Loading...
6D - Site Review #LUR2002-00019, North Boulder Village, mixed use plan comprised of 223 dwelling uniCITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: July 11, 2002 (Agenda Item Preparation Date: June 28, 2002) AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of Site Review LUR2002-00019, North Boulder Village, for a mixed use plan comprised of 223 dwelling units and 35,200 square feet of retail space located at the southeast corner of Broadway and Yarmouth Avenue; building heighY is requested to be modified in accordance with Site Review criteria from 35 feet to 45 feet; and amending the North Boulder Subcommunity Right of Way Plan to change the Rosewood Avenue alignment, and eliminating the two east-west road connections in accordance with theNorth Boulder Village site plan. Applicant: Jim Loftus REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Planning Department Peter Pollock, Planning Director Bob Cole, Director of Land Use Review Mike Randall, Presenter OVERVIEW: The applicant requests consideration of a Site Review plan for the vacant site located east of Broadway, south of Yarmouth Avenue. The plan features mixed use buildings fronting on Broadway and Yarmouth, housing on the eastern portion of the site and an orientation to padestrian scale activities such as sidewalk caf~, and walkable streets. This will be the first project within a larger area of the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan identified as the "Village Center." Staff finds that this request is consistent with the Development Guidelines of the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan and with the Site Review criteria, and recommends that the Board approve the request with conditions. S:~PLAN~PS-ITEMSUvIEMOS~mr4520Broad.pb711.wpd AGENDA ITEM #• Pa e 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION The site (see Vicinity Map, Attachment B) is divided into two components: mixed use (residentia] above retail) aligning the Broadway and Yarmouth frontages with parking to the reaz; and the eastern two-thirds of the site devoted to multiple-family residential units, of varying size and number of bedrooms, with enclosed parking provided for all residences. The commercial and residential buildings are two and three stories with a maximum height of up to 44 feet. The primary points of access from Yarmouth on the north will be 13'h and 14"' streets, and are primarily residential in character but will have some mixed use or home occupation opportunities. Rosewood Avenue will provide east-west access to the project site. Broadway will be the primary retail and service frontage with some retail also along Yannouth Avenue. The residential component located south of Yarmouth and east of 13th is a high density multi-family condominium style project. The buildings will be 2-3 story andbuilt upon a`platform' below which will be the parking garage. The Village will also feature lofts above commercial, 10 units designed with an attached work space (along 13"' Street) and carriage units above residential garages. Townhomes (28 du) are also planned along the southerly edge of the property adjoining the public parce3 (future library and park). STATI5TIC5: Zoning: BMS-X, Business Main Street - Redeveloping RMS-X, Residential Main Street - Redeveloping BVCP: MUB, Mixed Use Business Size of Tract: Private property = 372,438 sf (8.55 ac) Vacated Rosewood r-o-w = 17,670sf (0.41 ac) Total gross = 390,109 sf (8.96 ac) Less dedicated public r-o-w = 103,920 sf (239 ac) Total net area = 286,189 sf (6.57ac) Proposed floor area: Commercial = 35,337 sf four buildings (4,250 "live / work" space) Residential = 239,176 sf 22 buildings (223 dwellings) Total proposed = 274,513 sf Allowable F.A.R. BMS-X =1.0:1 =131,765 sf RMS-X = 0.6:1= 92,652 sf "Safeway" transfer = 78,581 sf (note: by priar agreement) Total allowed tloor area = 302,998 sf Dwellings: Lofts = 39 (over retail facing Broadway and Yarmouth) Live/work = 10 ("work" space approximately 425 sf per du) S:~PLAN~PB-ITEMS~IvIEMOS~mr4520Broad.pb711.wpd AGENDA ITEM # lll Pa e 2 Carriage = 2 (over parking garages) Townhomes = 24 Urban Block = 148 (74 du each over two parking structures) Total = 223 du Total Affordable on site = 45 Parking: Residential requirement: 1 space/du = 223 . Provided = 248 Non-residential requirement: 1 space/500 sf = 81 Provided = 93 * Total required = 304 Total provided = 341 On street parking provided = 55 spaces Total Project = 396 spaces (•Note: the maximum non-residential parking that can be provided is 1300 = 134 speces) KEY ISSUES: 1. Does the application conform to the Site Review criteria of Section 9-4-11? 2. Does the Site Review conform to the Goals, Objectives ofthe North Boulder Subcommunity Plan (NBSC Plan)? 2. Does the Site Review conform to the Guidelines of the NBSC Plan? 3. Are the building designs compatible with the types of use envisioned by the NBSC Plan? 4. Do the buildings present an attractive streetscape and incorporate design elements appropriate to a pedestrian scale? 