Loading...
6C - Site and Use Review #LUR2002-00016, Bixby School, 4760 Table Mesa DriveCTTY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 11, 2002 (Agenda Item Preparation Date: June 27, 2002) AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of Site and Use Review #LUR2002-00016 for Bixby School to demolish 2,867 square feet of the existing school (including a one-bedroom residential unit), and rebuild with 3,160 square feet of preschool area, plus a Phase II 1,400 square foot school addition at 4760 Table Mesa Drive. A parking reduction is requested, but no change in school enrollment is proposed. Appiicant & Owner: Bixby and Associates REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Peter Pollock, Director Planning Bob Cole, Director of Land Use Review Nan Johnson, Presenter OVERVIEW: The Planning Board is asked to consider an expansion of a non-residential use in a residentially zoned district (MR-D). Planning Board action is required to consider the requested phased expansion (1,693 s.f. total) of the Bixby School resulting in the loss of one residential unit on-site with no increase in the previously approved maximum 200 student enrollment. A parking reduction of 15 percent is included with the request. The key issues are impacts to the surrounding residents and commercial owners, impacts to the shared parking area of the South Creek Planned Unit Development, and the removal of a residential unit. The staffrecommendation of an approvat with conditions is based on a finding that the applicable site and use review criteria are met. s:\plan\pb-items~nemos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #~0 C~ Paee 1 STATISTICS: Proposal: Applicant proposes in Phase I to add 293 s.f. through a reconstruction of the existing school building and in Phase II add 1,400 s.f.of new school floor area. The additions (1,693 s.f. total) would change the existing 15,740 s.f. school facility to a 17,433 s.f. school facility. No increase to the maximum enrollment o£200 students is proposed. The reconstruction is necessary due to major structural foundation problems described in the ApplicanYs written statements. Therefore, the Applicant proposes to demolish the preschool area (1,936 s.f.) on the main level, including the one 1-bedroom residential unit (931 s.f.) above the pre-school, and reconstruct this space with the additional new 293 s.f. to the north o£the existing school. In summary, the new 3,160 s.f. built in Phase I will be comprised of the demolished 1,936 s.f. preschool, the demolished 931 s.f. residential unit above the preschool, and the new 293 s.f. addition. Phase II proposes the 1,400 s.f. expansion of the kindergarten area on the west side of the building. Bixby School is part of a mixed use planned unit development approved in 1977 (South Creek Planned Unit Development). Neighborhood commercial use and residential uses comprise the remaining development. Parking is shared among the commercial and school uses. Requested variations to the land use regulations: A 15 percent parking reduction. The new required number of spaces for the entire South Creek Planned Unit Development as a result of the school additions would be 321 parking spaces, an increase of 10 spaces. There are 273 existing spaces today shared by the commercial and school users in the South Creek Planned Unit Development. Six on-site parking spaces exist today on the school property and three new are proposed to be located next to the existing spaces at the north entrance of the school. Project Name: Bixby School Location: 4760 Table Mesa Drive, located in the South Creek Village Planned Unit Development Size of Tract: 97,600 square feet (2.24 acres) Zoning: MR-D, Medium Density Residential - Developing Comprehensive Plan: Medium Density Residential s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #~~ Paee 2 KEY ISSUES: Would the proposed expansion and operating chazacteristics of the school be reasonably compatible with and have minimal negative impact upon the sunounding residential neighborhood? 2. Based on the proposed addition, will adequate parking be provided for the mix of tenants and users? Ts the proposed loss ofthe existing residential unit consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan? BACKGROUND: History Bixby School received initial approval in December 1977 when Planning Board approved the South Creek Planned Unit Development (P-77-54 and SR-77-30). Bixby School is a private elementary school, pre-school, and daycare center. The maximum number of children allowed by the South Creek Planned Unit Development ("P.U.D.") is 200. Other uses approved as part of the P.U.D. include 68 townhouses, 20 apartment units, and 48,000 s.f. of neighborhood commercial buildings, not all of which have been constructed. The total building floor area of the school when constructed was 12,740 s.f. This figure included the basement, the main level, and two residential units that were approved in the P.U.D. as second floor aparhnents for the school administrators. Six on-site parking spaces including a two-car gazage were provided for school personnel, in addition to shared parking in the commercial lot within the P.U.D. for the school users. In 1989, Bixby was approved to add 3,139 s.f. to the building in two phases bringing the school to a total of 15,879 s.£ The student enrollment was kept at 200. Both phases were completed less 139 s.f. No new parking spaces were required with the approval for the addition (SR89-15 and P-89-32) on the finding that no new students would resuit in no new impacts to the shared parking. In the effort to integrate the different parts of the mixed use South Creek P.U.D., various parties allowed to share spaces like tha school playground and the commercial parking lot. The P.U.D. written statement states that the "parking lot will be available for the mutual use of the school and the commercial facility: ' The pazking arrangement had been contested by a group of owners of the commercial buildings. A lawsuit they filed against Bixby was eventually appealed to the Colorado Supreme Court. On s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #~o~~ Paee 3 October 23, 1989, the Supreme Court issued its ruling, granting Bixby School the use of the parking lot. The Court upheld the city's Planned Unit Development requirements, stating that if a particular condition is found only in the P.U.D. documents and no other public record, the P.U.D. does give adequate notice to all prospective buyers and conditions of the P.U.D. are enforceable. Project Description The ApplicanYs proposal requests to reconfigure the existing space, improve and replace some existing construction with a small increase in floor area, remove and relocate upper level residential space to the main floor, and in a later phase expand the kindergarten azea of the building - all with the goal to better serve the current enrollment (refer to the applicanYs written statements in Attachment E). The existing building floor area of the Bixby School is 15,740 s.f. (the 19891and use reviews approved 15,879 s.f. minus the 139 s.f. that were never constructed). The proposed construction involves a Phase One Remodel in which the 1,936 s.f. preschool will be demolished, a 931 s.f. second floor apartment (above the preschool) will be demolished, and a new 293 s.f. will be added. When reconstructed, this space will yield 3,160 s.f. for an improved preschool area as well as office space for the school's administrators all to be located on the main level on the north side of the building. Therefore, the Phase One net increase in floor area from the existine building will be 293 s.f. In Phase Two, a kindergarten room will be expanded to the west center of the building addine 1,400 s.f. of space to the first floor. The new total buildine floor area would be 17,433 s.f. (293 s.£ + 1,400 s.f. + 15,740 s.f.). Three new parking spaces are being added on-site to the north entrance drop-off location. This is presently landscaped and fenced area. Process The school property is zoned MR-D, Medium Density Residential-Developing. This zoning category allows a variety of residential uses but is primarily used for attached residential units where each unit generally has direct access to ground level. A use review is required because a private school and preschoo] (large day care center) in the MR-D zoning dish-ict is only permitted by a Use Review. The loss or modification of the residential unit that increases the floor area of the school area is considered to be an expansion of the school from the previous Use Review use approval and thus, is a change of use, requiring a Use Review with Planning Board approval. A Site Review Amendment is required because the applicant is requesting an expansion of the existing school building that exceeds the limits allowed by a Minor Modification to an approved Site Review. The expansion will vary the building location by more than 10 feet in the MR-D zone. It also expands the square footage limit set by the South Creek P.U.D. and the last s:\plan\pb-items~nemos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #(¢.~~ Paee 4 approved expansion in 1989. The removal of one of the two residential units is also an amendment of the original P.U.D. in that two residential units were required on site. The applicant is requesting the following variation to the approved P.U.D. through the site review process: a 15 percent parking reduction. Existing Site / Site Context The South Creek P.U.D. is located to the southeast of the Tantra and Table Mesa intersection (refer to the vicinity map in Attachment B). Sevaral commercial buildings are located at this mixed use site including McDonald's and Rudi's restaurants, a gas station, a few retail shops, and predominantly a variety of offices including a police station. The Tantra Village townhomes are located on the adjacent west and south sides of the school lot. Residential multifamily housing also exists to the east of the South Creek shopping village. A new office building outside of the P.U.D. is being constructed just to the east of the McDonald's. The school property includes a large open play field in the center of the P.U.D. on the west side of the schooi building. The project site can be described as having a 35-foot three-level building with a pool in the basement level, classrooms and activity areas on the main level, and office and residential space on the upper level. The school building is surrounded on the outside by wood fencing, wooden play structures, and mature landscaping. Garage space and storage is located in the rear of the lot. Refer to the applicanYs plans in Attachment F. The original P.U.D. describes a building envelope area of 300 feet by 130 feet for the total area of 39,000 s.f. The existing school with the new additions would remain within this total azea. A large parking area exists in the center of the P.U.D. just to the north of the school and east of the office building, as well as just to the northwest of the school and south of the office building. This area provides a total of 273 parking spaces for the users of the school and commercial buildings. Access to the school is gained through the parking lot from Moorehead Avenue just to the west of the McDonald's restaurant on Table Mesa Drive. All of the circulation for drop-off and pick- up takes place in the commercial parking lot, which is completely separated from the surrounding multifamily residential uses. Parents park in the paved lot north of the school building and walk their younger children into the school or drop off elementary age children in the one-way drive loop. Four guest parking spaces exist on-site of the school property in front o£the school building entrance on this north side (refer to site plan in Aftachment F). Access to the school's playground area is from the south end of the school property for the adjacentneighborhood users ofthe P.U.D. Enrollment figures haue typically been between 175 and 185 students since 1978. Enrollment for this fa112002 is stated to be 178 students. Of those students, 38 are enrolled in preschool/childcare. s:\plan\pb-items~memos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #~0 G Paee 5 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 was posted on the property for at least 10 days. All notice requirements of Section 9-4-2, B.R.C. 1981 have been met. Two letters and one phone call have been received to this date with the following comments. Refer to Attachment C for a copy of these letters. 1. Letter addressed from Oliver E. Frascona, Esq. of the attorneys at law office of Frascona, Joiner, Goodman and Greenstein, P.C., 4750 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, Colorado 80303- 5575 - representatives of the South Creek Owner's Association whose clients are the owners of the buildings and parking lots that aze adjacent to the Bixby School. The letter states that a special meeting with the Association was held to discuss this issue of the school's proposal. Overall support was given for the expansion provided that the outcome was a reduction in cazs to the site due to their opinion that an increase would result in parking problems. 2. Letter addressed from Dennie P. "Chip" Wise, III, owner of 4710 Table Mesa Drive. Refers to a letter from the staff planner Alice Rouyer dated February 21, 1995. Mr. Wise discusses the past parking reductions in the South Creek P.U.D. and the parking requirements in the P.U.D. He states that Bixby will need to put more parking spaces on site if this expansion is allowed, especially if Bixby plans to increase enrollment to 200 students at a future date. Phone call received from Dennie P. "Chip" Wise, III. He expressed concerns over parking stating that parking was being filled to the maximum, concerns over the access from the McDonald's lot in P.U.D. with the new office building just to the east outside of the P.U.D.; and, concerns with the drainage problems on the southeast corner of the school property. The Applicant was asked to respond to these concerns and the ApplicanYs written statements addressing these concerns are found in the Attachments E. The Applicant reiterated that there would be no new impacts since the enrollment was not proposed to change. The Applicant also conducted a pazking study over one week taking parking counts based on the number of available spaces at different times of the day. Drop-off periods were addressed as well as alternate modes of transportation for the school enrollees and staff. ANALYSIS: 1. Would the proposed expansion and operating characteristics of the school be reasonabiy compatible with and have minimal negative impact upon the surrounding residential neighborhood and other commercial businesses of the P.U.D.? s:\plan\pb-items~nemos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM # Pa e 6 The expansions towards the north and west will have minimal negative impact such that on the west side of the building is an interior patio-play area with a 6-foot fence surrounding the building envelope area with the piaygrounds on the other side of the fence. To the north is an absence of nearby neighboring residents. The additions have been designed in the same scale and uses matching building materials. The height of the proposed roof ridge is exactly the same height as the current building (33 feet). This addition will add less than 10 percent to the previously approved squaze footage of building area. The remodel will be built directly over the existing footprint with a minimal expansion toward the west and north and have the least possible impact to the neighboring properties. Few neighbors will be able to see the improvements. The school is not increasing the intensity of the operating characteristics as according to the ApplicanYs written statements will continue to function as it has in the past with a student enrollment not to exceed 200. The remodel and improvements serve to increase the functionality o£ the school facility with more room for its approved capacity. 2. Based on the proposed addition, will adeqaate parking be provided for the mix of tenants and users? A 15 percent parking reduction is requested. Yes, the reduction is justified since there is no increased need for parking. The additional floor area will not be accompanied by an enrollment increase. The school additions will only increase the floor area by a total of 1,693 square feet. This proposal offers nine on-site spaces (six existing plus three new); one of which is dedicated to the remaining apartment. The total parking spaces existing within the South Creek as verified on June 28, 2002 by staff is 273 spaces. The total required spaces per the South Creek original P.U,D. approval noted above would be 321 spaces. This equates to a 15 percent parking reduction for the entire P.U.D. for the Bixby additions. Refer to the June 28, 2002 Parking Analysis in Attachment G. For comparison, if the PUD parking requirements were based on today's land use code for the MR-D zoning district, then the total required spaces per the P.U.D. wouid be 276 spaces. This would result in a 2% parking reduction variation; 276 required spaces would ba matched by the 273 existing spaces. The Applicant was requested by staff to conduct a parking study to determine the availability of parking during dif~'erent times oFthe day and of the week. The results of the study indicates that parking availability in the shared lots in the P.U.D. were less than often filled at capacity. Refer to Attackunent G. City staff also observed the parking lot during these time periods to assess the vehicular circulation within the parking lot and with each visit observed several vacant parking spaces in the shared lots. There are 27 employees at the school; 21 of them are full-time equivalent. Their hours vary as well as the pick-up and drop-off periods for the children. To minimize existing traffic impacts to the area, staff reviewed a proposal for managing arrivals and pick ups and is supportive of the s:\plan\pb-items~nemos~nj6ixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #~OCi Paee 7 applicanYs traffic management responses that carpooling and ride sharing occurs now and is being encouraged in the future (refer to the Applicant's written statements in Attachment E). 