.... ..
- LOCATION:
Taft Drive 8~ 28th Street
- APPLiCATION ZYPE:
Subdivision (Preliminary Plat)
Site Review
- ZONING:
HR-E
- APPLICANTS:
American Campus-Titan LLC
~~~`~ Q
VI ~tN~~ N
Agandaltemp /Of~ PageB~,
ATTACHMENT C
~ DIbTLE AND DAVLS, P.C.
e~rroaNexs~ruw
r.e~w~.a~, twi:
Peter C. Die~e Sien~ Square Bui~ding
]cel C. Davle 2060 Brafiwy, Suth q00
Robyn W. Kube Boulder, Colondo 80302
Kathleen E. Haddodc Telephone (303) 447•1375
Kari F. Kumli, Ill' P.: (303) 4WA036
Dougl~ L Chri~m~cn"
Cartnen S. Danie4on
rnmil addrne~ petrrQDie~eD~vie.com
December 21, 2000
Brant Bean,
Senior Planner
Planning Department
City of Boulder
I739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O.Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: The Village at Boulder Creek
Dear Mr. Bean:
Uana S. Bickham
OlCounee/:
Harvey L Cohm
•Abo ~dmiKed in Califomi~
"Alro idmitted in Wialtington
On behaif of our ciients who live in University Heights, and after consultation with them, we
wish to give you our reaction to the ambiguity we perceive with respect to the staff s position on the
issue of the stability of slope.
There should be no misunderstanding that among the concerns our clients have expressed to
you , the concem over the potential instability of the slope is preeminent. To an extent, our clients
are relieved , based on the knowledge that the developer is undertaking a study of the soil conditions
of the slope, and that the results of the study will be made available to us and the consultant our
clients have engaged, Ed Giasgow of Scott Cox & Associates, Inc.
The ambiguity which concerns us, and which is found in the staff's memo of November 28,
2000, derives from the fact that it states in part that [SJtajJ' would ertcourage the applicant to
eomplete soils analysis of ihe hillside and determine what if any impact might oceur to neighboring
properties before this request is considered by the Planning Board on Jarruary 18, 2001. On the
broader question ofthe status ofthis application, the memo states: PlnnrringBoard can considerthis
request based on the the information provided within ihis docuraent with the exceptiott .... [further
portion of sentence omitted because not pertinentj.
n~nn:i. snoo- ~s~ pm
cuuirroot~nnrtniRya
4gentla Item ~ .lv~ Paga ~ o1D
Brent Bean
Senior Planner
December 21, 2000
Page 2
Realizing that the soils study is ongoing, according to Mr. Dierking--but the report is not
available as of this date, nor has there been time to digest it and respond to it--we are left to conclude
that except for wanting to be helpful to the neighboring citizens in University Heights, the stability
of the slope issue is not among the issues which the staff believes the developer must resolve in an
reasonably acceptable manner. Were it otherwise, why would staff write that the application is ready
for consideration by the Planning Board on January 18, 2001? Our clients would be grateful and
relieved to know that we are wrong in this; that the staffbelieves the questions raised about the
stability af the slope must be resolved by the de~~eluper based on competent evidence and evaluation.
We respectfully request that you clarify this point in writing.
We further request that until the soils report has been received and there has been an
opportunity for evaluation by all who are competent to do so, including Mr. Glasgow, we request that
the application not move forward for consideration by the Planning Board. In short, we believe that
the application is not ready for consideration by the Planning Board on January 18, 2001. We request
that you respond to this suggestion.
We look forward to your response. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
D TZE AND DAVIS, P.C.
r
Peter C. Dietze
PCD
c: Robin Youngelman
Bruce Dierking, Esq.
Ed Glasgow
n~oca:i.mao- ~s~ p~
a:wirrmi~wo-iniwe
Agenda Item d~!~~ pay~ p~
LLC
ACK AN'b COOTC
HUTCHINSON BT ~~'t~K e~~e.~ucn
~
. w¢vnM n. amrce cr~a~smrtma w, eono
)A~5 L GRr&VTmI, IL Im+ffiflRLY 1J. 31ULT
A T T O R N E Y S A S L A W y~ybp,~yR Ww.Ww1"dinNYrdP.v
CWtK C. ~WNiD6
S I N G S 1 8 q i OAVIDM.R~QCAy.U ~J~~
Int~S EnICUNO ST,wLerA suc¢
1216 SPRUC& 5lRFSI 1~~ e. GREBR ~ CHRISlOPF~R R EMVCNLi
NMGA86TLTOAI.
90ULDPR,COL~RAD~6Ql02id1B C.~AOPB1E190N G'fk7FftQ~0U1~ffi7WA@D9
M1CilAhL6~MINEN
TSLSPHON6 (903J 642~6574 • PAX (303) 442fi593 51'HVg. ti tmtCrsON
low~hbGlaeom
GALAWdLtAM9SIS.OC¢ OUDL4Yi. M7[C{ifNSON pWN-Iml1
DuD18YLHUf~lSbN,]R~f~l6trrol
_ tlItUCBD~U1m0~JC TlSMIYHUi~50N,Amm
MAIISNG ADDRffiS
P.O, tlOX 117U AMm~6rr of tlr Netovork of I[ading Ima Firme
80LiLDS& COLORADD 8030b1170 "AWmld•Wrdt AtwcWian uJlndeptadrnt ]mu Firm>
November 7, 2000
Peter C. Dietze, Esq.
Dietze and Davis, P.C.
206D Broadway, Suite 400
Boulder, CO 80302
Re: T~illage ar Boulder Creek, Sire 12eview SI-?000-7
l~ear Peter:
Following on our recent telephone conversation, this lerter is in response to your letter to
me of Nov~mber 2, 2000 and your letters to Brent Bean regarding the above referenced Site
Review. As we discussed, there have been two neighborhood meerings where your clients have
had che opportunity to ask their questions und express their opinions regarding the project.
Titan-American Campus Communities, LLC. ("Titan") has taken the nei~hbors' input into
consideration and is making fiuther changes and revisions to the projecc, Titan intends to have
another neighborhoad meeting in the coming weeks to present those changes to the neighbors.
We agreed that continued d'uect discussions between the neighbors and Titan is the appropriaie
forum for the neighbors to express their broad issues and concerns about the project.
Your letters to Brent Baan also seemed w quesrion whether the City planning staff is
doing ics job in a number of respsots re~azding this project. We aze confident that Mr. Bean and
the rest of his staff are adhering to the appropriate standards and procedures for a sice review and
are completiing their work in a professional and competent manner. Titan has and will continue
to follow the substantive requirements and procedures set forth in the Boulder Revised Code and
the requests and directions given it by thc staff: We do not believe it is our responsibiliry or
obligation to defend the staff s work to you or to respond to your critique of the technical
adequacy of the project und~r the site review standards. Technical review of the pxojec[ is the
responsibiliry of the Ciry plannin~ staff, and Titan will continue to work with the planning staff
regarding those matters.
Agentla Nem ~ ~ ~ Paga N ~.
.. '• • • +++ r.u~rua r 1au
Peter C. Dietze, Esq.
November 7, 2000
Page 2
We understand your clients have concarns regazding slope stabili2ation in connection.
with this project. Ttegarding tha~ issue, it may be helpful for you to refer to Section VI(B)(3) of
Titan's Site Review Submittal tuid the referenced letter from Yenter Companies. Titan agrees
that slope srzbilizt-tion is a critical issuo for the site and fully intends to take all necessary and
appropriate steps to provide for adequate stabilization so that there is no negative impact on
properties on the hill to the south. The prelicninary reports Titan has obtained indicate that
stabilization of the slope is feasible. The letter from Yenter Companies discusses some of the
techniques that may be employed to accomplish stabilization. T-Towever, unril the project design
is finalized, it is not possible to finali2e the slope stabilization engineering and construction
plans. Titan fully expects that as a condition of its approval, the City will require that Titan
complete engineering and construction plans for stabilizing the slope and submit them to the City
for review prior io commencement af any work. We will also be happy to provide you copies of
those plans when they are finalized.
Tn response to your request, Titan is also willing to commission a soils analysis of the
slnpe, We do not believe that such a report is necessary at this point in the process, but as an
accommodacion co you and your clients, Titan will incur the expense to obta.in the reporr. I will
provide you a copy once the repon has been completed, which should be approximately 2-3
weeks.
Tn the meantime, please feel free to cAtl me if you should wish to discuss this matter
furCher.
e truly y u s,
~
ruce D. Dierking
c: Brent Bean (via fax)
Stuart Davis (via fa~c)
Agendaltem#. ~o~ Pagek ,-~73
~,,d, ,~ ,~"
~~ ,
~ DIETZE AND DAVIS, P.C.
ATIOIiNEYSATIAW
Lubl4hed In 1972
Pecet C. Dietze
Joel C. Davie .
Robyn W. Kube
Kathleen E. Haddock
Kerl P. Kua~li, III•
Dougiss L C6riehma••
Carmen S. Dauielson
Siena Squue Building
2060 Broadway~ Suitc 400
Boulder, Colorado 80302
TelepLone (303) 447-1375
Fu (303) 4449036
Daaa S. Bick6am
email addceee~ pecer@DieueDavie.com
November 2, 2000
Brent Bean,
Senior Planner
Planning Department
City of Boulder
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O.Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: The Village at Boulder Creek
Deaz Mr. Bean:
OfCouasel:
Harvey L Cahen
A.{vo tdmirtadio L}/ifomra
"'.9/so admitred in Wis/~ingtoo
In response to your letter of October 17, 2000, we wish to say that we agree the applicant
should be given the time allowed to supplement the application. Our clients would like to be assured
by you that the deficiencies in the materials supplied by the applicant so far, which we have
enumerated in our letter to you, dated October 6, 2000, aze valid and that unless the deficiencies are
cured by subsequenY submissions, the application will be rejecYed.
~~4~e urge you t~ support the residents ofUniversity Heights in theirrequest that the applicant,
without delay, undertake a soils analysis of the hillside and supply to the City the result of such
study. In our view, the information gained from such effort will be an essential body of information
in order for the City to review and assess the adequacy of the engineering plans to be submitted by
the applicant, which the applicant intends to submit after the final site plan is approved, albeit
conditionally. In short, we do not believe the applicant is being asked to undartake work or incur
expense not otherwise necessary. Our request merely addresses the timing for the submission of the
soils data by the applicant. We contend the proper time for furnishing this information is now, prior
to approval of the site plan, and not afterwazds.
NovemberZ, ]000- 7:51 pm
G:IS517TODI~Itr1/2.r}d
Agentla flem k._,(v_.~ Pag2 N~?~_
Brent Bean
Senior Planner
November 2, 2000
Page 2
We urge you to support the residents in this regazd, and look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you.
Very truly yows,
DIETZE AND DAVIS, P.C.
V "' r
Peter ~ Dietze
PCD
c: Robin Youngelman
Novcm6a3, 3000.-1:51 pn
G:1S5177~qI1~BnnIUIIP.wpd
Agenda Item N.~~ Paga N~
~1~~ ~
~ DIETZE AND DAVIS, P.C.
ATIORNSY3 AT IAW
A~u6WMd in 1972
Peter C. Dieue
Jod C. Davie
xo~ w. x~
Kathteen E. Haddock
Kul F. Kumli, II[•
Douglas L. Chxietman"
Grmen S. Danielson
Siena Sqwre SuiWing
7A60 Brosdway~ Sui[e 400
sa~ta«, cotanao soaaz
Tekphone (303) 447•1375
Fu (303) 4449036
Dana S. Bulcham
email addreee~ Petec@DietzeDavie.com
November 2, 2000
Bruce D. Dierking
Hutchinson Black & Cook LLC
1215 Spruce Street, Suite 100
Boulder, Colorado 80302
Re: The Village at Boulder Creek
Deaz Bntce:
OfCouoselr
Harvey L Cohw
Nwrdmiaedla Gli~braia
AG»admimdia WasGingma
The clients we represent are residents and homeowners in University Heights. Their
ovemding concem with the proposed deveIopment is that the stability of the slope along the hillside
wili be adversely affected by the proposed development, and that therefore, they may be exposed to
damages to their persons or properties, or both. They understand that your client would be liable for
damages which they may suffer due to the adverse impact upon the stability of the slope, if damages
should result from the proposed development. Understandably, I believe, they are not satisfied to
wait and see whether the slope will become unstable, whether in the short term or over a long period
of time.
Based on ourtelephone discussion, it is my understanding that your clientproposes to submit
an engineering proposal which will deal with potential problems of instability of the slope, but such
proposal will be submitted to the City of Boulder only after the final site plan has been approved
(with the understanding that such approval will be conditioned on providing an appropriate
engineering solution of actual or foreseeable problems with respect to the hillside).
Our clients believe that a detailed study of the soil conditions along the slope of the hill
shoutd be undertaken now and the resutts made available to the City - as contrasted with the
submission of that data after approval of the final site plan by the City. We do not believe that we
are asking your client to do something which would not have to be done anyway. For we cannot
imagine that any engineering proposal dealing with the slope would not be preceded by a soils
Novemba S.lOW - 3::3 pm
G:W/77TOUI~Dialdn{1o-112Mpd
Agentla Item k__~vf~ Pag~ # a/~
Bruce D. Dierking
November 2, 2000
Page 2
analysis. To date, nothing has been submitted to the City which reflects that a soils analysis was
undertaken. In my letter to the City dated September 20, 2000, of which you have a copy, I have
recited the extent of the information which is available in the City's files. We submit that it is
insufficient.
If the professionals advising your client are of the opinion that the requests we have made
on behalf of our clients aze unduly burdensome because of two considerations, i.e.,there exists
sufficient information with respect to the soil and its characteristics, and therefore, no further soils
analysis is necessary, or alternatively, a soils study is unnecessary for other reasons, we may
withdraw our request, provided the available information is made public and the opinion of these
professionals is submitted to the City to the effect that either the existing data aze sufficient or no
soils data are required, whether in addition to what is lrnown, or othenvise.
We think the request we aze making on behalf ofthe residents and homeowners in University
Heights is reasonable. It is their hope that they wiil be assured by the opinion of competent
professionals, based on an adequate factual basis, that the proposed development will not result in
damages to their properties or injury to their persons.
We look forwards to your response. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
DIETZE AND DAVIS, P.C.
~~ '~~~~
Peter C. Dietze
PCD/dbr
Enclosures
cc Ms. Robin Youngeiman
Brent Bean, Senior Planner ~
No~n~. z:ooo _::u ~
O:WIT/~OOI~Oialtiny1tt1i3.wpd
lagenda Item ~ __.l ~ Paga #~Z__
CITY
OF
BOULDER
~artment of Community Design, Planning and Development
P.O. Box 791 Boulder, Colorado 80306 (3031441-1880 Fax#:441-3241
October 17, 2000
Peter C. Deitze
Siena Square Building, Suite 400
Boulder, CO 80302
Dear Mr. Dietze,
This letter is being written in response to you letter dated October 6, 2000. Unfortunately, I did
not receive your letter until October 12, which has resulted in this delayed response. I have
forwazded your letter and questions to the Applicant for the Village At Boulder Creek project.
This requests is still under review and consideration by the staff. The Applicant will be
submitting additional comments and plans for review as requested in the Development Review
Committee comments dated September 22, 2000.
The applicant should be given a chance to respond to the questions you have asked. The staff has
not drawn any final conclusions on whether a favorable or unfavorable recommendation will ba
made to the Planning Board regazding this request. The applicant may make two more submittals
under the provisions of "review of revisions." Tha Applicant may choose to proceed to the
Planning Boazd for consideration at any time in this process or apply for the two revisions. At
this time, the staff is not prepared to make a final recommendation on this proposal.
Thank you for your response to the proposed Site Plan for the Village At Boulder Creek project.
If I can be of any further assistance to you please call me at your eazliest convenience.
Sincerely,
Br~Be/ar~ ~ `'}(
Senior Planner
G'~' U
S:~PLANldate~cur\CORWbufll.ltr.wpd
,1gEn~a Irern r ._..~fi Paga;f ~~_
^-1%-~: ~C3:~~ ;,
~ DIETZE AND DAVIS, P.C.
nTroxxerseTUw
Eubl4hed In 1972
Peter C. Dietze
]oel C. Davie ,
Robyn W. Kube
Kathlcea E. Haddock
Karl F. Kumli, $•
Douglae L. Chrletman••
Grmca S. Dauieleon
Siena Square Building
2060 BroadwaY, Suice 400
Boulder~ Colorado 80302
Telephoae (303) q47•1375
Faz (303) 4449036
email addrese~ pecer@DietzeDavie.com
Dana S. Bickham
OfCoun.aeJ,
Hacvey L Cohen
:9lso admiXed in GG'loroia
Alsoadmr[tedio WisLingtoo
October 6, 2000
Brent Bean, Senior Planner
Planning Department
City of Boulder
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O.Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: #SI - 2000 - 7
Villare At Boulder Creek
Titan Investments LLC
Dear Mr. Bean:
On behalf of a group ofresidents living in University Heights ("University Heights Citizens
Group"), I would like to provide you tha Group's response to the staffinemo of September 22, 2000.
We received your letter of September 29, 2000, informing us that you sent to the
applicanbdeveloper forreview and consideration our letter of September 20, 2000, to you. Although
we appreciate that fact, our clients are disappointed in that you did not indicate whether you endorse
and support the specific requests we made in our letter. We ranew our request that you do so. If in
the opinion ofthe developer's experts no further investigation and analysis is required to express the
opinion that the stability of the slope will not be adversely affected, we request that the devaloper
be asked to fiunish such a statement in lieu of a report.
We appreciate the reminder to the developer by staff that without express consent of the
property owners affected, no part of the retaining wall and associated appurtenances may encroach
into neighboring properties.
Post•itm Fax Note 7671 ~a~a ~p.~3-(~ pe°pes-
7a From
Co./DepL Co. G,a~~
Phone p Phone 8 ~~
Fax s 2D _ _(~' Fex a
Oclobn6,1000- 7:Z6 pn
G:lS1S17T0011BrmM3lv.wpd
A~~n;ia tCern ~ _lvA__ i'a~a fi ~
Brent Bean
Senior Planner
October 6, 2000
Page 2
We appreciate the staff comments which address the inappropriate height and mass of the
proposed buildings.
Although touching on many of the important azeas of deficiency of the project, as measured
by the approval criteria applicable to site plans set forth in §9-4-11, in our view the sta£f inemo did
not adequately deal with the concerns of the Group in three areas: The impact of the development
on (a) traffic in the vicinity, (b) the proposed landscaping and existing vegetation within the project
area and along the slope, and (c) public safety, particulazly exterior lighting and its effects on the
homes on University Heights Avenue facing the north rim. Our point emerges from a review of the
approval criteria ~~hich we se. fcrth telow:
§9-4-11(g)(4) requires a shadow analysis that shows the shadow cast by a 35'
building located at the required setback and the shadow cast by the proposed building. Does
the City has the drawing showing the 35' version?
§9-4-11(g)(5) requires a list of the height of each principal building located within
100' of the proposed object.
Has the developer provided the City with this list? May we see it or obtain a copy?
§9-4-11(g)(6) requires a written statement and drawings which describe the way in
which the proposal accommodates pedestrians, including, without limitation, uses proposed
for the ground level, percent of transpazent material at the ground level, and signage and
graphics.
Has the developer provided this information?
~~ How are the special needs of the elderly accommodated in this proposal?
~A What is the proposed signage and graphics on the buildings?
What is the street experience of pedestrians when the buik of the ground level
building is open under building pazking?
§9-4-11(i)(1)(B) requires compliance with the maximum density associated with the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. The staff inemo states that BURA supports this type
of housing in this location.
What is the basis for BURA'S' support? What is the existing density in the 300 feet
azea surrounding the project.
Oclober 6, 2000.-326 pn
G~S517TIX11~Bean%2Nr.wpd
rig~nda i[em It _ ~~ Rag~ # ~~ .
Brent Bean
Senior Planner
October 6, 2000
Page 3
Does it exceed the Comprehensive Plan's maximum density?
§9-4-11(i)(2)(A)(iii) requires that tha developer provide for the preservation of or
mitigation of adverse impacts to natural features, including without limitation long-lived
trees, significant plant communities, ground and surface waYers artd endangered species.
- Has an inventory been made ofthe long lived trees in the area affected by the project,
including those on the slope?
- Vb'hat healthy iong livcd trees will ba affected by this development including those
on the adjacent property, to wit: the slope?
- What mature vegetation will be affected by this development?
- What will be the likely effect of soil stabilization on the sunounding vegetation?
- What is the effect of moming shadows cast by the proposed development on
surrounding vegetation and the ability to re-vegetate disturbed areas to satisfaction?
- How does this project affect the nature ofopen space on adjacent properties?
- How will the proposed project affect the ground water levels? Note: The CTL
Thompson Inc, soils report indicated a change in ground water levels.
§9-4-11(i)2(A)(v) requires that open space be provided to buffer and to the protect
sensitive environmental features and natural azeas.
How does the proposed project provide a buffer between the buildings and the
hillside to the south?
- 9-4-11(i)(2)(B)ii requires the ]andscape design to avoid, minimi2e, or mitigate
impacts to important native species, plant communities of special concern, threatened or
endangered species and habitat by integrating the exisYing natural environment into the
project.
The concept review document stated there is no environmental impact from the development.
What is the factual basis for this statement is based? ~
Who are the professionals who contributed to this statement?
Ocmha 6~ 300~ ):I3 pn
O:lSIfIfT001lBUnMlltr.wpd
t~g~r~~a I~.n, ;~ _ ~A Pay;s;~ _y~
Brent Bean
Senior Planner
October 6, 2000
Page 4
_ - In what manner is the community assured that no important native species, plant
communities of special concern, threatened and endangered species and habitat will
not be affected by this development?
§9-4-11(i)(2)(C)(iii) requires safe and convenient connections accessible to the public
within the project.
fiow is the safety of pedestrians, especially the elderly residents of Taft Towers,
being provided for?
§9-4-11(i)(2)(C)(viii) requires the project to be designed for the types of traffic
expected.
- Istheprojectadequatelydesignedforthetypesoftrafficrealisticallyexpectedduring
the academic year at CU?
- Has the developer's traffic expert studied the question of"cut-through" traffic within
University Heights so as to assess for the benefit of the residents of University
Heights that there will be no increase in cut through traffic from this development?
- Is there professional support for the timing of the traffic study, which was conducted
in July when the traffic on both Folsom and 28`~ street are considerably lessened from
that experienced during the academic year?
- If so, may we obtain a copy of this aspect of the traffic study7
- Will the residents of University Heights be given an opportunity to meet with the
developer's traffic consultant for the purpose of discussing the timing of the traffic
study? ~
§9-4-11(i)(2)(D)(i) requires the proj ect to incorporate into the design ofpazking areas
measures to provide safety, convenience, and separation of pedestrian movements from
vehicular movements.
How does the proposed project incorporate safety from assault, burglary, and
vandalism into the design of the parking areas? ' '„
§9-4-11(i)(2)(D)(iii) requires parking areas and lighting to be designed to reduce the
visual impact on the project and adjacent properties.
OErobv 6~ 1000.- 3:/7 pn
dlSS17T00t~BnnlYtlo-.wpd
r;~~r~a Item r; . lo~ ~ay~ ii _~c~__
Brent Bean ,
Senior Planner
October 6, 2000
Page 5
- Has the developer fiunished a lighting plan? Does the plan satisfy the requirements
of the approval criteria stated above? How?
We would appreciate your detailed response. Thank you.
Very truly yours,
DIF~-~~ND DAVIS, P.C.
C ~
i G~"'
Peter C. Dietze
PCD
c: Ms. Robin Youngelman
Oquhv 6~ 7000-.7:26 pn
GWt'I7~901~BqnXllo-.w~pd
P,~6~iicc Ifem Ir _. ~l~ Faga R~~.___
October 5, 2000
Brent Bean
City of Boulder, Dept. of Community Design, Plazuung & Development
1739 Broadway, Suite 300, P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Deaz Mr. Bean:
American Campus - Titan LLC cordially invites you to attend a neighborhood meeting for a
second presentation of the proposed development "Village at Boulder Creek." The meeting will
be held on October I3, 2000, at the Good Samaritan Society building, located at 2525 Taft Drive,
Boulder Colorado, from 6:00 p.m. to 7:00 p.m.
Please contact me at 720/528-7650, with any questions or concems.
Sincerely,
~
~
Anthony J. tinella, Jr.
Executive Vice President and COO
AJP/ejw
r.S~~,~al:emN~ ~ar4 ~a,~#~ _
4725 South Monpco Street, Suife 340, Denver, CO 80237 Phone 720.528.7650 Fax 720.518.7654
January 6, 2001
Planning Board-City of Boulder
City of Boulder Planning Department
1738 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
RE: Site Review of the Viliage at Boulder Creek
pear Planning Board Members,
I am writing to express my concerns over the proposed development of the Village at
Boulder Creek. These concems reflect my interests as both a resident of the nearby
neighborhood and a citizen of Boulder. They arise from my perception that the scale of this
project is much too large for the small strip of land on which it is to be sited, and that the
resulting density is not in character with nearby residential areas. I understand that the
deveioper is requesting a number of important variances from land use regulations, and I
vehemently oppose granting exceptions to principles that have been designed to serve the
interests of the Boulder community as a whole.
The density of thls project will have serious negative impact on the 8reas near this
development. The proposal does not allow for sufficient parking to accommodate the number
of residents in an area that is already fully parked during business hours. The impact of the
i~creased traffic on Taft Drive, Foisom Street, University Heights Avenue, Colorado Avenue,
and 28'h 5treet has not been adequately addressad in the proposai. The large number of
students who will occupy tha buildings wiil come into conflict with the elderly re5identS of the
Good Samaritan Home, who will also be adversely affected by the shadows cast by the new
buitdings during winter months. Finally, the height of the buildings, some exceeding the top of
the hiil to the south, will degrade significantly the quality of the properties in the University
Heights neighborhood. I fear that the diminished quality of family housing in this neighborhood
will ~change the character of University Heights, desVoying tha single family environment that is
the dominant residential pattem in this neighbofiood.
I recognize that there is a need fbr increased student housing in Boufder. However, the
University has plans to build new housing near Williams Villa~e. This is a much more
appropriste location for additionai student housing since it will be consistent with the present
usage of land at Williams Viilage. I see no need to desVoy an established residentiai
neighborhood and upset current Iand use pattams near Taft Drive when the demand for
additional student housing can be met at more suitable locations.
For these reasons I ask that you reject the proposed project.
Sincerely yours,
~~ ~~t,12~.-t
Robert McNOwn
2772 Bella Vista Lane
Boulder, CO 80302
1lgGi~~a If~m t~ __~o~ Pay~ # ~~_
Planning Board-City of Boulder
City of Boulder Planning Department
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box'791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
January 6, 2001
Dear Planning Board Members,
I am writing to express my concern over the plans for thp construction of the Village at
Boutder Creek. Everything about this project seems out of scale and out of character
with the City of Boulder. The density and size of the project maka it incompatibie with
the surroundings.
Citizens of Boulder have many concerns, and I am aware that some of these may
conflict with one another. However, the concerns that I hear expressed constantly are
of over-crowding, traffie, and a general deterioration of the qual+ty of life of the citizens.
We all agree that Boulder is a special place. You, as members of the Planning Board,
are in a position of trust to protect the city which wa love. The Village at Soulder Creek
creates far more problems than it wii~ solve.
The impact on the University Heights neighborhood will be particularly injurious. This
very stable, owner-occupied neighborhood is an asset to the city yet is in a very
vulnerable position. But, the negative impacts of this project do not fall entirely on this
neighborhood. I am quite concerned about the prospects of negative impact on the
residents of the Goad Samaritan Retirement Home. And, the members of the Harvest
House Sporting Association have also expressed cancem over this project. Indeed,
anyone using the Boulder Creek path will notice that the project will likerally cast a
shadow over a portion of the path.
I ask you to please hait this ill-conceived project.
Since ~~ , /
~~~ ~~~~~~~
Lauri H. McNown
2772 Bella Vista Lane
Bpulder, CO 80302
303/443-3360
h,,F;19~.3 (f8f01r _(O~ ~8~ ~r _p~ w_~_
January S, 2001
Planning Board - City of Boulder
City of Boulder Planning Department
1739 Broadway, Suite 300.
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, Colorado 80306-0791
Subject: Village at Boulder Creek
Dear Planning Board,
My name is Jack Landblom and I am a resident at 2650 University Heights Avenue. In
addition, for over 20 years I have owned an@ operated University Heights Apartments
which are located at 1310 Folsom, 1320 Folsom and 2425 University Heights Avenue.
There are two concerns I would like the Planning Board to focus on in the review of the
Village at Boulder Creek. The first concern is that the land on which the project will be
built is unstable. Byron Wells originally developed this tract of land. Bonnie Wells, the
previous owner of University Heights Apartments, told me that a poRion of the hillside
along Taft is fill left over from the original development. A number of years ago the
Good Samaritan enlarged their pazking lot. I understand the construction caused the
hillside to slide and resulted in about $ 80,000 damage to 2455 University Heights
Avenue, which is located directly above the parking lot. Since The Village At Boulder
Creek is larger, it seems reasonable that the houses on the north side of University
Heights Avenue are at some risk. I would request of the Planning Board to do whatever is
necessary to prevent a repeat of the hillside slipping.
The second concern is I do not believe that the Village at Boulder Creek represents good
land use policy. The project is too dense as illustrated by the nature of the variances
requested. I would ask the Planning Board to please review the wisdom of placing four
bedrooms of students in a 1200 SQ. FT. apartment. Having been in the student rental
business for quite a while I cannot begin to imagine the difficulty of managing over 300
students in such cramped quarters. The Good Samaritan originally was student rental and
it failed in that business. What will Boalder do with three dorm like buildings if this
concept fails because not enough students wish to live there.
,`,~~°~~,~a ftFm ~ __~~_ Ra~; S _,~~-
Furthermore, it does not seem like good land use to place the residents of Good
Samaritan and the affordable housing families in the same block with over 300 students.
Imagine 300 students walking, riding and driving by your home every day as they would
--- be going up and down Taft. The residents of Good Samaritan and the tenants of
University Heights Apartments enjoy a very special neighborhood in Boulder. It is quiet,
safe and uncongested. The residents have the opportunity of viewing an abundance of
wildlife, which lives on the hillside. I described the Village at Boulder Creek to a Boulder
Police Department criine analyst who responded that the project sounds like "Party
Central". The analyst provided data that said the Taft/University Heights neighborhood
has 11 police incidents per year. By adding a student neighborhood the size of The
Village at Boulder Creek it will increase the police incidents to over 100 incidents per
year. This does not seem like good land use for the tenants of University Heights or
residents of Good Samazitan.
I would request the Planning Board not approve the variances because it supports
a density which is too high for this neighborhood. The height restriction of 35 feet has
been very successful in maintaining Boulder's character. I do not think opening Boulder
to 50 Foot buildings is a very good idea. The TafUUniversity Heights neighborhood has
a lot at stake in good land use of the vacant Taft property.
Thank you for your consideration on this project and for all the time and energy you
contribute to the Planning Board.
Sincerely,
QfC~- ~~~cu~~ ~~
ack Landblom
2650 University Heights Avenue
Boulder, Colorado 8Q302
Cc: Boulder City Council
Brent Bean - Senior Planner, City of Boulder
~:ac„~ai:cri~tr _.rv~~'~~s~_,~~__
January 9, 2001
Planning Board - City of Bouldar
City of Boulder Planuing Departmeirt
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box 791
BOUldar, Coloraclo 80306-0791
Dear Planning Board Members:
Wo wish to exprass our opposition to the proposed developmemt oftha Village at Boulder Craek,
submiued to you for site review. As individuals who actively use the tennis and recreational facilities of the
Harvest Housa Sporting Association, we ara concsrned that the proposed project will substantially impair
our enjoyment of thase facilities. Tn particular, the close proximity of $uilding A to saveral tennis courts,
the height of this building which will cast a shadow on the courts, the dasign characteristics that call for
balconies overlooking the tennis courts, and the high numbers of occupants who may intrude on our
facilities are very serious concems. We particularly object to the variances ~ height limitations, setbacks
from adjacent properties, and reduced parldng facilities requested by the developer. These issues are a
reflection of the ovarall density of the proposed project, which is not consistent with tha setting of this
proposed facility and its surtoundings.
Name Signature Address
i~ d b~~ ~ F~~ N~,~~ ~Z~" l~ ~...~.
~~...
J ~ ~~ r.~ I
z~~z 13~1/a v~slc, L~,~i~
Z ~~U ,~~~ ~ ~
~~p N,2~,~` ~fi
z i ~o l~'L ~~ ~; ~l~r
~~~ ~,. ~i~~~ - ~~,.~..0.2~ ~6_
~ ~ ; J~~~~,~
/t~(~s 7~~ ~ ~ l~~ k r~
~~'~,~..,,-e ~`~+,~ L, ~
~~- ---~-
`~ grek~
~ ~~w~. ;~,.,., S~ ~.,-~~~,,,
~57~,~is,~lrT-~l/ ~$ o~ ~~-'
31 ~ L~ c~~u~ ~3c~a(.Q/ ~
~ c~ ~~ ~~~dp c~ .
~:~2~ C=~a,Ss ~`~
(~ °:~~1- ( ~HSt, r v~~~~., ac~ wl.~~
` `"oPA:d '9~j
J'I'i,il~i: 11.;;r(I fi ~~._ t'uy., v_.~.+(,_.__
January 9, 2001
Planning Board - City of Boulder
City of Bouldar Planning Department
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box 791 ,
Boulder, Colorado 80306-0791
Dear Planning Board Members:
We wish to e~cpress our opposition to the proposed devalopment of tha Village at Boulder Crcek,
submitted to you for site review. As individuals who actively use tha tennis and recreational facilities of the
Harvest House Sporting Association, we are concemed ihat ihe proposed project will substantially impair
our enjoyment of these facilities. In particular, the close prmcimity of $uilding A to several tennis courts,
the height of this building which will cast a shadow an the courts, the dasign characteristics that call for
balconies overlooking the tennis courts, and the high numbers of occupants who may intrude on our
facilities are very serious concems. We particularly object to the variances on height limitations, setbacks
from adjacent properties, and reduced parking facilities requested by the developer. These issues are a
reflection of the overall densily of the proposed project, which is not consisterrt with ihe setting of this
proposed facility and its surroundings,
Address
~i~~~! Ki~u~~~>c•ic
~,..
,
~..~~i ~~ ~ ~'~'~~~~
/1,~~:i~u> Sr1i~.~fi~ ~
s;~~+i i2Pse,•~~~~;~re ~`~,u.(de~~
~~~~.~~
„ °~
~ ~~ ~L~ /ZL~L~-~~ s1Zf/ ~'L
1773 ~lu.,,~~„~-u I~l ~~s-u~,
a.~'a.c~ N ~Ekt~.. ~ 4- 8o3a~ ~aY '
~~Y~S fti,~~d C.. ,~a-~uu.F~', c~ &'c~oz.r
~7os ; ~ ~~i~ y ~~l~P , ~o ~; ~
~i~ P~~ ~~ I~~ ~~u~v~
2~0 -/3 /~a.~./ S'¢.
1707 l~i[C,r, ~Q rj ~~„I,~Qr 6'~3o r
'~SG'~' /1/~nM~.tt~'~s~~I~t ~~..
~73 C ,-sy 1>-- ~~• ,
.~ ,. ,~ ,.
Ifa,:6u8~iUi111;__[O'-1-.__~Y~a~y~~ii_%~ ,
~~
~`l/1~~,~;~~~+ ~.ll.~
January 9, 2001
~'~' "~'~
~~ ~
~~~ .
Planning Board - City of Boulder
Ciry of Boulder Planning Departmerrt
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, Colorado 80306-0791
Dear Planning Board Members:
We wish to e~cpress our opposition to the proposed development of the Village at Boulder Creek,
submitted to you for site review. As individuals who actively use the tennis and recreational facilities of the
Harvest House SpoRing Association, we are concerned that the proposed project will substantially impair
our enjoyment of these facilities. In particular, the close pro~cimity of Building A to several tettnis courts,
the height of this building which will cast a shadow an the courts, the design characteristics that call for
balconies overlooking the tennis courts, and the high numbers of occupants who may intrude on our
facilities are very serious concems. We particularly object to the variances ~ height limitations, setbacks
from adjacent propeRies, and reduced parking facilities requested by the developer. These issues are a
refledion of tha overall density of the proposed project, which is not wnsistart with the setting of this
proposed facility and its sunoundings.
Name
~~:~~
~~ G
,
~ ~k~ -/-~
. ,~
~~~2y~ttkN~ ~i
. r/`~ rN,~~ti.T. ~A Ld wa Jt~
~.
~ts6~1 V-, e`IIcIG
Fr~~ c .~~.r,~
.~--- ~"' ~
C'~ i~c;A, ~ f'o ~J ~
~i,~~r=~~c7~~-
~
a ~7s , /l da ~ (~J ~ ~'~-~~
~3~ ~µ..~ C:~, rjld~ ~adY-
~~a ~~ _~~~ ~- ~1~~ ~~3~;
r~~~ a~2/-~'~-'~;~,-~+ /Z~
ii>5' c,c~a ~~o~ a~• ~1~R ' ~30'.
,~230~ ~"~~ J ~ pJw1~.i-~r~.~070[,
~7 7J/ ~ o ~ /JNd~~~~i~
~1 i ~~ t
.~1.~_/J ~~,`iz ~o C-~
y/ ~-(1~ n ,f )~/`{,vur~ut~,; v ~o,_ ,
~f~ ~~~.rA C ~ti~t- 'p ~ ~~ x~'~CL~ `
~ , ° 8o3p1~
'120 1 ~'acl~~r u~vo~,l L; ~
bo,~4 ~,~- ,' 8' fl 3 01
~~e~
~3 C~ . ~~..-
,_,, ,r,us :;ri, ~_ ._ . ___ k :,;~.s;, _. ~.
January 9, 2001
Planning Board - City of Boulder
City of Boulder Planning Departmem
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box 79]
Boulder, Colorado 80306-0791
Dear Planning Board Members:
We wish to express our opposition to the proposed development of the Villaga at Boulder Crcek,
submitted to you for site review. As individuals who actively use the tennis and recreational £acilities of the
Harvest House Sporting Associauon, we are concerned that the proposed project will substantially impair
our enjoyment of these facilities. In particular, the close proxnnity of Building A to several tennis courts,
the height of this building which will cast a shadow on the courts, the design charactsristics that call for
balconies overlooking the tennis courts, and the high numbers of occupants who may intrude an our
facilities are very sarious concems. We paRicularly object to the variances on height limitations, setbacks
from adjacent properties, and reduced parking facilities requested by the developer. These issues are a
reflection of the overall density of the proposed project, which is nat consistent with the setting of this
proposed facility and its sunound'mgs.
Name
Address
,~.•~'~ ,~~ /~l?~/ ~~Y~cSi!
---1,-~ ~-13y ~ 1~;~~~ c~ C-~ ~~~~
~. ~ G ~i./ _~ ; ~ °i.l, S~~ ~ ~ ~Iq~• ~.~s° ~
-~ ' ~' ~ ~ - ~ ~Q.Y - ..
~ "~~ ~ ~ f ~-~a-in.¢,r L~
rr .~.~.~,. ~ 23id ~s~~ J~ ~'a~,:;
~ (. ~(,~~I l~ d~'-~~vN~ ~Va~i~ ~ve
~31~ ~.
~,~~~~u~a~~em~;. l0/3 F~;~;;_.y~--~
~i 7l t' ~Ll<5 J~"i
~.~ V u%(~ ~
University Heights Citizens Group
c/o Robin Youngelman
2600 University Heights Avenue
Boulder, CO 80302
January 9, 2001
Planning Board - City of 8oulder
City of Boulder Planning Department
1739 Broadway, Suite 300
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: Village at Boulder Creek
Dear Planning Board,
This letter is to inform you of the response of the University Heights Citizens Group to the
November 6, 2000 Sfte Plan Submittal for the Village at Boulder Creek. This group was formed
to study this project and represents the collective viewpoint of ihe long time residential community
bordering the south side of the property.
Critical Information is Lacking
We hold the opinion that critical information remains incomplete. We have generated
specific requests for infortnation well in advance of the upcoming hearing and, to date, have not
received adequate response and/or time for analysis, The absence of this information, in a
useable and completed state, begs the question of how a decisian can be made on the project
viability.
