6B - Use Review #LUR2000-0003, Boulder Montessori, 3300 Redstone RoadCITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: March 1, 2001
(Agenda Item Preparation Date: February 13, 2001)
AGENDA TIT,LE:
Public hearing and consideration of a request for Use Review (LUR 2000-0003) to allow the
Boulder Montessori to increase enrollment by 15 students and 2 staff, and to increase the size
of the existing structure by an additiona1979 square feet of floor area for an additiona]
classroom, for a total of 6,724 square feet located at 3300 Redstone Road. This property is
zoned LR-D (Low Density Residential - Developing).
Applicant/Owner: Boulder Montessori School
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT:
Planning Department
Peter Pollock, Planning Director
Robert O. Cole, Director of Project Review
Don Durso, Case Manager
OVERVIEW:
The Planning Board is being asked to consider an expansion of the existing Boulder
Montessori School by adding 15 children, bringing the number of children to 90, and adding
two staff inembers in the morning. Pianning Board action is required for the Use Review
component because the proposed use is a non-residential use in a residential zoning district.
The applicant is requesting to add a one-story addition (approximately 16 feet in height)
totaling 979 square feet, located at the rear of the existing facility (to the southeast),
expanding the existing site floor area from 5,750 to 6,724 square feet. The applicant is also
proposing to add a new parking area located along Lehigh Street to the southwest side of the
school.
Staff recommends approval of the proposal, except for the additional parking area.
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 1
STATISTICS:
Application:
Project Name:
Location:
Size of Tract:
Zoning: •
Comprehensive Plan:
KEY ISSUES:
Use Review/Minor Modification to an existing Site Review
Boulder Montessori School Use Review
3300 Redstone Road
36,164 square feet
LR-D (Low Density Residential-Developing)
LR (Low Density Residential)
Will the proposed increase in students and staff at Boulder Montessori School be
reasonably compatible with, and have minimal negative impact upon, the surrounding
residential areas in terms of traffic, noise, and congestion?
2. Does the proposal provide a direct service and convenience to or reduce adverse impacts
to the surrounding neighborhood?
BACKGROUND:
Project Site and Review Historv
The site is located at the south edge of the Shanahan Ridge VIII condominium PUD (Planned
Unit Development), located at 3300 Redstone Road, at the northeast corner of Redstone Road
and Lehigh/Greenbriar.
The site is sunounded by condominium units to the north, a small open space area to the east,
and single-family homes and Open Space and Mountain Parks area to the west.
In 1976, the Shanahan Ridge filing VIII PUD was approved, which, as part of the "Village
Center" component of that approval, allowed for a day care with up to 75 students. (See
Attachment B, paragraph H& I of "Shanahan Ridge Overall Stipulations for Phase VII and
VIII"). An additional stipulation was that the day care facility should have a minimum of 15
parking spaces provided on site, with overflow parking provided by the commercial facility. The
school was built in 1979. It appears that at no time has the day care been able to provide 15
spaces on site, due to the configuration of the site.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 2
The PUD was amended in 1980 to eliminate the commercial center, which was replaced with
condominium units. This change reduced the square footage of development to the nortl~ of the
school from 19,000 square feet of commercial development to 8,000 square feet of residential
development. The overflow parking which was referenced in the 1976 approval was not
addressed in that amendment. The Boulder Montessori School has had an informal shared
parking arrangement with 16 condominium units since that time. The existing parking lot
includes eight private garages for the eight two-bedroom units, eight parking spaces designated
for the eight one-bedroom units, 13 spaces adjacent to the school for school parking, and an
additional 18 spaces to be shared between the school and the residents. It appears that 10 or 11
spaces immediately in front of the school are actually located on school property.
Current Proposal
Use Review Application
In the original PUD, the site was approved for an enrollment of 75 children. Currently the school
has 76 students enrolled, with 12 staff persons working in the morning, and 8 in the afternoon.
The proposal is to increase the approved enrollment at the school by 15 students, to have 90
students in the school at any one time. The applicant also proposes to increase staff from the 12
staff to 14 staff in the morning. No additional staff would be added in the afternoon.
Site Chanees
The Boulder Montessori Schoo] has also filed an application for a Minor Modification to the
existing Site Review (PUD) to increase the size of the structure by 979 square feet to provide an
additional classroom. The schoo] would then be able to provide for three classrooms, each with
30 students.
After the first round or review, staff indicated that the existing parking would probably not be
able to accommodate additional students. The applicant has submitted a revised application
which provides an additional parking lot for school use only, adjacent to Lehigh Street.
ANALYSIS:
Staff's analysis of the key issues is presented below. The two key issues relate to meeting the
Use Review Criteria. In addition, an analysis of the relevant Use Review criteria is included as
Attachment D.
Will the proposed increase in students and staff at Boulder Montessori School be
reasouably compatible with, and have minimal negative impact upon, the
surrounding resideatial areas in terms of traffic, noise and congestion?
s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 3
The operating characteristics of the school make it difficult to assess the impacts of the increased
number of trips. The school has a very flexible schedule, with six different options that parents
can choose from in terms of drop-off and pick-up times. (See applicanYs parking study for
existing and proposed school start options, page 22, Attachment F). Because of this, there are no
real "peak" times when traffic is more of an impact than others. There is a concentration of drop-
offs between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m., an increase in traffic around noon, and another slight increase
between 5 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. as shown in the applicant's parking study. As noted in the
applicanYs parking analysis and observed by staff, sometimes there have been vehicles parked
illegally on the site (vehicles parked in areas which are not legal parking spaces). While staff has
not been able to tell to whom these vehicles belong (the schoo] or the residents), the applicant has
indicated that they b.elong to residents.
Staff has made numerous visits to the site at varying times of the day since November. Traffic
and parking impacts have varied from a fairly high level of congestion and traffic, to no impacts.
Therefore, staff required a detailed parking study, included as Attachment F. The applicant has
asserted that many of the eight garages that are assigned to the two-bedroom units are not used by
the residents to park their cars but are used for storage, adding to the number of cars that
residents park in the shared parking spaces in the lot. The applicant has asked that they not be
"penalized" for this impact.
Staff believes that there are three ways to evaluate this proposal. First, look at required parking
based upon the two uses, residential and non-residential, to determine if the uses meet the
required parking requirements of the land use code, regardless of the actual parking demand.
Second, evaluate the proposal based upon the parking impacts to the site, taking into account
which of the uses is causing the impacts. Third, look at the number of vehicle trips generated by
the school, regardless of the number of cars parking at the site at any one time.
Land Use Code Pazkine Requirements
Under the first way of analyzing parking, the residential uses would require 20 spaces (one for
each one-bedroom unit, and 1.5 for each two-bedroom unit). The school, as proposed, would
require 23 spaces (one space for every 300 square feet of floor area). Therefore, a total of 43
parking spaces would be required on site. The site currently has 46 spaces available, including
the garages, and would meet the parking requirements under the land use code.
Actual Parking Demand
The second way of analyzing parking is by considering the original PUD's parking requirements
for the school, and the actual demand that can be anticipated by the increase in students. This is
more difficult because the parking lot is a"shared" parking concept. While the school's parking
requirements causes some negative impacts to the parking lot, so does the parking requirements
of the residents. This may be due to a number oF factors, including a general increase in the ratio
of vehicles owned per person since the time that the PUD was approved, or may be due to the
applicanYs assertion that residents are not using their garages for parking, thereby creating a
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 4
heavier parking demand on the site. The original PUD required that the schoo] maintain 15
parking spaces. Therefore, if the school, along with the proposed increase in the number of
children, is expected to utilize 15 or fewer spaces (as was required in the ariginal approval), staff
believes that it would be reasonable to support this proposal.
The applicant has provided a parking study and analysis, which estimates the number of cars
parked at the site at any one time, inctuding the increase in children. Based upon that study,
there are only a few periods where more than 15 parking spaces are utilized by the school.
Furthermore, the staff and the applicant have also agreed upon the following:
a. New schedule options which allow for greater flexibility and staggering of drop-
off and pick-up times.
b. Continue to encourage carpooling.
c. Boulder Montessori School shall continue to provide Eco-passes to all employees.
Trip Generation Anal,Ysis
The third way of analyzing the application is in terms of additional trips to the site:
a. 24-Hour Period
The applicant proposes to increase enrollment by 15 students in the preschool and two
staff inembers in the morning. According to Trip Generation, (Institute of Traffic
Engineers, 6th Ed.) trip generation per student for a private pre-school is approximately
4.52 trips per 24-hour period. This would mean that an additionai 67.8 trips per day
would be generated by the additional children (a trip, for purposes of this analysis is one-
way only. A parent dropping off one child would be generating two trips, one into the
site and one out of the site). Therefore, based upon the Trip Generation numbers, the
additiona] children should result in an additional 34 vehicles coming to the site each day.
However, based upon the traffic information provided by the applicant, approximately
115 vehicles come to the school on an average day. This would mean the school use is
actually generating approximately 3.5 trips per student per 24-hour period, which would
result in about 45.6 trips per day, or 23 additional vehicles coming to the site each day.
Tliese numbers indicate that this particular site produces fewer trips on average than a
typical pre-schoolland use.
b. Peak-Hour Trins
Another way to look at it is in terms of peak traffic generation. According to Trip
Generation, each additional child should generate an additional 0.82 during the morning
peak hour, and 0.86 in the aftarnoon peak hour, for a combined trip generation of 1.68
trips per day at peak hour times. This means that the additional students would be
expected to generate an additiona125 vehicular trips (one into the site and one out of the
site), or 12.5 additional vehicle visits per day at peak hours above what has been
s:\plan\pb-itetns~nemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 5
approved. Because of the staggered start and end times of this school, a peak hours
evaluation has limited use in evaluating the site, and the total additional trips per day is
probably a better indication of overali impact to the site.
After considering the three ways of evaluating the traffic impacts, staff has concluded that the
increase in traffic will have a minimal negative impact upon the surrounding neighbarhood.
Therefore, staff does not feel that the proposed additional parking is necessary to accommodate
parking needs. Further, the area that is the proposed location for the additional parking lot
currently provides a buffer far the school from Lehigh, and the berm which currently exists
reduces the visual impact of the school to the road. The area also includes a high concentration
of quality plant material.
2. Does the proposal provide a direct service and convenience to or reduce adverse
impacts to the surrounding neighborhood?
The key elements of the Use Review criteria that the applicants must show include one of the
following:
a. Provides a direct service and convenience to the surrounding neighborhood, or
b. Reduces adverse impacts to the surrounding neighborhood.
Convenience to the Surroundin~Neighbarhood
A total of sixty-seven families have children who attend Boulder Montesorri School. Of these,
38 families (57%) live in the general vicinity of the school (see applicant's Appendix C, page 18,
of the written statement, Attachment G). The school provides a convenience to the surrounding
neighborhood by providing an additional choice in schooling opportunities for the children of the
families that live in the surrounding area. Without this opportunity, increased traffic and travel
would be required for the children nearby to attend a similar type of schoo] farther away.
Reduces Adverse Impacts to the Surroundin~ Neighborhood
The improvements to the site outlined under Key Issue Number 1 above should reduce the
impacts that the school is currently generating within the neighborhood.
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
Staff comments dated November 27 and December 21, 2000 are included as Attachment C.
PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS:
Required public notice was given in the form of written notification mailed to all property
owners within 600 feet of the subject property and a sign posted on the property for at least 10
days. All notice requirements of Section 9-4-2, B.R.C. 1981 have been met. The Planning
Board agenda was published in the Daily Camera.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 6
The applicant has met with neighbors and the homeowner's association prior to this submittal,
and most recently the week of February 12, 2001 (as part of homeowner's association meeting).
Staff has received nine letters and e-mails from neighbors (Attachment E) and three phone calls.
Most of the correspondence was from residents who share parking with the school. They voiced
concerns related to traffic in the parking ]ot and neighborhood and the effects of an expansion in
terms of increasing parking difficulties, increasing building mass, and blocking views. Some of
the letters question whether the school serves the neighborhood. Most requested that the
application be denied.
STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the review of the written application, discussions with the applicant, multiple site visits,
and evaluation of the Use Review Criteria, staff finds that the application satisfies the Use
Review criteria, as specified in Section 9-4-9, B.R.C., 1981.
Therefore, staff recommends that the Planning Board approve Use Review # LUR2000-00003,
incorparating this staff inemorandum and the attached Use Review Criteria Checklist as findings
of fact, with the following conditions of approval:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The Applicant shal] comply with all previous requirements of the 1976 and 1980 prior
approvals for the Shanahan Ridge VIII Planned Unit Development.
2. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development is constructed,
maintained, and operated in compliance with the ApplicanYs Use Review documents
dated October 25/27, 2000, December 4, 2000, and the parking study dated February 5,
2001, on file with the city of Boulder Planning Department, except for the following
changes to the site plan (Appendix A of the ApplicanYs December 4, 2000 submittal):
a. The additional parking azea as depicted on the ApplicanYs written statement,
pages 14, 16 and 17, shall not be built. Additional parking spaces shall be
provided to the south of the handicapped space, in place of the drive aisle.
b. All proposed changes to the site, including signage and striping which are not on
Boulder Montessori School property, are subject to approval and agreement with
Shanahan VIII Homeowner's Association.
c. Sign number 26 shall be subject to the sight-triangle requirements of the land use
code.
d. Signs 9 and 10 shall include an additional notation of "no school parking."
3. The Applicant shall not expand or modify the approved use, except pursuant to
Subsection 9-4-9(g), B.RC. 1981.
s:\plan\pb-items~nemos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 7
4. The Applicant shall provide notice to neighboring property owners of major events
through newsletters, including 1he time and date of ineetings and events that occur outside
of regular class time.
5. The Applicant shatl continue to provide Eco-passes to al] employees.
6. Construction traffic, including delivery of materials, shall be allowed upon the school site
only. None of the shared parking spaces shall be used by construction equipment,
materials, or construction workers' vehicles during construction.
Approved By:
>2~~~ l~ i ~G ~
Peter Pollock
Planning Director
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A:
Attachment B:
Attachment C:
Attachment D:
Attachment E:
Attachment F:
Attachment G:
Vicinity Map
Excerpts from original PUD and amendments, 1976
and 1980
Development Review Results and Comments
Use Review Criteria Checklist
Public Conespondence
ApplicanYs Parking Study, dated February 5, 2001
ApplicanYs Written Statement, with attachments
and proposed plans
s:\plan\pb-items~memos\ddmontessori.memo.wpd AGENDA ITEM # 6B Paee 8
i i i_ i i_i_i_ i i i i i_ i i i_ __-__ _ _-',~
~ `~ ~~ ~~'~;~ ~
a
0
w
~~~
MapLink
City of Boulder GIS
n~.~mo.~~,~~o~n<v~~~~no~~m~~~~,~~~~ -
pro.iAed ss Rrryhm~l rryrnro~.~ian anlp.
The Gp~ ol6oulAer provida no uvrnmp,
eaprnwd ar implvd, ss m ~he aamrap-
md/or.amplnenns~iih. mforimuon
uined hereon
aaenda Item ~_ r--~•__ ._ Paae N_ ___
TopLeftl This i~ct~i~i~b~C~e~~F$-~~I~~tNf~l~nl~'~i~?~hr~ifu'~\10067\1006750
ATTACHMENT B
Ngenda 1(em p__ l~ page R~~
Bottom Left ]Bo~i~ ~i~t~Y¢i~~.~~~CD~1:~5e\€~IaeL•i ~49~ ~#~x~rli rR~Ja 10067\ 1006750.1
TopLeftl This is the date : 02-05-~0~~en~e~R~ii~lislfhe~tii$rt~e ~i~1~~.411~"1~flLink\Planning\10067\1006751.ti1
l~ !I ~~ '; ~ ~~ f
~ ~ ~ ~ =,.A.a ..~ ~..,. ~- ~ -- ~ --
_
~ , .
~ ~~ I ) RGMSED S'~ PMN (QC 4HANAHA^~ NvE~E G. . . . ... . . . . : ~
/ / { FcyKIP+' rJOLW RMi('M1C.FAI'f~0~+ L~ WM1Mtt uur.Kfi ~f~P a14v ' '-TI-
.. ~ ~l ct Pw-~w syuu.e rrisnv'(ne s.ws ^R~°~T° luv. r ~~~m ~ . . . ~ - ~
~ ~ /~~ irypip<. . ~ - ~ ~- ~ ~ . .. i I I~~. ~.
%
/ wun 1
' a5 frD I .-., ~:..~,r . ~ ~ ~ .1 .'
/ / I ,w~~
~; a~az~+e.n cwr nm ~ M~ r w,~ .,. 1 ;~...._. .. '
r„~ti Il°I
aN ~ Us ~ ~!° I-
-'____ ___ / :~ /~ i"4nl"~ , wai __' _ ' ~ f 7
. . _-- ~ . . ' . Ar ~~ a~ a - li
. _ ~~ ~ ~ ae n~r.m~o ~ ~~~s.m~.ea io. ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ - ..('. . i
~- ~ ~- . - ~ i ' ~~. ~ ~. ~ , m w I y,. ~sa I I ,
~ _,~ ~3% ~~ r; ~ { S ~ j- ~
_` ~ ~~- ~,~ - ~ ~."~'~ 'f~ ~~~1 °m" .°!'T
Q P ~ \
~r ', ~ vj r~~'~4 t/~ / ~
~ il . ~ ' L` . `~ .I ' F/YG . ~
.. ~ - ~ ~,I . j. _ISO a'Q I e = _b . a4 u ~~c ~ ; - ~ _ i j _ I , ~
-~ r%~ _
da '~ ~ r ' • -~
YF z - j i ' '. ~~_ ' ' , `' ~.."
r ~ ~
1~ . ~ ~ I ('I f ~ _~ ~. ~
. Yi
~: ~ 4i.~.,_ . ~ L ~ ~~ /.i~i _~ ..'-uW~Y!.s
~ ~~ 1
_ _ pi ' ~~ w~. ,
, . __r~ ~ ' ~.. .I '.t..
~ ; ~ ~ ~}r~ ;~ - ,
. -- . _ __~` __ ~ _~__, '-t '~ 'y_-~,-~,-5 ' '~~
. . .. ~ _. _ `._\.. ~`~ ~ . ..~o~.._~ .
~._. ~~ .~ , `. -/ v~~~'l ~
~ .. ~ / ~ . ~ ,~~. - ``\`~: . '\ 9 ...r~.Y ~ ~..~. ~~~~ /
3
~
m
~
a
m
m
3
r
i~
~
~,
~
~
~~
°m`°sa,....~"~ ~
-- ~- --
_ - - -~ 4'~`~ y"'A' :I .
~ -~ ~+.r+~nr
'J ~uuun
BottomLeftl This is the date ~(~ . . i,;~b~s T~±~Q~?~~~~;~a~~~,'~q""~`,p1~~"'""~\~nnc~~~~ ~~~,~~~ ~~;
TopLeftl This i~c~~i~i~b~C~e~~F$-~~I~i~t~~na~is2~C~rRiPa'~\10068\1006840.tif
, ._ .. ... _ .,. ---. . . . . _ ~ ~, --._~
. .: ~ r'~'~.,..t+
~ .
~4tARAR1tN itiDGE ' ,
i-verall 6tipalsti~ae fot M~aea ~Fy ard ~j=; ! ~
. ' ~~
~. fnbdtvtKat ~QttirM~atr: All Ctty ~erbdlalttie e+d o~t requlr~eh riLl b at •'
, ~nclaAing revAwi ~ aceeptat~se Dy lt~El~.e /pti'1ti~s. Eteff ~! ~rsai.e~s tttd ,~ '
e~sstnntlon rt ~il rtilttin sud Rtzpu. .
1. ndns ~ aieweae~s Ceepleq '~endseepfot ~lan~ rlli -~ web~ittrd b~itw Ctt~' .
lap-ina Aapart~t and ~ppzowiQ ~ti~T p~i~tr[~a~ ~! b~tildla~ pm~;q t~t ya~
/+rtiee ~! wnrerneeR~• 1'hm Pl/nt M~1 ~v ~~ ~f ~roneA pv~t Ad ~p~c;fy .
~lant arctarial type, ea'lipar ar Ktn, sad ~ailber~ Plavs H11 •lr. ~~ittWt
asM ~PFro~d sw~tieg Lsd~ca~aQ PrtYion~ ~~tt~ets. Th~ 1[oMwrnrr'• ~n~etati+~n
~ ~~sPa+sible t~r ~ ymdretpii~ tttl p~aiff~na~ ~f GTa~nDrlaT/Iwhijh Mdian, .
C. erL1Llies !rr t~: ~"4~111nE pn4t r~ll hav~ Itrtil~bls
• AaTtl~u p ot sn a rst a wrved ~fas~.'s and the ue~ ~! an ~et-dwr ' `
~ ewrl~z. Th~n co~en f~ntllttl~s viii 6t adaiMetraCed by Eift q~e~rnyr~R
*~ssiattsn. Th~ pesl fscil4ty Ml1I b~ •dpnt~ Es ~er-e •~e~btaed Z00 uait ~
pspalation ~ad wili laclude ~n xYehit~ctnr~tilly ~p~tibl~ W42d1e~ vith ~rpr~ •~
tfianEing r~wt, eQuiPwqt te+d tslat• pm~lt.
D. ~C!~t ~inr_k~: A eintaeam ~esbl~»d ~rea ~f S.SO /leres vill ~c deQieated ~e ~~im ~
o! S~anahan Fiva~ S~wn~ and Bi$Rt f~r we s~ t Ctty Ta~lc. Thts htk vili b~
dw~lop~ ~rr th~ ~Sre~at rlth the larics hpsrtmnt ~s+rri~e~31 apPr~v~d 1y Paskr . ~
•nd PlnmtinE BosrQ~. .
. .
B. Greenbrdar_~-1~tsttde The link ~! Or'a~nbrt~r Eon2e~~rd e+td 1.Mi~11 ~trwt ~rj~ p
to~pl~t~ • er• nal oceapanc7 ~n secv{ ta 6hanthen Ridge iwa~ wnQ Eisfit. ~'iy ;
Ve'~"'lnE turfaee ~ed~ ~n sh~ ~ttetn Kd• ~f ~iw ~ieik ~q be lelsrd ~n~ Mntat ~n~ .
~a~t fla~t ~ccupu~cy; bov~~r~ e tria=hl~ ~ttua~ral eas~ (to ~tq np~ciftcs~~')
vlll b~ ~plete befora !lret ~eenpancy in EkttiafiaA Saven md E~ght ~an ~ieve',
ayenda Item ~ ~Li Page ~ ~
Bottom Left lBo~imi~ ~i~tlt~Y¢i~~`d.~B~~CD~:~fie\ftlasL•i ~~P~~r~i r~VQ 10068\ 1006840.tif
TopLeftl This i~ct~i~i~b~~~£~~~~I~~t},ri~~nl~~i~.~'.I~rRi~'g\10068\1006840.tif
~ , ~ y ~ •r ,. .. ,! ,~. ,; ' . 4. ~ . . y, ,.;,
1. I~c~ ~2reMatrt 1ene~s rili br bait~ ~~i trvat+e~'Pri~T.' otistl ' Kiai,~ri M;. .t i
nrsint ahin tn~d~d Rn tM faeii4tT; 'j'~~Iti ~i11CtC ~11 'be ' CC1~i~E • ,
. aafA~ltt1 ~nteriale.4s Rhs Dv2ldicrss ~ed rMLll Wf,Iwiit 6y' th~:fl~ ~.'~w ~1 ;~?
• • .. - , ~, ~. ~ -,,t~~i v. ~ . t
e.
k'BiXu~ }Anit E~ Rn ~oeiar~sne*;~ri'!~!ip~r ~`i'[-t~al~ ef ~t~qairiihntr°~i {N. ~ ,~
~Ca) ot ~t-. s.u3an ~sa. r.r'1C~i3 ai~d '!H-l~ soTw. ~f3sn M. ~t~,ren.r'~~.~r~,~p at}
~ IRti~! .eat ttore CfwM ~ ~qmMt~ [oot e~' ttpi ,~~nC' liaaar #iot ~'f bui7.dini t~i~ ~' `.;
d' bs u~sd Ay Rf~a d~wlapik X~t ~espst R~a~hia~ ~ad tust'~o:~ ;M~aa:~ ~4u~ N ~~
~/l~e•.r' fiit .f 4M~lieint !ldat~t+.'~~ il*~tiiabl. ~e tt-~ tt~ali:r i.t ~w1~~ ~'" r
. r~rch.r.e~., .~~e-. ~irtuil b. em+ tila.~e.~.a .,r ~.a~r.ctlr t~~lu~a+r~a i~s.. ,.