3. Is the proposed conversion of the residential unit Sor the school expansion consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) and the Land Use Code Criteria? The loss of residential units is strongly discouraged by the policies set forth in the BVCP and the Land Use Code criteria 9-4-9(d). However, the community benefit being provided by the school may be considered great enough to allow the loss of one of two units on the school property for the reasons explained in the Applicant's written statements. As an educational facility in the city of Boulder, Bixby School provides an essential community service and benefit, and is in keeping with a number of BVCP policies, including policies: 8.01 "meeting the broad spectrum of human needs," and 8.05, "access to human service programs." Of the two apartments at the Bixby School, the administrator and co-founder Pat Baker, who had lived in the unit to be demolished, recently moved to a new home in Martin Acres. She lives within three minutes of the school and intends to walk to the school. The remaining residential unit on the school premises will continue to serve as a residence far the other co-founder Harlan Bartram. Mr. Bartram's family was the original owners of the property and building. Cunently, six other teachers live within walking distance of the school. The administrator's have examined the possibility of retaining the second unit in the reconstruction but have made the decision not to for the foliowing reasons further described in the Attachments. Safety is a primary concern since the resident would have access to the school entrance and strict restrictions would apply to the resident. Financial reasons and additional space needs were cited as the other reasons. STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff concludes that the Bixby School development plan meets the Site and Use Review criteria such that: The addition to the west is internal and will not impact surrounding neighbors. The expansion to the north side of the building will look much like the existing building. It will be screened from the residences and commercial users in the distance with the fence and trees along the west side of the property. No new outdoor play areas will be built closer to the nearby residential units on the east side of the property. Operating characteristics should not be affected as the same maximum enrollment figure continues to apply, thereby having minimal negative impacts &om the development. 2. There will not be a negative impact to the shared parking supply within the PUD since the enrollment will not increase. Staff justifies the reduction since the parking need is s:\plan\pb-items~cnemos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM # llt C/ paee 8 adequately met presently and will be adequately met in the future, given that the school must stay within the enrollment limit of the original PUD. The school will continue to encourage alternative modes of transportation as part of this application. 3. The loss of a residential unit in this case is justified such that it provides another community benefit by expanding the educational facility in order to better serve its existing student population. Therefore, staff recommends that Planning Board approve Site & Usa Review #LUR2002-00016 incorporating this staff inemorandum and the attached Site & Use Review Criteria Checklists as findings of fact, and using the following recommended conditions of approval. RECOMMENDED CONDTTIONS OF APPROVAL Approval continues to be limited to a private school use for a maximum enrollment of 200 students per #P-77-54 and #SR-77-30. 2. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development, Bixby Schoot, South Creek Planned Unit Development, City of Boulder, County of Boulder, State of Colorado, shall be in compliance with all approved plans and written statements submitted by the Applicant dated March 4, 2002; March 12, 2002; March 22, 2002; May 6, 2002; June 24, 2002; and, the staff Land Use Review Results and Comments dated May 24, 2002, March 22, 2002, and June 24, 2002. 2. The applicant shall not expand or modify the approved use, except pursuant to Section 9- 4-9(g), B.R.C. 1981. 3. The Applicant shall comply with the approved development phasing plan noted on the final site pian submitted on May 6, 2002. The phasing plan sha11 be in conformance with the requirements of Section 9-4-8, B.R.C. 1981. Phase I shall begin on the date of this approval. Phase II shall begin upon the eazlier of the ttu~ee years after the date of this approval or upon the final inspection of Phase I. 4. Prior to building permit application for each phase, the Applicant shall submit a Technical Document Review application for the following items, and subject to the approval, of the City of Boulder Planning and Development Services: a. Final site, landscaping, and architectural plans, including materials and colors, and corrected written statements to insure compliance with the intent of this approval and with the previous approval #P-77-54. b. A lighting plan showing location, size, and intensity of illumination units, showing compliance with Section 9-33-17, B.R.C. 1981. c. Development agreement, signed and recorded. s:\plan\pb-items~mamos~njbixbyschool AGENDA ITEM #~o Ci Paee 9 5. The Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions of approvals #P-77-54 and #SR- 77-30. 6. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant is required to clean and manage the vegetation for the existing pond outlet in the southwest area of the parking area on Lot 1 to allow for the drainage from the pazking lot to drain to the swale along the Bixby property and shall continue to provide periodic maintenance as an on-going responsibility. Approved By: ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Site/Use Review Criteria Checklist Attachment B: Vicinity Map Attachment C: Correspondence Received Attachment D: Development Review Results and Comments Attachment E: Applicant's Written Statements Attachment F: Applicant's Proposed Plans Attachment G: South Creek P.U.D. Pazking Analysis s:\plan\pb-itemsUnemos~njbixbyschool 10 AGENDA ITEM # ~P ~ Paee ~a Planning Department ATTACHMENT A SITE REVIEW General Criteria No site review application shall be approved unless the approving agency finds that: Boulder Vallev Comprehensive Plan (BVCP): Y The proposed site plan is consistent with the purposes and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Recent proposed revisions to the BVCP discourage the removal of existing residential units with the exception "the presumption against such a conversion may be overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social, human services, govemmental, or recreational need in the community inciuding without limitation a use for a day care center, .., or an education use." Bixby School is an established private preschool and elementary school having served the Boulder community for 30 years. Y The proposed development shall not exceed the maximum density associated with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan residential land use designation. Additionally, if the density of existing residential development within a 300 foot area surrounding the site is at or exceeds the density permitted in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, then the maximum density permitted on the site shall not exceed the lesser of: The proposed development does not exceed the maximum density allowed within the residential land use designation or within the limitations of the South Creek Planned Unit Development. The MR-D does not establish maximum floor area ratios. No additional units are proposed with this expansion of the school building. (i) the densify permitted in the Boulder Vafiey Comprehensive Plan, or, (ii) the maximum number of units that could be placed on the site without waiving or varying any of the requirements of Chapter 9-3.2, "Bulk Ftequirements," B.R.C. 1981. II. Site Desiqn: It utilizes site design techniques which enhance the quality of the project. In determining whether this subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the following factors: A. Open space, including without limitation, parks, recreation areas, and playgrounds: Y 1. Useable open space is arranged to be accessible and functional; ~~~~~~~ Half of the school property serves the school and the residential neighborhood with an open play area. Specifically defined as open space on the school property, this area remains open for the use of the PUD residential owners by a letter of agreement with the South Creek Homeowner's Association approved on June 22, 1989. In addition, the other half of the school property is surrounded with play areas for the children in addition to landscaped areas. Y 2. Private open space is provided for each detached residential unit; Private open space for each of the residential units will not be affected by this proposal. The original Planned Unit Development written statement by McStain Enterprises illustrated how open space was calculated for the residential units included in the South Creek P.U.D. The school site was noted as a 39,000 square foot lot that specifically "cannot be counted as open space." The actual lot size for Bixby School is approximately 97,600 square feet and includes the original 39,000 square foot lot that was shown on the P.U.D. Site Plan by McStain Enterprises. The school footprint and expansion are within the original 39,000 square foot lot, as proposed in the original P.U.D., and therefore the open space for the entire South Creek P.U.D. will not be affected by the expansion. Y 3. The project provides for the preservation of natural features, including without limitation healthy long-lived trees, terrain, and drainage areas; Impacts to the terrain and drainage areas will be minimal. Drainage issues have been analyzed in the engineering stormwater review and improvements are being requested There is a thick foliage of plants and trees on this school property. Every effort has been made to protect the existing vegetation. Two trees will be displaced on the north side of the school building. Y 4. The open space provides a relief to the density, both within the project and from surrounding development; A large open play field lies on the west side of the school and provides a nice transition and buffer between the school and the residential units beyond. An easement lies on the east of the school building and is lined with mature trees and landscaping providing also a nice buffer between the school and the residential units to the east. Y If possible, open space is linked to an area- or city-wide system. This is an existing planned area and this development does provide any new abiiity for linkages with the city trail system. Agendaltem~ ~ G Page# !a B. Landscapinq: Y 1. The project provides for a variety of plant and hard surface materials, and the selection of materials provides a variety of colors and contrasts; The existing landscaping has been established for many years and will remain intact except of two trees that are within the footprint of the expansion. These two trees will be replaced on the school site. Y 2. The project provides significant amounts of plant material sized in excess of the landscaping requirements of Sections 9-3.3-2 and 9- 3.3-3, "Landscaping and Screening Requirements," and "Landscape Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981; and The improvements do not exceed 25% of the actual value and therefore, will add landscaping to meet the current landscaping requirements plus any additional upon review of the landscape plans. Y 3. The setbacks, yards, and useable open space along public rights- of-way are landscaped to provide attractive streetscapes, to enhance architectural features, and to contribute to the development of an attractive site plan. The landscaping that was first established did provide landscaping to this effect. The east side of the property is heavy with mature trees as well as throughout the property. A diverse mix of shrubs exist throughout the property. Additional landscaping for the new construction will be considered in the landscape plan. C. Circulation, including without limitation the transportation system that serves the property, whether public or private and whether constructed by the. developer or not: Y 1. High speeds are discouraged or a physical separation between streets and the project is provided; The area in front of the school is a parking lot and immediately to the front entrance of the school is a one lane drop off loop to guide traffic in and out of the area. Y 2. Potential conflicts with vehicles are minimized; Three additional angled parking spaces will be added to the one-way drive where the elementary students are dropped off for school. These spaces will be reserved for staff use to prevent conflicts with cars backing up and students being dropped off. Y 3. Safe and convenient connections accessible to the public within the project and between the project and existing and proposed Ageada Ihm #_~ C Page N i3 transportation systems are provided, including without limitation streets, bikeways, pedestrian ways and trails; Safety is an important concern for the Bixby School. Part of the proposed renovations include a new entry sequence from the parking lot to the front door of the building. This walkway will be covered and completely separated from all playgrounds for increased safety of the students. Access to the school's playfields/park is on the south end easily accessible to the residents south of the school property. Y 4. On-site facilities for external linkage are provided with other modes of transportation, where applicable; The school encourages carpooling, use of the bus, walking, and will have a bike rack on the property. Bixby School is located on a regional bus route to Denver via the Table Mesa Park-n-Ride. Further encouragement of bicycling to work mainly for the staff since the recent addition of bike lanes to Table Mesa Drive from its recent reconstruction. Y 5. The amount of land devoted to the street system is minimized; The street system in the PUD is already established and is very minimal on the school property. Y 6. The project is designed for the types of traffic expected, including without limitation automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians, and provides safety, separation from living areas, and control of noise and exhaust; and The school is an existing site, however, three new parking spaces are being proposed and bike racks will be provide. Y 7. City construction standards are met, and emergency vehicle use is facilitated. The new parking spaces will meet the city's construction standards. D. Parkina: Y 1. The project incorporates into the design of parking areas measures to provide safety, convenience, and separation of pedestrian movements from vehicular movements; Parking areas will remain covenient for access to the school building. The location of the student drop-off provides for one-way traffic and students exiting the passenger side of the vehicle for the safe transition to the sidewalk and then access to a covered walkway into the building. Agenda Item # `L Page N ~ Y 2. The design of parking areas makes efficient use of the land and uses the minimum amount of land necessary to meet the parking needs of the project; Three new parking spaces are proposed with this remodel within an area having existing landscaping (an area inside the fence). They are located immediately adjacent to the existing one-way drive/student drop-off and this location minimizes the amount of asphalt necessary to add parking. Y 3. Parking areas and lighting are designed to reduce the visual impact on the project, adjacent properties, and adjacent streets; and Existing parking, drives, and lighting are separated from adjacent uses. A lighting plan will be required prior to a building permit. Y 4. Parking areas utilize landscaping materials to provide shade in excess of the requirements in Section 9-3.3-12, "Parking Area Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981. The new parking spaces will be created out of a landscaped fenced area and will be provided shade from existing trees. E. Buildinq Desiqn. Livabilitv, and Relationship to the Existinq or Proposed Surroundina Area: Y 1. The building height, mass, scale, orientation, and configuration are compatible with the existing character of the area or the character established by an adopted plan for the area; The