The Stabilitv of the Sloqe - The Taft Street property sits at the base of the steeply sloped
backyard properties of the University Heights Avenue residences. There are historical
issues, concems and problems relative to waler drainage, slope instability, and the
impact of prior construction at the base of the hill on these properties. As such, of
foremost impoRance to the neighborhood are the issues of slope stability and the
prevention of structural damage to the adjacent properties homes wh(ch may result from
the proposed construction. These issues were clearly communicated to the planning
staff and developer at an early stage of the projecYs development. Our citizens group
has initiated numerous written requests (see file) seeking crilical soils analysis and
evaluation. While the developer has finally agreed to undertake addKional soils studies, a
report is not currentiy available for evaluation. As of January 2, there still exists no
deFinitive information concerning the stability of the slope, the impact of the proposed
project on the slope, and the potential for damage and injury to the residences above. Ed
Glasgow of Scott Cox, the expert retained by our Cftfzens Group, needs to receive and
review the study, as well as advise us with respect to the findings, the impact on
residenees, etc. The city staff should atso be given adequate opportunity to study the
report. Until this important issue is resolved, we feel consideration of the site plan should
be withheld.
~; ^~e(teni~...~~-F~~a""--~~ -
Density and Scale
It is our considered opinion that, in aggregate, the projecYs design is not respectful of the
guidelines established by the Land Use Regulations and The Boulder Valley Comprehensive
Plan. The nature, number and scope of the variances requested in the site plan strain the limds
of appropriate building scale and density, as well as present an incompatibility with the adjacent
residential neighborhood. Our concerns about density center on issues of tra~c, congestion,
safety, privacy and noise, all of which threaten the character and current livability of ihe newly
developed area, the city and our established neighborhood.
As already mentionetl, there are many facets of this project which contribute to the over-
scaled, overly dense proposal currently presented to you for evaluation. The specific variations
from the Land Use Regulations are:
Requested:
(1) parking reduction of 7.7'Yo
(2) rear yard setback of 12.6 feet where 25+ is required (Building D)
(3) building heights of 52'9" (Buildings A& B)
(4) solar exception for the North Eastern portion of the sfte
Not cited in the 11/28/00 Land Use Review 8, Comments:
(1) rear yard setback of 12.6 feet where 25+ is required (Building A)
(2) reduction in useable open space
(3) parking in required landscape edges adjacent to public rights of way (all lots)
(4) building within the required front yard setback (Building D)
We believe the objectionable consequences of the high density of this project are:
Traffic and Parking:
Parkina Deficiencv - The area to be developed is already highly congested relative to
automobile movement and parking, including the existing nearby apartments, which
currently have significant spill over parking onto Taft Avenue. The current site plan
only parks 74% of the expected student population (assuming one car per student) in
the market rate units and requests a reductton for the affordable and eiderly housing.
Taft Street is already fully parked during the day as is UniversRy Heights Avenue, and
there is no nearby area suitable and available for overtlow. Regardless of the official
designee for a paAicular parking spot, the impact of inadequate parking wiA be
noticeable on cfty streets and unworkable for local residents. In addition, 11.5% of
the required parking sits within the required landscaped edges adjace~t to public
rights of way or within front yards. Out of respect for Boulder's landscape and the
pedestrian experience, adequate screening and landscaping of parking fots should
be provided.
Tra~c Imnact on ~cinitv - In our letter to the city of October 2, 2D00, we outlined
deficiencies in the developer's site plan submittal regarding the impact of the
development on traffic in the vicinity. Specifically the traffic studies were undertaken
in July when tra~c on both Folsom Street and 28~h Street are considerably lessened
f~om the volume experienced during the academic year. We questioned whether
there was professional suppoA forihe timing of ihe stutly. We also asked forthe
developer's expeR to study the question of cut through traffic on University Heighis
Avenue - a phenomenon which we already experience and can logically expect to
grow as northbound traffic on 28~h Street tries to avoid the iwo tights on Colorado
Rgentla Item u ~f~ Paga ~i ~
while crossing to Folsom to access the project from the south. The planning staff
has, so far, been silent on these issues and we believe they need to be addressed.
2. Congestion:
• One of the stated legislative intents of the land use regulations is to prevent
overcrowding of land. A combination of setback, height, parking and open space
requirements typically accomplishes this important goal. As submitted, the Village at
Boulder Creek Plan violates and oversteps all of ihese defined regulatory limits. This
will result in intolerably high density and its obvious community impact.
Insufficient Useable Oaen Soace - We question why no variance is requested for a
reduction in the required minimum amount of useable open space. The Land Use
Regulations require useable open space to be 20% of a IoYs square footage with
buildings over 45' in height. This affects Lots 1, 2, and 3 whose combined square
footage is 238,797 s.f., of which 20% is 47,759 s.f.. The Land Use Regulations also
require 15°k useable open space for lots with buildings above 35' in height (15% of
Lot 4 is 7881 sq, ft.). In total, the required useable open space is 55,640 s.f.. By the
developer's definition, the useable open space occurs behind Building A and in front
of Buildings B and C. The square footage of useable open space provided in these
areas is 34,900 s.f., a deficiency of 20,740 s.f., or 37%. The lack of sufficient land for
recreational needs again overburdens the community as a whole as disproportionate
use is made of public facilities.
Bedroom-To-Lot Area Excessive - We have analyzed surrounding high density
properties (see Attachment A) and have found the Village at Boulder Creek to have
an excessively high ratio of bedrooms-to-land. The average ratio of bedroom-to-land
is 874 s.f. of lot area per bedroom whereas The Village at Boulder Creek PUD has a
ratio of 572 s.f, of land area per bedroom. In essence, this project is placing around
35% more bedrooms on the iand as the average of comparable projects in the same
zoning classification. We quesiion whether this is the precedent for "high density"
that is intendetl to be set for Boulder.
3, Impact on the Adjacent Single Family Neighborhood:
• lnsufficient 8uffer Between Neiphborhoods - University Heights area is an old and
established, low density residential neighborhood. This project is evidence of the
uncomforlable relationship between high and low density residential adjacencies
when adequate buffers and space is not provided for in the site design.
We want to call your attention to revised cross-sections, which inGudes revised
profiles (see Attachment B) of the project area and more realistic porirayals of the
vegetation on the property. Please note that the hillside does not provide a neutral
buffer between the single family properties and the proposed development as the
hiliside is, in fact, mostly the property of the single family residents.
Taft Drive Provides Lot Frontaoe Not 28t" Street - During early conversations with
the staff over enforcing the add'Rional 1' of setback for every foot of height above 35'
where adjacent to residential properties, we were toid that 25' rear yard setback
should be adequate as our properties are protected by the hillside. This projed is
being submitted to you for consideration with 12.5, 18 and 17 foot setbacks adjacent
to Urtiversdy Heights residences. Because ihe developable lot is technically fronting
on 28~h Street, the lengthy expanse of land (750 feet) bordering on UniversKy Heights
Avenue backyards is considered a"side yard" in the project, thus allowing regulation
side yard setbacks of 12.5 rather that 25 feet. We believe the intent of the Land Use
Agenda Item N ~~ Paga # ~_
Regulations would be to treat it as a rear yard and enforce the requirements for 25'
plus setbacks along with landscaped buffers between dissimilar zones, Staff
recommended increasing the rear yard setback in their first Development Review
Results and Comments document and in the latesi document, noting that additional
•plantings are necessary to create a buffer between ihe two yard areas,
Insu~cient Rear Yard Setback - The looming nature of the almost unbroken wall of
buildings 17 feet or less away and 1000 feet long, with its attendant balconies, will
substantially impair the enjoyment and future development of the adjacent properties.
Many homeowners on University Heights have or may contemplate further
developing their backyards toward the bottom of the hill (see Attachment B- Section
D-D which is indicative of a developed property). In light of the proposed design and
use, a reasonable yard setback is essential, as is the elimination of all south-facing
balconies.
The affordable housing unit (Building D) is particulariy problematic. Because the
developer chose to fit 35% of the units on 18% of the land, the buildings configuration
requires 3 tiers of retaining walls and the absence of sufficient front and rear yard
setback. At a neighborhood meeting, Titan Investments cited the location of the
floodplain as justification for setting the building 12.5 feet from the rear lot line. Other
alternative building designs and decreased density in conformance with the Land
Use Regulations could and would alleviate the need for variances. Notwithstanding
the idea of combined open space in a PUD, we note that any children and others
living in Building D need to cross a parking lot and walk substantial distance to reach
useable open space.
Buildinas Exceed Heiaht Limit - Although we are appreciative of the lowering of
buildings to date, the buildings at the east end of the site remain four story and rise
above the crest of the hill, Additional density is obviously afforded by addKional
height and, because the site plan does not provide adequate parking and open space
for the proposed density, we see no reason to grant a height variance, Likewise, the
preservation of view is a recognized value in Boulder and is impaired by additional
height.
Securitv Fence Alonq Common Boundarv - The project can realistically be expected
to pose student trespass issues with the adjacent properties, both in the fortn of
pedestrian cut-through and the potential for using University Heighis wooded
backyards as open spaCe. In the event this project is approved, a physical barrier
(fencing) to remedy for the potential of trespass would be an importaM request from
the neighborhood that needs to be addressed.
4. Safety:
• General Safetv - Many aspects of the proposed Village at Boulder Creek project raise
concems of threat from fire hazard, vehfcular traffic, and personal attack, particularly
among the elderiy residents. Police related public safety will be impacted by the
presence of unsecured, undervbuilding, ground level parking garages (theft,
vandalism & assaults).
• Older Pedestrians at Risk - The senior citizens' outdoor movement will be subject to
increased di~culty and danger. More than half the senior parking is under Building D
(across the street) and we question the appropriateness of lengthening the distance
from senior housing to parking. We also believe the seniors will be at greater risk
relative to all safety issues. The shadow report indicates that Taft Street will be
A~endaltem#__~~ Pagail~
without direct sun for the primary daytime hours in winter months. The expected
"cold zone" will pose ice hazards for all pedeslrians and seniors in particular.
In aggregate, these many concerns present the project as oversized and unnecessarily
dense. In light of the city's stated desire for both affordable housing and student housing, there is
some question as to how this interfaces and realtsticatly fits with othergrowth and quality of life
issues in the Comprehensive Plan. Though many growlh topics remain and perhaps will remain
under significant discussion, and bear multi-faceted official and public opinion/sentiment, we
believe the painstaking creation of regulation guidelines in Boulder was done in light of a strategic
and tactical approach to ensure that certain living standards and principles were created and
upheld.
The Village at Boulder Creek site plan presents numerous exceptions to the Boulder
Land Use Regulations. To allow these exceptions blatantly means that this development will
incrementaliy have greater densily, exceeding that of other surrounding HRE qevelopments.
Granting the exceptions stands in conflict with the stated guidelines of our city. City goals can be
met while confortning to the Land Use Guidelines and respecting the intent of the Comprehensive
Pian.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
The Universiry Heights Cidaens Group
(See Attachment C for Signature Pages)
Cc: Boulder Cfty Council
Brent Bean - Senior Planner, City of Boulder
r;gantla Item It _rp~__ Pag~ # ~_,
Attachment A(page 1) - Comparison Worksheet
High Density & TB-D Zones - Existing Developments Near Proposed Village at Boulder Creek
Comparison Worksheet
Zoning Location Lot Sq. Ft. Number of Lot SF per
Bedrooms Bedroom
TB-D Colorado Place Apartments 51,589 47 1,098
1100 28th Street
TB-D Lazy L Motel 81,815 101 811
~ o00 2atn str~t
TB-O Phoenix Apartments 41,049 45 912
2905-2915 East College Ave.
HR-E TimbePridge 430,925 409 1,054
2920.2950, 2960, 2980 E. College
1010, 1014, 1024 Atlams Circle
1025, 1030, 7035 Atlams Circle
2980 Euclid
HR-E WinchesterApartments 36,298 24 1,512
2975 & 2985 Eest College
HR-E MaplewoodApartments 131,594 119 1,106
2995 College Ave.
1080 Kent
HR-E Wimbledon Apartments 35,284 36 980
Colaado Avenue 8 30th St.
HR-E Cavalier Apartments 198,600 260 764
2898 & 2900 Aurora
HR-E East Campus Village 57,606 108 533
2905 Aurora Ave. ~
HR-E Kensington Apartments 178,792 168 1,064
2950 Bixby
HR-E Harvest Manor 149,730 82 1,826
7444 Folsom
HR-E Sterling University Peaks 133,953 384 348
2985 Aurore
HR-E The Maples 94,896 72 1,315
1310 & 1320 Folsom
2425 Unlversity Helghts Ave,
Tota~s/average: 1,622,031 1,855 874
HR-E Village at Boulder Creek 290,251 507 572
(Proposed) .
(including Good Samaritan Bldg)
„g~n~a Iferri ~ _.~~ ._ Paga # ~_
~~
i3~ r`
~
~ ~i~ . ,
~ a
i::,~ E~ 'I: ~ ~'
AVE
C7
bn'~~+1~+~(
~ ~ N
~~'~~I , ~
_..~ __ ___.-_,
~ o ( .
i ~
Q;d m
, ,p
:: ~
i~ d i
I -.. _~~ o ~
_ ~ - -_. -- ---
~ i ~~ o
-- ~ ~
~1 ~ ~ '
I ~ ~
I ~~~
i ~
~ ' SPRINGDALE ~ .- ~
~~ j -----
„
~I ~ ~ .~~ t~~ E> e
~~
~~ ; ,/~ ~ ' y;~
~
r
~
1U
,,,;~ '
~:,,.,.
IdYNER4~~ ElGNTB
ua~vt~sirr r~~c~tm
A -A
2,as
5sD0.~=--
- !~~(C~I~~( N (~i)
,
;~
~ :~
eeee e 8 g ;
eeae ~ a g ~~
e a ~
i
I
Paiw~6 uT I
4b I
bL~D6,dk'(o~D ~4 . . ~ ,
es~ eurccn~ e~ g~ n'a~ ~PE ai.~ A~ ~~ u.uvFSrnnus~ eauco~ c~;
Conectionsto SectionA-A
1. Revised contour of hill ta ag~ee with context map conlours
2. Noted face of building beyond 13'-0" offproperty line as pe~ developer's sulmrittal
3. Noted height of building at 39'-0" as per developex's submittal
4. Noted localion of parking lot at rear of propa[y as per developer's submittai
~
~
~ eui~wuy
iqnv~iTr ~i~+~s
ir I ewcocvs b'
ca+~~
~~
,J
`k
i~
i
~
~ !
~
~=;' , ~
'` . PARWU4 I .pti
. . ... ~ i ,M~
12 ~
, i
i
i
TAF1'ORlVE , 9WLOAYG A' i6' i- H4R~£97WI18F Et7ULGER CI~
ti ~GarEec~~ :~n~e F
Cotrections to Sedion B-B
1. Revised contour of hill to agree with context mao contours
2. Revised slope to deli~ate locaGon of exterior tenaces at 2705 Universty Heigpts
3. Coirected praSle afhame at 2705 IJniversity Heights
4. Removed trees not resident an property at 2705 University Heights
5. Revised Buitding A to s6ow developer's proposed height of 49'A"
6. Noted face of building B 13'-0" otT south properry line as per developet's submittal
7. Noted height ofbuilding B at 39"-0" as per developer's submittal
8. Noted landscape buffer is accually a parkiag loi in front of building A as per developer's submittal
9. Noted location of sidewalk adjacent to pazking loV~xopedy line in front of building A as per developer's submittal
v1L~AG~ ,47 BDULpER CREEK
Sl7'F SFGI'lONS
.4 Ml1Tf-FN~pLY IPE8/Df11T1,6( ptyFLOP1~NT ~ ~
~ N $lr~ R~'V!~(ll ~~ sa.
AMFRlCfW G4h0~'(!5-
~ ritAN L.L.G. JG ,.~pJBpN ,4RCNlTrttB, P.
u3na f~reg ~EV cnecce sr~ ~
~~~, ~ ~
7]0.5~.%?m PF~Nf . z3m nn~ ar., sur~ n~ ,
~~~, ~ ~
9~9.d97.'16167PHONE
d41GE h Sa'~O
.
1aL.576765! FAX ~
9O9d417Pl9 fAX ~
i
p i ~
~ 'P'1~~'~ifi~~~tl ~~ ~(~ilv~ii...~
i ~ i u ~m . ~wr~ • ~~
c -c
D 'D
~....... _ . . t--"~,
25A5
~
(4YlV~TY~ Cf/19
5a94.¢' _
(FNVPP9lTT' I~E/Cd/T8
c~~~,s co s~hon cc
1. Revised contout of hilt to agree with conte~ map contours including aznount of cut at the tow of the lull
2. Noted face of building beyond 12.5' off property line as per developer's submittal
3 Removed hees ¢ot resideeott onthe lol
A Revised slope to delineate lacation of exterior teiaaces a126i5 University Heights
5 Noted the single slory portion of the good Samaritaa Building at 1he cut line
. ,
leroaY ewv, e
i ~i~ ~
~: _ I
~T' ~. HWLO(NG C'
8/lE' 5ECTlON~
N
~
. AGLBh16'~O
~~~rALO eF 3~C~.
}. 'a~'(d.,n
~
i
~
~1~ !
1
APIVB d!~' f C[Y.1G A6IWR/7AH tl' NdRVF9T IA71lBE
' '_
COR2tIlODS t0 '~.~CCh~ ~-D '
1. Revised contour of hill to agee with contextmap contours
2. Cmrected profile of home at 2595 lJaiversity Heights
3. Revised slope to delineate localion of e~ctena ten~ces at 2595 University Heights
4. Removed hces notiesident onproperty at 2595 Unive[sity Heights
S. Noted the 12.5' face oFbuildmg C beyond as per develaper's submittal
6. Noted the single story portion of Good Samaritan Build~g at section cut
lbtlLDPR CJ~K
i
VIL.LAGE ,At BOULD,Ef? CRE'EK
a rwttt-varv~r ~sro~rtai ~ta~Nr ~ y~ ,~
sit~ R~v~i~w ~~ ~ A~
AMER/CAN Gdh&°US-
t1TAN L.L.C. ,JG „rWNBpN ,q14Gylr[{TS. ~•C.
i9179. P/LDLERg G/tEEN pRG(f 9fE D3A-E
9YGLE7YlJD
CO B6A7 79O 17)N d7.. 9(pTf Nm
.
t'~3~.&~ PFl~NE
' DENVBQ. CO l6J07
903.891 d@167PlCNE
7dOd~.
p66f FAX
l03.e91•7d9 R4X d
~~/
0
~ ~~~
~ - A~~~n~f 3 (~~- ti)
- ~~~ ~ (~~ 3~ _
E'E
,
~ ~~,~~. ~ '~~
PR~N6an{ u
Phvu+da ~ '
i
41~ ~
L~NSBbAPL'~ ~
~ L~tlrFtR~ TAFI GRIVF GAk79CAPE
WFFER
C~D SAMARITAN l5'
~~ ^
M4RVFST FA~'13f TENMA9 GOUR79 B~ULDER GleF.EK I
COLICGIl0II310 gECbOR F'rE
I. Revised contour of hill to agree with conte~ map contours
2. Conected ihe number and laation of retaining walls at Building D(including amaunt of cut at the tow of the l~ll)
as per developers submittal.
3. Removed ireesnot resident on property at 2505 Unive~sity Heights
4. Nated the location of underbuilding parking as per developer's submittal
5. Noted the ]ocatian of parking lot, not ]andscape butt'er in &ont of Building D as per developer's submittal
6. Noted face of building beyond 12.5' ofipropeity line as per developer's submittal
7. Noted location of parkiag 5' from property luie, witliin requireA front yard setback as per deveioper's submiUal
~ALC oG Bt,DG~. bEyo/.ID
E.
rs:.
~
f~F
!A'lVfR9~~ lCa~ll9
I n,
IGµ
~
~ ~ ~
~~ C4GY7 ~GfWRlfAN /9'
~~
H.IRVESTlbU9E 7ENN78 GO4Rf9 ~~ ~
Corrections ta Section F-F
1. Revised contonr of hillto a~ee with amtext map contours
2. Conected ihe number of retainiug walls ~d amount of cut into the lullside as ~ develope~'s submittal
3. Noted location of puking ]ot, not ]andscape buffer, within reguired front yard of Suilding D
4. Noted face of building D 12.5' off propeity line as per developer's submitlal
5. Noted height of Building D at 39'-0" asper developer's submittal
5. Removed trees not inresident at 2495 University Heights
VlLL.2GE ~S7 E'OULDER C12EEK
8l1'E SEGTIONS .a rn~cn-farncr e~s,~r,.u ~La~,c~r ms sErrerrerR ao~m
SIT~' REYI,~IU ,vFwea,v sr~nrax
N
stMkR/G4N GAMPIlB-
T1TAN L.l,C.
JG JOiAJSON ARGNITEGTS. P•L•
f/GOLtRJ Ld~ffN L~RLLE 9tE 99ID~f
63J78 NID R1N Of., 9UI7E 1/m
\V .
~eeroa~, ca emru
7dC.578.765m PFA7A~
7]0.5~.766! fAX oa+v~ae. ea e~va
7m~D92T6~?PFf~'E I~ .
3o3.a927A!! fAX
LC4L6/•!O''S
_Fa;~i;,~_.._
en~wal;~mt ~~
,,
_
g
.~~
~ ~
. ~~.~~~~~
~.~~~ ~ ~
~..~~.~~~~~ ~ .:~
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
Name: ~. A , M~ ~S ~~ ~~ Signature:
~ Q
Address:2L~55 UfJ~V . M~Tr~
c
S
-
-
' Date:
~ /~ !~ I
o ,
o
3o
~2
Bol.t.~n~.
z
Name: ~.~ N171~ ~'- Nl A-RS N~A-~ Signatu~: ,~~ /~
'T.Gcs,e .:..c/~
Address: ~.655 t.l N W• Ntg Date:
(3Du.~Dt.~ ~+• Sc~"3o~ ~~E+ o I
Name:~Jp~/~/ ~, ~~~~,$ Signature: ~ ~~ ~~~~G'~J
Address:~'~0 u/~/~/~l'Sl~ 'fs
Boc~lder g0~6 ~ Date:
~~~°% 9
Name: S'~j L ~;~-1 j o C L~'~ Signature: S' I ~'~~
Address:
~z sq s u N+ uc~-ft s~ T y rf-~r6N-,3 Date:
' 6 0
Name: M I CN~ E I~ TO O L~ y Signature: M`~ .~-~
Address:
'l.Sq S UNIV cRSI'r`1 H Ei ~H'7S Date:
- 6/ o/
Name: ~~ ~~ 2/~/ ~ v Signature:
'~
7
~
~.
Address: ' ~ ~ f7" ~ ~ ~
~S.S ~j ~ ~'i / vy `~~ ~ Date: ~
// ~ Ln ~
,~i // ,%
N :i~i TJ`„l~`G/11 ~l"i^ta y~., ~
(/I ~ lL~i / a ~ Sign :/ 7-. /
-
Address: ate:
me
'.
Na
~ id ~~~MG~Sti ~~2 Signature: 1
T
'
~ /
Address:
'LCiOD ll+n~V~fj~}~ ~( . A1Il. . Date:
~ / ~6 / O 1
Signature Page 1of 8
1/9/01 Letter to Planning Board - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group
;r^nda I?em H ._~~ _ i~agz # _,~3 _
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Name:
~ I~'! ~~'n w,
a 1
l~
~ Signature:
~2~ n~ )~~.z-~
v
~
,
r
Address:
l~>-;r
i3~ll
~-
~
~
~~s~~ Date: i /
i ~7 ~ ~
,
-
~
z
a
Name:
~~z~~~( /~/
~ / (, Q~'.1/,1.~ S' n ~
~~,- ivn ~
~
, c, ~~,~,'r~-~
Address:
~ '1 ~~
~%~ --~... Daty____
~G ti
'~ t,~- ~
Name:
~~.~~~~ "~ ~~~n.~~~~s~1 Signature:
`~
~ S 1~~~ s~~;
~o
Address: Date:
;.` °-~ le -~. ~~ \~ c~ \.r ~S~cz L-ct.tnc-._ l `-7 t3 I
Name:
Ti
1r1 E: -~l ~~ic~
~ ~1 Si natur .
9 ~ ~r
<
~~
~,
.
~ _~~,~-
-
~
Address:
~ %~'~ ~'~lc,a ~1i5-r;~ ~-n~ Date:
!~ 1 ~`7
Name: ,
/
/~ ~~~~ rf .~~~ ~ 1F ~ t Signat~~" ~ -~~~~ "?
i/'. J /~~
~ ~
Address: ~~
~ ? ? .~E-! i (/~s !< < e:
~ 7 ~' ~
.
Name: ~ / ,
~
~
~
` Si~ at~re: ~~
'
C
' C ~
~.°~ :
/ l° - ~>~~
~ F
Address:
i,~~c - n26~1 ~~~r~~~ Date: ~
c~~ ~~ ~i
,
Nam : ~ ~
~ 1 ~ ~ ~~-t-Z ~ Sig at r.~ ~ ~ '
~~~1'1 / -' ~ -L';C,2~
Add j<C~~hCt ""` ~~[~~~ D t. n C/ C~
Name:
J~ ~ ~~ ~.
C:- ~~ ~
~-~ Signa ~re: ~ )
t~ ~~ ~
~ ~,~-tz. ~
Address:
~~~ i a~.~'
S-~ (~ ,, , ~L 5~~~_ Date: ,+ , •
i
/
Signature Page 2 of 9
1/9/01 Letter to Planning BoaM - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltlzen Group
,;r,~;itla l~em # _ ~f~ , f~ag2 ~ . 5~/
17.
18.
~8.
20.
21.
zz.
23.
24.
Name: . Si nature:
Address: _~ ,~~
u~
~
` I~S Dat , a
~t
P~ t
J ~
v ~ ~ ~
Name:
w k i.~, S a~ ~' Signature: n n
'1,(J,
Address:
2 c~,.~ 1~~~'veti--s'~~~ l~ei l~~s Date:
~a.~ 6 2ob
J '~
Na~~ 2 ~ E' // NE i9n re: _- -
Addres :
Z6~5 ~,(/rt~c~s,r ~~&(ti/S ~ Dat •
~, ~~'1
,~, ,
Na~OI?~lvA l~~V~l~~ e: ~
Address: , I~ I LS ~
Z6 45 ul~r~erst ! n~ a e: ~~ ~~6
~
~ x
Name:
J ~ ck 1.~ww~ ~o,.~ Sig atur ~~
Address:
Zl~SO (.~r~I~F~S/~ /~~s ~ - Da •
,'A~! ~ ~~~1
Name: ~.
~~~ ~/~ ~ Signatur :
Address:
2~ 5~ ~ n~ve~S; ~,; h~5 Date:
~ te ti~
Name: .• ' . ; -~
? 1~-ti~ H Signature: 1
/ e' ~~/ ~t% n
Address: ~ ^~
~~
-
~
ti~ l
~
~ Date:
~~~'~Q'
2~~
-
,~~~.
~<
%
.
~
Name:
~C'/~/I ~l~' ~ Signature: ~
~
Address: ,~ ..^`~~
~ Dale:
I D~
,~7Y5 c~N;~-~~~s%~y ~r,~.~~f,~,~
~r Signature Page 3 of 9
1/9/01 Letter to Planning Board - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group
,~~,,,~,,i~~ry~? ~A nart2~`_._S_S_
._ '_ _ _ ~
25.
26.
z~.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Name: .-- ,/ ~ `
'_~~
"
~ Signature: ,-!~
~~' ~
'
~
(
~
. /
~ ~.
~ a
,
,
~,_...
Addre~ , ~
- s J~ '
' Date: ~
l 7 ~
~
~.:r ~ ,
Name: ~~f'/ G j ~ ~
~._,J ~.~- ~`_ Signature• ~~ f ,~~
~7C;~.~
Address:
2~h~ ~~n~J~~~ 11 fs Date:
r~-/~ r
NaR,e;_,
~ Signature:
~
~ Y~
~-~ 3tiv~
Address: Date:
I c~( ((~ ~0 I 5 Cl'Vt l-_7- Ci'/
Name: r\
\. ~ Signat e: ~
'
(" (
Address: Date:
~~O
~~
I t / ~
- ~
Name: ~~~ ~`
~ 1 \~-Q~~-~ 1 J Si~"fure: ~
~ ~ O~Q,t~(/f
Address: ~ ry ~~~4'--` n
~_° IJa~- Date: 1 1~1~~1
Name: ignature:
~ ~ ~
Address: Date:
!/
~ / f7 ~ ~iyui -~GQ~
~
Name: ~
~~J ~~111/d- Signature:
,~ .~---~,' .
Address:
--~ ' ~U ~ ~~ I`~`~ ' ~~ U
~ ~ I C/ Date: , ~
--(' ~-
N `~j, ~
J~` Signature~ ~~ ~~
~ ~
Address: '
~2 Date:
~~. 9 daai
Signature Page 4 of 9
1/9/01 Letter to Planning Board - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group
!;s:a-~~alt~nrtr ~A_i'r~aa~`..,~lD _
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
Name-----
~ 1 ~ ~~, ..tic: ~~ ' ature; -
-~
Address: ,.rit Date:
\, ~FC' ~.C~^ o~c.._~ .~~ `~'~S; ~ `a C'%
I ~
Name: ~
~
` ~ ~ ~1J
~ G rI~
[ Sig ture~` ~ a~~
%
~
~ ~
~
~,
1 ~.
~ q r ~-c
z l
-
~ ~.
~E;
Ad ~~~ ,~ ~t~ ~~ ~
~
~ 1^(aQ Date: ` ~ G
~ ~
~,
Na e: ~
~v9
(.l Sc`!~ Signature:
• , / n~/C(1
Address:
~7~s r ~
~~-~ ~ Date:
~.. ~~~~
v ~ ~, ~
Name: Sign tu : y ,
~
K
al r g .
O E
'
Address: Date:
.~70~ N~/Eksii~ '~s. ' ~200/
V
~rne: / j4fgnature:/_ ~ ~
~ lC~ ~ "C.K ~
Address: D~te:
' ,. ~ . - _ .~ °7 oc~
38.
39.
ao.
~
'
Name: /~~~ ~'~ ~~~U E ~
/~~ ~~.
Signature: T ~~ /„' /
Ad
~~°!~ JN~IFRScT / ~S, Date:
I~a~dT
Name: ~/
'~Oti~~r~ loVr C ~Mwr~ Signature;/ /,~
/ . "_-
Address:
t~ ~
rC~c ~~ ~4 1~
r
~ Dat~
~
I ~' ~ 0 1
.
.
~,
v~ ~ ~
2tooc;~
A
Name: ~
~n~~0 ~ .~/'llZi~ Signature• ~ ~
_,/~
Address:
:~ 6 0 Q U~ i~~n S~ f~ ~k~ T:1~rl Date:
~'7 0/
Signature Page 5 of 9
1/9/01 Letter to Planning Boarc1- City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group
;~;c~;ua I`ern P _. ~~ (~aga U ~..Z.__
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
Name• / n~
~~fVl(,~~ Signature: , { ~(
lln b
Address:f~; -~/~
~~-+~ ~ ' v- Date:
' ~ ~
Name: ~~~j~~~
~/~ ~li ~ ,. Signature: ;J ~
~~: Le V` -C-e ~ %
Address: I(~
2 2-t~ ~~ l 7 ~ ~ Date: ~ ~ ~_ ~ ~
~M ~J ~ ~
Name:
~
~
1
~ Signatur :
~ ~
~
~,,-
~.
~ ,
Address r~~/
: ~i~'~ C 31 ~- D J
~ ~C'S l~
v ~
Na
~111~
~TG' ~v~1R.-- Signature: .-~/
~ ,;~iG,z_~jr.
Address:
J.~~iC%
~6i'~S~'r." ~ Date:
~ G'~ ~-~' ~
Name:
STC~°MEN WAGSNI=C Signature: ,~ ~- / // ~~~
]S~t.ya,~`
Address:
1 s.2 o Fu~ so~ Date:
~' ('.?~~ G
Name:
~~~ e~. tii Signature: . ~~
Address:
~ 3~ U(Fv! s~~, -~ ~ Date:
sl `~ o
Name: l~~/
~
~ Signature: /~ /, ~n ~ ~
~~
'
c;lSOh C Gt /.~;^„r
v
-__
Address: ~ Date:
t ~v ~~( -w, 4 ~ ~s ~ i
Name: /
~-
~ Signature:~ ~~ ~ / ~
,~-c,
en ~c
Address:
~3~~~~.5t ,l3 Date:
%%
,
Signature Page 6 of 9
1/9/01 Leflerto Planning Board - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group //~ q
n~c11~3ii^f~Y?i. ~!/7. i'~'.!~"sti_._~G._
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
Name: ~~ ~ ~ ~ Signatu • ~ ,~1~7~ ~
~
(I r ~
v1
.
i
Address:~ 3 1~ ~( S~ ~ a.~
~ Date: ~ d ~ I
0
!.' U v~~ ~~ v~ ~ ~ u
Name: ~ ~I~~~ Signa ure~ °
Addre$sA „ A ~,y~„ ~ ~ ~
Itc'~~~ r~~~ Date: ^ D
c~
~ , ,
Name; n
~Ii sG 17 Signature:
Address: rj
1~~1 G~ ~ ~~.j ~ ~~- Date:
t ~~~
~~
i~
Name•
~~
7/
~~
~ Signature:
1
Vf
Q~i
S 1.Q, l
Address:
13( d~l~m ~t , ~1 Date:
1 g ~~
~ ~ r~
Name: Sign t r •
Addre • r~
~V Date:
C
Nam~~ A ~<
~v ~ Sign ture: `-
~
Addres :
~~2~ ~~ [`~ Date: ~-l
) 'Z~
~ ~
Name: ~~j/~~ /~~~
~~'~'~1~,~ ~~~~YrW Signature• ~q~ ~
~,2'V'~V~~ ~..
Addre~s;~, _/ ',,',I ~,9 n', -~ ~ ~
~CY~ V ~ ` Date: / D,
t
Name: ~
~~~, ~ ~-~f1S~- s' nat e: ""'"~
Adyir~s, G~ ~I
I TUI~UJ~~~ DaXe:~ '
(j ~'j ~)
' ~ ;
Signature Page 7 of 9
1/9/01 Letter to Planning BoaM - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group
l;ysn~:'r.~ I~~,r ~ ~' _ ~~_ f ~~=9v ~' _~~
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
Name: ~/'~/~~'„~~
~ "U lU Signature:/
~
A/ddress: ~/~^
1 /~~~ Date:
Name: /~~/1 eo
'
` Signature: ~ ~~~A
~
~-~lC.~-
' ~C~ o
--ee~t
Address: Date:
-~~/" ,~Z•~~/G /~ lv '" p/
Nam`e/:
K.U~ `7/h/`l/.u~15 Sign/a~/t~Ir.e.,:~ _
/~+/I
Address: { y
~'~.~ UJV I ~1~~5 )~ ~1j. -1'1~ ( ~
~t Date:l _ . ~
Name:.~ Signa e
_., fM ~,~i~,9~e~' . ~., _
Address:~ Na ~~(Jjn.~.i~ l~..l%L ~ .
~-r Date: ~ ` , v /
~
~~ .,
Name: ~, ~ ~~~
~ ~ ~~ ~ na
Addres~: . I ~ ~
,
~ Date: ~ ~ ~
I / ' /% %
Name; Signat .
. ~
Address: ~.I
~~ Date:
~
l .
~
Name: k
1 \a,~~ ~\\~1 Signature:
~! I t
Address: , ~ ~~, i
y Date: O
Name: ,~ ~ ~ Si ture: ~
1
Ad~r~s: Q ~\~f~~5
G
l
v ~~ ' CD O~
-
0 r
v ~
~
I
~
Signature Page 8 of 9
1/9/01 Letterto Planning Board - City of Boulder
University Heights Cltizen Group
i.;":~i,',c.llcrr~;i._ ~i4 _.I'~~;,:;,~ _~~.~ _
85.
68.
87.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
Na e: // ~j,~~ ~
~
~
~ S' ure• ' ~/ ~
2~
?
'
, ~1/ L
fi~NI /y :/
/6~C
Address:
z~ ~~, ~~~,~ /~e~yhf ~~~ D te: .
- ~ - ~~
Name: Signatur .
/ ~iz" l~>'~/?~~~ri `~ ~:~~u- ~ ~ ' .-~~
Address:
~~~~-y ~~i~~-~..~ ~~ ,~. D e: c,
~ - ~ - ~> ~ ~
Name:
rjCr~y ~1~. ~e ~ Signature: ~
~
Address: /' p
u~~F lv~ofci0..0 {~J~ • Date:
/ ~"r'/
Name: ~.'~ ~/
~G6A-FS ~V~ Signature:
"~c~J ~_¢.a.-a-~-e--~-'u
Address: ,
SSHv U-hl[dqis~tT ~C~i(~HTb /ku~, . Date:
1-9-0 I
Name: ~ ~~
~ Signature:
Address: Date:
GrSNU unltJ, ~Ff~• M,"~ I-~1-oI
Name: Signature:
Address: Date:
Name: Signature:
Address: Date:
Name: Signature:
Address: Date:
Signature Page 9 of 9
119/01 Letter to Planning Board - City ot Boulder
Unfversity Heights Cltizen Group n / ,
i',,~,"~~I.~,'~ I : ~;'il'~ . _ ~/7._... f'ih,~J ~i __~Q_~~~___
ATTACHMENT D
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REViEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
DATE OF COMMENTS: November 28, 2000
CASE MANAGER: Brent Bean
PROJECT NAME: VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK
-- LOCATION: 2525 TAFT DR
COORDINATES: N02W04
REVIEW TYPE: Site & Subdivision Revlew
REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2000•SIS14
APPLICANT: AMERICAN CAMPUS-TITAN LLC
DESCRIPTION: Site Review and Preliminary Plat: Construct 126 new dwelling units, including 82
market rate units and 44 permanently affordable units. Code variations requested
include building height of 49 feet where 35 feet is allowed by rlght; parking
reduction of 7.6% (364 spaces provided where 394 are required); rear yard setback
reductions to 12.6 feet where 25 feet is required; and location of parking within the
front yard landscape setback. The four buildings proposed are located on both
sides of Taft between 25th Street and 28th Sfreet.
REQUESTED VARIATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: - Parking reductfon of 7.7%
- Rearyard setback of 12.6 feet, where
25 feet is required
- Building Heights of 52'9" for two of
the buildings and 39
- Solar exception for the North
Eastern portion of the site
I. REVIEW FINDINGS
The plan has been revised to reflect comments made in the September 22, 2000 Development Review Comments. The
building heights have been reduced on to approximately 39 feet for all buildings but the eastern half of building B and all of
building A, which have a height of 52'9". The total parking reduction has been reduced to 7.7°/, and the total number of
units reduced to 82 market rate unit, 44 permanentiy affordable and 39 equivalent units at the Good Samaritan for a total
of 165 units (previous pian 172 units, maximum of 181 units permitted on this site).
Engineering issues have been responded to with the submittal of additional engineering plans and support documents.
The question of the slope stability remains as a potentiai issue. The applicant indicated that Yenter Companies has
reviewed the slope and has indicated that the hiilside can be stabilized with proper design and construction. Considerable
concern has been expressed from property owners along the south side of the hillside. Staff would encourage the
applicant to complete soils analysis of the hillside and determine what if any impact might occur to neighboring properties
before this request is considered by the Planning Board on January 18, 2001.
Building height has been reduced to 39' for all but the eastern half of building B and a all of building A, which have planned
heights of up to 52'9". The site sections and model provided shows the buildings with elevations of less than 40 feet do
not impact mountain views to the north and west for the residences in the University Heights development. Buildings A
and B will encroach in views from University Heights to the northeast.
Building A does encroach into the solar protection areas for the property to the north of the site. This area is within the
High hazard zone for Boulder Creek and new construction is not permitted within this area. This area currently contains
the tennis courts for the Harvest House. The solar protection area is for the protection of solar equipment.
Staff is generally supportive of this request for consideration of the Site Review. Planning Board can consider this
requests based on the information provided within this document with the exception that the solar drawings need to be
adjusted as indicated in the following discussion. The request will be scheduled for consideration by the Planning Board at
the January 18, 2001 Planning 8oard meeting. Please contact Brent 8ean, Senior Planner if you have additional
questions about the information contained in this document.
1;~~:;SQalfcri~li~~_~e.~.;"~ -
,~
II. CITY REQUIREMENTS
Building Design
The solar analysis for pages 11,12 and 13 of the site review need to show the solar shadow for a 35' building placed at the
legal lot setbacks. Please provide the corrected drawings on or before January 3, 2001. A solar exception is required to
be considered for building A. This portion of the site is adjacent to the High Hazard zone for Boulder creek, which makes
the area north of the creek unbuildable. The tennis courts for the Harvest House tennis courts are present on this portion
of the site. Because no buildings can be placed on within the area north of building A, staff can support an exception to
the solar protection requirements for buiidings within this area.
Fire Protection
Prior to final inspection, (due to building configuration, size and emergency access limitations) applicant shall install
standpipe hose connections in each building to serve internal corridors. Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350.
Landscaping
The landscape plan is generally appropriate for this site, with the exception that additional landscaping in the form of trees
should be added to the southern portion. Trees should be added to along the south propeKy line to visually buffer the new
residences and parking lots from the University Heights neighborhood.