R~l+l~'inat~d. laeR [1SirTLLna'ttan rt~a11 s. wre.a ~c ,e.t~ad ,~L~OD P:tir a~{ )e0~'~.R. ~: .
~n..s cii~s:.r ,ts~-.~.oite~y ~:rre ~t«- ,~h~..a. , ~t.*.,~~sa.Ww ° ~~
1~* ~n rbatn wr p~l wl..le~ ~i -~t Xse~r 1}: oo Ps~r.. '~ ' ~s ,,1:
, i . ' : ' '. ~ ~ r , ~ . '' .!'
ar+~tr•r~ic/'e~. .~pK .1~eanc:!1~ ~~ aw ~t" ~' b~rtai~ tn Riw rt~,i -. ' '~'~
rs~itto~d Rt ~+ra~ a~, ffirp ~ mt Mv~i'~t~,~~ a reiadtr reMllss;' '~ ~,~°
M~ ~uNr~r+v~ilclC~"~.~i.li:bi v~rile+-~e ~r ~as ~~l.vtcl.n it •i5~dle~ t .
Rstt baiqiai 7M1whi~tlw~' qtMt~ ~i'20' ,l.n ~LM/th- (8M ~se1~~M '
~+~~ ~ tir 4
. '~R+ tta Rtslldik~ rti~it ~NM1~'I.~t p~w1dlt+~d. ~~1'~ ~~h-, arid"~n1Nc~~~~~. ~ i ~ ~
',4~"~fri~t. . . . , , , ' !;: ~ ~ .: s~ _ - '
~ . 6.rt~: p~. ~~SC. ....'• ~;, ,'.I~..:~'~l.Y '~ ; ..'.
~~ : ~f . ~.• ~ . iy ~ . ~r..,i ..
~an-.e ~nt::a.~nt.s~.'s n~tt ~ti as~i~dri~t ~•~sa. +ra~~tlr~t ~~ .r+ ' ~
Is~ Mfin~l[ as N MiiNr ~atstiai~, ~-Q coli~ 07~ tM neEadf~ p~e.. .; , ~:~~1
• Q. . . 'y ~ ~ • . M ~~'1
~Y ~ . ' S~. ~ ~~
~., • :,j
Aii xttail Kset MiII M w~~~st t~''~+~fBA 11VP'eWrhri yy N~ d~ti+Mt t6d ~
apartllM~t aad ru~t ba eo~ttibii qi~A ~e1~ ~iset-tEiornral p.n1t~-t 1ri roh~ M'~~ ;q
~ r ~ COlof~ IIIdC1C~ ~" " ~ • .. .'' ~ ,, ; j~ ' , .
..._ ...,,~ 7!o^~Irwe'wa'irv~. • . 1 ° .+''
, ~~ . rsiw,raa-,
' ~N~ .~~t~ ~» v~s~-t t~ etw r~tt~ls~ ~t:. ,dt~ ~. e+wrr~lts:3 'f `.r~lstsai'~~e. ~~ y..,,
lt a~tiw~ letr .piii~ t Miaisu~ nu~bi'r , ,~~~
~' (rrsvf~ ~! 185 o~ae'A-.~ I.~fht' Dq' ~1~
w~til ~v~ e wnniscr Mf ~5 hrtaa d1r'~-3i~ wiil~ +wrflew P=!'k1ui P~'id.d,~y~ ~1~'~ . '
u ~
~~'lcial fecil~t9• . .t ~ ,. .•r. :~, :. ' a; . ' ' . ~ '~ ~,~.
' ' , .v tiR '
t. ,~~ ~i> a....~„ n,t ~~t~ s.ncfi~ wi::;~1~.ii, emt aI'i~wQ b~r ~ •,,.
asna ;r Mlll'~s tYl {Ht~ ~'~upatitl2f'ait~J~ M~h1coltloet iNeerpt ~iJ ~' ': :.,,~.
bY q~ial"'tavilll.tab~srt ts ,e'PPtovtl i~ ~~-,~;ipiaaai~ at~'!'f.~. ~TAI~F 'IZG1/IG~/ h+N /y
t~ A tarY'~y r.*cevraec ana ss~~l etlr cot Rb-ixeuM 3,~0o pwrar`~~pi..~ T-/ ~
. MiI2 bt p~tl~it~d si R`}p~c3el s.+Xiv Ca:ar.; ( Nor a. ~asTl.~omn ;~i'Y'~E C.~T.. i!C'~
~:. . ~ •
;~yentla Ifem n .,_~~ page N~
Bottom Left ]Bo~tlmi~ ~i~tl~t~1~i~~.~B~a~CD~1:~~e\€~h~sL•i ~~I~~O~i r~VQ 10068\ 1006840.tif
ATTACHMENT C
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
DATE OF COMMENTS: November 27,2000
CASE MANAGER: Don Durso
LOCATION: 3300 REDSTONE RD
COORDINATES: S05W04
REVIEW TYPE: Use Review
REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2000-00003
APPLICANT: VERN SEIEROE
DESCRIPTION: USE REVIEW: Expand student population from 75 to 90 students.
VARATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: None
REVIEW FINDINGS
Application does not meet criteria; a revision is necessary or a recommendation of denial wlll
forwarded to the planning 8oard.
Staff finds that the applicant has not demonstrated that the application meets the use review criteria relating to:
1. Being reasonably compatible with and have minimal negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
2. Providing a direct service or convenience to the neighborhood.
3. Site layout regarding the parking lot.
Additionally, the application is deficient in the foilowing ways:
1. Insufficient vested rights request
The applicant may choose to file a revised application to address the staff findings and comments below. If no
revised application is filed by January 17, 2001, the Planning Department will recommend to Planning Board
that this application be denied.
The city review team for this application is avaiiable to meet with you to discuss the findings, assist in resolving
outstanding issues, and discuss the next steps for the appiication. Please contact your case manager to set an
appointment.
II. CITY REQUIREMENTS
Access/Circulation
Staff believes that the application does not meet the use review criteria which requires that the use "have minimal
negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood". Based on level of congestion of on-site, on-street, and illegal
parking (parking parallel along the most northern area of the lot) that staff has observed at the site, staff does not
support additionai students or staff on this site. The current use of this site appears to aiready be impacting the
neighborhood negatively. The applicant, in a resubmittal, should show how these site issues could be addressed
through site improvements or other means.
The applicant has given general information regarding whether the use serves the neighborhood. They have stated
that half the students live within two miles of the site. At the recent review by Planning Board of the Friends' School, the
Board had a difficult time finding that the use served the neighborhood, and three of six members voted to find that it
did not serve the neighborhood. Because of this, a further breakdown of the location of students should be provided,
either by mapping the location of families' residences, or by further breaking down the distances, such as walking
distance, within Y. miie, one mile, etc.
Fire Protection
1. Prior to final inspection, applicant wili be required to extend existing automatic fire sprinkler and fire alarm system
protection into new construction. Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350.
~;genaa Itein ;^ ,_~?~i __ paga ri ~
Landscaping
No requirements at this time. Bev Johnson, 303-441-3272
Miscellaneous
The trash and recycling area at the school does not meet the requirements of 9-3.3-25. Modification of this area will be
a requirement of building permit, should fhe use review be approved by Planning Board.
Construction traffic, materials, and blocking of parking spaces are a concern, and will only be allowed upon the site
actually owned by the school. A condition of approval would be that none of the shared parking spaces could be used
by construction equipment, materials, or construction workers during construction, if the expansion is approved by
Planning Board.
Neighborhood Comments
Staff has received three phone calls and three letters (attached) related to the expansion of the day care, all of which
were from residents who share the parking lot with the school. All three cails were against allowing more children in the
school. Concerns included difficulty in finding parking spaces, parents of children parking in condominium-designated
spaces, parking in illegal areas not designated as parking spaces, and blocking their cars. One neighbor indicated that
more noise from more cars would be a problem.
Parking
The handicapped parking space does not meet the City of Boulder dimensions, as required by 9-3.3-11(c).
The proposed new parking space adjacent to the fire lane (indicated as space number 39, and possibly 38) blocks the
required access to the fire lane. This area must remain open, as required in the revised site plan dated July 25, 1980,
for at least 25 feet from the garage face (see attached).
Much of the signage at the site is difficult to read due to Iack of maintenance. The striping is almost non-existent in the
lot as well, and difficult to determine where the spaces are located. If Planning Board approves this application, a
requirement of approval will be that all signs, illegibie or damaged signs, should be repaired or replaced, and the
parking lot restriped. The signs include a fire lane/no parking sign, which is almost illegible, signs indicating which
surface spaces are reserved for residents.
The applicanYs parking analysis appears to be incorrect with respect to the parking lot immediately adjacent to the
school. It states that there are 11 spaces focated on or assigned to the school, 8 garage spaces, and 29 open
unassigned spaces. It appears that 8 of the spaces (indicated as numbers 14, 15, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 16) are
assigned to particular units as are the garages, and are not shared spaces as set forth in the applicant's written
statement, leaving only 18 spaces as shared parking. Additionally, the Shanahan 8 PUD required that the school
maintain 15 spaces. W ith the addition proposed to the school, for a total of 6778.4 square feet, the school would now
require 22 spaces under the current code requirement of one space for each 300 square feet. W hile it appears that the
site would still meet the parking requirements under the code by using the shared spaces for accommodating both the
condominium and school uses (46 required where 47 exist today), the parking analysis on page 8 should be corrected.
While the site may meet the Land Use Code regarding the required parking, staff is actually assessing the needs of the
use, as required under the use review criteria, that the use does negatively impact the neighborhood. As stated above
(access comments) staff feeis that the use does not meet this criteria.
The following departments had no requirements: Forester
III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
Access/Circulation
The applicant is not required to provide a Traffic Impact Assessment. However, it is advised that the applicant conduct
a limited traffic assessment to address specific traffic concerns from members of the neighborhood and staff for the
Planning Board hearing.
Steve Durian, 303-441-4493
Building a~d Housing Codes
Addition must meet all requirements of the building codes in effect at the time of permit application. Steve Brown, 441-
3172
~g~~~naa Itein t~ _~~C'2 Pa~ # /Jr .
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
DATE OF COMMENTS: December 21, 2000
CASE MANAGER: Don Durso
LOCATION: 3300 REDSTONE RD
COORDINATES: S05W04
REVIEW TYPE: Use Review
REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2000-00003
APPLICANT: VERN SEIEROE
DESCRIPTION: USE REVIEW: Proposal to expand student population from 75 to 90 students. An
expansion of the building by 979 square feet to accommodate the increase in students
is also being proposed as part of a separate review.
VARIATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: None
I. REVIEW FINDINGS
The applicant has nof yet demonstrated that the application meets the criteria wlth respect to the parking impact
on the surrounding residents:
Staff finds that the applicant has not demonstrated that the application meets the use review criteria relating to:
1. Being reasonably compatible with and having minimal negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
2. Site layout regarding the parking lot.
The city review team for this application is available to meet with you to discuss the findings, assist in resolving outstanding
issues, and discuss the next steps for the application. Please contact your case manager to set an appointment.
II. CITY REQUIREMENTS
AccesslCirculation
1. Staff has further reviewed the proposed parking configurations, including a number of site visits. Staff does not
support placing parking at the proposed location due to the high quality of the native plants, the buffer it provides for
the school from Greenbriar, and the berming which reduces the impact of the school upon pedestrian and vehicular
traffic along the street. Increasing the number of students at the site at the expense of losing this landscaped area is
not supported. However, the applciant can take this proposal, with additional parking forward to Planning Board for its
consideration.
Despite the fact that the school is not the sole cause of the parking IoYs overuse, additional traffic will exacerbate this
problem. Staff has made numerous visits to the site at varying times of the day over the past month. Observations
have varied from a high level of congestion and traffic impacts to none. The lower traffic levels have been observed
recently, and it is difficult to evaluate whether this is because of the time of the year (holiday season) or for other
reasons. The initial traffic study that the applicants have submitted is not sufficient to gage the level of use at this site,
or to tell to whom the vehicles belong which are using the parking lot (school-staff, drop-off, residents). The original
PUD required that the school maintain 15 parking spaces. If the school, along with the increased number of children,
are expected to utilize 15 or fewer spaces, staff could support this proposal. If the school is expected to utiiize greater
than 15 spaces, then staff would not support the proposal. A further parking and traffic study should be conducted,
which documents how many cars are entering and leaving the parking tot from what type of use (staff, child drop-off
and pick-up, or resident). This study should be conducted over a greater time frame than just one day, and should be
conducted when it appears that most people (both residents and families at the school) are back in town after the
holidays, which is probably no earlier than the January 8~h, 2001 week. Staff will also be continuing to monitor traffic at
the site as well.
,~,~t(~i0fiu IC~III G _[~L) ~fi~ ~i ~~ _
3. Another option would be to establish an agreement between the owners of the parking lot to reserve parking for the
school and residents and to pursue active enforcement of parking violators. Additional striping and signing would be
required to appropriately delineate the appropriate use of this parking iot. Part of this signing and striping effort would
include clearly delineating the fire access to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall. This proposal seems unlikely, given
the objection to the eicpansion by residents as well as members of the HOA.
Neighborhood Comments
Staff has received three phone calls and three letters (already provided to the applicant) related to the expansion of the
daycare, all of which were from residents who share the parking lot with the school. All three calls were against allowing
more children in the school. Concerns included difficulty in finding parking spaces, parents of children parking in
condominium-designated spaces, parking in illegal areas not designated as parking spaces, and blocking their cars. One
neighbor indicated that the noise from more cars would be a problem.
Recommended Conditions
The following wili be included in the Planning Board memorandum as recommended conditions, if the project is approved
1. Construction traffic, materials, and blocking of parking spaces are a concern, and will only be allowed upon the site
actually owned by the school. None of the shared parking spaces shall be used by construction equipment,
materiais, or construction workers' vehicles during construction.
2. All signs, illegible or damaged signs, should be repaired or replaced, and the parking lot restriped. The signs include a
fire lane/no parking sign, and signs indicating which surface spaces are reserved for residents.
3. The trash and recycling area at the school does not meet the requirements of 9-3.3-25. Modification of this area will be
a requirement of building permit, should the use review be approved by Planning Board.
III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
Drainage
If the Planning Board approves this project, the applicant is advised that any expansion of the existing parking lot area will
require a drainage plan and report that is prepared by a licensed engineer to be submitted to the city for review and
approval. Said plan and report shall be done in conformance with the citys Design and Construction Standards and
submitted through the Technical Document Review process.
Fire Protection
Prior to final inspection, the applicant will be required to extend existing automatic fire sprinkler and fire alarm system
protection into new construction. Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350.
.y~~, ~da Igerr~ ~~ _~ 6._ trage ~ 1 Z. `
ATTACHMENT D
CITY CODE CRITERIA CHECKLIST:
Use Review Criteria
The use is consistent with the purpose of the zoning district as set forth in Section 9-
2-i, "Zoning Districts Established," BRC, 1981, except in the case of a non-
conforming use; Zoning District:
The use of this property as a school is allowed by use review in this zone.
2. The use either:
(A) Provides direct service or convenience to or reduces adverse impacts to the
surrounding uses or neighborhood;
Thirty-eight families out of a total of 67 families live in the general vicinity of the school
(see applicant's appendix c, page 18, of their written statement). The school provides a
convenience to the surrounding neighborhood, by providing an additional choice in
schooling opportunities for the children of the families that live in the surrounding area.
Without this opportunity, increased traffic and travel would be required for the children
nearby to attend a similar type of school further away.
(B) Provides a compatible transition between higher intensity and lower intensity uses;
N/A
(C) Is necessary to foster a specific city policy, as expressed in the BVCP, including
without limitation, historic preservation, moderate income housing, residential and
non-residential mixed uses in appropriate locations, and group Iiving arrangements
for special populations; or
N/A
(D) Is an existing legal non-conforming use or a change thereto that is permitted under
subsection (e) of this section.
N/A
3. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed
development or change to au existing development are such that the use will be
reasonably compatible with and have minimal negative impact on the use of the
nearby properties;
The proposed addition of approximately 1,000 square feet is designed to be lower than
the existing structure. The location behind the existing school will further reduce the
visual impacts of the addition.
~ ~,!!~ ~, r: ;i i;6i;; r, _~'-C.J.-- N:a~2 ii ;~O_, _°--
The addition of 15 students will have a minimal increase in traffic. Staff and the
applicant have agreed that the following will be necessary to minimize the negative
impacts of increasing this enrollment:
1. New schedule options shall be explored which may allow for greater flexibility
and staggering of drop-off and pick-up times.
2. Continue to encourage carpooling.
3. Encourage parents to park in school designated spaces, and not off-site or in
tenant spaces.
4. Boulder Montessori Schoo] shall continue to provide Eco-passes to all employees.
4. As compared to development permitted under Section 9-3.1-1, "Permitted Uses of
Land," BRC 1981, in the zone, or as compared to the existing level of impact of a
non-conforming use, the proposed development will not significantly adversely
affect the infrastructure of the surrounding area, including without limitation,
water, wastewater, and storm drainage utilities and streets.
The addition and increased eru~ollment will not adversely affect the infrastructure of the
surrounding area.
5. The use will not change the predominant character oFthe surrounding area.
The proposed use is the same as the current use, but will expand the number of children
in the preschool from 15 to 30. 15 additional children will not change the predominant
character of the area.
,I;~~~Qui"G(ii~~, (P~ h~3~£k~ :-
Attachment E
Public Correspondence
~a,ieriua~~err~,~ 1o6.--I~a~a~~r o?D -
Iqv-27-00 02:02P
Alex Hoahn, Ph.D,
Novemoer i~, 2~00
Mr. Don Du-so
ProjeC! SwR MMiper
dry ot 8ouiaer Buaanp Sarvias CemK
t739 Broai0wq.17+ko Floot, P.O.Bax 791
Dou Q{~~Q9G4070t. US.I
n.~ aao~ It.elsean~ ~ors I~e.w~w N~n~wr e.uRaoooma0~)
Dear Mr. Dureo,
R$RaUtY~&r)
90~k~1~S?l~lFiA
W OrY ~npw~ qQi) Ii3• Si73
tleum p~oec (101) N7-u11e
Wonc fsa: p031 ~97•11[i
w~uJ: nMM~yut rolanao.ta~
Pnonr. {3037+vi•~es0
FAX. (3f?3) 441-3241
e sCC om,ra~~~a,lwu~oer. co,yp
i am wriung co you as a resident cf 3233 Redskone Road, immaaia~ely ad)acent w t~e
praposad Monnessori School r.xpansfon. Whlle I 9uppors the mis5lon of 41e Mon~essori
SChool, I belleve t118[ 9everel ke}r poillts in Che apR~~~~ ~ mis-rppresellted, end I
w811tod LO eni4fe dla[ V~R9AI a56~fdf1CCS witl'1 fESpeGi t0 (1QISE, VifflC 2fld COniVucSiOn
damege mitlgarbns arc tollcwed by cananauel assurenees,
N1y aonoMns ~n as iellows:
1. ~; whik traffic Is limiced tc mornings and aRcrnoons, ana a spofeaic parencs
ev~ninq, ~M tlrop~off ane pitlo-up traff~c actually acoeed9 the resident tra~ic (75 kids vs,
16 residd~my. While parer~ appear to be ~ery con5ervati~e while dropping off kids,
perents oRen leave the parking bt wiU~ e~occessive speeds. CarS ere pa~ked across t~e
sinew~ik, ~nh~b~drg aaess co che SKiA nus aop. Ac peak c+mes, tnsuFfrcienc pandn9
ceusee perenl~ to blcck qup~s ~nd perkinq ~paces.
2. p,~jt1~; tha ccnv~nience i~nd habi[ ot front-daor drop ctf will be difficulc to break,
yowever, similarly safe may be droQ-oti pencing cn Greenb~ler (more watKing) nr on
Redsmne Road (more w~IKinp). Z woultl v!hlmently oppos! addibanal paving for
paricinp. InsteaQ, alcemaUve aanspormtion, CAr pools, or on-satet Aarkir~Q on Greerfhrier
sho~ld be inv~tiqatos,
3; lar,d~caoe Imnsct the exoessive w~uvin~ and orainape~ of the SR~enahan Ridge nas
aeac~c! a Rice wedentl whkh drains right in front of q~e Mante580ri schoCL Pnvinq Over
chis, albeit humin-made, wedartd would atter the IandgcePe neqativety.
4. Damaae Reeair. hpM {pr qaily use antl espetially for damege durin~ cCnsVuCqon, am
apreement has t0 be fiountl fnr p~Acing lat malntenance and repair. The rraffc of 75
a~f?luent perenes d~firing monspor SWs end minivans have impatt on tt~e paved parkin9
10~, Drop-of~ of hawy aquipment and constn~ion maoer~ai wiu iuRner tlamape ths bc
and tl~e fire lane. Agreemencs a-e neecfed to ropeir th~t damege.
5, CAO~N~on: Th! DrflAosBt do~s nCt etldres9 how censpruction c~w anq eohstructlon
trea will be set up, wtrore equipmen~ wi~l be stnned snd whem m~shuc~on wi~1 take
placa, ln order m not affect sehool buSir-ess, I prn afrs~q that noise cnr-.struc~ien may
ocsvr'after hours' wnen i as a res(denc may wanc to en~oy snme qulet cime.
P.09
~u..ear NaCn ~ 387 A~arw~ Ia~d . lou~aw, G'0 M10S.717l~ VY~-
(1031~9i~O1M Mme -(IO11~~'bifl! ba- • plq) N7~11Q f.M • pp~pp~pq,~p~p,~
D~.w..pnwwawWonw~n wle.Dnie.ax !/~
.'~~.i:';:~lS((ir~_~~ Y'3G3~£_L.-_
Jav-27-o0 OZ:02P
Novmbsr i 7. zaoo
Paps 2
P.10
6, 9[sllil~LyCl: The North-5ide a9uftaripn of ttto ~tLmaion n,ns parallel with the
mountains and obstn,as Yiew tc the mour~Mtis. Whik the alry desl9n may aCd liqht and
~enG~ation, a lawa raot mac Dbck I~tr views,
7, ~~-at~eai: While I typicslly work dufn4 tne Cay, and thereforo I am not
nonnoernea aoout noise, it wowd be nice if the new landaapin9 anC ou~door layou~ could
addrr9a ralse abatemenG such es chick bushes, aees or simiwr on che penme~er m
reduce playqround noise aPoer mwinq of faalities.
e. ~~,uee,4c~ The -ww proposeA parkinq runoves Me lute aaess. I assume this rc
be iuegal and trie drewings should be changed. Altert~atlvey, she current layout of
qarao~, fro iane ana reminin~ wau ca,1d ne cnanped, but ~ost fOr chis modificetlon
should be ao Montessai sehool
In ~ummary - I do not wsnt to see more pdvinp ot preen speCe, 1 do c~ot wdnt more
parking s~acea, but I~ss, so triat people are forced ~o use public transportatian tnrough the
~mm~venience of noc I~ing aql~ m parK. The construction ehould nat adversely aflec~
currenc resldents ar the (uture value af tha homes. It appeare ~nac the appNwtion minimizes
the Impaet oi the mnstrucoion in a sutrjectlve manner, by mis-reprrsendng or omieting key
factors as listed before. --~~"A~+°C ~1~n d~n ~ M tUn 61,~{-2.v,-,~~~'
Thank you for your as~istance and conslderatian ot pxse requests, l~
Slncvet(y Yewn ,
.~vPs.4~r a ~
O1M~MY+O/~M hdUA~OrIVMAiO
YOaYII titCY0110~lM~/ UlIiV~/~ 0~ COb~
~ww~~/R Noiu~ • DieSNw fpetT~eLweLi~n - 4a~ {y,~71 . yy~nwiy [~n.r Aom lCAE IY!] - 8o~~wv CO 8010905~9
(705)MR-IOO7n~~mwa • PW1N~d17l.sx - (3N/H3•ti1i0Y~ • ~~eum~jP9ieaman~e~
~,.,,l:filfr _~rL7 F'3}j:fi rJ~~~_ .
1029 Mountain Meadows
Boulder CO 80302
November 19 2000
Mr
. Don Durso
Project Staff Manager
City of Boulder Buiiding Services Center
1739 Broadway, Third Floor, P.O Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: 3300 Redstone Road (Review Number LUR2000-00003)
Dear Mr. Durso,
As a townhouse owner at 3Z13 Redstone Road, in the 40-unit Shanahan VIII, I am concerned that the
proposed addition to the Montessori school will be detrimental to my tenants and me.
My concerns about the proposed expansion are:
i. The increase in students will increase traffic Flow and congestion whenever classes start or end.