5. Are the amendments to the North Boulder Subcommunity Right of Way plan in accordance with Transportation goals? BACKGROUND: On February 7, 2002, the Planning Board reviewed a Concept Plan for this project and made comments which have been attached as Attachment C. The site is at the heart of the Village Center described in the NBSC Plan and is the largest parcel under single ownership in the area. Zoning of the parcel roughly divides the site into predominately commercial along Broadway and residential on the interior of the site. Broadway is intended to become the new "Main StreeY' for north Boulder and projects are to be designed to accommodate a more pedestrian friendly environment along the sidewalks. Although a future library is prominent just to the south of the project, the library is not a part of this application and is only represented on the attached drawings for context. Attachment D is a copy of that part of the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan which envisions the "Employment and Retail Centers" inciuding the Village Center. Also staff comments relative to the Goals, Objecrives, and Development Guidelines in the Village Center are set forth on Attachment E. S:~PLAN\PB-ITEMSUI4EMOSUnr4520Broad.pb711.wpd AGENDA ITEM #(P Pa e 3 SUMMARY The site is comprised of nearly 9 acres of relatively flat vacant land with virtually no mature vegetation. As depicted, the site does include a portion of public right of way (.41 acre), south of the subject property, which was previously dedicated to the city for the extension of Rosewood Avenue. The site does not include the remaining public area to the south: right-of-way, the public use area (library), the open space and flood control area (Fourmile Creek) (see Vicinity Map - Attachment B). The applicanYs proposal is included in the attached wire bound 11 x 17 sheets. The site is accessed by a grid of streets including 13"' and 14"' streets north-south, and Rosewood Avenue east-west. The street alignments are not exactly as indicated in the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan but do correspond to the staff's recommendation. The primary north-south access between Yarmouth and Violet will be 14`" Street. The primary pedestrian/bike connection over Fourmile Creek will be 131h Street. The plan is divided into 4 blocks, two blocks are residential, and two blocks are mixed use (residential and commercial). The commercial buildings front Broadway and feature wide sidewalks to create a strong pedestrian appeal. The residential buildings are accessed primarily by 13`" Street and the street is also designed with a strong pedestrian appeal. 13"' Street extends to the south and terminates as a"turn-around" which will primarily serve the future library. The plan indicates a possible ]ay-out of a library and parking but is not a part of this Site Review. The site plan shows a close relationship between the edge of Broadway and Yarmouth and the front of the buildings. A plaza is proposed at the corner with the architecture emphasizing the entry aspect. An additional plaza breaks up the building mass facing Broadway, and creates a pedestrian and visual corridor through the site. The applicant describes the architectural character (sheet 11) as taking "its roots from North Boulder's industrial past" using simple materials that will "mesh with an `urban' architecture of view-seeking storefronts, walk-ups, balconies, bays and terraces," and variable roof styles. Site Review Criteria The purpose of site review is to allow flexibility and encourage innovation in land use development, improve the chazacter and quality of new development, and to facilitate the adequate and economical provision of streets and utilities, to assure consistency with the purposes and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and other adopted plans of the community, to assure that the project incorporates elements which provide for the safety and convenience of pedestrians, to assure that the building is of a bulk appropriate to the area, and that the amenities provided are of a scale appropriate to pedestrians. When development plans go through the site review process, it is anticipated that the approving agency will consider the overall economic impact of a development as a component of its success S:~PLAN~PB-ITEMS~NIEMOS~nr4520Broad.pb71 l.wpd AGENDA ITEM #~ Pa e 4 in meeting a broad range of community goals as well as the economic feasibility of designated implementation techniques. The staff has compared the proposal to the Site Review Criteria (see Attachment F). The proposed plan implements to a significant degree an innovative mixed-use proposal, provides a variety of pedestrian oriented opportunities (cafes, shaded walks, plazas) and incorporates an eclectic azchitecYural design drawing from neighborhood materials and textures. As a new planned center for economic development in North Boulder, the plan provides the very first opportunity for new commercial, retail and services use in many years. The development will provide the cataJyst for new development of the other properties within the "Village Center" which is centered at the intersection of Yarmouth. and Broadway. The Planning Department had a consultant (Civitas) prepare an analysis of the possible siting of a grocery store within the Village Center area. This analysis is attached as Attachment G. Height Moditication Most of the buildings indicated in the plan are three stories with a variety of roof t}pes and pitches. According to the City ofBoulder code height is measured from the lowest point 25 feet distant from the building. Therefore, overall height for each of the three-story buildings is between 40 and 45 feet. Actual height will be calculated at the time of building permit but shall not exceed 45 