Miscellaneous
A correction needs to made under the notes section of the conceptual landscape plan L1.1. Under #6 the burlap materiai
needs to be rolled back at least 2/3rds down into the planting hole and the excess material cut back to the base of the root
ball. Ellie Busse-Sottile, Forester, 303-441-3406.
Neighborhood Comments
Two letters regarding development concerns of this site have been received from Peter Dietze representing the University
Heights neighbors. Copies of the letter are available in the city file.
The foliowing departments had no requirements: City Attorney's Office
111. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
Access/Circulation
1. Staff will accept attached sidewalks along Taft Drive, which is a variance from the City's collector street standard. The
proposed attached sidewaiks are consistent with the existing attached walk in front of the Good Samaritan Homes and
preserves existing trees located behind the existing and proposed sidewalks.
2. Staff agrees with the conclusions of the Traffic Impact Assessment that the project's traffic impacts will be minimal and
that sufficient Traffic Demand Management would be achieved with the transit, bicycle, and pedestrian options outlined
in the report.
3. A CDOT Access Permit w(II be required for the access onto 28'h Street before construction is begun. This permit will
be coordinated through Steve Durian at 303-441-4493.
4. Before approval of the final plat, Construction Plans for improvements on Taft Drive in accordance with the City of
Boulder Design and Construction Standards will be required.
5. The applicant will be responsible for curb and gutter, landscaping, lighting, and sidewa{k improvements adjacent to
Taft Drive.
6. The proposed project includes work within a State of Colorado right-of-way. A C.D.O.T. right-of-way permit is required
prior to initiating construction.
7. Fire lane markings/signage will be required in parking lot areas and at fire lane east of Bldg. B. Adrian Hise, 303-441-
3350.
Building and Housing Codes
No additional requirements, Steve Brown 441-3172
fy;^;';S I'.OIi~ f~ ~.~. i,i;,,., - ,~ ~ -
.
~ Building Design
The basic building design, color and materials are consistent with materiais and colors found within this area.
Dralnage
1. Prior to approval of the final piat, an Erosion Control Plan in accordance with the City of Boulder Design and
Construction Standards will be required.
2. Prior to approval of 4he final plat, the applicant will be required to provide a Final Storm Water Report and Plan in
accordance with the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121.
Engineering
Further detail of the design of the retaining wall systems will be required at Technical Document Review. The applicant is
reminded that no portion of any retaining wall structure, including footings, soil nails, etc. may encroach into neighboring
properties without permission from the adjacent property owner and recordation of the agreement. Construction
easements for any work, including grading, on adjacent propeRies will be required prior to initiation of any construction
activities. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121.
Flood Control
A majority of the subject property is located within the 100-year flood plain for Boulder Creek. Any work within the
regulatory flood plain, including grading, will be subject to City of Boulder flood plain development regulations (BRC 9-9)
and will require a flood plain development permit. An approved flood plain development permit will be required prior
building permit application. Per Section 9-9-6 of the B.R.C. 1981, "no person shall establish an area for automobile
parking in any portion of the floodplain where flood depths exceed eighteen inches:' Grade elevations and floodplain
depths for the parking stalls will need to be provided with the plain development permit appiication. Contact Alan Taylor,
303-441-4232.
Fire Protection
Fire alarm system and occupant notification requirements to be per Uniform 8uilding Code and Uniform Fire Code.
(Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350.)
Land Uses
The placement of the buildings can be debated as to whether the southern buildings should be moved north to provide
additional open space along the south boundary, or moved to the south to provide the more active openspace areas as
shown on the current plans. It is staffs understanding that the current is more desirable because it keeps the more active
(noise generating) activities on the north side of the building and there are less impacts on view north of the buildings if
they are placed closer to the hiliside. As a result, the buiidings are serving as a buffer to the residents in University Heights
from a sound perspective. Small setbacks along the south property line will reduce the number of residents using the
south portions of the site for recreational activities, thereby reducing noise impacts on the adjacent neighborhood. If it
were not for this circumstance, staff would have strongly encourage the buildings to be pulled closer to Taft Drive and have
the recreational/openspace areas within the south portion of this site.
Landscaping
Please note the following requirements for final landscape plan:
Plan drawing af a scale of 1"= 10', 1"= 20', or 1"= 30', to include:
Standard title block including scale and date
Scale
North Arrow
Date
Location of property lines and adjacent streets (with street names identified).
Zoning and use of adjacent properties.
Existing and proposed locations of all:
- Building footprints of structures
- Sidewalks and curb cuts
- Parking lots including layout of parking spaces, interior perimeter parking lot plantings, bike paths and
pedestrian walkways, drive aisles and curb islands.
- Utilities and easements, including fire hydrants, water meters, & height and location of overhead lines.
Existing location, size, and type of all trees 1 1/2" caliper or greater.
W here fencing is used for required screening, a scaled drawing of the fence elevation.
~'.~ ~I ~~n ~'r'.~ i~ ~~~ ~ ~~:;" ~~ _-~~~-
,
,,
Planting and irrigation specifications
Final irrigation plan indicating type and locations or irrigation and of plant yroupings by water requirements.
Layout and location of all landscaped areas inciuding:
- planting strips along all streets
- parking lot screening •
- interior parking lot landscaping
- perimeter site landscaping or screening
- all other landscaped areas
___ Botanical and common names and sizes of all plant material and ground cover.
Locations of all proposed piant material, shown at size they will be within 5 years of initiai planting, and
appropriately spaced.
Proposed planting of all ground surfaces. Grass surtaces must be identified as sod or seed with the blend or mix
specified.
Location, size, and species name of any plant materials proposed for removal.
Location, design, height and materials ot other landscape improvements, such as:
- earth berms
- retaining walls
- fences
- water features
- outdoor furnishings and artwork
- trash enclosures
- Iights
- paved areas and/ or walkways
- tree grates and planters
Location and treatment of any proposed detention ponds.
Location and dimensions of site distance triangles at all intersections of streets and curb cuts.
Summary graphic and chart with calculations to include:
Graphic drawing with locations and dimensions of all required landscaped areas. Include dimensions and total
area for each requirement. For example, each interior parking lot island should include dimensions and total
square footage, and the total square footage of ail interior parking lot islands should be calculated.
Total lot size (in square feet).
Total parking lot size, including all drives and driveways (in square feet).
Total parking lot interior landscaped area required and total provided (square feet).
Total number of parking stalls provided, total number required by code.
Total amount of perimeter landscaping provided, total required by code (square feet).
Total number of street trees required and the total provided.
Total quantity of plant material required and the total provided. Bev Johnson, 303-441-3272.
Legal Documents
1. Any easements required by P.S.C.O. for the power poles along the south and east property lines should be shown on
the Preliminary Plat.
2. All public utility easements shall be at least 25 feet wide. The proposed 20 feet wide Drainage Easement on the
eastern line of Lot 2 must be widened to 25 feet. Revisions to the preliminary plat are necessary. Scott Kuhna, 303-
441-3121.
Miscellaneous
No portion of the structure, including footings and eves, may encroach into any public right-of-way or easement. Scott
Kuhna, 303-441-3121.
Utilities
1. Prior to approval of the finai plat, the applicant will be required to provide Utility Construction Plans in accordance with
the City of Boulder Design and Construction StandaMs.
2. Maintenance of the sandloil interceptors, all private sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines, and private structures shall
remain the responsibility of the owner.
3. The landscape irrigation system requires separate water services and meters. In addition, separate water Plant
Investment Fee's must be paid at time of building permit. Service, meter and tap sizes will be required at time of
building permit submittal.
~~ ~~~~irn ~iCfll ~~~. -!L ~hG2. "_~
~ 4. The applicant is advised that at the time of building permit application the following requirements will apply:
a) Water and sapitary sewer Plant Investment Fees and service line sizing will be evaluated.
b) Storm Water and Flood Management Utility Plant Investment Fees (Storm PIF's) will be calculated for the project
and must be paid prior to scheduling a final inspection.
c) Since the buildings will be sprinklered, the approved fire line plans must accompany the fire sprinkler service Iine
connection permit appiication.
5. Trees proposed to be planted in the right-of-way or in public utility easements shall be located at least 10 feet away
fram existing or future utilities.
6. All applicable C.D.O.T. permitting will be required prior to initiation of construction of utilities in the C.D.O.T. right-of-
way.
7. All water meters are to be placed in city R.O.W. or a public utility easement, but meters shall not be placed in
driveways, sidewalks or behind fences. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121.
~~;'LC(J~",G(il3r ~~ ~'i;ij;'."_~~
ATTACHMENT E
i'ITAN INVESTMENTS I LLC '~~
AMERICAN CAMPUS - TITAN LLC
Village nt Boiilder Cre~~lc
Boulder, Colorado
PLANNING BOARD MEI~,TING
JANUARY 25, 2001
~
1
~
~
~
~ ,
,
,
,
,
~
~
,
~
,
~
,
,
, ,
,
~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK
Ylanning Board Meeting
January 25, 2001
I. Site Review Submittal / September 5, 2000
II. Site Review / Development Review Results and Comments
September 22, 2000, / Revised I1/6/00
III. Site Review / Land Use Review Results and Comments / November 28, 2000
IV. Architectural drawings with 35' shadow analysis - Revised 11/6/00
Civil drawings - Revised 11/2/00
Landscape drawings - Revised 11/2/00
Preliminary Plat- Revised 11/2/00
V. Site Plan (full size)
NOTE: Scale Model and Material Palette board will be available for meeting.
~ Septe„iber 5, 2000
~ ~~E REVIEW OBJECTIVES
~ 6 ~B~
, ~ Existing Site Overview:
The proposed development, located on the north and south side of Taft drive, is a 5-acre pazcel,
~ zoned HR-E (High Density Residential - Existing). The site is bordered by 28`h Street to the east,
single family residences to the south, Folsom Street to the west and the Harvest House Sports
_ Association to the north.
The land on the south side of Taft Drive (Tract "B", approximately 4.2 acres) consists of 3.5
', acres of undeveloped land and a YZ -acre, surface pazking lot. The undeveloped land has
irregulaz grades with a steep slope rising upward towards the single-family neighborhood of
University Heights to the south. The YZ -acre parking lot is currently bein, used by Good
, Samaritan and has 105 spaces. A portion of Tract "B" does lie within the 100-year floodplain.
, The iand to the north of Taft Drive (Tract "A". approxunately 3.1 acres) contains 85 existin;
surface pazking spaces, not being used by the Good Samaritan Society. The north property line
of this parcel borders the Harvest House Sports Association and has direct access to the Boulder
' e Creek Trail. This land is also located within the 100-year floodplain, and a portion lies in the
high hazazd and conveyance zones.
, The Boulder Good Samaritan Center is located within a portion of Tract "A on the north side of
Taft Drive, with a 9 story concrete and brick building which houses both assisted livin; and
~ independent living seniors. In addition, a 1 story brick building, also within Tract "A",
accommodates the Good Samaritans skilled nursing faciliry
~ Many mature trees are existing on both sides of Tafr Drive, with the majority being neaz the 28`h
Street right of way. Direct access to the Boulder Creek Trail is on the northeast end of Trac[
~ .~A„
~ Obj.gctives:
(IJ Is the proposed site plan consistent with the purposes and policies of the Boulder Yalley
, Comprehensive Plan? Does the proposed development meet the densiry requirements for
a HR-E designation?
~ Densitv: The total developable land azea for this site is 290,251-sq.ft. This
excludes the full dedication of Taft Drive with a 60' right-of-way (the north 34.5' of Taft
` Drive has already been dedicated to the City). Dividing the developable land azea by
1600 square feet of lot azea per unit results in a maximum of 181 units that can be
, developed on this site. The property is not fully utilized based on current zoning criteria.
Our proposed development density is consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive
, Plan and is indeed lower than the allowable for this site. In addition to density
requirements the proposed development also complies with the BVCP for community
design, facilities and services, environment, transportation, and housing. The proposed
~ 1 .
~_
, development is within a hi~
units per acre. p~ ~h-density resi@ential zone (HR_g~ ~yh~ch allows up to 27
Pennanently affordab e~unist 98 msubmitta! had requested a total of 190 units (53
~ Samaritan ~ arkat rate units, and 39 equivalent units for Good
}, which Staff Planning Commission and Naighbors expressed concern about
due to exceeding tlte allowable number of
~'i is requesting a total of 172 units 47 ~ts for this site,
q unifs for Good Sama tri an}ently affordable ~~ Site Review submirtal
and 39 e uivalent units, 86 market rate units,
i °~~inal Concept plan proposal. This r.3ucti nhin density haslsn of I8
' s proposed development in reo- ~ts from our
corridors, ~~ds to buiIding height, scale/massin ~~~cantly helped the
! g~ and opening up view
~2) Does the proposed develo
place through crecttive ~eS entpreserve and enhance the communities uniqaee sense.of
~ environ~r:ent, physz'calsertin°~d loaat on espectful of it's relationship to the naturcrl
, The Vifiage ,.; $oulder Creen
entire block on has been desi~ed to create a comprehensive 1
Taft Ddve, qn intergenerational campus has been developed to~have
~ Universiry $tudants, Perma~enTly Affordable Housin
share common outdoor spaces and en"o g and Senior Citizens interact and
designed to create a residential streetYlinking ati oF t~unit .
~ existing facilities of the Good S Pioposed buildin~ sn has beert
133 units wi[hin four se ~~tan Center. The propased deve(o ° With the
Taft Drive P~'ate buildings. Threa of the buiidings are onthe south side of
i units dedicated to stude t noUriOn h.19 uiidings A, B& C will have 86 rental apartment
will have 47 For saie ~ '~ ~ 3 bed~'ooms and 67 _ 4
~ bedrooms and IS - P~~ne°t~y affordable housin be~0oms). Building D
3 bedrooms) available for all qual'fiedibuye s. The 47oom, 17 - 2
affordable housing units represent 35,0
sansfy Boulders ~equiremant for inc(usiona the total 133 Pennanently
t also inciudes an additional (S% of aFfordable housing, Proposed units. This would
ry zoning For affordable housin~ (~~o~o~ and
~ en S ace The site has a tota! o f 2 7?
(103,200-sq. R.) for open space calculationsn1We ~ju ent~y`have a to al o001SI4,2
or 664,1~-sq, (}, per unit7 ~~hich exceeds the re g' ft Per unit
~ designed to 6enefit all the residents of the proposedude e(o ts. 32-s`~ ft.
The open space has been
Center across the street, pment and the Good Samantan
undisturbed behind Buildin~ The high hazard and conveyance zones have been teft
~ front of the buildin ~ A and a shiEt of the buildina
of Yhe buildin g' BII1(ding B has also been shifted to create more op n space ~nafront
~ greater baffer a1o ghth slt~eetl~Mo~e open pacef as br~oughttforward to the
buildings and less behind the buildin s. ~ Y~~en areas and a
desigcted for Good Sam g The c~ntral atherin front of the
located in &ont of Buildin
aritan, pe~anently affordabte housing a d tudent residenbs Is
park area wi1l have a combination oF forma( and
inFormal spaces various t ges of nattive ve etation, numerous avin
` area, select pieces of artwo~, ~andsca e g
the use of hardscape/pavin p~miture and li htin P g macedals, a Iawn
g makerials will tie a1] of the buildin~shtoge hert the entire site
~ existing, Thase materials will direct and encoura e
they are out for a stroll, enterin ~ PrOPosed and
8 P~opla to use these areas whether
University or shopp(ng at the nearbyerBa,j~aro~ SreeEvenaithough the
, ~oing to classes at the
project is tied
~
~ together ~~~ith various paving materials each building has it's own sense of identity by
having generous open spaces, which is both easily accessible and functional. All of the
133 proposed units have a private balcony for its residents. A considerable amount of
~ time was spent on creating open spaces and placement of buildings so that the existing
trees and vegetation could be preserved to its fullest extent. The set back requirements
~ have been met and open space between neighboring projects provides adequate relief.
The Boulder Creek Traii has direct access to our site and has been enhanced with
signage, lighting, paving materials and landscaping to take advantage of this link to a city
] wide system of trails.
, LandscaoinQ There is a mixture of existing vegetative growth including native
tree species on this site. The proposed development has taken these trees into
consideration and many of them have been preserved and incorporated into the proposed
, design. Landscape buffers have been created to establish attractive streetscapes and
conceal as much of the parking from Taft Drive. Taft Drive itself has been modified to
~ promote slower traffic and provide landscape azeas with a variety uf plant materials and
paving for aesthetic enhancement as you drive from one end of the street to the other.
Flower gazdens in the central gathering pazk will add a multitude of colors for all seasons.
~ Circulation On-site circulation patterns are handled with many well-lit pedesri-ian
, walkways beriveen proposed and existing buildings and walkways to city linked trails and
public transportation. Potential conflicts with vehicles are minimized by the significant
reduction of curb cuts from our concept plan submittal. Our modification to Tafr Drive
~ will discourage high speeds and create more of a physical separation from the buildin,s
and street. Travel management techniques play an important role in our proposed
~ u~velopment anil the following represents many reasons that support our use:
1) The location of the site, the proximity to the University campus, retai]
, shopping and businesses will decrease the number of daily single occupant
trips. Pedestrian traffic will increase and the hardscape/paving design will
~ encoura~e interaction beribeen permanently affordable, student hous~ng
and Good Samaritan residents.
^ 2) The proposed design accentuates the access to the Boulder Creek Trail.
~ This path is directly accessible from our site and has an intricate system of
trails that lead to all parts of the city and University campus.
~
3) Folsom Street, which borders the site to the west, is a major public
~ transportation artery for both the RTD Crosstown line and the HOP. This
will allow altemate modes of transportation and reduce the number of
trips. Each University student receives an ecopass that allows for
r ridership on public transportation throughout the city and it is expected
that bus use wil] be significant for this population.
~ 4) Bicycle use will be encouraged and secured storage will be provided for
on site.
'i
~ 3
The traffic study completed by Drexel Barrell on August 22, 2000 and included as part of
this submittal, indicates and supports this proposed development will have a minimal
affect on the area because of the alternative methods of transportation available.
parki°¢ The parking incorporates measures to keep the areas safe by having well
lit areas 24hrs a day and convenient secured access to the building through lobby azeas at
parking level. The pazking has been designed to be under the buildings at grade level for
several reasons: 1) To keep the buildings out of the 100-yeaz floodplain 2) To visually
reduce the sight of the cars from the street and create a better sense of curb appeal from
Taft Drive 3) Have less visual impact on residents of University Heights, and 4) To
promote pedestrian traffic in front of the buildings.
The proposed development parking has been categorized into three different azeas, Good
Samaritan, Permanently Affordable Housing, and Student Housing. The proposed
development will have a total of 80 surface parking spaces dedicated for the Good
Samaritan facility. The parking will include 52 spaces on the west-end of the site and 28
surface spaces on the north side of Taft adjacent to the skilled nursing facility. These
pazking spaces will have controlled access available to only Good Samaritan residents,
employees, visiting families, and guests. The Good Samaritan facility under the B.It.C. -
1981 would have a requirement of 99.5 spaces (3-effiencies = 3 spaces, 71 - 1 bedroom =
71 spaces, and 17 2- bedroom = 25.5 spaces). Staff comments on the Concept Plan
Review sug~ested that ~hey could support a reduction in pazking of 20 stalls and that a
total of 80 spaces would be a reasonable number.
City Staff and Planning Commission indicated that adequate student pazking would be
necessary for this proposed development. In listening to their comments during concept
review we have gone back and incorporated the student parking in accordance with the
zoning ordinance. A total of 239 spaces aze required and 239 spaces have been provided
(19 - 3 bedroom = 38 spaces and 67 - 4 bedroom = 201 spaces).
The Permanently Affordable Housing units currently have a requirement of 70.5 spaces
(15 - 1 bedroom = 15 spaces, 17 - 2 bedroom = 25.5 spaces, and 15 - 3 bedroom = 30
spacesl. The recent proposed changes (rental housing vs. for sale) for the inclusionary
zoning has affected the design and mix of units for this development. We have proposed
a wider range of units with more flexibility, thus causing the parking ratio to ;nr,rease
slightly. However, we have a total of 56 parking spaces dedicated to the Affordable
Housing (1.2 ratio) and feel that a for sale product will justify a small reduction. The
parking is below the building and will have controlled access to it.
The total number of spaces required for this development in accordance with the zoning
ordinance and equivalent units aze 410. We have provided a total of 375 spaces, which
would equate to an 8.5% reduction overall.
4
PROPOSED & REQUIRED PARKING
EXISTING BOULDER GOOD SAMARITAN CENTER
UNITS:
Effiency 1 Bedroom 2 bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom TOTAL
BUILDING
independent Living 49 17
Assisted Living 3 10
Skilled Nursing 12'
Total Equivalent Units 3 71 17
Parking Required per
BRC - 1981 1 1 1.5
Total Off- Street
Parrking Required 3 71 26 100
Total Off- Street
Parking Provided 80
Parking Reduction
Requested 20
30 Units with 2 beds = 60/ 5 equivalent units = 12 equivalent units
PROPOSED MARKET RATE UNITS
UNITS:
Effiency 1 Bedroom 2 bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom TOTAL
BUILDING -
A 3 31
8 2 31
C ' 14 5
Total Units 19 67
Parking Required per
BRC - 1981 2 3
Total Off- Street
Parrking Required 38 201 239
Total Off- Street
Parking Provided 239
Parking Reduction
Requested 0
5
PROPOSED PERMANENTLY AFFORDABLE UNITS
UNITS:
E~ency 1 Bedroom 2 bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom TOTAL
BUILDING
D 15 17 15
Total Units 15 17 15
Parking Required per
BRC - 1981 1 1.5 2
Total Off- Street
Parrking Required 15 26 30 71
Total Off- Street
Parking Provided 56
Parking Reduction
Requested 15
PROPOSED AND REQUIRED PARKING SUMMARRY
Parking reduction requested
Boulder Good Samaritan
Market Rate Units
Affordable Units
TOTAL
Reduction
ReGuired Provided Requested
100 80 20
239 239 0
71= 56 15
410 375 35
BICYCLE PARKING PROVIDED 125
AVAILABLE ON-STREET PARKING 60
( 8.5% Reductian)
6
~
, 3) Is the proposed development compatible with the existing buildings within the
surrounding area and any sub-communiry or sub area plans:
,
Height / Bulk & Scale: There is no sub-azea plan for this community,
however we felt that the buildings had to be designed with quality architecture and vrban
r design in mind to fit in with the sunounding neighborhood. The reduction in density has
allowed the height of the buildings to take on an entirely different appeazance from both
~ Taft Drive and University Heights. Building "A" has remained four stories and the
'
"
height of the roofline is 49
-0
. The elevator shaft element has been reduced to be no
higher than the roofline. Building "A" has been broken up into two sections to give it
, more relief from the street and reduce the massing and scale of the building. Building
"B" has been redesigned to incorporate both a three and four story building. The four-
story portion of this building has been maintained at the 28`h Street side of the property
~ with the building height being 49'-0"and the building cascading down to three stories at
the westem edge and having a building height of approximately 36'-0". This opens up
~ view comdors to the northwest for the University Heights residents. Buildin; "B" has
also been shifted in a north/south directicn to create more relief and reduce massing
considerably. This design sets back a portion of the building from the south property line
~ moving it away from the residents of University Heights. Building "C" has had the most
dramatic changes in that an entire story has been taken off to lower the roofline to
~ approximately 36'-0" and open up an expansive view corridor for University Hei~hts
residents. The bulk and scaie are also diminished with a vast green space in front of this
building for all residents oF the block. This building takes on a different scale and works
, harmoniously with the existing skilled nttrsing buildin~ across the street. Building "D",
permanen~iy ai;ordable housine, has been scaled back to include a three story and four
, story building similar in design and height to Building "B". Again, this opens up view
`h
comdors for University Heights and anchors the entire block from 28
Street to the West
End. The height of the proposed buildings is lower than the Good Samaritan Center
, across the street, which is a nine-story building. To the south is the University Heights
neighborhood, which sits atop a hill approximately 48' - 50' above the existin~ grade of
~ the proposed project site. Elevations contained in this submittal indicate that there should
be no significant obstruction of views from the University Heights neighborhood. We
also understand th?r +he RRC-1981 states that we can build to 35' in height with a 16'
, high mechanical wall above. We have designed our buildings to have all mechanical at
grade thus reduoing visual and noise impact for the University Heights residents.
, The elevations of the proposed buildings indicate an Italian renaissance styla architecture
with sloped roofs, large and small arches at both the parking level and upper levels and
, roof pediments similar io the style at the University campus. The materials proposed are
a mixture of soft stucco colors to compliment the surrounding community. The roof will
' be an architectural asphalt roof tile that offers some relief and dimension to the pitched
roofs.
, Drainage / Slope Stabilization The Site Review drawings as prepazed by Drexel
Barrell depict where water quality features will be employed and designates the proposed
locations of the on-site water quality ponds. Taft Drive cunently divides the site into two
~ distinct drainage basins. Existing storm inlet structures in Taft Drive convey storm water
runoff from the southem half of the site to the city storm water system. With the
~ 7
~
, proposed improvements, Taft Drive will continue to form the drainage basin divide. In
order to meet the current water quality standazds for storm water runoff, smaller EDB's
, in conjunction with Best Management Practices (BMI') will be required for the southem
basin prior to release to the city storm water system. The northern portion of the site will
use existing water quality features where feasible before the outfall to the city storm
, water system. The hillside area directly adjacent to the south property line of Tract "B"
will have a series of tiered retaining walls to direct surface drainage away from the
, proposed buildings and into appropriately designed water quality azeas 'with eventual
outfall into Boulder Creek.
` Slope stabilization is a major condition of our site. A Colorado registered engineer has
completed a geological study for this area and with his findings the following solutions
have been proposed by Yenter Companies who have extensive experience in designing
~ and constructing these types of walls. A series of tiered retaining walls along the south
property line of Tract "B" will be extending from the west-end of the site to the east.
, Yenter Companies (See Attached Letter) has recommended several different methods.
The two most excepted solutions for slope stabilization for the proposed development
would be both 1) soil nails and shotcrete or 2) micropile and shotcrete. Both solutions
~ would require a facing system using split-faced block or other acceptable materials. On
, the east-end of the site, where the slope is not as steep, a system using mechanically
, stabilized earth (MSE) retaining walls would be used. These solutions would also
include significant drainage control for water on the hillside. All of these methods would
follow the requirements for Hillside Development as outlined in the B.R.C.- 1981. In
~ addition to the above site strategies and techniques being implemented our grading plan
limits the amount of re-grading necessary by retaining a significant amount of the
, existing grades as possible. The introduction of pazking at grade and foundation walls as
p;::~ „i the retaining wall system helps considerably in providing adequate slope stability
and soi] erosion.
Fire control and protection of the proposed development will be implemented for the
~ buildings as well as the existing slope along the south property line of Tract "B". The
project will be constructed with a supervised automatic fire sprinkler protection system in
all of the buildings. The south property line will be lined with dry standpipes at 200'
, intervals to assist in fighting a potential fire along the treed slope.
, 4) Does [he proposed deveiopment take into consideration the appropriateness of or
necessiry for housing and the management of student rental units?
, Permanently affordable housing has long been a goal of the City and has been identified
and established by the "Housing Fund Program" and "Housing Needs Assessment - City
of Boulder 1999" that this type of housing is in great demand. Our proposed
~ development not only contains the inclusionazy requirements for affordable housing but
goes beyond and provides an additional 15°/a to further support the goals of the City.
, Student housing rental units have also been identified by the city as a much-needed use in
Boulder. This site is appropriately located to support both uses. The site is within
, walking distance of the CU campus, Crossroads azea and local businesses.
1 8
~
~ Manaeement Philoso}Lhv & Techniaues: Providing the optimal student housing li~~ing
experience entails much more than the just providing the optimal physical product.
, Meeting this objective can only be accomplished by recognizing the specialized needs of
the student resident and customizing all aspects of the management program to meet
those needs.
,
American Campus-Titan is committed to providing its student residents with the highest
, quality products and services. The company's customer service orientation and
management philosophy aze based on the following objectives:
, • Maintaining an academically oriented community by meeting the
specialized needs of our student residents with the highest levels of
, customer service.
. Developing and implementing a premiere resident life/student
development for maximum student interactions and personal o owth.
, • Maintaining the project buildings in top conditions by implementing
an aggressive on-going maintenance program, performing necessary
f~ preventive maintenance, and effectively prioritizing and managing
~ capital improvement projects.
• Ma~cimizing revenues an,: .::aintaining reasonable operating expenses.
,
To ensure that the highest levels of customer service are maintained, American Campus-
, Titan staffs each community with on-site personnel in each of the following key
functional areas; administration, maintenance, and resident life/student development
functions.
~ ~
American Campus-Titan's community assistant (CA) staff is the foundation of our strong
, customer service orientation. A CA at an American Campus-Titan community is the
front line customer service representative. CA's aze student resident employees who are
trained and committed to serving the needs of our customers. Our on-site resident s[aff
~ implements and enforces all community policies but always with a customer service
orientation and never in a manner that belittles or strips our customers, the student
, residents, of dignity and respect.
A~nerican Campus-Titan's corporate staff will recruit, hire and train an on-site
, management team of professionals. The GM's responsibilities include residing within
the community and directing all facets of operations. Reporting directly to the General
Manager will be Maintenance Supervisor, an Office ManagerBookkeeper and a Resident
, Director. The Resident Director will directly supervise the para professional staff, which
will consist of at least one Community Assistant for every 35 students. At all times an
, American Campus-Titan staff inember is on-site, ready to respond to resident concems or
emergency situations. During the evenings the GM and/or resident Manager aze on-site.
, A CA is on call and a maintenance person on call to support them. A 24-hour answering
service will be in place to notify staff immediately when residents aze in need and/or an
emergency situation is occurring.
~
~ 9
The followin; is an outline summary of American Campus-Titan's preventi~ e,~scheduled
maintenance program in use at similaz communities.
. . ~.
• Clean and inspect lawn and grounds
• Clean and inspect parking lots, drives and
walkways
• Inspect exterior lighting and replace bulbs
as needed
• Ciean and inspect laundry equipment
• Inspections of exterior shell will be
performed through the day-to-day activities
of on-site staff, or as needed after
inclement weather conditions.
• Visual inspection of exterior screens and
windows
• Visual inspection of windows and screens
• Water softener/test water sottness
• Maintenance sta~ to check integrity of
stairs and railings
• Inspections of gutters to avoid clogging
• Visual inspection of roofs
• Inspect interior painting and make needed
repairs
• Inspect exterior painting and touch up high
traffic areas as nesded
• Inspect carpet and vinyl flooring foF unusual
wear and tear
• Clean carpet and vinyl flooring
• Inspect/test hardwired smoke detectors in
units
• Certified vendorjlocaf authority to test fire
alarm and sprinkler system every 6 months
• `Nater softener/check salt Ievel
• Unit air handlers/change filte~iinspect
• Unit exhaust fans (6 mos.)/inspect
• Wates softener/check timer maintenance
staff
• Boilers/inspect pilot and main burner flame
and firing rate
• °oilers/operate all controls and gas valves
• Boilers/inspect for water leak
• Boilers/oil pump motor and bearing
assembly
• Boilers/check impeller hearing condition
• Boilers/check coupler for wear or vibration
• Inspect and treat for pests per rotation
• Check heaters and sprinkler system ciosets
10
~
~
~
,
,
. ~, ,
• Inspection of 8rick
• Inspection of Windows and Caulking
• Painting touch ups as needed on railings
^ Inspection of Soft and Facial
• Minor roofing repairs as needed
• Inspection and repair of normal wear and
tear of windows, screens, doors and
• Water Softener/Clean brine injector
• Water Softener/Inspect resin
^ Water Softener/Measure free board in resin
tank
• Boilers/Inspect heat exchange
• Boilers/Check vent system
• Boilers/Inspect for scale
^ Boi(ers/Check flow switch paddle
^ Boilers/Clean room air intake openings
• Boilers/Insure quality of combustion air (no
corrosives)
• Clean/Inspect dryers and dryer ventilation
^ Perform annual clean-out related to pest
control
hardware
, ~ Inspect/Change backup battery in
hardwired smoke detectors
, • Unit AHU/Clean Condenser Coils
• Water Softener/Lubricate moving parts
• Water Softener/Inspect pilot screen
,
,
• lnterior painting based on need to address
either normal wear and tear or abuse.
Estimate 33% of rooms are painted each
year.
• Clean carpet and vinyl flooring and inspect
for normal wear and tear
• Inspection and repair of abnormal wear and
tear of windows, screens, doors and
hardware
• Inspect window locks
• Inspectdoorsweeps
• Random re-keying of doors
^ Inspect/Repair damaged smoke detectors
and other security and life safety equipment
^ Cleaning/Steam Clean upholstered
furniture
• Inspect, clean and repair appliances and
replace miscellaneous parts
• Inspect and Replace miscellaneous parts on
furnishings
• Repair abnormal wear and tear damages
• • M'
~ Repainting of railings
^ Replace roof
• Paint EMerior surfacAs
• Replace and repair caulking of e~erior sheli
• Repair and replace carpet and vinyl flooring
• Rcpair and replace windows, screens, doors
and hardware as needed
• Repair and replace furnishings, fixtures,
equipment and appliances
• Clean air handler uniis, compressors and
evaporator coils every two years
11
Safe ~ and Secaritv: The community will be designed and constructed per NFPA 13R.
Units will fearizre hard-wired, battery backed smoke detectors and a fire suppression
system. The buildings will also iriclude fire pull stations. Another safety feature within
the community is our key policy. Our system consists of a removable lock core that
facilitates timely changes of locks when deemed necessary from a life safety standpoint.
This permits immediate responses to misplaced or lost keys. Regular rotation of locks
takes place between academic years when we rotate all of the locks for a clean start. By
having this system in place, we can efficiently implement policies, which can minimize
exposure to key related loss.
Exterior lighting is addressed at the time of construction. Facilities will be designed
utilizing applicable codes and national lighting standards. American Campus-Titan will
also work with local authorities for establishing crime prevention programs and
additional input on other security issues.
t2
Sent By: Yenter Companies, Inc.; 303 279 0908; Aug-31-00 12:17; Page 2/2
--~, :~ ; August 31, 2600
. ~~ •
, `
. ~ ~' i
p~~y To: Tony Patinella
BIASIING Titan Investmeats, LLC
~ 631:: S Fiddlor's Greeu Circic, Suite 330E
!~ Englewood, Colorado 80111
i~
~ ~ ` From: Chttistopher L. Todd
~N~ RE: Retaining walls for The Village at Boulder Creek, Multi-family
~ Houaing, Soulder, Cotorado
~ '"' T Yenter Companies, Inc. has reviewed the plans for the proposed retaining walls daled
Mazch 22, 2000. Yenter Companies, Inc. offers to design and construct the retaining
~~
~ ~ walls through the u: e of several methods. After a site visit and review of the
l
geotechnica
report, Yenter Companies, Inc. has completed some preliminary analysis
~ of the slope stabiliu~tion. The slope can be stabilized and the retaining walls
~
~
, constructed per the plans.
~°
'
In the areas where ttiere are only one wall, Mechanically Stabilized Earth(MSE) walls
, y~ will be constructed. ln the azea where there are tiered walis, soil nails and shoterete
SPECWISTS stabilization with a lacing wall wi11 be consriucted. if there is a problem with obtaining
~,_
:~
:
r~
~
~ easemerns, a micropile and shotcrete wall can be constructed with a facing wall. The
,
,
..., r.
;;,z~ facing wall is a fa~le to cover the shotcrete. The facing for the retaining walls can be
biock, rock, or timbers. The most economical facing is block. The most expensive
~ ~~ facing is rock. Any facing can be used for this project.
SFRVACfS -
~ 'fhe tntal azea of the retaining wall is appsoximately 6,60Q squase feet. The setaining
walls can be built an i the siope stabilized. lf you have any questions or concems, feel
free to corrtact me.
,
, 5incerely,
G~~ ~, ~~~
Chastopher L. Todd
, Yenter Companies, Iac.
~
~
, 20300 W. Highway 72, Arvada, CO 80007 • 303YL79-4458 • Fax 303I279-0908 • www.yenter.com
L3
~
~
~
~
1
VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK
A) Side Yard Setback: Pazking
, • Good Samaritan Center parking west-end: Lot 4
• Good Samaritan Center pazking east-end :Lot 1
, • Market Rate pazking, Building A: Lot 2
• Permanently Affordable pazking, Building D: Lot 4
, B) Side Yard Seth~~?c: Q.ttached Sidewallcs
, •:~urth and Sou~h of Taf~ Ddve
, C) Front Yard Setback: Buildine
~
• Permanently Affurdable, Building D: Lot 4
, The subdivision of lots has created a front yard encroachment
_ Parkin~
• Overall parking reduction of S.~%
, • Reduction of handicapped requirement from BRG1981 to Americans Disability Act
(ADA)
~ Building Height: _
I' , • Building A, Proposed Vtarket Rate, height 49'-0" / 5?.9' above 1958 contour
• Building B, Proposed Market Rate, height 49'-0" / 52.9' above 1958 contour
, • Building C, Proposed Market Rate, height 39'-0" / 49.9' above 1958 contour
• Building D, Permanently Affordable , height, 49'-0" /~3.5 above 1958 contour
~
~
~
~
11
Track #36
DRC Meeting: 9121/00
CITY OF BOULDER
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
REVISED NOVEMBER 6, 2000
PROJECT NAME: Village at Boulder Creek
LOCATION: Taft Drive & 28th Street
COORDINATES: N2W4 .
ZONING: HR-E
REQUEST TYPE
AND NUMBER: Subdivision (Preliminary Plat), Site Review, S-2000-14,
2000-19
APPLICANT: American Campus-Titan LLC '
DESCRIPTION: Site Review for a housing project located on Taft Drive,
between Folsom and 28th Street. 133 residential units proposed, 86~'~
student rentals, 47 permanentiy affordable units. Height exception to
49' requested.
REQUESTED VARIATIONS
FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS:
• Building heights to 53.5 feet
~ Front and rear yard setback variances
to 15 feet.
• Parking within the Front yard setback
I. REVIEW FINDINGS
Staff has reviewed this request and finds it cannot support the number of units proposed for the site based
on the current plan. The Iocation and size of useable open space areas are very Ifmited within the context
of this plan. Useable open space includes 12.5' wide rear yard areas and steep siopes that do not provide
useable open space areas. The frontyard areas of the site offer very little useable open space as well. In
additfon, the private deck7porches along the south side of the site may not meet the building code
requirements (see buitding code comments). This plan does reduce the num6er of units and the amount
of parking has been increased to meet the required parking for the proposed hausing units, but at the
expense of praviding reasonable open space areas. A common open space area should 6e developed
within immediate access to all units with a size adequate to provide far some of the recreational needs of
future tenants. IN addition, staff would encourage the applfcant to reduce the averall height of the
buildings along the south side of Taft Drive to three stories (not exceeding 40' in height). Additional
changes to the plan will need to be made before staff can make a favorable recommendation to the
Plannfng Board on this request.
Based upon the Stajjrevlew findings and a nelghborhood meeNng the Site RevleNV Plan has been revised to
address the concerns expressed:
~
~ Concern One: Density;
The revtstons include a denstty reducNon oj(7) units for a tota! of 126 proposed units (82 Markec Rate
, and 44 PerinanenUy AJj`'ordable) and 39 equivalent Goad Samarilan Uniis. The tota! unils for the Vll[age at
BouJder Creek are I65, while the aUowable unrts under the current Boulder zoning ordinance is 18I units The
reduction in density has decreased bullding hetght, created more useable open space, reduced scale and massing,
, reduced trajflc impact and lncreased rear praperty set backs.
,
Concern Two: LacaBvn and Slze of Useable Open Space;
, The revised Open Space Plarr contains 120,375 sq. jL of apen space which ezceeds the ciry requirement
6y 21,375 sq, ft Tke werage sq. J3 per unit is T29.54 sq.,/t The revised design categorizes the useable open space
, into three areas; 1) Active open space area, 2) Passive open space areas, and 3) Tnternal activity areas jor
restdents.
, I) ~1ive useable apen qpace: The praject cuntaixs three major active open space areas, whlck are
located in !he rear ojBuilding A axd in front ofBuilding B and C The rear of Building A wtR kave an area
designed to aUow jor many informal acttvides such as frisbee, croque~ playing catch and other active activiiies.
, In addition, plcnic tables and gas grilJs will be p[aced in se[ected areas for residext use. Building A also has an
area to the west ojthe building that could potentiaUy accammodate a small half court basketball area. A[tkough
~ a1l buildings have Ankages to the Boulder Creek TraiJ, Building A sits creekside, allowing for a unique
connecHon to the creek path. The linkage af the Boulder Creek Trai! plays an impoRant role in cnnxecttng fhe
projsct to city wide pedestrian and bicycle trarls promoting allerxative methods of iranspoKation and connections
to other activity areas. Building B has beex deslgned to allow for a larger open space with activities including,
~ but notltmued tu fiisbee, ptaying catch with the foot6all o~ baseba![, nnd a gross vo!leyball coart SmaJi natwa!
berms wil! be designed to allow jar seating/viewing along the noKh side af the grass volleyball courG Bui[dtng C
, wil/ have a grass area east and west of ehe enrry that can be used far a variety of activities tnclud~ng korseshoe
pUs, botccki ball and other active activittes.