2. The increase in teachers will result in further "spillover" from the school's parking spaces into our
residents' spaces.
3. The Montessori school owns only 6 spaces. It has access to 4 of the Shanahan VIII spaces. According to
the application, it needs 18.26 spaces. There are clearly not enough parking spaces for the school
and it is erroneous for the applicants to claim any additional Shanahan spaces to compensate for the
deficiency. The shortage of parking spaces must be alleviated.
4. I believe that the Montessori school should construct a new drop-off zone with iks own entrance and exit
off Lehigh/Greenbrier. Such a drop-off zone will eliminate most tra~c in the 'mostly' Shanahan VIII
parking lot, It could be constructed in a tasteful and environmentally acceptable manner.
5. The construction process will be noisy, messy and inconvenient. There is no plan to control or minimize
these impacts.
6. The addition must not reduce or block any views that our residents enjoy from their units, the parking lot,
sidewalks, or any other Shanahan common space.
7. The proposed height of the addition should be reduced.
8. The additional noise from the relocated playground must be mitfgated to reduce sound carryovers to the
residents.
The statement on page 3 of the application regarding congestion is not accurate; this a significant issue,
which has been discussed at numerous meetings with the school and its architect. Both pledged to
minimize traffic and parking issues; these pledges have not been addressed in the application.
The parking calculations on page 7are incorrect. They should exclude all spaces on the East Side of SH8.
On the west side of SH8, the Montessorf School only owns 6 spaces. Four additionai spaces are shared
by agreement with our Board; one new space will be created, totaling 11 spaces that the Montessori
school refers to. Only 7 spaces are actually on their property! The Montessori school cannot claim access
or control over parking spaces they do not own.
I vehemently oppose the school's proposal to remove the "fire-zone" that is needed for emergency
equipment access. This is an important safety issue that must be resolved. Emergency access, along with
access for trash removal, requires that 4 spaces be eliminated from the calculations (identified as #36,
..~'.,...~t;T~~~_~'U 'i~!"?~i~.,~__
37, 38, & 39)
I agree with the proposed elimination of the drop off zone, but I object to the proposed elimination of the
emergency and fire access zones. Contrary to the applicanYs map, the fire easement doesn't slope
between the buildings, but is only accessible from the East Side of the parking lot. For the safety of the
16 condominiums directly northeast of the school, closure of these access points poses a serious risk to
the health and safety of our residents. The additional parking spaces would also block the drive-through
that connects the buildings with the parking lots (for moving vehicles, emergency vehicles and for city
maintenance). Furthermore, the additional parking spaces are not on the Montessori property, but rather
on Shanahan VIII property, so the school must amend its application with regard to parking spaces.
Another concern is that the addition should not be noticeably visible from the north or northeast sides of
the building. The diagram on page 14 doesn't show this the case. I request that there be no visible
impact to the residents from anywhere on Shanahan VIII property. The structure's height should be
significantly reduced.
The application states on page 6, "The proposed change, expanding the use to accommodate fifteen
students will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area. The change will result in
minimal to no impact to the surrounding area let alone any change." This is not accurate, as the
proposed addition to the school will severely impact parking, noise and traffic congestion, both in our
parking lot and on surrounding City streets. It will diminish the current playground space, and relocate
the playground space closer to the Shanahan VIII residences. This will cause an increase in noise from
the school. "Sound blocking" trees, bushes, or shrubs should be added along the north side of the
playground, as a condition of the expansion, in order to minimize any noise impacts and to help hide the
addition.
Thank you for your assistance and consideration of these requests.
Sincerely,
Bruce R. Neumann, Owner
3213 Redstone Road
303 442 7268
, .~..::. ii',li~;; ~!'_C1 .~j7i4ri;ii~ ,a" "/ --
Mary F. Evans and Eina V. Wong
3213 Redstone Rd.
Boulder C0, 80305
November 19, 2000
Mr. Don Durso
Project Staff Manager
City of Boulder Building Services Center
1739 Broadway, Third Floor, P.O Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: 3300 Redstone Road (Review Number LUR2000-00003)
Dear Mr. Durso,
As residents of the Shanahan VII complex, we have several concerns regarding the proposed expansion
of the Montessori school. While this letter addresses our main concern, parking, other concerns include
increased traffic Flow and additional noise.
Page 3 of the application inaccurately states, "adequate parking exists". Spillover from the school often
prevents residents from parking in open parking spaces, forcing residents to find parking on the street or
elsewhere. The spillover problem occurs frequently durfng drop-off and pick-up hours. In our block alone
(16 units), there are approximately 24 residents of driving age, only 8 of whom have access to garage
spaces. Our block represents only a fraction of those Shanahan residents who utilize the Redstone
parking lot. The proposed expansion will exacerbate this problem by increasing both the number of drop-
offs and pick-ups; as well as the voiume of employee spillover into our spaces.
The already tenuous parking situation worsens when the school holds special evening functions. The
evening functions occur a few times each month. During these evening functions, attendees fill the
parking spaces, as well as any street parking along Redstond Rd. Often, attendees also park along
Greenbiar. Not only does this greatly inconvenience Redstone residents, it presents a danger to those
driving (and parking) on Greenbriar.
Finally, we submit our opposition to the removal of the drop off zone and emergency and fire access
zones. The fire zone is needed for emergency equipment access. Removal of this area would put the
safety of the residents at great risk.
We implore you to resolve these issues as you consider the Montessori school's application for expansion.
Thank you for your consideration of our comments and requests.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Evans
Eina V. Wong
i .. ~... ~ ,~ ~~ //-~~ ~.,,,~Q-, ~, ~.`~
..;'.,41.,viC:iPV,_".`~Y ..[tt~.~L~ ...__._...
From: "Peter A. Mandics" <mandics@qwest.net>
To: . <BSCComment@ci.boulder.co.us>
Date: ' 11/19/2000 11:37:54 PM
Subject: Montessori Expansion - Review No. LUR2000-00003
November 19, 2000
Mr. Don Durso
Project Staff Manager
City of Boulder Building Services Center
1739 Broadway
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: Montessori School Addition, 3300 Redstone Road
Review Number LUR2000-00003
Dear Mr. Durso,
Thank you for sending us notification of the proposed Montessori
School addition development application. In the following, we would
like to list our concerns about the proposed addition.
We feel that the addition to the school, as currently proposed, wiil
adversely impact us and the other Shanahan Ridge VIII residents.
Please consider the following issues:
1. The larger number of students (and staff) will significantly
increase traffic flow and congestion in our west-side parking
lot. The School has only 7 parking spaces on their property and
currently uses 4 additional Shanahan VIII spaces for a total of
19. According to their application, 18.26 spaces will be needed
to accommodate the increased number of students.
2. Given the error on page 7 of their application (there are only
18 open, unassigned parking spaces in the west-side parking lot,
not 29), we do not see how the additionai spaces can be provided
without a major detrimenta! impact on Shanahan VIII residents.
Currently, adequate parking is already a concern to all Shanahan
VIII residents.
3. Removal or blocking of the fire-zone in the NE corner of the
west-side parking lot (to gain more Montessori parking spaces)
is tota!!y unacceptabie for safety reasons.
4. A possible solution may be to have the Montessori School provide
a firm, written commitment that a number of students (say at
least 35) would always come to/from schooi using public
transportation. (There is excelient, frequent bus service
provided by the SKIP, practically to the School's doorsteps.)
5. Because, as always, the construction process will be noisy,
messy and inconvenient, we would like to see a plan to controi
and minimize these impacts.
6. Unfortunately, the playground will be relocated closer to
Shanahan VII! residences thus increasing the noise level.
Because a number of residents work at home (including one of
us), we would like to see a plan on how the School will reduce
the increased noise from the playground. We feel that addition
of sound-blocking trees, thick bushes and/or shrubs along the
north side of the playground should be a condition of the
expansion.
-,, .
,, ~~.,~:, ,~ :,_,.,;. ~~
7. The School addition should not have any visible impact to the
residents from anywhere on Shanahan VIII property.
Consequently, the proposed structure's height should be
significantiy reduced.
The issues we list above raise serious questions about the veracity of
the statement on page 6 of the Montessori application:
"The proposed change, expanding the use to accommodate fifteen
students, wili not change the predominant character of the
surrounding area. The change will result in minimal to no
impact to the surrounding area let alone cause any change."
In summary, we would like to maintain the quiet enjoyment of our
property and surroundings. We request your help to minimize the
adverse impacts of the Montessori addition proposal as currently put
forth that would clearly detract from the neighborhood and our quality
of life.
Thank you for your consideration and help in this matter.
Sincerely, ~ ~
Peter A. Mandics, Ph.D.
Agnes M. Takacs, M.S.
3268 Cripple Creek Trail
Boulder, CO 80305-7195
Tel: 303-499-4024
E-mail: mandics@qwest.net
CC: <takacs@qwest.net>, <mandics@qwest.net>
.., ..~~;,: ~DoQ.__':~',--'~,--,~1_--
From: "Jeff Brislawn" <Jeff.Brislawn@state.co.us>
To: . <Bsccomment@ci.boulder.co.us>
Date: ~ 11I20/2000 10:46:58 AM
Subject: Montessori Expansion - Review No. LUR2000-00003
November 20, 2000
Mr. Don Durso
Project Staff Manager
City of Boulder Building Services Center
1739 Broadway
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: Montessori School Addition, 3300 Redstone Road
Review Number LUR2000-00003
Dear Mr. Durso,
I am a concerned resident of Shanahan Ridge VIII. I have lived on
Redstone Rd next to the Montessori schooi for the past 5 years and have
witnissed an increase in traffic and parking confliCts due to the
Montessori school sharing the use of our parking lot. The proposed
expansion will only make these problems worse with the addition of more
teachers and students.
If the proposed expansion is approved I request that parking issues be
adequately addressed in a manner that will not require adding additional
pavement over green spaces or that will impede emergency access.
Thanks for your consideraton
Sincerely,
Jeff Brislawn
3229 Redstone Rd
Boulder, CO 80305
303-273-1790 work
303-499-7581 home
~.:~ ;`.:~,~?: (o~U_ .' ;;C.;;,, _.~I~__.
Shanahan VIII Board of Diredors
@ Borg Real Estate
236 Pearl StreAt
Boulder CO 80302
November 207 2000
Mr. Don Durso
Project Staff Manager
City of Boulder Buildipg Services Center
1739 Broadway, Third Floor, P.0 Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: 3300 Redstone Road (Review Number LUR2000-00003)
Dear Mr. Durso,
As the Board of Directors for the 40-unit neighboring homeowners' association, we are concerned that the
proposed addition to the Montessori school will adversely impact our residents. We expect to maintain
the quiet enjoyment of our property and would ask your help in minimizing any adverse impacts that
would detract from the neighborhood and our quality of life. This letter is being sent according to a Board
resolution on November 16, 2000.
The concerns that the Board has about the proposed expansion are:
1. The increase in students wili increase traffic flow and congestion whenever classes start or end.
2. The increase in teachers will result in further "spillover" from the school's parking spaces into our
residenks' spaces.
3. The Montessori school owns only 6 spaces (the application proposes re-striping these spaces to add a
handicap-accessible space). It has access to 4 of the Shanahan VIII spaces. According to the
appiication, it needs 18.26 spaces. There are clearly not enough arking s~aces for the school and it
is erroneous for the applicants to claim any additional Shanahan VIII spaces to compensate for the
deficiency. The shortage of parking spaces must be alleviated.
4. The construction process will be noisy, messy and inconvenient. There is no pian to control or minimize
these impacts. We request that there be no significant impact on our residents.
5. The addition must not reduce or block any views that our residents enjoy from their units, the parking lot,
sidewalks, or any other Shanahan common space.
6. The h~.'laht of the p~ooosed addition should be reduced.
7. The additional noise from the relocated playground must be mitigated to reduce sound carryovers to our
residents.
The statement on page 3 of the application regarding congestion is not accurate; this is a significant
issue, which has been discussed at numerous meetings with the school and iks architect. Both pledged to
minimize traffic and parking issues; these pledges have not been addressed in the application.
The parking calculations on page 7 are incorrect. They should exclude all spaces on the East Side of SH8.
West of SH8, the Montessori School only owns 6[7, after re-striping] spaces. Four additional spaces are
shared by agreement with our Board; one new space will be created, totalin9 11 spaces that the
Montessori school refers to. Only 7 spaces are actually on their property! The Montessori school cannot
claim ac~ess or ~ontrol over parking spaces they do not own. Also, the number of open, unassigned
west-side parking spaces on page 7 is in error; the correct number is 18, NOT 29.
~ .., , -(O.Q_.. c:.,,;:_!~/_
The Board vehemently opposes the school's proposal to remove the "fire-zone" that is needed for
emergency equipment access. This is an important safery issue that must be resoived. Additionally, the
fire-lane, as drawn on the Map in appendix E, is incorrect. As the map (incorrectly) indicates, fire
equipment access to the condominiums is over a 3' wall. Emergency access, along with access for trash
removal, requires that 4 spaces be eliminated from the calculations (identified as #36, 37, 38, & 39).
We object to the proposed elimination of the drop off zone and emergency and fire access zones.
Contrary to the applicant's map, the fire easement doesn't slope between the buildings, but is oniy
accessible from the East Side of the parking lot. For the safety of the 16 condominiums directly northeast
of the school, closure of these access routes poses a serious risk to the health and safety of our residents.
The additional parking spaces would also block the drive-through that connects the buildings with the
parking lots (for moving vehicles, emergency vehicles and for city maintenance). Furthermore, the
additional parking spaces are not on the Montessori property, but rather on Shanahan Ridge VIII
property, so the school must amend its application with regard to parking spaces.
The Board requests the City to ensure the safety of our residents. We do not want to see huge parking
lots created to accommodate the School's expansion. The eoard doesn't want existing open spaces to be
paved, as our residentr expect to continue enjoying existing open spaces. The Board wants the wetlands
and open spaces to be preserved.
The Board suggests that the City consider modifying Greenbrier and/or Lehigh to make it more accessible
for parking.
Another concern is that the addition should not be noticeably visible from the north or northeast sides of
the building. The diagram on page 14 doesn't show this to be the case. We would like to ensure that
there is no visible impact to the residents from anywhere on Shanahan VIII properry. We request that
the proposed structure's height be significantly reduced.
The application states on page 6, "The proposed change, expanding the use to accommodate fifteen
students will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area. The change will resuit in
minimal to no impact to the surrounding area let alone any change." This is not accurate, as the
r~posed addition to the school will severely impact parking. noise and traffic congestion, both in our
parking lot and on surrounding City streeks. It will diminish the current playground space, and relocate
the playground space closer to the Shanahan VIII residences. This will cause an increase in noise from
the school. We request the addition of "sound blocking" trees, bushes or shrubs along the north side of
the playground, as a condition of the expansion, in order to minimize any noise impacts and to help hide
the addition from residents' view.
Thank you for your assistance and consideration of these requests.
Sincerely,
Bruce R. Neumann, Treasurer
Shanahan VIII Board of Directors
~ ~,_,',,;!:~ . ~~ __ ._ _..~~ _
From: "Pettem, Daisy" <dpattem@ball.com>
To: <BSCComment@ci.boulder.co.us>
Date; 11/20/2000 4:53:42 PM
Subject: Re: 3300 Redstone Road (Review Number LUR2000-00003)
November 16, 2000
Mr. Don Durso
Project Staff Manager
City of Boulder Building Services Center
1739 Broadway, Third Floor, P.O Box 791
Boulder, CO 80306-0791
Re: 3300 Redstone Road (Review Number LUR2000-00003)
Dear Mr. Durso,
As an owner of a condominium next to the Montessori school, I wouid like to
offer my opinions on the proposed school eniargement, While I am not
against the expansion, there are a couple of concerns that I would like to
see addressed before the approval of the permit. I am also disappointed
that the representations made by the school and the architect were
dramatically different from what I saw in the planning package.
First, contrary to what was listed in the planning package, parking is an
issue. This issue has been discussed at several meetings between the
school, the architect, and the homeowners association (the board of
directors and membersj. The number and representation of parking spaces
provided to you is blatantly incorrect. As an owner of a lower unit, I do
not have a garage, but an assigned parking space, which is "soid" along with
the unit, however the school identified my space as unassigned and
available. These spaces are identified in the by-laws and cannot be
reassigned! I do not want to lose my parking space. I am also especially
concerned about the storage of construction materials & equipment, as this
would cause a large impact in the lot. I would like to see these issues
addressed, as the parking lot fills quickly and parking is a big issue.
The proposal proposed to remove the fire and drop off zones for emergency
and fire access. Contrary to what is drawn on the map, the fire easement
doesn't slope between the buildings, but is only accessible from the
east-side of the parking lot. This is visibly noticeable by a retaining
wall on the south side of the garages - north of the schooi. Allowing the
school to add parking where a current fire zone is would not allow a fire
truck to come close to reaching the condominiums, creating a serious threat
to the health and safety of the residents of the condominiums directly
northeast of the school. Additionally, it would also block off the
drive-through that connects the 6 buildings with the parking lots (for
moving vehicles, emergency vehicles and for city maintenance of the park),
the trash dumpster and the mailboxes, not to mention blocking the walkway
from the parking lot !o !he condominiums. Furthermore, the fire zone is not
on the Montessori School's property, but rather on the Shanahan Ridge VIII
property (see property line on map in pianning package), so I don't betieve
that they should be able to dictate the use of this space.
~
, ::;. ~,~ .. - ~ ~.~~.,_
Secondly, I was yery surprised to see the elevations of the school, as the
roofline is much higher than I thought it would be. In May, the Montessori
school manager toid us that the addition would not be much different from
ihe existing shaded area. At the annual meeting in July, the architect
presented a drawing, which had a very high roofline (the pointy roof). When
we were discussing this with the architect, one of the "requirements" that
the homeowners,.myself included, wanted was that the addition was not to be
visible from the north sides, meaning that we didn't want to have any
visible impact from the addition nor did we want our views blocked. It
appears that although the roof was lowered, it was not lowered very much, as
it will still be very visible.
Lastly, the plans that were shown to us at the July meeting included a
revised playground, which I don't see, reflected in these plans. Since the
addition will be taking up a large portion of their current play-area, the
playground will be relocated (moved) closer to the condominiums. Not all of
the residents work off-site during the day (as is indicated in their
planning package) and the noise (screaming & shouting) from the playground
can sometimes be very loud and disturbing, especially when you are trying to
study. Moving the playground closer to the buildi~gs and increasing the
enroliment by 20% will only compound the noise problem and will make it much
worse. The school needs to address this issue before they are allowed to
build their addition. Perhaps they could plant trees (close together) so
that the noise won't travel as far.
In summary, I would like to see the following changes before the permit is
approved:
' The parking attachment in the planning package should be updated to
reflect the accurate representation.
' Quiet-liours for construction needs to be set, as well as
compensation if they make noise when they aren't supposed to. Agreements on
the noise of the construction equipment (i.e. times, days, etc...) so that
there is little or no impact to the condominium residents.
* Existing fire-lane/drop-off zone to remain (do not allow additional
parking in iYs place). The fire-lane and the current drop-off zone should
not be turned into parking spaces. I would like the City of Boulder Fire
Department to review the access to the condominiums and determine what the
adequate space should be (again, this is located on Shanahan Ridge Eight's
property and the use should not be dictated by the school). I believe that
the reason why the existing fire lane has worked is because off the adjacent
drop-off zone.
" A lower roof line on the building so that it is not visible from the
north or northeast sides of the building (there should be no impact to the
condominium residents).
' A pian regarding the relocation of the playground - i.e. a
requirement to plant dense bushes or trees to help block the increased noise
from the playground.
* No storage of construction material, trailers, bulldozers, etc. in
the lot.
" Agreements on if the construction equipment ruins any property, it
should be replaced.
7hank you for your time & consideration on these matters. Please feel free
to call me at 303.939,5827 if you have any questions.
, ~,~ _~~__ ~ :, ~a .
From: "Gary Hillman" <ghillman@qwest.net>
To: . Don Durso <BSCComment@ci.boulder.co.us>
Date: 11 /11 /2000 8:53:53 AM
Subject: Review for 3300 Redstone
I am a property owner at 3180 Redstone. I am writing to object to proposed
expansion of above referenced property.
The additional traffic from this non-residential use is unacceptable.
Currently, when the school has functions there are already dozens of cars
parked illegally on Lehigh, because of lack of parking facilities. There is
an increased amount of traffic already at drop off and pick up time. The
parking lot is shared with Shanahan Ridge 8, and there is already an
existing problem of illegally parked cars in unauthorized spots.
In addition, my house was built in 1990 and faces the school. Any expansion
will further datract from the existing view and would detract from the open
space-residentiai appeai of the immediate neighborhood. I am also a Broker
Associate with Coldweli Banker Moore And Company and feel that this
commercial expansion wouid detract from the value of the properties in the
area. I am opposed to this expansion.
Gary Hillman 3180 Redstone Road
.:: , G,Q._..: u3y_.
- i - November 15, 2000
Claire B. Levy
3V2 Reds[ont Road • Boulder, CO • 80J03
Phona 30349¢2244 • Fax: 303-543-7276
November 15, 2000
Don Durso
P.O. Box 791
Boulder, Colorado 80306
Re: LUR2000-00003, 3300 Redstone Road
Dear Mr. Durso:
I would like to submit comments on the proposed expansion of the Boulder
Montessori School to accommodate 15 additional students.
Allowing a preschool in a resideritial neighborhood is generally a good thing
because it gives day care options to surrounding residents that do not require them to
drive. The design and function of this building generally fits in with the neighborhood
at its current size. Unfonunately, this preschool and kindergarten does not primarily
serve residents in the surrounding neighborhood. Most of the students are dropped off
and picked up by car. Therefore, it does not really serve the purpose of allowing
mixed uses. At certain times of the day, that creates a lot of traffic in and out of the
parking lot. While an increase of 15 students is not terribly large, I hope that you
require the applicant to address traffic and parking conflicts.
In addition, I question how the site can accommodate an additional 979 feet
without making the play yard too small and without disturbing the cat tail area to the
east. The existing building has a low profile and consists of two offset portions. This
reduces the mass of the building as a whole. I would not want it to become so large
that it appears to be institutional. In addition, the water table in the immediate area is
very high and the ground is frequently marshy. Please be sure that the addition will
not cause more saturation of the ground
Sincerely,
Claire Levy
, , „ ~p _, 03~'
~,
„ , .~,.. ,
ATTACHMENT F .
Vem Seieroe Arcl
archftecture . planning
2631 Lee HIII Drive
telephone 303 /4y 8960
fax 303 44S 8920
Don Durso
Department of Community Design, Planning, and Development
City of Boulder
P. O. Box 791
Boulder, Colorado 80306
Re: Parking Supply and Demand Study
Use Review
Soulder Montessori School
Don,
Attached is parking supply and demand study.
Page 1 of 2
5 February 2001
We prepared this study using a model of a methodology explained to us by Joann Higgins, professional
engineer, at Transplan Associates, fnc. of Boulder. Ms. Higgins indicated that the methodology she
described was similar to those used in Boulder to study parking availability in neighborhoods surrounding
the downtown Boulder area, such as the Mapleton Hill Neighborhood.
A staff person, under Karen Olsen's supervision conducted the study by observing the parking lot at the
time referenced.
That data was assembled and included in the study and referred to as "Parking Supp(y and Demand
Study Data Collection" and/or as "Existing Conditions". A copy of the staff person's original data entries
is also included.
We then took that raw data and increased the Boulder Montessori School parking data by twenty percent
to reflect what might happen 'rf all aspects of the school's operation were uniformly effected by the overaA
twenty percent increase in student population.
This projection indicated some problem areas which Ms Higgins indicated should be identified as those
times when the available spaces were five percent or less of the spaces available or a even slightly
higher that five percent amount. Those Yimes appeared as 8:30 a.m. to 9:OD a.m. and at Yhe noon hour
when apparently a lot of homeowners retum for Iunch.
We then developed a detailed class scheduie that accommodated the staggering of classes that we had
proposed and projected its effect upon the study.
~.c'~ r , v~~
Vem Seierce Architect A.I.A. Page 2 ot 2
archttecture • planning • InterbrarchRecture 5 February 2001
2631 Lee Hill Drive BouWer, Colorado 8030Y
tNepha~e 303 l43 9960 hx 30S 4t3 8920
It should be noted that Monday January 8 was an anomaly in that it was the first full class load retum
frem winter break day. At that day it is nortnal for all students to be in attendance and to arrive at a
narrow window of time. Nortnally student arrival is dispersed. This condition and its effect can be seen
in the distribution of Boulder Montessori School parkers in the existing data. This effect was carried out
throughout study but is not typical of the supply and demand. Typical and normal is the supply and
demand existing conditions of the study found on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday. We
expect tfie projection of the staggered c{ass times to reflect what will virtuaNy always be the case.