addition has been designed in the same scale and uses the exact same materials as the original school building. The height of the proposed roof ridge is exactly the same height as the current building and is in direct alignment with the existing roof ridge on the south wing of the structure. Y 2. The height of buildings is in general proportion to the height of existing buildings and the proposed or projected heights of approved buildings or approved plans for the immediate area; The height of the proposed roof ridge is exactly the same height as the current building (33 feet above the lowest grade). Y 3. The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from adjacent properties; There is sufficient distance between the school building and the surrounding buildings. The closest buildings are to the east and south and the additions will not create blockage or shadows in either of these areas. Agenda Item R~ Page N ~ 5 Y 4. If the character of the area is identifiable, the project is made compatible by the appropriate use of color, materials, landscaping, signs, and lighting; The building colors and materials will match the existing building. The existing structure is very well surrounded with mature landscaping, wooden fences, and shrubs. Y 5. Buildings present an attractive streetscape, incorporate architectural and site design elements appropriate to a pedestrian scale, and provide for the safety and convenience of pedestrians. The school building was built 30 years ago. The building is well within the setbacks and is surrounded by mature landscaping and wooden fencing. The new addition will come closer to the north parking area but will still be adequately screened. A covered walkway will take those in the parking area back into the school area. Y 6. To the extent practical, the project provides public amenities and planned public facilities; The school is adding 3 new parking spaces to the shared parking area for the South Greek P.U.D. It also provides the playfields(open space area to the neighborhood residents. Y 7. For residential projects, the project assists the community in producing a variety of housing types, such as multi-family, townhouses, and detached single-family units as well as mixed lot sizes, number of bedrooms, and sizes of units; This is a school facility. Two residential units are on the premises with the proposal to remove one. For residential projects, noise is minimized between units, between buildings, and from either on-site or off-site external sources through spacing, landscaping, and building materials; Does not apply. Y 9. A lighting plan is provided which augments security, energy conservation, safety, and aesthetics; Agenda Ifem ~.~_. Page N~ A new lighting plan will be required indicating the location, size, and intensity of illumination units, showing compliance with Section 9-3.3-17, B.R.C. 1981. Lighting plan will not include parking areas off the school property. Y 10. The project incorporates the natural environment into the design and avoids, minimizes, or mitigates impacts to natural systems; The additions will be over existing foundation areas with minor expansion outwards from the main buiiding. Impacts fo natural systems is minimal in this case. Y 11. Cut and fill are minimized on the site, and the design of buildings conforms to the natural contours of the land. F. Solar Sitinq and Construction: For the purpose of ensuring the maximum potential for utilization of solar energy in the city, all applicants for residential site reviews shall place streets, lots, open spaces, and buildings so as to maximize the potential for the use of solar energy in accordance with the following solar siting criteria: Y 1. Placement of Open Space and Streets. Open space areas are located wherever practical to protect buildings from shading by other buildings within the development or from buildings on adjacent properties. Topography and other natural features and constraints may justify deviations from this criterion. No new open space or street areas will be created from this development. Y 2. Lot Lavout and Buildinq Sitinq. Lots are oriented and buildings are sited in a way which maximizes the solar potential of each principaf building. Lots are designed to facilitate siting a structure which is unshaded by other nearby structures. Wherever practical, buildings . are sited close to the north lot line to increase yard space to the south for better owner control of shading. The remodel will be built directly over the existing footprint which is on the northern half of the school lot. Expansion will occur towards the west and north/northwest. Solar siting is only minimal. There are no structures close enough to property to reduce the solar potential. Y 3. Buildinq Form. The shapes of buildings are designed to maximize utilization of solar energy. Buildings shall meet the solar access protection and solar siting requirements of Chapter 9-8, "Solar Access," B.R.C. 1981, Agenda Item ~~C pag~ q ~`~ The building form replaces the existing preschool and extends the existing ridge line so that the building height does not change or increase, therefore maximizing the solar potential was not a viable option. Due to the location and height of the current building, the proposed addition would exceed the allowable height of 35 feet if solar energy collection through windows was a requirement. Y 4. Landscapina. The shading effects of proposed landscaping on adjacent buildings are minimized. No new landscaping will affect adjacent buildings. _Y_ G. Poles Above the Permitted Height No poles above the permitted height. This section does not apply. Ayenda Item 8~L Page H~~ USE REVIEW Criteria X 1. The use is consistent with the purpose of the zoning district as set fotth in Section 9-2-1, "Zoning Districts Established," BRC, 1981, except in the case of a non-conforming use; Zoning District: The Bixby school use and the two on-site residential units were approved through the mixed use development known as the South Creek PUD and Special Review in 1977. The school use is an approved Use Review use in the MR-D zoning district. X 2. The use either: X (A) Provides a direct service or convenience to or reduces adverse impacts to the surrounding uses or neighborhood; The school is part of a mixed use development that serves the surrounding Tantra Subdivision and South Creek condominium residential area. Bixby School provides a quality private school environment in south Boulder and is in a convenient location that encourages other modes of transportation. The school playground facilities are open to the neighborhood residents and provides open space in the South Creek P.U.D. X (B) Provides a compatible transition between higher intensity and lower intensity uses; Bixby School is located between two multifamily neighborhoods and the South Creek Shopping Center and functions as a transitional development between housing and commercial or between lower and higher intensity uses. X (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 living arrangements for special populations; or The loss of residential units is strongly discouraged by the policies set forth in the BVCP and the Land Use Code criteria 9-4-9(d). However, the community benefit being provided by the school may be considered great enough to allow the loss of one of two units on the school property for the reasons explained in the ApplicanYs written statements. Bixby School is an established private preschool and elementary school having served the Boulder community for 30 years. As an educational facility in the city, Bixby School provides an essential community service and benefit, and is in keeping with a number of BVCP policies, including policies: 8.01 "meeting the broad spectrum of human needs," and 8.05, "access to human service programs." A~enda Ilem # 6G pa~ ~ ~q (D) Is an existing legal non-conforming use or a change thereto that is permitted under subsection (e) of this section. X 3. The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed development or change to an 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 expansions towards the north and west will have minimal negative impact such that on the west side of the building is an interior patio-play area with a 6' fence surrounding the building envelope area with the playgrounds on the other side of the fence. To the north is an absence of nearby neighboring residents. The additions have been designed in the same scale and uses matching building materials. The height of the proposed roof ridge is exactly the same height as the current building (33'). This addition will add less than 10% to the previously approved square footage of building area. The remodel will be built directly over the existing footprint with a minimal expansion towards the west and north, having the least possible impact to the neighboring properties. Few neighbors will be able to see the improvements. The school is not increasing the intensity of the operating characteristics as according to the ApplicanYs written statements will continue to function as it has in the past with a student enrollment not to exceed 200. The remodel and improvements serve to increase the functionality of the school facility with more room for its approved capacity. There will not be a negative impact to the shared parking supply within the PUD since the enrollment will not increase. There are 276 spaces currently serving the commercial and school shared use of the parking lots. The applicant is proposing to add 3 new spaces. The parking needs have been demonstrated to be adequately met presently and will be adequately met in the future, given that the school must stay within the enrollment limit of the original PUD. The school will continue to encourage alternative modes of transportation as part of this application. X 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. tiyeiida Ilem ~( G aage ~_ 2~_, No new demands on the infrastructure will be created from this development proposal since there will not be an increase in the users at the facility. All storm drainage and utility requirements will be required to be met through a technical document review of the project. X 5. The use will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area. The use is part of a mixed use development including neighborhood commercial, residential, and the school. The school facility is expanding, however, the use will not increase such that the maximum student enrollment is kept at 200. X 6. Conversion of Dwellinq Units to Non-Residential Uses: There shall be a presumption against approving the conversion of dwelling units in the residential zoning districts setforth in Subsection 9-3.1-1(a), B.R.C. 1981, to non-residential uses that are allowed pursuant to a use review, or through the change of one non-conforming use to another non-conforming use. The presumption against such a conversion may be overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social, human services, governmental, or recreational need in the community including, without limitation, a use for a day care center, park, religious assembly, social service use, benevolent organization use, art or craft studio space, museum, or an educational use. The loss of the one unit (931 s.f. residential use) to use towards increased new school use space improves the functionality of the main level classroom and activity areas for the existing student population. The loss of residential units is strongly discouraged by the policies set forth in the BVCP and the Land Use Code criteria 9-4-9 (d)(6). However, the community benefit being provided by the school is generally considered to be acceptable. As an educational facility in the city of Boulder, Bixby School provides an essential community service and benefit, and is in keeping with a number of BVCP policies, including policies: 8.01 "meeting the road spectrum of human needs," and 8.05, "access to human service programs." Of the two apartments at the Bixby School, the administrator and co-founder Pat Baker, who had lived in the unit to be demolished, recently moved to a new home in Martin Acres. She lives within three minutes of the school and intends to walk to the school. The remaining residential unit on the school premises will continue to serve as a residence for the other co-founder Harlan Bartram. Mr. Bartram's family was the original owners of the property and building. Currently, six other teachers live within walking distance of the school. The administrator's have examined the possibility of retaining the second unit in the reconstruction but have made the decision not to for the following reasons further Agenda item N 6G page ik ~,~ described in the ApplicanYs written statements. Safety is a primary concern since the resident would have access to the school entrance and strict restrictions would apply to the resident. Financial reasons and additional space needs were cited as the other reasons. Fl~enda Ilem # _~_ pa~ ~ ~_ ATTACHMENT B H R- E ~TA9LE ME9A DR "~ A' D Z D L A a 0 p . M R- D :;: w~ - LR-E . ~ rp . 0 M R- D ' ~ c~ ` _~~ TANTRA DR MR-D ~ \: Subject PropeRy 4764 Table Mesa Dr s?~ Lacaflon: d7B0 Tab/e Mesa Dr , ~ Revtew Type: S~fe & fJse Review ~;4000 ~ ~ Projeci Nama: B/Xbj7 SCIIGIOI ~ MapLlnk Clly ~f Bculdo'QIB ReviewlVumber: LUR2d02-00098 Thvirtcrtnabna~d~+aenWe~mPlo ~nw.~v«~b.,~~~,„~o~ow. R:` ~PPIPCaIlt: BIXb~ 8& ASSOC~a#BS N z>•°~"P';,~"'°"'"•"""'•,. -a AaemplRm'm~cftM Iitam~.Ybn l mria iW ~awn ~ A~onda Item ~~ G Page 8.~„_ _ -- 4760 TABLE MESA DR. LEGEND ~:°~ , ~;;r° ~~:•.,..~_. ea ~ 1:3551 N • '~~%~ ~ MapLink City of Boulder GIS n~~~ml~,~m~~ nd~~A~<~~~a~,nri,~>n~.n~~ p.oa~~a~.K~~pia~i.~pre,r„~,~~~~„ ~y. ~ ~,a ~ ~,> o, ~,,., ~~~,, ~„,,,~~, ,,,,,,,,~„~„. ~.p« wd ~,~ ~,pr~~~a..~, ~~~ a,~~,a,~..~~. s. anJ/ur nmplurcucu.dih~ ~nn~m.w,~n omainulLc~con ;Inn~~I~ It~m+~ /, l. n.,,,..,,~ aN _ ~ N ~ E- r i ~ ~ J ? a. I O, H ~ : „n,,, SITE PLAN r.w.e I I'. ~ ~_ J , '~'~~~~~ •.~~IlllilllllFl ~ ~ ~ ,~s. - _- _ ~ ` ~. ~•~ ~ ~ '~. ; ~ uiiiiiiri~iiiii ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ ``\ . •, . M °T tNe~ ~~ ~ • ~ eV~,~ ~ -~ \ \ ~ - ~~. ~ _ f _ , .. ~ a n y i. a.a~~ ~. ~ '~ ~ .. . i ... ~ ~ A . ,m _. . ~. , : aisrm4'~'='~'~1'" '. ..~ . .w. . . 'Y4~r~uW~ ~ ~~ ~~~~ .~. ~ ~ T s e ~ ,~[7I -~ 4 1 ~c\~ \\ 4~- ~ ~ III I~ ~ I~ . ~\`~1~ s ~\I ~~\` - .. ~~ ~, ~.~['~. .. ....~r:.3,.~ , , ~ ~ ~ ~_ m ~ - _~ . ~.~ ~, ; ~ i , .~,n„ ~T-~ .~~ ~~. ~ ` ~ i ~ , = _ ~~~:; ` ~ - o ~' ',. ~• _- mrd ~ _~ ~ ` ~ I ~ :,; . . ~,, ~ ~ 1<~ ~ - _ - ..t~ ~` ~ ~_ _ - R -s ` I `"_ . . ~ ~..x' ""e ~~ - .' I~`' . .~-\ .. ' ~S ~ I~YB9111 - - ..~-.~ i~c ~ _ µ / i / wnR- v.cu.ur tnn veu.n~ ~:~..w.s / .PV+wiR' eev~. /' ~1T' o'H eu(/V~ wnyi-acv+~ 4ee~.w.+k+ca'YM ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~! ' ~L~L~~~ ~ ~~~ ~ v C ~_ _._.._- ~ ~~~ - r 4742 - Lot 6 4720 - Lot 101 Rplt of Lat 1 4770 - Lot 7 4740 - Lot 1 Rplt of Lot 103 Rplt of Lot 1 ~ " 4730 - Lot 1 ~ Rplt of Lot 102 4700 - Lot 4 Rplt of ~ot 1 ~ ~ r~gen~a Item # ~~ ~ ... . .. . . . . ,,, y „ ,. „~ ~ N ~ ., „~ w~e: si io~~uue ume: r.[e:iu Hnn ATTACHMENT C ~~.°~.~~..°~~~y ~~~~~.~y V~~1.9.~~~ ~~1.6 <Y.~~~~~~~..'~~y ~e~/o L~ttorneys at Law 4750 Table Mes~ ~rave Boulc~er, Cio~oracl~ 80305.5575 Faosimi~e° 303~~1Ji1-630i9 Voiae: 3(63~/1.91/L~3l10~ www. YrasCOn~. com e.~mail : Olaver~ YraSCOna, cOm To: Planning and Development Svcs From: @Y Company : Ciry of Boulder Total Number of Pages: i Fax Number; +1 (303) 441-3241 Date: 3/15/2002 Subject: LUR 2002-00016 Message: This firm represents the South Creek Owner's Association. Our clients are the owners of the buildings and parking lots that are adjacent to Bixby School. We had a special meeting to discuss this issue. We want to go on record as supporting the applicanYs {Bixby's) request for their expansion. We have only one caveat. The parking in this center is filled to the max at this time. With the advent of another building being built as you read this next to our lot and the amount of traffic that will enter and exit this small center there is simply no more room for more cars traveling in and out off of table mesa drive. It is our understanding that the City is not going to allow any additional traffic count or a use that will increase the already tight traffic situation. Having said that, we hope that the redevelopment will result in a reduction in the car count and not an increase. Please feel free to contact myself or any of the owners of property in this little center. Oliver E. Frascona ~P'u~oi~ ~. 