2) Paccive a~~Lar~P: The passive activity areas occur at the front of Building A, East ofBullding B,
, in jront of Building C and D. The area in jront ojBuilding A has a number of existing trees and wiU provide a
good setting for passive seating areas at the building extry. The east-stde ofBui[ding B wrll have gas grills and
~ tables placed rn selecred areas jor resident ase. These tables and gri!!s wil! be away fram the new Jire /ane being
pravtded to the south property line. Building C wA[ contain a main jocal polnr with an outside caurtyard sening
to encourage intergeneratlnna! interacrlon with Good Samaritan, Permanent[y Affordable housixg ana Student
~ residents. The hurdscaped courtyard witl have a circular seuting urea sarrounding a main focal point (te. gas
f:re pit, sculpture ar fountain), that can beused jor picnickixg or a place jor Gaod Samaritan residents to gather,
which is current[y not availab[e to them. This searing area around tke matn foca! potnt would be stone and
~ would have a 1reUis above surraunding the perimeter (see detai/XX and Sectton AA). The open area ta the easr
of the courtyard wrl! also provide landscape jurniture and flower gardens along the path leadtng to Building C
entry. Building D wifl have ju!! use ajall ojthe jacflities and will hav¢ seattng in tke front entry caurtyard
, 3) Lnrernal acrivi areas: The project also offers tnterior activities in the clubkous¢ (located In the frrst ~
Jloar ofBuilding C) wilh an activity roam including ping pong, foosball, pool table and camputer room. The
, residenis wil! have access to the indoor heated pool located in the weUness center at Goad Samaritax. Individual
tennis membershlps are avaUab[e at the Harvest Rouse sports assoclutfon.
, Concern Three: Openings ln sefback
The cade Issues regarding openings wilhin a certain dlstanee oflhe properey line hme been addressed in the
~ 6ui(ding code section ojthis report
,
,
~
~ ConcernFour: BuildingHeight
, The overall density has bees reduced as mentian previously, the buildtng helght for Building D has been reduced
6y oxe jull story to 39'-0" at the hlghest potnt and 36'-0"to the main rtdge line, wh~ch runs the length of the
building. The reductfon in square footage fo~ Burlding D kas resu/ted tn a reductian of 3 unlts. Bullding B has
, deleted (4) 4 bedroom units on the west stde ofthe building to reduce the height on this end to 39'-0"at the
htghest point and 36'-0" to the maln ridge line, which Is consistent w~th Building C and D.
~ Actian: All Architectural, Civ11 and Landscape drawing tndicate the revls~ons made.
A parking reduction is still being requested based on the parking needs of the permanently affordable
housfng units and the congregate care center. The resulting parking reduction of 8.5% for the fuil site
~ appears to be reasonable for the uses proposed on this site.
, Applicant acknowledges comment The parking has changtd since we have imp/emexted the new butlding
keights, denstty reductions and npen space rev~slons The new parking reduction varlance has /mproved to
7.61 °/a
^ Acdon: Refer to Architectural drawings number 3.
~ No plan sections were provided showing the amount of cut and fiil, building heights and adjacent
neighboring housing units to the south. At least two sections through each of the buildings (six total) from
Taft Drive to University Heights Avenue should be provided. While the south lot line is technically
considered a side yard setback because of the current configuration of the property, this lot line backs to
~ the rear yards of adjacent properties to the south and should respect the fact that the new buiidings will
6ack to rear yards. Current City policy encourages buildings to be placed adjacent to front yards to create
~ a better presence along streets. Shifting the buildings and parking closer to Taft may help to reduce
impacts on the hillside and adjacent neighborhood. Staff would encourage the applicant to maintain a
minimum setback of 25' along the south property line. Note that the building code does not support
~ window openings at less then a 20' setback from the south property line for this site.
New plan sections have been added to the to tGe revrsed drawings as requested above. Tke set backs on the rear
^ of the property have been indicated on the revrsed plans. Building D kas adjusted its set back to varyfrom 12'-6"
to 25'-0'; the majoriry of Building D setback (approximately 50%) is now greater than ZO'-0"fram the proper[y
line Building C has a rear set back oj17'-6". Building B kas a rear set back of 18'-0" to the west portion of the
~ building aad 60'-0" to the east partton of the building. In most cases the eristing houses in the Unfversity
Hetghts ne7ghbnrhood are between 70' and 120' f~om the proposed buildings.
, Bui/drng code rssues regard~ng opexings are addressed in the 6uilding code sectron of this report
Actian: Refer to Architectura[ drawings 8,9 & 10.
, Yenter Companies has suggested that the hillside can be stabilized through the use of tiered walls, soil
nails and shotcrete. Use of shotcrete along the hiliside will result in very Ilmited landscape areas. These
, areas would not be considered useable open space if they are improved impervious areas. The walled
areas appear to be 6 to 8' tall stepped areas that will not result in useable open space areas as weil.
These areas should be removed from the apen space calculations if they cannot serve as useable open
, space areas.
~
,
^
~~
,' A meeting was held with Scatt %ukna, City ofBoalder, Yenter, Drexe[Barrel! and Titan to discuss the design and
canstruction of the retaining walls. Cross sections have been provided jor revtew. The vertical portion of rhe
walIs wili have the shotcrete and will6e buried 6eneaih !he ground The sloped areas 6etween the retaining walJs
, will be pervious and approprtate ground caver wtU be useaL
Actfon: Cross sectinns have been submlited wUk revisions.
Drainage and stromwater facilities have not been clearly addressed by information provided with this
submittal. The location and size of these facilities could have a significant impact on the final development
consVaints for this site. How will these areas impact useable open space and landscape areas7
Applicant acknowledges commenG A meeting was held with ScoK Buhxa, Drexel BarreU and Titan and changes
to the drainage axd stormwater facilities have been clearly addressed in the revised drawings.
AcHon: Civil drawings have been revised
This review will require submittal of a review of revisions making the corrections requested in this
document. Staff would encourage the applicant to meet with staff to review issues raised in this
document. Individual staff members have been identified with comments made below to assist you in
determing whom to contact to review specific questions. If a combined meeting in necessary with several
staff members, piease cantact Brent Bean (303) 441-1880.
Ii. CITY REQUIREMENTS
Access/Circuladon
1. Crosswalk pavement marking within the right-of-way shall not be implemented at the time of development
Tsansportauon staff may ceview warrants for pedestrian demand at these ctossings and detetmine whether
pavement marking is appropriate at a later time.
App[icant acknvw!¢dges this comment and wrll erclude any paving strrping on the documenls for juture
submilrals. The Ciry will be responsible for the striping, if and when they determine it necessary.
Action: Take striping ojf of Landscape Plan, see drawing L-1
2. Handicap ramps are required at att driveways and at the locadons of handicap spaces. Please see chapter
I1, detaiis 2.07 and 2.07A in the Ciry of Boulder Design and Consduction Standards. Handicapped
parking spaces aze, required to be 12' wide, with a 3' walkway beside the space. Two adjacent handi-
capped spaces can shaze a walkway, Mi,,;..~~~..~ width for a single space is IS' and hvo shaced spaces is 27'.
We met with Steve Durian on Ociober 11, Z000 and agreed that handfcapped ramps will be provided at
all driveways axd kandtcap ramp locaHons. The handJcap stalls wil[ meet rhe Cliy ojBou[der Design
and Conmuction Standards. flandtcappeA ramps will be added at all necessary toccNons for parking'
stalLs
Action: AUArchitectural, Clvil and Landscaping drawtngs lndtcale thfs revlsion.
t
, 3. Curb cuu on either side of Taft do not align with one another. Secdon 2.04 of the Design and
Construcrion Standardr requires that driveways be located direcfly across from each other or at a minimum
offset of 150 ft.
, We met wrth Steve Durian on October 11, 2000 and agreed that the curb cuts for Building A and B an
the eastern end are across from each other and do not requtre modiJicaNon. The curb cut on the western
, end of Building A w~ll be modiJled and moved to a[ign witk the curb cut between Building B and ~ The
curb cuts on the east and west end ofBuilding D wiU not requl~e modijication because the Baulder Good
Samarttan Center curb cuts are existing for a one way drive thraugh that does not generate datly heavy
, ~''°f~~'
, Acdon: SeeArchitectural drawingfor revised changes.
4, The sidewalk on the north and south sides of Taft aze shown as attached Section 2.06 of the Design and
, Construction Standards requires detached sidewalks. The non-centered 60 ft wide right-of-way on Taft
does not allow adequate space far the required improvements for the base road standard showa in section
2.06. An additional tluee feet of right of way on the south side of TaR will be required to achieve the
, standazd of 6' sueet side landscaping and five foot detached sidewalk with a minimum of 12" between the
sidewalk and the right-of way. A right-of-way vacation of three feet along the north side of Taft Drive can
be pucsued to create a balanced 60 ft wide right-of-way. Any desired variance to these standazds must be
, pursued t6rough the procedures outlines in section 1.05 of the Design and Construction Standards under
Altercations, Mo~cations, and Waivers.
~ We met with Steve Durian on October 11, 2000 apd agreed t6at the attached sidewa[ks skould remain as
skown on the plans. The narth side of Taft Drive currextly has an altached sidewalk fram oxe end oj
[he street to the othert The area dlredly in front of ehe Boulder Good Samaritan Center wi1! not be
, disturbed during conshuction and will remain as is. We jeel that keeping this cansistent thraugh the
block was imponant In addition, there are a signiftcant number of exisNng mature trees lacated along
the street that shou[d be preserved and kept for the praposed developmext A detacked sidewalk would
~ eliminate these trees. The street has been modtfied ta include areas that wil[ create landscape areas
along the road The anached sidewalk wil! alsa allaw the existing trees to ixtegrate wtth the shrub /ayout
to create a unifying element (o the meet Steve agreed with tkis concept and felt that the existing hee
, preservatian and the existing attached sidewalk in front ojBoulder Good Samaritan wau[d justify
leavrng the aKached sidewalks in the proposed design.
~ Actlon: A/! drawings will indicate aKached sidewa[ks, no revistons were necessary.
5. Bicycle pazking spaces required on-site is equa( in number to 10% of the parking spaces before application
, of pazking reductions. The locarion of bike pazking shall be distributed behveen the buildings in reladan to
the aumber of vehieulaz pazldng spots and shown on the plans.
, Appllcant acknow[edges tNis comment The total number oj6icycle parking spaces jor the praposed
develapment is 12S spaces. These bicycle spaces are distrtbuted throughout a11 of the buildings and are
indtcared on the Parking Plan drawing with the note ZI deslgnation.
~ Actlon: Archrlectura! drawings wUl rema/n as !s and no revisinns necessary, see nofe 21 on drawings.
~
~
,
~
~
~ 6.
~
,
,
~
, 7
M
~
Traffic Impact Assessment
a. The Background Data section of the TIA lists Folsom and 28`" Street as arterial roads. Folsom is
more specifically classified as a"Minor Arterial" and 28`~ Sheet as a"Principal Arterial". Please
make this correction in the text of the ceport.
b. Table 1 lists °Condominium" as TTE land use #253, when in fact it is ITB laud use #230. Please
update this in the table.
'c. 28'" Sheet (US 36) is classified by CDOT as I~iR-B. This information should be included in the
report for use in obtaining an access permit for Taft Drive. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493
We met wrth Steve Durian on October 11, 2000 and the above comments tn a, b, axd c wiU be modtfied
in tke Trajfic Impact Assessmerca
Actlon: The Traffic Impact Assessment has been reviser~ see attachment
The proposed impcovements shall maintain a 2A°/a ccuss slope an all Qublic wallcs in the right-uf-way ar in
public easemenu. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121.
Appl7cant acknowledges this comment and will maintain a 2% crass slope on al! proposed pablic wa[ks
in the right-of-way nr public easernents.
Actiox: Refer to plan nate on Civi! drawings 3& 4
~ Emergency Access
1. Prior to final site plan approval, applicant s6a11 modify access points into pazldng lots from TaR Drive to
, provide adequate turning radu for fire appazatus. NOT'E: Driveway turns &om Taft appeaz OK, but
transidon tums &om drives into pazking azeas do not appeaz to accommodate SU-30 velricles.
, Applicant acknowledges this comment and will modify transition turns to camp/y wirh SU-30 vehicle
turning radius
~ Action: Refer tn Architectura! site plan drawing, drawing number 3.
2, Prior ta final site plan approval, applicant shall design a fue lane on the east side of Bldg. B, connecting
~ TaR Drive to the south pazking lot. Fire lane is to be reflected o¢ revised site plan, and meet design criteria
of City of Boulder. This lane is teprovide emergency access only to the reaz of Bldg. B, as well as better
firefighting access to the noRh-facing slope, south of the subject property. NOTE: Tlils is in addidon to
, the two pazking lot access points shown on cuirent site plan. Adrian Hise, Fire DeparVnent, 303-441-3350.
In a telephane canversatian with Adrian Rlse on Octaber d, 2000 it was clarified and confirmed that a
, new curb cut will be installed just east ajthe curb cut jor Bailding B. This wil! be sole[y dedicated for
emergency fire access to the rear ofBuilding B nnd tke souJh s[ope for the Boulder Fire DepartmenL
We will install two 4'-0" wide concrete lartes separated by a 4'-0" wlde grass strlp in between lo tke
' south property line in accordance with the design criteria as established by the City of Boutder. Thts witt
occur Ix the 25'-0"front yard setbacla
, Action: See Architectura[ site plan drawtxg, drawing numberl, 2& 3.
,
,
6
^
~~
, Building and Housing Codes
Table 5-A of the Uniform Building Code requires all openiags of (ess than 20 feet &om a property line to be
~ protected if a type I or type II FR constcuctioa is used for these buildings. If the conshucrion type is not going to be
type I or II, further review of code requirements will need to be wnsidered. However, under the current
assumptions; no egress windaw or openings would be permitted for this project along the south property line. Note:
~ all bedrooms aze required to have emergency egress windows. Steve Brown, Inspection Services, 303-441-3172.
,
In a telephone conversalion with Steve Brown on October 4, 2000 it was clari,f~ed and confrrmed that rhe V'dlage
~ at Boulder Creek will be Type I and Type V Canstruction. Type I Consttuctlon for an S3 Occupancy Open
Parking will be on the frrst level and separated from the bui2ding above with a tkree hour occupancy separaAion
(this is allowed by SecBon 311.2.2 Special Pravrsioxs of the 1997 Uniform Building Code). The bui/ding above
~ the parking level wil[ be a Type V ConmuctJon, contafning a Group RI occupancy.
The Type I Constraction on the first [eve! parking wiU protect any openings that are within 20' jrom the property
, line The Type V Construction can have unprotected openings within S' ojthe property lin~ AU bedrooms wiU
be provided with emergexcy egress windaws per section 310.4 of the 1997 UBC, which are atlowed in type V
_ caastruction greater tkan 5' from the property lin~
AcHon: No revisions to the drawing are necessary.
Building Design
The building heights and locations have been adjusted from the concept plan. The central building along
the south property line has been reduced &om a four-story building to a tluee-story building and the east
and west buildings broken into three and four story buildings. The westem buIlding is quite large in size
and scale and could be reduced in si2e if the minimum unit sizes aze reduced to an average of 948 squaze
feet as noted in the Housing Division comments below.
Building D wr![ be reduced in slze given the new requirements ojHousing Division. {f''Uh !he required
square footage being 80% oj the average market rate units we were able to reduce Building D from a
jour story building to three stories. Tleis reduces the height to be consistent with Building C.
Actiott: See Architectural drawings jor building layout, elevations and sections.
2. Detailed site secrions need to be p~ovided showing the building location and topography from Taft Drive
through to University Heights Avenue. At least two sections through each building should be provided.
Has a site model been developed For this plan? Planning Hoazd will be interested in seeing a site model of
the site and tbe surtounding neighborhood. In general, the plan seems to be "fighting" the natural
topography. It proposes major alterations to the south hill. Ttris is inconsistent with the Site Review
criteria calling for "preservation of natural features, including terrain." Could the buildings, or a poruons
of the buildings, be pulled away from the slope? Or could they be stepped down the slope? Staff has
sttong reservations with the height of the proposed building in light of the fact that ttris information has not
been pravided.
Two sections through each buitding will be provtded showPng the buildingloeaHon and topographyfrom
~ University Heights to the existing Gaod Samaritan. A model has been developed and wU! be avallable
for Staff, Planntng Board and Neighborhood residents. Our joundution deslgn, whlch consis7s of a
retalning wall, actually takes tato coxslderation the south slope and reduces the amount of distarbance
, to the naturaJ topagraphy. ~tk this des/gn we have been able to reduce the lengfh ojretaining wa!!
requlred and minimize the amount ojregrading of ezisting contours In this sense we have preserved
the natura( terratn. The buildings do jollow the contours from an east/west direeHan. ~th tke
, _
,
narrowness of the site it would be extremely difficuk to step the bui(dings in a north/south direction. The
sect7ons and mode! wil[ show that the height ojthe buildings skould nnt have an adverse affect on the
vrew corridors to tGe Northwest Any development orc this site, whether it Is a ane story or fnur-story
bui/ding, wiU have an ajfect on the views down.
Acto»: See Architecturu! site sections. A modet wilt be provided for staff revlew appraximatety one week
afterreviskn submiitaL
St~ff analysis of the building heights along the south property line suggests that a building height of wer
three stories or 40' is not warranted in this azea. The property to the south of this site is single family
residenrial zoned and the existing units are primarily single story units. Increasing the heights of buildings
along the south property line should be very sensitive to both visual and noise impacts that could occur as a
result of placing multi-story buildings adjacent to existing single family homes.
With the reducNon in square footage for Butldfng D we we~e abie to reduce the Hetght !0 39'-0"at the
highest point axd 36'-0" to the main rldge Uxe, whtck ls constctent wuh Building C. Thls is clearly
demansrrated by the made! axd site sections provided BuUd~ngA has remalned four stories, however
Butlding B has been modiJted to three stortes on tke west end and remained four stortes on the east enaL
This has allvwed for more useab/e open space in front ojBuilding B. The Ueiversrty Reights residents
on the east end of the project are nearly 120' away from the proposed Building B. This wA! open up
more vtew corridors and create greatsr separation. Tke floor plan of tke propased units have 6een
changed ta reJlect the outdoor ba[coxies to be ixcluded in the building envelope, thus reducing visual
impacx We are staffed to maxage these proJects in a way that creates an academic environment We
have a CA (cammunity assistant) in every bullding that is responsible for the student relations. In
addition, we wll! have a juU time properry manager on slt~ The block kas created a Dec[aratian af
Covexants for this projecr and American Campus-Titan, Good Samaritan and the Permanextly
Afjordable Home Owners Association will be he[d accnuxtable for their respnnslbiltttes
Action: See Architectural drawings and site modeL
3. Pazking is proposed to almost completely line Taft Drive, as either surface pazking or under-building
parking. Evea with the pazking screened, Uiis reduces tlie animarion and iaterest of the project from a
human scale. The stteet level can become a no-man's land. Can some or part of the buildings - without
ground-levei pazking be brought to the sheet?
Buildings A and B have been designed to create a gateway ta TaJY Dive. With the landscaped areru
A praposed, this wilCgive the projecr a more kuman scale and areas to interact Al! of the buildiegs have
graund level parking and can natbe moved jorward without rmpltcarlons to parking counts. Witk the
anached sidewa[ks we have created a greater distance jrom lhe street unifying the baildings and
, landscape. The sarface parking in Jrant ofBuilding B has been e/iminated to create more open space.
The parking in front of Building C has been modifted fo be double loaded creaeing inore open space
~ Action: See Architectural drawings for revisions.
4. Genenl uclritechue of the buildings appeais to create a vaziery in height, color and texture. Additional
~ design details need to be provided showing the rype of material to 6e used on tlie building exteriors
(material pallet).
, A sample board ojrepresentative builAing materials w/1l be furnished for the praject
Acrian: Materialpaleete will be provtded one week ajter submt~tal wilh modeL
~
,
,
5.
Can easements be obtained from the adjacent neighbors along the sauth property line to permit
construction of the necessary retaining walls and slope stabilizarion construction methods proposed for this
azea? Brent Hean, Fay Ignatowski
A meeting was held with ScoK %uhna, Yenter Companles, Drexel Barrel[ and Tftan on October 17, 2000
to dtscuss the design and construcNon of the reeaining walls along the south side of the propert}c It is
the intention to design and cnnstruct the walls without easements f~om the ~esidents ta the south. Yeater
Campanies has prov/ded preliminary cross sections for revtew.
Action; See cross sections attached
Drainage
Previous plans have included extended detention basins (EDB's) to address stormwater quality and
pollutant removal, but have not been included in the most recent submittal. Stotm water quality mitigaflon
should include miuimi~ation of d'uecUy connected impervious azeas and a minixnum of one, per pioperty,
apprapriately sized Water Qualiry Capture Volume (WQC~ Facility $om the Urban Drainage aud Flood
Control DisuicYs (UDFCD) Drainage Criteria Manua! Yolume 3. Providing WQCV Facilities is a
fundamental requirement for any site addressing stormwater quality and pollutant removal from runoff per
UDFCD's Yolume 3. Revisions to the report and plans aze necessary.
We met with Scott Huhna on October 17, 2000 and conJirmed tkat revisions ta ehe Drainage Report and
Drainage/Erosian Cantrol Plan wiU be made as requested to provlde an apprnpriately sized Water
Quality Capture Yolume (R'QCi~ FaciGty.
Action See Civi1 drawixg # S jor revrsion~ Preliminary Drainage Report attached
2. Runoff calculadons for the proposed development will be requaed for the Prelitniaary Drainage Report in
order to assess the proposed "french dcain" and drainage swale, as well as the p[oposed storm sewer
system. Incorporarion of a WQCV Facility and routing of runoff through the Facility shouid also be
addressed in the calculaHops. Storm sewer design calculaHons and fiuther detail of the "french drain"
design will also be required.
We met with ScoK Xuhna on October 17,1000 and c[arifted that the calculations jor runoff, WQCV
Faciltty, storm sewer design and french drain will be provrde as requested
Action: 5ee Civi[ drawings for revisions, see Pre[iminary Drainage Report aKached
3. Acceptance and conveyance of offsite cunoff t4uough the proposed developmenk is requiced. The pzoposed
"french drain" and''drainage swale on Tract "B" aze not required to be located within public drainage
easemenzs. Maintenance of the private storm sewer system shall remain the responsibility of the owner.
Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121
We met with Scon Kuhna an October 17, 2000 and acknowfedged comment The public drainage
easemext will be etlmtnated jrom tke ptans and preliminary ptat
Actlox: See Civll drawirtg # 2 and Preliminary Plat far revlsioxs
~.
, Engineering
Further detail of the design of the retaining wall system will be required. Several cross-sections through the
, proposed wall should be provided, as well as preliminary engiaeering drawings and calculadoas showing that the
slope can be stabilized The applicant is reminded that no portiou of any retaining wall shucture, including
footings, soit nails, etc. may encroach into neighboring properties without permission &om the adjacent property
,. owner and recordadon of the agreemenk Conshucdan easements for any work, inciuding grading, on adjacent
properties will be required prior to initiation of any constcuction activities. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121
, A meeting was held with Scntt $uhna on October I ~, 2000, with Yenter Companies, Drexel BarreU and Titan in
attendanc¢. It was cnnftrmed that preliminary cross secHons of the reta~nixg walls would be provlded along witk
, any other pertinent rnformatioa regarding the stabilrty of the slope Yenter lndicated that the kiU can be
stabllized with t,he proper design and construcHon. Titan ixdicated that in a neighborhood meeting that was held
on October 13, 2000 the suggesdon was made to have the UniversPty Heights neighbors hire an independent
, engineering as a peer review and approval prior to the Clty /ssuing any construc8on permils.
Action: See crass sections attached
, Housing
, The minimum average size requirement for the pem~anently affordable uniu under 9-6.5 B.RC., 1981, Inclusionary
Zoning, is calculated as SO°/a of the average size of the proposed mazket rate units. Given the proposed market unit
sizes, the permanendy affordable uniu must average a minimum of 948 square feet. Proposed pemianendy
, affordable units exceed this minimum and thus meet the size requirements of Inciusionary Zouing. Cindy Pieropan,
Housing Planner (303) 441-3140
1 In a meeting wirh ,Iohn Pollock on October 20, 2000 the average size of the uxits was discussed To determine
the average size ojthe market rate uniu the jollowing was conducted: 4 bedroom unit =1,233sf, however
according to John PoUock the square footage jor the 4 bedroam unit anly needs ta include up to 1.200 sffor
, determining the average size. The calculation is asfollows: 4 bedroom unit 1,200 sfx 63 unifs = 75,600 p[us 3
bedroom units 1045 sfx19 units =19,855 for a total of 95,455 sjdivrded by 82 tota[ market rate units =1,164 sf.
The inctusionary zoning is calcatated at 80% of the average size of the market rute units (1,164 x 80% = 931 sn.
, The proposed ave~age siie nf tke permaxently affordable unlts are 986 sf as shown on the a~chuectura! drawing
# S.
, Actiox: Refer to Architectural drawing # S, indicates the chaxges to the size of the unrls
Landscape
, l. If tlte south sidewalk is'constructed as an offset sidewalk, street trees can be placed within the planting ship
between the curb and sidewalk. A minunum 8 ft. planting strip between the cuib and the sidewalk is desued co
, support lazge s~eet rrees. Omamental trees should be removed from azeas adjacent to sueet and site restricted
azeas at driveways. Lazge or medium street hees should be planted along Taft Drive. Please aote the
requiremeats for stroet h~ees and street hee planting i¢ the City of Baulder Design and Conshuction Standards.
, The landscape plan identified trees as "telocated to be protected". If trees aze relocated aad do not survive, they
will be tequired to be replaced
, See comment # 4 above under Access/Clrculation far attached stdewalks. The use ojOrnamenta[ trees at
Tajt Drive neckdowns are to aid In creating a greex pedesfrlax rejuge and to create a vlsuo! speed controf jor
vehicles. The Ornamental trees will be limbed up to creafe a cfear stght dtstance (trtangles) jor vehicles
, entering or eritrng fhe sile. The eristing trees along Ta, f~ Drive will be pratected durrng conmuction per the
Ciry ojBaalder Desigtt and Cvnsiructlon Standards.
,
IO
,
Action: The Landscape drawings will remain as is far the anached sldewalks.
2. The landscape plan will need to zeflecc the changes in location of the sidawalk along the south side of Taft
Sueet if the sidewallc is relocated. Use of a wall to screen the pazking in these areas might be more appropriate
then heavylandscaping.
It is our lntent to avold creating a solld physlca! barrter between the publlc and private domain. The use af
screen walls wJU create a hard edge to the site and will most [ikely nat be needed now that the s~dewalk will
remtrln as aKached and the laxdscape areas remain as large as they are.
Action: Laxdscape drawings ta ~emain as is
3. Landscape plan should identify azeas where shotcrete or similaz materials will be used. Staff questions if
shotcrete azeas can effectively be landscaped and/or considered as open space azeas. Brent Bean
The skotcrete oxly erist on the verlical surface ojthe two retainittg walls a[ong the south property line (see
cross secttons prnvrded). Tke areas that are erpased w1U have acceptabJe jacing of eiiher roc1~ dmbers or
split face block The harizontal areas between waUs wlll be landscaped w&h an approved ground cover.
Action: See crass sections anached
4. Trees proposed to be planted in the right-of-aay or in public utility easements shall be located at least 10 feet
away from existing or fuwre utilities. Scott Kuhna, 3031341-3121.
Comment acknawtedged, the tandscape plans wou1Q ittdicate proposed trees to be IO' from utitity lines
Action: Clariftcation, no revisions to plans.
5. The landscape plan does not appeaz to meet rhe requiremeats for interior lot landscaping as outlined in Secrion
9-33-4(d). Please iaclude a summary chart on the praliminary landscape plan to include the following:
total tot size (in sq. ft.)
total pazking lot size, including all drives and driveways
total number of pazking stalls required and the total provided.
total iaterioc pazking lot landscaped azea cequired and the totai provided,
total perimeter pazking lot landscaping required and total provided.
total number of sheet trees required and the total provided.
total quanrity of plant material required and total provided.
A summary Chart will be added to the laxdscape plan
Action: See Landscape.drawing L1.! jor summory chaK
Bev Johnson,303-441-3272.
Land Use
BURA supports addiag this type of housing ia this location. Fay Ignatawski, Boulder Urban Renewal Authority
(303)441-4278 _
Cumment acknowledged
Il
~.
Legal Documents
, Please submit a cucrent title commitment on the site prior to drafting the development agreement. Also, please
submit suthorization to sign on behalf of all of ihe ownets if the property is not privately held. by individuals.
, Missy Rickson, City Attorney's Office, 303-441-3020.
Comment acknowledged
, Miscellaneous
, This project will have a major impact on calls for Police Services with inczeased patronage, taf~c, offices, parldng,
etc. Personal safety issues, lighting, and landscaping should be considered as a major priority. Potential tiaffic
accidents will be extremely lugh. Lazry Wieda, Police Departmen~ 303-441-3327,
, Comment acknawledged Amertcan Campus-TUan contacted Mr. Larry R'teda on November 1, 2000 to d"ucuss
imp[emexNng a safeey plax. Mr Wteda indlcated that thls p[an could be worked out after Site Review approva~
, Acdon: No changes to current documents
, Plan Documents
1. The Preliminary Plat stisll show the names and address of all tenants and all awners of property abutting
, the pcopased subdivision, pec Sectian 9-5-3 of the Bauidec Revised Code, 1981.
, The preliminary Plat wTU be revlsed as requested to show the names and addresses oja!! owners of
proPerty abatting the propased subdivision.
, Action: See revrsed Preliminary Plat d~awing, see Adjacent Property Owner ta61e.
2. The Proposed Land Use chart on the Preliminary Plat shows a right-of-way dedication of 1.684 acres.
~ Some of this azea is already public right-of-way. The value on the chart should be revised to reflect this.
The proposed land use chart shall be revised as regues[ed
, Action: See revised Preliminary Plat drawing, see Proposed Land Use table
, 3. Note I in the Notes sectioa of the Preliminary Plat should delete the word "SECTION" between "OF" and
"N 1/4" and revise the spelling ofShe next word "SECTION' of the sentence.
, The Preliminary Plat wi!! be revrsed as requesterL
Actton: See revised Preliminary Plat drawing.
, 4. Any easements required by P.S.C.O. for the power poles along the south and east property lines should be
shown on the Preliminary Plat Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121
, Con+ment acknow!¢dged, current TUIe Commitment does nat indtcate an exisiing easement for the
overhead power poles a[ong tke south properry!!ne Furlher lnvesNgaNon is needed to determine tjany
, exislfng PSCO easements are ~x p[ace jor the exisNng powerpoles.
Action: Further research befng conducted
, '
,
12
~
1
, uc~ut;es
1. A preliminary Udlity Report in accordance with Secrion 5.02 and Sec6on 6.02 of the Ciry of Boulder
, Design and Construction Standards was required as part of the Site Review submittal. The purpose of the
preliminary Utility Report is to determine the impacts of this project on the City of Boulder utiliry systems,
specifically in reladon to estimated water and wastewater demands of the proposed project. A Utility
, Report meeting all of the requirements of Sections 5.02 and 6.02 is required.
A prelUninary Utility report wil! prepared as requested
, Actiox: See revised Preliminary Utllity Repart attached
, 2. The proposed water main extension across 28'~ S~eet to the east shall use boring methods for installadon.
Open ~enching across all laaes of 28'" Sheet is not feasible for the haffic on tlris state highway. All
, applicable C.D.O.T. pemuteng will be required prior to initiarion of construction in the C.D.O.T. right-of-
way.
, Comment acknowledged
~ Action: Wi!! obtain permtt prior to canmuctton
3. Storm water generated inside the covered parking azeas (i.e. vehicie snow melt) must be routed through
, sand/oil separators prior to conveyance to the ~it~y sewer system for all covered pazldng azeas outside
of the 100-yeaz "flood protection elevauon". All covered pazkiug azeas inside of the 100-yeaz "flood
protection elevariou" must be routed through sand/oil separators prior to conveyance to the ~~ sewer
, system. AA sand/oil separators and trench drains need to be shown on the Preliminary Master Utility Plan.
Trench drains with sand/ail separators are provided for all covered parking ubove the flood protection
, e[evation, the drains outlet to the sanrtary sewer system. For the covered parking below the jload
protection elevation, the parking areas are sloped tn drain to grass areas. Na trench drains are pravided
for these buildings to funher avoid inJlow into the sanitary sewer system.
~ Action: See revised Preliminary Master Utilily Plan drawing.
, 4. All Ciry-operated public utilities, including without limitation, water, wastewater and storm drainage
systems, shall be located within pyblic rights-of-way or a public utility easement. All public ucility
easements shall be at least 25 feet wide. In addition, public ufility easements are to be placed
, longitudinally along one side of any properry line in a manner that no portion of any easement falls on both
sides of a parallel pcoperty line. Kevisions to the plans aze necessacy.
, Public Utility easements wi![ be widened, kowever they can not be aligned on properry line.
Action: See revlsed Pre[iminary Master UJility Plan drawing.
, 5. All fue hydrants shall be insqlled within public rights-of-way or easements and easemenu shall extend at
least 10 feet beyond the hydrant assembly. Additional easements will be required for all hydrants within
, 10 feet of the right-of-way line on both the north and south sides of Taft Drive.
Addltional easements around the praposed jire hydrarcts wil! be provided as requested
, Actton: See revised Preliminary Master Utility and Plat drawing.
, 13
,
~.
6. Valves shall be located such that no more than 600 feet of water main, and that no more than two fue
, hydrants, will be located between isolation valve zones. Addirional valves will be required.
Additiona[ valves wi/l be added such that no more tkan two frre hydrants will be isoJated at any one ttme
, Actton: See revised Preliminary Master Utility Plan drawing.
, 7. Service connecdons to manholes aze not pematted unless particulaz conditions warrant The proposed
5ervices to sanitary sewer manholes #1, #2, and #4 do not meet this criteria and require the installaflon of a
, tee or wye in conformance with the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standardr.
Service connectians wrU be made using a tee or wye in the conformance with ehe City of Bnulder Destgn
, and Construcdon Standards.
Action: See revlsed Preltminary Master UNGty Plan drawing.
, 8. The proposed 8"PVC sanitary sewer main neaz its connection with the existing 21"RCP sanitazy sewer
main is approximately 5 feet &om an existiag power pole. Per Section 4.05 of the City oF Boulder Desigri
', and Conatruction Standardr, the minimum parallel separation shall be 8 feet Relocation of the proposed
sewer line, or the power pole in coordination with PubGc Service is required.
, The miximum separation of 8' between the existing power pole and the propased saaitary sewer line wi![
be maintcined
, Action: See revised Preliminary Master Utilily Plan drawing.
9. The written statement mentions that the buildings have been designed to have all mechanical equipment at
, grade. Per Section 9-9-6(m)(4) of the Boulder Revised Code, 1981, all structures shall be "constructed
with elec~ical, heating, ventiladon, plumbing, and air conditloning equipment and other service faciliries
that aze designed and located so as to prevent water &om entering or accumuladng witlsin the componenu
, during condirions of flooding".
The mechanica[ equipment atgrade wi!! beJlood proofed to prevent waterfrom entering or
, accumulaNng within the components during fiooding conditions.
Actton: See revised Grading and Erosian Contro! drawrngs, note # 9 on Preliminary Master Utility Plan.
, 10. Ground water barriers for the proposed sanitary sewer main, and storm sewer tnain shall be consttucted
where the possibility exists that ground water may be diverted, or migrarian of ground water along the
, maia may occur.
Comment acknowledged
, Action: See revised Preliminary Master Utiliry Plan drawing nate # 10.
, 1 t. All water meters aze to be placed in city R.O.W. or a public utility easement, but meten shall uot be placed
in driveways, sidewalks or behind fences.
, Cnmment acknowledged, a1[ water meters would be placed in the City ROW ar public utility easemenG
Ac~ion: See revised Preliminary Master UJi[Jty P[an drawing and Preliminary Pfat
,
,
14
,
1
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
~
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
12. Manholes located within the 100-yeaz flood plain, or in a location where cunoff may accumulate and pond
shall be installed with a watertight, bolfing-type cover, to prevent inflow/outElow. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-
3121
Manhales located wlthin the IOOyear jloodplain will be installed w&k a water ttght, bolting type cover as
noted on the Prellminary Master Utilily Plan #~
:4ction: As noted # 6 on the Prel~minary Master Utllity Plan
III. INFORMATIONAL CONIMENTS
Access/Circulatlon
I. The applicant will be responsible for curb and gutter, landscaping, lighting, and sidewalk improvemenu
adjacent to Taft Drive and 28'~ Sh~eet
Comment acknawledged, applicant will be responsible for curb axd guKer, landscaping, lighting and
sidewalk improvements.
2. The proposed project includes work within a State of Colorado right-of-way. A C.D.O.T. right-of-way
permit is required prior to initiating construction.
Cnmmext acknowledged, applicant will obtain rightaf-way permits prior to initiating conslruction.
3. The proposed project is expected to intensify tlie haffic at the 28'^ S~eeUTaft Drive intersection. As per
the CDOT Access Code, for a 20% or greater intensificaHon of use, a new access permit is required.
Please contact Steve Durian, (303) 441-4493, to submit an application for the 28'~ SlteevTaft Drive
intersection.
Commexr acknow[edged, applicaxt wrll abtain necessary access permiA
4. The proposed improvemenu shall mainhin a 2.0% cross slope on all pub(ic wallcs in the right•of-way or in
public easements. Steve Durian, 303-~{41-4493
CommextAcknowledged, a 2% cross slope wi[I be maintained an a11 public wa[ks in the rrght-af-way or
public easemenls. See plan note on Preltminary Grading drawing 3& 4.
5. Prior to approval of the final plat, Consuucrion Plans for improvements to Taft Drive in accordance with
the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards will be required.
Comment acknawledged, Taft Drive wi([ meet City ofBoulder Design and Construction Standards
Drainage
Prior to approval of the final plat, an Erosion Con~ol Plan in accordance with the City of Boulder Design
and Construction Standardr will be required.
Comment aeknawledged, an Erosion Control Plan would be prepared prior to,JPnal plat approva! as ._
required
l5
2. Prior to approval of the fmal plat, the applicant will be required to provide a Final Storm Water RepoR and
Plan in accordance with the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-
3121
Comment acknowledged, a Final Slorm Wa1er Report and Plan would be prepared p~tor to jinal plar
approva[ as required
Fire ProtecHon
1. Bldg. fire sprinkler systems will require monitoring by an UL-approved receiving station.
Comment acknowledged, the building fire protection system would be monitored by a UL approved
receivircg station.
2. Bldgs. B, C and D show "FDC"'s at mulfiple poinu on building sides: I am not clear whether these aze
FDC's for the automatic fue sprinkler systems, or if they reflect proposed connections for dry-pipe
standpipe system(s), as discussed proviously with applicant to address wildland firefighdng concerns. If
they aze sprinkler system FDCs, they will need to be relocated to the &ont sides of the buildings, facing
Taft Drive. If they aze dry standpipe connecrions, we will need to discuss their design and placement,
AND/OR ia view of the #2 comment in emergency access, as well as changes made to building layout,
they may no longer be necessary. Please contact ttris office.
A telephoxe conversation with Adrian Hise was conducted on October 4, 2000 axd clarif:cation was
given. Tke FDC's are shawn for the dry staxdplpe connect7ons to address wildland itrejlghting
concerns. Hawever, applicant wt!! be adding a fre emergency access at the east end ofBui(ding B, in
the 15' jrontyard setback for fire protec7ton along the south slope. In [ieu of the rtew placement of
buildings B, C and D and the new emergenty access lade on the east side of Butlding B, the dry
standpipe system wil! not be needed The new emergency access lane will run back to the soutk property
line and be built in accardance with City ojBoulder criterta
Aclron: See Architectura! and Civil drawiags for revisions.
Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350
, Flood Control
, A majority of the subject property is located within the 100-yeaz flood plain for Boulder Creek. Any work within
the regulatory flood plain, including grading, will be subject to City of Boulder flood plain development regulations
(BRC 9-9) and will require a flood plain development pemut. An approved flood plain development permit will be
, required prior building permit applicarion. Per Secdon 9-9-6 of the B.R.C. 1981, "no person shall establish an azea
for automobile pazking in any portion of the floodplain where flood depths exceed eighteen inches." Grade
elevations and floodplain depths for the pazking stalls will need to be provided with the floodplain development
, permit applica6oa Contact Alan Taylar, 303-441-4232.