Seieroe
file
Parking Supply and Demand Study
staff data tabulation sheets
~
, ; lv~,__' ''; !. a1_ _~.:.
Parking
Supply
and
Demand
Study
Boulder Montessori School
prepared as part of a use review
i~
1Q
i
,
°i
l~
~
5 February Z~~~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
~ • ur6an desig~
architecture • planni
page 2 cf 30
~F~A1
Parkinit Supplv and Demand Studv Data Collection
P~o~~.t: Boulder Montessori School Use Review
Existing Conditions
~~
_,
.=;
Ip~
~
~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdecture • planning • urban design
page 3 of 30
21rai01
P~o~~e: Bouider Montessori School Use
~~
I~
,
'
~~
~
period of time I number of care park, Boultler
Montessori Schooi
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 3 I
7:45 a,m. to 8:00 a.m. 5
S:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 7 I
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 7
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 10 i
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 92
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 11 I
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 10 I
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 11 j
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. '
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 6 ~
2:30 .m. to 4:30 .m. 2
I
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 2
,
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4
5:00 .m. to 5:15 .m. S
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 9
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 1
date: 5 January 2001 (Friday)
number of prs parketl, ofher number of cars improperty number o/ parking spaeea
parked, no improperly parked vaeaM
cars bebnged to staff or •
parents of Boulder
Montessori School
17
17
14
14
13
13
13
14
11
12
12
12
12
12
13
13
1
1
1
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
1
1
1
17
15
16
16
13
12
13
11
15
19
23.
22
20
17
15
23
perceMdge of parlUng~spaces
vacent
45.9%
40.5%
43.2%
43.2%
35.1 %
32.4%
35.1 %
29.7%
40.5%
51.4%
62.2%
59.5%
54.1 %
45.9%
40.5%
62.2%
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
page 4 of 3D
25A1
P~o~~: Boulder Morrtessori School Use
i~
I~
i
~
I~
period o1 time number ot cara park, Bc
I Montessori School
730 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m.
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m.
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m.
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m.
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m.
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m.
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
6:00 p.m.
11: 15 p.m.
date: 6 January 2001 (Saturday)
of cars parked, otherl number of care improperty I number of parking spaces I percentage of parking
parked vacard spaces vacant
16 21 58.8%
17 20 54.1%
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
page 5 of 30
25A1
Parking Supplv and Demand Studv Data Coilection Pro~~:
date: 7 January 2001 (Sunday)
I perlod ol time Inumber of cars park, Boulder) number of cars parked, other I number of cars improperty
Montessori School parked
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
S:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m.
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. Boulder Montessori School Use Review
I number of parki`g spaces I percentage of parking '
vacaM spaces vacaM
830a.m. to 8:45a.m.
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m.
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m.
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m.
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m.
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
12:45 p.m. 17 20 54.19'0
5:15 p.m. 14 23 62.2°io
';S
'~
,
~ Vem Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
~ architecture • planning • urban design
Ip'
I~i
pege 6 of 30
2F.H01
~~
{
I~
Parkina Suqqlv and Demand Studv Data Collection
period of time
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m.
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m.
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m.
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m.
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m.
'9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m.
!11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
2:30 p. m. to 4:30 p, m.
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p. m. to 5:15 p. m.
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
7:40 p.m.
number of caia park, Bouldei
Montessori School, existing
3
6
12
15
21
20
8
6
7
17
8
4
6
7
9
8
6
date: 8 January 2001 (Monday)
Pro~~: Boulder Montessori School Use Reviewl
of cars parked, other number of cars improperty
parked, no improperly parked
cars belonged to staff or
parents of 8oulder
Montessorl School
17 0
17 0
16 0
10 0
10 0
10 1
8 1
11 1
10 1
14 1
14 2
12 2
10 2
10 2
11 1
8 1
10 1
19
number of parking spaces
vacant, existing
17
14
9
12
6
7
21
20
20
6
15
21
21
20
17
21
21
18
percenqge of parldng
apaces vacant, exlating
45.9%
37.8%
24.3%
32.4%
16.2%
18.9°h
58.8%
54.1%
54.1%
16.2%
40.5%
56.8°k
58.8°k
54.1 °k
45.9%
56.8%
58.8%
48.6%
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
pege 7 of 3D
25~D1
~
',Q
I~
~
Parkina Supp lv and Demand Studv Data Collection ~ro~~: Boulde~ Montessori School Use Review
date: 9 January 2001 (Tuesday) .
period of time number of ears park, Boulder
number of cars parketl, other! number of cars improperty number of parking spaces pereentage of parldng
I I MoMessori l
School I parked I
vacant I
spaces vacant
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 5 17 0 15 40.5°h
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 7 16 0 14 37.8%
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 8 15 0 14 37.8°h
8:15a.m. Yo 8:30 a.m. 8 13 0 16 43.2%
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 12 13 0 12 32.4°h
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 13 14 0 10 27.0°~
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 9 14 0 14 37.8~
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 7 15 0 15 40.5~
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m, 6 15 0 16 432°io
11:30a.m. to 92:30 .m. 13 15 0 9 24.3°io
12:30 .m. to 2:30 .m. 11 13 0 13 35.1~
2:30 .m. to 4;30 .m. 8 9 0 20 54.1°h
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 8 10 0 19 51.4°io
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 5 10 0 22 59.5°io
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 12 0 13 35.1%
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 9 12 0 96 43.256
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 2 13 0 22 59.5°k
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdecture • planning • urban design
page 8 of 30
ZFA1
Pro~r. Boulder Montessori School Use
date: 10 January 2001 (Wednesday)
~
I~
periaf o1 tlme number of cars park, Boulder number of cars parketl, other number of care improperly
Montessori School parked, no improperly parkec
cars belonged to staff or
pareMS of Boulder
. MoMessori Schooi
7:30 a. m. to 7:45 a. m. 2 20 3
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 3 18 3
B:OOa.m, to 8:15a.m. 10 14 2
6:15a.m, to 8:30 a.m. 13 14 2
B:30a.m, to 8:45a.m. 21 13 2
6:45a.m, to 9:OOa.m. 17 13 2 ,
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 12 11 2
9:15a.m, to 9:30a.m. 12 12 1
9:30a.m, to 1130a.m. 7 13 0
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. 12 12 0
1230p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 6 10 0
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4 10 0
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 7 10 0
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 9 12 0
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 12 0
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 4 13 0
5:30 .m. to 5:45 .m. 2 95 0
7:00 p.m. 3 12
number of parking spaces perceMage of parking
- vacaM spaces vacaM
15 40.5%
16 43.2%
13 35.1%
10 27.0%
3 8.1 %
7 18.9%
14 37.8%
13 35.1%
17 45.9%
13 35.1%
21 56.8%
23 62.2%
20 54.1%
16 43.2%
13 . 35.1%
20 54.1°~
20 54.1%
22 59.5%
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
~ archdecture • planning • urban design
~1
page 9 ot 30
2FA1
~
I~
Parkinq Supplv and Demand Studv Data Collection
period of ilme I number of cars park, Bc
MoMessort School
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 2
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 3
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 10
6:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m, 9
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 12
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 17
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 13
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 8
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 6
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. 10
12:30 .m. to 2:30 .m. 7
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 5
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 6
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 9
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 10
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 3
9:45 p.m.
Proie~e: Boulder Montessori School Use
date:11 January 2001 (Thrusday)
wmber of care parked, other number of cars improperty number of parkirg spaces
parked, no improperly parked vacant
cars belonged to staff or •
parents of Boulder
Montessori School
21
15
14
13
13
12
10
10
9
11
11
11
13
13
15
15
17
4
3
0
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
14
19
13
96
12
8
14
19
18
19
21
20
16
12
12
19
20
percenWge of parking
spaces vapnt
37.8%
51.4%
35.1 °k
432°~
32.4°k
21.6%
37.8%
51.4°~
48.6%
51.4%
58.8°h
54.1 %
43.2%
32.4%"
32.4°k
51.4%
54.1%
~ Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
~.~ archttecture • planning • urban design
page 10 of 30
25A1
P~a~c: Boulder Montessori School Use
period ol time number of cars park, Bo
MoMessori Schoo~
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 4
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 8
S:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 9
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 8
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 15
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 11
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 14
9:15a.m. to 930a.m. 15
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 9
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. 14
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 4
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 5
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 6
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 10
I5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m
~•
':~
date: 12 January 2001 (Friday)
of eare parked,
19
16
14
14
13
13
12
12
11
11
9
9
6
4
11
number of care improperly
~arked, no improperly parke
care belonged to staff or
parents of Boulder
Montessori School
7
1
1
1
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
number of parking spaces I perc~tage of paridng
vacaM spaces vacant
14 37.8%
13 35.1%
14 37.8°~
15 40.5°k
9 24.3%
13 35.1%
11 29.7°~
10 27.0°~
17 45.9%
12 32.4%
24 64.9%
24 64.9%
26 70.3°~
27 73.0°k
16 43.2%
~ Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdecture • planning • urban design
;~
(12A8 ~ ~ Of ~
2/~a~0~
Parkins~ Supplv and Demand Studv Data Collection
proi~: Boulder Montessori School Use
Summarv of Available Parkina Snaces. All Times Surveved
~
!~
~
~
period of Ume
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 5 January 2001
17 45.9%
15 40.5% 6 Jattuary 2007
17 45.9%
14 37.s% 9 January 20D1
15 40.5°k
14 37.8% iq January 2401
15 40.5°k
16 432°~ 71 Jaauary Z001
14 37.8%
19 51.4°k 72 January 20D7
14 37.8%
13 35.i°k average
41.4°k
41.0°~
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 16 43.2% g 24.3°io 14 37.8% 13 35.1% 13 35.1% 14 37.8°k 35.6°~
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 16 43.2% 12 32.4°~ 16 432% 10 27.03'0 16 43.2°k 15 40.5% 38.3°~
8:30a.m. to $:45a.m. 13 35.1% 6 16.2% 12 32.4% 3 81°io 12 32.4% 9 24.3°i, 24.8°,6
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 12 32.4% 7 18.9% 10 27.OR~o 7 18.9°k 8 21.6% 13 35.1°k 25.7°k
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 13 35.1% 21 56.8% 1d 37.8°k 14 37.8°k 14 37.8% 11 29.7°k 39.2°~
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 11 29.7% 20 54.1% 95 40.5°io 13 35.1°k 19 51.4% 10 27.0°k 39.6°k
9:30a.rt1. to 11:30a.nt. 15 40.5% 20 54.1% 46 432% 17 45.9°k 21 56.8°k 17 45.9% 47.7°k
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
19
51.4% 6
15 1&.2°k
40.5% 9
13 24.3a/o
35.1°io 13
21 35.1%
56.8% 18
19 48.6%
51.4°~ 12
24 32.4°k
64.9°k 31.4°~
50.0°k
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 23 622% 21 56.8% 20 54.1% 23 62.2°k 21 56.8°~ 24 64.9°io 59.5~k
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m. to 5:95 p.m. 22
2Q
17 59.5°k
54.1%
45.9% 21
20
17 56.8%
54.1%
45.9% 19
22
13 51.4°k
59.5°k
35.1% 20
16
13 54.1°~
43.2°k
35.1% 20
16
12 54.1%
43.2°k
32.a% 26
27
16 70.3°k
73.0°io
43.2°io 57.7°k
54.5°k
39.6°~
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 15 40.5% 21 56.8% 16 43.2% 20 54.1% 12 32.4% 37.8%
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 23 622% 21 56.8% 22 59.5% 20 54.1% 19 51.4% 47.3°k
^X indicates area greater than or ctose to 95%
Vern Seieroe
archRecture •
ArChitect A.I.A.
planning • urban design
page 12 of 3~
2Fa~01
Parkinst Supplv and Demand Studv Data Collection
project: Boulder Montessori School Use Review
conclusions.existina
Highest use of parking by Boulder Montessori School is the period of time generally between 830 and 9:30 a.m.
2 10 Jaanuary 2001, 8:30 to 8:45 a.m. is an anomally, this condition Rarely occurs and should form the basis for evaluation of existing conditions.
3 Shanahan Ridge VIII homeowners are not inconvenienced by a lack of parking spaces at the 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. activity of parents
bringing students to school as at that time homeowners are leaving the lot and do not require finding a parking space.
4 Traffic pattems appear to show that some owners return to their home for lunch, this time of day shows an existing congestion at the 12:00 noon
tfine period.
5 Monday, 8 January, was the first day back for most students. Some lesss structured, reduced size classes were held for the weeks before
8 January. Classes are abonormally attended on the first day back in that almost all students attend class and they are usually very prompt.
As can be seen, normally students arrive over a period of time and not on a prompt schedule which helps with the dispersion of student arrival.
;~
~
`~ Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
~ archRecture • planning • urban design
case ra or ao
~i
Projected Pa~~ng guPp~y and Dernand Study for lncreased $tuc{ent pop~~~tion
~
~
c
Vern Seieroe Architect q,~,q.
architecWre .
planning . urban design
page 14 of 30
?FAi
period of time
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m.
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
8:30a.m. to 8:45a,m.
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m.
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m.
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m.
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m.
11:30a.m. to 12:30 .m.
1230 .m. to 2:30 .m.
2:30 .m. to 4:30 .m.
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p,m.
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
~
iand Studv P~o~~: Boulder Montessori School Use
date: 5 January 2001 (Friday) (projected for increased student population) .
number of cars ~ number of cars ~ number of cars ~ number of cars ~ number of ~ number of ~ pefceMage of ~ percentage of
park, Boulder I park, Boulder parked, other Improperly parked parking spaces parking spaces parldng spacea parldng spaces
MoMessoq 1 Morttessori vacaN, exisfing vacarrt, proposed vacaM, existing vacant, proposed
SChool, exi~iing I School, proposeA (
l I
~
3 3 6 17 1 17 16.4 45.9% 44.3%
5 6 17 1 15 14 40.5% 37.8%
7 F3.4 14 1 16 14.6 43.2% 39.5%
7 (3.4 14 1 16 14.6 43.2°h 39-5°0
10 12 13 1 13: 12 35.1% 32.4%
12 14.4 13 1 12 ' 9.6 32.4°k 25.9%
11 132 13 1 13 10.8 35.1% 292%
10 12 14 1 11 11 29.7°k 29.7%
11 132 11 1 15 12.8 40.5% 34.6%
6 72 12 1 19 17.8 51.4% 48.1 °,%
2 ?.4 12 1 23 22.6 622% 61.1 "o
2 2.4 12 2 22 22.6 59.5% 61. i"/o
4 4.II 12 2 20 2D.2 54.1% 54.6^,0
S 9.6 12 1 17 15.4 45.9°k 41.6°~0
9 1 U.8 13 1 15 132 40.5% 35 7"/0
1 12 13 1 23 22.8 62.2% 61.6"/0
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
arch8ecture • planNng • urban design
\
page 15 of 30
2~SA7
Pro~~: Boulder Montessori School Use
Proiection of Proposed Increase in Student Population
~.
~
GC~`
N
period ol Nme
date: 8 January 2001 (Monday) (projected for increased student population)
number of cars number of tars
perk, Boulder park, Boulder
MoMessori MoMessori
ScFfool, existing School, propased
number ot cars number ot cars number of number of percentage of perceMage of
parked, other improperly parked Park~ng spaces parking spaces parMng spaces parking spacea
vacant, eaisting vacaM, proposed vacant, existing vacant, proposed
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 3 3.6 17 0 17 1F.4 45.9% a4.3°6
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 6 72 17 0 14 12.8 37.8°k 34.6^0
S:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 12 14.4 16 0 9 6.6 24.3~0 17.a°o
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 15 18 10 0 12 9 32.4% 24.3°6
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 21 25 2 10 0 6- 1.8 162% a.9°i~
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 20 ?4 10 1 7 3 18.9% 8.1°io
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 8 9.6 8 1 21 19.4 56.8% 52.4°6
9:'15a.m, to 930a.m. 6 72 11 1 20 18.8 54.1°/a 50.8°0
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 7 8.4 10 1 20 18.6 54.1% 5o.s°6
11:30a.m, to 12:30p.m. 17 20.4 14 1 6 2.6 16.2% 7.0°,~
12:30 .m. to 2:30 .m. B 9.6 14 2 15 93.4 40.5% ss.z°~~,
2:30 .m. to 4:30 .m. 4 4.8 12 2 21 202 56.8°~ 54.s~;o
4:30 p.m. fo 4:45 p.m. 6 72 10 2 21 19.8 56.8°~ 53 5°0
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 7 8.4 10 2 20 18.6 54.1% 50.3^0
5:00 p.m, to 5:15 p.m. 9 10.8 11 1 17 15.?_ 45.9% a1.~°~
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 8 9.6 8 1 21 19.4 56.8°~ 52 4~0
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 6 72 10 1 21 19.8 56.8°k 53.5`;6
7:40 p.m. 19 18 18 48.6% 48.6`So
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planrring • urban design
page 16 of 30
25A1
P~o~~r. Boulder Montessori School Use
date: 9 January 2001 (Tuesday) (projected for increased student population)
I~
,U~
~J
period of time number of cars number of cars
park, Boulder park, Boulder
Montessori Montessori
School, existing School, propose~
7:30 a.m.
7:45 a.m.
8:OOa.m.
8:15a.m. to
to
to
to 7:45 a.m.
8:00 a.m.
8:15a.m.
8:30 a.m. 5
7
S
8 6
8.4
9.6
9.6
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 12 14.4
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 13 15.6
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 9 10.8
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 7 8.4
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 6 72
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. 13 15.6
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 11 132
2:30 p.m, to 4:30 p.m. 8 ~.6
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. S 9.6
4:45 .m. to 5:00 .m. 5 6
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 14.4
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 9 10.8
5:30 P.m. to 5:45 p.m. 2 2.4
number of cars number of cars number of number of perceMage of pereeMage of '
parked, other improperly parked parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces parldng spaces
vaeaM, existing vapM, proposed vacant, eaisting vaeant, proposed
17 0 15 14 40.5% 37.8%
16 0 14 12.6 37.8°k 34.1°k
15 0 14 12.4 37.8°k 33.5%
13 0 16 14.4 43.2°k 38.9%
13 0 12 9.6 32.4°k 25.9°k
14 0 10 I.A 27.0% 20.0%
14 0 14 , 12.2 37.8% 33.0%
15 0 15 ' 13.6 40.5% 36.8%
15 0 16 '14.8 43.2°k 40.0°~
15 0 9 6.4 24.3% 17.3%
13 0 13 10.8 35.1 °h 29.2°k
9 0 20 18.4 54.1 % 49.7°k
10 0 19 17.4 51.4% 47.0°k
10 0 22 21 59.5% 58.8%
12 0 13 10.6 35.1% 28.8%
12 0 16 14.2 43.2% 38.4%
13 0 22 21.6 59.5% 58.4°k
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
page 17 or 30
2F,~07
'~
,
,~
~
Parkina Supalv and Demand Studv Pro~~r. Boulder Montessori School Use
Proiection of Proposed Increase in Student Poqulation
period ot tlme numher of cars number of cars number of caw number of cars number of number of perceMage of percentage of
perk, Boulder park, Boulder parked, other improperly parked parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces parking spacee
MoMessod Montessori vatant, eaisting vaeant, proposed vacant, existing vacant, proposed
School, existing School, proposed
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 2 ~.4 20 3 15 14.6 40.5°~ 39.5°io
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 3 3.6 18 3 16 15.4 43.2% ats°io
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 10 12 14 2 13 11 35.1°/a 29.7°io
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 13 15.6 14 2 10 7.4 27.0°~ 20.09%
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 21 25.2 13 2 3, -12 8.1°k -32°0
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 17 20.4 13 2 7 3.6 t8.9°~ 9.7°~
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a,m. 12 14 4 11 2 14 11.6 37.8% 31.4°6
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 12 14.4 12 1 13 10.6 35.1% 2a.s°io
9:30a.m, to 11:30a.m. 7 8.4 13 0 17 15.6 45.9~k a22°-o
11:30a.m. to 12:30 .m. 12 14.4 12 0 13 10.6 35.1°k 2a.s°~o
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 6 72 10 0 21 19.8 56.8% 53 5°-0
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4 4.8 10 0 23 222 62.2°k 60.030
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 7 B 4 10 0 20 18.6 54.1~k 50 3~.0
4:45 .m. to 5:00 .m. 9 10.3 12 0 16 142 43.2% 38.a~to
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 14.4 12 0 13 10.6 35.1°~ zs 6°a
5:15 .m. to 5:30 .m. 4 4.8 13 0 20 192 54.1% 5t9^o
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 2 2 4 15 0 20 15 6 54.1% 53 o^a
7:40 p.m. 3 12 22 25 59.5°,6 s~.s~~o
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
page 76 of 30
2F.~101
Pro~~cr. Boulder Montessori School Use
date:ll January 2001 (Thrusday) (projected for increased student population)
period of time number of care number of wrs
perk, Boulder park, Boulder
Montessort MoMessori
School, existing School, propose~
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 2 2.4
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 3 3.6
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 10 12
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 9 10.8
6:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 12 14.4
B:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 17 20.4
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 13 15.6
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 8 y.6
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 6 72
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. 10 12
12:30p.m. to 230 p.m. 7 6.4
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 5 6
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 6 7.2
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 9 10.8
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 92 14.4
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. 10 12
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 3 3.6
9:45 p.m.
number of cars number of cars number of number of percentage of percentage of '
parked, other improperly parked Parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces parldnp spaces
vacan[, existing vecant, pro~wsed vaCant, existirtg vacarft, proposed
21 4 14 13.6 37.8°k 36.8%
15 .3 19 18.4 51.4% 49.7"/0
14 0 13 11 35.1% 29.7`%
13 2 16 13.2 43.2% 35.7%
13 2 12 9.6 32.4°k 25.9"/0
12 2 8 4.6 21.8°k 12.4"/0
10 1 14 , 11.4 37.8°k 30.8%
10 1 19 ~ 17.4 51.4°k 47.0%
10 1 21 19.8 56.8% 53.5~%
9 1 18 16 48.6°k 432%
11 1 19 17.6 51.d% 47.64/0
11 0 21 20 56.8% 54.1 °io
11 0 20 1B.8 54.1% 50.8`%
13 0 16 13.2 432°k 35.7"/a
13 0 12 9.6 32.4°/u 25.9'%n
15 0 12 10 32.4°k 27.0°'0
15 0 19 18.4 51.4% 49.7°/u
17 20 20 54.1 % 54.1 "'o
~~~•
;Q
-,
- Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
~
architecture • planning • urban design
,~
page 19 of 30
215/D1
' 6~
Iv~
,(~
;~
Parkina Suoalv and Demand Studv Data Coilection Pro~~: Boulder Montessori School Use Review
date: 12 January 2007 (projected for increased student population)
period of time number ot cars number of cars number of cars number of cars number ot number of percentage of percentage of '
perk, Boulder park, Boulder parked, other improperly parked parking spaces parking spaces paridng spaces parMng spaces
Monte55od Mont¢SSOd vacant, ezi;ting vacaM, proposetl vacant, existing vacent, proposed
School, existing School, proposed
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 4 4.8 19 1 14 182 37.8% 49.2°io
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 8 9 6 16 1 13 94.4 35.1°,6 38.9%
8:OOa.m. to S:15a.m. 9 10.8 14 1 14 12.2 37.S~o 33.0%
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 8 9.6 14 1 15 12.4 40.5% 33.5%
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 15 18 13 1 9 10 24.3~ 27.0"io
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 11 13.2 13 1 13 10.8 35.1°~ 292%
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 14 16.8 12 1 11 . 92 29.7°k 24.9%
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 15 18 12 0 10 - 9 27.0% 24.3%
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 9 10.8 11 0 17 92 45.8°k 24.9%
11:30a.m. to 12:30 .m. 14 1G.t3 11 0 12 8.2 32.4% 222"~o
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 4 4.8 9 0 24 82 64.9% 222°io
2:30 .m. to 4:30 .m. 4 4 8 g 1 24 82 64.g% 222"'0
4:30 .m. to 4:45 .m. 5 6 6 1 26 5 70.3% 13.5"i~
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 6 7.2 4 1 27 2.8 73.OYo 7.6"~
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 10 12 11 0 16 9 43.2°k 24.3"/0
5:15 .m. to 5:30 .m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archRecture • planning • urban design
page ZO of 30
25I01
project: Boulder Montessori School Use
Summ ary, P roject Parkin g Conditions for Proposed 2 0% Increase •
_ 5 January 2007 8 January 2001' 9 January ZDO7 I 10 January 20D1 I 11 January 20D7 + 12 January 2007 averege
period otnme ~~~~ ~~ng I petceMage parlting percentage par in9 PerceMa9e Parking pereeMeBe pa in9
C percentape Pa n9
s eesvacan( spacaswcen[ spacesvacan( spacesvacarit, .
spacasvecan[,p~o~~ose spacnvacant,proposen
pioibsed 1^opose~l P~~POSetl piopo~ed ~
7:30 a.m, to 7:45 a.m. an.s°io 44.3°~ 37.£3?L 39 5`% 36.FS4~ 35J°/~ 39.7%
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. as2°i~ 34.6~t, 34.1'iS, 41.6%~ 49 7')6 30 8°% 39.0%
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 3a.~^io 17 8°b 33..5?~ 29]".b 29 ;°Jo 33.0°i~ 29.6%
8:15a.m, to $:.'3~ 8.IT1. 34.19~a 74 3"0 38.9"sS~ 20.04-0 35.7°/n 36.2°io 3~.5%
8:30a.m. to 8:458.~1i. 32.4% 4.9% 25.9°/, -32% 25 9°%o 162°~6 17.0%
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 28 e°io 8.1 °,4, 20.0`;~, 9 7°/, 12 4",6 29 2°/n 18.0%
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. z92°~o 52.4`l~ 33.0°6 31.4°'0 , 30 8% 222°~~ 33.2%
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 37.s~~ 50.8^,6 3f.8';~ 28.6°~ 47A`% 1P.9°~6 36.7°h
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. z3.~°o 5n.a°;, ~o.o~?s ~z z°o ss ~°o ai i°;,, 41.8%
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m. 7.0% t7.3"r,~ 2s s°~~ 432~0 2a.9%~ 24.2%
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 2s.z~a ss2:s, 292~~.~ 53.5~~ a7.s°;o 6z7^,% 43.1%
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 31.n~i~ 54.635 49.7°S, 60.0°0 54.1`Sa 62.72~ 52.1%
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 34.1% ~~ s°„ a7.a,s, 50.3°~o sa ~°-0 6Z6°/, 50.5%
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 33.o°i~ su s^.:, ss.~^s, 3s a~~ 35 ~~~ 6~, ~~,c, 47.3%
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 28.1~~0 4~ 1~;~ 2s.s~s, 2s.s^% z5 a~o 3za`;~~ 31J%
i~
I~ 5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. so.s%a 5z.a ;~ se_n~;~ 51.9°,-o z~ o~,~ 33.3°io
~I
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. oi
3a.s,o ro oi
~.~ 5,~ o~
58.4,0 oi
53 O,o ~~
49J',o o
41.5/a
~ ~X indicates area greater than or close to 95~o Vem Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
~
~a'~ Z~ ~
Mitigation Measures
Mitigaiion will include those measures already discussed in an earlier submittal.