3wecama,, ~~. The information contained in and accompanying this facsimile message may be attorney privileged or attorney work product, and is, in any event, confidential information intended only for the use of the individual or entity addressee named ebove. If you are not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivery to the intended recipient, ~u are hereby notified that any dissemination, distributio~, or copying of this communication, and any review, semination, distribution, or copying of the accompanying materials is strictly prohibited. If you have received this ~munication in error, please immediately notify us by telephone, and return the original message and accompanying ~ials to us at the above address via the U.S. Postal Service. We will reimburse vou for postal charqes upon request. V,qenda Ifem #_ 6 G_. . pacm #~ z iP,nn. iJ•LVVL ~~IliiYi idVV~niaft~ Date: 03/14/02 To: The City Of Boulder Planning and Development Fax 303.441.3241 From : Dennie P. Wise, III Owner 4710 Table Mesa Dr South Creek Development P.U.D RE: Bixby and Associates - Site Yteview Amendment P~rking - See letter from staff planner Alice Rouyer, February 21, 1995. South Creek P.U.b. has had a,~5 fq party reduction to date. See South Cteek parking whiCh was attached to Alica's letter. There are only 269 spaces, of which 266 aze accounted for, which shows Bixby school at 10,775 square feet, not 15,879 square feet, which would put the P.U,D, 14 spaces over. Bixby rvill need to put more parking spaces on site if this expansion is allowed, especially if Bixby plans to increage enrollment to 200 students at a future date. Sincerely, ~~~ ~~ Dennie P. "Chip" Wise, TTT 303,494.7700 Hgenda Item N,~G Page # ~ vn~. i GVVG 7 ~v rnuu~v in~ C' 1 1 OF BOULDER Department of Community Design, Planning and Development P.O. Box 791 Boulder, Colorado 80306 (303) 441-3270 February 21, 1995 Thnm~as W. Tyrxell 3107 28th Boulder, CO 80301 R~: 4710 TASY,E MESA; MINOR MODIFICATION AND PARKING ~tEDUCTION TO SOUTH CREEK VILLAGE Dear Mr. Tyrell: Your administrative review application for a Minor Modi£ication and 9%parking reduction to the South Creek Village PUD at 4710 Table Mesa has been approWed, finding that the proposal meets the Minor Modification and Pazking Reduction criteria. The Minor Modification appxoval allows for a 350 square foot internal floor area addition to an existing 6,856 square foot restaurant. The 350 floor area addition shall include no external building changes. This approval also includes a proposal to finish the existing 1,486 basement area. T'his area will include a kitchanette, storage room, break area, and bathroom/shower facility. The applicant shall not utilize this space for office uses. To accommodate the addition and all other development within the South C~eek Shopping Village PUD, the applicant has requested a 9% parking reduction. Staff will grant the parking reduction as part of this request. It should be noced that the Planning $oard approved a 6% parking raduction for the 5outh G`reek Shopping Village PUD on December 7, 1989 as part of the Bixby School addition (the Planning Board disposition notes it as a 100% parking reduction for 8 3,971 school addition. This results in a 6%a parking reduction for the entire PUD,). Cor~sequently, the total PUD parking reduction is 15%n. The approved building additions and associated parking reductions may preclude £utute building additions at the S~uth Creek Shopping Village if parking is not adequately accommodated on the site, If you have any questions about this decis#on, please contact me at 441-3270, Sincerely, Alic~ uyer" Staff Planner ~sgentla Ilem # ~ Page # ~~ ~r~n~1, IJ, GVVL J. iL~~Y~ ~ ~1UVLIYI1f1L SOUTH CIiEEK PARKING Ta61e Meaa Drive Number Use 5quare Foota¢e Required Parking # of Spa~es 4700 Retail 3,000 5 spaces/1000 sf IS 47I0 Office 8,675 1 epace/300 sf 29 47Z0 Office 6,225 1 spaca/300 af 21 Restaurant 50 seats I space/3 seats 17 4730 0$ice 14,150 1 space/300 sf 48 4740 lietail 3,660 S spaces/1000 sf 19 Ok~'ice 750 1 space/300 sf 3 474Z Gas station - Lot 6 None 4750 O$'rce 10,500 1 space/300 sf 35 4760 . Office 10,775 1 space/300 sf 36 (Bixby School) 4770 Restaurant 125 aeats 1 apace/3 seats 42 (McDonalds) TOTAT. 266 Existing spaces 269 (in attached PUD plan) The existing spaces have been veri~ied by Alice Royer and Dennie P. "Chip" Wise, III. ~~genaa item ~ _(LG Page N ~! rn , I.l LVVL J IL iY ~uu~viin~ .. ., ,_ Of BO m ~~~ g ~; ~ ~0/~4. H f~- E ~ c~,~~ .. . ~ Q : ~. . . ~R ~ i ~ 40LE MESA pR ~ . f a D ~~ N~ . ~ ~D ~'+Q ~, o ~ Z ~i ~ o ~'~ oEF~W m ~ ~. • ~~~ ~ ~~-~E~, SP~`-i N 5;w. = a ' a' ~V10/c f3~~`~~ ~`~' o. .~. a~ ~9 -'~ ~ G(, cN~- i ~n ~ . ~ ~," D ~ G ~ • \ -~ ' ; •J~,~~6 - ~ D ~ i'C` ~ ~i,~My~::,,.1.8:;,~~ ~~~~,;;~n~.y,~<~, a a;~~'~~~";,,,'y~.t~'<=,,,,,~;. c P~~~;~n,o . •e~ ~~~+;. .',r,''a;~;.;;,';: '- s~d ,;.r. .~ ~:,, ~ >;,, :, .,~:, .. ... ~\~\\ z` a ~..f, ;~ ,~;. ,.,;..;.r , ,.y.i.'X:k\.:,,,~~~:'~;.. ~ ';il:~'~fti~.~pr~~'~;,rvAf.}`( ~~ ^ Vs~ ;n~ldli~.r.~ic;i(o(ir~.~'~!/~.jt~,., sge /71~<<. Rpy~r- le~~: e ~ ,~ o~ q~o~,~ L L3a-E ~+, ~.~;a~ - W i ~~'i~. 00/~ ~ ~. Sow~'. GV`~L~ ~ ' TANTRA DR ~ IA ~A~~ I~ Subject Property ~~ _.__-.___,._....,,,..Ab . ~+~i ~~ ~ 4760 Table Mesa ~r Locatio~: ~47~60 TabJe Mesa Dr ReV1eW Type: ~r~e 8 Gse Rieview 1:d00t1 Prqject Name: 81xby Sct~no! ~ MapLfnk Clty d 6aidv GIB Revtew Numdaer. LUt~20U2-Q00?S od~ ~a e~~ ~~.~aW. "°'"°"" ~' ~.",". '. c~s . mn ~ ~ *~ ni App,tlcani: Ba~by & As~oclates N no awnn~r . ~ r r.~ e'tlnae~eiMplm. ~a~ira+ww ;W4.ao~•m~a~-~~~.~.~~ ~~~~o~ -- . ... _- sosn7~ i ern ~s _ i~~n~~~ ~ _ 3l • . ~vvc ~.~u ~ I I\uVLIYI1f1L ~ ~ V~ ~Q 2 ~6 4 ~ ~4.~ ' H R- E ~ ~ ~~~4 , ~ ~ ~ 4HLE ME6A~ DR ~ ~ ' ~ N~" `fo ~-~A ~... o ~ 2 ~ `~ ~ ,EF,~ i ~~ m i . ~ 4u ~ ~A1~E~ s~~~ /vo _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~e« a~~"~~ ~r~5;~. A ~ ~R-D -.?~ ~. G/~nocc,a~- ~,n ' ~'~~~ . ' \ ~ .. ~. `~-~ib ~~ ~ ~.:.~ r.r:r~~qi ~,. y . ~ ~ '~S'D IYYP'~V~w,~%,.Si~;~~r'I.'~q~,i9~~~: ,,.,, ., r ~ P/a R k.m,o ~ d.e ~F;i:.S".~d1~;~~7:{::iti.+ 'l R ~ ~: ~:!,';;ti ~r'I~yh`~f •.~~ c ~ ~ ?;'ly:~w11~.;<,m r;d.1~,~i,+.,, ' ~~ ~\~~\ ~`~I . en..`~h~7... V~~:~'I~qdi,~.,.;~ .p,.~,,;~.~.~•,~;;+t~,. u,.; Sed ~,, ~,.~;; .. .~,: n;., . ,, ~ ;~a;~a";::'. i.;ro: ,,a~,~~,, 5 &e ~ ~~ ~ c 1 ~pye,~/' ~b~'7~+~ L R - E ~ ° ~ Al°'"o,-s- ~. ~ ' .W~ ~~'l. G0r1 ~ ~ ~~e~t ~` .~~ sowd~.~~k~i TANTftA D R I A'`A ~l,~, ~ ` Subject Property ~`d~ _. r __..._..._..-r~,.= ~I R- ~7 4760 Table Mesa Dr LocaYion: ~ti&U Ta~le Nlese Dr Re~r~etti Type:. S~te. & Use'Revliew /~ ~ :4f701~ ~~ Proje~ Natne: $iXby Schoat ~' 1 MapLlnk Clty d 66aItlaGIB Rev~~w~Vf~fn~er: LURZOt1F-OfJ~~~ ~~~L TMI^0"^~°~adaCpaneNe~ela ~ wb~s a b~~ r~rcmenery. ~i. cy u ps'~iMrwq~imna. rrw,. xi v e~Yl~m~wo~~t H~~~abe A,p~licam: Bdxtsyr & .dlss.+oci~fes ~,,,,,,H~._~ -- ~-~~,~;;~ ;r~m ~" ~ G _ r aac # _3a ..... ~.. ~.....~ .... .• v-~ ~~u v~~ ~IVVY931UUY City of Boulder ~~'~~ Departmerrt of Housing & Human Services `~ Division of Children, Youth & Families To: Nan .Tohnsan City c~f BoulAer, P1lnnin~ DCpztrtmunC PO Box 7)1 Boulder, CO $030G RF.: Re!•StrucCuring of space ac Bixby Schaol, 4760 Table Mesa Da, Buulder, CO 80305 I am th~ Managcar of the Child C;u~c Fesource Rs Refarr~l Program that is loca[ed witlun the Children,'i'outh 3a Families l~ivision (CYF) of the City of Boulder. CYF m~int~ii~s u data6atie ~f informacion on chiid care c~ptions in the eity oC Boulder 1nd the other arels ~F Boulder County. CYF provides referr~ls to Pamilies secking child care and recruits nnd truins individuals to enter into the licenscd child care profession. CYF also offcrs ~echnical assisrince w child c~re centers and licensed family child c~re homes and mainta.ins ciasa and trend infotmacion nn supply ans ~iemand of ehild care in Bou{der Counry. Occasionally, a center will ask CYF for fcedbflek on pronosed clianges such eL5 the one that I3ixby School is considering. Pat Ssiker, Director of Bixby School has infoi~ned Children, Youth & Families (CYP) nF plans to recon~gurz internal sUsec ac their lonacion, 47fi0 Table Mesa Dr, ~c~ulder, CO. Th~ proposed rse~nfiguration at $ixby School involvcs the eliminacion of an apanmenf previously used as single fnmily living space and convening this space to add more square footage for tl~e Bixby Sehool and child care center. SpecificalJy, the current apaltmcn~ would be used ~o aad more square footng~ for the school's kitchen, storage, and afCice space. 'l'his would, in tPPect, create more fiinction~l spuce for the children. Right now, portions of the play areus are 6eing usod Por stora~c and doubling us use for the business operations of che sch~ol. The aparfinen[ has Ueen occupied by the schoul's direcfor, but thc dirc~ctor iti moving to another living space. To accesv the apartmcnc locaced ac 4760 T~blc Mesa Drive, it is necessary to eo through thc sch~ol. This, in effect, does not make the apartment a f~~sible living space fc~r someone from thc general population. Allowing someone from thc general populAtion to r~sid~ in the upartmenc could pose safety concerns for tha chilcYren enrolled in tlie school. Pat Bak~r ha~ explained I:l~ut BixUy School will not be askin~; to increas~ the capttciCy ~t th~ schuol. Sixhy Schonl has been operating sinc~ 1970 and oPfers a continuum of care for children ages 2 1/2 yaars through 11 years. Presehool, elementary school, before nnd u£ter school csu•e, and summer program~ are provided. P'or families with childron in both the praschnnl age ;roup and elementarq age grnup, this creaces a convenient. arran~ement and may lessen a fnmily's commuting. CeaAinly, a continuurn of car~ concribuces positively ti~ the emotional and cognitive ~evelopment of childrzn. Childran's Sarvices Progrems • Community Medlation Servioes •Youth Opportunities Program Preventlon & Intervantion Programs • famiiy Resource Sohools Program n~an r......,,, na,,,..a _ nn o.... ~t+~ o....iA... I~n1...~A.. O(f4AR ./~n~~ AAi_A~~7. G~v /9l1~1 AAi_~4AA . . ~~, ~, ., ~~ ~ ( ~ „ .. a~ '~ , ".. ~....~ .... ,. ..~ .~u v~~ OU04411004 One pprtion of the building is Por the preschool, as well as a large pl~yground, Th~ preschool has access to the school's swimming pool and large gym that the school age children use. The school offers a wide variety of expl~ring activities, Uoth structured and unstructured. ChiJd care in the 80305 zip code area is n~eded, as in otliet por[ions of the city. Comprehensive programs such as Bixby School aze needed. ChiJdren, Youth, & Families believes that the proposed pl.an, as dzscribed by Pat Baker, would enable the school to inore effectively use their apace and would l~elp to alleviato safety c~ncerns of children. The proposed change will not negatively impact pazlting at or tr~nspnrcation to and fr.om the schonl, Sincerely, ~ ~~ Tudy Fiy Child Carc Resource & ReferrAt Program Children, 'Youth & Families Division City of Bouldcr ~lgentla Item # ~ C _ Page # ~`~ ATTACHMENT D .~~~=/ ~ ~ CITY OF BOULDER Planning and Development Services 1739 Broadway, Third Floor • P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306-0791 phone 303-441-1880 • fax 303-441-3241 • web boulderplandevelop.net CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS DATE OF COMMENTS: March 22, 2002 CASE MANAGER: Nan Johnson LOCATION: 4760 TABLE MESA DR COORDINATES: S03W02 REVIEW TYPE: Site & Use Review REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2002•00016 APPLlCANT: BIXBY AND ASSOCIATES ZONING: MR•D, Medium Density Residential-Developing DESCRIPTION: SITE & USE REVIEW: Request to demolish and rebulld 3,160 square feet of preschool building, for approvai of a 1,400 spuare foot additlon, and to convert one 1-bdrm residential unit to educational use area. REQUESTED VARIAT IONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: Parking reduction less than 20%, and the conversion of one residential unit to educational use area an expansion of a non-residential use in a residential zaning district. I. REVIEW FINDINGS Application does not meet criteria due to the need for further analysis with the following requested information by staff. A revision is necessary and must be submitted within 90 days of the date of these comments. If no revision is submitted within 90 days, the City staff will schedule a Planning Board action based on the latest plan on file. The applicant may revise the project and submit up to a maximum of two revisions only. The primary concern of this expansion request is the parking needs and impacts within fhe South Creek P.U.D. Further information must be provided and analyzed to determine whether the Site Review criteria has been met. A decision on this application (an approval, denial, or approva! with conditions) is to be made by ihe Planning Board at a public hearing. When the review of revisions has been completed, staff will prepare the Planning Board memo with a recommendation for Board action. Staff at that time will schedule the item at the next available Board hearing. Any decision by the Planning Board is subject to call-up by a majority vote of the City Council within 30 days. II. CITY REQUIREMENTS Building Design Building heights and the lowest point of the existing grade must be indicated on the elevation plans to show the new development meets the current code requirements. A lighting plan must be submitted to show compliance with the illumination requirements of Section 93.3-17, Bouider Revised Codes, 1981. Nan Johnson, 303-441-4190, Drainage A plugged pond outlet was addressed as an issue in the drainage letter. Please address how this issue will be resolved in order for the swale that is along the east property line to accept the discharge from the parking lot pond prior to building permit issuance. Jenny Coley, Public Works, 303-441-1886 Fees The revision is requested for the Site Review only. Therefore, a revision fee of $2,380 will be required at the time of submittal. Technical document fees will apply for the review of the final plan and construction documents. Nan Johnson, 303-441-4190. Address: 4760 TABLE MESA DR /~gentla Ilem ~~G Page R~~ _ - Fire Protection Existing fire alarm and automatic fire sprinkler system(s) must be extended into new construction and remodeled areas. Fire alarm protection in renovated/new areas must be compliant with current fire alarm codes (NFPA 72). Contact Fire Protection Engineer David Lowrey with questions. Adrian Hise/David Lowrey, 303-441-3350. Landscaping If the cost of the redevelopment exceeds 25% of the Boulder Counry Assessor's actual value of the existing structure on the site, the landscaping must be brought up to current standards (B.R.C. Section 9-3.3-1b). ). Please indicate the estimated cost of the redevelopment. If the redevelopment meets this threshold, please provide a detailed landscape plan which meets the requirements of the following sections of the code: general landscaping (93.3-2), streetscape standards (9-3.33), and parking lot landscaping standards (9-3.3-4). If the redevelopment is below the 25%, the applicant must provide general landscape information indicating any changes to the existing landscape. Bev Johnson, 303•4413272. Legal Requirements: Neighborhood Comments Two letters and one phone call have been received to this date and are attached with these comments. 1. Letter addressed from Oliver E. Frascona, Esq. of the attorneys at law office of Frascona, Joiner, Goodman and Greenstein, P.C., 4750 Table Mesa Drive, Boulder, Colorado 80303-5575, The letter states that this firm represents the South Creek Owner's Association whose clients are the owners of the buildings and parking lots that are adjacent to the Bixby School. A special meeting to discuss this issue of the school's proposai was held and resulted in the following: The Association would like to go on record as supporting the applicanPs request to expand the Bixby schooi with one caveat. The parking in this center is filled to the max at this time. W ith the advent of another building being built next their lot and the amount of traffic that will enter and exit this small center there is simply no more room for more cars traveling in and out off of Table Mesa Drive. It is understood that the City is not going to allow any additional traffic count or a use that wiil increase the already tight traffic situation. They hope that the redevelopment will result in a reduction in the car count and not an increase. 2. Letter addressed from Dennie P. "Chip" Wise, III, owner of 4710 Table Mesa Drive. Refers to a letter from the staff planner Alice Rouyer dated February 21, 1995. Notes that the South Creek P.U,D. has had a 15% parking reduction to date. He notes from the staff letter that there are only 269 spaces, of which 266 are accounted for, which shows Bixby school at 10,775 square feet, not 15,879 square feet, which would put the P.U.D. 14 spaces over. He states that Bixby will need to put more parking spaces on site if this expansion is allowed, especially if Bixby plans to, increase enrollment to 200 students at a future date. 3. Phone call received from Dennie P. "Chip" Wise, III. He expressed concerns over parking stating that parking is to the maximum, noting that 4-5p.m. not bad for parking; concerns over the access from the McDonald's lot in P.U.D. that has been given to the new office building just to the east outside of the P.U.D.; and, concerns with the drainage problems on the southeast corner of the school property. He suggested that possibly some new parking couid be added in this southeast area. Parking 1. To assess the current parking demand, a parking study will be required for five consecutive school days that the school is fully operational. The applicant will need to count the number of available parking spaces north and west of the school during the morning peak drop-off period, the afternoon peak drop-off period and during the noon hour for each of these five days. A report of available spaces will need to be presented to staff with a revised supmittal. City staff will observe the parking lot during these time periods to assess the vehicular circulation within the parking lot. Steve Durian, Public Works, 303-441-4493 2. In addition to the parking study above, staff has reviewed the proposal for managing arrivals and pick-ups and is initially supportive of the concept. Along with the revised submittal, please provide any information about carpooling and ride sharing that occurs now or will be encouraged in the future. Steve Durian, Public Works, 303-441-4493 Plan Documents The applicant is to provide a final site plan that provides the site development data (i.e., land area, building area, parking and open space area, etc. for both existing and proposed development). Nan Johnson, 303-441-4190. Address: 4760 TABLE MESA DR kgentla Item N~ page # 3 6 A more detailed phasing plan regarding the time schedules of the development must be submitted. Nan Johnson, 303- 441-4190. Site Design - The play equipment structures in the south rear yard (wood frame climbing area) do not show on the site plan. Please indicate the extent of its location and any other accessory structures on the property and indicate the distances between these and the property lines and the setbacks. Nan Johnson, 303-441-4190. Utilities 1. The sanitary sewer main is not shown on the Utility Connection Plan. Please show the location, type and size of the sanitary sewer main on the Utility Connection Plan. Jenny Coley, Public Works, 303-441-1886 2. The sanitary sewer service line is shown tapping off of a manhole. Please verify that this is correct. Jenny Coley, Public Works,303-441-1886 3. Please show all of the water main that is located on the property and not a portion of it on the Utility Connection Plan. Aiso show the type and size of the water main and the location of the water valves. Jenny Coley, Public Works, 303- 441-1886 III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS Area Characteristics and Zoning History SITE REVIEW AMENDMENT.