Comment acknowledged, aJloodplain development permit wou[d 6e obtataed prior ta building permit appltcatinn
, submittaL Grade elevatlons and Jloodplain depths for parking stalls wffl be pravlded with J/oodplatn development
QPPlica~ion.
~ ,
~
I6
,
Housing
Covenants to secure the permanent affordabiliry of tlie units must be signed and recorded prior to applicarion for a
building perarit. Because this project contains 35% of We total units as permanenfly affordable, it will be exempt
from applying for Residential Growth Management Allocadons through the quarterly allocation system. Cindy
Pieropan, Housing Planner (303) 441-3140
Comment acknawledgery covenants jor permanenUy ajfordable units w7ll be signed and recorded prtor to
application for buildingpermit
Miscellaneous
No portion of the shucture, including footings and eves, may encroach into any public right-of-way or easement
Scott Kuhna,303-441-3121.
Camment acknowledged, no structure including jootings and eves will encroach into any public right-of wayc
Utilities
1. Prior to approval of the final plat, the applicant will be required to provide Utility Construcrion Plans in
accordance with the City of Boulder Duign and Conshwction Standards.
Comment acknowledged
2. Maintenance of the sand/oil interceptors, all private sanitary sewer and storm sewer lines, and private
snuctures shall remain the responsibility of the owner.
Camment ackrtawledged
3. The landscape iaigation system requires separate water services and meters. In addition, separate water
Plant Invesunent Fee's must be paid at time of building permit. Service, meter and tap sizes will be
required at time of building permit submittal.
Comment acknowledged
4. The applicant is advised that at rhe time of building pernrit applicarion the following requirements will
apply:
a. Water and sanitary sewer Plant Investment Fees and service line sizing will be evaluated.
Comment ackxowledged
b. Stocm Water and Flood Management UHlity Plant Investment Fees (Storm PIF's) will be
calculated for the project and must be paid prior to scheduling a final inspection.
Comment acknnwledged
c. Since the buildings will be sprinklered, the approved fue line plans must accompany the fue
spcinkler service line connection pecmit applica6on
Comment acknowledged
5. Trees proposed ta he planted in the right-of-way or ia public utility easements shall be located at least 10 .
feet away &om existing or future uriliHes. Scott Kuhna, 303-441-3121.
Comment acknowledged.
, BBViIge1.DRC
,
l7
~
/ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~
Goss Section A-A
Scale 1" = 6'
zmoo w. tnanw4 n
a~.aa.. co soom
Plmne: 303-279~~56
Fnc 303-279-090E
YI17f6RC011ltANR68,1NC.
~
, CITY QF BOULQEFt
LAND USE REVI~W RESUL7S ANP COMMENTS
M pATE OF COMMENTS November 28, 2000
CAS~ MANAGER; erent 9ea~
PROJECT NAME VIt~tAGE AT BOULOER CR~EK
, LOCATION: 2525 TAFT pR
COORDINATES N62W04
REVtEW TYPE. Site 8 Su6dlvlsion Revlew
, REVIEW NUMBER I.UR2000~SI51A
APPLICAN7: AMERJCAN CAMPtlS-TlTAN LLC
DESCRIPTION: Sita Review and Pr~liminary Plat: Construct 1z6 new qwelling units, includln8 82
ma~kec rate u~its a~d 44 permanently atfardable units_ Gada variacio~s raqueated
, Inolude bullding height of 49 feet wltera 35 feet Is allowed by tigM: pafking
reduction of 7.6% (364 spACes provided wha~e 394 are required); nar yatd setdack
reduetlons ta 12.6 teat whers 25 taet is raquirod; and Iocation qf parking within the
~ front yard landseaps satpack. Tha faur buildings praposeq are locahd on poth
sides of Tatt between 25th Sinat and z&th 5ueet~
REqUES7ED vARiATiON5 FROM ThrE I.AND uS~ REGUTATIONS: - ParKinp roduodon oi 7.7x
, - Rearyard setdack of 12.6 taat, where
25 fect is required
• Buildir,~ Heights of ST'9" for two of
, the buildings and 39
• Solar exception fcr the North
Eastem poRion of the site
, 1. REVIEVY FINDINGS
, The plan has heen rev~sed to reflect comments maae in tha Septem6er 22, 2000 Development Rev~ew Comments. The
buila~ng neigncs have heen reduceq an to approx~mately 39 faei for ail duiiamgs but cne eastem nalf of bunqmg B and an of
butlQing A, which have a heignt of 52'9'. The total parlcing reducGOn has been re0uc~d ;.: ~. i% an~ tne total clumpe~ ot
, unrts reauced to 82 mancet rate umt, 44 parmanenUy af(orclaDle and 39 equrvalent units a[ she Gooq Samarican for a toral
of 165 units (pre~~ous pian t72 u~its, maximum of 78~ units permiaed on thi5 s~te).
Engineering issues have peen respondea to w~tlt the subm~nal of aaq~uonal engineenng plans and support documents.
` The quest~on of ine slope s[apmry remams as a pocenGal issue. The applicant ind~cated chat Yenter Companres nas
rev~ewed the slope anq has ma~cated sha~ cne n~lis,de can De stabilizea w~tn proper design anq cronstruaion. Considerable
COncem has Deen expressetl from prop2rty owners along the south siae of the hillsiae. St2ff would enCAUf2ge t11e
, applicant to Complete sails analys~s of the ndls~de and determine what if any impact m~gnt occu~ to ne~ghhorin9 properGes
oe-ore u1a req~est is consiqereG by ~he Planning Boarq on Ja~uary 18, 2001.
, Buildi~g hei4hl hd5 D@e~ ~educed to 39' fo~ eli but the easte~ll h81f Of building 8 d~tl 8 ali af 6ui1Gif1Q A, wn~ch nave pianneq
heignu ot ~p to 52~9'. The sde sections and moqel provided Shows Vle pudqingS w~th elevaqorfs Of less [tian 40 feec da
not irtlpacl qlountain views to the notth and west for ;ne res~dences in the Urnversity Neignts p9velopment Buddings A
~ an0 8 wdl encroaclt in v~ews from Univefsity MetghtS t0 the nofttledst.
Buddm9 A aces enctoach mro tne solar protacGOn areas for tne property ro che nanh of the sita. T~is area is wiu~u~ the
Hig11 haz3ftl Zofle fOt BOulqer CfeBK 8f1q flBw COflstfuCtiofl i5 f10~ (JEfRldied wit~lifl f11i8 3~6a. Thi4 8fE8 CuRBl1(Iy GOnlBifls
, the tennis courts for the Harvest Mouse. The solar protecuon area is tor the protection of salaf equ~pment.
Staff is generaily support,ve of ~his request for consideracion o( me S~te Review Piannmg Boara can consiqer trns
, reques~s ba5eq on the informauon prov~ded witi~in this document with the exeepaon tdat Ine solar drawings neea to De
adju5tetl as intldateq in the following tliscussion Tna reques~ wiU oe scnenuieq for consiaerapon by tne Planning Baard at
me January 18, 2001 Plannu~g Board meatmg. Please rnntact erent Bean. Sarnor Planner if you have addiGonal
, questions about ihe informaAO~ contained in this document.
,
~
~ II. CITY REQuIREM~NTS
, Building Pesign
7he soiar analySis for pa9es 7 t.12 and 13 of the site review ne2tl to show tha solar snatlow (or a 35' builtling placed at the
legal lot setp8cks. Please proviqe the cafrected Craw~ngs on or before danuary 3, 2007. A solar except~on is requ~red to
be considered for duilqmg A. Tttis portion of tlte site is adjacent to the High Nazard zone for Boultler creek, which makes
~, tna area nortli M the creeK unbuifdabie The tennis courts for the Marvest rlouse tenn~s courts are present an this poR~on
of tbe SdB. Because no budq~ngs can De plaCeq on wdhin the area north of pudtlmg A, staff can support an excepUOn to
~ the soler pratection requifements for buddmgs w~U~in this area.
Fire Protsction
~ Pnor co final inspectian. (que to budCmg configuratian. size ana emergency access limitapons) appbcant snatl install
stanqp~pe nose connect~ons in each euiiqing ro serva m[emai comdors. Aarian h~se, 303-441-3350.
Landscapinq
, 1'he lanpsCape plen ~s generally apprapnate for tnis srte, wrth tha exception tnat adtt~GOnal lendscaping in the form oi trees
shoulq de added to the southern portion. Trees should be added to along tne south propetty line to v~sually bufler tne new
residences and parking lots from the UnrversRy Fleights neignnotl~ooq.
~ Miscelldnaous
A cortect;an needs to maae unqer the notes secUOn of the canceptuai landsCape plan L1.1. unqer ri6 the burlap materral
, naeda to be ro~leef haek at leant 2l3rds doWn inro the planpng hae anq thc excess material Fut qacK [o efle DasB Of t~e lopi
halt Etlie Busse-3oRde, Forester, 303-441-34~8.
, Neighportiood Comme~ts
Two letters regarau~g develapmen[ rnncems af this sde nave been received frnm Peter O~etze represeanng the Unirefsiry
Heights ~e,ghaors. Copies af ine ietter are avaiiaoie ~n the ciry file
r The following d~partm~nta had no requireme~ts: City Attomey's Office
IB. INFORMATIONAI. CQMMEN7S
~ AcwsdCireulatfon
i. Se~B w~ii accep~ attachea s~aewa~ks along Taft Dnve, wnicn is a vananee from me Ci[ys collector street sWnCard. The
pfOpOSed 2ttacheq siqewalks a~e consistent with che ex~sdng attact~ed walK in front of the Good Samarrtan Hames and
~ ¢resarvea exisOng VeCS IOCffied bahind the exiSting anC proposed sidewdlks.
2. StaB agrees w~th the conciusinns of ine Tratfic Impacc Assessmene that the projecYS traffic impac[s wn1 Ce minimai antl
r mat suttic,ent Traffic Dema~a Management wauld oe achieved with u~e uansa, picycle, and pedesu~an optians oupined
in the raport.
t 3. A COOT Access Permit will de reqwred for tlie access onro 28'" Streat defore consuucoon is tiegun. This perm~t ..ui
be coorainated mrougn Steve Durian at 303=441-4493.
i a Before approvai of tne f~nal plae, Construction Plans for improvements on Tah prive in accorqa~ce witn ttte Ciry of
, Boulder Oesign anu Construcrian Stanaa~as wdi be requirea.
~ 5 The applicant will oe responsible for curo and gutter, landscaping, hghting, and sidewalk improvements atl~acent to
Tah Drive
, b. The proposed pro~ect inc~uaes worK w~tn~n a State of Coioraqo r~ght-of-way. A C.D.O T. rignt•ot-wey permil is requiren
prio~ to mil;aGng construction.
7. Fire Iane marlungsfsignage w~ll be requiretl i~ parhmg lot areas ana at fire lane east ot Bldg. B. Atlnan Hise. 3fl3-441-
, 3350.
Building and Housing Codes
~ No addiiional requiremencs, Steve Brown a41-3172
,
~
~
, euilding Oesig~
The bas~c bu~ldmg design, coior anq matena~s are cons~scenc with matenafs and colors fo~na w~mm th~s area
~ Rrainage
i. Pnor w approvai ot me 6nai piac, an Eros~on Coniro~ Pian fn accordance wim tne Cay of Bouider Design and
~ Conslruetron Standards will be requirea
2 Prior co approval of the final plac. ~ne appucant wdi ae required to prov~de a F~na~ Starm Water Repott ana Plan in
, accoraance w~~h che C~ry of Bou~aer pesign ana Construction Standarqs. Scott Kunna, 303-4a1-312i
Engineerinq •
, Further datail of tne qes~gn of tne rctam~ng wan syscems wnI pe requ~retl at Technicai oocument Rewew. Tne applicant is
remindeq ~hat no port~on of a, ;, ,„ain;ng wall suuccure, inGua~ng faatings, soii nans, etc. may encxoacn in[o neighboru~g
propernes without permission from the aa~acent praperty owner and recoraation of the apreement. Consiruc[;on
easements for any worx, ~nGUd~ng gratl~ng, on ad~acent praperties wiu be requireC prior to irntiation of any consVuctian
, accw,ciea. Scott Kunna, 303-a47-3121.
Fload Conbol
, A ma~onty of the subjec[ property ~s located within the 1 o0-year flood plain for Bouider Creek. My worK wahfi che
regulatory flooa piain, meWtling grading, will he sup~ect to C~ry of Boulder flooC plam development regulaGOns (BRC 9-9)
and wi11 reqwre a floo0 plei~ development permit. An approved flaoa plain development permrt wdl be requireG pnw
builtling pertnit apptication. Pcr Soction 9-9-8 af tha B.R.C 19$7, "no penon shell estaplish afl 2tee (ar au{otnadlle
, park~ng in any poRion of tne flooqplain wnere ilaoq qepths exceea e~gllteen mches." Gratle elevations antl fboay,ain
dapths for the parkmg sk1US wilt need co be prowaetl wipt the plain development permd applicauon. Contact Alan TBylor.
, 303-441-4232.
Fire Probctio~
Fre alarm system and occupant natificauon requirements to be per Umfarm Builtling Coae ana Un~fortn Fire Code.
, (Aprian H~se, 303-441-3350.)
Land usea
r The placement ot the huildings can be tlebateq as ta whemer the southem duilamgs should pe mavea north co prov~qe
aqaiuonal open space alang ma soutl~ Coundary, or movea to the south to provitle the more actroe openspace areas as
shown on the curcent pians. It is s[affs unders~anding that the current is more desirabie DeCause it keeps pte more acGve
, (noise generanng) acuvities on the north siae of the builqing ana tnere ars ~ess impacts on view naRh ot t~e pui~qings if
mey are placed closer to me hius+tle. As a result, ehe puiiaings are serving as a nuffer to tne resitlertts m Unrversiry Heignts
from a Saunq perspecdve Smali setbacks along ihe sauth property ~ine will rsduce the num4er of residents using the
, south portians ot me site for recreauonat acuvrties, thereby reauang no~se ~mpac[s on the adjacent neignoomooa. If it
were no~ for this c~rcumstance, staFf waultl have saongly encourage U~e nu~idmgs ro he pullea c~oser to Tah Dnve and have
the recreaGo~aVopenspace areas w~tt~m ~he south poRion of mis site
, Land:caping
Please note tne lollowinp requirements for l,nal fanqscapa plan:
, Plan draw~nq at a sca/e o( T- = 10', t^= 20', or 1~= 30; fo mclude:
, Stantlard tipe plock ~~GudYng scale anq tlatE
Scaie
, Nortn Arrow
Oaoo
Location of p~operty 6~es and aajacent stteets (wah street name5 iqencd~etl). ~
, Zornng and use of ad~acent properties.
Fciscing ana propasea ~ocat~ons of ali.
• Building (oo~pfnu of sttucwres
, - Siaewdfks ana curb cuts
Parkmg locs incluamg Iayout of parWng spaces, interior perimeter parking Iot planungs, Dike paths anq
pBtlESSfi8f1 w81kw8yS, tlrive aiSles 8fltl Cufb isla~tl5
- utdfies ana easemerns, mcluding fire hyqranu, water meters, 8, neignc ana iocanon ot rnerheaq hnes.
, Ex~s~ing loca~ion, sae, anq type of all :rees 1 1/2~ cauper or grearer
Where fencing is used for reqwrea screenmg, a sca~etl qrawing o! the fenoa elevauon.
,
~ 3
, Pianhng and i~r'rc~ation speafcaNons
Final irriga[ion plan mtl~ca6ng type anq locations or irr~gahon and of plant group~ngs hy water req.uirements.
, Layout and location of a{I landscapetl areas incfuding.
plantmg stnps aiong all streets
- parkmg Iot screen~ng
I : mtenor parhing iot ~anascapmg
perimeter site lantlscapmg or scraening
- a0 ofrler 18fld5c2ped areas
~ Botan~cal anG crommon names ana sizeS ot all plant material anp ground cover.
~.ocations of au proposeo plant matenal, shown at s¢e they w~ll pe witnin 5 years of in~ual planun9, and
approp~iately spacetl.
Proposetl planting of all grauna surfaces. Grasa surfaces must pe ~den4fiea as soa or seed witn me blend ar muc
, speCif~ed.
LocaGon, size, ana species name of any piant materials proposed for removal.
Lacatwn, tlesgn, hereht and matenais ot other ianqscape improvements, such as:
, _ earth hertns
reaining wdlls
- fences
, _ water features
outdaorfumislungs antl artworh
- aasn enc~owres
- 6ghts
~ - p8v@Q drEas aftd! af walkwayS
aee grates and pianters
locatian and ueatme~t of any proposed detenGon ponas.
~ l.oC3tion ana aimensions 6t s~te distaRCe uiangles at all intersections of streets and curo Cuts.
Summary graphie artd chaR with calculauons fo inUude:
, Graphic drawmg w~m focaiions anq dimens~ons of a11 raquirea ~anqscaped area5. InGutle dimensions and rotal
area for eacn requirement. For example, each fnteriar parKing iot island snoula mGude dimensions and total
Square footage, ana tne totel square faotaee of al1 interior parking lot islantls shoulq Ge calculated.
, Tarai toi s'ize (in square ieec).
Ta~a~ pancin9 lot s~ze, inUuaing at1 drives and dri~eways (in square feeq.
Tota~ parking loc in[erior ianpscaped area required and total providea (square feet).
ToWI number af panang stalis pravideq, rotal numper requirea py cotla.
, Total amount o( perimeter landscaping proviqed, to~al requireq py caqe (square feet).
To~al numper of street [recs requveq anq tha 2o[ai prwitlea.
7ota1 quanGry of planc matenal required ana the total providecl. Bev ~ohnson, 303-a41-3272.
, Laga) pocumants
1. Any easements required by P.S.C.O, for tne pawer po1e5 alan9 tha soutn and eas[ propeRy hnes shoultl ne shown on
~ u~e Prehmmary Piat.
Z. Ji11 pub6c unliry easements shall be ac ieast 25 feei wiae The propasea 20 feet wide Drainage Easement an c;,a
, eastern Ime oi Lot 2 must ~a w~ueneC to 25 feet. Revis~ons to ihe prei~m~nary plat are necessary. Scott Kuhna, 303-
441-3121.
Miscelldneous
, No ponion of t~e struclure, includmg fooUngs ano eves, may encroach ~nto any puniie right-of-way or easement Scott
Kuhna. 3o3~a1-3121.
, utilities
t. Pnor to approval of the finai plat, tne appGcant w~n pe requireq co prov~ae Uciliry Construction Plans m accoraance wit11
the Cdy o( Boulder Desgn antl Construaion StBndards
, 2. Maintenance of tne sandloil interceptors, all private sanitary sewer anG storm sewer lines; and pnvate svucwres sha~1
remain u~e respons~biGry of cne owner.
, 3. The lanascape irrigatron system requires separate water serv~cas ana meters. In aaQ~uon, separace water Plant
Investmen[ Fee's must he paid at Gme af Guildi~g permd. Serv~ce, meter a~ct tap sizes will qa reqwred at time ot
buildmg permd submitta~.
,
, ~
a Tne apphcant is adv~sed that at the ume of bwlGmg permn application tne fotlow~ng requirements will appiy:
a) Water anq sanitary sewer Plant Investment Fees anp servrce I~ne sizing will qe ev8tuated.
b) Srorm Water ana Fiooq Management uul~ry Plarn Investment Fees (S~orm PIF~s) wdl de ca~culaceq for tne project
ana musc ee pa~a pr~or to scheduling a finai inspecuon.
c) S,nce u~e ouilaings wdi oe sprmkiered, me approveq fire pne pians must accompany me f~re spnnkler serv,ce Gne
cannecpoa perm~tapphcahon.
5. Trees proposea to de piantecf in the ngnt•of-way or in pupiic uturty easements shail ne ~ocateC at Ieast 10 feet away
trom eaistidg or future uGlit~es.
8. Ai1 applicable C D.O.T perm~ttmq w~ll be required prior to iniuauon ~` t0~struMion of uTdittC4 i~ th2 C.D.O.T. right-af-
way.
7. Ail watM meters are w be psaceq in City R.O.W. or a public utiliry easement, Duc me[ers snall not be placecf in
dnveways, siqewaiks ar Denintl fences. Scott Kunna. 303-441-3121.
5
~
~ SITE REVIEW
, General Criteria
No sice review appi~cat~on snalt be appro~ed unless ~he appro~~ng agency finds thar
, I. BSulaer Vanev Cort~prehertsive Pian
,~ ~'fhe proposed si[e ptan is consistent w~m the purposes anq policies of the 6auloer valley
, Comp~enens~ve Ptan.
, ~Les Tne proposed develapment snau not exceetl tne maximum qensity assoc~ated wi[h ute Boulder
Valley Camprenens~ve Plan ~esident~al land use tlesignaaon. Aqa~honally, iF U~e qensity of ex~scing
resiqenual qevelapment w~ch~n a 300 foot area surrounding tt~e s~te is at or eaceeps ttle tlensiry perm~ttEd
, in the Boulder valley Comprenensive Pian. tt~en t~e max~mum aensiry permittetl on the site sna11 not
exceed Ihe lesser of•
(i) The denslty permiaed in che 0oulaer valfey Comprohansive Plan, e Ra acrea of qevelopaolo
~ land area exists on this propetty. This tnnslates to a maximum ot 181 units at one unit
px 1600 square fa~t ot p~r unit.
, (ii~ me mazunum number of urnts that could ce placea on the site wimout waiving or varying any af
tne requ~rements of Chapter 93.2, "8ulk Requirements," B.R.C. 198i. If the buiiqinga are
lowereci to 35' maximum heleht, the amount of requlred openspace fo~ this site ieduC~s
, hom 20Y. to 10•/., the applieant has proposed developinp the rssldentlal units on the
srcond floor elevation of tha sita to keep them out of tna tlood plain. The patlcing could be
placed belo•a grada and flooq prooied, allowing the buildings to b~ lowered. ft is possible
, to achiove the density ~equestad or greater if the pulldinga wero Iowersd and flaod
proofed,
, II. Si[e Oesian~ it utdrzes s~re qesign techniques wn~ch enhance tne quahry of the project. In
aeeermirong wnelher mis sutisecuan is met, the approving agency w~ll consiaef tne follawing
fectors:
, A Open space, inGuding witftout limitation, parks, recreaGon areas, ana piaygfounCs:
ves 1. Use9ble apen space is arcangetl to be accessiCle anc3 func[ional; USah4e
~ openspaca has been previded adjacant to al- buitdings. Tha spaces are
larpe enough to accommodate rocreational activitiea and passive out door
use.
`, na 2 Pr~vate open space is prowdeq for each aetacheq res~dential unrt: No detacped
uniu are proposed for this site.
, ves 3 The pro~ect prov~aes for tne presenauon of natural feat~res, includmg wdhout
timitacion neai[ny iong-hved trees, terrain, and arainage areas; Thete ate ~ot
, iasntified natural ueas on this sita. Existing treas have been iaantified and
will ba preserved or felocatsd wnen possihle on site. Approvo0
engineerinp stanaards anQ precticss will be used tor development on steep
, slopes presam on this site. Drainape through and irom this site will be
dssi~nsq to meet city siandards.
ves a. The open space prov~des a rel~ef ~o me aensicy, bofh witnin t~e pro~ect and from
, surrouna~ng qe~eiopment; 7he location of the apenspace within ihis project
~
, ~
~
^ can 6e maved ~o the southern portian oi this site and the builqing5 moved
to the narthern portio~s of tha lots, but chis site is adjacent to a hiilside ttfat
resu{ts in a buffer to the site. Plaeing me openspace adjacent to the
, hillside wnuia place the mors active use of the site adjacent to lawer
density rastdantial uses. The impacts ot the taller builqings proposetl far
this site are teduced by placing them closer to the hilisides. The further
the buildings ara moved to the north, Lhe rtloro thoy disrupt views from the
, south• Ttte placement of buildings on this site has been a compromise to
~ mest concarns e:pressad by ~he neighbornood to the south.
, ~ 5 If poss~ble, open spaca is linkea ~o an area- or cdy-witle system This site is
adJaeent to the Souidar Creek Trail systsm. Paths wnnecting this site to
the trail system hava paen proposed.
,
p. Sanascaoma:
, yes t. The pfoject provides for a vahery ot plant and harC surface mate~iels, and tne
seiection of materials prav~aes a variery of colors ana contrasts, The ptaposad
landscape plan is wnsistent with tltis clita~ia.
, ves 2 The pfoject prov~aes s~gm6can~ amouncs o( piant matenal s~zed in excess of ine
Iantlscapmg requiremants of Sechons 9-3.3•2 and 9-3.3-3, "Lanascaping and
Screening Requiremenu," and "Lanqscape Design Stanaards," B.R.C 1981: and
,
~es 3. The setaacKS, yaras, ana ~seaC'= ~pen space aiong pubhc rights- af-way are
ianqscapetl to pronde attracpve sueetscapes, to e~hance arcnaecturai features,
, and ca contriouce co tne aevelopment of an aaractive stte plan.
C. Circulatian, inGuding wiVtout limit2qon the U'8nsportation system N8t SeNES tlte prapeRy,
, wneUler pub~ie or prrvate and whettter wnstructed by the developer ar noC
ves t. Nigh speeas are aiscouragea or a physical separation Detwaen sveees ana tne
, pro~ect "s proviaeC, Parking wilf be malnWined on Taft Orive and curb
axtrn~ions have peen proposed at speci~iad loeations widtin ths
development to reduce tra~c speeds and enhance pedestiria~ movaments.
, yes 2. Po[ential cronflicts wrtn ven~clas are minim~zeq: Cut6 cuta have beoR locatad to
reduce traTfie conflicts anq curd extensions have bea~ propasW to
improve pedestrian and car movements on site.
,
ves ~ Safe ana comenian~ connect~ons accessible to tne puai~c w~th~n cha pro~ect and
between me pro~ect and ex~sting ana proposed transportation systems are
, prowtled, induamg w,u~ouc Iimrtation streets, biheways, peaesUian ways ana
trails: Sidawalks and uail connections will pe proviqed to ttta Boulqer
~ Creek uail system, and side walks a~.., ~a 28tl1 and Folsom Strests.
, ves a. On-site (aahties tor external IinKage ar Nrovitleq wi~h other moaes of
transportation. where appl~caGle, Conneetions to th~ future Z8'" SttaoC translt
, wrridor will be available co this site through the Boulder Cfeek trail system
and sidawalk connections to 28`" Straet Pedestrian accass ta the Nop
trsnsit Il~e a~ang Folsom will also be available co this site.
, yes 5 The amoun[ of lana aevoted co che street system ~s minimizea; Taft Drive will
Ge the minimum street width neesssary to meet ciry stanqards and provide
safe ua~c movomrnts.
,
,
, ~~
ves 6. The pro~ect is designea fnr tne rypes of aaff~c expectea, ~nGua~ng wanaut
iimaauon automotides, bicycles, antl pedesmans, and provides safery, separahon
from iiv~ng areas, anq contral of noise and eahaust, and Tait has been
designad w mest city desigq staadards tor tha typa a~d ~ature af «afFc
expected to use the street.
e~s 7. C~ty cOnStnsctwn standards are met, antl emergency veh~c{e use rs facilitaretl.
City design and construction sta~dards witl be meet with the planned
, improvements to Taft D~ive.
D. Parki o.
~ 1. Tne pro~ect incorporates ~nto t11e des~gn af parking areas measures ta prov~qe
safety, canvenience, antl separaoon oE peCesu~an mo~emencs from ~en~cwar
movements; The puking lots have been deslgnad to mee~ airy design a~d
eonstruction standards. Much of the parking wili be u~der plannsd
buildings.
Xes 2. The tlesig(1 Of parking areas maKes eflicrent use of the tand alld uses the
min~mum amount af iana neeeasary to meat ~ha parl.ing neeas of ine pro~ece,
most of the parking has bean piacad u~qer planned buildings rather then
use other portions of the site.
ves 3. ParKing areas and lighci~g are aes~gne4 to retluce the ~isual impact on tne
ptoject, ad~acent properties, ana ad~acent streets, and Lipht of pa~king Io~s wili
de required to met city standards. All Iiehting is required to be directed
onw th~ aite. AII li¢htinp is requirea to be directed onto ths site.
ves 4. Parking areas uqlize landscaping materials to pravide shaae in excess of ine
raquirements in Secpon 93.3-12, "Parking Area Oesign Standard$' B.R.C.
1981. The majo~lty ot parking praposed fo~ this site will be under
bulldfngs. Howaver aqditional landscaping adjacent ta the uncovareq
pa~king lot in tho southoastern portion oF the site should be provided.
E. Buildinq.pesi qn. lroaCiiicv, antl Relationshia to the Existina or ProooseA Surroundina Area:
ves t. The bu~ld~ng heignc, mass, seaie, onentaGon, anq configuratwn are wmpaGble
with Ine ex~sting cnaracter o( the area or tne cnaracter established by an aaopted
p~an ta~ cne acea; Thare is nat aaoptad ~efghtiefiaed pla~ for this site, it is
adjacent to the eURA arsa, whicft supports larpe scals duildings with
heiqht of up to 55'. The proposed buildingF will genefally be lower than
the top ot the hillside that runs aloag tfie southern poRion o( She site.
Homes in the University Haighu neighbarhood will continue to hava
uninterrupted views to the ~orthwast. Viswa from this neighborhood so tha
Bouldsr Craek area will bt lost in soma pses.
vas 2 The ne~ght of Cuddings ~s m general prapartion [o [ne he~ght of axiscing bu~ia~ngs
and the proposed or pro~ecteq he~ghts of approveq Guilqmgs or approvea pians
(or the ~mmediate area: Buildings to tha north, easf and west of this site
have comparadle hsights to the buildings proposed. Tite Gaod Samariwn
a~d Harvrst House have heiahts in excess o155', which are not permitted
under currant standards.
_y,es 3 Tne orientauon of bu~la~ngs minimizes shatlows on anq olocking of views irom
adjacertt properc~es: As notad abave, views to the ~ORtt irofil tha UnlYefslt}r
Haights ~eighborhood may be disrupted, but this a~ea is on a hiilside that
~
has a height af up to 45 feet above the proposed deveinpment site. The
duildings witnin the cantrnl and western portions of tha sita wi11 not exceed
39' in haight. Tha buildings in the northeastern portion of the site will have
heights of up to 49' anq may disrupt views down towaro the BoWder Crsek
corridor tor some of tha residents within the unive~sity Heights
neiyhborhoad, peve~opment on north of Taft Drive at pertnitted heights ot
35' would block thesa views.
, Solar shadows wi11 be cast onto the Ia~d north o( this site, but this area is
within the Boulder Craak ••Hign Mazard" zone, which doss not permit
devalopment of new buiidings.
~ES a. if the cnaraccer of ~he area is ~dent~haCte, tne projec[ is maae companCle by u~e
appropriate use of co~or, matanals, iandscaping, signs, ana hgnt~ng, There is
noc identitiable charac[er to Chis area. The site is not within a designateq
planning area. The proposed colors of the new builqings have heen
proposed to blend with colors currently used within the Ctl campus.
e~s 5. 8uiiaings presert an attrecuve sueetscape, incorporate arcttitectural and site
aesgn eiements appropriate to a peaesuian scale, and provide for me safesy and
convenience of pedesvians. The pasic design alsmonts af the buildings
propaseq arn appropriate for this site. The puildings have parking pWced
at the frst floor olsvations of the buildinps, ro;sing tbe habitatsle floor area
for moat of the buildings to the sscond (evet, aut of tho Bauld•r Creek flood
plain. Pedastriart eonnoctions to all buildings have baen designed W
provfda padaauian movements within and e:terior to tho site. Curb
extensions have bwn praposed at togical loratlons to promote safe
pedastrian movsments batween both stdes oi the street
e~s , 6. To the extent practical, the project prov~des public amenities and
plannea puouc faciunes; Not applicaGle to this site. Conaectiana
to the Buuldar Creak Trail nave been providad.
~~ 7. For resiaential projects, the pro~ect assists the commun~ty in proaucing a vanery
of nousing types, sucn as multrfamily, townhouses, anQ aetacheq single-famdy
un~ts as well as mixed lot S~zes, number of bedrooms. ana sizes af uni~s; This
site will provide studant housing ana low incame housing consistent with
the city dafi~itian for "parmanently affordable" housing. An elderly
housing project is also presont on this site. Three rypes of housing
iaentified as nesded within soulder wi1l bo avaitable on thls sits.
ves 8. For reside~ual pro~ec~s, noise is m~n~mrzea oeMreen unas, petween tuddings,
and from e~ther on-si~e or of(-sae external sources tnraugh spaung, lanascapmg,
and budamg ma~er~ais; The moro active openspaca elements oi this sita
have been located along che nortn sides of duilqings ato~g the sauth side
oi Taft p~ive to nduco noisa to residents south af t~is sita. The vast
mdjority of parking has bee~ pl0ced under the ptoposad buildings.
yeg 9. A hghting plan is prov~tlea wn~cn augmencs security, energy conservauon, safeey.
and aestnaqcs; The tinal lighting plan will be provided at the time oi
building parmit application. 7he lighting plan will ba requirsd to meet city
standards for design and consvuction.
f
~
, ves t0. The pro~ect ~~corporates the natu~al environment into tne aes~gn anC
avo~ds, m~n~maes, or mit~Bates impacts to naturai sysrems: No
natural environmental areas have heen idantified ~o be present
, on this site.
, yes 11. Cut ana fiii are mmimaea on the site, antl the design of DuilOings
conforms co sne naturai conto~rs of u~e land 7he applicant has
- p~oposeq m cut a partion of the hilisids alony the sauthwestem
partion oi this sita to kaep the iow cast hausing out af the
~ Boulder Cresk flaod plain. Fundinq requiraments for these
units require the puilainqs to be placed outside identified flood
plains. The city has identified low cost housinp as a major
, prioriry within the airy. The hillsida cut wiil be roquired to meet
engineering sta~dards asauring ata6ility of the existing hillside
if this plan is approved.
,
F. So~ar Si[ing ana Conswcc~ore For u~e purpose af ensuring me maximum patenual fw
, ut~iizat~on oi soiar energy ~n tha ciry, aU appiic~ntc for rae~den~fal site roviews
shall place sueeu, io~s, open spaces, anq buddings so as to max~m2e the
patenua~ for tne use of solar energy in accoraance wan trie following solar siung
critena:
,
yes 1. Piacemen[ of Ooen Soace antl Streau. Open SpBCe ereaS 2fe located wFlefevef
, practical co protect huilqings hort2 snaC~ng Cy other huildings w~th~n She development o~ hom buitdings on
aa~acent properties. Topography and a2ner naturel leatures and constraintS may jusQfy deviauons from
tnis crtterion. Th~ duildinps wiMin this sits hav~ 6aan pfaeaq on a north sauth orianWtion and io
tho southem portions of ths aiAs. Both [hosa desiqn efements help to reduea impacu on
, propossd and s~isting building locations within this site.
~ 2. Lo[ Lawut ana 8uildmq S~Gng. Lots are onenfed anG Cuildings are sitea ~n a way
, which maz~mizes tha solar potential of each principaf nuilq~ng. Lou are aesigned
t0 (acditate siting a sUuCture which rs unsnatlea by otller nearhy stfuttures.
Wnerever practical, Cuildings are sdea dose ro the north Io[ Une to increase yard
, space to tne soum for tetter owner contrat of s~ading. This site is adjaceat to
a staep north facinp 11IIIslds, which limits solar access for ths southem
portion of the sit~. Thw buildings have bean placed cloasr to the south
, property line to reduee noise and huilGing height Impaces on the Unlveraity
Heights qevelopment The new 6uilding narth of TaTt OAve moeu thls
eriteria.
, xce non 3. e~nqina Form. The shapes ot oudcfmgs ara qes~gnea to max~m~ze unirzaaon of
SGlar energy. Buildings Srtall meet the solar acceSS protection anq Solar siting
requirements of Cnapter 9-8. "Salar Access," B.R.C. 1981. The buildings have
, been dasigned to make use of tne solar requirements, but the northeastem
building daes encfoach into the solar atea }vr the property to the north.
This area is within the eonveyanae zone for Bouldar Creek and no new
buildings ean be construc~ed in this area. There are thrsa 4ungalows In
, this aroa that will nat pe shadowed by the new huildi~gs.
~ 4 ~andsCaoina. The shaaing effeas of proposed landscapm9 on anjacent
, tiuildings are minun~xed. Landscaping ale~g the rtorth, aast, and west
property linos conform with thls pfavision.
,
,
~D
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ .
- 0
~
~ ~2 k
~ ~
~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
t
~~~G +~' N 3 C
N ~ C
~q~~~~~
~~ ny,;A
Y;~
j~I~
kb~N ~h 'l) A
'C i m
~~~ ~ ~ o A
~ N h~ m
z 0
~ ~ h
m mM
~
`~
m b
~
WW~~ A
Y
Bez~ Gl ~
o~m~ ~
~~Ax
~~s~ ~y~
A m U
~~c x
kme~ ~' ~ ~
n y
N
°
m
~ z
~
N ~
~ ~
n
O ~ r ~
se ss
~ ~A
2Z Z=
~ ~
.~-~ ~ ~___ i
1~
' - D~1JSl1'Y CALGULATION
~
'
~,~
FI&~,°05t~UNlfS
BUILDlNG A• MARKeT k-0iE APARTMEMiS lHmRR~M
•" 76IDRGl~M
" 38FCROL~M
"' 49$7RLLWM
39 70tAL
,3p
0
6UILDfNG 8• MARKE7 R4JE APAR~E7Y75 -- -~ ) 73 15
WlLD1NG G~ MAR'CEf RA7E APARThlEN15
(INGLUD£3 3t{/DENT AOMlM57R4 tIOM ,4RE4J .. -- !7 !m 17
i07A1 hb4~¢KE7 RA7E UNI f9 -- -- 19 63 87
EWLOlNE D^ PERNdNEN11Y APrO~@JABLE IfOll51NG
(fOR BALE CONC9MIAUUM9 • 35x Of tOJA1 PROJfLi LWI13) 14 M !6 •- qq
iDlA1 PFO°aSED UNITS !4 /4 35 b3 !76
'
1
'
,
'
, ,
, ~
,
,
,
'
'
'
'
KEYNDI'ES
i ao ~aR aoa ruw n a:aw ro rw~K mewwieur.av w mru~
.av
' a ur~v uVae rsau rar .uo m,¢rse crte: nea¢
x.~nr ut~
! R0.MCpNy1'NKEXM1¢ P p!lINFEIPApfµ4lIA4.11/iFIL !1 MIlLS`~
~ rer Wm 3+ a~uc wmr r wner
s t.uursee mwsa ne ru u~r ue~ a euama i wtlraramm
ta+eb.u°e Pt.ew ro rawr~ sna~ra,s qccese aav
w~r raiua~
• s e~eenrn nereerc ~ae a rrAarravrercu
'
, i nvcwq nm~n eme a~ remnaw ac+te
s.~eamw wut uunuas erama~ mar~
rert crvtt aumvs~i n rus~e e~s~utx ,
s wrwm b FdanMSamac/m
' ie rorusm emewc.r ro ~mvw
a rrtuwe
~
' m nua cce ~~m
~: nse raersv~ ru~+ rox m~2 ~eac+r
,~ ~,~~,~,
1/ K£ 4M1Si~F[ P~AII fq~ ALL
u~avavas
„ ~I , ~ ~ III I I I ~ i ^ii ~ ~iii
EX/57ING UNITS - POULDER GOOD SAMARl7AN CEN7ER
fNDEPENDENJ LlVING
A99197ED LlVMK•
9K1L1ID NflR.41NG
T07ALS
~cFrcisvcr ~e~n ~ se~n ~ or erwivuerrr~~nv~
1JNl75 f-0R DEN51fY
'" 49 17 8Fi 71
9 !A "" p 5
"' ~j• ' •• l7 l1
3 7! li 91 39
• 39 ~INIT$ tl»7N ? B~5 • 60 / 5 KNNALEN7 UNITS PfR BED • 17 K7UlVqLENT LNf73
5/1'~ PL,4N
N'
~
SGALE: C• 5p'-O°
RJ7A1 PRDPG3ID GNff5: /y> µy/7g
70tAL EOULDER G~D S,41YARl7AN 87UIVALEN7 UN175: 39 UN175
rarac oAUSirn na yarra
-. _
~a • ~vu~ns
Y/LL.4GE ,4 r 6c'JULDEI? CR~~K
A HlJLJ!-,54MlLY RES/DENtlAL DEVELOPMFMf . ¢56p°TCTfBfR 292'9
s~r~ ~EV«w ,~~9~ s~~„ra~
AMER/CAN CAl`~U8-
nr.au ~.t.c. rG ~v~ ,a,ecNrrECrs, P.c.