Herein is discussed in detail the projected beneifit of Reorgartizing Class start and end times so as to mitiagate
any parking congestion that may occur.
~~
~
1
,
i~
°~ Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdecture • planning • urban design
,ZZi3~
~
!~..
II~
~
Parking Supply and Demand Study
Class Staaperina Mitiaation Measure:
Existing Class Schedule:
Toddler Students
3 toddle~s 8:30 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. ruesday, Tnursday
2 toddlers 8:30 9.m. f0 11:15 a.m. Monday, Wednesday, Friday
4 loddlers 7:30 a.m. to 12:30 B.fTI. Mondaythrough Friday
7 toddlere 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 e.fi1. Mondaythrough Friday
16 toWl toddlers
Preschool Students
12 preschoolere 8:30 8.R1. t0 11:30 e.ffl. Mondaythrough Friday
6 preschoolers 7:30 8.R1. t0 12:30 p.rtl. Mondaythrough Friday
10 preschoolers 8:30 a.m. to 2:30 p.rtt. Mondaythrough Friday
6 preschoolera 7:30 S.fT1. t0 4:00 P.fit. Mondaythrough Friday
23 preschooiers 7:30 8.fi1. t0 5:3D p.Rl. Mondaythrough Friday
57 toWi preschoolere
73 total enrollment
Pro~~r. Boulder Montessori School Use Review
~%~~t} s~
Ex~g Class Schedule:
Toddler Students
3 toddlers 8:30 a.m. to 11:15 a.m. Tuesaay, Tnursday
2 toddfers 8:30 a.m. to 11:1b e.fTl. MorMay, Wednesday, Friday
4 toddlers 7:30 8.fT1. t0 12:30 8.rt1. Mondaythrough Frlday
7 toddlers 7:30 8.ft1. YO 5:30 8.fT1. Mondaythrough Frlday
16 total toddlers
Preschool Students
8 preschoolers 8:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon Mondey through Friday
8 preschoolers 7:30 8.fT1. YO 12:30 p.rt1. Mondeythrough Frlday
6 preschoolers 8:30 8.R1. YO 2:30 p.rtl. Mondaythrough Friday
7 preschoolers 7:30 8.rt1. YO 2:30 p.Rl. Mondaythrouph Frlday
S preschoolers 7:30 8.fi1. 10 4:00 p.Rl. Mondaythrough Friday
31 preschoolers 7:30 8.f1'1. l0 5:30 p.fil. Mondaythrough Friday
8 preschoolers 7:30 a.m. to 12:00 f100f1 Mondaythrough Frlday
76 total preschoolers
92 tolal enrollment
note, toddler 8:30 to 11:15 time slots are for Tuesday/Thnisday and for
Monday/VNednesday/Friday such that the net on site student population
does not exceed 90 on a day of full attendance.
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdecture • planning • urban design
page 23 of 30
2I5/01
; ~.
~Q
i
~~
I~
Parkinn Suaplv and Demand Studv
Pro~~r. Boutder Montessori School Use
date: 5 January 2001 (Friday) (projected for increased student population with ~ew staggered start of class sessions)
period ol time number of ca~s number of cars number ot qrs number ot care number of number of perceMage of peremWge o1'
park, Bou~der park, Boulder parked, other Impr[~perly parked parking spaces paridng spaces parki~g spaces perMng spaces
MoMessori Montessori vacant, exisling vacaM, with vawM, existing vaeaM, wilh
Sthool, exisling School, with proposed proposed
proposed staggered class staggered class
stag9eretl class schedule Schedule
schedUfe
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 5 7 5 17 1 17 12.5 45.9°k 33.8°,0
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 5 7.5 17 1 15 12.5 40.5°k 33.8%
S:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 7 10.5 14 1 16 12.5 43.2% 33.8°io
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 7 10.5 14 1 16 12.5 43.2°~ 33.a°io
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 10 B.0 13 1 13 16.0 35.1% 43.2°io
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 12 9.6 13 1 12', 14.4 32.4°~ 38.9%
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 11 13.2 13 1 13 ~0.8 35.1°~ 292°io
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 40 12 14 1 11 11.0 29.7~k 29.7°io
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 11 132 11 1 15 12.8 40.5°k 34.6%
11:30a.m. to 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 6 72 12 1 19 17.8 51.4°k 48.1%
2:30 .m. to 4:30 .m. 2 24 12 1 23 22.6 82.2% sf.~°io
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 2 2 66 12 2 22 22.3 59.5°~ so.a°io
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 4 5.32 12 2 20 19.7 54.1% 532;~
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 8 10.15 12 1 17 14 8 45.9°~ ao. i°io
5:15 .m. to 5:30 .m. 9 11.43 13 1 15 12.6 40.5% 3a.o°io
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 1 i27 13 1 23 22.7 62.2°~ s~.4°io
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • ptanning • urban design
page 24 of 30
2i5~D1
Pro~~: Boulder Montessori School Use
Proiection of Proposed Increase in Student Population
;~
~i~
~-
\
date: 8 January 2001 (Monday) (projected for increased student population with new staggered start of class sessions) '
period of time
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m.
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
830a.m. to 8:45a.m.
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m.
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m.
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m.
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m.
11:30a.m. to 12:00 noon
12:00 noon Ito 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 230 p.m.
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
5:15 p.m. to 530 p.m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
7:40 p.m.
number ot cars
perk, 8oulder
Montessori
School, existing
3
6
12
15
21
20
8
6
7
17
8
4
6
7
9
8
6
number ot wrs
park, Bouider
Montessori
School, with
proposed
staggered dass
schedule
45
9.0
18.0
22.5
168
1G.0
~ Fs
72
£3.•1
17
133
10U
4.8
~ .98
931
1 1 43
10.16
i .62
number of cars
parked, dher
17
17
16
10
10
10
8
11
10
14
14
12
10
10
11
8
10
19
number of cars
Improperry parke
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
number of
parldng spaces
vacant, existing
17
14
9
12
6
7
21
20
20
6
15
21
21
20
17
21
21
18
number of
parking spaces
vacant, with
proposed
staggeretl dass
schedule
15.5
11.0
3.0
4.5
10.2
11 0
19.4
1 B.8
18.6
21 3
13.0
202
19.0
17.7
i a r,
18.8
19.4
18.0
Vern Sei~
archdecturt
perceMage of percentage of
parking spaces parking spaces
vacaM, existing vacaM, with
proposed
5taggered class
I schedule
45.9% 41.9`;'0
37.8% 29.7 ~6
24.3% 8.1 °.~o
32.4% 122%
16.2% 27.5°io
18.9°k 29.7~~0
56.8% 5Z4%
54.1% 50.8'i6
54.1% 50.3"6
16.2°k 57.7%,
40.5% 351'%
56.8% 54.64%
56.8% 51.4`Yo
54.1 % 4 7.8';6
45.9% 39.4'%
56.8% 50.9`;b
56.8% 52.4",0
48.6% 48.69'~
~roe Archi tect A.I.A.
• planning • urban design
page 25 of 30
2IS~D1
P~o~ect: Boulder Montessori School Use
date: 9 January 2001 (Tuesday) (projected for increased student population with new staggered start of class sessions)
peri od oi time number o( cars number of cars number of cars number of cars number of number of percentage ot . percentage of
perk, Boulder park, Boulder parked, other Improperly parked parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces Pa~ana S~ces
MonteSSOri MontessOti vacaM, exishng Vacant, with vaCaM, ezisling l2Cant, witb
School, existing School, with proposed proposed
proposed . slaggered class staggered dass
siaggered dass schedule sched~le
schedttle
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 5 7.5 17 0 15 12 5 4U.5% 33.8%
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 7 10 5 16 0 14 10.5 37.8°k 28.4%
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 8 12 15 0 14 10 0 37.8% 27.O~k
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 8 12 13 0 16 12.0 43.2°~ 32.4~0
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 12 9 6 13 0 12 14.4 32.4% 38.9°k
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 13 10.4 14 0 10 12.6 27.0% 34.O~k
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 9 10 8 14 0 14 122 37.8% 33.0%
9:15a.m. to 930a.m. 7 8 4 15 0 15 13.6 40.5% 36.8%
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 6 r 2 15 0 16 14.8 432% 40.0%
11:30a.m. t0 12;00 noon 13 1 6 15 0 9 20 4 24.3% 55.1%
12:OOnoon Ito 12:30p.m. 12.~
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 11 J~~ 13 0 13 14 4 35.1°k 38.9°k
2:30 .m. to 4:30 .m. 8 9.G 9 0 20 18 4 54.1% 49.7°~
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 8 10.G4 10 0 19 16.4 51.4% 44z%
4:45 .m. to 5:00 .m. 5 6.65 10 0 22 20 4 59.5% 55A°k
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 15 2<t 12 0 13 9.8 35.1% 26.4°k
'~~ 5:15 .m. to 5:30 .m. 9 11 43 12 0 16 1' ~ 43.2% 36.7%
~(~ 5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 2 ~.S~l ~3 0 22 21.5 59.5% 58.0%
i~
~
~~ Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdecture • planning • urban design
page 26 oi 30
25A1
P~o~~: Boulder Montessori School Use
Proiection of Proposed Increase in Student Population
date: 10 January 2001 (Thursday) (projected for increased student population with new staggered start of cla~s
period of time number of cars number of cars number of cars number of cars number ot number of percentage of percentage ol
perk, Boulder patk, Boulder parked, other improperly parked
- perla~9 spaces parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces
MoMessori Montessori vacant, existiny vacant, with vacant, existing vacaM, with
SChool, existing SChool, with proposed pmposed
pmposed staggered class staggered class
staggered class schedule schedule ~
Schedule
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 2 3 20 3 15 14.0 40.5°~ 37.s~;o
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 3 4`> 18 3 16 14.5 43.2°h 39.2~;~
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 90 15 i4 2 13 II.U 35.1°h 2t.6°-o
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 13 19.5 14 2 10 3.5 27.0°~ 9.5~~
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 21 16.8 13 2 3 72 8.1°/a i9.a°;~o
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 17 t 3.6 13 2 7 10.4 18.9% 2s. t~;~
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 12 14.4 11 2 14 11.6 37.8% 3t.~;o
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 12 14 4 12 1 13 10.5 35.1% 28.s s~
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 7 8 4 13 0 17 15 6 45.9% az.?;~
11:30a.m. to 12:OOnoon 12 1.2 12 0 13 23.8 35.1% 64 3'~~
12:OOnoon Ito 12:30p.m. 9.6
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m. 6 Z2 10 0 21 19 8 56.8% .53.5°i~
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4 4 8 10 0 23 22.2 62.2°/a co.o;~
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 7 9 31 10 0 20 17.7 54.1% a7.s';~
i~ 4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 9 1 1 97 12 0 16 13 0 43.2°io ss2°;~
j'~ 5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 1524 12 0 13 9.~3 35.1% 26.4%
~-. 5:15p.m. to 5:30p.m. 4 508 13 0 20 1B9 54.1°io ~tt°~o
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m. 2 2.54 15 0 20 19 5 54.1°k s2.s,~
7:40 p.m. 3 12 22 25.0 59.5% 67.s°s,
~. Vem Seie roe Archi tect A.I.A.
;~ -
~! archRecture • planning . urban desi9n
page 27 of 30
25/01
P~o~~r. Boulder Montessori School Use
iQ
~
-~
'-.:
I,~
~~
date:11 January 2001 (Thursday) (projected for increased student population with new staggered start of class sessions)
period oi time number of cars number of care
perk, Boulder park, Boulder
Montessori Montessori
Scliool, existing
C o0 School, with
proposed
staggered class
schetlule
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 2 3
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 3 4.5
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 10 15
8:15a.m, to 8:30 a.m. 9 13 5
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 12 9.e
6:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m. 17 13.6
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 13 15.6
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 8 9 6
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 6 72
11:30a.m. to 12:00 noon 10 1 1
12:00 noon ~to 1230p.m. 9 1
'12:30 .m. to 2:30 .m. 7 6 ~s
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 5 6
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 6 7 98
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 9 1 i 97
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 12 15.24
5:15 p.m. to 530 p.m. 10 12.7
5:30 .m. to 5:45 .m. 3 3.81
9:45 p.m.
number of cars number of cars number of number of percentage of perceMage of
parked, other improperly parked parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces parking spaces
vacant, existing vacaM, wdh vacaM, existing vewM, with
pwposed proposed
staggeied class staggered class
schedule Schedule
21 4 14 13.0 37.8°k 35.1 °'o
15 3 19 17.5 51.4°h 41.3 °'o
14 0 13 8.(1 35.1% 21.6"'0
13 2 16 10.5 43.2% 28.4°'0
13 2 12 14.4 32.4% 38.9°'0
12 2 8 11.4 21.6°k 30.8°6
10 1 14 11.4 37.8°k 30.8%
10 9 19 17.4 51.4°k 47.0°~
10 1 21 19.8 56.8°k 53.5%
9 1 18 26.9 48.6°k 72.6 ;u
11 1 19 192 51.4% 5t9°4~
11 0 21 20.0 56.8% 54.1 `3b
11 0 20 18.0 54.1°k 48.%S6
13 0 16 12.0 43.2% 325`;b
13 0 12 II.ES 32.4% ?_3.!",0
15 0 12 J.: 32.4% 7_5.1 i'o
15 0 19 18.2 51.4°k 49.2^,'0
17 20 20.0 54.1% 54.1';~,
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I,A.
architecture • planning • urban design
page 28 of 30
25i07
pro~~e Boulder Montessori School Use
date: 12 January 2001 (projected for increased student population with new staggered start of class sessions)
I~.
i~
~.
U
1
period of time
number of cars
park, Boulder
Montessori
Schoot, existing
number of wrs
park, Boulder
Montessori
Scttoo7, wtlh
pmposed
staggered class
schedule
number of wrs number of cars number of
parked, dher improperly parked parldng spaces
vacant, existing
number of
parking spaces
vacant, with
proposeA
siaggered class ~'I
schedule ,
percenpge ot
parldng speces
vacent, exis[ing
percentage of ~
paridng speces
vacaM, with
pmposed
staggered class
schedule
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m. 4 6 19 1 14 9 r.D 37.8% 45.99'o
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m. 8 1~ 16 1 13 ~2.0 35.1% 32.4~'0
B:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m. 9 1..5 14 1 14 9.5 37.8% 25.7`;6
8:95a.m. to 8:30 a.m. 8 12 14 1 15 10 0 40.5% 2~.0`;'0
8:30a.m. to 8:45a.m. 15 12.0 13 1 9 16.0 24.3% 432°'~
8:45a.m. to B:OOa.m. 11 F3.II 13 1 13 ' 15.2 35.1% 41.1%
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m. 14 16.8 12 1 11 92 29.7% 24.9°!~
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m. 15 18 0 12 0 10 9.0 27.0°k 24.3%
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m. 9 10 8 11 0 17 92 45.9% 24.9°'0
11:30a.m. to 12:00 noon 14 1.?_ 11 0 12 23.8 32.4% 64.3%
12:00 noon Ito 12:30P.m. 9 6
12:30P.m. to 230 p.m. 4 7 2 9 0 24 5.8 64.9% 15.7"~
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m. 4 4 B 9 1 24 82 64.9% 222°'~
4:3Q p.m. to 4:45 p.m. 5 6.0 6 1 26 5 0 70.3% 13.5^,6
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. 6 72 4 1 27 2 0 73.0% 7.6"k,
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m. 10 12 0 11 0 16 9.0 43.2% 24.3','~
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • planning • urban design
page 29 0~ 30
2Ira01
project: Boulder Montessori School Use
s.
~
period of time
7:30 a.m. to 7:45 a.m.
7:45 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
8:OOa.m. to 8:15a.m.
8:15a.m. to 8:30 a.m.
8:3Qa.m. to 8:45a.m.
8:45a.m. to 9:OOa.m.
9:OOa.m. to 9:15a.m.
9:15a.m. to 9:30a.m.
9:30a.m. to 11:30a.m.
11:30a.m. to 12:OOnoon
12:OOnoon Ito 12:30p.m.
12:30p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
2:30 p.m. to 4:30 p.m.
4:30 p.m. to 4:45 p.m.
4:45 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
5:00 p.m. to 5:15 p.m.
5:15 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
5:30 p.m. to 5:45 p.m.
u
5 January ZOD1
xrteMa(p ot Parkin~
spaCG wean( wilh
p~oposed stagqe~rd
class schMUle
33.8%
33.890
33.8°'0
33.8%
432%
38.9°'0
29.2%
29.7%
34.6°~u
48.1 °,~n
61.1%,
60.4°'0
532%
40.1 °4~
34.0%
61.4%
Project Parking Conditions for Proposed 20% Increase
8 January ZODt I"9 Januar~ 2007 I'10 JanuarY 2001 I 11 January 20D1
peaenfapa M ParkinB I Perce~ga W Parkin9 I Peroenta9a W Parkin9 ~ Oarcenb9e W parkin{
spaces vacant ~Ni spaces vacent ~++~n speces varaM, wi~h spaces vaean( wnb
pmposetl sagAeietl pmF~"etl ctaggried pioPOSetl ang9e~ed pmF setl slaggeietl
cLxs srhetli~le rlaes uhptlule ola¢e 5chetlule rlr:s scheAule
41.9%
29]°/a
8.1°~
12.?O~6
27 .ri°,%
29.7%
52A°,~n
50.3°io
50.3'/~
57.7 ~b
3.ri.1'/o
~a.s°io
51.4',~0
47.II°,o
39 4'~6
so.s~o
52.4°io
12 January Z001
parceMape d parWn(
space5 vacan( vnih
ironosetl sdgge~ed cla
scnodule
45 9%
32 4%
25.7%
21-0%
432%
41 1%
24.9%
24.3%
24.9%
64 3%
38.1%
35,1 %
23.0%
23.9°h
35.2%
33.8%
33.8%
36.2%
40.9%
52.4%
157%
22 2%
13 5°,%
%.6 %
24.3°/n
Vern Seieroe
architecture •
'3.8in
~8.~%
27.~~/0
32.4°,6
JH.J~fI
.°~4.0°0
33.0 ;6
'6.8%
40.0%
55.4'io
'8.9',6
49J ;b
44.2°,0
.°iJr.~°o
26.4';0
367°-6
~JS.~~~o
J7.H'I)
~9.Zia
7_ t .6^/0
9.5°.0
~ 9_4°/n
28.1'/0
31.4%n
28.6°~0
42.2'.'n
64.3',~0
53.5°'n
G0.04%
4l.8'~0
35.2°'0
2G.4?'o
51.1%
SZ.6~~o
35.1 %
47.3~U
21.6%
?8.4%
38.9%
JO.H%
30.8%
47.0%
53.5%
72.6°~a
51.9%
54.1°%
48.7%
'2.53~
23.7%
25.1 %
492°6
40.5%
50.3%
44.3%
38.8%
30.1 %
39.6%
54.7%
Architect A.I.A.
planning • urban design
,~~a ~,
r~~ ~~
Parkina Suaalv and Demand Studv
project: Boulder Montessori School Use Review
1 The existing class schedule provides for 24 to 25 students beginning class at 8:30 a.m., a problem time under existing conditions.
2 The new class schedule shifts some 8:30 a.m. start of class students to a start of class schedule that begins at 7:30 a.m. so that only 18 to 17
students start class at 8:30 a.m.
3 The existing class schedule provides for 14 to fifteen students whose ciasses end at 11:15 a.m. or 11:30 a.m.
4 The new, staggered class schedule provides for 2 or 3 students whose class schedule ends at 11:15 a.m., 16 students whose schedule ends at
12:00 noon, and 12 students whose schedule ends at 12:30 p.m.
5 The existing schedule provides for 6 students classes ending at 4:00 p.m. and 30 students ending at 5:30 p.m.
6 The new schedule provides for 8 students ending at 4:00 p.m. and 38 students ending at 5:30 p.m.
`,~
~
;~
~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archftecture • planning • urban design
Vern Seierce Architect AI.A.
archdecture • plannng • ir~erar architecture
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Cdorado 80302
telephone fax
oifice 303 443 9960 oifice 303 443 9920
studio 303 7868977 sNdio 3034473261
REVIEW TYPE:
REVIEW NUMBER:
"' "' '~ANAGER:
Use Review
UR2000-00003
Don Durso
Us~ Review
~ Response to City of Boulder's Land Use
Review and Comments
~ Boulder Montessori School Traffic and
Parking Use Mitigation Plan
^ Regarding the Specific Comments of
Neighbors
ATTACHMENT G
4 December 2000
p3ge 1 of 27 pages
Boulder Montessori School Classroom Addition
3300 Redstone Road, Boulder, Colorado 80302
._ ~ ~p,B ,~ ~by _
~~~~~ iiiui,i i T^ui ii~ii i ~~mi ~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
arch~ecture • plannmg • mtenor archi~ecture
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax.
o~ce 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920 4 December 2000
studio 303 786 8977 studio 303 447 3261
page 2 of 27 pages
Don Durso, case manager
Department of Community Design, Planning, and Development
City of Boulder
P. O. Box 791
Boulder, Colorado 80306
Re: Use Review
Boulder Montessori School
Sir,
Please find the following response to the findings and comments
that you have assembled and communicated to us.
We have carefully reviewed the comments including the
correspondence of neighbors and have taken the findings and
comments under serious consideration. We anticipate that the
response contained within, including modifications to the site plan,
increased in parking provided and other measures proposed as
action of the Boulder Montessori School satisfies the concerns and
issues that have been brought forward and that you will find that the
use is:
^ reasonably compatible with and has minimal negative impact on
the surrounding neighborhood,
• provides a direct senrice and convenience to the neighborhood,
and
• that the site layout provides what you consider to be adequate
the parking and parking impact mitigation.
The Boulder Montessori School chooses to revise their application
for Use Review and requests the staff to proceed towards resolution
of their review as soon as possible and to refer the review to the
Planning Board as soon as possible.