~ The project site is located in the South Creek development, approved as a Pianned Unit Development (PUD) in 1977. This PUD specifies building coverage, parking, open space, and setback requirements unique to this project. The 1977 approval allowed a private school with a maximum enroliment of 200 students. Also, included in the approval were two dwelling units that were constructed as second floor apartments used by the school administration. In 1989, the Bixby School received approval for a Special Review (#SR-89-15) and (#P-89-32) for a 3,139 square foot addition to the existing building in two phases for a total of 15,879 square feet, and a parking reduction. The first phase of the expansion was completed in 1990 and the remainder was completed in 1994. A Site Review Amendment is required because the applicant is requesting an expansion of the existing school building that exceeds the iimits allowed by a Minor Modification to an approved Site Review. The expansion will vary the building location by more than ten feet in the MR-D zone. The ApplicanYs proposal requests to reconfigure the existing space, improve and replace some existing construction, relocate upper level space to the main floor to better serve the current enrollment, and in a later phase expand the kindergarten area of the building. Specifically, Phase One (remodel existing building) involves demolishing the 1,936 s.f, preschool and the 1,152 s.f. second floor apartment (above the preschool) and replacing on the north side of the building a 3,160 s.f. first floor addition. Phase Two involves expanding the kindergarten room to the west center of the building by adding an additional 1,400 square feet of space to the first floor. Student enrollment is not to exceed the approved limit of 200 students and no increase is proposed in the number of staff members required to teach and administer the school. The applicant is requesting the foliowing variations to the approved PUD through the site review process: a 5 percent parking reduction. USE REVIEW.~ A use review is required because a private school and preschool (large day care center) in the MR-D zoning district is only permitted by a Use Review. The loss or modification of the residential unit that increases the floor area of the school area is considered to be an expansion of the school from the previous Use Review Use approval and thus, is a change of use and requires a new Use Review. Building and Housing Codes Address: 4760 TABLE MESA DR ~;nflld3 ~~Cm ~; toG r?(f8 ~ 3~" The structure will be required to meet the requirements of the building codes in effect at the time of building permit application. With this proposed demo and addition the structure will be required to provide an elevator to serve the basement, first floor and second floor. The main floor will be required to be handicap accessible. Any additional restrooms that are required based on chapter 29 of the Uniform Building Code will need to be handicap accessible. Steve Brown Land Use - The school has approval for a total enrollment not to exceed 200 students as part of the planned unit development of South Creek PUD per Special Review (#SR-89-15) and (#P-89-32). Parking Further analysis of the parking situation and impacts must be completed by both staff and the applicant. Staff wiil need to further review with the applicant the implications of the shared parking agreement within the South Creek P.U.D. and this proposal. Utilities There are a significant number of structures encroaching into the public utility easements. The applicant is notified that for any reason specified in Title 8, Chapter 6 of the Bou~der Revised Code 1981, removal of the encroachment in accordance with the Boulder Revised Code 1981 will be required, at the owners expense. Jenny Coley, Public Works, 303-441-1886 Zoning The project site is zoned MR-D, Medium Density Residential-Developing. This zoning category allows a variety of residential uses, but is primarily used for attached residential units, where each unit generally has direct access to ground level. A private elementary school is permitted by Use Review in tk~e MR-D zoning district. A preschool or'large day care center' is also permitted by Use Review in the MR-D district. IV. NEXT STEPS The applicant will need to submit a revision application that addresses the above staff comments. The applicant should respond to each of the comments made in the above sections and update any revisions to the written statements and plans. Applications for revisions are received by the noon (12 p.m.) deadline on the first and third Mondays of the month. Applicants are recommended to submit prior to the noon deadline to ensure the completeness and acceptance of the application. Once the application has been received, the review period by staff is three weeks. Staff will issue the comments for the revisions the last Friday of the 3 week review period. If the application meets the review criteria at that time, staff will schedule the item for the next available Planning Board meeting. Address: 4760 TABLE MESA DR I4dA0Gu ~fNm ,4. GG _ f Af~O ~~ ~~ .~,/ .,~~ - , ~ CITY OF BOULDER Planning and Development Services 1739 Broadway, Third Floor • P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306-0791 phone 303-441-1880 • fax 303-441-3241 • web bouiderplandevelop.net CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS DATE OF COMMENTS: May 24, 2002 CASE MANAGER: Nan Johnson PROJECT NAME: BIXBY SCHOOL LOCATION: 4760 TABLE MESA DR COORDINATES: S03W02 REVIEW TYPE: Slte and Use Review REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2002-00016 APPLICANT: BIXBY AND ASSOCIATES DESCRIPTION: SITE AND USE REVIEW: Request to demolish and rebuild 3,160 square feet of preschool building, for approval of a 1,400 square foot addition, and to convert one 1- bedroom resldential unit to educational use area. REQUESTED VARIAT IONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: Parking reduction less than 20% I. REVIEW FINDINGS Application will meet ail criteria with the following conditions described in the city requirements section; a staff recommendation of approval with conditions will be scheduled for a Planning Board public hearing, if the applicant accepts these conditions. Any decision by the Planning Board is subject to call-up by a majority vote of the City Council within 30 days. 11. CITY REQUIREMENTS Drainage The existing pond outlet in the southwest area of the parking lot on Lot 1 is not allowing proper drainage to occur. This plugged outlet mwst be cleaned and the vegetation managed to allow for the drainage from the parking lot to drain to the swale along the Bixby property. -Jenny Coley 303-441-1886. Fees The Planning Board review fee of $2,900 must be paid prior to the scheduling of the item for the public hearing. Technical document fees may apply for the review of final plans and construction documents and the development agreement. Landscaping No further requirements. Bev Johnson, 303-441-3272. Land Use Any change of use or ownership changes with the school property will not be allowed to exceed the existing approved use and conditions (such as student enrollment and traffic trips) unless approved by the city. Plan Documents Approval of this development proposal will be subject to all approved written statements and plans submitted by the Applicant. Address: 4760 TABLE MESA DR rlgenda Item #~ .('_~ Page k~_ All final plans must be submitted for review prior to buiiding permit. Upon approval from Planning Board, mylars containing the finai site plan will be prepared by the applicant for the final site, landscaping, and elevation plans and submitted to the Planning Department. A development agreement will be prepared by staff also during that time requiring the owners signature(s). III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS Building and Housing Codes No additional requirements. Steve Brown Housing and Human Services The Bixby School proposal involves the conversion of one 1 bedroom residential unit to educational use area. The loss of residential units is typically strongly discouraged. However, the community benefit being provided by the school is generally considered to be acceptable. As an educational facility, Bixby School provides an essential communiry service and benefit, and is in keeping with a number of Boulder Valley Comprehensive Pian policies, including policies: 8.01 "meeting the road spectrum of human needs and " 8.05 " access to human service programs." Linda Hill-Blakley, 441-3140 Neighborhood Comments No further comments have been received since the initial review and public comment period. IV. NEXT STEPS Planning staff will prepare a recommendation of approval with conditions and schedule the item for the next available Planning Board hearing. The Planning Board review fee of $2,900 will need to be paid prior to the scheduling of the item for the pubtic hearing. Address: 4760 TABLE MESA DR 1lgenda i~em ~_(G__ Page #~~_ ATTACHMENT E Date: March 4, 200 Project: Bixby School 4760 Table Mesa Drive Zoning: MIt-D, Planned Unit Development Regarding: Amendment to the Planned Unit Development, #P-77-54, Special Review#SR-77-30 RAIITON•M~EVOY A R C H I T E C T S To: City of Boulder Planning Staff e o u ~ o e R From: Phil McEvoy, Itailton McEvoy Architects Copy to: Pat Baker, Bixby School Bixby and Associates, Board of Directors WRITTEN STATEMENT Project Description and History Bixby School has a current need for improved space to better serve the existing student population. The School would like to reconfigure existing space, improve and replace some existing construction and relocate upper level space to the maitt .floor to better serve the current enrolment. In the future Bixby would also expand the kindergarten a~•ea of the building. Bixby School was originally approved as a part of the South Cxeek P.U.D. on December i, 1997. This approval allowed a"private school" for children with a maximum enrolment of 200. The approval also allowed two residential wiits whicl~ ware constructed as second floor apartments used by the school administrutors. In 1989 we assisted the school in a Special Review (#SR-89-15) and Planned Unit Devetopment (#A- 89-32) to add 3,139 square feet to the building in two phases and we requested approval of a 100% parking reduction for the addition. These applications were approved on December 7, 1989, The first phase of the expansion was completed in 1990 and the remaiuder was completed in 1994. The Final Disposition (December 7, 1989) allowed for a total square footage of 15,879 square feet and a] 00% parking reducYion for the area added to the school use. Although 3,139 square feet were approved, a 132 square foot air lock entry on the west side of the first floor has not yet been constructed. Today Bixby finds a pressing need to make repairs and improvements in the building. The school needs additional office space for the administration, meeting space to interview new parents, a larger "commercial grade" kitchen for serving hot lunches a~~d a more secure playground for the preschool. During four previous repairs, the preschooi floor slab has Ueen replaced, levaled, covered and raised to prevent recurring settlement problems. Since none of these repairs has been successful, the school needs to demolish the preschoo] and completaly replace the foundations and the floor slab. While this majar work is underway we would like to reorganize the preschool space, define a recognizable public enhy, separate the public access from the preschool playground and take the area of one upper PpOJECT CONCEPTS ~ AESI~ENCES RESTOMTION • CAflPOflAiE OESIGN 1920 Pg¢qyl St., Boultler, CO 80302 (~(?E~1Qnifem~~~C~3~4353aF/a%A43~ 5 r yn ~F Bixby School Written Statement Mazch 4, 2002 Page 2 level apartment and add it to the first floor for the overall improvements tl~at can be gained from a larger first floor. °-S( S.F. To complete the Phase One Remodel, the 1,936 square foot preschool will be demolished, th~ square foot second floor apartment (above the preschool) will be demolished and a 3,160 square foot first floor addition will be added to the north side of the building. Therefore the net increase in floor azea will be 72 square feet, however, there remains 132 squaze feet to be built from the 1989 approvals. Not included in the area calculations are attic storage and mechanical space that will also be demolished. These areas are not included since they are not occupied spaces, but accessory to the building functions. In the Phase One Remodel these non-occupied spaces will be replaced to serve as storage and basement mechanical necessary to serve the building. At a later time the kindergarten room will be expanded (Phase II on the Floor Plan) to the west center of the building adding an additional 1,400 squaze feet of space to the first floor. The schedule of this phase of construction has not been determined. We ueed additional space for this section of the school curriculum. A variety of school fixnctions such as nap time in the gym, the reading hours in the library and shared use of the reading and writing rooms would be improved if these functions were provided separately for each section of the school, While the space provided increases, at no time will the student population ever exceed the approved enrolment of 200 students. There is also no anticipated increase in the nuxnber of staff inembers required to teach and administer the school. Access to the school is gained through the parking lot from Moorehea3 Ave. just to the west of the McDonald's Restaurant on Table Mesa Drive. All of the circulation for drop-off and pick-up takes place in the commercial parking 2ot (which is completely separate of surrounding multifamity residential uses). Parents park in the paved lot north of the buiiding and walk their younger children into the school building or drop off elementary age children in the one-way drive loop. We intend to add up to 3 additional angled pazking spaces to this one-way drive. These spaces will be reserved for staff use to prevent conflicts with cars and students being dropped oFf. The parking lot north of the school is shared with other tenants in the South Creek Center. The original written statement (McStain Enterprises, 1997) addressed parking for the school portion of the "South Creek Center" by stating in Section G the following "...Six spaces will be provided on site for the exclusive use of school personal. In addition, the adjacent parking lot will be available for the mutual use of the school and the commercial facility. A two car garage may be constructed for the extensive use of school personnel." Neighboring conunercial property owi~ers once challenged Bixby School's use of the shared parking lot, but this was upheld by the Colorado Supreme Court on October 23, 1989. As originally constructed, and also in it's cun~ent condition, there are two personnel parking spaces on site with 4"guest parking spaces" just north of the school at the student drop-off location. The parking needs of the school and the South Creek Center have been adequately met by the existing shared parking lot. We are proposing to remove one residential unit during the expansion of the first floor. Since this unit has one bedroom, one required parking space would be associated with it's use. We are adding three new parking spaces, which would make a total of four available for use. Four pazking spaces would equate to 1,200 square feet of useable space in the school building (using the parking ratio for ~;n~~nea IYem v G G_ Pago ~! Na Bixby School Written Statement March 4, 2002 Page 3 MR-D Zoning). Since our net additional area is 1,340 square feet, we are short only 0.53 parking spaces. Since the original PUD stated 6 spaces would be provided, and now we aze required to have 4.53 additional spaces (for a total of 10.53) we need a(1.0 - 10/10.53 = 0.05) 5%parking reduction. Existing City utilities that the serve the school will be adequate to serve the remodeled building. The site drainage and storm water facilities that serve the school will not be affected by the remodel nor will the site runoffbe increased. We believe there is no need to submit a drainage plan or waste water report to document existing conditions. GENERAL CRITERIA FOR SITE REVIEW I. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (A) Recent proposed revisions to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan discourage the removal of existing residential units except for "..the presumption against such a conversion may be overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social, human services, govemmental, or recreational need in the community includiiig without limitation a use for a day care center,... or an education use." as written in Agenda Item 6A on page 76 of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Bixby School is a 30 yeaz old pre-school and elementary school that l~as conMbuted significantly to ti~e successful education of numerous Boulder families. Their successful child rearing contributes to the overall community benefit and will be improved by the expansion and additions proposed to the pre-school, administrative offices and full service kitcheu facilities. Bixby offers before and after school care for children from pre-school age through elementary age. A full day summer program is also available that furthers a child's education. A second phase of expansion will further improve the overall facilities for the kindergarten and elementary school. (B) The proposed development does not exceed the maximum density allowed within the residential land use designation. No maximum floor area ratio appears to have been established for the MR-D Zone. Also, no additional units are proposed with this expansion of the school building. II Site Desien: A. O_pen Space: 1. Specifically defined.open space on the Bixby site remains open for the use of the residential neighbors as established by a letter of agreement with the South Creek Homeowner's Association that was approved on June 22, 1989. 2. Private open space for each of the residential units will not be affected by this proposal. The original Planned Unit Development Written Statement by McStain enterprises illustrated how open space was calculated for the residential units included in the South Creek PUD. Tha "private school" site (now Bixby School) was noted as a 39,000 square foot lot that specifically "cannot be counted in the open space." The actual lot size for Bixby School is approximately 97,600 square feet and includes the origina139,000 square foot lot that was shown on the PUD Site Plan by McStain Enterprisas. Due to our ~~,,r;ea~da icem i' _~ G__ Pau; ~~ Bixby School Written Statement March 4, 2002 Page 4 findings, we believe the school footprint and the expansion are contained within the original 39,000 square foot lot, as proposed in the original PUD, and therefore the open space for the entire South Creek PUD will not be affected by the expansion. 3. Does not apply. 4. The existing open space continues to provide relief. 5. Does not apply. 6. The linkages that existed will continue to remain. A. Landscaping: l. The existing landscaping has beeii established and will remain intact except for two trees that are within the footprint of the expansion. These two trees will be replaced on the school site and are shown on the Site Plan. 2. Does not apply. 3. Does not apply. 4. Does not apply since all of these conditions were met with the original PUD. C. Circulation: 1. Does not apply. 2. We intend to add up to 3 additional angled parking spaces to the one-way dzive where the elementary students aze dropped off for school. These spaces will be reserved for staff use to prevent conflicts with cazs backing up and students being dropped off. 3. Safety is an important concern of Bixby School. Part of the proposed renovations include a new entry sequence from the parking lot to the &ont door of the Uuilding. This walk way will now be covered and completely separated from all playgrounds for increased safety of the student population. 4. Bixby has always and will continue to encourage to caz pooling of Bixby families. Due to the young age of the students, biking has not beeu an acceptable alternative. Since a pre-school is provided, many fan~ilies have all of their younger children enroled, thus reducing the number of car trip to other scools. 5. Bixby is located on a regional buss route connecting to Denver via the Table Mesa Pazk and Ride. Recent reconstruction of Table Mesa Drive included the addition of bike lanes. 6. Existing linkages remain in place that connect to off site facilities. 7. Does not apply. 8. The pr.oject continues to meet the demands of the types of anticipatad traffic. 9. City standazds are met. D Parkine: 1. Parking areas remain convenient for access to the school building. The location of the student drop-off provides for one-way traffic and students exiting the passenger side of the vehicle for the safe transition to the sidewalk ~~,~anti_;I'o;~~~>~ (aG Pagalr`~. Bixby School Written Statement March 4, 2002 Page 5 and then access to a covered walk way into the building. 2. T'hree new parking spaces are proposed with this remodel. They are located immediately adjacent to the existing one-way drive/student drop-off and this location minimizes the amount of asphalt necessary to add parking. 3. Existing parking, drives and lighting aze completely separated from adjacent uses. 4. Does not apply. E. Buildine. Design. Livability and Relationship to the Existing Sunounding Area: 1. The addition has been designed in the same scale and uses ihe exact same materials as tha original school building. The height of the proposed roof ridge is exactly the same height as the current building and is in direct alig~vnent with the existing roof ridge on the south wing of the structure. 2. The height of the proposed roof ridge is exactly the same height as the current building. 3. Does not apply. 4. The building colors will match the existing. 5. Does not apply. 6. Shared use of the open space was described above. 7. Does not apply. 8. Does not apply. 9. No changes are necessary in parking lot lighting. 10. Does not apply. 11. Does not apply. F. Solaz Siting and Construction: 1. Open space locations are not aFfected. 2. The remodel will be built directly over the existing footprint with a minimal expansion towards the west and north (as shown on the attached floor plans), therefore no impact will be oUvious in the solar siting. Tha covered walkway will reduce the saFety coi~cerns regarding the northeast entry location. 3. The building form repiaces the existing pre-school and extends the existing ridge line so that the building height does not change or increase, therefore maximizing the solar potentiai was not possible, Due to the location and height of the current building, the proposed addition would exceed the allowable height of 35 feet if solar energy coltection through windows was a requirement. 4. Does not apply. G. Poles Above the Permitted Height: This entire section does not apply. USE REVIEW CRITERIA Below is written response to the Use Review Criteria found in Section 9-4-9(d), B.R.C., 1981. Since the existing and proposed school and residential use meets the original zoning deFined in the 1977 approved PUD, the criteria for non-conforming uses in Section 9-4-9(e), B.R.C., 1981, has not been n~e~mia l~ern ~I~ _ G C__ I'ai~ a's NS Bixby School Written Statement March 4, 2002 Page 6 addressed. 9-4-9(d) Criteria for Review (1) The existing and proposed school and residential use rneets the original zoning and uses approved in the 1977 South Creek PUD. (2) (A) Bixby provides a quality private school environment in the south Boulder neighborhood and in a convenient location. (B) Bixby School is located between two multifamily neighborhoods and the South Creek Shopping Center and functions as a transitional development between housing and commercial or beriveen lower and higher intensity uses. (C) Recent proposed revisions to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan discourage the removal of existing residential units except for "..the presumption against such a conversion may be overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social, human services, governmental, or recreational need in the community including without limitation a use for a day care center,... or an education use" as written in Agenda Item 6A on page 76 of the proposed Comprehensive. Plan Amendments. Bixby School is a 30 year old pre-school and elementary school that has contributed significantly to the successful education of numerous Boulder families. Their successful child rearing contributes to the overall community benefit and will be improved by the expansion and additions proposed to the pre-school, administrative offices and full service kitchen facilities. Bixby offers before and after school care for children from pre- school age through elementary age. A full day summer program is also available that furthers a child's education. A second phase of expansion will further improve the overall facilities for the kindergarten and elementary school. (D) Does not apply. (3) This proposed addition to Bixby School will add less than 10°/a to the previously approved square footage of building area. The remodel will be built directly over the existing footprint with a minimal expansion towards the west and north (as shown on the attached floor plans), therefore this location will have the least possible impact to neighboring properties. Also, due to the juxtaposition of the additiou, few neighbors will be able to see the improvements. (4) No additional City infrastructure will be necessary to serve Bixby School. (5) The school addition is compatible in scale, color, massing and duplicates the orientation of the existing pre-schooi such that there will be almost no noticeable change in the chazacter of the building and use. The concludes the Written Statement for Site Review and Use Review. Railton McEvoy Architects, Boulder, P.C., 1928 Pearl Street, Boulder, Co 80302, 303-443-4353 ,{r~~i~da I~wm 4; _ GG P~~ y; y~_ Dafe: March 12, 2002 Project: Bixby School 4760 Table Mesa Drive Zoning: MR-D, Planned Unit Development Regazding: Pazking, $uilding Height and Open Space Provided at Bixby School To: Nan Johnson, Case Manager City of Boulder Planning Staff From: Phil McEvoy, Railton McEvoy Architects Copy to: Pat Baker, Bixby 3chool Bixby and Associates, Boazd of Directors Parking History and Parking Provided When the South Creek Village was originally approved in 1977, the PUD documents prepazed by McStain Enterprises provided the following "... Six spaces will be provided on site (School Site) for the exclusive use of school personnel. In addition, the adjacent parking lot witl be availabte for the mutual use of the school and the commercial facility. A two car garage may be constructed for the extensive use of school personnel." The original school design included 7,500 square feet of school building use, two additional apartments of up to 3,000 square feet, and an allowable enrolment of 200 students. Although the school has subsequently obtained approval for additional square footage, the enrolment has never reached the limit of 200 students. In 1989 the school went through both an Amendment to the original PUD and a Use Review for the expansion to 15,879 square fect. When this expansion was approved, there was no additional parking provided and City Staff described the approval as a"100% parking reduction". This terminology was developed by the Staff in 1989 and not by the applicant. Bixby School has always used the parking lots to the north and west of the school entrance. These two lots have always been shared by the adjacent commercial buildings as well. In 1989 the owners of the commercial building(s) sued Bixby School in order to force the school to pay for iYs portion of the parking lot maintenance, not because they disagreed about the number of parking spaces that Bixby occupied, Bixby won this case at the Colorado Supreme Court and did not have to pay. However, in the interest of being neighborly, they have made, what they believe to be fair, payments for their share of the maintenanoe expenses. To the best of our knowledge and research, the original PUD did not document the actua] parking that was reserved for the school use other than the quote addressed above. There are two letters in the "central file" from McStain, written in April 1979, that address the total pazking provided and required by the commercial developmenY and the apartments. These leYters illustraYed an overall commercial parking demand of 265 spaces and stated that there were 247 spaces available (not counting the gas station site). This "pazking demand" letter does not include the school, or specific parking related to the school use. It does however include 16 apartments with a parking requirement of 24 spaces. These units were not constructed above the original commercial buildings as planned in ~lgenda Ilom 9f _L_~-~'ago ~,.~~ March 13, 2002 Bixby School Planning Memo Page 3 included the origina139,OQQ squaze foot azea. We have used the equivalent of the 39,000 square foot lot (275ft. x 141.8 ft.) and have determined the amount of building footprint and impervious surfaces and then the resulting open space. The total open space will be 18,743 square feet or 48% of the total (original) lot. Building Heig6t When we reconstruct the roof of the school and remove the second floor apartment we will build to the existing ridge height. Based upon existing drawings of the school, the ridge is 35 feet high measured to existing grade beyond the exterior of the lowest wall southeast of the building per the Land Use Definition. To determine the height precisely, we will need to have the ridge surveyed, and we can furnish this information by a separate letter. This information can be provided prior to the Planning Board hearing. ,•~~;ditlliGiili~~r ~~u(J.li_y~,__.__, Date: May 6, 2002 Project: Bixby School, 4760 Table Mesa Drive Regarding: Written Statement Regazding Design Review Committee's First Review, 2-0 ~ / Site and Use Review, LU2002-00016 ~~ AAIITON•McEVOY To: Nan Johnson, Case Manager, City of Boulder Planning Department A fl c N ~ r e c T s B 0 U L ~ E R Copy to: Bixby School From: Phil McEvoy, Architect, Railton McEvoy Architects ~~~/' Discussion: Below is an item by item response to the issues identified in the D.R.C. Memorandum regarding the original application for Site and Use Review dated March 22, 2002, REVIEW FINDINGS The applicant acknowledges that revisions have been requested by stafF and these items are verbally described below. Supplemantal drawings are also submitted to complete the revisions to the original application dated March 4, 2002. CITY REQUIREMENTS Building Desigtt We have verified the building height by physically measuring the structure and the adjacent grade and we have determincd that the existiug highest roof is 33 feet above the lowest grade, as defined in the City Land Use Regulations, We acknowledge that a Lighting Plan must be submitted, but since the selection of lighting fixtures is normally conducted during the development of final Construction Drawings we would prefer to submit the Lighting PIan with the Building Permit Application and have this item listed as a Condition of Approval when the application is reviewed by Planning Board. We intend to use only wall mounted, down directional fixtures at each building entrance and recessed down lights in the entry porch trellis- like structure to provide for night time security lighting. None of the fixtures would create off- site glare or light pollution onto neighboring properties. Drainage The plugged pond outlet will be cleaned by school personnel. Fees PflOJECT CONGEPTS • flE51~ENCES {tE570ftqilON • COflPOflAiE OESIGN ~I~9p2~B PeaA 5Y„ Boultlet CO 80302 F~~~~il~c~ ~~Qm ~~ / C.