63113. f/LDLfR5 GRfFN ClRLLP, SiE 33~£ 739 17M 31., 8(IIfE Um
FNGLAIY~D. CO 8OllI DfNVER, LO P010?
71~.5~.7650 PXONE 303.8927651 PJ~NE
770.57B.7854 FAk O
~
,~,~.~.1659 FAX
~ui~l I
1~
1~
1
1
i
1
1
1
,
, .
, ~
'
,
'
,
'
'
'
,
'
'
~ ~~ ~~~ I I ~~ i ^^~ iii
PROPOSEO 6 REQUIRID PARKING
EV'JnNe ' amJ~ktlVI4NCINree
GbTk
_.. GibM1w 1Neaan Hrao~ Nlr.usl9idrroe IO~µ
~tl ! ry
i.x.w u ~ m
lkRYp Nui tl~
~eu~ rwlno um~ a n n
ro~<ig ~.w.e w
aC'~M i i ~s
IWIICryytryl~
PW~g pwrylrM ! A b Ip0
IpLICryliry~t
/I/k!r( /iOWdd p
ar4ag Ibaevcn
~~d r
_ _... _.......... - ~,o -r ............... ~.
~°Ra1J,f~ M4£rFl R4If W't~
UHID
ilFO 1ROroav hdrow -B.e.mu~Meiaen lp)4
a ti
e n a
C H K
iwrWn~ N d
hho-g Aqw.4 par
!/M' I\Y ) !
2(s1011'OfM~
PiMlp Aju4M b M IIi
IeNpHlrw!
PW:Ly ProvM,O p~
hrkNg RM~m~aa
Fyw~tN O
~rNOr~s
r un rsGe stxo nqw e rnr~om a ercue raeem~o • ~ nnr wm
> rrmr wuw aax m~F n daa/PEer vaw:uas eiau, rrPmN. w aa~ Pse ,eau ~ rnr u9~
, a.cw arrrn.~ee ru¢ n aux~ ~ra,a~s nacuJe n rnew eva.orur v ~wc a e~vaa ,am~
~ nb, u3~ u JrahDt cRVt dK1e a.Y~1 uAp sr m9m tavr i BtrRr
5 LL~OBC'Vfi DYFiEe e P4M1~ BIIBPMS F'~ lWLLION Cl~FO % fbblLW / FKpIF/qAID
raauraxc~^er.awi a inrmrn ,aapswcw
f PASlM9 PR~PGPIY LM1t
i FlarraPn r~~v:raexn tm~e
u rrPiuc ewx rro~rag aa Y/plll~
n~nr~
~,e-cnam.m ncc¢+f~nte
a Reramo~s craue n¢ crs ma ~ui~raanw eraec m.mr+s~ ra~ecen arau
auemaa . rr in~usID
9lbt4b r vaiatM. rw~,ror
AFLFfANE ~
b M! U!~ Hf4YE~fIIECOfG
'
b BIPFd[f P60.
M4
:O Ip! lNID
~ii ^ ^
MGl`RfID ~NYFYElVILY A~L:4GYF ~6!ll!
lPfliR'
-..._... bM IYlaa~ b<repr Jbdrow rtlreaa I0S4
M N I6
~,w,. ~ a ~
PuYry,g pyµr~p pr
MG -NM 1 Ib y
rouiareo~.r~
PIHI~ AqWM u ~ r n
IOWIpfEf/Mt
a~rvq enwew b)
Pe/kdg RWUCtbn
/sau..i.e p
P,4RK/NG PL,4N
N
~
~(E: ~~= $~~-Bn
P.6YLMN ~e RPViRm ~deeiua nuonn
hMW naLetron nan~utl
.aqm~.e rnvrsd ~ °°
NulaYr 6btl MYNIm IAe M Y
,nM.o au u,ri, m ar e
aro.mew uro. sr n m
10/K !M 9s1 b
vr~~.,a~~ ~r aou~p~,e ce~~,~
l11~ MGtetkwl
81A(Id
A HIIL'fl-FAMlLY RE5/DEYtIAL DfvELOPMENI 65 SEPtEhBER a¢~9 ~~~
S~rF R~v~,~w ~~,9,~ s~,~rA~ I
.A
N
Ah~U3.
~l C ~
L
C
L
rl JG ~FIN90N ARCF!ITEGtS. P.C.
6311 S. FlDDLER$ GRFfN CIRCLE, 97E 3:ID-E 13m lifF! SL, SPl1E ll~
fNGLE4~D. CA AL911 DENYER, GO 9979i
7~5~8.7EbID PFl~NF 393.897.72~i7 FhdNf
7~.5~.7654 FlJf 0
3D3.891.7~59 FAX 3
~
. ~~ ., ___~ .. I I ~ I J I ~~~ ~~ i i ~_~~u - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i i i i~~ _~~~~
OPEN BPAG$ &(lMMARY
aar,ica.mp~ z.wa„
wa~a.e....c..r.mo oa,nx as~viun,
•• a+w~era vme. r aiioa'
LEGEA'D
veixncs ~
OPEN 3PACE CALCULAIYON
OPEN SPACE
~D SAhfdRITAN /i0~ l): 36.d~ SF
LOJ 2 2~0 8F
LOT 3: 47,77~ SF
LDi4~ 71,955f
RJ7A1: I~~% 9F
BALCONIES
/PqRT OF GPEN9PACf1
GGV^D9,GYe4RRAN(LOiIJ: N/A
LOTT. . 39 g4(LONl69 x~ 9R' 74Pp 9F
L073. 5184LGONIES x t~ °/j' d'/~ 9F
LOT 4: 44 g4(LO,yl65 x d9 SO' 33~ 9F
TO1AL: IO,~,^O 8F
(l01 /1DDRlCNAL
GPflV9PAGEl
TO]aL OPEN SPACE
fstA~ 9.4HiRItAM lLOt lJ: A8,8t6 9F
10T 2 ~,7¢p 9F
LOT 3: ~5,9~ $~
LO7 a.~ /b,dd5 gF
TOi4L: f76S75 SF
ti
[
N
~
~
KEYNOrES
r m mu rtcw run n rntu+~n y norwm
1 fpGJ WSAR) lL0.L SdF tl ltliLB~ D W~W2
f ftOAQlNKV4KGKA£' D WIYi$ b IO~Itl6
~ a°D4wKt u noru+m # M~/u9~
5 IOfWID 9 1bIWp i Atllfg~
s iorusm
. wsrar: rmreerr r.a~ a wiu~ n'nruem
] I~DID /R)I'RI/ LNT H AOIIblD D AGIIb~
e ~m~ wm
m ivru~
f ra~a~
'
~ WYB@J PAM:I~ n iarue~
~ WI(N~ m .wv~te rrema r .un ue~
OPEN 5P,4CF PL,4N
r ~u~
3t NJiUl9
b LAf Ndl4DNJ AMV£ N
31 tWID IOGbY / S?RY W
~ FM/IIWi / R6CGflJGLLM~
ACGEtl4 R4>
w-o~uetm ncnmemt[
IAKFVO BIqGL
SCALE: )'• ~'-0^
v1LL,4G~ ,41' 60ULDER CREEK
A MULtI-FAMi[Y RE9/Db1tlAl. ppYELA°MENt OS ,4EPT~~ 79f~9
rJ~r~ R~YI~ REY15/CN 9LA'7l7AL
~I
CAMPUS•
~
TI ,/G JONN90N ,4RCNltECT3, P.C.
63/19. FIDDLAZ'3 G.4fIN L/RCLE, 57E 33D-E 13~ I77N 37., .4f/!TE A~
ENGLElIkk7D. GO ~11! [~VV6¢, Cp 9~)
Y10.518.7659 PINJNE 3ID9997.7661 PH~NF
77m.5~.tfd4 FAX ~
~
303~891.1259 FAX
~^~ ^ i~iu~
1
1
1
1
'
,
~
,
~
' .
, '
'
,
'
,
'
,
'
'
,
'
~
s a~D,eooMis a~r,~ rm~~ s~
4 BEDROOM/4 B,4?N 1233 SF
TYP/CAL 3 6EDF~'OOM ~ 3 B,4PN UNIr TYP/C,4L d BEDROOM / 1 B,47H UNl?
1~5ID 5F AVER4GE 1650 9F AYERAGF
OY~R,4LL PROJECl' ~UMM,4RY
M,4RKET R,4 tE UN/75:
(BPJ~ OF THE 707,4L MARKET RA7E UNl7 SF'J 70T,AL ° 76,364 Sf
PEI2M,4NEN7' .4F~ORD,ABLE HOUSINCr UN(7'S: 7'OT,4L ° 43,4PPJ 5F
SUM: 7'O rAL = 119, 764 SF
l19,764 SF x 35~ = 41,917 5F
~ M,4RKET RATE UNl7'S ~OrAL SF (NGL UPES 4 BEDROOMS ,4T 11QJPJ 5F
Tl'P/G,4L /BEDROOM / z g,4TN UNl7
°.~9 Sf AVERAGE
TrP/G~L UN/1' PLOOR PLANS
SGALE~B°° ~,~ID"
MARKE7 R47E 97UDENf NOU5ING
Yi1VlT ?YPE NJ? 9F NO.OF UNliS TOtAL UNR 77TE 9F
f eEDFODfI 1,133 $F 63 77,679 SP
3 HEORa7M l,~4i 9f 14 f9,e95 BF
707A[ d7 97,53f $f
AVtR4GF GNlT 81ZE~ ' ~ 1,789 SF
AFF~RDABLE UNl7CALGULAtION:
63 X 116t% SF • 15,6~/D 9F
19 X f945 Sf • 19,85~i SF
95,453 5F X~ R• 16.34-0 SK , g3l9f
ea uu~rs
M,4RKE7 RQTE AP,4RlMEN1'S
PERM4NENfLY AffCROABLE I;OU&NG IINItS '
I1NIT 7YPE AVG~ UNl13F Ak~. Of GN119 70TAL !!N? TYPE 8F
1BIDRCbM~18A7N 9¢YL SF !4 i7,66~ SF
2HECRGbM/1BA1H !¢~ 5f 14 /4,~D 3F
3 BFDRGI~M/3 $47H !&~ $F 16 fB,86~ $F
70rAL 44 43,4A9 SF
AvER4GE- ~N? SIZE: °.db SF
PE/2M~4NENTL Y AFFORDA6LE NOUSING UNITS
N07E: 8lIEB Al~ UN17 L4YOGT5 !UlLL VLRY
VlLLQG~ ,47' BOULDER CR~~K
A MUL7YFAMLI' RES/DENtIA~ ppVELOPMEM ~ S,~Pt~MgER 70,d9
u~/T~ RFV/E7V ~sio,v suerrrrac
AMERICAN CAl1FU8•
rlTAN L.L.G JG JONN90X ARCHI7ECT5, P.C.
es~as. FroDtEes r~x a,ecte, sr~ ~ao-e >s~ nr~ sr., suite nv
ENGLP~7, Co ~Iil DENVER, CO dm~7
710.578.1~` 1'FIONE '~O3~B9I.7A61PlbNE `
T10.578.7b54 FAX O
3~.8921~59 54X L.,
~
1 11111~
1 ~
~
1
1
,
'
~
~
~
~.
~~
1
~
'
'
,
,
~
'
1
,
~. ~e~p~~ u
~, -s,3H., ,~
~ ~~~ ~~~~~
~
. _ ~,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~woa~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ P9' ~
~ AtU69NUNwR~oWB 41' ~
39 ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ,~~ a~~ ~
~ roearxvmcpxeoe
~WB9SPoATYifflIDi2fW AI.IESTWALL PAFRWOSCRPENWALL lF SFAI4IFLOORI~GNf ~~ FfAORHCIG6f
I e 5}91d ~ I I I I
HWDAq'B'---Y-BUP}Hl-+t+'----SAAfMIYE~L4ND3GVbHUPfER-V-
~ ATTA'fCi~ ATfAiCpEp ~
' BmEWqLY . SmEPlALK
A EASTEL6VA?IONATMAI4'~TRA7EqppRTA~'NfS
~_,~~
~Oti - - -_' . . _
~~~~~~ i~~~~ ~B~- 0~0~_-
~' ~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ e8 ~I ~ H~8 ~ ~ p~ 0
, ~~~ ~C~ O~B~ ~e~ ~e ~
h e
Y~ ~ ' ~
~ - D NORTf3ELEVATIONATBUII.DING`B'.1dARRETRATEAPARiT~Ni$.
. . U 1fb"•1'-0' ~. (SptiTHF.LEVA110NSIMQ.AR/BW.DIIIG'A'SA~9R) .
GONGEr°~U,4L ELEY,4170NS
SCALE: %k" , ~, ID"
~
,~
~1 ~~ ~
~ ~ ~ e
~~m~8
7CiPOFFI1GFffSY&Ippg
7~3' -
-52.7AHOlT
IAWBSTPoAT
i ~u~
n~ccesrwu,c
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ 4~ ~~ .'
v/LLAGE ~4 r BOULDER CREEK
~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ALUh4WE4W-iWA9
PQSSRIN
~ ~ ~ ~ PINIAHF100R10@St
\ WEC[Fim•5}ABJ'
`--PARRIH(i SCAE@I WALL
A r1127hFAf1/LT" RESlOFN7/AL DEVELCPMENt ~ 03 NOVEMBER 1W2b
5/l'E R~V/EW
AMFR/CAN G4MPU8- I
TlfAN L.L.C. /G JONN90N ,4RCFl/7~CTg. P.C. 'I
6317 9. FID'uLERS GREEN C/FLLf, BTE B3D•F
'
' 730 17TN $T.. 5Ul7E OID
~
~
fNGLE~U
~
LT~ GO 8~111 DfNVfR. C-0 ZO70?
'..
7~.57&76~8 PNONF 3~3.8927~1 PiqNE / ~~~
770b~.Tb;4 FAX \,/
303b927~b9 FAX yj ~I
1~
i~
1
1
!
1
!
,
~
,
, ~
,
,
,
'
,
i
1
~
'
'
J _ ~~~ ._J~. I JI ., JL
~~~,~~~,~ i
xasr8m•xui.a
wwasreo¢mwmmr~r ,
5)864
, . ~ ONORTF3ELEVATIONATBUILUIIJG`C'-MARK&TRATE
' ~ .L9"~Pp'.
~~ ~~~ - _
~~0 ~~~ ~~ o ~ ~
~~C~ ~0~ ~1~~_ ~~ ~ ~ ~
~a~.~~~r
SDOp -
NORTHELEVATIONSAT ~PERM/S'prTLypFFORDABLE ft0U5ING
'.ve~-I'a^ . ISOVnin,6vAr~aaSmmA.e)
GoNC~P~U,4L ELE~,4 rloNS
' SCOLP: fm" , I,.O"
I ~ .~~~ ~.^
~ ~ ~~ =43.SAB~VB ~
WWESTPo4YT
L~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
~
~
~ ~~~~
Th~fwAll
:~~~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~g...~~ WY1DOlVS
u ~~
~~~
9"-~n~ro-~z9+s
`~
YlLL,4GE ,4 r QOULDER CR~E'K
A MULtf-FAJ4lL1" RESfDEN7/AL DfVELOPMENr m3 NOVEMBER 7¢Ye
srrE ,e~~~~cu
~M~IC
NC ,4MP(18•
•A
L
L /G JOWN°,.ON ARGNJfEC79. P.
63/18. f1DDLER'9 6REfN ClRCL6 6Tf 330£ 739 17TH 57., 9tl11E 1!~
ENGLEIti~D, GO Z~'11 pENVER, Cp 2m~1 f
77m.57B.76~ PLqNE ~
3~3~897.1BK7PNAVE '7
77~5?&7G54 PAX y3.892.7P59 fAX J
'
~
~
v
0
m
~.
~
~
~
'
~
~
~ 3N/7 .(SN3dGMd
~..~.._....._..~.._.._.._.._.._.._._.
._.._.._.._.._..___.,`5,..~..~.
~
n5
m m m ---5
~ ~
m
m m m
- ~T
~
~
~
~
' ~
y~
`~~.
_-_~
Qp~.
0
_ ~ ?J3ddll9
3db'~60NV7
~
mmm ~
m
2
~ S
~
mmm
I ~ ~ -~
~ mm
mm ~
- -~
~
4
~
~ =r
m
~
~
W
~
Q
x
3N17 -11213dOL'd
~. ~.._.._.._.._..~.._.._..~..~..~..~.._.._.._.._.._.._.._..~..-`~.
~
W
~ Ya~
~ 3
'~
' ~
~
~
ti,
~. '~ ~
a
g
~~
~
~
9
~
.
Ih
3N/7 .11U3dQ3'd .
~
W
~
W
Z
~
~
W~
~
'
~ ~
I I
~ ~
~ O
~ k
~~ ~
~~ u
~ ~4 ~
~ W~Zpk
~ ~j~`3`[
'
, 0.
~
~~~~
~ hn
`/
w 9
] r~~T
~~b
~ Qo@e
m~^
w
~ g W
0
~~ ~
~
N
Q D
~~ W
U
~ ~
U
w
~
q ~ ~ N
?
~Q W
E ~~w
w ~ ~
~ ~V ~5~~
~ J
u ~
~j
~ Q
U~t ~ ~~
"
W
~ L ~
~ Q N ~z
~
~~ h~~~
'~~ m~i~~
Z
Q ~
~ z
~
1~. K
14
~
~
- - - - - ~ ~ ~ ~ . - - - - - - - - - ~ -
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Ib
b
n
~
~
~
Z °
cy
z m~
~
~ a~ ~,
m ~
~'
~
J
\
~
n
N
m
~
m Z hi
~ y
~ O
~
L ~F~~E ~
~
~ ,
~~
N
,m _
~~ ~
y m
~
AT
A
A
2
~fi
~~
~"
m
•ny
~Y
` a
~~
A~
~ m
~
nT
A
A
A
2
U
aa~w ry3 t~ ~ C
~
~~
A Z~ m ~ ~ a A
~~Ob r2 J(~ A ~
m C
- ~ C
m
x~s~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
m~~ ~Cwy
N ~
~ '
A A ~
n
m
~
~ ~ tr
m m A
~ ~ ~ ~'
~
~~r°~ry~ ~ y ~
mNC ~
~
~'~~'~I
~~~~ ~ m
O
km~m ~
~ ~c
+nb
0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~
'~1 ~ ~
(~ N ~
~ ~ ~
ob~~
n
~e~ o~< ~ o.. .
a
E
i iii ^ iiii~iiiiu ^^i
LC 'E
~ ' ~
+~ ,~~
LA~9CAPE LAND:X.'APE
BUFFER 1AFT fJR1YE &1FFHF GCOD 9AMAR1IAN
n~
.
~
W
~
a
~ ~ ~ i
i
~ ~ ~ '
I
LAND&.'APE lAND9G4PE
~ BUFiER TAFf DRNf BUfFER GP~ 9AM4,¢7AN l~'
sirF s~cr~oNS
N
~
xncE~r. sm~-m°
~~
NARVE571dNlSE 7fNN15 CO~R79 ~ULOfR CREfK
~~
FL4RVE9t F!~!l5E /ENNlS GOUR7b POULDER LREIX
v~~t,a~~ ~r e~ul~~,~ c,e~~K
a nuln-F,arncr ,eFSroEVnat ~v~toPr~Nr ms se-r~t~rre~ m~
SITE REYIElU ~eEV~Slon~ sua~nrAL
AMERlEAN C,4MPU9-
7/rAN Ld.L. JG JONN50N ,4RCN/fEG75, P.C.
6317 5~ FlODLfRS GREEN GIRLLE, 57E 330-E 73ID 17fH 57., SUITE Il0
ENGLE711?^D. , CO ~lll . DENVER, CD E9102
710.S~.7b.49 PiIONf 3ID3.89270b7PNG7Nf
770.S~.Y6N FAX ' ~~
3ID3.8927~59 fAX
~i
1~
1
,
'
1
'
'
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
'
,
1
,
,
,
1
~ i^ iiii~i i i i
~ ~ ~,~
~ ~~~~ REr~c uaRV~sr
I;VJ(15E N07PL PARKlNG
~ ~ i NARYEST ';
' ' NOUSE '
~ ' I N07EL ~
~t ~i I
+ ' i
~ J I i
~ ~ i i
j i! ;
i j ~~~o
~ ~ ~
,1.\/ - --- - ~
/ ~ ` i POUiDER EK ~uSE ~ E~E51 '~eF~
~r `~ --a. TENNIS GOURTS
/ ~ BUf~EG :.
r ~
~ ~~
l ~ ~ ~ P,4RKING RFCsAL NARYE57 g~ P,4RKING ~v~ g~
i ~
Nous ~rFC caeaNas
~r
~ w, -~. ~'<*;~.
~ ~:. ~ _. - ~'~" ,
; :; .:.
... ..:.:: ..::.... .::
.. . '~~
~~:.. -----------°------------~~-.:_ ~; .
~ ' "'_"""...
~ .. ' ~ ' i f. . :~ . `:• . ~„e'+.. _'~`''~;% ~
/ ~... ___ .__._.._.._..___.- . - - ------------- -----_.--- - ---- ; ~ ~ . 21 ..
--------------- .. :>;.f/
• _"_ ... . . ~ ,:-.:;
~ _________"_ '_'_____ _ ________"_ ' ______________ . ;
' EXIST R?AN CENIER ~ ~ ~,
' ~` . 9 ING EOULDER GOOD SAMA . . ~ ...
ti STCX/ES 1570R1' 9~ lf9 ';.~;,:~
i is~ofzr
PARKING i s [,s ~ 'r~
i ~
z ~ i `~ ' ~
NR-E ~ - -------r---------- ------euasav ---- -+~- ~ j h
_ ^ ~ - ~-~- -~ UI
~ ~ i ~
~ ~
8UlLOlN~ r p .~uc~ swacau suac~ ~.s~wecu~ euaoav e ean ~A~ s~ ~.,._.~ c~ :. "...:.,. ~. ^` /
SNAA;YO i 3 PM m UAY m 9 AM m II PM g PM m 9 RM r.4~T ~R~YE 3 Pff \:v:. ~:.:a ~ ~.~.: N
811P7f '/.~ '. .~?,~.. (:.~
~ •b' p. ~•: ~ll:ii:~i... .~%IR~.
~ :.\ ~ . ~ ~4,~!~ :i~~':i?..
~`{.: ~.'..:
~ ~:~:I.~i:. r,:: : ':..:.};.4, , ., '~< ~ `~~J d~
.... . ~ .~ :::..
::.': - . . _...
. . ....... , ..T ~{
iiv,.r .....:....... ~
$IA ~1 . .. ~ ":. . . .... . __ _ ___ _ ' .°.~._ /.1 I'::,'.;.'::.: 4J'. ~iti~~~ •`i. I ~
~~
B ~:.:. _ . . ~ . ~ ... .. ~ . ... .. . rr.4 -Q~~ ~ 4YllrfM1h ~ ': ~~1
. ~c, T ' ti ~.. . ( .. +~ - Y, '. __ _ ___ _ _ _ _______ ____ ' .:.;'.'.~'::
I< s r. `;~ '_~ 3" - - ~,y ~»:;"''~ 0.1
. ; :. ..,.~c~:: a.,-~.. ... . ......
~ . ~ :•. ~. . , ~ ~ r....: • - - "
~:::. .., : , .,~.,' r.. ~ . ~. ,.., }'.~ i' w::..: ~.~ . "M:' :~~::.;~:::
(y.:i:?, .e~;.,: .; ~,r~ n. . ~ : { ~';~. ~... ::. ~:.~!m~4"!~~ ~ ::~..'~` . .n~y>::,..:. + ~Y
.r::.. 'o-,~4..,-.'4.v., 4 ly..~\~.. ~5'r:'' <t, '.fulR~ Ismlqtg:',. _':? ' ~~v.,.. ~ ~::~:'::}<'.. C~in, .: r:~•.. ),?»>.,;y1
\A?G;~1.\ \,r~\~ ~1.,~1,Y,..•i\~'!v ':tv: ~~.:.,~ ~ Y;"i:?:~:i' ~~~ I
I: ;;;~:: ..e::...... . \ _..i " :::r~~ns.x~g::~~ 3~~:'r.i~.e: , o'.n~. °,z~r.:...G::•) ~: ~'~~..:~z,s~i,~' ' 'G v
~~.::.: ~.~~ ~% ~'~i;~~ ~ ~Xe!~F!~"~C!3:i?~'.j!i: ~e,Y.;o);.:;:?~?,Ri?,..',~4.''~,~'Y'.I~.;.:~~ ~:'r~y„ ~~41~4 }~yr+~ :::
~?E:::. ~. .ti .,<:f _ q`C'+.;\':~\' \ \' ~,.~.. ~(; r
/ ',', , . : `::.i . . .
PA(2KlNC~:;::~::. - ~ .ifj : ..:4i: .. :/ i
I f~ i raer sroe~~s iYi'~%~ : ;;~S ;
~j.:~??i '1~ ~. i: 3IE3 5 !5 ': ii:! : 70R1 ~ ~ ~
/ APARTMfN7 ~.... ~. ~•::•::~5~ ::..;:~:~ ~ ;
( 8CllLD1NG 4~:?i'r:: :::;y'J:: ~: ~:.\::.~. qq~/
i i:;:;f \~: ~::,~.. ~i~~~B 3 PH ~ i
r ~"~~; :. ;~~ ~\ ~.j i i
.:
~ i ~ i i
~ ' '__ _'"" I'""'_"""""____"___'_'___'________'_________"__'""'"'""___'__'__ _"____'_"""" '"'"""'"""J j
~ ~~ ' I I~ ~ I ~ i'__._.._._..___._._.i_.___.._..._.__._pi
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ I 9~/~ i ~ i ~
~ ~ ~ 1 ~ i~ ~IONE O157RIC7' ~ I ~ ~ i ~
j ~ ~~ i i ~ R_E ~ i ~ ~ j i ~
I ` I ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~
_- -___, ~I ~ i ~ i i i I i i I ~
i ~
i
CNtlRCN j i ~ + ! I ~ f i ~ ~ ~
I ~ I I SIN ~ FAMILY RE EN f5 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ i i
~ I ` _ ~ ! j ~ ~ i i ' I
~ ~~ i-------- ~ ; i ~ j ~ I
ZONE Dl91R1C7
P=E
LECrEND
t,~.,~,~.T.r~, ..~
k~:'..:::::s,.(;``.j,:,...~ SHALl~WS r~t
~ ~ 9:~ AM 3~2f9 PM
f ~. 3 ,~/IACplIS
~I p:::::::::~:::::::i~:S:.:i At l2~ PM
~~
g~~
~~ /
~v
SHAWGl5 CA5ifD SY
A 35 FT FL,4T RGOF &JlLO1NG
s~,a~our ,an~a~ rs~s
M,4RCN 1/5~ / SEP~EM6ER ?!57
N
~
9GALE: !,, 50,.~,~
V/LL,4GE .47 60ULpER GREEK
A l7UL71-fAMlL7 RE5/DENiIAL DEVELOPMt7VI ~i 3EP/EM6ER ~
5/ rE R~Y/EG! ,eEVrsrax suernra~
AMER/C,4N GAMPllS-
1/tAN L~L.G. JG ,~NN50N ,4RGFlIffGtS, P.G.
63115. FIDDLEY25 4RFEN GlRCLE, 57E 33~-E E3~ f7iH ST., 5Ulif I!O
ENGLELLl90p. CO Pfllq pENVEQ, (A ~702
710.51d7650 PH'~NE ,~3.891.7¢G?Pid~NE
71Pr.579.165F FAX
303.891.7~59 FAX
II
iiu~i ~~i i ~~ ^
~~ \\
q~'~ ~
.n~~ PARKIN" ~ ~\
`CY
~
/ APARTMENT
, SUILDING
'6 ~
~
PARKING
APARlMENi
BU/LpING
CXURGN ~
~
~
i
L~GEND
~,n,rT ..~
(::i:',~>im~^:^iii:~I SHADpIlS ,~7
09 PM
ID~ AM 3
r~<>_<>:>__:_~! 9:
:
i p';';.~;.^.-.-.-.-:-.7
a
"~
mm
k 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v t
rz
Pn
REG,4L
N,4RVfST
youse
raor~c
iiuu^iiii ^^i
8RlDGE RF~ac ,~a,ev~sr ~~
NOUBE NOTEL P,421'fNG ~
~ l~
~
~ ~i
--J ~
!'~CIJLDER ~r C REGAL NARVE57 ~
~NN S ~ R7'S ~
PARKMG RECiAL HARVEST PARKfNG euaccw
NOGSE NOrEL CABANAS ` nP" ~,~
s e Px ~~,
~ aav9~ m raPrr ~.w3~ ,
~e.•-..c-:_S°_ _ ' _~ c'-___v..•. .., . , ..,.,-.. ' °-wrrs'-- . ... _ _.._.._.. """'9 ~:
---------- - ---------------------------------~- - - --- -- -- -------- ----, ;
-~ .
EXf51ING POULDER UOJD BAMARlfAN CENTE,E '~ ''- _' i
9 STORIES 1570Rr 5~ If5 + M
isro,er . , _ ~-.5
raFr o,eivF
~-e~
~I I i i
~ ~ I I
~ ~ j>,..,..,,~,e„-,j
i
I 1 I
~ ~~ ~ I ~
1 ~ ~ ' ~
i ~ ~ ~ iI- i
I i I 51N ~ FAMILY RE FN 5
,
~i i_ ~ ~ i
i ~ i '
Suac~us cAStm sr
A 35 iT FLA7 RODF BUILOMG
'----'------""`--'-_'_~'-`--..-~_'~..~'"'----------------'-'. .
` ~ ~ ~I
i I I i ~ I
~ ' ' ~ ~
~ ; ~ I 1
~ ~ ~ I i
i ~ i ~ ~
~ ~
i ~ ~
~
~ i ~ I ~
~
~ ~1 ~' ' j j i
su,avour ,aN,a~ rs~s
/uNE ~~sr
N
~
SGALE !'• 59'-O°
~
w
~
y
h
~
V/LLAGE ,41' EOULDER GREEK
A MUL11-FAMILY RE51pEVTlAL DEVELGPMENF 05 SEP7fMBtR :~D
s~r~ R~Yi~cu ,~~,s~N ~,Ta~
AMER/C<tN GAMPU3-
tIrAN L~L~C. JG .~NNSaV ,4RCH1fEC1'S, P.C~
63/15. FIfiDLERS GREEN CIRCLE, 57E 330~£ 7~p (7TN 5L, 50I1E 0~
ENGCElN~~A~' , CO Pfllll
DENYER, CO d07m1
710.51di6.~ PNONf 303~89276~1PFbNE
Y1Pi.S16.1&54 fAX /~
~3.99270~i9 FAX
~~ ~ __
~
~~
t
~
~
~
~
~
~
~.
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
1
'
'
,
LECrE'ND
~.r_{....,.,.-.,r.-. ~~
12:;:;;;;::::: :,;il ~n ~r3:¢m Pn
~~;: ~_ v:_ :_ ~_ ~_;_ ~; (
F,::~i;'i"::":T:.-:-:"':3 SNAA'NU5
t: :;;:;;:::t;t7'sS::::~;::;:3
..................:::::.i Af 11:~ PM
sH~aus casrm er
A 35 FT FLAr ROOF BUlLDING
J .~ ..~~~~
5N,4DOlU ~4N,4L ~'S/5
D~GEMBER 115 r
N
~
9GA4E: P= 59''0"
^.. ~~
V/LLAGE ,4r 80ULDER GREEK
A MULiI-FAMLT' RESIDENTIAL DfVELaPMINi 85 SEPtEMBER 721Z~
5l rE RES~IEll/ Rerrsrv,v sua~urac
AMER/CAN G4MPll5-
t/tAN L.L.C. JG JGWN50N ARGNlrEC?5, P.G.
6317 S. FIOOLERS C~REfN dRCLf, 5/E 33~-E 73~ !UN Si., SUITE !1~
Eii'GLELL/KD, GO BIDlII DENVER, CO EOZDI
719.578.76F0 PHONE 3ID3.8927661 PN:J~Vf
7AJ.5)8.1654 FAX ~~
303.897.1259 fAX
1
1
,
1
,
1
1
1
1
'
'
'
,
,
'
1
'
'
~
,
'
RAL N
7J hE LWA-CN ff E11159N6 IINOE~AWND UPIIPES OAE 410WN 1N AN APPR]pMhiE WAY CNIY ANO
HAVE NOT BEEN IN~PENOENRY 4fAIFlEO BY iXE OIMER qt IIS REPRESENTATK. iNE
WN1AACi0R S4NL OE1FA4fVE IHE EYACi LOCAPON OG PLL Eq51NC UTIlttS BEFORE
~MIIENCING WOAK, ANO 0.GAffS ip BE MiY PEWaNLdE F0.9 1NY ANO ALL DAM0.C{5 WH{d1 ~
Mlqll BE OCCA90Nm BY IHE GdliRACiOP'S (NWRF i0 FNACRY LOCAIE AN~ PAESFRK ANY
PND ALL II1111T6. '
z) u~ woek sxau e~ eErro~EO w ncco~onrvcc ~nn~ TMc'o~crv am cwumucncw
srawe~or es nc an ov ~anw, uw s~nu e~ care~cho ro Me snns~nenow a n~e
oecma~ av weuc wcRrts. ix n~c Ewrrt ma n oes~r~ m~cnr occs Nor a~cr an
SIAWPADS 7XE MFi1ER MUSi BE MMEDIAtELY BAWCHT 7p iXE Ai1ENiNIN Of' 1HE FNGlLLER /NO
iHE dRECiCP OF PUBUC N'~PKS. hE ENGINEOi SHALL BE RESPW9BIE FOR RECOMIMNGlG A
sauna oR u~uan~t saunas ro n~e utt rce q~er arvo nrexovu.
3) IHE MPAO4PL Of A CCNSiRI1CnON PUN WGS NOi RELEYE 11E CONiRACiOR OF iHE
Aesaoraeiux a cu+macnrvc woprcna~ weuc iur~aveu[u~s. nu aensp~vs wo/are
COPoiECTCNS PEpHRm NLL BE ~IFI.Y 1HE WNiRACiOR'S AESPON9pILIN, N:D Ai 1HEIR
IXPENSE.
4) iHEtE PLWS H4VE BEEN CHECKFD BY iflE qtt OF AOUIpER IX1:Y FOA CddFRYANCE MM 1HE
°o[s~ uu awsmucnan srnwoaqos,^ mMVUUUce mm o[w.wMeNr wAttu~nr coxrenoxs,
u+o rar c~tRai cw+ffvna~ ~aaaoru ar vueuc naraovwwrs ~s s~owr. n~[ att's
AENEW WE> NDt YERIFY OR ENSIIi iHE ACCURACY OF IXbTNG OP PRWCAL U~XENSWNS, lINES,
cacaomnxs, a~ wa»~s s~awrt ixaumxc nu cvisnrx um~nc5 sirow~ o~ nor croux.
S~UPIIiY LOCAPWlS:HOHN RfFlECi AVMABIF PECOFD pAi0. 1NE WNIRACI~ SN1LL iNfE '
PRiCAUMMIARY YEOSIIRES TO Pkp1ECT pLL UPLItt tINES 9fOWr1 AND O1NER UTIl1Y LINES
on~~avng ~xat[o, nit ccxmurox sxut awr~cr TM[ 'UDUrv xonncanw ta+mt oe
G+%OPA~O' FtM IITLItt LOCAlES 24 NWRS PPoOA 10 6ETANNiNC Nu51RUCfiLN. TNE OENYER
AI~fAO iFIEPHLNE NtR1BfA IS (5113) 531-6)W.~ W151DE iHE G.N!{R MEliq ME1, 1HE
iIX1-FAEE kW~A IS 1-806-942-1961.
B) EEFORE WJAK BEdXS, TNE CONiRACi~R 93/11 OAtAIN A PERMrt ro W[qH M 1HE PIfIIT-OF-WAY
FliW iHE CIIY AN~ MUSi NOTFY TiE dtt Plqli-OF-WRY INSPF~,CPON SiAfF AT IEASi 21 HWRS
W AMANCf 01 CpIMENtTG CCNSIAUGTON FCiINT6.
7)1HE CONIRACiaA S4ALL OBTNN AND NAINTAIN A CW PIFIE AN~ AoPftOVED SET W CONSIPUC1qN
PUN6. 1H6E OftAWNGS. OND PNT IVEW~D PIXMIIS, SHALL BE AVAIU81£ AT 1HE PROJECi 9iE
Ai PLL PYES ANO SHNL BE MWE AVAIVBIE 10 ptt SiAfF UPpN AEWESi. F fANSIflUCTON
PLWS ARE NOi REO-ILY AVGUBIE Ai TNE PRO.E{T giE, RE MfEtiOP 6 PJAUC WJANS NAY
ISSIIE A SiOP'NOIM OR~ER -fm HAIi 1LL CONSIRUC11IX1 RC11NnE5 pp~qry~ p~/PIIPNCE BY TNE
C~P'iRACiGR.
B~1HE CONiRAC1lR AGWES TO C0.1RY WiX NL %tOM51CN5 OF iHE iRAFFIC WMIPaI PUN AND
iNE'MNIVRL OF UlNGORM iRnFFlC CONIRM 0.~MCE5,' PA2i N, Fpq WkSiqUCnql 9(NqCE M'~
mnmc mrttRa. ~
9J ALL 9JRPLUS MRIEAINS i0pL5 I.ND 1EAIPOPARY SIIOICNRES, NpNI5HE0 BY iHE CON1flACi0A.
SHRLL BE flEN04FD FAUM IHE GRIt~£Ci FlE BY iXE CaNWACIOA. ALL OFBPoS ~1N~ RYB915H
U~SD BY 1NE OPERAtIW 5 01 iHE CGVIAACTqt 91k1 BE AEYOIID, ANO 1HE PRG OCd1P1E0
O~FING CON51AUC1pN ACTN11E5 A1ALL ff R6iQ3- i0115 0.RI'~NA~ Cp~01PW, Y,11HIN /B
HOURS Oi PRpECt COMOt£IION, IINIESS O1NQMISE OIRECRD BY TIE OIPECiOP OF WBIIC WdVKS.
10) iHC cd~m~c~rn s~ui ano1~E mR µo uHO:cM[ cit~arzrna~ u gt ~atnl IN cNna1EA
6-6, 7ROlECT~ON Of iflEES AN~ ftANiS," BWtppV RCASEp COpE (B,R.C.) 1801 ANp iHE qtt OF
. B~~NEA DESIkI Mp O]NS1AUCnCN SiHIOlR~S (~CS). PiL WipSCpPINC SX~LL BE PRONUm
AN~ MNNIAINE~ IN CCYPIIIlCE WiH iHE IPGROVED LPNOSCMING %1N. dP.C AN~ OGS
CIiY OF BOULDER GENERAL NOTES
t. ALL WIXM AIALL WNFORM N11H iNE p1Y OG 9W1~%R SoECIflCAlI0N5.
2 CONiAACiCA 91ALL CONiACi ALL PPP~PRV,1E Ulllltt WMPINIES ANP T~E
qtt OF BdllDFA i0 03iAIN ALL NECESSARY LOGiES 48 HWRS 96CqE
~CONSiR11CnON BEGINS,
]. NO VANIANtE FR(.1 THE SPECIFlCATpNS A~ ND1E5 HEREIN SHALL BE
ASFPhD'MiNpli PAIOR'MtIiIEN APPfl0VA1 BY 1HE ptt OF BOINDER.
a. qLL PHA~3 Of iNE WOAK 911t1. BE ]NFECiN ANO APMMVF- BY 1HE
GN Of BWNFR.
5 EaW ME OI CCNSiRUCTqI SNNL 9E D]MPIEIFD BV A CON1AACi0A
1HAi Hl5 ~EMWSIRAIE- nCCEPfp&E pJqLIi1C1TQ6 i0 ME CRY CF
BW~ER
s. nu muFlC eaHwn si~u caeoAU ro rnE nawcee~ re~aunoxs
sn roan~ iN n{t u.u.r.c.o.
~. au roru~norvs ~nu ca+roRM m n~c nvvucas~ ;saiunaa srr
va~M er n~E iac u+o os+a -
B. RLIERNAIE BEWWG YAIFAIAL S4ALL BE SUBSPNIEp IN UNSTP&E
fAN~ITONS AS DFLG~U BY TIE 4EO1EqNIC4L FNCINEEk nND APPA0IE~
BY I!E Cltt OF BqMpE4.
^I
~
PRELIMINARY PLANS
FOR
TI~ VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK
84NG A POR110N OF THE NORiH HALF Of THE NORTH HALF OF THE
SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF iHE NORTHWEST QUARIER OF SECTION 32,
TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 70 WEST OF 1HE 6TH P.M., qiY OF BOULDER,
COUNTY OF BOULDER, STATE OF COLORADO.