Thank you for your consideration.
IIIIIIII II TIIIIIIII II ^~IIIII IIII~I ~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
arohdecture • planning • mtenor arch~~ec~ure
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
office 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 studio 30.3 447 3261
4 December 2000
page 3 of 27 pages
Table of Contents
^ Response to City of Boulder's Land Use Review and Comments.,
.
II I ~~II
3300 Redstone Road, Boulder, Colorado 80302 ..............................................................................................1
Table of Contents ............................................:................................................................................................. ..3
Summary of Response ...................................................................................................................................... ..4
Boulder Montessori School Traffic and Parking Use Mitigation Plan .................................................................. ..4
Response to City of Boulder's Land Use Review and Comments ...................................................................... ..5
Regarding the Specific Comments of Neighbors ............................................................................................... 11
Appendix A ........................................................................................................................................................ 14
Revised Site Plan .............................................................................................................................................. 14
Appendix B ........................................................................................................................................................ 15
Alternative parking impact mitigation measures reviewed with the Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowners
Association ........................................................................................................................................................ 15
Appendix C ....................................................................................................................................................... 18
Map of location of residence of student population ............................................................................................ 18
Appendix D ...••-••-••••-••••• .................................................................................................................................... 19
Revised Site Plan for Shanahan Ridge VII I dated 25 July 1980 ........................................................................ 19
Appendix E ........................................................................................................................................................ 20
Distribution of Pre Schools seroicing the Ciry of Boulder ................................................................................... 20
Appendix F ....................................................................................................................................................... 21
Contractor's Responsibilities for Minimizing the Impacts of Construction .......................................................... 21
Appendix G ....................................................................................................................................................... 22
West Elevation (corrected) ................................................................................................................................ 22
Appendix H ....................................................................................................................................................... 23
South Elevation (enclosed for reference only) ................................................................................................... 23
Appendix I .........................................................................................................................................................24
North Elevation .................................................................................................................................................24
Appendix J ........................................................................................................................................................25
Proposed Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowner Association and Boulder Montessori School Parking Lot
Maintenance Agreement .................................................................................................................................. .25
Preliminary Signage Schedule ......................................................................................................................... .26
Appendix L ....................................................................................................................................................... .27
Letter to Neighbors ........................................................................................................................................... .27
III ~1111 I~1 ~ III
Vern Seieroe Arc
arohi~ec~ure • p~anrung
2631 Lee Hill Drive
telephone
office 303 443 9960
studio 303 7868977
;nit~ ai.a
• mkenwarcti{ec~ure
Boukier, Cdorado 80302
fax
o(fice 303 443 9920
studia 3034473261
Summary of Response
Following this summary is a traffic mitigation plan to be implemented by the Boulder Montessori School. Following that is a
comment-by-commem response to the staff's "results and comments.' And finally, following that is a response to the
various comments of the neighbors.
The Boulder MoMessori School, as a result of the findings and comments of the staff and in response to the comments of
the neighbors proposes to make the foilowing mod'rfications or add the following features to mitigate the impact of their
increased enrollment and optimize the conditions that affect the immediate neighborhood.
1. Construct additional parking to be located to the west of the Boulder Mor~essori School building:
^ 7 additional spaces,
^ two way traific,
^ parking area to be screened with landscape planting from residents to north including those using existing
parking area and from people using open space to southwest and as well as Greenbrier, and
^ safe site triangle and 200 feet clear vision along Greenbrier.
2. re stripe existing parking area along its southeast edge:
^ create one handicapped accessible parking space,
~ eliminate one parking space, add one parking space to new parking area, this parking space is one of the
fifteen parking spaces to be maintained for the Boulder Montessori School's use per the Revised Site Plan
for the Shanahan Ridge VIII P.U.D. dated 25 July 1980, and
~ conved five parking spaces to small car spaces, stripe fire lane to 25 feet from southwest face of garages,
as directed,
3. signing of existing parking lot to direct Boulder Montessori School staff and parents, neighboring residents, and
visitors to the correct use of parking spaces:
^ sign t ~ spaces along southeast edge and four spaces at the south end of the southwest edge of the
existing parking lot in order to maiMain fourteen of the fifteen parking spaces required to be maiMained for
the Boulder Momessori School's use per the Revised Site Pian for the Shanahan Ridge VIII P.U.D. dated
25 July 1980,
^ provide signage to show that the eight nodheast most spaces of the central group of spaces of the existing
parking bt are "reserved" for the exclusive use of the residents,
^ provide "no parking" signage at the northwest edge and the ceMral islands of the existing parking to
discourage improper use or the circulation areas of the parking lot,
• sign the eight spaces at the southwest end of the central group of spaces and the north four spaces along
the southwest edge of the existing parking lot to indicate that they are for the use of visitors, and
^ provide sign in front of the fire lane at the east corner of the lot to designate it "Fire Lane - No Parking°
^ provide identification sign at the entrance to the new parking area to indicate the er~rance to the Boulder
Montessori School.
^ all signage to indicate violators will be tow away per city ordinance
4. upgrade trash and recycling coMainer enclosure.
5. plant dense vegetation planting along nor~h edge of playground to screen the playground from the residence to the
north as requested by the neighbors in their letters of comment.
4 December 2000
page 4 of 27 pages
Boulder Montessori School Traffic and Parking Use Mitigation Plan
Boulder Montessori School has and will cominue to instruct parents and staff regarding the use of the parking lot. Such
insVuctions are published in ihe parent handbook, are verbally communicated to parents on an ongoing basis, and as a
reminder in the monthly newsletter. These instructions include:
1. stipulate, in the enrollment contract required to be signed by enrolling parents, that they will abide by the rules laid
out for utilization of the parking areas,
2. stipulate to the parents which spaces the school's families are permitted to use,
3. stipulate to the parents that parking in front of the garages and in the iire lane is absolutely not permitted
4. encouragement parer~s to always use considerate behavior in direct relations with neighbors and visitors,
5. encourage parenis to be patient if a situation should come to be where a parking space designated for school use
is not available and to wait until a space is available,
6, stipulate that double parking is not permitted as it will often inconvenience other people,
7. since the past spring, the school and the homeowners' board of directors have been discussing alternate ways of
sharing the parking lot, and ensuring that it is used only for the school and the residences, continue this ongoing
discussion,
8. a recent step the school has taken is to purchase RTD Eco-Passes for staff use, funded through a donation, as
many employees of the school would prefer to use the bus, or have no other means of transpodation, the staff is
encouraged to use these Eco-Passes.
9. staff will be required to park in the new parking area, and parents will be asked to enter the site through the new
parking area'rf possible.
10. class start times will be staggered so that a pattem of arrival for ciasses beginning at thirty-minute intervals is
created.
TIIII ~ ~111
Vern Seieroe Architect AI.A
'archifecwre • planning • ir~eriorarchilec{ure
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephane fax
office 30344399fi0 office 3034439920
siudio 303 786 8977 studo 303 447 3261
4 December2000
page 5 of 27 pages
Response to City of Boulder's Land Use Review and Comments
The following is a response and discussion of the findings, comments, and issues brought up at this point regarding the
Boulder Mor~essori Schools application for a Use Review to address the proposed expansion of the school's student
population from 75 to 90 students. The sections within the areas surrounded by a line are taken directly from the °City of
Boulder Land Use Results and Comments".
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
DATE OF COMMENTS:
CASE MANAGER:
LOCATION:
COORDINATES:
REVIEW TYPE:
REVIEW NUMBER:
November 27,2000
Don Durso
330D REDSTONE RD
S05W04
Use Review
LUR200a00003
APPLICANT: VERN SEIEROE
DESCRIPTION: USE REVIEW: Expand student population from 75 ta 90 students.
VARATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS:
None
I. REVIEW FINDINGS
Appfication does not meet criteria; a revision is necessary or a recommendation of denial will forwarded to
the planning Board.
Staff finds that the applicant has not demonstrated that the application meets the use review criteria relating to:
1. Being reasonably compatible with and have minimal negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
2. Providing a direct service or convenience to the neighborhood.
3. Site layout regarding the parking lot.
Additionally, the application is deficient in the following ways:
1. Insufficient vested rights request
The applicant may choose to file a revised application to address the staff findings and comments below. If no
revisetl application is filed by January 17, 2001, the Planning Department will recommend to Planning Board that
this application be denied.
The c"dy review team for this application are available to meet with you to discuss the findings, assist in resolving
outstanding issues, and discuss the next steps for the application. Please contact your case manager to set an
appointrnent.
Reasonably compatible and minimal impact on surrounding neighborhood: We have reviewed the staff
comments regarding reasonable compatibility and minimization of impact on the neighborhood and have made the
folbwing modifications in our submittal for use review of the proposed expansion of student population.
^ Additional narkina area:
1. We propose to add parking to that area locaied to the west of the school building. An additional curb cut
at Greenbrier wi11 be installed to access this parking. The new parking area is proposed 1o be one-way
circulation with egress from the parking area to be directed irrto the existing parking lot and oMo Redstone
Road. See the following site plan, Appendix A
2. We an6cipate that parents will first park here when arriving at the site and will proceed onto other spaces
w~hin the exisiing lot if spaces are full at the new lot.
3. The area proposed for the new parking is an area that becomes wet due to excessive irrigation by the
homeowners association of the landscaped areas surrounding the parking lot. The school currerrtly has a
subsurface water problem that results in seepage into the building. The new parking will help to alleviate
this problem by directing this water to the southeast of the new parking area.
4. A drop off and parking area at this location was first recommended by members of the homeowners
association. We prepared plans for such a parking area, reviewed those plans with the Mr. Steve Durian
of the City staff, and then reviewed those plans with the homeowners association along with other
altemative approaches to parking impact mitigation. See Appendix B. No conclusive resolution came of
those discussions so we did not pursue the alternative of additional parking to the west of the building.
Given the stafi commeMs and the outspoken commeMs of the neighbors, we propose to construct
additional parking. We believe this will alleviate the negative impact that concerns the staff as it relates to
^III I~ 1~1III ~ II^ I
Vern Seieroe Arc
archi~ecfure • plamm~g
2631 Lee Hill Drive
telephone
office 303 443 9960
stud'a 303 786 8977
;hitect A.LA.
• mlenararchileckure
Boulder, Colorado 80302
iax
office 303 443 9920
studio 3034473261
use of the existing parking lot, existing negative impact, and possible negative impact resulting from the
expansion of the student enroliment as proposed.
• Re stripe Parkinq:
1. The parking along the south side of the parking lot will be re striped.
2. Egress from the new parking area will consume some of the existing space along the south edge of the lot.
With restriping, the existing count can be maintained. See Appendix A.
• Reauired Parkinq / New Parking. (West Lotl:
1. Required Parking, West Lot
land use quantity parldnq required
Existing Condominium, serviced by west parking lot
^ One bedroom units 8 units 8 spaces
^ Two bedroom units 8 units 12 spaces
Proposed Facility:
• other area, existing facility, not part of new addition 5,502.is.f.
^ corridor, includes part of existing facility 56.Os.f.
^ new workroom, includes part of existing facility 167.Os.f.
• new interior classroom closet 49.5s.f.
^ new classroom, includes part of existing facility 948.4s.f.
suMotal 1,22D.9s.f.
^ east attached, exterior playground shedlcloset 34.4s.f.
• west attached, exterior playground shed/closet 21.Os.f.
suMotal 55.4s.f.
totai building floor area, including attached sheds 6,778.4s.f. 22 spaces
Total Required Spaces 42 spaces
2. Parlting Proposed, West Parking Lot:
Existing Parking Spaces
^ enclosed garages 8 spaces
^ open spaces 37 soaces
subtotal, e~sting spaces 45 spaces
^ spaces removed for restriping (11) spaces
^ spaces replaced by restriping 10 spaces
• addftional spaces at new parking area 8 spaces
subtotal, new spaces 7 spaces
total spaces
net increase in parking spaces at west parking lot
52 spaces
4 Decemher 2000
page 6 of 27 pages
^ Direct service or convenience ta the neighborhood. The Boulder Montessori School serves predominantly ihe
local residential area in the vicinity of the school. A map of the place of residence of the students indicates that fact
and is attached. See Appendix C.
Additionally, the distribution of pre schools in the City of Boulder is such that there is a much lower distribution of such
schools in the south Boulder area and more importantly in the area around the school. See Appendix E This
reinforces the concept that the school provides direct service to the neighborhood.
The loss of this school would resuR in a loss of profound loss of preschool services to the area of Boulder that is south
of Table Mesa Drive. The loss of this school to the community would result in a clear lose of service to the south
Boulder neighborhoods. Fur~her, it would result in a loss to the community of Boulder as a whole and to ihose
residents of Boulder in the immediate vicinity surrounding the Boulder Montessori School.
Additionaily, the Boulder Montessori School is one of the few schools providing child development services to toddlers.
Citywide there exists very few schools that provide such services.
Site layout regarding the parking lot: The Boulder Montessori School has given serious consideration to the
tindings and comments of the City of Boulder staff and to the comments of the neighbors. The Boulder Momessori
School has met several times with members of the Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowners Association and its Board of
Directors to discuss the school's plans. Additionally, in crooperation with the Shanahan Ridge VIII homeowners
association, we prepared drawings and a lerier describing the proposed add~ion for mailing to all of the homeowners.
See Appendix L. We have carefully reviewed the written comments of the neighbors provided as an attachment to the
staff's findings and comments.
Members of the homeowners association suggested a drop off and parking along Greenbrier. We prepared a sketch
plan of such a drop off and parking, we reviewed it with Steve Durian of the Transportation Division, and then prepared
a summary of alternatives available to relieve parking issues at the complex. We were unable to ascertain consensus
or direction of opinion from the homeowners association, Comments ranged from yes to don't, the conditions are o.k.
as is. The sketch of the drop off prepared and presented to the homeowners association along with the written
discussion of the alternatives is included in Append'a D.
After review of the findings and comments and taking into consideration the commer~s of neighbors, the Boulder
Montessori School would like to propose that it construct a new parking area to the west of-their existing building upon
their property.
^ existing parking spaces in west lot that are dedicated the Boulder Montessori School
per the °Revised Site Plan for Shanahan Ridge VIII" P.U.D. dated 25 July 1980 15 spaces
^ loss of one space per the proposed restriping along the south side of the lot (1) space
• additional parking spaces proposed to the west of the Boulder Morrtessori School
building 6 spaces
total number oi parking spaces available to the Boulder Montessori School for their sole 22 spaces
use
7 spaces • Many of the neighbors utilize their garages for storage. In two cases, the garage is used to warehouse goods for
businesses conducted out of the homeowner's residence. These uses are non-cor~orming as they are uses not
consisteni with their approved use (parking per the P.U.D.) and they remove parking spaces from the available stock
of parking spaces. The staff has offered the opinion that their exists a negative impact as the land use relates to
1111~ III~ IIII ~I III ~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archheclure • planning • in4enor archi{ec~ure
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
office 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 studio 303 447 3261
parking. We ask that the staff exercise accuracy as it identifies the impacts of existing conditions and existing use of
the site and allocate responsibility appropriately and not solely towards the school.
^ Vested rights request shall be waived. Enclosed is a fully completed form waiving vested property rights.
The applicant may choose to file a revised application to address the staff findings and comments.....: The
Boulder Montessori School chooses to revise their application for Use Review and requests the staff to proceed
towards resolution of their review as soon as possible and to refer the review to the Planning Board as soon as
possible.
II. CITY REQUIREMENTS Access/Circulation
Staff believes that the application does not meet the use review criteria, which requires that the use "have minimal
negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood°. Based on level of congestion on-site, on-street, and illegal parking
(parking parallel along the most northem area of the lot) that staff has observed at the site, staff does not support
additional students or staff on this site. The current use of this site appears to already be impacting the neighborhood
negatively. The applicant, in a re submittal, should show how these site issues could be addressed through site
improvements or other means.
^ The revised P.U.D. stipulates that 15 spaces are assigned to the use of the Boulder Montessori School. Of the
amount, eleven existing spaces located along the south edge of the parking lot are designated for exclusive use by the
school. The school has posted that those are their spaces for the exclusive use only from 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. An
additional four spaces are therefore allocated to the school but are not designated as exclusive for the use by the
school. The school requires their staff, when they arrive in the morning, to park in the four spaces designated for their
exclusive use along the southwest edge of the lot.
^ Many of the neighbors utilize their garages for storage. In two cases, the garage is used to warehouse goods for
business conducted out of the homeowner's residence. These uses are non-conforming as they are uses not
consistent with their approved use (parking per the P.U.D.) and they remove parking spaces from the available stock
of parking spaces. The staff has offered the opinion that their exists a negative impact as the land use relates to
parking. We ask that the staff exercise accuracy as it identifies the impacts of existing conditions and existing use of
the site and allocate responsibility appropriately and not solely towards the school.
^ After review of the findings and comments and taking into consideration the comments of neighbors, the Boulder
Montessori School would like to propose that it construct a new parking area to the west of their existing building upon
their property. We believe this measure to mitigate parking and traffic impact is consistent with the opinion of most of
the neighbors.
^ The provision of a one way parking area to the west of the Boulder Montessori School building will provide a net aain
of seven additional parkinp spaces and produce a total amount of parking spaces that is in excess of the amount
reauired.
4 December 2000
page 7 of 27 pages
The applicant has given general information regarding whether the use serves the neighborhood. They have stated that
half the students live within two miles of the site. At the recent review by Planning Board of the Friends' School, the board
had a difficult time finding that the use served the neighborhood, and 3 of 6 members voted to find that it did not serve the
neighborhood. Because of this, a further breakdown of the location of students should be provided, either by mapping the
location of families' residences, or by further breaking down the distances, such as walking distance, within ~/a mile, one
mile, etc.
The City of Boulder has never legally defined (ordinance or adopted regulation) that which defines neighborhood.
Webster defines it as "1. A district or an area with distinctive characteristics, 2. the people who live near one another or
in a particular district or an area, 3. the surrounding area , vicinity.° Arguably, one could define that the area south of
Dartmouth and Moorhead as the neighborhood served by Boulder Montessori School as it relates to "serves the
neighborhood". Narrowing that area , one could argue that the area south of Table Mesa Drive is a distinct vicinity and
neighborhood. Perhaps more is common that any definition to consider the group of residents generally served by the
neighborhood school, Southern Hills Middle School, as a neighborhood.
A map is attached that locates the students currently enrolled in the Boulder Montessori School. It clearly shows that a
significant amount of the students live in the surrounding neighborhood. See Appendix C. Also, it is a well-known fact
that the South boulder Community has far fewer pre schools than the northern part of Boulder. A map of that
dispersion clearly shows that fact.
The lose of this school to the community would result in a clear lose of service to the south Boulder neighborhoods.
Further, it would result in a lose to the community of Boulder as a whole and to those residents of Boulder in the
immediate vicinity surrounding the Boulder Montessori School.
The Boulder Montessori School's economic condition and its currant battle with financial contradictions have been
stated in the original application. The fact is that the school finds itself having to drastically raise their tuition rates at a
rate of increase that is beyond what they consider to be reasonable and to a level that they feel has reached its
maximum amount. The options to the school as they see them is to expand the enrollment and adjust the financial
forrnat of the schools business, allow the school to continue as it has done in the past few years, or to sell the school
and relocate out of the Boulder preschool market to a nearby community hopefully maintaining as many enrolled and
alumni sibling interest. The Boulder Montessori School has discussed these alternatives. Obviously they concluded
that expansion was the more favorable approach. They consider allowing the school to continue as it has in the past
few years will eventually result in a degradation of the quality of the school programs, an eventual loss of support, and
a resuRing bankruptcy of the organization. The alternative of selling their facility and moving out of the community is
not a desirable altemative. The communiry / neighborhood nature of the school runs directly contradictory to that
altemative. But there is an enormous amount respect for the Boulder Montessori School and a desire to maintain the
operation of the school as a high quality institution of early childhood development important to the Boulder Valley
Community. The Board of Directors have decided that 'rf this Use Review request fails, in a limited amount of time the
Board will direct that the Boulder Montessori School real property be sold and that another property in a suitable
location be acquired.
Fire Protectioni. Priorto final inspection, applicant will be required to extend existing automatic fire sprinkler and fire
alarm system protection into new construction. Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350.
^ We appreciate the review and acknowledge the comment. Thank you.
I 1 I ~ I~~
~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architecture • plannmg • in~enor archilecture
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
office 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 studio 303 447 3261
Landscaping
No requirements at this time. Bev Johnson, 303-441-3272.
^ We appreciate the review. Thank you.
^ We anticipate that the visual impact of additional parking will be offset by any berming and screening that we can
accomplish in the landscaped areas immediately around the parking area. We believe that the areas adjacent to the
drives should be kept clear of screening except at Greenbrier.
^ We propose berming with landscape evergreen planting and deciduous shrubbery between the new parking area and
the right of way along Greenbrier.
^ Several neighbors have made the suggestion of planting trees and shrubs densely along the east side of the Boulder
Montessori School playground. We will install such landscaping as part of the construction. The smallest practical
opening will be maintained for sandbox sand deliveries at the existing gate in the fence.
Miscellaneous
The trash and recycling area at the school does not meet the requirements of 9-3.3-25. Modification of this area will be a
requirement of building permit, should the use review be approved by Planning Board.
The trash area shall be modified to fully screen the trash containers. It is proposed that the existing roof of the shed
behind the existing trash area will be extended to cover the trash container and new fencing and doors will be
constructed.
The recycling area containers are shared with the homeowners of Shanahan Ridge VIII. It is proposed that these
containers will be placed within a screened enclosure that will be part of the trash enclosure. The fence and roof of the
trash enclosure will be extended to screen the recycle containers. A door will be constructed at the east end of the
enclosure to provide access to the recycle equipment. The homeowner association will be. asked to contribute to the
cost of the recycle equipment enclosure and in that case continue their use of the containers.
• See Appendix A, Site Plan, for the layout of this enclasure.
Construction traffic, materials, and blocking of parking spaces are a concern, and will only be allowed upon the site
actually owned by the school. A condition of approval would be that construction equipment, materials, or construction
workers could use none of the shared parking spaces during construction, if Planning Board approves the expansion.
It has been the intention of the preschool to not allow any storage of equipment, parking of construction equipment,
parking of construction workers vehicles, and construction visitor's vehicles in the parking lot. The new parking area to
the west of the existing building will be used for construction staging and parking. Two concrete deliveries and two
lumber deliveries will be brought onto the site by a route that extends through the parking lot, along the fire lane, and
through the existing gate in the fence at the east side of the site. Another route could be set up to come directly off
Greenbrier but this would invo~ve damage to established natural vegetation and would require driving heavy trucks up
4 December 2000
page 8 of 27 pages
over the curb and no doubt causing damage to the curb. It is not anticipated that the route for the heavy trucks will not
cause damage to the lot or fire lane. The existing lot is constructed for trash truck service to the homeowners and
school trash storage at the east corner of the lot and the fire lane is constructed to accept heavy fire truck traffic. Of
course, if the contractor causes any damage, the contractor before completion of the project will repair that damage.
We will photographically document the conditions of the lot, any aprons, the fire lanes, and surrounding landscaping.
^ It is proposed that the City of Boulder "Contractor's Responsibitities for Minimizing the Impacts of Construction° rules
and regulations be adhered to. We also understand that this compliance is required as part of the understanding of
the issuance of building permit.
Neighborhood Comments
Staff has received three phone calls and three letters (attached) related to the expansion of the daycare, a14 of which were
from residents who share the parking lot with the school. All three calls were against allowing more children in the school.
Concerns included difficulry in finding parking spaces, parents of children parking in condominium-designated spaces,
parking in illegal areas not designated as parking spaces, and blocking their cars. One neighbor indicated that more noise
firom more cars would be a problem.
We believe that the proposed additional parking will alleviate the existing parking conditions and the impact of the
additional student enrollment.
Parking
The handicapped parking space does not meet the City of Boulder dimensions, as required by 9-3.3-1100.
As part of the redesign to add additional parking, the redesign of the handicapped parking has been accomplished. We
have provided a 4-foot wide aisle on the passenger side of the space in lieu of the required 3-foot wide aisle.
The proposed new parking space adjacent to the fire lane (indicated as space number 39, and possibly 38) blocks the
required access to the fire lane. This area must remain open, as required in the revised site plan dated July 25, 1980, for
at least 25 feet from the garage face.
The redesign that has been accomplished provides 25 feet from the garage face to the first parking space. We do not
intend to block the fire lane as defined in the 25 July 1980 revision to the P.U.D. See the Site Plan, Appendix A.