~) 44~yq~ b~3 •~ A4 ~ 535 [~ f yo Bixby School DRC Written Statement May 6, 2002 Page 2 A revision fee of $2,380.00 has been submitted with this revision. Fire Protection Comment acknowledged. Landscaping Since the DRC Comments were received, we met with Bev Johnson and understand that since the improvements do not exceed 25% of the actual value we need to provide "general landscape information" regarding the existing landscape improvements at the school site. We have prepazed a General Landscape Plan to document significant landscaping that currently exists at the school. Most of the landscaping has been on the school grounds since the school opened in 1978. Neighborhood Comments The two letters and one phone call aze acknowledged. The parking lot study conducted at the beginning of April may help to address the concerns raised by these comments. Parking After our first submittal, staff requested an in depth pazking study that was conducted during the first week in April of this year. During this week Bixby School was in session. Cheri Belz, Bixby Board presidant, counted the number of cars pazked in all of the South Creek parking lots at 8:30 in the moming, at noon and at 3:00 each afternoon. The results of this pazking count is attached to these revisions. This parking lot analysis shows that even during the peak school traffic, during the morning drop off time of 8:30 A.M., the adjacent parking lots have sufficient available parking. Bixby School, by design of the "before and after" school programs, has been able to spread out the frequency of the necessary vehicular trips each day. This service allows working parents to drop off as early as 7:OOA.M. and pick up as late as 5:45P.M. By staggering the drop off and pick up times the peak traffic flow is mitigated. In the elementary grades, 68 students have befare and after school day caze and 64 students are there just during school hours between 8:30 and 3:00. In the pre-school program 31 children have full day care and 7 are part time. School demographics demonstrate that vehicular trips are minimized by the make up of the staff and student body. Currently, 6 teachers live within wallcing distance. One administrator, that now lives in the aparhnent to be razed, will live within one block of the school. A second school ~;ne;~aa itarn aY. l G f a~;~ S~b Bixby School bRC Written Statement May 6, 2002 Page 3 administrator lives within walking distance of the school. Four of the current teachers have 6 children attending Bixby and this provides for car pooling by these families. Within the overall student population, 29 families have 2 children each at school. These 29 families drop off and pick up their 2 children at the same time and therefore reduce the number of trips per day by 29 both in the morning and night. One Bixby family has three children attending elementary school and pre-school. Seventeen of the preschool children have oldcr siblings attending elementary school. In conclusion, out of the entire Bixby population, 61 children come from 30 families, thus greatly reducing the number of trips per day by caz pooling within these families. This number of multi-student families is not unusual for Bixby. Typically all of the children from the same family will attend Bixby. The staff at Bixby includes 27 employees of which there are 21 full time equivalent. The maximum number of staff working at any time is also 27. Between 18 and 20 of these staff members drive a car to work and park in the shared pazking lot immediately north of the school. The number of staff inembers in the building varies throughout the day. For example, three part- time pre-school teachers work after 3:00 P.M. with the "after school care" program. Bixby's janitor, who works primarily after school, is also included in the number of full time staff as well as the dishwasher that works in the kitchen works after lunch has been served at 1130 A.M. Traffic flow, and therefore parking demand, is greatest during periods of morning student drop off and afternoon pick up. These peak times extend from 8:00 to 8:30 A.M. and from 3:00 to 3:30 P.1VT. Adjacent offices have their peak parking time at the hours of 10:00, 11:00 and 12:00 A.M. using the Urban Land Institute publication Shared Parking (1983). The peak parking period for Bixby is in the morning at 8:30 A.M. and at this time the overall pazking lots of South Creek Village were 71 % empty per the parking lot study conducted during the first week of April. (Attached) Plan Documents The Site Plan has been revised to include the area calculations for the existing conditions, the phase one remodel and for the phase lwo addition. The conshuction schedule predicts a start of phase one by June of 2003 with the phase two addition to start within three years of the completion of phase one. Site Design The wooden play structures have been added to the Site Plan and are drawn in scale as to their respective locations. Utilities ~~;:!"li(i~ ii3iii'i~_ ~C t~C~''r,` ~ _, Bixby School DRC Written Statement May 6, 2002 Page 4 The detail for the existing water and sewer linas has been added to the Utility Connection Plan. Based upon the Owner's information, the school building sewer connects to the main to the manhole north and east of the building. The 12" water main is located to the far west of the school building approximately 82 feet from the west wall of the existing school. There is an additiona120 foot wide easement approximately 23 feet west of the school and to Yhe best of our knowledge there are no City utilities in this easement. We have researched all of the documents available through the GIS system and have not found any City services in this easement. We believe this easement may have a underground electric service due to the locations of existing transformers. We are currently awaiting a response from Excel Energy regazding the location of the underground electric line. We have determined that none of the play structures are built over the water main or sewer main easements that exist on the Bixby property. Area Characteristics and Zoning History: Site Review Amepdment The building square footage has been confirmed and this information was sent to Nan Johnson on March 22, 2002. The previous submittal should be revised to show we are demolishing the 1,936 square foot pre-school and the 931 squue foot second floor residential unit and then we plan to replace them with a new 3,160 square foot addition in phase one. The area to be added in phase two remains as noted previously at 1,400 square feet. (We had ca[culated an area of 1,152 sq. ft. for the apartment in the original application). Building and Housing Codes Comment acknowledged. We have discussed the building code requirements with Steve Brown. Land Use Bixby School acknowledges that the original approval and subsaquent approvals state that the school is approved for a maximum student population of 200 students. Park9ng When the South Creek Village was originally approved in 1977, the PUD documents prepared by McStain Enterprises provided the following "... Six spaces will be provided on site (School Site) for the exclusive use of school personnel. In addition, the adjacent parking lot will be available for the mutual use of the school and the commercial facility. A two car guage may be constructed for the extensive use of school personnel." The original school design included 7,500 square feet of school building use, two additional apartments of up to 3,000 squaze feet, and an allowable enrolment of 200 students. Although the school has subsequently obtained approval for additional squaze footage, the enrolment has never reached the limit of 200 students. ;~:e ,e'; itsin ! __( ~ Puc; #~ Bixby School DRC Written Statement May 6, 2002 Page 5 In 1989 the school went through both an Amendment to the original PUD and a Use Review for the expansion to 15,879 square feet. When this expansion was approved, there was no additional parking provided and City Staff described the approval as a"100% parking reduction". This terminology was developed by the Staff in 1989 and not by the applicant. Bixby School has always used the pazking lots to the north and west of the school entrance. These two lots have always been shared by the adjacent commercial buildings as well. In 1989 the owners of the commercial building(s) sued Bixby School in order to force tha school to pay for iYs portion of the parking lot maintenance, not because they disagreed about the number of parking spaces that Bixby occupied. Bixby won this case at the Colorado Supreme Court and did not have to pay. However, in the interest of being neighborly, they have made, what they believe to be fair, payments for their shaze of the maintenance expenses. Bixby has not entered into a shared parking agreement with the owners of the adjacent commercial buildings and will not likely pursue an agreement in the fizture. To the best of our knowledge and rasearch, the original PUD did not document the actual parking that was reserved for the school use other than the quote addressed above. There are two letters in the "central file" from McStain, written in April 1979, that address the total parking provided and required by the commercial development and the apamnents. These letters illustrated an overall commercial parking demand of 265 spaces and stated that there were 247 spaces available (not counting the gas station site). This "parking demand" letter does not include the school, or specific parking related to the school use. The apartments, above the commercial buildings, were never built. In February 1995, Alice Rouyer, City of Boulder Planning Staff, wrote a letter to a Mr. Thomas W. Tyrrell regarding a parking reduction for 4710 Table Mesa Drive. Included with this letter is a parking summary for the South Creek Village where she documented 36 spaces were required for Bixby School using a building square footage of 10,775 square feet. She also noted that the 1989 approval for Bixby therefore allowed a parking reduction of 6% for the entire PUD since there were no additional spaces added. In 1989 the approved squaze footage was actually 15,879 square feet, not 10,775 square feet. Utilities There is a 20 foot wide easement approximately 23 feet west of the school and to the best of our knowledge there are no City utilities in this easement. We have researched all oFthe documents available through the GIS system and have not found any City services in this easement. We believe this easement may have a underground electric service due to the locations of existing transformers. We are currently awaiting a response from Excel Energy regazding the location of the underground electric line. We have determined that none of the play structures are built over r~r!endaltem~ C~~P~9~~ S3 Bixby School DRC Written Statement May 6, 2002 Page 6 the water main or sewer main easements that exist on the Bixby property. Zoning Comment acknowledged. Additional Items From the Applicant The original Shadow Diagratn has not been revised due to staff's request for revisions of the original applicarion dated Mazch 4, 2002 and therefore we have not resubmitted this drawing. Assessed value of the existing school improvements is $1,150,000.00 and we have estimated the hard cost of the improvements for materials and labor to be $275,000.00. F,~Sl~u~iufii;`---~C=."f~;,"' ~-.. S:3o AM Noon 3:0o PM Qate Lot Ttl # empty 'Yo emp •k empty % Mon Apr 1 A 111 78 70°~ 31 2°k 44 4 96 B 32 21 86°,6 10 3196 13 41 °k C 34 24 7f% 20 5996 14 R196 D 8 8 10096 8 10p96 8 100qo ~ 73 51 76% 37 51 % 45 62°~ TOTAL 268 182 7196 706 41% 124 4896 Tue Ap'P 2 A 55 5096 30 2796 39 35% B 9 2896 iS 479'0 11 34% C 24 719'0 /8 5396 17 50°,6 p 7 88% 8 10096 B 75°k E 53 73% 23 329b 36 52°k TOTAL 258 148 6796 84 36'Yo 111 43% Wed Apr A 58 5296 48 43% 40 38% $- 12 38°6 11 349b 11 34°~4 C 24 7196 12 355fi 14 4146 D 7 88% 8 100"k 8 100'Yo E 53 73% 3S 48^,6 42 58% TOTAL 2b8 164 60°/. 174 44°,6 115 45~.6 Thu Apr 4 A 62 569~ 35 32% 55 5D% B. 15 47% 10 3196 11 ' 34°k C 25 74% 15 44% 18 47% p 7 8896 8 100^,6 6 75% ~ 59 8146 28 38% 42 58~k TOTAL 258 188 65% 96 97% 130 b0% Fri Apr 5 A 60 54% 37 339b 38 34% B 11 3490 14 44% 18 58°k C 21 62% 18 539'0 21 82% p 7 88°b 8 100% 6 75% ~. 59 81°k 33 4596 43 73% TOTAL 2S8 188 61% 1i0 4~% 138 83% !'~~$~:~ii ~t~~ P1-~_ rQ~4 R ~ a-05-202 3:A6PM FROM BELZ/SML WRLO VENI ~e~ bnl ibii ~ • ;•V~~M'J~ .r4a' .~5. . ' ' .Jp'.i. ' ,l . F4'~e';,.:' • + ' .. . ~ ~ ~ ' ~,'~ ~ ' . `.!' ~ . . ~. '~~.,,;~, . , . A ~.1~i . ~~ ~..1 ~ . . ~ ~ ••` ~~~~ t'i ` ~ . ~ . . . Y~ ~[j ~~ry~ r' 1;`~. ~K •~~ ~. , ~ . ~ . . ' /~' ~Y:~~il"r)Y~~a~'~~ ~ ~ ' ~i. ~ ~~~f'~~3/'," : , ~ ~w.` . . ; ~P. :` z. ' ~'qi..•`; ;; . .,, .. ' • . . ' . y ~y~'r,fi~sti'r:'.. 'y.; \ ` V.t'.!.~/~~.`~tiFy~':.1~~\ i ~ .. .. . ' '\` \ . . ~ ${,~,~~~ii" ~p~ ~~ / ( ~"/'. . „"Si~~:+.a~ <i ::~^:T„~a: ~Y, . . . \ ; . . . ~ti:- ~o ~ u~;~a ; .,..., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ jf~ '~~~1~~ y'~,I'•~~~n~,..~' rt • •.':•r ~ ~ _ ~ . . ', ~~ll~ /1 Yr'. ~x,1~yN. ~ :a" f '. \ ~ ~ . "!i L•. ~ ~(f~~~`Jy I. C """"' i ~,~~:f%~; .7y~i~/r•C~. f •~ ~: ^.Y..y, i. ' I ~ ~ ~~~.J7.'~1 fa 1z~~ ~ + 1 ~ yy ~ ~ ~ ~ ~R ~ iS~~Y1) ~ fV~fk.~tl4j gft'~iV/. F ; ~'ry~ '\~/\ •~ ..4 \~ ~ .. 4 ,• IS.uf~,{.M~y M~ ~1j1j, ~, ~` '~" i P/\~l] - •n,~ '~ ~•f+Yi" ~i~Ai.~il y-v(.:(.9. ; 4 ~, , \J ~ . ~'."(J' f',k(,.:~ a~U~~ ~~ ~ ~. _ . . ~ "~aMY' v ~~~ . . ~ `~ ~ ~ , ''yA:.~'~i~i,'~41~`~,j~~i~~ip~;;~".~~i" ~y'~'M1:I~ • ` , ' .` ' ' . .. f,'~"i~"'~~'i7,... Y.•~el,:i'yF~:••y~~~ .:. , . "'` .IQ~SQO' , e. ,i;: , . .''+' t!'? ,:1.'. ~ '. ~., y ~ ' ' ;!:r., x.: y{r.T' • j e~ ~: .,,k •, ru: ' .. ~ L.._~ j~. ~ ,t y~~A ~4 ,~f? k~;~ ~.x ~ _ • ~I .w t ] . ~ . , ~ ~ ~ ,,,,_Y ~' '4 ,f t~ hYYF~~~~+ ~ S r~~. 7 (~{Y!~~'( T . . 1 S "7i~~'• t ( ~t~'`'f~4~' '~(fn~~j',~ ~1~iY •. I ~ Y ~ ~~i~wl M• 1 ~^'{ ~ ? , ~ ~ ..... ' ~ s ~i~ ~~4 ti ~~~' ` , . ~ . • ..J . ' ~~ 14 ~~ . ~E . ^ r 1 • s ''.` \ •ij .E . ~ l ( ryr ia t7r r rY' '~! y~ 't ~ Jf ' ~ ~ , '•T ~ . r . ~ a ,rir~~ri, il W~y'~G Y ~NO,( ~ y ~ ~ ' ~~~,~ yr;.+i .~ ~m .~; i C~i ~y ` ~ " , ~ ` 7'*'~~n ~f! r !R'7 }~'iMi~ " ~ fi~~Y~M'j y~~y,A" r . . . , .. t „~S ~v` ~~i ~~~Yifi~(• ld~+~nv~ ~1~(f~~~J~~7 k1J' r~f~~~^j'~6t. ~~ . . a ~ e 3 ..is ~ .'. ,,{ .~~f .~ ~, s=A, ~ Y ~ b~ it4 ~ frt :.i~ : yys~Y'it ~ 1'. l~` w,•V ~`!!~ ~ ~~'J E ~ 1#~a~ , . ' , . , ~S6 ~~I jir~~~nWj ~ x ; Y;.: u~ ~~~ ~'`,`N ~ ~ ~ q ~ ~ H.~„ / 'i .~... 1 : ~~. . , ~ ~, ,i.: ; ,v^ 3i k`r ~ ~ n Fc r' H s , x ;i,•;. , ~ ` ` '~9 i~' " ~;'i' ~r t~ ~I »»+~,~aY,{.+...y~ga.- fl•• , + ,. ,'~ ,~ ~~ , ~ '! 'S f,l , x..a, ~, .~. ~ t - ~', .P;~,,.,~. ~ r~,i ~ ,r, , ~ } ^,W : . ~ ,,, ~ ~y, r m i,,,;"• ' x~S° b~ ~ '" ~ , . i ~~i'" l ~e ~ ' .~1~;kh~ N~n:~:•'~4 ;r.~~ i ~ . { ( , . . i1 ', f~. ~r,~f~ t~, ~. r' i ' , . . ~ ` F ', ``~,~~ ~ ' ~~ ' '/: .. '•x , i ~ ~ . a ~t • J.. : ~~~ ~1 ~ i , ~d ,~ ~ R~ ^i/ r . l ' I ~I ` , • ....~-...~ r ~ ,'c ~+ec!,-. . .' •'( T1 0.~ ' j ~~ ~ ~ ;~,+, ~t ?, ,5 ~, ;. . '}' i y ~ +' '~ ' ~~' . `,A , I ~ 11~~•{~ 1 I .~~ ~~11, ! I I~ ~ ~ ) y r 1; .~ ti ~ '5 , . q j ~ 7~ y4 ~ ~ y~~ ~~ 3 S~ . ~ i , . ~ ' ~ '• ~ f 1 ~ i ' ~ +~. 'AI.. ~ i ~ 4 ~ ( .~ . ' . . 1~ ,~~~5 ti~ Pi• ~ ~~ ~ !-~ ~ii~ il. ~'{• ,1 I~ iif~~ ~t~i~.~ . ~ .~ ~l{ ~ .. . ^ , ~ . ~ i ' . % % 7 $ `/ ~ , ~ ,. ~ .i ~~ ~ 1'~ ° y 1 11 ~ t i ~ . ~ 1. ~ , y ' I , I ,, ' ' '. a ~ ' i t e, Y~t J~ .~. hh~ , ~ ' ~' .•.r,., ' I i' ii n i ~h b Y` ~~t3,~{ ~~' ~ „ , j,~ ~ ~.' ~~ 4 i i' ~ ~y . 1i ~ I~ ~ N~, ~~'~~ ~F '~R'' ~' +~ ,l ~'~~ ~ , @j n , ~ , . t~~~ ~.,, ' 1~ ~ ~ YV~i ` ~, . ' ~~ ' ~ j Y ~ : ' , ~S \h. ~ !~~ ~JS ~ ~ L '~ • i 777 i I , ~ ~ ' ~ ~ 1 I `pd j1i! 'v . ~ , p~ ~ n, r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 4 1~ ( ~I V~~'~ ~4.I~~~u ~ i •' _ ~ ~ ~ F/' 1 q i~}~ i ~ ~y~ +~tl'~ltK '~ 1 ~ ~ , V~~ ~ ' ~-~ J ~~I ~ ~~ ~ S t ~ ~~ ~ i 7., ~rsi. u k!'~' '.~~/~ ~ .~ ` -{~.~ ' J~. , ~ + 1 ~ a :;;~7' v ~~ti `',.M;•r.w4, '.r Kf.LJId'~ 'j.f'.,: 1Q) j F',~ ~ wk"",.,` ~~ ~ ~. ~p' ~~ ;'. :s "q• ~,.rv/ I '+ °~~/ .~''~ ~'iit. ;'.,' t: ...., n'~~\l~^I~~I.i~~ ' Y'i .~..... ~~~• I ~I.. . i 1 ( • ~ ~ I ~~ ~Y ~r 7A 6 ti yp, 1 ~ ' I ~ ~ I 'I ~ ~,~1~,^L t., . . ~ ~ \ ( . . ~ • :.~'~7'ft;~~y~r.~ ~t~j`. ~. ~ _ ~ . ' ' ~ .~r.w ~ ~~_~.~ \.~« ~ ~ . ~~~;r;'~, yfi4. ~_-_~~:_ -. _.... .~ ~ , c* .~'< t N;.;~g~~'`:,: _= -~ i, ~_.. . ,.... _ . . .., ~._ . __._ ',`,'''~Z~,~'r ,; ' :..-...,....__..._. .. ___.~___.__. ~,..:'-i:: v ~y+; ^+~i?I:+:n" 1~ . _...~~.~ , _ , ' • ' ~I \:1y.lyfA • . ~ . ~..~. 1 W. !i ~i~'!n~K.~ ~• .. ., ...i . . •r~ .... . ~ . y ,~ ... ~:3({.~:: n r - . .~....~.,........-._,,...,.,... . .. . . . ,s.~ ,,,~y,.~,: . . ... . . . . ... ..... .M. . ..... . ..~ ~.. rl~S ~• i'' ., ~Y~~: VL~. Y,. ~ '~~'~r ..;..ciF;',t :",'iil:l.'i~~;~~. . ~ fr~~.~~.t. ,~ _~_~'~,(,~it~" ~o ;e'?':~:.'~`i ;'~" ° , . u~a~iL~~ fi G ~;.<. , . . _.. .. , .. .. .. , ,...,-«-~< <..... ., Datc: Pzoject: Regarding; To: Copy to: From: Discussion: March 22, 2002 Rixby School Building Square Foutage Nan Johnson, Case Manager, City of boulder, Planning Uepartmcnt Pat $aker, gixby Schaol Cheri Belz, Bixhy Board Presicient Phil McF.voy, Architect and Plaaner RAILTDN•McEVO~ A R C H i i ~~. r T S A 0 U L U E F At the request of Nan Johnson, we are providing tlie fullowing summary of building square footage which was verified using the historic drawings &om thc original construction of the school in 1978 and from drawings we prepared for two additions built in 1989 and 1994. Our current proposa! for demolitians and thc two phased additions are thr~i addeci for the iiltimate proposod total building azea as noted below: Suilding Area Summary Description uCBuilding Area and Year Area in Squazc Feei Basement Level, School Use, 1989 4,415 Main Level, School, 1989 6,264 Sccond Ploor Apartmenis, Residcntial, 19R9 2,051 Tatal Ruildingl~rea in 1989 12,73U Bascment Level Additioa, School Use, 1989 1,538 Main Level Addition, 5chool Use, 1994 1,472 Tntai Building Area in March 2002 15,74U Proposcd Demo., North Apartment, 2nd Floor <931> Proposed Demo., Pre-School, Main L.evel <1,93G> Proposed Pre-School Addition, Main Lcvel 3,160 P~oposed T~tal Rnilding Area in 2002 16,o33 Future Addition Requested in 20U2 1,400 Proposed Future Total Square Footage 17,433 ; ~ H~xuaur,¢5 Pf i'lIIN41111N • CUNPWNI! 0.`SIGN n /~ %lp!.'~I;uC~liuliis~_G ~'it~;i~T__ in~no~xuis~.ewaorcuemu: _--f7r,>.; m:~ aaaa•rwc 5~a esa~ Blxly Sahaal ~ • . 