05 SEPTEMBER 2000
PR£PARED FOR.•
~aa ~7M sm~, suih »o
~EN~ER, Cd.ORADO 80202
(303J 892-7062
CONTACE JAMES G. JONNSON
PREPARED BV
~ Drexel Barreil & Co.
-T Engineers • Surveyors
~ 4840 PEARL EAST CI(iCtE, SU17E 114
BWllffR, CALORADO 80301
(303) 442-4338
CONTACE
BARBRRA WEISS, P.E.
Olt LESIJE IJNNCSTON, E.I.
III ~ III ~
: ;~.
;
i;~v
cau unun NonFlCanou
c~rvhx ov co~oaaoo
1-800-922-1987
~ CALL 2-BUSINESS DAYS IN A~VANCE
BEFORE YW OIG GRADE, OR IXCAVRIE
FIXt 1HE MARKING OF UN~EAGROUNO
NQABEfl U7RI71ES,
SHEET INDEX
N0~ ~EET OESCRIP110N
1 CDVIIt SHEET
2 PREIJMINARY MASTER U11LI7Y PUN
3 PRELIMINPRY GRADING PUN WE ~
4 PRELIMINAfiY GRAOING PUN EAS
5 PRELIMINARY DRAINACE AND EROSION CANTROL PLAN
B ~ETAIL SHEET
BASIS OF BEARINGS
BEPflIN45 ME BASE~ ON ME NORM IINE OF ME NI/1, Nt/3, M/4,
51ri/1, NM/A 9EC J$ i1N, A10fV OF iHE 61H PM ~NCN6
N8B°55'JO'E
BENCHMARK
cm or eou~x eu~aiu.wK o-s ~aaho ar me miwsccnon o~
FpSW S1REEfMID BWIDER diEJ(; StAR FA5IFNER M SOUIMME5(
MNCWALL Cf 00J1-EA CREEI( &tlOGE; ELEVAiqN . 5399.B] tltt OF
BW1D6tGANN.
REFERENCE PLAT AND REPORTS
1. °%tkLMINFRY PIAi FOR MIAGE Ai BbJtOER ptFEN" PRFPAREO BY
DRENEL BAFRELL tr C0. ~ARU N01fLAER 3aW (PRP1ECi / 51231-2).
CCNiACi: SOii PIIWNC, PLS.
2. 'Pftp1MIN.VtY DRANPGE RWIXii F~ NLLME At BOULOFA GPEE%'
PIEPAAm BV OWaF1 BAAAELL k W. ~A1W a5 SEPiFMBFF 200q
AENSED 02 IqVEMBEA 1D00 I~~~ N E51W.P).
CWiRCi: lE9JE l1NNC5iIM:, E.I.
3. "9RElU11WL4Y UPLIIY PFPCqT FOP NLLAGE Ai BOVIDER CAEJ(
w~waox^ anwaeco er nAau, en~cLL s w, oaho o~
NOV~I~P ~00 (PROhCi / ESi8J.2).
CONiRCi: IESLIE IINNCSiON, EI.
4. 'iflPFflC INPACi SNOY FCR TNE NLLACE AT BWWER fREER°
PREPAAE- BY OREtII BMFF116 DJ. DA1ED 22 AlKll57 10pp,
RENSE~ ]II OCiCBER 2000 (PflpIECi F ~1B).I),
CGliACi: JEFfERY W%WFLL
6, 7RtUMINANY CEOIECHNIC.4L NYESil0AlI0N, BWLDfli MULP{/,~i~y
PROJECi, 28M 37RfEi AND iNi OAIVE PAEPARm BT CR/MOMPSON.
INO. MffD 18 NOIEUBER 1999 (PRO.ECi / ~0,189).
CONiACi: 1LAM D. IS[NIGA
6. '%tEllMINAHY ffO1EpINIC4INVESTBATON, BWLDFA MN.P-FMIILy
"
' Qp RfC~
MNJECi. R81H SiRFEi AND iAff ~PIVE
PFFPnPE- BY CR/lHW3~P
~ P J'
~
~'
~
NG ~AlF9 PB MARCH POOD (%tQECt # 31,090)
aurnm: wau a namn ~ o
4
t
,~
fp~ '
o
i
°
°
S 1S4I1 ":
1
F
j
~
n/
G
~Q
~
NO i VALI~ WI7HDUi ORMANAL
SIGW1i11RE AND DAiE
mvm ~anar wh
CiiY pAMEN15 02 NOV. 2000
5D 603 E-5187.2
SHEET 1 OF 6
N PR0.IECT LOCATION ~1AP
N.T.S
.
~
~
~ HIG H1UAD 2pNE
a. n~ro+uz sswx
'~~' _~-~.=T= _ -~~ ~S~Yoo~~~~ =:
""" "'" """"""~S 76~.
1 GOOD SAM RIT N HOMES ~
. i~ ~
~~~
a~a.~,~,~ 5
~ NVp/Fy3,iB
.
. ~ '
~ ~IXIYFSY%9lIW~lPBf
~ `_'""
~=~ ._...'"""""""'"""""' ""' ""'
_ •
a
=~
'
c c v
~ _ _ ~
=X =
_ - _ _
~r c a
fv-~(
_ ~ ~ _~_
-
~._-'__
~ ` •
«~~~ Z«~ ~~~',~'E I
~,~.~~ I
LOT 1 ~s~wm ~ '
~~ ~ ~•_. . , .~~
~ lOT2~ `'--
0
0
n
n
rswsm
~JF WAVI
LOT
ae Murc
ummn w
6'Yl4 YA---~
srx
_i _
~
I
~
I ~ PkEYDPoRV~~
W ~~
~ ' S ; W~1
° $
~
~
I
' '!
O 4 ~
~
~ ~~ ~
'. N ~:.
~ i tl~ 6
~ j tl
I
~
~i~ll~l
'
.
~ ~r
`4
, a . 1 ~
ry i
~
!
- ,
~~~,~~ .
~ N89 t
'55'10°E
--
_-~
-1099.25'
- ~~
- ~ -- -
roecma~mev ~ ~~~~
omss ' , ~~~ fiao uux ~
~ "~~$
-
LEGEND .+Qt,^#.d~~~=TW:dvn
Sln~n' NOiES
P ROPOSE D UTILITY Si RUCTURE SUMMARY
1, IXISTNG OPLtlY IWAMN SHOWI A61ECT AWIlA9tE RECORD OAiA
a Q. -, cANIiARV c~usrz Y~uxnrc ._.~. cFUFR wuHA'tt ~mp~l eEYIER
_ INI~R
. COA'iRAC10R S4N1 DEIEPMNE E%RCiLDCATON Ci 111 IXISIING U1WiiES PRbR
~~~T
oi fill
52A1B4
OWM:
528F89
n
52B2M ro ca~smucnort ~
'~ IX SRbP!l.~pFR INV Wi: SD9.&1 NY W(W} 52gZ25 I~ OUT 52]9.~M1 2 A MMIM'J1! SEPARINXI OF f0 {EET HOFIZCNiAlLY 51lALL pE HANTNN[p RiW;pJ
'~6
O PoM:
S~
B6 HN M(9}
My WT 4B2fi6
B
0 P~NtF1 Wa1Ek NNN ANO SANIi~FY SE14Li4 AIAIN.
~ Ap~ ~
INV IN: .
SZ18.0'i : },15
SP [:
INV Wi: 5281.0/
52'I8.01 3, p IIINMW SPARATQV OF 5 iffi HOARCNiALLY SHALL BE YRINtNNm BEl%tfN
-
~ f% SRbY! WLK9IOt ~,H' p~ INV WL 5!]].9) OflIFI:
MV IN (19 SR83,65
M8P% ~ OPoFlCE % A'IF P~Pk1F1 Wq1ER MNN ,1N~ SfOfd1 yEYhlt NAPL
~
L4PCFO~FNLIFR 510.ql.tMEP..... . ,., . O OJ RIM: 518286 F
iNV m
s
ei I!N Wi: ,
54I8,94 4. Pil R09' DRNNS 91A1t BE MNNECRD IO IHE MNPOSFO Si0P4 ~ENfR NAIN.
9 wv w(rh ax~ea9 ~
):
I
V IN sz
ae
IX SLWTAN(Rl~~i L% B" P14' S~I[ S'NEA
, INV IN ~Ek
SRM.39 (NWk
N
I
V I
' SYBia9
O~ ~'
S~'S4 5. ALL SiORAI MNApIES LOCAIED 1fliHW iHE fOD-YFAR fID00 RAW SHALL BE
NV Wi:
SD0.19 N
N (SX~
. 5201.J9
INV Wi:
51BI.96 NS(RLLm MiH A BOLPNG-ME COYFP TO %EVWi ~ASS OF COVFA.
~y FK WA]lRGa£ ... .......... ..... EC SP" k1IER
t flM'
O
S191.~ INV Wi:
Ob
Pok 5200,89
5]BS.55
E
O H: .
520J.,H
AR FLOCD PWN
6~ S4ALL BErWSRALLEO X%1H A'NA
R 1AItl1T
~
E
, INV Wi: 53i'l.45 MV IN
(r~
szeo
s INV Wi: SR1.51 ~ B
IE
iNF
T1PE CO
~.
Cx ~~~
........... ., v
. ......... I
IN
(~ .~
0 `
"
"
"
°
k O RIM: 5184.84 :
INV WT .45
5R
5l00
25
c
c 1. CO
kRm PMKNC qPFAS BENEAM 011t-ING
ANO iXE
D
, BJILqNC
C
'
'
EX W)fR YALVf ............ .. ...... m INV IN Iw7
IN41N S.
} 52)5,1D
SD5.36 . . roqy
~y,}~p p~ ~II1XµE$i pppPpN 6 BIIININC
B
41PLL pRNN i01ApMH ORAINS MHICH
~N1. Bi GR'I~ECIED i0 RiE PPOPOSED SPNItARY SffRR MAIN. u1 PqOPWEO
EK IR9IIR bEifR _ ..... ..... ....
.....
., p INV dlf: 52I5.16 O~
INV Ltl
5 SP8259' ~&" i.ES. 1AfNCH INWXS SHALL BE iL00~ PROOiED i0 AVq~ S10RM WA1FA INROW IN10
. (
~:
INV WT: 5]81.39
y/g1.18 INV Wi: SYi9.69 iHE SANtARY SEWER SYSIFY.
E,C YAMlk£ .~....
... ....... ... ~
......... ~ Sraa/ a~+!^ uaxxn rc
ONG
5]6231 y y~' F.ES B. ILL Ep51AC SipiN SEWEA 9NXN 91,1LL BE AUIOLW p~PoNG CONSIfiUC-IXV.
PRW03~ SiqlN SENER NLER IN iOFi pRIYE SHALL BE F18ARGE0 ANG S4AIL
~(lp{TM/E .............
............ ~ ~ rJ.l:
0 5390,31 MY IN
(N'Xk
52]B.W Nv Wi: 5~g.ce
YAtdl FLOMVfE EtEV~iroN Of EqSTNC MIfT SiftUCNPES PPOP030 SiORId
IXV IN' S285.SB MV IN (SN~: ST/9.[p SEYER OUIFALL SNll1 MAICN N1VEAi Of [qS~NC OU7FMl.
~ Po~~ INV Wt: 52&S.q9 INV M(5): STI9.50
_ ........... ............ ~ WV WT: 52'18.9U 8. MELHNlICAL EqIIPMFNi Ai CAAOE AIALL AE FLOOD PNOOfE~ t0 PqEMNT WRiER
0
Y PoI.I:
INV IN (WJ: 51~,50
SxBM1.Xi
OPoN:
5ffi512 FROM ENRRNC Ok AfLLM~AAPNG'MiXM THE COMPONENiS OVRNG ttNqPONS
OF 1LOWMG
- INYIN (S~ :IB4.JD INVIIt 527&B] ~
INV Wi: 51&.30 INY Ni STI&]0 10. G4dkN WARF BNPIERS SNALL PE WNSiPUC1ED ALQVG PA~POSFD SANRARY
OPoM~.
53BI
85
O~:
52A2.pB
~ SEY.EA MNN AN~ SiOAY YYkR NAIN MERE iHE Po55911tt Eq5i5 RNi
6RWIp Wp1EH MAY BE UIVERiEp OR YlfiiqTIXd Ci (RdN~ WAhR ALCNG 1HE
, IMlIN (N): .
528294 1NVXV: iY]&5] . MAN M~Y OCWA.
~ INV IN (5): 53&l33 INY Wi: 5t]&47 it. 8UIL0.NC V11Utt gRNtE LOCAPONS ME gJBJECi N CHANGE ANp 91Pll 9E
!NV W!: 528284 ' :~ COQ4DMAtF- MM AflClIIIECNRAL I,W LWpSCpPWC PIANS
~~ ~:
_„__ Drexel, Barrell & Co. e~9~~ae~ s~~yon '~ ~` ~ G JOHNSON ARCHITECTS PC ~~
.~~-. «+u vr~n r.ut c~c~c su~ ,i~ muua. cnertmo enw~ ~xn «:-ax ~w imi sntar. su~ „o , VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK
°~ ~°a"fr °~ ~°"0° ~ Ctl0^~° °~ro (^o) ~~ oEmrtx, cota~+m eozez I~ULTI-FANILY HOUSING
~ e~o Hm .e~xic wrt ro amsr, mur~w exx (arol u~-ava po~) esx-wsz 28M AND TAfT DR
tllMACi: LESIIE F. IMNGSfON COMILT: JAN6 C, dOMiSON ~~DER. COLOWDO
`
12 ILL Utllltt INES SHl1l BE Sq&ECi i0. A ID'-0" SEIBA6( fROY ALL SA1E-
eaSnNC a+o crewos~o mcES,
~~W`~ ~~+~ Icm cau"`w~s ai Nov soool~~c ~ro PRELIMINARY
I~"~"'~ ~~+ MASTER UTILITY PLA
depxo ec
i
j
i
i
IXf
_ Z:
a
Y.
bi
~I
i
4y0~ ~20,.~- =0.~ . 40-- ~80 ~ i
SCO~~-~~
i
Ppp REpiS
OlPTaAN.Of} ^
9~ N
~ ° 15471 "'o
~.
~ Not vnuo wrtHart oeiar+u.
SIC~lANRE OND OAIE
os sfr 2aoo E-5187.2 2
N w~e'~ _ ~~ mn~vcw: uF
, 5D 603 6
~ ~~~~ ~~ II•~~ I ~ ~~~~ ~~ ^ I IIIIII ~ ~I II IIII ~
,
1
1
'
~
,
,
~
~
1.
1 '
,
'
'
'
' II
, I
1 I
I
'
1 I
~
1
~ ,
~ •.
r.7 ( ~ .., ~xa
i ' ~ .
~ NO-YiAR fLaW PWN ` ~'~
~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ' ~;~ • ~~'•.
~
~ tS `~ ~'cM~ittNCE zON[~ ~ 1~
I~i-lf--~ ~ -~- ~ `~n~+r--.~vY-==Y =~%(_~ _ :
(
~ ~ ~
,~ ~ ~~
~
i
~~ `~j~
li ' _ ~-y~w~ ,'~
1~ ~
ii r 52 5 '~ ' i
i i
~ hry
~ ~ ~v ~ 1
~ ~ I
i b I ~ I I
I 1
I11 I ~ ~
I11 ~v~~
II ~i I ~~,~ 1
I i ~ ~
i~
~$! ~
~~;~ ~ h
Py~ '
' ~~
; '
!
,
~ i j
,
`.
~ 'i
~
' ~
' d
~ ;
,
,
, ~~
,
,~ '
~` ` ~~
~
,
~ r: ~~,,_"
f~
' tz1 :~
,~
~k~ ~~ ~. - ,
.~-i
~ ;~
I ~ ~
xnvno ta+[ ~ .
. . N'~ '~' ' ~
r '
y~. ~ , ~ ~ ~~ ~~
a ~
~• ' ~
~ ~~~ . ` '""_ " _ _'
n '• ' ~ ---- -- -m~;c~.~~}..;~ . ... ---
~_ s -%_ _ 'p _-~ ' =g'=-g_ _,*__ _g` _ _:_ _ -.- __~- T _g~....~ rt% ~~+~'+~+Es.- _ .. .:. ars. ....... ... '•~-L
-'~~ ~'•e.-...:v.u... ....................7..-..-r.:nc++~ ..., -~L:.~~1'i::.GL~ua-~Z~* __-_-_' _"~'-'~~~`~~~_'X--F' ~-R- +x_ ' __ _>'
a~+ , • i ~~.e.~e.~.e~...~ ~ m.,m
~w.1~.~~,m.~ ~.~. ~.~ ~~~s~.~~.s ~~ Aa~ ~ ~.~.+~ ~r~.e'~~~~~°~~w~ ~.m.
i
i J _~.-"_'-
, i.i . ~ i . ~ ~ ~ . -~_.
LEGEND
~ GOOD SAMARITAN HOMES
~
~ LOT 1
N
~
F
3
, A
x~ I~ zo io o so no
i
~~ ~
scuE: +'=20'
~ '
~
I
~k_~_x_'_,~__ O O '
~ ~
,
~-------------~---
,
~ ---' ,
--------- - ~
fK M'kh1F'fOG1E C0.VIIXIR _. ._. ~~~3.k4,_"-~ GRPAE B,3N( ....... . ......____ GB
£( M'DEN LU4RpR ......... . ... --"_r.s~5"" " LOW PqNi ._._. ........._.. N
PROPp${pIN1ERYE~IhiE CONiWR . ...... `5364-'~'~ iCP BACN OF Glf~ ..... ............. iC
aROOOS[D iNDEx cawram ~ +5285~- RouwE .._.__.. .......,,., r~ m rt
Hiqi PoINi .._......_... _._..... HP
I
.~ur
~- 'mdmQ-~, r~ .,.
~3~ - ,,-n r _~-~~~
~ , \ 'Y . ~s~ ~ _ '~~ I ~e ,, , ~
~ '~ rw n...:~. a ~ I~~ _.,. .. ~ 52s ~ ir xoorwwM, LOT 3 ', 7
~' 1 ~ ~ I '^- . o AY~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .. 4 :' '~ o
~ I' . : ': ,~ + ';-t r i ~ N o
' 1 '~'^~ . . i . & ~
_,
~.
,.
i. ~ ~ r~. ~~~" ~ 6~ ' '1~-. ¢t _ ~~-~ ~~ ~~
}
~,~ , ,~ ~, , . "'~.~r , ~ ' - ~~ . ~ .~LOT 4 _"' ~,+t r- i `, ~. ;;~.
, _:... , .,.. ~
~y
i' ~ i y ' ~ ~"`~ - ~y i ~~ ", 2 .
,~ ~
~ I~~~ , ~ _
~ ~ ~ G 9v ~T ~ ~ ~ ~°`~
, ~a~ ~ ~
, ` . '' ,
_ ~-
~~ r
i~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~' ~ ,. U
i i ~ I'~ ,~ ~~ ~.~~v,., "~ rv ~. i
~ 1 ~~I ~ a `''~.?"t~i,kk
~~4~ ~ ~ 1 ~i~l y ~ . . ~f~ ~' ..I ~
~ ~ ~ __ _ . • f.
~`~ ` ~~" ~~~ -- - ' i - y r. ~ ~ Y ,: ~~ ~~ ,r
~.~I~ 11 <~ ` ~"r
1 1 _
`~1 t 1 ~ ~ 3
~~1 y.L '~ I 1
~ ~ ~I ~ `~ _ F ; 'J ~F,.. ~
~ ;U' 1 ~
~ ~ ~ :~`i -_ - r[ .~ '+
~ ~ wa " ' " '
9 ~',~' ~` - -- ~
~~l~ ~
~u ~', ` ~ n',,~~ '~ - - ;:~ 5~~45- ~ ~~~~n~~ - _..
.~n ~ ~ ~~
~~ ~~ ~~ ~ ` . N = ' x, . n ~la ~ 5 t r ~ y~ ~ 1_.:
~ .~ . ,< ' .
tn~ ~ :~, ~ ~ _ ~ '" ' __ ~' ~„ ,, a_ ~~ ~ t-.
~„ `. , ,
i . . . ~ ,.. '- - ~_ _
~ . ~ k . ,.. ~_, ~
. :' , .. ~ : ~_ _'~~ _~ _ _ ~•
1 ~ _ I
' ~ i N~NftAt~ ; ' ` ' . ~~ ' ~ ' ' _' ' , _'_
~ 1~ $LCPE '... .r,.. :. ~ _ _ ' N RIypAS -~_.
________ _ ____ ___ i~ _~____
i ~ NAAES) . ._______ ~~O,i•= _ " " ~' •"~C` ' S`:' , __ __ '- _ _ _______ ______ __ _- _ _____________
"_ . ~~.__T~ __
I ~` ~~~~: .,,_. ,~ `
i,~ ,~ •`~ ~___ _ ~0 __"_._. .."_"_____'""'"_"_"__.-c~ "yv,. ~. IfAF,_~__ ,"" - _ ' "_"_""______'_'""""___ "" '___ ' "_ _ _ .._ "_
~ „ -L- __ . ,__ ___ _. . ' -' _ _ __ ___ ___ _ '~~. _ _ _ ____ ,__ _ _ ._ '
__ __ ____ ____ _ _ ;,, __ __ _ __ Tq 6~_- _ ___ ___ __ _
` "` ~ _________ ,_ , ;: .., ~ _ ___ _ ENCH'OR~N -9~-~~A-y~~-¢'dPok.SI , . _ _ __
., -„
~t' _i~... ~~~~-_ _ - _'""___,~-_ ""_'__ :2 ,..... _ _ _ _ _ •'d.~ "' y~r: _' "" ' _ ' __""'__ _____' _
` ~~ _
~ , _ ~ . .-- . . ..,..-.:^^.-'_"_'[~„ " "' ' ' ______'_"_ "' '_ __"_' _ '_ - _ ' _
-' __'_'_'___"'_'""_". ;,,.,_`?ary""'~.'~"~--E~ „_._
_ _ ,= °_'_~ ".2:~.i~-~. _
`""- , """_ ,._. . , "„__ """'-~' . ' ' "' _`-_ _'--__-__ _ _-_ _ _ _ _ - _ __ ,. ---- ""-
~,_'_" '_"" .. . -_'_ -
~ •',,,- ""_""". '.•.'CY~=°~::=:•:-: ":.'_; -...,.. -,__,' ' """"' __ _' _ ' "_'_"' "" "
" ""• ~_~-~,,,
_, "• "",,...""'_""__"` '--"".;.. -''':-:-.-i:-:,:--.• - _ -'_ _'__'___ _ - _'_ __ _ ___- - - ~. - „
" . ....._ "'-'"'". '" -" ,..,,._- '",.-""' ." '"~-'' ' ""'_ ' '_" -,_ '.' ' _
~ ~-_ .__. .."_"""'""'_""'"".-' _'""_".,t-'. : , .- . .. ,-"' "' ~ " ' • - " - "" -'"' ' " _'
-.. ...- . ' ~:...-~ __. . .. - -"; _.-"""" -,_ "- _~ " '' -" ~ ' __ ^..' -" "'" '_
_ ,__;., _
~ -.;~ - ,` '
.. -_ ._ . ~'.-'. .. --:'.-:. „ .- . ,. "" ' '_,_ •„"- "- ', _' ' - ."" ' - ' "_' _' " - __
„ " '" "_"""'__'__'__"'. ~ .. ., -__ . .•. ,_ ~-.. .--."'"' '_ -„ , . , __ _,'-_'- ` _ - ' _ "" -.. - _ ,;
_ ~-- ---
"". '" -'. ,- -" •___'~ " '~. '. "~~ "-, _ " __ '_ "' '
_~.. . __ _._ ~
._~__-- _._.- ... .--'-' -~ --- ._.--v..-~.,.::-5~----- =------------ --•-' „3 -~ ~~~537 : ~``'~:_;,"~,-.._. - __ ---- - - _. --
------ -:- ~~-. "'• - - ----- - -
---- - --___--:'_~~------------- ~ .:,:_ .:.......:::...:..... ::.:, ;:: ..;,. ~.:-_:__--_._ ~____:-' ___ =~;_ `--. ~~s,~::,: ,:~_,,:~~:=_:~~ .;; :,.,, _s ,..:: ==: ~:--.,_ - ---------. ----~__. .. -.. - -- - -- - ~ -- - --- --
_.._---;-------------- - ----- TS-~,--..---._-:.- ..:_-.:=;;;;-:-;:--:53~:-==~=:__-__;,~_--_---~_~•"-.~-_,~., ,. ,- -- =_ ~ _ -- "_--- -------_ ._---- - _ ----
- . _ .. • ... ,.,
.,~_~~
----------°• ---------~-~`='"= -"=---~ -- - - --- ----- -- - - -
.. ,,,. ;: -•,, - --
---__-~ - _
_. ..,,.
-- - ~-•; - _,~__r ~,-.
.,~.'~ _
-_ -- _ _ '=-- -- - --_ -~-------- - - - ---- - ' ~ - - _ _ ` - - _ - _ "_ -_---_---------~---537 ----- -- ---- ~-
- , =-. _,--,--... __._._ . __, ___.._::....,._-'%%%~'~%-'~%--:,::--~ _ ' ' _ ' ' '
~ .'-'-„'-,--" . -,-"' „ -_ -,=. ' - - -
-.; _:,,-- :
_,
'_"'_~-_„ --, _ --- _.. .,~_ ;; ~ - - -'--- - ` '
"..,"' '--"_-'----' .. ........... - ,,.,v.,,-.:=rc'====_'==~:CC--.-„ - _ _ ---`------'- ' '-'.. '_
--=".r"'-'_.=_-"'- .__'--"'-""_..:;.-- _.---.:.--; ~,,.,, ,,, ,,,--- '~ . ~ ' - - - - --- ----' -.-__ _ '
'_ ", '-•' -",- _ --' -'-..._ .,-. .- . _ - __ ' - ' -- _ , - _
. , - ,
, ,. --_.
.. . „.. .~
---------='=---'• ~-__- .:-:_::",;.~;;=''c=:,;'.;'~;~;'~;_~':,-`'~"`="~''~~.`~'~ `531S_" --
--- "_.. ---- ._... .,, ... .....-'_..- .- , o.,,, --'_--' -- ,::_-' - - -- - ,
,_ , .. ~. . . ,,. __ , .., -.. ---__ -.
- -----~ .,.. .__. , ,_-_, . _ .,, . . ._.-: --_;- ---'- -. .._, =,~.-- ;,_ _ „
- -- . _ . . , _ ..,.,,,, ,,,,,,;,,xn -- - - - -- - -- ---
---------= ~---_ . ---
i&TA5991: PE-1SGfOP: ~SqIfCINA Lf9TImBY AMilll[f9.AIPAPIS MS WYN4Mi6 . ~. ._~ WR J.BNR 9FFi
__;,__ Drexel, Barrell & Co. c~emaen ~ s~~~,~ ( ~ G JOHNSON ARCHITECIS, PC VIILAGE AT BOULDER CREEK ~~n crne~eNrs s Nov zooo PRElJ~11NARY 05 SEP 2WD E-5187.2 3
--v~~ ~ew fu¢l utf qPEIC 5m[ t1t e~LUER~ OJlcwnO B6Wi f~ Mx-uR 1~0 11M SIPEET~ 9UIIE 110 mw en
~~~ wrca+a¢~oar,c cawoo mwws, or,awm emie U,q aeo-o-mn pp~p, pxpy~pp gpqp~ MULTI-FAMILY HOUSING ~p~~ ~RADING PLAN scuE: ~ ~ wrwc in, . m¢c
aio srtn utavc swrt sia m~r. caowaa mw Pro) xi-oeu (~ e9E-mss 28TH ANO TAFT OR
cowuc,: ~sue a. uw~~s,ox cormer; ,w~ a;m;rm~, eou~uce, co~oanoo °` ~°" (WEST~ "~ ' 20 SD 603 6
~~~ ~m ~~~~ ~~~
I' ) ~~
~ t ~
~ ~
~
;
.....
. ~ ~ xic~ xnuno zone
,..%._.~~_•.~x-- • J _~...~
,.. -
_- - N-~"~_ ..
-x--~=~ =3t~~~-
•• .~~~ -z-
~.voe.r.
~ ~ ~ ...
s n. ~~
~ ~
~ i
~ ~y~ n~
w `
y ~~y~
••yy
'
J .~
~ ~
W~-~..
...
- ~~
~~
-
I
ro-smie
~ rou~vaNcezaac
oex ~+..
~~~n.
I
~ "
~,,;
U ~ ~I ~ I i
+
Q
~
~ I F a
~GOOD SAMARITAN HOMES ~ ~~~ ~ ~
~ ,
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
LOT 1 ~
~
I ~
~,
~ ~ ~ &
I 1 p I
1
Q 1
n
3 , i
- #.
I
~ ~' ~
~
d d 1~1~,r,. , 1 d~
h'
'
!~.
I I
I I }
'
I O
I I ~
~ I ~ ~ _
~
~
~
~~
~
~
'
,
~
'i I i
,
- ~ ~ t
- ; J - - -
~-- ---------------
- -
- -
--------
-- _
--- --
- --
-- .., ----
~+---
-~~=
--_--- ----:::
.~~
I
I
~ GPANtt AEiPMiNC
weu ro e~ res~wco
ev oNws
%.--.-=Ya.T ~(_ -~_ _ _
a• ° , ..2;ovosm swu.e . .
~. ~,~ ~ ^° .. _ ...
Illtt 1$5D W. R.
iRED 570RAGE
~~
a rr~wsaw.m
~~yJ "_~ _ _' -
~`
~
~ ~
f~ i
r j
; ~ I
r~
0 . -"
I ~
~fr~ I ~ ~
,
~-- ~~`~-_ ~`~_-,_~~~-~ --
- -
;
~ ar ro ee uesiam ; ~ ~
~
, --_
1 ~~~ ~
-- "~ -- --------- -- - -
.,
arv nn•snee
,~
. -
..
r
LOT 3
~ ~ ^
1 ,1l1 W
.
7 - - ' ' _ _L ~ ~~ - -'--' - ~ - .
__ , 5
'_.` . . . „
.._., ~~:.µ
,~
. -
"--- -' - -- - I - - ' '------ '~--- . ` -- _ ' ~~'~\ ~
_ ~
,~. -- - - - - -- -~ -~-- " - ,
' ---- ' - - _= . , , ~~, ~ , ~ ~,
_ ,
.,-- - -, , .
.
. ~
,
.:.- .,1 '__~_ ___""~ __ „ -- ,.`: ~ --___~" _ _' • r, ~, I ~~h ~ `
. ~~ `.\.~`. .~' ~ 1 I I 1 1 1
'' " _ ~___"'_" '".z _ _ " " " ' ,.
'_ - '~`. """"---._ ' -'"""" ' `i ~ i ~ ~ p
.__ _.. ~ -
~ --- - ------- - ------ - ----- --- ---- •
. _ _:.._ ... _ _ , --- '., -
- - _ s~ „~~ ~,~ "~~ ~ ~ :~
----' ° -- ,. .,
~ - - s~ei-- _ _~ --- -- - - " - - . ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N
- _ ---_--- =---- - - - ~ __-- ~~, ~ I. '~,'~ ~ ~ ~~
~ ~ zei : _ ~ , ~ ; ~1 '~ ~
~ - \~~; ----- _ :. --~-._~~ ~' ; ~~, ~ ~ ' , _,
~~ ~ :;:;;,,:~ - - ~:3~35.'~,'~ : ; ~ ' ;%;i ~ ~ ~ '~ ~; ,
' ' ;;~~;~;v:z-~--=-- - a~~',''~'/,' ~ 1 ' ' n, ~,
_--- _ ' ~ , ~~, a
~ ~ ~~', ~ ~ ,, l ~ ~, ,,
~ . ~
-- 7 ~~~ i i i
G., '~ u~~ .: rie_ __ ~' :~ Ha=easo _ s~~ ~ ~ r, ~' , ~ ~
~' ;~ ryps
"+{~ _ _ `~- ~ f,' "" ' '.
~... .. -~ I I I ~ N y '~'~ I
/
'^ ~ ~Y~ ~ ~ ~
~ .. 3
,~
.
. a
'1,, ' r
`I I .
~~ - ~ I ~ ~ - --:~-- - ~
~,.~,A ~, , . ~.~- r ~ , , , . -- ---' , ' ' ; -= ; ~, ,,
~ a _`' amma, .~-' ~- ' T' _'__ ____ _ - ~r hRC~OSEDflEYNNING'
i ~ IFD
'~~ ~E'-x ARIUe~L S4WE, ,'P--. - --_--•--, "~ ,~.. ''i IUA~RAL 9LaPE ~ ~ i FALL i0 9E Af9C)IFD i
~,.. ..
.
~, -.,
. ,_ _
- _ _ __,7 ~t=iRirsy_~' =; - ~ ~~`+~;=;=,. y ' \''` {~~.=atf=E a""-~,rr-, , .~ ` ~7_ _ '=,- _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ -~ _ ~ _ _ _ _ - _ _ , e~4 omws~_, r _~ - _ _
~L iYi
~ ~ z
,. ._, . . -. ' _ _ ' _ _
~',
.r
.
__ . '. '-„ ,., ~ " - ' - '
,
~~~~ • ~•~. ~ y~~iP]-IEAR Fl00PPI~1M ~
_'- ~ . \ ` "" ' - - ,,..- _ ,. r
-,. . . ,
_ i~, ',,.` ." "'.,_ " . ' ~~k~' , ~
~~ ~, ~~ ~ . _- _ _________'.____._.
~ ' ~ ~ ~-_
_, . . ... _ - / . g
, ', '• •`. .. ' _ /' "_"""" ~~ ~
. ~. ,, ~. _
.
.,
.
., ., , , ` _ _ _
.
.~ _
~.,;,.,'~ ~, ~.
.
. . .
- ._ _ !"~--~-~"~"` "-." =`-,,,:. ''~ „'_- ~~ . i r
.~
~. I
-" ~'--,. '' ', ~` _ ' "' '
-__ ..__
=:~ _
.'
... .... .. .. ... • -- _ _ - - - - -- --= - - -- ~--- - --_ ---- 5 83-------- ~ I
. _,,: -~• -
,,,,
_.
--.;`-__; ~~i_-, ;..,•., ,,,_~:_:`:'~ - - - _ _~.-.-- - - - -- - - --- - - - --- - ~--- -- -- -'! ~~!~ ' ~
- __ ~ ~ '~ __'~`~~;~„
_,; '
='-"'-"~ ~'~~ -- - - -
-., ~
-- "- " ,•:,:, ;,;~.,. •-„~-•.: ~~~~'~ -- - - -' - " -------__--- - - - - _ _ ----~ - -- -----•----
_ ,~
. „ ,`
. •.~
, ~. ,_ -="==--=~-
~• '~ ' '~ - - ~~~ " - ~-'~='~-"~~ -~-_ - ---- ---- - - - ---
_- ~ -: ~
~ -: -=---_-,; ` - --
:~
,,, -. ,. ~,, ,,, ;,, ,,, , ,, ~.. --_--. ._ ,__ ---- - ------------ '- - - --------------------------------- ~ I, I ~ ;
. , ~~
_ ,~:
-_-----, _
, -. ., , _ _ .~~ -._ . ., _. - - _ - - - - - - -
, _._ . __,_.___.:_ ' '
. . . ._ . .. ,..___. ~ ' -
. ,~ _ .,,~,,,, ~ ., ___ - „_. . .- -- -
, .. .. . .. .. . .. .. •.,, -.. " ., ..__ . -, -.. -. ~ ~ - - -
- '~ - - --- ~' , ; ~ ~ ,
?ut?m c: `.. ' . ewrrnm roa - owm ~ oECwe ar: rz~nw usmvis oeh aw~ orv.
~~ Dregel, Barrell & Co. e~ema~ s~~wn J G JOHNSON ARCHITECTS, PC VILIAGE AT BOULDER CREEK w~ ~n couMEN~s o No~ 200o PREl1MINAftY
-w.- ~w vux~ csv ~c~ su~ ~~< a~w ca~am mwi pusl ~u-ava ~3o im~ srte~. sur~ tto "e° ~~i GRADIN6 PLAN
-T- wes cowowre w~x mnwoo mwcz ozea.no mcio pie xo-mm NULTI-FAMILY HOUSINC ~y
) o[KVFa. cpunwo sozoz 281l1 AND TAFT IN2
~ s~o xm Awut swrt xio wmn~ m~maoo mw~ csrol xi-oow (t0a) en-1o51 w~roav er: (E~15'~ .
C9MACf: IESlIE.A: IMNGRON fIMTACf: ,W16 G..qHN~N BOUIDER, CCLORA~O. . .
~4~
_ y~t„
~i ~ i',
~~ ;,~,~; ;-' ~~~P`~
f~l
iiiii~
- %:~i
-
~_;
~~i
_F~__~~~_
~r; ~ i
~+ 't~• ~
", ~ " :
1~.: ~ ~
I:, 1~ ~
~~j' 1~ ~~ i
~~ I; ;~o ' ~
p~~~ ~ ~i ;
~ ~ n ~~ ~ ~
~ I ~ ~ II I 1
1 I
I'~ ,I' ;', I
~~ll ~III~
Y ~~I~Illil ri
1h1~ ~ '
j ,~,~ ~ ~ ~
,
t ~; ~~ , ~
~ ~ ~
I~ ~
I
~~O ' ~
1 1^
~ i ~ ' ' `1
` ~
~/~ 1~~ ~~ ~ ~, /~
II IF 01 ~ !
a
l~l ~1
IM N~
,~IItl~~~S'N~ ~~fj~
i ~~ II'' i~' i ~
; ~~ '
~ ; ; ~"
;~,~i
: ~: ' a~'
,~
~'~ ~~
1' '~
~
~; ~~
,
,529~~~~-:; ~',
, 1',
,
~,
; ~
20 10 ~0 20 40
,~~
°"a~ s~a zooo E-5~jg~,~ ~q
ttuc~,'~ _ ~~ wn~mcm: xn
~ 5D 603 6
~..~ ~ ~.1~
'
~ ~ ,~, ~., - ~
' ~.
1
~ ;~I,y' \~''
~ ( ~*w xC.ON'kYf' ~NEE ZoNE~
~ ~ Lli
! ~ m
, I ~ i,,
~ 3 ~ ~ ~I
~ ~~ q i i
;' ~Ily~ I~
, ~' ~ , ~~ ~ ' '_
ti ~ y6~ n ,~ X '~
~I~~ ~
~, ~ ' ~
~~, ~ ~ ~ , :
n,,
~ '''~~~ ~ ~ ~~
~, ~ ~
~, ,~
~ -~ ~
w~~.
1 ~ ~ ~ :,
~ '~ ~ ,.
~,~ ~,
'-_:
~
~ ~w; ?'~'~~
'~i,~. ; . ~ ~
I 7
4~
, V ,
1
~~I 1, ~
III ~11~1 :~.. .'
d ~Jdi'd ,,f - ?~,`da~~'~
W~~iu~id'--; ";
1
' ;~'1~t~11t,1 ;~~~~.
N 11111,~ '~ ~` .
t~i„~~~ Y
~~
1 .
, ~ A~ 1 ~~ ~~- ~*c
;~i f~ l~
"_ _' ieti,
~ ~= ~='~_~ :_'; =.: ~, - '
~:.; *~c,7§=i~""'"_, ~
"sba;"e','"`r-''"51
~"n'=z'c'._ ---=s "
. ',c°'°`=3Sec==,i
~:, _" _
4'~`
~ `~, :
, ~~Y1.