^I~ ^^ I ~I I
Vern Seieroe Arc
archi~eclure • planrnng
2631 Lee Hill Drive
telephone
office 303 443 9960
studio 303 786 8977
:hitect A.I.A.
• m4enor archi~ec~ure
Boulder, Colorado 80302
fax
office 303 443 9920
studio 303 447 3261
Much of the signage at the site is difficult to read due to lack of maintenance. The striping is almost non-existent in the lot
as well, and difficult to determine where the spaces are located. If Planning Board approves this application a requirement
of approval will be that all signs illegible or damaged signs should be repaired or replaced, and the parking lot re striped.
The signs include a fire lane/no parking sign, which is almost illegible, signs indicating which surface spaces are reserved
for residents.
Maintenance of the parking lot is the responsibility of the homeowner association The Boulder Montessori School
contributes financially to the cost of that maintenance on a regular basis. A copy of a proposed updated agreement to
that effect between the association and the school is attached. This attached agreement is under negotiation and
should not be assumed to be approved by the school simply because it is included hear. It is included to verify the fact
that there is an ongoing understanding that the homeowners association is responsible for maintenance of the !ot and
therefore responsible for upkeep to the signage.
The Boulder Montessori School will provide additional signage referred to herein as part of the construction and will
renovate any existing signage.
The applicant's parking analysis appears to be incorrect with respect to the parking lot immediately adjacent to the school.
It states that there are 11 spaces located on or assigned to the school, 8 garage spaces, and 29 open unassigned spaces.
It appears that 8 of the spaces (indicated as numbers 14, 15, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 16) are assigned to particular units as
are the garages, and are not shared spaces as set forth in the applicanYs written statement, leaving only 18 spaces as
shared parking. Additionally, the Shanahan 8 PUD required that the school maintain 15 spaces. With the addition
proposed to the school, for a total of 6778.4 square feet, the school would now require 22 spaces under the current code
requirement of 1 space for each 300 square feet. While it appears that the site would still meet the parking requirements
under the code by using the shared spaces for accommodating both the condominium and school uses (46 required where
47 exist today), the parking analysis on page 8 should be corrected.
It is in fact our understanding that 8 of the spaces (indicated as numbers 14, 15, 16, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 16) are assigned
to particular units as are the garages, and are not shared spaces as set forth in our written statement. The Architect over
looked that the eight parking wheel stops are numbered. Surely few people who visit the site understand the numbers on
these concrete wheel stops mean that these spaces are designated for the use of a specific homeowner, reserved, and
are not for parking by anyone else. The homeowners association would serve its concem well to indicate clearly that
these are °Resenred Parking" as is done typically and universally throughout the rest of the community. Such designation
could be accomplished using upright signs. This would also help the school a great deal by making it clear to visitors such
as the Architect or parents that these are reserved parking spaces. With permission of the homeowners association ff
forthcoming, the Boulder Montessori School will sign these spaces as "reserved, no parking."
The school does in fact maintain 15 parking spaces. The school proposes to remove one of these existing parking spaces
and will reconstruct that space in the new parking area. The school will supply signage that marks all of the remaining 14
spaces in the main lot as those designated for the Boulder Montessori School. Those spaces that belong to the Boulder
Monfessori School will continue to be used so that as stipulated in the Revised Site Plan for the Shanahan Ridge VIII
P.U.D. they can "maintain those spaces". Further, all spaces not designated reserved for residents or the school will be
signed visitors if permission to do so is forthcoming from the homeowners association. Lastly, the fire lane will be sign "fire
lane - no parking.°
4 December 2000
page 9 of 27 pages
While the site may meet the Land Use Code regarding the required parking, staff is actually assessing the needs of the
use, as required under the use review criteria, that the use does negatively impact the neighborhood. As stated above
(access comments) staff feels that the use does not meet these criteria.
We believe the proposed new parking area alleviates the parking conditions, the impact of expanding the enrollment, and
greatly improves circulation of vehicles on site.
Many of the neighbors utilize their garages for storage. In two cases, the garage is used to warehouse goods for business
conducted out of the homeowner's residence. These uses are non-conforming as they are uses not consistent with their
approved use (parking per fhe P.U.D.) and they remove parking spaces from the available stock of parking spaces. The
staff has offered the opinion that their exists a negative impact as the land use relates to parking. We ask that the staff
exercise accuracy as it identifies the impacts of existing conditions and existing use of the site and allocate responsibility
appropriately and not solely towards the school.
The following departments had no requirements: Forester
We acknowledge the lack of comment by the Forester.
111. INFORMA710NAL COMMENTS Access/Circulation
The applicant is not required to provide a Traffic Impact Assessment. However, it is advised that the app(icant conduct a
limited traffic assessment to address spec'rfic traffic concerns from members of the neighborhood and staff for the Planning
Board hearing.
Steve Durian, 303-441-4493
The comments of the Transportation Engineer are noted and appreciated.
We believe the proposed new parking area alleviates the parking conditions, the impact of expanding the enrollment, and
greatly improves circulation of vehicles on site.
Many of the neighbors utilize their garages for storage. In two cases, the garage is used to warehouse goods for business
conducted out of the homeowner's residence. These uses are non-conforming as they are uses not consistent with their
approved use (parking per the P.U.D.) and they remove parking spaces from the available stock of parking spaces. The
staff has offered the opinion that their exists a negative impact as the land use relates io parking. We ask that the staff
exercise accuracy as it identifies the impacts of existing conditions and existing use of the site and allocate responsibility
appropriately and not solely towards the school.
No signage that is deteriorated in its visual quality will be reused.
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
arc~tifecture • p~amm~g • in~enorarchifec~ure
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
o~ice 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 Studio 303 447 3261
Buildiog and Housing Codes
Addition must meet all requirements of the building codes in effect at the time of permit application. Steve Brown, 441-
3172
We anticipate that the construction of the addition will comply with all building codes.
^~ ~I~IIII 11~
1
4 December 2000
paqe 10 of 27 pages
1 1 III 1 III'1 TI I IIIII
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
architeclure • plannmg • intenor archi~ecture
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fvc
office 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 studio 303 447 3261
Regarding the Specific Comments of Neighbors
^ Neiqhbor Comment:
"The increase in students will increase traffic flow and congestion whenever classes start or end"
The new parking area, to be located west of the Boulder Montessori School building, will create a new entrance fior
staff, visitors, and parents of the Boulder Montessori School. They will enter through the new areas and proceed
along the circulation path to a parking space. If a space is not found they will proceed on into the existing parking
lot to a parking space at that locatio~.
The City of Boulder staff requires that the Boulder Montessori School maintain its 15 parking spaces. One of the
existing 15 parking spaces will be removed and relocated to the new parking area. The semaining spaces will be
signed for Boulder Montessori School use. Those spaces will be along the south edge of the parking lot and along
the west edge of the lot. This will restrict parent access, entering the main lot from the new parking area, to the
southwest portion of the main lot.
The Boulder Montessori School staff will be directed to park at the new parking area. This will leave ihe main lot
for the function ot parents parking and dropping off of students. Parents will be required and further trained to
leave via the new parking area there by avoiding impacting all but the south corner of the existing parking lot. The
Boulder Montessori School expects the measures that they propose as traffic / parking management program by
way of their parent and staff education plan will be successful. However, they realize that it will not be perfect nor
will all parents comply with the measures required of them. Their witl be a tendency for ihose leaving and heading
southeast bound to drive north through the parking lot and a tendency for others to take the "short cut° through the
existing parking lot if heading northwest bound. Almost universally, the parents of Boulder Montessori are very
responsible people and will adhere to the commitment they will be required to submit to as part of their enrollment
contract with the School. Additionally, the Boulder Montessori School realizes that its traffic / parking management
program by way of their parent and staff education plan will not be able to reach all people. Grand parents, home
childcare providers, older siblings, and friends will drop off and pick up children on rare occasions and visitors
unfamiliar to the school will come to visit.
The following attempts to calculate the existing amount of traffic flow associated with Boulder Montessori School
business. It assumes that traffic on 9 November was consistent with normal traffic, which attendance rolls and
observation by staff confirms. It shows the worst condition whereby every individual picking up a child is not a
parent and is a grandparent or home care provider and that they use the existing lot as a means of exit. This of
course is far trom similar to the most unusual condition; parents for the most part pick up their children. Though
this is an impossibility except in theory, the following shows that even in that case, still the traffic flow within the
existing lot is greatly reduced from the existing conditions.
4 December 2000
page 11 of 27 pages
daily traffic circulation summary:
existinq traffic circulation count at existinq parkinp lot:
existing trips "into" the existing parking lotl
existing trips "out of" the existing parking lotl
total, existing trips "into" &"out" of existing parking lot
proiected t~affic circulation count at existina aarkina lot:
trips "into° the existing parking lot (all trips enter new parking area
except those coming from the north)'
additional student trips "into° existing parking lot
trips °into" existing parking lot
existing trips diverted °out" through new parking area
existing trips "out of° existing parking lotl
additional student trips "out of" existing parking lot (20% x 116)
total, projected trips "out of" existing parking lot
trips toffrom existing parking lot
116 trips
116 trips
232 trips
58 trips
0 trips
58 trips
0 trips
116 trips
24 trips
140 trips
Total, trips `into' and `ouY of existing parking lot 19$
~ please reference traffic count conducted on 9 November 2000 and submitted to Don Durso on 13 November 2000.
^ Neiahbor Comment:
"Increase in teachers will resuft in `spillover' from the school's parking spaces into our residenYs spaces."
The teachers of the Boulder Montessori School will be required to park in the new parking area to the west of the
building. They will not be permitted in the existing lot, except when the new parking area is full. In that instance, if
it occurs, the teachers will be required to park in one ofi the four spaces along the southwest side of the lot.
Additional parking at the new parking area will relieve parking impact of the increase in teachers.
It should be noted, that access to the City of Boulder open space is across Greenbrier form the existing parking lot.
In discussions with homeowners, it has been noted that thare exists a burden upon parking at the site in the torm
of people parking in the lot and then walking across Greenbrier to use the open space trail. The school asks that
as a benefit to offset the negative impact upon the private parking facilities of the homeowners and the school by
users of the open space that the City of Boulder mitigate this condition by constructing adequate parking or
assisting the school and the homeowners financially with the cost of mitigation.
~~11 I IIIIII~ I ~ I~ I
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archdec~ure • p~amm~g • m~enaamhi~ec~ure
2631 Lce Hill Drive Baulder, Cdorado 80302
telepfane fax
office 3IXi4439960 office 3034439920
studio 303 7868977 studia 3034473261
^ Neiqhbor Comment:
"There are clearly not enough parking spaces for the school. The shortage of parking spaces must be alleviated °
^ The new parking area will greatly relieve parking requirements.
^ Many of the neighbors utilize their garages for storage. In two cases, the garage is used to warehouse goods for
business conducted out of the homeowner's residence. These uses are non-conforming as they are uses not
consistent with their approved use (parking per the P.U.D.) and they remove parking spaces from the available
stock of parking spaces. The staff has offered the opinion that their exists a negative impact as the land use
relates to parking. We ask that the stafi exercise accuracy as it identifies the impacts of existing conditions and
existing use of the site and allocate responsibility appropriately and not solely towards the school.
^ Summarv of Parkina Requirements and Parkina Provided:
- parking spaces required to be maintain by the Boulder Montessori School per the °Revised Site
Plan for the Shanahan Ridge VIII P.l1.D. dated 25 July 1980 15 spaces
- spaces removed due to restriping (1) space
- spaces relocated to new parking area 1 space
- additional parking spaces at new area 7 spaces
total parking space for the use of the Boulder of the Montessori School 23 spaces
^ Neiqhbor Comment:
"No storage of construction material, trailers, bulldozers, etc. in the lot"
"The construction process will noisy, messy, and inconvenient "
"I am also especially concemed about the storage of construction materials & equipment, as this nrould cause a large
impact in the lot°
"Drop oH heavy equipment and construction material will further damage the lot and the fire lane."
^ The coMractor and their subcontractors and suppliers wili not be permitted to park their vehicles in the existing
parkiog area temporally or otherwise at any time.
^ The contractor and their subcontractors and suppliers will not be permitted to store materials or any equipment,
temporally or otherwise at any time in the parking existing parking lot.
^ Construction parking will be restricted to off site at a location of the contractor's selection and in the area of the
new parking area.
^ Construction materials and equipment storage shall be limited to within the playground area and the new parking
area.
^ It is proposed that the City of Boulder "CoMractor's Responsibilities for Minimizing the Impacts of Construction°
rules and regulations be adhered to, We also understand that this compliance is required, by ordinance, as part
of the understanding of the issuance of permit.
• The Boulder Montessori School will be diligent in insisting that the contractor adhere without exception to these
requirements.
• Durable, but temporary signage will be posted within the existing parking lot the intlicates, "absolutely no
construction parking, violators will be towed away without warning per City Ordinance."
II IIII11 ^ ^ ~ ~ ~
4 December 2000
page 12 of 27 pages
^ Neiqhbar CommeM:
`The addition must not reduce or block any views that our residems enjoy from their units, ihe parking lots, sidewalks,
or any other Shanahan common space "
"The height of the proposed addition should be reduced."
^ On three occasions, prior to application for Use Review, the Architect and the Director of the Boulder Montessori
School met with members of the Boulder Montessori Schooi and its Board of Directors. During those meetings it
was reqaested that the Architecf lower the ridge of the addition so that its elevation would not be above the ridges
of the northeast antl southwest wings of the Schools building so as not to block views of the resider~s.. The
Architect has done that.
• The Boulder Montessori School prepared a letter with attached sketches for distribution by the homeowners
association to the residents. A copy is enclosed, see Appendix L,
^ The Architect has, however, comrnitted an error and did not accurately lower the ridge of the addition on the
drawing found on the cover and the "West Elevation" on page 15 of the original application submittal. The
Architeci apologizes for that error. The corrected drawings are enclosed, see the cover of this document and
Appendix G - West Elevation.
^ It is proposed that the apex of the arch of the upper surface of the roof shall be 16 feet above the floor but not
higher than the elevation of the east wing of the existing building. See Appendix H and Appentlix I. These
drawings are unchanged.
~ The existing two wings of the school have eight-foot ceilings that are dark and oppressive and compress
acousticaffy the sound produced within fhe classroom, For a school environment, with the quantity of people, the
amouM of activiiy, and the bustle of communication a taller ceiling is necessary to create an environment
appropriate ihe needs of its inhabitants. A typical school environment is designed with taller ceilings. The
proposed design will have eight-foot ceilings at the northwest third of the new classroom and around all edges of
the new classroom. The center of the classroom will rise and provide light monitors for energy saving daylighting
of the new classroom.
^ Neiahbor Comment:
"The additional noise from the relocated playground must be mitigated to reduce sound carryovers to our residents °
"It (the addition) will diminish the curraM playground space, and relocate the playground space closer to the
Shanahan VIII residences."
"Since the addition will be taking up a large portion of their currant playarea, the playground will be (moved) cbser to
the condominiums"
"A plan regarding the relocation of the playground... °(Landlord)
"...., it would be nice if the new landscaping and outdoor layout coultl address noise abatement, such as thick bushes,
trees, or similar on tfie perimeter to reduce playground noise after moving of facilities."
^ The existing playground is not proposed to be relocated.
^ The addition will be located in the area of the existing wood trellis. This area of the existing playground is under
utilized and will be removed.
^ The executive director and the architect have met with the neighborhood association and its board of directors.
They discussed the playground renovation and showed a conceptual drawing of ihat design. That presentation
was not emphasized downplayed because the purpose of the discussion was to inform the neighbors of the
proposed building addition.
1
1 III^ ^
Vern Seierce Architect AI.A
arc,h~kecture • plamm~g • mienorarchi4ecture
2631 Lee Nill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
office 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 7868977 studio 3034473261
Apparently in not emphasizing the explanation of the playground, or because the playground renovation was
mentioned in the context of the addition discussion, or because of erroneous assumptions, the neighbors have
come to the false realization that the playground will be expanded or relocated.
The enclosure of the playground is no1 propased to be modified at this time.
The school does not permR all students to enter the playground at a single time. Class access to the playground is
sequential to enhance the safety of the playground and to allow for better supervision.
^ Neiqhbor Comment:
"...a~n) requiremem the plaM dense bushes or trees to help block the i~creased noise from the playground "
° reduce playground noise after moving of facilities."
^ The Boulder Montessori School proposes to do as requested by the neighbors; they will densely plant trees and
bushes along the north and nor~heast edge of the playground. See Append'a A, site plan.
• Neiahbor Comment:
"AgreemeMs on if the construction equipmeM ruins any property, it (the property) should be replaced "
~ The Boulder Montessori School, with the contractor and the architect, will invite a representafive or representatives
of the homeowner association to survey the existing conditions. Extensive damage and deterioration to the
existing common property exists. This damage will be identified and photographed.
• If any damage occurs to the common facilities, it will be repaired as part of the construction.
~ Neiqhbor Comment:
"Cars are parked acrass the sidewalk, inhibiting access to the SKIP bus stop "
^ The Boulder Montessori School has been concerned about this condition for some time as it also effects children's
circulation on the sidewaiks and their safety.
^ The School plans to install parking wheel stops at the spaces along the southeast edge of the existing parking lot.
^ Neiahbor CommeM:
"The traffic of 75 affluent parents driving monster SUVs and minivans have impact on the paved parking lot."
~ Not all parents of the Boulder Momessori School are affluent However, the cost of living in Boulder and the cost
of conduc6ng a high quality, non-profit preschool business in Boulder at affordable prices for a wide distribution of
people is difficult to do in the Boulder economy. The Boulder Montessori School utilizes a sliding scale fee and
scholarships for their tuition.
^ Not ali parents drive SUVs and minivans.
^ The homeowners association and the Boulder Montessori School have had a long-standing agreement for sharing
4 December 2000
page 13 of 27 pages
~ Neiqhbor CommeM:
"The Norih-Side orientation of ihe e~ension runs parallel with the mountains and obstructs view to the mountains "
• The addition is solely on the southeast side of the existing building.
^ The existing building screens the addition from the view of the residents.
the cost of parking lot maintenance.
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A
archilecfure • plarnmg • ir~enorarchitecture
2631 Lee HiN Drive Boulder, Cdorado B~i02
telephone fax
office 3034439960 otfice 3034439920
s~u~o ~ ~as esn sa,cso ~ aa~ ~2s~
: . . ~ 2~ ~ ~ ~ "~'` ,~~';~v ~ .. :
[~,wr~a ~ES . i• ~,.~' ,• •
. ~r ,.i. ,,;' ~ ~
,'~ T T T T T T ~'..'•: ''° .
2 L~/~R~i, Fc~ n~ ' ",r~`: '' ~~~ ` I ' .~
C-£~./ ~ 'o • , ~
', ~ ' . 't i'/~VINC.~ -~ ~;,, ~ ~..~ •~px•sn~l~`i' •,~
~ ~pin~ r ,:. ;
`~ ' ~15 . .• .• .,, ~8:
~~-~Y ~ ~'~
~x~t' ro I ~O 2~ ~ ~~
~,ESr~~. ~ ~
15 ~2~7 ~ag ~~ 3~
,: . 14 22 ~v ~q---~
' . `' ~~ ~ / ~ I / n #T..-D --t~
! ^f~
.. • 12 2a /~ '~
i • ~ ~ c4 /~ ^
~ ~ ~
' .I I~~~ ' I~~ ~ .
~ •• lo $ ~' F 1
~ , . ~ ~~, ~~ ; 28
~ # ~ . .'• ': ~i ;~14 :' ;/ N -,~~. ~
~ EhITl2 EX~~11~l~'~I. a-
~ ~~ ~ pAi~KlrlL~ (;~
~'fD aED5TOt1~ H~v~ S~p„~~ o' ' ,~- J~,
~ ~ r "~
~ ~
L~ 876 5
~
~
'
~ 43 2 -
:
~ `.
.
~ #~
~ ~
~ ..
,'~ ' . a . ~ .
' •#`&: .~' '•'*1`F ~ . • ,~- .
.
~~3t . :•.~32. ~
~ANb ~ P~ ~-~Ud : ~ • ' ~ML.sT ~, 6~'~'~
~ ~}2.J6 SGl2EF.~.1-DEt~SE ~24N UNE ~ .
~~,-~
. g'~ cJwE~'f~.;
~c~`o UEC ~t~~o.~h ~~, ~s6,~L.K-^~
~h 2U2 ~ALI1?E~2 3
KIP~-=-~
' ~~5
~N~.r--=-~~
~~ ^
~~-E~I2 ~j-1ZEEtJ~ WV~/
E
1f
'
~ ~ ~'f~"~:
T
i
B~A}.~~'4
E~~ D
C
~)~' ~~~ ~~~~r c~~~,~ , ..
rt ~--'
~
~:• ~. _ ~;• .~•.:.-...: ~
,' ,,
. .r.::
: 'o,,'; ' ' . • ""'t;:...,
.~ .
. ..
,~ . .~ ,~~r• : •, , .
~~ ~~';~`•~~':;:,.~
~~
.'~5~~&. .
;, ~
~'! .. ~~~ RYIGV'~li
. ~,.~
r ~• '•
~.' k~l: ~ . ~• ,
~ ..
. ~• • :~
/.~ . ,~ ~ '~S
~ :, ~. ~°0 44 >~
2~j~ ~ Z ,~ ~~ ~27.-~q~
_ ".~+ °~~~c~
~~,, ~
~~~ ~ `,'~
~3~,~ 6~ 43
~~ 2 _..~~Da_~ ~
42
~~'. ~~
h ~'u; t~:
. ~ ~. 4 • ~ •
~ ^I ~ IIIIII~II ~I
.
/ ~ rpi~l,
XI7•. • 1 N~
,j
~
~ ~~i •-ar~:sa~v1 i:
,
. . ` n~~.~; x ; ::' • ~.]r
t•• ~
'~„.;.:: ~' ~ L~
';,,:~ ~ ~ ~..
/
~/'/~~~ ~
^~
-,,` c~~4E~~~ I,~;e~J o :
~~
~ !~e~E a~xx S~N~,~E ~a~L .
yw" a~
~
'
'~ ~c+D,lo~ ~r~S ~lS~cTt
#~5~
p~~E~~aGE ~So~
2 '~V~~c,-~N `i~~~ ' (~ ~Fvl~.oW~Nt~
~xi~~t~1-
-l2~~1D--,,
~A`~C ~~~~m~~~ ~,~
b,~x
N o,~
,
~
b~ ,p
~o~- ~
~
~ ~1~~
u R~F~~nIGE
~o, c~~~
~1c£
' ~C'u-UW~N~i,
~%7T
~ ~ t~~cl~~
~
ac~~5
~^f~'IN ~
~Y~~~~~e
,,
, .
~~ .
. .~ '. '••
~ • `
~..
: .; ~. • •
~"+ ' .
N; • '/
~ . ...- :
i~i ~
~.' ji,~~ s',
...t.
ilr~'/ '.t.i:
.~'~•:
: ~ . .. ~ G,
~'~ + ~
. ~ ~~Y~~~
~
r'~~4ck. ; ' ~ - :
... . 'y,,~~'~,.
r~r~,,-~'°. ;
• .,, ,...
~ ~=~~~~:~j
: ~ ::;
..
~!',:..' ~,.
,; • ~~.
~
h ~~
,_--
l
~'h~ ~5~r~ ~.~
~
~~~ Ntiiztl~ 12~~~2000
C t0~ ' ~j~ ~ 8~~
^
^
^
4 December 2000
page 14 of 27 pages
Appendix A
Revised Site Plan
IIIII^ III
I
Vern Seferoe Architect A.I.A.
archileclure • plenning • mledorarchikecture
2631 Lee Hill Ddve Boulder, Coloredo 80302
telephone tax
oflice 3034439960
sludio 303 7868977
4 December 2D00
page 15 of 27 pages
Appendix B
Alternative parking impact mitigatioo measures reviewed with the Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowners Association
Parlting lot ideas
8/17/00
oflke 303 443 9920
studio 30344732fi1
1. Restripe, make more spaces on Greenbriar side.
2. Survey - only congestion occurs 830am-9am, (eacept for events and parties which now
have better controt}. Maybe BMS couid alter arrival fimes to relieve congestion, have
different drop-aH pmcedares.
3. Designate sidewalk (I l) and Greenbriar (8) for schooL, middle (6+10) for condos, aod/or
offer condos parlting along sidewalk daring day ezcept for "dmp-off zones"
4. Eco bus passes for staff, families?
5. Actually, for several years, tfiere were 85-90 families coming in and oat of the parldng
lot each day, Four years ago there was a dectine of abont 15 famiiies when the afternoou
(only) program was closed. With the building project we are considering, there would
again be that many families, bat arriving in tLe AM instead of t4e PM.