4760 Toble Me9a Drlve ~ • B~~~~ BouICe1. Colorsdo 8a303 Phono:303/494.7508 ~ Schooi Fa,~; 303/494,7519 June 24, 20Q2 APARTMENTS 40CATED AT 47b0 TAB4E MESA DR. "fhere are currently 2 apariments at Bixby School. They are occupied now, and hwe atways been occupied by the school's co-founders, Harlan Bartrom and Patricia Baker. Mr. Bartram's family were the original owners of the property and building. They believed thaY the family and school interes'ts would best be served if Bariram and Baker lived on site. The units are restrieted in usage because access is through ihe schoo~ itself. Occupants must be intimately connected to the school, must undergo rigorous background checks, nnd must not allow visitors during school hours. We have tried to preserve the apartments in prior repairs to the north end of the build(ng. We have a'I'tempted to repair Yhe sinking floor on five differe~t oeeosions, even driving helical piers into the ground to support the floor. We have been unable to adequately compe~sate for the rubble under that portion of the building. The ¢rttire north end of the building, including orte apartment, must be removed. We hnve made th¢ decision To rebuild wiihout the north epartment for the following re~sorpS: The finencial resources of th¢ school are Ilmited; our primqry purpose is education and child wre and we must use the resources w¢ hnve to fulfill that purpose. We need additianal space for aur kitthen faeilities, arid we desperately need off~ce space. Both ihose needs support our function as a schoal and chi Id care center. The apartments have such strict rPStrictions that it seems unlikely we would be nble to continue occupancy of both and still meet those restrictions. The south unit will remain as is and will continue to be occupied by Harlan BaPtMm. In anticipation of the renovation of Bixby School, Patricia Bakar has purchased a home in Martin Acres; iY is a 3 minute walk f~om the sthaol. Pat Baker Director ,, r~~ ~ GC Pr~~` sE? BIaEy 8 Aseoclntes ~,~;,.;IJw, Ili:illl} i y: 6 l5L P6P £0~ "100H~S .18X I8 WOti~ WdZZ' Z l ZO~Z-DZ-9 Btxpy 6eheel ~ • ~ • 6760 Tn61e M¢sa Drlvn • • B ~~~~ Boulder. Coloratlo BO3a3 . Phone:3tl3/n96.7508 , ~~~OO' FuM:303/d96.7519 June 24, 2002 BIXBY SCHOOL ENROLLMENT AND BUILDING USAGE The current enrollment for fnll of 2002 for Bixby School is 178 students in preschool through 5th grnde. Of those studercts, 38 are enrolled far preschool/childcare and the remaining 140 are in elementary. Approximately 60-70°k of the elemerrtary school students alsa use before and/or after school child care on a regular basis. Our enroliment has fluctuated somewhaY since we moved to this buildi~ in 197B, bui has typiwlly been between 175 and 185 total studerrFS. We use the building only for school ond child core. Our insurance hes always covered those uses, but has been limited to that. We do not plun to incrense or chcnge the use of the building. The playing field at the west side of our property is ovnilahle to South Creek Condominium owners to use after school hours wh~ Bixby is not using the property. There is a gate on the southwest corher to nllow access. ~~~~~~~ Pnt Baker Director Blxly & is~0elales 615L 46V E0E 100H~S ,18XI8 WOa~ /,c;c~ i~;; lieiti;! ~ (r;;~ ;' S`1_ WdEZ°Zl ZOaZ-PZ-9 F~I F W U F Q a~ A~ILiON pcEVOY ~ACRIIE1If AOtIIbEH i~q~a ru~~~ -_ L~JT ~, ~~UTH GREE~: '~ILLAC~E PROJEGT SUMMARY ~ `JyHOMSIOx ~H LREEK vILLA!~E LOf {WEA 33k AL(tF5 [9i¢~5 Sf-) ~ ZOMH3 MY-O-PU~. AQP_4yMMRY _._._..." _ _'.__. _ __ __ _. 2LIL~INS ~Opi!-R~NT . . -I SSY i5 8 W5F BB 94195F 10.3 PAftKINi. GRfVCS ! QlT 9NLOIN55 SF -I,q B 30 _4 B.] 1930 SF B I GFFN SP~E H2?65 $~ G50 B DIB S E30 l9lOB SF 8 l I iOiAL ARFh ' _ 9'k3S SF ~~O 91635 SF . 1000 9'tb33 Sf . 1000 i W~ ,_- t - ------ -~ ~1 ~.~,.,~ .~~e„ ~„~.E.,~ ~ N 89°3820 E 355.00 - `~YNCE'~ ~--!~\ _ _ _ ...... . 1 0 ~i'cF',nc¢4°'F.rin x°'~-:--a- -~x-~1 _' _ ~ I __-_ ~_- + ~_I_.r _ -t+-y--r-~-n-.~ I EW ~ x ~ ~~ % ~ ~ I E{~ ~ i I ~. ~~ I ~ i ~ ~~~ .''i~~ _i . _ ~.. ~ Ew - --- ~ ~ -1' E4V . i I- I I ~ ~ ~ ~ I _ \ -~- , - + ~ I W I ~~~ I I I f I I Iw' .~ h ~Li . . ___ _" .. _ . _.. . _ ~ 2N'-o" ~ _ - I I ' ~ .3~.0o i i ~ ` I w ~s r~w~ i n n~u ~J-4' ~r r~r .r n~. ~~ F~~m ~r~K~ssl. ~ zay~ ~~uvlun $ 89 3H'20'W ~d ~ ~' ~6EUD i i I i . EW EX197'6_WO {~AY 6TRUGY~IRE ~f - GntE !IW jiEP1.WD.P-nY-Z1R1}GM1~R£ ~-~c-ac+~EFIGE Sg SPND gDX }REh - . BR ~{~ RPCK , , ~ dFF BR ~. a ~~ .._ _ ~ ~. `V' ` {~ ~ V ~n . `. ~' ' ~w In:q,.~~-f .~ - '~ ~ , t -7 / ~ W ) i ~ ~.E, --- - - -- -- ---- , q ~ ~E ...~E~ - r,WezEa r,o~lc. : - F ~/^+-K Yo pnRKnA6 ~ ~ ,~r BIXSY SGHOOL REM017EL ~ i ~160 TABLE MESA D(~IVE ~ ~ ~ /M..,,'01= " BOULDE(2, GOLORADO ~ ~ - - ---~ -- -._ I\ ~~ :o ~ SGPLE~_I'-3Q gl(EFEYf6W ''~4~02 v ~Q~ ° : SITE (~LA1~I LrtYREYK~bNSSialoa i rmrs: m~s v~me~a> nar , ia.qe ~~~e. o~ r.ame o~ay sen~ca~.es ~~ r ~ 3 N \`f ; ~'° I~ 1 Fiw o ,• • .. y 355.OO r ~ ° . I I I ' I _ unJ out Wi1L~ngs vM1xM1 da nof eOCeir to be IvunEeE, aM are wt iM1ovn Ferron. qll of LFe1! 64ilEingy anE s4uttur¢5 art riMin . tM1e boondz o( [~is prpOartY but sork tie ritnin [Xe 20 loot ~n~ ~er e.~ ~~e :: ma;wx.a. ~ IMPPOVEMENTC LOCGlIpN CEflTIFIC4TE I ne~eEy cnlily Inol M~f ImO~wbnenl lacollm entrli~ale woz pepNeE Im ~SL COIU/atlo iitlP - iHGi IL IS HOT ~ LAI10 $URVEY P~6t OF LN IMCROVEMENi Sllfl'/ET CIET anE ~~p1 II I5 nM fa Oe rel~eE uom ~M 1ne ~i'chllslmM e~ 1[nc~, W~IUfnq~ a~FM lulue ImO~wlmen~ IinBS. " - I tmine cv~ily Ilul Ine imprwemeny an Ine ~we Eesui~etl v~«el an INe Jalq ppril 10, 19N9 mcepl ullllll C« I~ma~be ui~e(Y ni1pN fM1e LaiEM<f of IM pMCe{lecpl es a~Wn~ W01 I~~re O o..~oaCAmmli upon I~e EocnOeO P~~>m bY M^hare nb mM a%VOmin9 wvnbn. e¢ep~ at bU~m ~ .jbLr OM ~1 f~.IMre M1 m GPPAflENT evihriCe w fi0n o1maM e fe ml- w.tin9 b Gu~Elninq cry pm~ ~'i r e p R'Y,.nmapr m nweu ,e ~ /j ,/ NOiE IDix propeRy l~es m Zone C according to [.M U.S CePor[ment o~ ~ ~ _ M1~ Nouz~n9 anE UrUan OereloN^¢nt fload Insurance Itatn 14~P. ~I I CG No. 090021 0~95 B) iRLES~ Elv1Y z av ~~ lo. ~ses ~Eya~'oESBbionorv: mt z, sauni cF~cK MELV/N SURI~E~Y/N~'i vu~%Gf cne crty or eamee., cowry no a . Smte ar coloraao ~ - P.O 60X P//P ~jg4J 90pLOEF, COLONA00 ieq_~oes eoaoc F.C. 2164 ; L~?T ~, ~~UTH GRE~l~ VILLAGE E~'Fo "4'.EL- ~SNf#D .. ~ , .. 9 ~ ~~ ~ ~ , - .._ __ ~ ~^ ~ . ~ ~ ~ -- ~ - ~ ~~ = / ~ ._ ---,--- ~ , : . ~ .. '?; ' ~; ~ 61XBY SGHOOL fi2EMOT7EL 4~60 TABLE MESA DRIVE ` BOULDER, GOLORADO ~I SGPLE~I'=30' 81TERfYIEW j~4'~02 y GttY (2E4~StONS 5~6~02 f N016 IM1is property Faz a ta~v. nnmp!r of ham¢ O~ay z[rvc[ures anE mrt bu51~in9y Micfi do not appea~ [0 08 Fovnde0. antl a no[ sM1aw 0erron. All v! LM1ese M1viltlingS antl 5[mtNres dre wi[~in tne m~~e; or o+;s nmoerty wt :mme i ie wiom~ me zn voe ~en;ey e +.~,.~~~ as mei~aem. - i41CF0VEMENT LOCSTIdN CEftTIFICpTE i n< eq =e,rip mm m.s imvrnmrtn~ ~ocmim ce:ln<me .m peo^~ea Iv Ist totoratlo TiUe ~ ~(XLT ~ IS NpT 0-lpNO SVflVEY PLAT Ofl G iMfqWEMENi SIIP'~EY VLGi on0 I~a11115 iml ~o Ee reM1eE upm Iv inp es'nbl~9mm~ p~ ImCV,M~dlnq, ulhv lWUe Imp~er~M Mni. I Iminn a.llly IM1a~ ine bnpwnmenrs on t~e vbaa Eouieee o cel on Inn emq por:l 10, 1?A9 .~w~ • .~m« in~ eowene. ae ma w•=.~. •.~ror a ma..~. rnm in ~o p,Mxea~,nmem.~~oa~~in. e~au~eea w~~... W m.aa..m.•n e~ or,Y eaqrt~a a~~+•....~mi =aYava - ,~a!'u,°we ificr,Jive n m arvnAeml enanc. v eiQ. o~ o r~a.+m.,~r v.ms a e~.eemnn ey oen -, T:ao~e;.'v~ckiS..aor m ~w.a - . ~~otF. rnvs Yroperry t~ez tn zone t acmta;ng co tne uS. oepartment or ~ /M Ilnusing and IlrAan DeveloGmPnt ilw~ Insuranre Vate ftiio. ((L ( GV Mo 0.90pt1 OIflS B) 9FLE5 fl~ EIVIY ~ ' Qor(1-10. 1989 '`S~evei -ocszAirnox. im z, ~ouni ~xtes MELV/N SURVEY/NG nunr,E; ~~~ ane c~ry or eo~mz., coo~ry r„ Ilouldeq <[a4C o! (plorado. ' P.O 60X P//P RAa~ eoumep, cocoenoo - F.C. 2164 SfO.IOJS 60J06 AT11C ATIIC AiTG I IINNG flY MT BEOHA = .,TIC B^6RY qT 1149lG NM I I~T11C nmc I aew ro aiow ~ ~mc EXISTING SEGOND FLOOR PLAN I/16„_ ~ ~_p~, C1D fl~IliON YtEYOY ~I 0 U~I~O E 1~ ~-~ ~ W ~ ~ ~ Q n~ c~ rWo O ~ o O du vmw ~' ~dp m~~• ~ d~- i ~ ~~- i -~r.<~s~ Fnrsrr~Fj,k_v_ux5 ~~ a.~ R-I ~ GitY ~ µ REJISiaN I ~~ v~~ww"~u~~.~ .. rn r~~a'~e~°`•uw ~ F=: L ~~ ~ ~> ;' ~ ~ EXISTING BASEMENT FLOOR PLAN EXISTIN6 PIr25T FLOOR PLAN I/16~~=~~_Q„ - -- - -I/16~~_~~_~,~ . ~ NeW R~DVE HT 10 IAnTGLl EXISTG RIDC+E ~~~ - . W/ Id 52s'-Po'~oR "I - (SOU'i~!) SIDE aF 6 EX151'G R~DGE I ~//~ ~ I._ _Cxis'r'v RIO6E / _ ~ ;~~ I~i' _ --i~ll Lll~l~llllll~ n~rin LLGYni~~n,: i~~~; ~i_o,i FXI~l~ 21WE~ -I_ ~ \\ ~- - I ~IeW e~NS1, Fu~.sE 2 -'~ WE~T ELEVr~71oi-L ~~ , i o ~ NeW Ri~E Fcr. To ~ ~ MATG7 E%~ZT'C~ RIIJGE ~P57 ELE~/rtTlol~ ~ - i~~,~. p, p~~ _ a~ ~ R~It10N YcEVOY AILAIIFLIS °~ eaeiu[e ~ ~ m .u ~ ~~ ~ ,I c; ~ LL~ c5 Ill ~ ` ~~~ E_.~ ~~d ~ ~ W O ~ ~ O Orow ~~~ c[] O c~ x~~r~ ~ d- ~xi~roN~ ~Yo r~~ H~ i ~rri No7~ : ~l a~ 8~~1~0~ YE ~YO~ ~ouioee ~~.~ a, :~^ ~~ w> 0 ~o~ ~ ~~o o~o 0 w ~ ~ ~ Q X~m m~ __ o ~-- s~c~~p~~¢ 3/~q/nOry~ aG'-' i^cs -- ~c~ ~TEP UT( '~'(y6 rw RENS~cy / \~ "~°°"^n.~~ a ~. ~~ ~ ~ ~ U~ ~ ~ :~ e., -~- PRCP05ED ROOF PLAN ~ I/8"= i'-o" NoRrH I I I ~ FU~~ I I ADV11l~~ ~ Q400SF) ~ --- '__'__ __'t 1 ~16 r~COf/~ ~ ~ ~ ~e ~ i exl~rMV _ - ~ ~~ ' ~ ExrE!_iCp,% WALL~ \ i UIbB~ES ~ ~ ~ ~ ~( ' Of'FIC.F. s~•. R R ~' $ I ~ ~ s ou UP :I ~ ..__.,.~ r~ ~~~oo~ .i KirGNE~ LIilE oF 8%IyI~G 6~DO F~t7RUAT To ~ REb~YeD Musi~ ~P1~fi IaP r,~ CiGIEFIGE '--' - IZEAD'G ~y~ ~ ~ __ yuqEoF EXisY~ 1`_ ~ E1,ob F~t7FwT, ~b BE REhbYED DFKi~ 1b EO~E pu as~ t "~Oi0.(~ ZF @ A~Tlor~ = 31fpD hF 11ore: P~n~J ~z coN~z?iun~ oN~Y tF IS NoT pnla4 DESI~~y. PaRnc~~ F~20POSED FIRST FLCOR PLAN - ~ i/8"= i'-O" Flexrrl a~ A~Ili01 YcEYOY IItIIfFLIt IOOLOEI ao5"'.0 .... e ~ ~ O ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O W J O ~ ~ vmw ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ~ L~ ~ - - o~ ~.4 3~a~ ~acR-e~" ns rorv ~~ ~ LrtY 5/% w 0.EV~5i ~I a~,..~ °."~"" ... ~.. ! ~~ Ra((tOH RcEYOY IIt911fGi3 l9UtAEP I ewsr'~ vnwe ~ I I i ~ I f ___ ~_ ~ I ~ ~ ~~ ~_ aY `V~ ~- V ~ ~ ~ _ V p 4 $ " I ~.~ ^ . SEWEZ /AN~I -~ ~'~pf5 BIXBY SGHOOL REMODEL ~m~•~~~~ 4760 TABLE MESA DRIVE ` BOULDER, GOLORADO ewsr~~ - - ~SEW~ZLWE -- -"___ FbTE: U11~AiFli ZNntL _ ~~~Y WRU'IHE G oF ' SOLI6UER pE51tqJ ~ ~ I ' GO~K~STJ~IIDARLK. o SGl4E~1"=30 SITEFEYIEW ''/4I02 L11 iLITY (.ol~U.lEG7lot~i ~I,AF~ GIiY RENSIOµs 5~6/01 ~ ~ nore: Th;s p.ope~ry nas a ~a.g~ oumae. or r.a=re v~•> se..mec~es "' antl on[ puildings vM1icM1 tlv no[ app^ar ta be 1ounEeE, entl dre no[ sM1wm M1preon. AII nf NPiP ~vi~Qin95 anE s[rvctures a~ wlNln [be Lroueds ot [M1is property but som= ~ie .itM1in !M1e 20e(oot ~t:~rzy ease..~t az ~~nfce[ce. IMVpOVEMFNi LOCdiION CEfli1FICGtE - . ! ~Pie6Y [E~fil~ !MI! Nvs MparmPnl b[n~IM [b1iM1[ale nas Pepped lo- )52 COlUfddO il[IP ' 2 lHp! li I$ NOT G L~1ND SURVET PLAL Ofl >N ~MPqOVEMENi SUP'/ET GLpT md I~a1 II Is nvl lo be ~tl2E ym !a Ne es'ahll•hnmt Ci fmtt,EuMing, O o1Mi lulae Imo~ovemenl linei " - u~l~n Gerli~y IM1aI 1~< imPOVemPnli o~ in< aewa eesamea omee~ On ~NS Ep1p~ M1O~iI IV ISN9 ~ nclpl u11Cly c me minely wY~~F Ine lo-Nwles o1 IM pv~cel, ~acaol af y~p+n. lnor 1~Fe are p ^ i11F'I?Ffinen~eu ~siM Ouaipe0 PNmum bym LnpavaemMb ^^ mm acrmma w mbn. ertev~ m M¢e- N ot~~ 0 0 Inai. mveog~ra GPpLPENT iOeMa elpn f Y eme ~ e~o9 w EmEemn9 mry pc.i ~. I:JYd.~GOref~„exceol o n41[d. ~ " SNWE: iFis Oroperty lies In Zane C acmrESng [o t~^ US. ~epartne~t v/ y No~zin~ antl Ur~an Oevetopmen[ FlaaE (nsurunce Rate MnO~ /(~ f cv tw_ osaoz) oies e) ~ R'tELVIN . up 1 )0. 199? ~~ecp~ oestwrnox- im t, soa-x caece ~ELVIN - SURVEY/NG ' vLLLpf.F.-~ tne f cy or RautEer, councy c' IMuldcr, cta[e o( Celorddn- ' eo Box e~ip 229e~ . BOU[OEN, LIXORIQO - ~at.ame eo3os F.C: 2f64 L~?~ ~, S~UTH ~R~~l~ ~fII~LAGE .R ~E_=_. ATTACHMENT G SOUTH CREEK PUD (SHOPPING VILLAGE) PARKING ANALYSIS AS OF JUNE 28, 2002 - PREPARED FOR LUR2002-00016 ADDRE5S USE SOUARE PARKING REOUIRED # FOOTAGE/ RATIO PER OF PARHING SEATS PUD SPACES 4700 Li uor Store 3,000 s.£ 4 s./1,000 s.f. 12 4710 Office 8,675 s.f. 4/1,000 35 4720 Office 6,225 s.f. 4/1,000 25 RestaurantRudi's* 94 total seats lsp:3seats 32 [67 indoors + 27 outdoors seats 4730 Office 14,150s.f. 4/1,000 57 4740 Retail 3,660 s.f. 4/1,000 15 Office 750 s.E 4/1,000 3 4742 Gas Station 1,178 s.f. 4/1,000 5 4750 Office 10,500 s.£ 4/1,000 42 4760 Bixby School** 13,294 s.E 4/1,000 54 Rasidential 1,000 s.E (one 1- Isp:ldu 1 BDR) 4770 Restaurant- 118 seats (indoors) lsp:3seats 40 McD's*' * TOTAL REQUIRED SPACES PER PUD: 321 spaces TOTAL ON-STTE SPACES PROVIDED: 273 spaces**** The Bixby School additions would result in a 15% total parking reduction for the entire South Creek Planned Unit Developmant. This is using the parking requirements described in the South Creek PUD 1977 approval. * Rudi's Restaurant is approved for 60 seats. ** Bixby School has 4 on-site parking spaces on the north side of the school, proposes 3 new on-site next these four spaces, and has two spaces for the residences in the carport area on the south side of the school property. A total of 13,294 square feet is used to calculate the square footage such that that is the proposed new total 17,433 s.f. less the 3,139 s.f. addition that was granted with no new spaces, and less 1,000 s.f. for the residential unit that is counted separately. *** McDo~ald's Restaur~nt is approved for ]04 seats (ADR95-122). **** Field verification by Nan Johnson, Case Manager 6/28/02. Includes the new total of 9 on-site spaces for the Bixby School property. ~ ~;~ ,., ,_.~~~~ :~.__~ ~_ r~,~;,- ;: 6'~ SOUTH CREEK PUD (SHOPPING VILLAGE) PARKING ANALYSIS AS OF JUNE 28, 2002 - PREPARED FOR LUR2002-00016 ADDRESS USE SOUARE PARHING REOUIRED # FOOTAGE/ RATIO PER OF PARKING SEATS MR-D ZONING 5PACES DISTRICT 4700 Li uor Store 3,000 s.f. 1:300 10 4710 Office 8,675 s.£ 1:300 29 4720 Office 6,225 s.£ 1:300 21 RestaurantRudi's* 67(indoors)+27 lsp3seats 23 (outdoors) seats if out >20% of in 5 than excess 1:3 4730 Office 14,150 s.f. 1:300 48 4740 RetaiVOffice 4,410 s.£ 1:300 15 4742 Gas Station 1,178 s.£ 1300 4 4750 Office 10,500 s.£ 1300 35 4760 Bixby School** 13,294 s.£ 1:300 45 Residential 1,000 s.f. (one 1- Isp:ldu 1 BDR) 4770 Restaurant- 118 seats (indoors) ]sp:3seats 40 McD's* ** TOTAL REQUIRED 5PACES PER MR-D ZONING DISTRICT: 276 spaces TOTAL ON-SITE SPACES PROVIDED: 273 spaces**** * Rudi's Restaurant is approved for 60 seats and has exceeded this as of 6/28/02 with 67 indoor seats and 27 outdoor seats for a total of 94 seats. ** Bixby School has 4 on-site parking spaces on the north side of the school, proposes 3 new on-site next these fouc spaces, and has two spaces for the Lesidences in the cazpod area on the south side of the school property. A rotal of 13,294 square feet is used to calculate the square footage such that it is the proposed new total 17,433 s.£ less the 3,139 s.f. addition that was granted with no new spaces, and less 1,000 s.f. For the residential unit that is counted separately. *'"'" McDonald's Restaurant is approved for ] 04 seats and has exceeded this as of 6/28/02 with ll 8 seats all indoors (ADR95-122). Three on-site spaces on the McDonald's lot were removed recently for the access of the new office building at 4790 Table Mesa. **** Field verification by Nan Johnson, Case Manager 6/28/02. Includes the new total of 9 on-site spaces foithe Bixby Schoolproperty. ,.; -, _,~, G G ~~~;;, G ~ _ 4-05-202 3:dBPM FROM BELZ/SML WRLD VENT 303 5A1 1011 ..---~' p~~~ ~; ~a ~-~ ~ s ~~~ k~ s~-~~, ~~:~~~,~, ~~~a~~ ~,-~ ~ 8:3o AM Noon 3:a'0 PM Date Lot Ttl # empty 96 empty °k empty % Mon Apr 1 A 111 IE 70°h 31 28°k 44 40% B 32 27 86°h 10 31% 13 41% C 34 24 71°~ 20 59% 14 41% D 8 8 100% 8 y0p% 8 100°10 E 73 51 70°h 37 5196 45 62~~ TOTAL 25B 182 71% 106 41% 124 48% Tue ApP 2 A 55 5096 30 27% 39 35% B 9 289b 15 47% 11 34% C 24 71% 18 5396 17 50°,6 D 7 8896 8 100% 6 75°k E 53 73°~ 23 32°h 38 52°h TOTAL 258 748 57% 94 36% 111 43% Wetl Apr 3 A 58 529'0 46 439'0 40 36% B 12 38°k 11 349'0 11 34°k C 24 7196 12 3596 14 4196 D 7 88°•6 8 100% 8 100% E 53 73°k 35 48°h 42 589'0 T07AL 258 1S4 60% 114 A4°h 115 45% Thu Apr 4 A 62 56% 35 32% 55 50% B. 15 4T% 10 31~l0 11 ' 34% C 25 749'0 15 4496 18 479/0 D 7 8896 8 100°,6 6 75% E 59 81% 28 38% d2 58% TO7AL 258 168 65% 9fi 97% 130 SO% Fri Apr 5 A 60 54°k 37 33% 38 34% B 11 34% 14 44°~6 1S 56°k C 21 62% 18 53°/a 21 62°h D 7 88% 8 100% 6 75% - E. 59 81% 33 b5% 53 73~k TOTAI 258 156 61°k 11D 4J% 136 53% ~_....__ ..a ~,:' _ G G _1~...:: ? . ~~,.--_ -95=~~2 3:46Pf~1~ '~'i ~~~FROM BELZ/SML WRLD VENT 303 541 1011 .. '~FF;:~i. ~ ' ~ ~ ' ~.~V'r.:k ~< ~~ ~~7; , ~ , , t R~ ~ ~. ~ . . . ~ ~~ f ` . , . .. ~ ' ' , ' 1 , ~ ' • :~~;.r;.:';. ! ~ S ~, ~. ~4f1~4??..~2~~: .ti. ~~~.. . ~ . . . ' ~.^1~.~~~^;,]i~',.:'~ '~+rY `~~`~._` ~ ' rd ~ . ` a ~,zyi,; • ~ . ~ ~ ~z"~~y,? ~~~ ~... ~ .:. : `` . ~s~'.+'~~D~f.+ , ... ;.~. " ~ i ~~ 19.' s» ,,;~si~. '~.,.::~v. u;: rj, • . , \ . 14 :'.. ~ ::~ . fi .. ~ • t . . . i~. •_~]u.. ~. ~~'e'. , n ~'O` . \ I M!' J 1 IA. ~ J•T•~A a' • { •.~ ~i . ?'jP.• ~R, i ~ 7~ j e 1 + • a `~ ~~ ~ i ...~ti . , + ;~,Ty~4 f fa5 pH.. s ~ , ~ , ~ . Y1 F I` / J f ~) ~~.~„+~\' ~~t19n~'- i~~ I ~ :,/ ~\. \\ ~/~.\ :~ ..l ~ ~ ~' ~ lr, x.._ .,., - { . ~.. ~:'A 4`K •, = y~ . , ~ ~9 ~ ~;'~ ~~.~:,~ ~' ~,-T :S; ,. :,: ,.: '.1.'' , ;~' ~;; ; ,: : ~ ,;:. :.,. ,'~ i ,~~.~T .".i; ~ ~'.~ ,~G:i:.x _. ~~~~ ~~~: ' 's!$. .,.: f~,.~,: .; r~..•... ~ ~,~f ~, a,"Y ;hw: :,~~~ ~ .. .:/ . 'I./.:. •~ ''~ ~ . A.. .. ~., . ^ L ... : :,' ". , - ~. _, ~:.;,~,~~,a~ ~ ~~; ' ~ ' ~a :.,:~ . };r.;~~.,~;~r.; .~ ~ i.. ~ ~ ~ i~ 1 I • ; i ~ ~ ,~~ ~ ~ . :~ ~~s r'i 1 ~ ; ~ ~ , ! ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~,~ ~ ,a ; ~~ t;~ ~ I~~ '• r a ~ ~ ~ , Iti i ~ i ~ ~ ~ I ~ ~ ' i f Cw.~6 ~ ~r ~ ~ ~ j i ~ F ;f/1 4 e . ' iir - "••~/~. V I ~ i MJ:-; *=:1~" .n.r!~ ~:eJ~ r. ~u ' Il~.; ~ ,'„~-r- 3 , ,; ;:,' , °e~f : i , - , ~ ~i ~:i`,~ „a, ~ `~,,, ~,... C ... ""' i i , •~ ~ ~ , ~ ; ~I ~ il ~ ~ .. ... ~- , _" .- - - J - __.'~" ~ ' ~ ~~-----. I ,, ~~ - - •--- ~~i'~i .. ' - . .~ .. ~Lly ~VY.i `.rv~'%, .; . ~,: .~~::,~~;, GG ~~~;:~;t;~p