~ ~ -_~~!
ys~
1 ~",~
' 1~
~
i ~u~~l
~ '~ '-. ~i . ~ ~' ` `~ '~ ~ ~ ' ~ "`i ~
~ ~ _ ~ ~', '_"_ '_ ~ ~~_, '', ~ ~ ~ "~J ~ "' _ ~ '~-,
1 , ~ I ' _ ~ ~~~,,,
, ~~
; .~_,_~ ~ , ,
1 , ~ ~ -; --~.~ , ,
~ ~
, , , , , ~:
, , ,,,
.,,~ ~ , , ~ ,
I ~ i
~ ~ ~ ' ` ~ ~ ~
L£GEND
I
£X. M'RRllErd'Aff D:Vl10.iP' ......... ~ -5J5a - _ ORNNALE BASIN BWNDABY. , .. _ ........ ^ \ ~ ~. ~~EC1qN OF ROW....... , _ ............. ~ 9U fENGE _ .. _ ..... . , , O
(SEE GEiWI SHEET 6)
' ~ ER M9EY QXJTiX/R .. _ ... . .. . .... ~ -4N5- ~ ORIINdGE BA9N OESIpI PqNt... . ........ _ . ~ CUAB INIEi PIV01ECilON . , . .. ... .. _ .. .'P O
(SEE DEfNL 9kEi 6) SIPRW BAIE OME...... .... .. $~B
vmvosm mrzRruouh ca~muR ,....... ~6265---- e~siN i.o. ~' (sc o~iu~ ~~r s1
li PROPOiEP IN~E% CONTqIR _ . . . ... . _ -~285~ BP9N ARU (Aeea) OllllEi PF~1ECTdV . . .. ...... ... . . O ~ `kHIpE iRACpNC CONiR0. . . . .. - OO
'E
, I Is¢ oerna saii s) ~~c o~ru~ sxen a)
wr~aaxr .......__..........._._.xa s-ivneuxcnf~)
I~ ~ow aaxr _ ... , . .... _ . . . _ . ... . .. .. _ ~e wo-vene aurvoR (~m)
I ~~, rmHeo rm vram ra amxn ev: ~mn c+s~emva
~_ Drexel, B8CYCI1 SC CO. Engineers Surveyors I ~ G JOHNSON ARCHIIECTS~ PC I VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK ~~ ew `~ pT~ coMUenrs
' I -+:-. uw cr.wi csr canG swrt n~ ~utta, rouawo wwi (wsl ux-a~.a ~w ~m~ srrRCr. suirt ito (~ULTI-FAMILY HOUSWG c~/in
"T- exs ~wroMrz aa+c camw sr~nr,s. a~wm mcis hia) zw-ou~ otNrLn. caoxnoo emos 2BTN AND 7AFT ~R ucum ec
I ~ y10 6iM N'ENJF, 900E 21~ OREFIEY, CpLCPlLI! BN% (YIO) ]5~A815 COMA':T:}JA46 GO.pNM50N ~~~ER. ~~~~~
~p(!yT: 161k 2 WINCSiON
,
I I 1 ~I~ -
~; ~
', ,
~,
i
,
`,1
11
.~~~~ ~~i
~ ~
~
i
i
'". 1
i ~~ i 1- """~ia~~i~~ir~ ' ~
l~?
~~oi4iryniu~niii~ii~¢{
~ ~ao~~mm~~~~~~~~~~~ ~, ;
i '~ »o~~u~ei'll~x~
oi m~qf e~~;~ ~
'~, _ _ 'o'M4iNNWi"ii~~~ ~
, ,,,~,,~~,,~~,~~,~~
.~~~,.w~..,,.,,
~r~; -- ~ ~~; ~~~~ ~~,,,,,,~ ~~,~ - __
~ ~, ,_ ;; ., ,,~,,,~,~~~~,,,~,,.
.,~~,,; ~, ~
' ~ xqii~iii~~~np~'~~~~
n
nnu.i~n i
~~ 4 20 0 - 40 84 i~ypiii~iiin~~y~4~
~ 4~Y~i5~dun~p,~~'~,r
, ` ~ ,~~~~6~~~~~~:~~:,~
,,,~,~,, ~,~,r'~
~
~'~ ~,
; '~ o„~;„~,,.u
SOALE; 1"=40' ~ ~u~viraa^^~dt~„ ,
~ ~ i i nryyrin!n~niiM,~
FROSION CONTROL NOTES Poo~?;c~s
i. wrn~am nreeu s~al ee Racmco uwn ox+e"~" X. w~J~^y
p~MRE110.N OG D1fAL0i CAA~ING SEE REC8IMEN~FD pfe 's}~
SEE~ING SCNEDUIE SHET 8. :m 15171 ~;~
2 ALL ~ISNRd[~ AAEAS iNAT N1Ll ~NAN UNUSNA~D t ~
Gqt bOAE iHUI k~ OA151AUSi BE RE3IDE~.
S EAOSION CW iFLL IlFA9JA6 i0 FEMWN IN PUCE ~~•'~/G\
IINft ~ECETAnON IS ESiA&14fA . ONRL
q FA050N CW~iROI MEASIIfES N BE NANiA&EJ hND ~ NOi VPLIO WRHOU~ ORGWk
AEPAIRm dl A REIXLY BA45 OR WMEDUIFLY SIGNANRE AND OhTE
raiohmc A un~re sroAU cvcNr. .
aurww~o. ~05 $EP 20D0 .aen %~
uov s oo PRELI~IINARY E-5187.2 5
DRAINAGE AND EROSION CONTROL PLAN :~ ~, = 40, 5D~ 603 6
r
^iiiii viii
va
RfW
NOh
S1RAW BALE WTLET PROTEC710N QP
Iq SC4LE
~
5iRAW BALE CHECK DAM S~
Np $CAfE
~
H~ ~y~RO~
P~ ~ M~mM(rt1
~
I ~I/Y - J' ROL1(
1/2" - 3/4' FlL1ER UYER
6"YINIYUM
~5 REQUPN-
VEHICLE 1RACKING CONTROL~
NO SCALE
TREVARTON ROADSI~E GRASS SEED IAI% /RECOMUENDEDI:
~COIdMON NAME SqEN71FlC NANE YARIEtt ~ X OF MI%
BIG 0.UPSiW dNORW000N CSRM011 PANNkE - 10
BLUE CAMNA BWIELW~ UWqU3 HACHILA OA LbNNC10N 25
4DEOARGWMA BWIELWAC~AIIPENOLU VWpW f5
GNAA'AN NkCR1E ELYMIS UNADJdAS NAT4C 10
s~eo~ w~eal~eus a~uus mnamnuos sne ~uw io
r+¢shau r~en~nss Pes~aovmuu s~nwu nRAea zo
^'o'a: roru, iaos
I. NG PlS / HA = KLOptA4S OF Rlfd I1VE 9Ep PEA IFCiME
2 lH PLS / ACRE a GL911PJ5 d NRE LhE 5~ ffA AptE.'
3, qt~E45 MLL 9E WNE IN PUIff IIYL SEED PWNpS, NOT BIILK PWNOS.
1. XRiES SHONN IN 11E PHOK TP&E ARE NR DPoLL S[IDING
5, qAlES SH01YN IN hE IBME i/BlE tFFD i0 BE OWBLfD fi A BPWDCASi ffmING MEIHOD IS USEA
6. THE USE CF ONY O1NEA SE4D MI% MUSi BE /3PROVED BY tltt OF UFA1EitE
-v a~ vosrs µo uavnx n 2 nu~c rara rcwcixc ro
4 BY 4 RI (10 BY W CM) WE POS1S
mo+cx uvs~ tnou auo
unxc we or~ oF aosts .
/ ~~ / /`-~
% ~
'-~~ ~'-
~ 4b(104M)
a nn~n n+e n~rce ra~ic ro ~, anarnu nwo w~re~cT nrt
iHE WRE FENCE AND E%IFN~ R ENCAVAIED SM.
WLO 1HE iRENCH.
~~~ ~~~ ~ RifR fP9PoC
~f ~ /~ w~e
~~
SILT FENCE SF
NO SCALE
KG PLS / HA LB PlS / ACRE
1.2 65
0.6 3.1
2fi 14.2
1.) 9.J
5.4 29.4
i5.5 et.s
fi.D 141.2
WRBINtFi ~
GAAN1 qLiEfl
(WPRO%. 3/4' ~IAJ
X1RE MESH CONCPEIE
(APPRJ%. 1/2' M6N) B~
~
dtRYEL FlLRR
MAE MESH
PLAN NEM'
MiRE ME54
ckalTl FlliEk "'
FlLiEflEO WAiER
flUNWF
I 1 '
1~
:
EOIbFNi _ I~III Il
. CIIPBINLET
WNC. CUi1ER ~
SEC710N NEW
cv+mu xorzs:
1. P6PECT PND RFPM FlL1ER5 Af1ER EAtlI SiORM R1NT.
PEFp`.E SEpMFM NNEN 0.4E HAIF ~ iNE FlLiER UFP1X
Nu sFU Fluco. awou[o scou[xr wpu ~ mvosho
IN PN ,1REA iR~JiARY i0 A RDIkEM &.4N OR O1HER
fIL1ERING MERS!RE.
2 SEOIMENi.WO CRAVEL SNNL BE IMMEOIAiELY REMOISD
mow ma~v.m wnr or ~oaos ~
WRB INLET PROTECTION ~P
NO SCAtE
cuAe um wtms aoi
CROSSPPN AN~~RF011 CURB AENRN AC65E5 ~ 203
CONC2EIE NRII( FN~ f{DESTtlAN/BICYCIE iRNLS ypq
ca~rne¢ wau~ auo a~oES~av/a~ct~ mu~s ~awn z oaa
GCNLAEIE nAt!( OND PEDE5IPoPN/BICYCIE iRWLS SECIWN ~EiAIL 2048
SDEWPiK ACCESS CURB RPAW lDG¶W 20>
SIpEYIAU( qCGE55 GIR9 RMIP ~EiPIL 20]A
oRi~cwar Ru.re rm armwr~ z.z~
w~ nroea~r rncu~xr ~.tt
m[ Nroeaur iNSrutAnex mes t z zuo a s.ia
NOAIZONTdL hAlUSi BLOCR Sd4
SiFNDARD 3' AND 5" SEkNCE 5,tAA
SiM'OARp KiER Plt ]" µD 4" 4ANCIES 5.1~
SipNpARD S' AND 4" NEhR SEIDNO S,tEC
Si0N0ARD SEWER MANXOLE ~~~
MANHOfE W4Efli 6A3
SiANDAR~ YANXOLE AOLT-OOMN WA1EP-nCHT FAPME ANP D]YEA 5.M
SEMER I1NE gRNCE 6.Oi
SiOAM ffMER WNHCIE J.Of
SipLN SENfR W WICIE B0.ff - ].OR
ftAT it4 FOR S4ALL01Y NAWIptES LESS iXPN 6' W HOp11 1.Od
IYPE N OJf~ IMET 1.08
. POOrRYw/S
~~P1, h' b~~ePM
~v
~i 15471 't
}t
~~.+"
A
Npi YALID WIIFIOUr OWGIN4L
SIGNANRE AN~ MIE
`~ Drexel, Barrell & Co. e~~~aers s~~o~ "~`"`~ g JOHNSON ARCHITECTS, PC ~ VILLpGE AT BOUL~ER CREEK
~.~- rew nua usr aACU, mrts iu muttA, cunwm ewoi (xi~) wz-um
--~- ~w imi sm¢r, w~ ito MULTI-FAM~Y HOUSINC
5~65 m~aarz oa~,i cuoxmo maws~ caawoo maia (ne) vo-ae~ oEmix. C~'an2mo aoforz
~ sia xm .mnue, su~ rsio c~uv, w.nwm meu lsro) w~roua (+A3) e9s-~ou 281H AN~ 1PFT ~R
coxu~cr: ttsuc e,tmr~smN co~nci:~wcs a,nnxsow BOUIpE& COLDRPAO
omatoan. ~o~nws p~h ownncu~o
~ qTY CONMEN75 02 NOV 2000I
WA1N BM.
GH/lP
~~
DETAIL SHEET
S~a 2000~ Eo5187.2~ 6
"^~ 5H0WN ~ 5D 603 ~ 6
r.
iii~i
NOTES
L 9upply aM Meull u~ fonval febrlc bdou ell rc~ m~kh Pmemlel
ard gand mva bede d. rot rraive memf cqWOl FaMlc
2 FIIaYW»wbaemhMUnof3'~0"hanellmFaauN~.
(mmared hen LLe vM1a allb pIMU
3. Paev~bVbnwl tede w recelve 4" ol Yro epeclfkd uood chlp
,rultlv PmanlallMwl bede do no[ receNe vead conbol feL~nc
4. All plGMlrrj be[Y b be edged mllh epaclfbd etael edgp.
5. F addRm ~o W pleNe Yxw n W plem Iin~, Yere will ba
30 mnre dxfducue eM 30 mue evergram ehvbe h be eel~bd
em bw~ad by w LaKbcape achivcc can.ecwr w bm adaMg
plam me~nie~. enm plenung m~a uw miiebi LeMecepn Piee.
b. Alllree~,ehW,a Wkr ballld erd burkpHvtl plenalmfterldle,
ehell hve ell alro, wnne, a olha xnulmmen4 melalal, mcept
ffv bubp, remved hom W Wk eM roct bell prla a
Wenixl
1 ikW v:ly an m~ulMg plem ~oratiu,. prror w be.jimmg unk
~B All pmWng lelydd b be e bmm o11B'-i4^ at a 4:I akpa vnbs
wmwea ma~ww on dM meuNg..
SI7E / LANDSCAPE DATA
3 All pa>niel a ahub bai~ m ba eeporabd Ran ~af wXh eteal
xk~m or cmceLe.
Im. Fn euwmauc tmigeticne eyeun uiil be Metelled to weM Ua plem
malmWl.
II, Me1Neh e 5'-0° ro lrttgeEkn zore mand ell tulldpge
unlms oYiaw~ee eWarlmd InurcMlrg.
I~. NleYrb bei WreceNeepeclned yrenlbrodtnukh a
cobbla ws umd crntrol Febrlc pa plen. 9utmi: cobr
emmpiwFa ep~rroveL
19. Paanlele tobe eelec!ad rcom UnplmlilelPeranlelata be
epecei I'-6" on urte on evsege eM mll ba locebd In W Peld,
CaNena w pyuro plerAing bad eM mrwm P,+r,s Rep. p1«
to aMm'Irg W plevM1 aeb'Iele.
14. All trem pmmvW em b be poucted dwug caewcuon
ae ~n,n ~piy ~i~n un cny or aaa> c~r.wtti~ sufae~de
~« Vae pobcNOn.
I5. BIU in.llltue WII be ec~Web7 m me1MeU a i%~0' wtbeck
rtee, an pq,eme n.~s.
tOtAL LOT 51ZE = 299115 SL7. P7.
PAPoCING LO? SIZE, INCLUDING DRIYES AND DRIYEWAYS = 45,595 5a. Fi. (NOt ~PI~ER BIIILDII~C51
NUMBER Gf PGldCIWs STALLS RELHII~D ?ND NIIMBER PROVIDED = 5EE PCRKINCs PLGN
INTERIOR PAPoLINfi LOT LWJD6GAPED AfgA (g4VlIRE~ AND THE TOTAL PROVIDED : Y$l9 9/2 FT. / 1,161 °~Q, Fi.
PERRIITER PARKINS LOi LANDSGAPMG REQUIRED AND iOtAL FROYIDED = WA
NUMBER OF Si~Et T~E9 REOI11ftED AND TOTAL PROVIDED = 39 / l3
QIlANtItT GF PLAN7 MA7ERIAL RE0111r¢p AND TOTAL PROYIDED : T~E6 REO. = 80 / TREE9 PROV. = 131
~ sH~118s REa , amm sHRUes PROV. = ima7
LEC~END
}~ 6fd4DE tF£ES - 3I toul 3 m° celipa
1 A~~
' Poeabl¢ epeciw nald tr~cWde:
~.~/~ Pdtmae deh
AutwM Psple Aeh
R~ HAple
NoivayMapk
Rednad Llndm
Nnpmlel Honeyloaut
°
~ OR~iAMErvL4 iFEE8 ~'Ia total ~ ~rz" ullpm
Poaelbk tyxla uwld IncM1Uh:
Fbwmmg aabappls (nre bIi frt resistant verieua only)
LbekN9 ABFaen
Amw Mepls
Newport Plun
canade Red Uary
\~1I~~~
3 p- Po eMl#e >uec~ Id rcuds: 4-5' MigM
~AN' PcndTOm Plm
Lolaecb Bloa 8~ce
MJBlflfifi(1't15
~n~~ ~~,
~LOGAtED t0 BE PROTECiED
~ 6' OR B' BENLN
~ PIQlIG TA9LE ~
?~ iLWEwNG AND EvEfxiREB~I:HPoI&5 - M3 ox. rotel
~~ \ Poeelble apeGw wculd Ircl~ic . q~3 Eva. Tctel
~~ + ~ Po4erRllla varldlae - p59~yeeeee iolal
VJ bpirm sgailon
LIIdG
Red-tuig pogw~ad
Euavynw
Jwlpm .
Younlaln MBhc~arvj
6dTBG
ratanmetsr
fa~eebn Seg¢
vrvarr a~ctlc willow
~ ~F£MIIALSK~PPAJDLOrcR3 11]b EF to~al
Paebble yzciee wwld Ipclucb: 3 1l4° poU
ampvg HaMmia
Fwpl¢leaf Mal~mia
Polyqonlum
/aUlba
9iMNe Dairy
Luplre
Bleck-ryvJ Suoen
~ NAWdL88YPJR¢R
~ NAtIYc GR49SES
'~~'' ~
_, EWER
-idssoa essaerdtas
me~sxox.nssocures, mc.
2298 P&NL STRE4T SU1TE f00
BOllID6R, COLORADO B030Z
>9C4E (9g~ NONL6 %6 (ffiI NF~II
Cq~yrleM 2W] ALl -RAWN ON~
VA$ilfN pGppXAilpN MPFMJWi MAIN
SHALL Iqf 6E OPLICAiEd-ISCI~EO ~R
OiNFRW[ff USEO VIi1PJUf VqIIiEN
f-0NSENfOF WWSiON ASS9LIAlA, RC.
Lssc RecW/Revlzbn
Mpose -Yte
SOP RAN 9/SNO
LIiY COMMEMS 10/LW
i
W
W
~
U
~
W
~
J
~
0
~
H
a
W
~
a
J
J
0
0
a
¢
0
J
~
u
~
W
G
J
]
0
m
LL
0
s
~
U
9
0 ~ ~'
~~~
SMet Ney
NOT FOR
CONBTRUCTION
seet l~pe
CONCEPTUAL
LANDSCAPE PLAN
~~ N6IOp
'4a.n By~ '9Yf
Cnedetl By~ LWB
"°~" "~'" 98800
s'~"`""°" L1.1
^~^i ~~^ iii i~^ nu~~
~ ~
'
~
O O
' ----'------'- ---- -
' ~~~~ __~~~~~~_ ~~~~~~~__~.
~ ~..
,
, o i
1
_. __ ... _.. .._ _..: _--. ...
-_ _- _...._.
^ ~i i i
~ ~ '
~~ ~ ~~ PI~( YP.)
r'
~ ~
~
I i ' I A71NG PLAZ4 ; I 12 '
"
~ ;
NCN(TYPJ ~~i j " 1,
Ir}~ .1' 12'i
~ .
~
~ RBEGtUE (iYPI
'
-
- --~= - --- - N~KO6Ak-PBk~
~-.-- . . ~.
. r.
~ .
. '
~ i i S~ 0
~kif~-r--+-+ -'r---r--
"
.. ~
:
. .
~ __
~
.._...
.
-..:'. . ~-
nivi ..,,,. ,.
. - .
..~ .
_.
-
...
,- f
- ._~..... _
,.._.. . ~ ,p
~_. - _..~_...,,.~r
...
,.-.- " .~
' .~
~ .
`• -
~~,. ~.,,~ . 42" WCsH 5C ' _
„_.
.,,
~~.
~.
~•. .
,
~
~,
.
' _'__'"_"
~""~ "-"'
'"
_"~~'_
"_'
_"
_"_"_'
_ '"_"_
"_"
'
~
_ _
. ' ~ .: '_..
d .. _ 6
~~~.
' . ' ~.
~~
, ' I d ~
• • .
~
~ '
'
I~
~ .
•
Y
a
~
~^n .
H~
. .
~ ~~ ,
.
.
~ . . ~
~: . •' '~ ~ ~
~
~i.
,
~ ~ .
.L~4
'
~
I
•..
.. '
.
. ., ~ __ '
__
0•' '
. H~3{'VJES' . . . . :
.. ~..'
. .
',. _ . j l..
... .
,~,::.r yN
_ _ _
... ..'._ .._. _..
: ~ : ' "_....._.:._~
,~.!' r'n.. .. ._.__..._._..._..._..~ .._.
~
..._..
_
~...._... .
.
,~D-_~ ` :4ii
' '" .
;:. %'
_
~-
_
'
.
.
,
'
,
~ ./~.~i
_
_
_
;[:_ _. -
~...
_ ~=:.L
'-_ - __
"'~.....__.._._
~ ~ '___."'"__..:~
1
~
.'
...
.
..: ,~ ,
.
..
~
~,
. jhlin
•
" i '
,
'
'_
..: .
_
~ (/
'
~
~ ~, ,
.
'
,
~
'_' __
_
_
__ _-
m
'
-....,
-,.~
R~~.
1
" o
..
o
~ \~ ~.. ..~ ' .
~» uw~ + ,
~~,
~, i I
, ~, f
~
~I
' .
:
; I
~ GN f 1k
.
, -
..
,.. .,
> ~ ~J, ; , ,~
,
... . . ~~ .,.
~~~~ ~ ~
~; ~ sob ' ~
!1
.
~..
~ ~
'
~ _ :
, ,
'
'
~ ~
'
.
. . __. ._._
,
_
.._
... _a.. ,
. ___..__. __ __. _..
_..... _.... _....._
~
~
. ..
.
_.. ..._.. _
_ .
~......- - .. - -- - - ~i
_....-..- _Y.
.
..
I__
~
~
~
l r~.~._,._. ~. , ~~ ~
. ,
'
~~~
~,
/
~ '
~ '~
~~
~~
~ ~~
l
~
'
~~
~
,.
`
"._. ~._
..
_'_"_I "_•. _._.._
.. . ~ .
.. . ' _ ....___ ..
-`.'~........___'.._._._.__. . ,;-'
.___...._._.~._.._-'....._.....-'.'_'__'
_- --_ --- _ __.....
---- -._._._.. ------_ _ ._ _.
_
.
-- .
--- _ .._._ ._ _ ---......--:=- ~_ ::-~~:_. ...----
__ ____.... -- _- ----_. .,
_ __ ____ ..__..__.__.._._ _.. _.._... _
-
_..
...-------------- -.._..__.-: /
: ""'...
~~ _ ....__
.-::..- -~_. __ ._ .%
__
_._..
_. _ ___. .._
.-._._.._.._._.
_ ,
,
r
i~ '
' '',. : + ',.
~'.,
~l
B~ s , . , .
,
,
.
. _~_
~- - -
~ - ,:,:::,::~:~
, _ _ _ _
..~~~
- '
~', '~ (
.. ~--=....
_
- - _
_~:v:: , :
-
__----..
, - .
_ _
...~....~ .... . . ...
,....__ __..___ ._.-
............
_..._ __ __--- --
.............__~._.._... ..... . ...._.
_....------....----._._.,...._. , ..
---
-
_. _____._.. ___:~:~_.
..._.~ .. . ~~"~~~...~..~_..~._......~.,.._._..-i i~
_ __
_ ___ __ ___ ____ ______ _ _ ___
........_... » . '. . .....~... . . .. ~..i ...
"
-- ' ~ ~ ______
.._..
--- __..._..... __
_._
_
__._....__._.
--.
..._..._
.._:
.-__:_~-_._
_._ _..__...__.__ _
__
_. _..., :~:: ~;: ::_::_.: ~:_ ._~:
..
.._.
_..~, .
-_..... --~...~_ .
......_: .~
......~::c.
...._,,`~-.. ' -
..........
-........ `. _..,,,
:__ ~__ _ ,:~~
___...~,.
: :::: : .::..
-
`•: ~,
,
' ~~UILpING P~NrtRI' 0 CLUBNOUSE AND BUILDINCs C~N7R1'
' sca~.e i',~m'•o^ sca~.e rv.am~~m
1
1
1
1
t
1
~
,
~ 1
~ 0 NORrtI~ SID~ OF BUI~pINC~ A
ECALE I".20'-0"
~ ~u~~p~N~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~R~
~ SGALE I".10~~0°
IIBStOX 65SOCIlf&S
zu~c nno u~ve necm¢rn~
MNSfON ASSOCIAl'E5, INC.
Y08 PEORL 9TRffif 9UfTE 100
BOULDER, COIARADO 00902
vmi¢~ Iare)~-moo Pa Isa1+u-~u
Capyrl~M 2W0 qLL fRAVN Alm
VRRRN MF6Mi1M MPFMING 1OS1N
awu uor s~ av~~urtn, msw~o m
mxcams~ us¢n un~mur !,xcrrtx
mNSEVi ~' 4WS11N ASSGGPIFS, INC
.~e a~~w~r~~
vwvose n.k
S-P RPN 9/5/W
piY tCIR1ENfS 10/L00
W
u
~
~
J
~
m
H
a
W
~7
a
J
J
>
0
0
<
~
0
J
~
u
~
W
G
J
~
O
m
~
0
y
t
u
~
o ~~ ~o~
r~ u--~
Sheet Key
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
s~s ~
CONCEPTUAL
LANDSCAPE
DEiAILS
mm avoo
IeaWn ep BYT
baeNetl Hy~ LWB
`~°"" """' 98600
~"""°" L1.2
~~ ~~iu~~~~
1
,
'
,
'
'
,
'
1
~i ^ ^ ~~I
aaevaiurve
~INP
~~~ ~~~~
`~
T~ESWDER `
'*~E53'
3"GLP GLP+6'P
~ SiAYJ'Mi R?N
'RWE OE40 OR DNMY£D W?'JO Rilpp iO PLGNTi~Y.
11FG° ENiIRE iI~ffALE LF 1RWK t0 FIRSt BRCNLH
YttH M~0 t~EE LLRA~PiNG P'cR °•FEC SECiKN %FY0
>0 NOi Cllt OR DPIW E LEADER
'ffG.NYLCN ifFEB1R4P
M1S GGWE GALV, Wlp~, pqIBLE SIPAND nllI51ED. iL W WIRE.
3rtUMISqW° iRE= LLR4P FER5PEC5.
XP9iC GW ON AlL 3iAKE6
9'~0" MEi4l't' FENCE PQSt NiNIN M1LCH iRE RI~+'G
~~,3 SiAKIt~ R.MJ SHGWJ ABOVE
ipVi ]REE 3" ABOYE mRN.t
~MpyE ALL WFE 4ND R:f£ FRQ1 iCP P/3 Gf &1R~.AP.
frYCGIFIEO M1LCU ~E RRG
WGDE DiIG EWE IN SCD AREAS (ttPl
~
~LANi Plt R%91ZE Gf RCOIBALL
iPECIFIEO PLAMIFY nMUfE
i'~RIFY 610E6 GF f~ONiINla HOL'c
'LY'IPALIED SJEGW~E
' n D~GDUOLiS 7R~E p~7AIL
T
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
'
~ ~
.. ._ _ II ^~II~~I~~
MFG. ir&E SiRaP 9EE SPEC SEGTION 02950
3 EaJAL S°ACED GU"6
iW19TEO pp1BLE 9iRd1~5 Cf
9a GI. MRE, V4" X:0" WNItE
SGN. f0 WG SLE~Yc
YR~ ROOiQAyL i00E SEi
9"AB~~E FIN45H GR4DE
SPEGIFIED HpLCH, SEE 3f£C SEGtILN 01950
FMI6H CdtME
16" S1EEL POST SE*'OP
Gf POSi 0.U5H YUfINISH
GR4DE GF 9qL
~Y..dWFl" 61~E6 Cf PL4Nil1 a VpLE
dPEGIiIED PLGNTING hIXN~
flR1P4C1E~ SJd'aR6DE
PLANiIIYa NOL SIALL EE M TiE
~RT05F£CScGTIq~03959 OIGfiEfEECFTHE~iBdLL. ~
FGR MPtERIALS OND PROCE~~Rv
n CONIF~RDUS TREE DC?AIL
.,
~ _ ~ 5~C710N AA .
~ 2LAlE:.:..1 -2u'-b'_NOaI'rR}fD1-".... ..
s., , . .::t =m`~-~v4Pme.nu .:. _ . .. .
1
~
.L 1"ABbvE
1LW
ItAIN'cR
ES 6 PLM'TIW,~ NOLE
A4iING MIMIIRE
EBGRd~E
~LE °J16'_L 6E 1X
iHE DIPnEtER ti arooiBALL
n SNRUB D~TAIL
~,
JII _ I ~~~ .~
IINSiON 93SUCIIfBS
euw+mc .Vm u~:c.we .~.~m¢
NLVSSON ASSOCIATE4, INC.
R2B8 PE.UtL 99REBf 9UITL S00
BOVL-Ek~ COWRADO 803~2
PBGIB ~8df WI-Bm0 1!Y ~ M9-WII
[o)pY$t 20~4 ALL IRPVN N9
NWii[w iqCANni1W WffMJqG 10ax
SNML Nlf H[ Wh~SAiN, IDAL6E0 ~
pSNAWISEII8E0 MRHiJi NEIiiEN
cm~su+i w mrmm+ nsmcw*¢, wu
Isue RecaMMeNSIm
PVqse Onte
S-P PLSN 9l6/00
Cltt f-;WENiS 10/2/W
T
W
~
u
~
W
~
~
m
H
Q
W
~
J
J
/
~
O
~
~
O
~
0
u
~
W
C
J
~
0
m
LL
O
Y
F
U
\I
STeM Key
NOT FOR
CONSTRUCTION
s~~ ,~u.
CONCEPTUAL
LANDSCAPE
DETAILS
mw ~~e~oo
aom ar m
o.~red ep LWe
"°"" "~°" 86600
~""~" L1.3
RfER i0 9FEL SEGiION IDIYO
f~2 MGiERIALS AND F~CEDLINE6
fnrnr~lta'1~E
,>
,
M
a ..~f ~N.~/~~ . ~ .
l~.dbwuhs...,~"+ . . -
~
Y
S
~
E
a
a
8
s~G
~V
~2
Hm
~ 1J W~ J~...V.~~~~ .~
NW COR~NI/Z NI/2, W/Z,
SW'~~~.W.I/~ sca s2
AIVMCN XMVOf OA PBlt6
NA MLIAM911 PEIXPW \
~~ m Xln!
~: sLi9t
5ll '
RS2W3
&p; ' raao M ~ae u•
p WP49CGNpftaP@
wo u uuv
~ T ~'
g~.
~
~~
~
~~
YN
c~.sr,
NMN~m'
lO6 W/I' OAN.
PUSR C?P SIILG~b
9N LS 3SE
FOL'X4 et1.55 --
WMR ix
Wllli 4uPm
LS MAP. flp
N~B'$5'6Y&IAS
~cw m~¢ crc+.
c
z
0
w
N
PRELIMINARY PLAT
VILLAGE AT BOULDER CREEK
A SUBDIVISION OF LAND IOCATED IN NI/2 OF THE SWI/4 OF THE NN~/4 OF SECTION 32, TIN, R70W OF THE 6TH P.M„
CITY Of BOULDER , COUNTY OF BOULDER, STATE OF COLORADO
AREA = a.360 ACRES, I~ORE OR LESS
~ ,SP88
,~ . , ,~ ._. ••--•••-•••--•--....--° .~ . .
~~~~ ~~ ~ ~~~ -'-~- - -- ,--
Qa ~ -
~~ ZONEO 1B-E
~r d~G2W/T. N/%MR
.._~SMRhW/~YC.II _.~.
~.~~~V. ._ . . . _.
.~NB9~55'7(17(1`_E,._~_~,_~,.._ _.~U~.J5__.."""""""""
__--_--_ ^ .. __-___ _
%o!%~////%/%//i/i%%///%//////%i~ `
~g ~ ~ ~I
II y LJ Q I ~~ ~
,
LJ
~~ ~ I II ~ ~
. .~B ~/~ 1 0'i' ~Y
I ~~I`- ~~ ' 0 0 Y xeY55's~"E ~st.n'fa,, ~?,' ~' ~n~ _
c7
~~.
SRry 416
IOXE W/i~ WN
' M5T4 WO SIMILEO
~ `,•cmo~svea1\
1
,.. :.~ . .,. . . ' ._
.. SBd'Y'Wv
i6u~v ""'
~i ~~
~ ~d30.] . '- .Im't
re~
~ - ~~,~~~ ~: ~~,
~_ ~~ _ . ~~
~ /
:Ii ,. ~''~_ ~! '`
~ APX0.1P.viMNtL01 ` Ipy~/~.~ \
i~4 . B$ PEiAlU9 PIPpXt SA25 ~~~~ Z~ F U ,
~ I~
~ w• <• ; I ~
i j~~
j v~~~ ; ~ LOT 2 ~i ~ ~ ~ ~ r
~ ARFA" 0.969 4CR6; 1 a ~b. ~i a ro a
I I a..~'°~x~~ ~~~~ .,5~~ ~, ~ ;; ,~ ~' 4u
,i .~ R~ Y . : ~ .
~ fli ... .... ~ ,
'. ~ I ~" -. - r,. I I ,~~, °' ~' - -- ~ Y
~ .- ~~ . I ' "_ . _ ___. '- . -. .
~•~- I _ .
- ~~
N
.~ w__ 'n--?~ an~ rurw7o~e.. TAFl .0 '~'Pn. w a1aa, ~ -~. ~ -nsee-i .~93 .6~~ -'~CVC°,p^owi'~~rasirc ~n0~~ o ~ .
QM ` _ . _•T . -~r-P- ~ F--k~ ---W- ~-"~ w- 4- ~ SPYP@ `Y ~
-- " M a muix
N ~ ~ w~ Zsb ~~ ~=B~ (n~o A o-'
~ ~~ , ~ IM~~ .'$~ Ml4HY/2MJ'dM~d ~~ ~ '. ' NMNN1[XI&1X ,
~/S NM// iE JI ~
Wnmcexo mis nnA 52A~. }. ~ ~
~ _ _-:~z • ' ~ - _ "'_ f 5 __ / _
~, ~_ ~ 599'S5~1A'Yf'. 31I.N'~ oe. la ~ e f"~ NB9'SB[OE eL I ~p8.fi0 . eg~~uxuttUSNEx~~ J~ V a ~~~.
lro r&R aam /YaVI ~ umn s~sartvr ~~~' ~ '.~'s Cmurc ~~ ' ~ " ' m .' ~ ~
a pp m YsPm ' 00qp a ~s ~e [n3YEVi ~ IIANrfFS?kAi" --~~t'2 _ ~ p~~y~ I ^ _
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ wr ~ " "' ~ s (±~~y~@le• ..~ ~.~ ~ W ~ .
b x+.~m m v ~ena w s s~~R~ r.D f?t cT.T~ I ~ o n: ,
..Y.. } ~ ~1 ~ ~ u~ ~ ~ ~ F
N I
N~, LOT 4 ~ ,~,`, . ~- g _ ~ f .
~
` ARFA = 7J97 ACR6 f ~ ' ~
, '~~ ~wcmmvr.axxc _'
. ' ~
• ~
~ ~ ~ , .. . ~ ~'~- ____ .. _ ^cs ~ ~, 2S13 A'- ' ~i ~ ~ . .
~`., _t ~ -.' . . ' : °y'di' - :_ _r.' . " a ..'AflfA . CRkS t _ ..-, t~ 1 ,
~r
szsv ~ ~~ ' ii tl ~
.. _ _ ~'~~ ~ _. ~~ ;~ ~ ' S ~ ~ ~~
-~.._. 2~~" - ; ~ ~ _- '.
,.. , _ ~ ~ - - . ._. . _ ... .
_ B
_
.. , .:-, ~ ~~
-,_ 5~~ ...: ',~ ._ _ _ __ _ ' Y '
`
„ , ~
_JZU -- .. „ ~ ...: .r_~~
...... SYu.`._ . ._.._" ,: : ~ - . . - _ -_ , . 'i p .
'.-.' - _ ' _ " '_ ~ .
~
..- , ~ . _ - •, _ .
oreaer~ I ~aw ~n~ee w'
~..59 .% ~~~ ~ . ; .' .- '" ~ Sx' - ' m~ 9y~r~ _...... .
p ~R
. . . . .., '...
--.... „_, - ~. . ;;. - ' ~
,r.: - _ , c.._ ' ~ .. .. ' . .. .
. ~~~/ ,; ..; _ , .._„ .. -- -. - . _
.. . . . ; ... . ,:a,: . .,,, .. . .. , .. . . ~. .. . . .
.' ,.; . _ .,_._.: , . . .. . -,. ,.._ ,.- . ~"_. -..:,=. ~ ,r. _ ~ 5j~'m
~•-G~~'Mf~ ~ ' , ~ - _ .SPf , _ ~~ _
_
~ ~ _ ~.~.:. w ~ ~
~-~~ ~ . .' .. ; ..~~ ... . - _ ~~' ~YY_~x~ , '
_-. = 59S ,' , ~ '-,_ -.= a _ :. "~Ja ' _ _ ' ' _ '`d .' ' ' ~
. , ~..~. ~ __ _
~o ~i '-z SLID .
~Y . " ..... . ~ _-~~ ~ '.
-_ -~''3Jyv _ '"~ '' ; " ._ .-'': _~ ...;_ ~~ y~;' -. _ ,
__ ~~~5 ~ , v~ . ~ ~ _ _ - -
, ~ Y="~ , ~ ..~.:.: =~ , :. "~'~i-__.:. .~ ~. _ SJ/6 .. .
,
=:
~ ~. - r _- ,. ~~ . .
~ ~ ~ ~. ;. .. -. . ~ ~~ -~ ~ -aa ... -.~ -~'------v_ , ~~ ; ~' ~, . . ~ ~n
:~~:,:n;::r,cilv :~ ...,.T.. ~ ~.s,n: .._ ^ ~
........... . . . ~nm c q...~.., rr.:, ~
SCALE : 1° = 49~
N ]0~
ZCYJED R-E
PAOPOSED IAf10 U%
LOT I P.IfiO ACRES, 3 IXISIINC 00~ SNAAPotAN HONE6
LOi 2 0.989 AG9ES 3 PROPOSID MAI&Ei MlE HpW N0
IAi 3 2341 AGPES 3 ~~~ID MAAKEi AAIE HqIANG
IAt 4 1191 AtRES, 4 PERNANFNi AFTOROABIE HUJANG
iAFT ORIVE 0.6M ACPE$ f PNCPDYD It-O-W DEq64110N
~m~mw~x- .u~soew.uxaaamrs
Wl tIM1IE oPoIE
emwu, oMquno eo~
Ifi10N:FE- S~BLMi:BfY~NdMISAKKYE
eommxcaerino mwz-mv
tmlattM3- WtHIMFB.Y~RNF
Zlf61YEfA9!IY MA114 ANT~IL
amern aw.ao rowz-mr
~mtiam~s- cmneevucaxi ~
ara uwexsm ~oom evw~
suieu. mwrao rox>cw
1~T19LSNY- MN~.WHiI.SAt
6N IY/INiM V16 MN
eo~u, ~¢reaoo m~vs~
IOi40.Q%1- ~~,~ttHYMSA'hNYF
eo~~m, c,uem emox
IOt1.&DXf- YWNLMWSlMtU10[IkY
'nG] WI'hP9rv;&CIIS A~fME
eou~.v.%es~no mronaas
wr4e~cax- mu~an[wuto
w~nw°ar w]~mn~`-~
LpI9~ YSIX ]- iPM1: N~IYM ktl1U%flI XFIFl1910
'aY UIMP-tt X$i16 A'EMIE
ro~ina mwoo m~mt~
LM iq 0.0X i-.CY Y. tr YLWONF E ANW.
BWiRR WIWDJ BAIR ~
wr r. a~an: ¢- r~au¢ mxA
xw ur~src ~pns Awwre
menq, wwm ormes
wrizaaaz- vmwod140nxt~GM:.
Hi0.101 W R%N4 M°IN
omm a- wawr aeu ~:aar~ nwwmu
HlIBRMdl1Y.WfTi1
BOIIP.A.tRIM1~DJ MM
WM1OlA- MLLW44ID%NWEtMWiAW¢~PW
en wwwr uor m
e~i~nu. m.ad~oo emm
mu~mo- a~wawanrcuc
w~ rcuu wmsr ~ax
ua um srtm
BWIdA.~JLUIYI lSW3
~
I. BEMiINGS AAE &4ffD ON 7HE NOA1H LWE CF 7HE NI/2 OF 7HE
w/z cs n~e ui/e aF wc sw/a o~ n¢ Nvn/a ov sECnox .n
PN, R'NW 6iH PA., AS BEhRMC N89'S5'30"E - ASSUNED.
2. RECOA~ED EASEMENb .VID PIGHi:-OF-WAY PAE 540NN ACCOR~INC i0
CNICAfA illlE OF WLORA~O, INC. 1111E CaF1YIWENT N0. -]JO)8
EFfEC-bE DAIE'.
3. PfffPAfED BY: ~~%EL 9PRRELL @ C0.
dB10 PEAAL EA4T CIftCtE ,~4
BWILDFA, GO 80.1G
(Y17) 442-Mi36
ORiE Oi PPEPMAPON~, JJNE 4, 1999
DAIE OF REN41W:
4. ONNER: EVANGELCAL LUiHERAN GOOD SAMPPoiAN SOCIEtt
4800 W. 5]7H SiREEf
P.O. BOX W3B
aoux rnus, s.o.
(805) 362-A10
Dresel, Barrell & Co. r.~.aim..~,.
-wwmnun~memmv wmm~wmwnrsw.~-~
~ wuvwa¢auvmo ~amr~oomwo~irula~~aa~
Inv v-a«
>nu... _ nb ~eb ~rvm Br UJ Nc
mabe e~ o,a.ry xo
RW va ~~.~''~~
~
~
~ FROi ~
NiS