Loading...
2 - Minutes, 03/15/01CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD MINUTES March 15, 2001 Council Chambers Room, Municipal Building 1777 Broadway, 6:00 p.m. The following are the minutes of the March 15, 2001 City of Boulder Planning Board meeting. A permanent set of these minutes is kept in Central Records, and a tape recording of the meeting is maintained for a period of seven years in Cantral Recards (telaphone: 303-441-3043). BOARD PRESENT: Peter Gowen A1 Gunter, Vice Chair Andria Jacob Tina Nielsen Alan O'Hashi Beth Pommer Mark Ruzzin, Chair STAFF PRESENT: Jerry Gordon, Deputy City Attorney Jean Gatza, Planner Bev Johnson, Planner Mary Lovrien, Board Secretary Ruth McHeyser, Director of Long Range Pianning Peter Pollock, Planning Director Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planner Randall Rutsch, Public Works/Transportation GUEST PRESENT: Jim Charlier, Charlier and Associates 1. CALL TO ORDER Vice Chair A. Gunter declared a quorum at 6:00 p.m., and the following business was conducted. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES There were no minutes to approve. 3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION There was no citizen participation. 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS There were no dispositions or Planning Board call-ups to discuss. ~ s:\plan\pb-items~minutes\010315min.wpd City of Boulder Planning Board Minutes March 15, 2001 Page 4 MOTION: On a motion by A. O'Hashi, seconded by T. Nielsen, the Planning Board retained (4-3; P. Gowen, M. Ruzzin, and A. Jacob opposed the motion) the designation of Low Density Residential for Parcel 13A. Parcel 13C, east of 30th, north of Kalmia Avenue. The proposed change would ensure a mixture of housing types, provide flexibility in the site design and compatibility with adj acent land uses, and provide enough density to ensure a significant amount of affordable housing. MOTION: On a motion by T. Nielsen, seconded by A. Gunter, the Planning Board retained (4-3; P. Gowen, M. Ruzzin, and A. Jacob opposed) the designation oF Low Density Residential on Parce113C. Parcel 13D, east of 30th, north of Kalinia Avenue. The proposed change would ensure a mixture of housing types, provide flexibility in the site design and compatibility with adj acent land uses, and provide enough density to ensure a significant amount of affordable housing. MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by A. Jacob, the Planning Board approved (6-1; A. Gunter opposed) the staff recommendation to redesignate Parcel 13D from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. AREA I SITES PROPOSED FOR MIXED USE DESIGNATIONS. The changes in Area I focus on encouraging mixed use development in commercial and industrial areas, converting sites from non-residential to residential uses, increasing density in a few select locations, and preserving the character of existing residential neighborhoods. R. McHeyser outlined the following options for Board review: 1) selectively adopt (go through the sites one by one and adopt them as appropriate); 2) adopt a resolution following Board actions clarifying intended next steps far process for implementation, specific implementation techniques, and transition provisions; or 3) not to adopt the changes until more detailed planning for all the areas or for specific areas is complete. She said that City Council has directed staff to begin the commercial growth management project after the BVCP is adopted. She said that because most of the mixed use designated sites are in commercial zones, staff would work concurrently to both implement the inixed use designations and the commercial growth management project. The Board and staff discussed definitions of mixed use to ensure that housing is provided; how to involve affected commercial landowners; the need for discussion of impacts to the overall commercial use in the community, along with the individual sites; the choice of parcels to be redesignated; the problem of becoming too specific in the land use designations; ways to increase s: \plan\pb-i lemsUninutes\010315min. wpd City of Boulder Planning Board Minutes March 15, 2001 Page 5 housing opportunities and decrease future projected job growth; the possibility of adding a separate category of "Mixed Use - Undifferentiated;" changes to the designation of mixed use business to allow up to 75 percent residential; how the proposed changes interface with the 28th Street project, such as superstops, local service, and regional bus service along the corridor, and intermodal facility just off the corridor; and the need for additional highway lanes to justify increasing housing density. The Board made changes to the following definitions: MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowea, seconded by A. Gunter, the Planning Board approved (6-1; B. Pommer opposed) a change in the definition language for Mixed Use Business to read as follows: "Mixed use - business development may be deemed appropriate and will be encouraged in some business areas. These areas may be designated Mixed Use-Business. Business character will predominate, although housing and public uses supporting housing will be included. Specific regulations will be adopted which define the desired intensity, mix, location and design characteristics of these uses." B. Pommer opposed the motion because she thought that the land designation map is getting to be too much like a zoning map, and she would prefer a more general mixed use designation. MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by A. Gunter, the Planning Board approved (6-1; B. Pommer opposed) a change in the definition language for Mixed Use Industrial to read as follows: "Mixed use-industrial development may be deemed appropriate and will be encouraged in some industrial ueas. Industrial character will predominate. Housing compatible with and appropriate to the industrial character will be included. Neighborhood retail and seryice uses may be allowed. Specific regulations will be adopted which define the desired intensity, mix, location and design characteristics of these uses." The Board included in this motion a change in the definition language for Mixed Use Residential to read as follows: "Mixed use - residential development may be deemed appropriate and will be encouraged in some residential areas. These areas may be designated Mixed Use-Residential. In these areas, residential character will predominate, although neighborhood scale retail and personal service uses will be allowed. Specific regulations will be adopted which define the desired intensity, mix, location and design chazacteristics of these uses." B. Pommer opposed the motion because she preferred the word "encourage" to "included" in the third sentence of the definition for Mixed Use Industrial. • Parcel4C, south of Boulder Community Hospital: The proposed change would reflect the existing and approved commercial uses on this stretch of Broadway. MOTION: On a motion by A. Jacob, seconded by P. Gowen, the Planning Board approved (7-0) the redesignation of Parcel4C from High Density Residential to Mixed Use Residential. M. Ruzzin said that the Mixed Use Residential designation is more appropriate because it is more relevant to the historic context of this area which was, unti] relatively recently, much more residential than business. s:\plan\pb-items\minutes\01031 Smin.wpd City of Boulder Planning Board Minutes Mazch 15, 2001 Page 6 Parcel 2A, Crossroads. The parcel is being recommended for a land use change because it is located in a dense commercial area and is an ideal location for increased intensity of mixed use development; the mall has many vacant tenant spaces and this parcel provides a prime redevelopment opportunity; the parcel is served by high frequency transit service; improvements for pedestrian, bicycle, and auto connections are being proposed for 28th Street; and housing at Crossroads will support retail and commercial as well as transit uses along the 28th and 30th Street corridors. MOTION: On a motion by P. Gowen, seconded by A. Jacob, the Planning Board approved (6-1; B. Pommer opposed) the staff recommendation to redesignate Parcel2A from Regional Business to Mixed Use Business. B. Pommer opposed the motion because she thought that this parcel should be reviewed as part of the discussion on managing commercial growth. The Board did not complete the review of the BVCP redesignations and chose to continue the meeting. MOTION: On a motion by T. Nielsen, seconded by B. Pommer, the Planning Board continued (7-0) the meeting until March 22, 2001. 7. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 10:05 p.m. s:\pl an\pb-items\minutes\010315 min.wpd