Boulder Nbntessori Schooi Addition
evaluation of parldrg attematives
desaiptiai
attema6ve A cre~e drop off directly off Greenbrie~
to the west of the existi~ BMS
buiiding
additional
P~~9
~~ ~ pros 8~ cons
3 high, S50,D00. no impact upon existing parking
to $75,000
creates 3 addifwnal spaces
conflict with drainage
cost not affordable
loss of green space
conflid of traffic with Greenbrier
conflict of in 1 out traffic with bus
stop
attemative B restripe existing eleven spaces
2 minimal small spaces, not adequate fw
opemn9 car doors ~ droppin9 off
children
minimal oost
no change in wear 8~ tear to
parking lot
altemative C restripe 5 parldng spaces-into 6 small
car parkin9 spaces
1 minimal minimal cost
no change in weaz & tear to
parkin9 lot
aftemative D construct new parking spaces
2 to 4 high loss of green space
rp d~ange in w~ 8~ te~r to
p~an9 lot
IIII~II I~I ~~
I
1
1 1
^ II~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A
azchi4ec4ure • planrnng • mlenor aroh~tecture
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
ofBce 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 studio 303 447 3261 4 December 2000
page 16 of 27 pages
Appendix B, (continued)
Alternative parking impact mitigation measures reviewed with the Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowners Association
_..
ac~ 1 -~ .
o`~~
// / I
0 o I
CB.~~.2aoo
~ ~ I ~
Vern Seieroe Arc
archiledure • planrnn9
2631 Lee Hill Drive
telephone
office 303 443 9960
studio 303 786 8977
.hitect AI.A.
• mtenorarchi4ecEure
Boulder, Co~orado 80302
fax
off~e 3034439920
stud'a 3034473261
~.
/.
/' ~,~~
~ am
5~~
~oJ~~F.~ ~oN7e~
s;n•~o, , i
~. ~~~~ ^ ^ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T ~^r^
4 December2000
page 17 of 27 pages
Appendix B, (continued)
Alternative parking impact mitigation measures reviewed with the Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowners Association
x+~ooL
.
,
~
~
~
NE
~
~ O~1 "1'Ls~O ~ 1 "'
d
L o
~ o
~
0
~
~
~
N
C
N
7
n
ID
'
~
``
O
.w
N
.-
C
a
.~n ~
~ ~
a A
c ~
w ~
~ \/
m'~,~ <
~ ~s~
y ~ 0 ~ ~
~ ~fD m C U~
O fD = m N
wW ~v ~
~a w c~' •
~~
rn ~
~'
~~ ' ~
~
~
~'g~ ~
~ ~
o a
~;
o ~ ~_
0
o ~
~~ $~p
~ ~~~
~
~ O N ~
~i
~ A
i v
~ j
O Y
V ~
~ Ng
N O
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A
archilecture • planning • mlenor arch'declure
2637 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Cdorado 80302
telephone fax
office 3034439960 olfice 3034439920
studio 3ai 7esB9n shidio 30344732s1
4 December 2000
page 19 oi 27 pages
~ .~
;- , , ~~ #; ,i .:~ . _. _~,...r..., AppendixD
, _
~ ' ' ~~ i' Hevised Site Plan for Shanahan Ridge VIII dated 25 July 1980
' ; ~ - . '~ i I~ °,~„~`~_?_`~..~~t°.~'~tN F?C 5Nk^~~ya~l ti95E 9. ,~ ~--•' ~ . .
.. r'. I j','~ • 1~ / ' ~ uww~a+s .rva.w a,i( ;xa ~w rT sr~hac. ,.,~nbc~ ~ I i
il '!r x,^.,~..o ansu ~,,wnv TMb sr,.~. ~,vnomo n~. ~° r~ `../~ :
' • / . !'
~3 .~'%~ rl I~ ~Nrou": _ ' ~'--..._._.~
~ ' ~ ii ~ow*
- ~~~~.._._~..... .17.-+"i,~ ; ~ ' i, n r/P ~ ?/oZ~'%J~j j ~~ ~,',:.
~ .~__ ' __ ~_~~~~ ' / ~(,_G` ~dA~AI 1~MM9 dM! ' PqE , + .~ ... . ~`. ~:.
// '~ L .r~~;= _t
~
0
,,. ~ ~ I . ~~ ~
. ~ ~ ~ ~ _ _ _'" '~ ... / ' '~. ~~ MWA ~ aC AG p~ly I ~ :i i .
'. f.- ~ " r \ . . ~- : 5... /. R
;,'.iij' 1
_"_._.... . ' ~'~ ' . ' . . , . , ~ .i
~ ~
~-~•,'' a wr.v.~.~w~uw~a.
. -..... . ~ . .
.._.. ~~f ~`.~ L~ Lnfe5do N n~ .
~ _.~.~ _ ~ ~ / ' Iw. Wu+. " . U/,Q uwlh
~.--_.._., . '- f, ,l, ~:ti - ' ,
, . ..; ~;~°.° . ~..i y a~.
; Q„ .
~ _ rr/ . . , ` '•I.:.. '~1 ~~ . ' `"" :~
~ ~- --~ ----:~--~ ~~~ i _- / , . ~ ` ,._ -' ' '+,~
.I /'--' -'._~..~_.^.~-^,~' :/% /r ' ;, \ ;..'„
j ~; .: .~w--.-1 ;,,.,,,,~u
wm.r,.a.o.:` ~~. T :ry..,.'~~,
~ ~ ~,; :0 39 spaces 25:~ ; ~~•~ .~,~ ~.1 ~. '~°' -_
~ ~ ~I~o~ ~ i~atal ,7 ~,-~_.__..-i ` Fi' ~ I; /
. ..._.. / . ~ f~•.. Z~r ~ {'iNJB~~ a ~ ' ~',+~ I ~ ..
~`~ ~ . ; :: I ~ ~ i
:~ a.: _ "''-0 .3,d e ~ . 4 . na ~ ar „b_ " ~ , y , : i ~
~ ~:~. :~ 1?IO~It k],i3_i!~'.IS'~ . ~" ~ "~ - '" ~~- 'i '
j~a~ „ ~ I :'"
~' 4. je, ~171g 19'20zI..Z2$24i ~~ - ~,, - -
~_, ~ .~ ~ I ,~ ~ ~ ~ ~ -
~ l;m.- ~ . ~ ',Ii~ , ' ~ wa < ~W~a' 2 ~i
vN~- . i I ~ ~ ~ . . ~+~'. ~oar.ite . ~.~5: i+a.z~s ~ .
°: °- ; pi , L_ .. ~~: ..~ ; ~ .
I , _ i9. . ~ ,. a ~,, :•i ..
~~ . . ~ 5 ~ I'.: ~'... ('•
. . : ~i ~ .~ .._.~t._.. ~..~_L., .
• '~~I ~ ~ ~ I i ~' '' I ~ -
7128; x9~ 30 31;32;33GI~4I35~3 I37 ~j~'11 ~ ----~ ; i ~ ~ ~ ~ry, I ~ . -
, _ . ~_. __ .l __p. { + i. ~v I„w„~'~ ! . .
~~ .. ~ . . _ ..._. _ _~..._. : . ~•` I ..' !S :k• 1~.~..~..~ i "__~~'_
1.•-, ~.,\~, ;-r ,~~I e~w:.~ ,~
- % , . ~ , Ji ;~ . `~``i~`:~, ~.. .L:. ._..~ J"ow`~° / ~~ .r.•I/~.
~ , ` . ~ ~ ~ .,Ci G ~ v {~i :.r ~ J ~ \\ 4 . ~ 't; v ~.v/.; -s}''' ,C . ~ :/ /. .~A,~~-Y,~~'*T
,1; . ~ ~1;j.`:.. :~w i ~ . /' all~ ~
~ ~ . / 5 ~ I ~r,,,. { . 1 . 1 `. . \ ~ ~ . O "' ,.r.' ~ ~ . ' ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~
~ ~ ' ~I .. : . ~ ~ ,. ~ \ ~ ~ •~ ~~ ~
~ ; ; ,.,~+ ;, ~,~t- ~ ~ ~ ~• ~ N
`i~4 :.-.,:.. ; . „ ~Jy( ~ .. .. -..t"' ' f
. 1 ~ . • . K~T'.~tYQ~ ~i Yy~~... ~~ .~ . 'J S'w Y~M {Y~.s~T~~Y~Q .. .u .11~~1~~ ~ ~.7, ~ ,
i~7~A ~. tw~-~ ~~o :... .b'.~.. ~iiun.a.Il~rytR'ai~~er~lm'mrtf~' m~n° nrn ni n i d~~i^ ` ~~ ~ ' ' '
i
~
; !} ~f~~ -i~a~ ;G oar~inq SvGG~ :~; :
~ .
~ ~
~OGGt;Ga :n ~;~ SLhOGI pr~; P~ ~ ;i'12
~ .
;
J't'1 ~"il,l'iG~i';Cf~$ Ji"A.~.P ,1.(,,,q;, ' ;
~ i ~ ~in,.~~~
„' •i
a~ ~~ s~acas o~ s,~. ~r9 y~a~~~~~ ~
~
i ii~i i ~ iiuuii i ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ T T
m^~~C ~
$ ~~~
~ ~ r ~'
~ a s ~ t~D
~°+ ~ = 1p
$ ~ •
~iW ~' ~
m
~ ~
rn ~
ao ~o ~
~~ '--a
~,
~
~g,~
~
~~ ~_
~ ~ o-
o,
~~ ~~
T ~
~ ~ C
V ap ~ ~
~ O m
~
,
~
v
w
c
_
_
s
~
~
~
~
~
0
0
y
y
A
~
n
7 .
~
.-
S
ID
~a ~o
W~ °~
a a
~ m ~~
N
~
~
,
' ~~~g ~~.~
L
Vern Selerce Arc
archi+ec~ure • p~amirg
2631 Lee Hill Ddve
telephone
otfice 3IXi 443 9960
studio 303 786 B977
:nitect ai.a
• m~enararc~i~ec~ure
Boulder, Colorado 803U2
fax
office 3034439920
studfo 3034473261
4 Decemher 2000
page 2i of 27 pages
Appendix F
Contractor's Responsibilities for Minimizing the Impacts of Construction
CONTRACTOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES
FOR MINIbIIZING THE
IlYIPACTS OF CONSTR.UCTION
Although temporary in duration, construction can negatively impact surrounding
praperties and residents. By working together, contractors and the Citp of Bonldex
can minimize these canstruction related neighborhood disruptians. The following
rules and regulations emst to help make the City of Boulder a healthy, safe place to
live.
NOI3E
Constructian Hours
~ Start time- 7am
~ Ending time- Spm Heavy equipment (including nail guns).
9pm Light equipment.
(Leas than 5 horsepower, not including nail guns).
• Days- 7 days per week If the project is close to a residential
area, aeighbors may be more tolerant of disruptions if
canstructian starts later on the weekenda.
Noise Levels Allowed
~ 80dBA at a receiving property line between 7am and 5pm.
• Radios are not construction noise: Therefore, radios fall under the
residential section of the Noise Ordinance, allowing 55dBA at the
propertp line. Please remind employees and sub~contractoxa to keep
radio volume levels to a minimum.
TRASH and CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL$
~ Trash and construction materials must be contained eo that they do not
blow off the site.
~.Trash must be nmoved aften enough so that it dces not became a health,
Sre or safety hazard.
~ Dumpstcrs may not be put in the street without apecial approval
through the Right-0f-9~ay permit process.
DU3T
~ Piease adequately water the site to control dust problems, especiallq
during high winds.
^ 1^ Illlll ~ ~
~
~
TRACI~VG MiTD ON ROADWAY
1Y~acking mud or debris onto a road or sidewalk ia illegal. Please cleau
off conatruction vehicles before leaving the site.
USE OF STREET RIGHT-0F•WAY
• Please make provisions far employee and constructiou velricle parking so
adjacent neighborhood parking ie not impacted.
• Storage of construction materials in the right-of-way is not allowed
without special approval through the Right-of-Way permit process.
OBSTRUCI'ION3
• The cantractor is requiied to maiatain an adequate walkway araund a
blacked public sidewalk.
• The coatractor ia required to clear all snow and ice hazards fram public
sidewalks by aoon on the day following a snowfall.
DANGEROU3 AREAS
• The coatractor is required to secure dangerous areas, such as trenches,
holes, ditches.
Failure to comply with City af Boulder regulations may result in enforcement actio~,
including the isauance of summonses. Failure W build a prnject according to the
approved plans may result in "stup work" orders. For more information, please
crontact Inspection Services at 441-3280.
Thank yoa far your efforts to make Boulder a healthy, safe place to live
^IIII T 1
Vern Seieroe Arc
azchileciure • plarming
2631 Lee Hiii Drive
telephone
office 303 A43 9960
studio 303 786 8977
;nne~t ai.a
• mlena amlx}ec{ure
Boulder, Colorado 80302
fax
office 303A439920
studio 3034473261
4 December 2000
Pa9e 22 oi 27 Pa9es
Appendix G
West Elevation (corrected)
Q o'Rlt~i~W, t~nDF ~la~ Mb'~A'X•E
~s+ u~tE -a~rt~o
~~iqw~soc~n~rr
1~ouacrmN
-, ,.... ..
. .~.. . :i s:r,: i a+'Twie<ae:: ~. ...~a.;arirt,~w"vw.~e~!A'xA+iM1~!NVJF.
~ . . . ~ . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . .l.l
' RooF•pbf4~1.T
- ~2CDL~i,~
.__.._........:....': KppRIN •
.,r--,~_,„.~--
~Xc~-nNc~ . $t~t~t~t Nc~
_...__... ~,._......
~--~~:~ :'.'.'. ... _ ~ .~~.
~._.. .. . . _.---_.__..~..___...._._._
~. ~-;.~-,.--
, ..-_.,...._ ~.. _ _ . .~
~
Ih-~7+'~'~ +il ~fPi~4r' I 119 ~r I ~~
1
! ~,/~~~+ ~y.~^,f
YVL71 ~~~r'L'1 K/1~
~ , , •
~ ' .~.• • ~
1o iM~'~
. ~d ~"~s~r
' ~~~ ~o
,1~D~ m
£K17mNLT
~ur r~iri in
^ ^ ^ I ~ 1 1 1 1 ^ ~
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
archileclure • planning • ir~ena archdeclure
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Cdorado 80302
telephone iax
oHice 303 443 9960 oifice 303 443 9920
stud'w 303 786 8977 stu~6a 303 447 3261
4 December 2000
page 23 oi 27 pages
Appendix H
South Elevation (enclosed for reference only)
w~~w~
o,~-iN~. o~ ~F~~
p~~no~ P.'r ~O~ITI}
~1L~E G~ ~-11Lfl~1.I(.,-~
~ ~/ _ :.~~~~1
f~1 ~~
~
~~~~ .~~wr~i~~r~ , , . ~~~.uiw~~
. ~
~
~ ~
~1,OiZ7~ ~L~~~TI d'N
_~_~1 .wl gpl _.
..... ..._-._.. ...
~ n 1
~ ~I
Vern Seierce Architect A.I.A
archileciure • plannmg • mlenor arch~teclure
2631 Lee Hiil Drive Boulder, Coiorado 80302
tdephone fax
oHice 303 443 9960 oifu:e 303 443 9920
stud'w 303 7868977 studio 3034473261
4 December 2000
Pa9e 24 of 27 pages
Appendix I
North Elevation
_._....~~ ~ w~e. P~F`•e.o
I
~ s' ~a zo'
i~~~ ^ ^~ i ~ i i i T uiur ~ ^
Vern Seleroe Architect A.I.A.
aro{uleclure • plenninp • InlenorarcNleclure
2831 Lee HIII Ddve 8oukler, Coloredo 80302
telepfrone la~c
oNice 303 443 9B60
studb 303 786 8977
o(Nce 303 443 9920
studb ~3 447 3261
4 December 2000
page 25 0127 pages
Appendix J
Proposed Shanahan Ridge VIII Homeowner Association and Boulder Montessori School Parking Lot Maintenance Agreement
BORG REAL ESTATE, INC.
and Property Management
236 Pearl Street
Bouider, Cobrado 80302
303-449-6088, Fax 303•449-6087
SHANAHAN RIDGE VIII CONDOMIMUM ASSOCTION
November 10, 2000
PARKING LOT MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
This agreement supercedes previous parking lot maintenance agreement
dated March ~5, 1992. beiween Shanahan Ridge Condominium
Association, hereinafter referred to as the Association and the Boulder
Montessori Partnership, hereinafter referred to as BMP.
It is hereby agreed and understood that maintenance and repair of the
joinfly shared and owned parking lot at 3300 Redstone Lane, Boulder,
Colorado shall be handled as follows:
1. Association shall make all decisions about work required and needed
to maintain the lot. BMP waives the right to make decisions in
reference to the lot.
2. All direct costs of maintaining the lot are to be shared with 25% of
costs paid by Association and 75% paid by BMP. This does not
include removal of ice, snow, litter, dirt and debris or lot striping
which is shared equally between the Association and BMP.
3. The Association will notify BMP in advance of any one-time
expenditure in excess of $1,000.
4. The Association will submit the bills to BMP for its portion of
payment, which is to made within 30 days,
~4ssccia`acr
President of Shanahan Ridge HOA
Date
IIII~III I ^^IIIII ^ ^I 1
1
EMP
Title
Date
1
1
(Note, this agreement is under
negotiation and is not approved as a
factual agreement; its inclusion here
does not imply its approval by the
Boulder Montessori School; this
agreement is included to demonstrate
the fact that the Homeowner
Association and the B~ulder
~, Montessori School in fact have an
agreement and are discussing a
revised agreement to reflect the
proposed change in the Boulder
Montessori School enrollment.)
Vern Seieroe Architect A.I.A.
arohitec~ure • planning • in~enor archileclure
2631 Lee Hill Drive Boulder, Colorado 80302
telephone fax
office 303 443 9960 office 303 443 9920
studio 303 786 8977 studio 303 447 3261
4 December 2000
page 26 of 27 pages
Appendix K
Preliminary Signage Schedule
sign
i numbe
~ r
~ 1
i
2
~
; 3
i
4
5
~
i
~ 6
7
~ g
i
9
~ 10
;
11 '
~
~
i 12 I
~ ~
13 '
I
; 14 ~
~ 15
i
` 16
~
type of sign
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
fence mounted
painted onto wheel stop
painted onto wheel stop
steel posUground mounted,
double face
steel posUground mounted,
double face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
sinple face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel posUground mounted,
double face
sign message
;~, RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30
{ P.M. _ .
; RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
i ~y
i RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
; ~y
; RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
i ~y
~ RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
~ ~y
; RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M.
j COMPACT CAR
i COMPACT CAR
UNIT #XXXX, RESERVED, I~~I
UNIT #XXXX, RESERVED, IG~I
FIRE LANE, NO PARKING, ~y
NO PARKING
NO PAEKING
NO PARKING
NO PARKING
VISITOR PARKING, ~G~
UNIT #XXXX, RESERVED, ~[y
UNIT #XXXX, RESERVED, ~Gy
VISITOR PARKING, ~y
~ ~ I~
1
1
sign
number
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
~ ~
; 2~ •
i ~
i ;
i 28 ~
I ;
` 29 ~
i ;
i
~
' 30 `
, ~
i ;
i 31
; !
~ ;
, ;
~ 32 F
~
i i
~
type of sign
steel posUground mounted,
double face
steel posUground mounted,
sinqle face
steel posUground mounted,
sinqle face
painted onto wheel stop
painted onto wheel stop
painted onto wheel stop
painted onto wheel stop
steel posUground mounted,
single face
steel post/ground mounted,
single face
ground mounted, non
illuminated, maximum 30"
height, monument type, two
sided
steel posUground mounted,
sinqle face
painted onto wheel stop
painted onto wheel stop
painted onto wheel stop
sign message
VISITOR PARKING, I~y
' VISITOR PARKING, ~y
i
; VISITOR PARKING, ~y
COMPACT CAR
COMPACT CAR
VISITOR PARKING, ~c~
COMPACT CAR
COMPACT CAR
RESERVED,BOULDER MONTESSORISCHOOL,IGy
RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, ~~I
BOULDER MONTESSOOORI SCHOOL, 3300 REDSTONE
RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
~y
COMPACT CAR
i COMPACT CAR
~
' COMPACT CAR
steel posUground mounted, ; RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
single face ~ ~y
steel posUground mounted, ; RESERVED, BOULDER MONTESSORI SCHOOL, 7:00 a.m. TO 5:30 P.M. ,
single face ~ I~y
1
1
1
T IIIIIII II~
Vern Seieroe Architect ai.a
archi}ec{ure • planning • infenorarchifecfure
2631 Lee Hill Drive 8oulder, Cdarado 80302
telephone fax
ofFice 3034439960 office 3034439920
stu~o 303 786 8917 studio 3D3 447 3261
~~~~.
t'~ ~
~
~~s
3300
REDSTONE
ROAD
BOULDER
COLORADO
80303
494-5814
Dear Shanahan Ridge VIII Condominium Homeowners,
August 30, 2000 (~A~-~Gj
i
f
For the past several months Boulder Montessori Schoal 6as been consideriag an
expansion of our multi-purpose room to create a third preschoot classroom. This would
accompGsh two goals: to accommodate our substan6al wait list and to reduce the number
of children in each classronm. Representatives of the schoo! have met with your Board of
birectors and with those of yoa who atteuded tbe annual meeting in Jnly to inform yoa of
our plans, and to give yoa an opportunity for input, ,
For those of you who have not attended these meetings, our plans include an S00
square foot addirion replacing the carrent covered sandboa area on the ptaygroand, and
some interior remodeling, primarily to enlarge the kitchen, The playground will also be
redesigned due to the rtataral deterioraHon of the equipment over more than 20 yea~s.
Enclosed are drawings from onr architect Vero Seieroe, which dispiays the addition.
We have incorporated alterations to our plans in consideration of feedback from your
Board of Directnrs. After completion, appro~mately 15 more ciWdren wili be attending
the school in the moraings, but overa0, this is not an inerease in the number of families tLe
school has earolled 6isforically, as an af~emoon program that operated nntii 5 years ago
also had that many students.
Soon after our application to the city planning department, you w~71 receive a notice
regarding the process of approval. Piease do not hesitate to contact us with any quesfions
you may have.
SincerelX,
`~ l~~%~~ ~ fC~Ce~~/~~~
Mari~ Berkenkotter, President
$oard of Directors
an~
GU~Q/~n,
V ~7~9'~-^
Karen Olson, Administrator
~
~Pb~~U
~'bb1TI0N
~o~Li~.-12 F
(~1'(~~a2~
~o~L
~
4 December 2000
Dage 27 of 27 pages
Appendix L
Letter to Neighbors
Note; distributed by
Homeowner Association
e•n~+mo '
~~~~,
~Ct~OO4
~ II Il~~
, ,
r~~~~OE
:~;:; _
Exwna a.~ MIG`~E9TE 5~1~120E AI2C1~1?~CT'S~~c,
w~~~~~5 B•49 2c00
^~~ ~ ~~
~~ ~ ~~~~~
!--"~
~ I d' ~ I~ ~_ ..
~
I
~
MrorE~ ~~rtc~ ~i2c~-~r~cr,, ~,c,
8~2~•4x~
Vern Seierce Architect AI.A.
arcluleclure • plen~ing • ir~ena erchlec{ure
2831 Lee HNI Drive Boulder, Caloradp ga{p2
~ ~
otfiCe 303 443 9A80 olflCe 303 443 9920
sNdb 303 788 8877 etudlo 303 447 3261
_ ...
~nan~l~ ~I~'F. U~.~J ~_~._
~
r"°q°"'. wm~ W` P°~°
,~ ~y~, ~pyllCEO 1D
~ ~1'~ ^V.CCIA~
5o~t~1 ~~~V~-noN
p,c, ° s~ ~a ,o~
. ;~ .,~ _:~
~ ~ ~. .
? i i i oii d il" ~i i~
~
I
~.olz~} ~~EV~rioN
o! `~,~o' ~o~
$a1~.oF~z h~o~TES~,oRI ~~
.,
,t
4 December 2000
Appendix L
Letter to Neighbors
Note: distributed by
Homeowner Association
KtAF uNe -~pyrEb
i LOtJS.I~ED 'fp
,_...... ~..... _. _., ;
I rvr~r ~t.~v~~ttoN ,
d c' w' so'
'~0~1~DER.1''~OM'~55~RI ~+~~~L
`III ^ ^ I I I I ~ ^