Meeting Summary Form - Planning Board - 08/06/2001CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS MEETING SUMMARY FORM
• NAME OR BOARD/COMMISSION: Plannlrig BOaxd
DATE OF MEETING: September 6, 2001
NAME/TELEPHONE OF PERSON PREPA2iNG SUMMARY: MarV Lovrien, 441-4464
NAMES O~ MEMBERS, STAFF AND INVITED CUESTS PRESENT:
Bourd MemUers Present Macon Cowles, Thom Krueger, Tina Nielsen, Alan O'Hashi, Beth Pommer, Mark Ruzzin
Board Member Absent: A1 Gunter
Staff Members Present: Steve Durian, David Gehr, Bob Harberg, Nan Johnson, Mary Lovrien, Peter Pollock, Susan
Richstone, Douglas Sullivan, A. Taylor
OUTLINE OF AGENDA
1. CALL TO ORDER - The Planning Board declared a quorum at 6:05 p.m.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - The P1lnning Board approved the minutes of March 8, March 14, March 15,
March 22, Apri15, and April 19, 2001.
3. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION - Jane Monson spoke against a large accessory structure that is being built
in her neighborhood at the setback boundary.
4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS - The Planning Board had no
comments on the Planning Department memorandum regarding vacation of a public access easement located
east of 30th Street between East Pearl Street and Wilderness Place. The Board commented on the Canyon Gate
Plaza disposition located at 2700 Canyon Boulevard, in partictilar, the possibility of a superatop at 28th and
Canyon and elements of a Transportation Demand Management program.
5. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY -
• The Board and staff discussed ways to improve the Planning Board minutes; the alanning number of house
demolitions and pop-ups and how these permits can be more restrictive (change the definition of what would
constitute a demolition, lower the historic threshold to 40 years old so that such damolitions can be reviewed
by the Landmarks Preservation Advisory Board, and tax such demolitions for inclusionary zoning); the
permitting oflarge accessory structures (review the footprint and setbaclc issues, allow zone changes at the street
or alley, create a buffer that is built into a setback, establish a size For an accessory structure that could be placed
at the setback boundary and allow a larger structure only if a buffer is created or impacts are mitigated); and
weeds on the Cox Corner site; P. Pollock noted that the Greenways Advisory Committee will meet on October
17 to review the draft Greenways Master Plan, the Downtown Alliance will meet on September 24 to discuss
ciowntown zoning, and the Planning Board and the Transportation Advisory Board will meet jointly on
November 27 (tentatively). He presented a 2002-2004 accelerated work plan far the Long Range Planning
Division which includes the work progratn discussion on jobs to population project and the additional costs in
staff and/or consultant resources to address area plans, ADUs, pop-ups/scrapeoffs, occupancy limits, and
annexation. He said that staff will discuss Yhese issues at the City Cotmcil retreat to get clarity about Yhe
problems and options with each of these issues and how they might fit into a work program, He updated the
Board on the City Council discussion to extend water services to the Gateway Fun Park, the appointment of a
task force to address the jobs to population balance in managing commercial growth, and the response regarding
the Crossroads framework plan. He updated the Board on the meetings regarding downtown zoning and the
deveiopment oP the north Boulder pai~cel and tlie adjacenC public parcel.
` J
6. ACTION ITEMS
A. Public hearing and considerltion of the Running River School and Meadowlark Preschool, Use Review
~#LUR-2001-00040, to locate a private elementary school and preschool within the existing church and
recent church addition located at 2650 Table Mesa Drive. The zoning is LR-D, Low Density Residential -
Developing. The Board approved Use Review #LUR2001-00040 (6-0; A. Gnnter was absent) with a change
in the finding on page 6, last sentence in the second paragraph, to recognize that fhe Bear Creek Elementary
School would be expected to generate approximately eight times as much traffic as the Running River and
Meadowlark scbools, a chaiige in CondiYion 2 to reflect that there shall have a combined total of no more than
55 students and 7 teachers on location at anyone time with the exception of evening hours for special meetings
and programs, and the addition of a second sentence under 2(A) of Attachment E to read "The use provides an
opportunity for more neighborhood service in the future."
B. Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council regarding the Bear Canyon
Creek tloodplain mapping restndy. The Planning Board recommended (6-0; A. Gunter was absent) that City
Council approve the updated Bear Canyon Creek floodplain dalineations study from Foothills Parkway upstream
to the city limits and submittal of the study to FEMA for regulatory adoption and that the city continue to wark
with the property owner of 715 Gilpin Avenue to remove the property from its current high-hazard zone
designation to a similar state prior to the construction of the Bear Creek public improvements.
C. Public hearing and consideration of a motion to amend the Board's previous action on the following
items relating to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP): a) land use map designation for Parcel
16 (east of Cherryvale, south of Arapahoe); b) Manufactured Housing land use map designation
de~nition; and c) procedures for plan changes. The Planning Board amended its previous action on the
above-listed items (6-0; A. Gunter was absent). The Cotmty Commissioners approved the five northernmost
acres of Parcel 12b for Medium Density Residential and the southernmost acre with its current Low Density
Residential designation after the other three approval bodies had approved all six acres for Medium Density
~ Residential. SYaff pointed out that if the change would alter the decision of the Pianning Board, then an
appropriate motion to amend the prior action should be made. Pommer, O'Hashi, and Nielsen thought that the
issue neaded to be brought back bafore each approval body to make sure that they understand and approve the
change; Cowles and Krueger said that theywere comfortable with the split designation on the parcel. The Board
asked staffto return to the Boulder County Commissioners to ask them ifthey expected the different action they
made to be considered by all the approval bodies.
7. ADJOURNMENT - The Plannine Board adiourned the meetine at 10:50 n.m.
T1ME & LOCATION OF ANY FUTURE MGETINGS, COMM[TTE~S OR SPECIAL FIEARINGS: October 4, 2001
i