feet. Because the proj ect will stand on a presently vacant parcel, the views from neighboring proparties will be substantiaily altered. However, the project tries to establish an interesting character, not simply a solid wall, and has a number of views along street corridors such as 13th and 14"' (looking south) and Yannouth, Rosewood, and a private lane (looking west). These building elevations and street corridor views have been graphically represented on pages 12-15. Pubtic Private agreement to provide siguiCcant library facilities The staff has completed substantial work with the applicant on the design of the south edge of the property which borders the future library site. The developer has agraed in principal to a cooperative effort in providing the public facilities designated in the Subcommunity Plan. Attachment H is an outline of the provisions of the tentative agreement. The major elements are: 1. The developer wil] receive %z of the vacated Rosewood right-of-way, the other half will be incorporated into the library site and Village Green. 2. The developer will construct, in accardance with library directions, a building shell for future library use. (The shell will be financed by the sum of the Development Excise Taxes which would otherwise have been paid by the developer.) 3. The developer will construct drainage and detention £acilities for the project and for the library improvements. (Therefore the same facilities do not have to be provided on the private property.) 4. The daveloper will construct landscape improvements within the "Village Green." S:~PLAN~PB-ITEMSUVI$MOS~mr4520Broad.pb711.wpd AGENDA ITEM # Pa e 5 5. The City will not have to pay for any on-site improvements. (`old' Rosewood is being vacated and is therefore not to be built by the City.) Amendment to the Right of Way Plan The street network which is depicted in the site plan has been recommended by staff. The Rosewood Avenue east-west alignment has been changed to accommodate an updated flood/drainage plan west of the Broadway bridge over Fourmile Creek. This change will move the street northward to a point where the two east-west connections presently depicted in the ROW Plan need to be eliminated. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS Staffls general comments, requirements, and recommendations are included in Attachment I. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS: Required public notice was given in the form of a notice posted on the property and publication. All notice requirements of Section 9-4-10 (g), B.R.C. 1981 have been met. Conespondence from the public has been received (see Attachment J). In general there is great concern for the loss of views of the adjacent properties because of the proposed height and density of the project. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff finds that this request is consistent with the Development Guidelines of the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan and with the Site Review criteria and is recommending that the Board approve the submitted site plan and height modification with the Conditions of Approval specified in Attachment A; and, recommends that the North Boulder Subcommunity Right of Way Plan be amended in accordance with the approved site plan. S:~PLAN~PB-ITEMS~MEMOS~mr4520Broad.pb71 ].wpd AGENDA ITEM #~~J Paee 6 Approved By: Peter ollock, Director Planning Department ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Conditions of Approval Attachment B: Vicinity Map Attachment C: Concept Review and Comments bythe Planning Board (Feb. 7, 2002) Attachment D: North Bonl@er Subcommunity Plan -"Employment and Retail Centers" Attachment E: NBSC Plan Guidelines and staff comments Attachment F: Site Review Criteria and Haight Modification Attachment G: Civitas Grocery Siting Analysis for North Boulder Attachment H: Outline of agreement between City and Owner Attachment I: Development Review Results and Comments Attachment J: Correspondence Attachment K: Applicant's Site Plan Description and Drawings S:~PLAN~PB-ITEMSU~IEMOS~mr4520Broad.pb711.wpd AGENDA ITEM #~~ Paee 7 ATTACHMENT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (Conditions of Approval are being drafted by the City Attorney's Office and will be sent out to the Board Monday, 7uly 1) S:~PLAN~PB-ITEMSUVIEMOS~mr4520Broad.pb711.wpd AGENDA ITEM #~ Pa e S ~ ~ W~ ~ ~ U ~ F ~ F ~ dm . . ~ ~ ~ / / i ~ / ~ i /~~ i ' ~ / / i~ ~ ~ r ~ ~~ ~ ~ / / , /~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~, , ~~ ~ ~~ / ~~ i~ ~~~~~~~~ ~/ / /~~~ ~~ ~~i ~ /~~~ ~~ . ~/ ~ ~:~~ , . - / ~~ ~ ' i i / , i ; i " ; ~ ~ ~ ~/ ~ ~ ~~ ~~, ~, i~ / ~~~ ~ ~~i ~ ,~,~ ~ ~ "~%: ~~ . ~ ~ ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~ ~ ~' C 3 ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ /~ ~ % ~~ ~~ ~~ , ~~ ~~ ~~~~~ ~~~ ' ~:~i . /. '~~. i d 0 ~i ~~ /~~~ ~~~/~i ~/ ~~~i / i i ' / ~ ~ / i / ~ ~ ~ / / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / . Q ~ , ~ ~ , i ~ / ~ ~ ~~ . ~ ~~~~ ~ i J i ~ 0 i/ ~~~i '/ i ~ / / i ~~~ ~~ ~~/ ~ ~/~ ~~~:~i ~ :~ / i ~~~ ~~ ~ .'~/ :~~ ~ ~i ~~~ ~ ~ i ~ / ' ~ / / ~ / , ' , ~ , ~ , ~ ' 1- ,~ i , .' ~ ' ~ ~, ~ / / ~~% ~~ i % i /~" ~ , 2 ~/. / I / / / i i , U i ' ' - ' ~~ ~/~ ~~ ~ ~~ % ~ i , ~ ' / ~ ' ~' W 0 ; W - ' % j ~ , ~ ~ i!~ ~,; / i i , i ~i 7 N / i/ ,~ , / / i ~~i~-~~~ /'~ ~~~~~i /~/'~, '~ I ]N , a' , li , ~' ~ ;~;~ ~ ' , ~ i/ ~ ~ -~ ~ ~ , ~ ; iQi~~~/~~~',~~~~ ~//.~~ ~ N~ ~ ~ ~,~~~i ~., / ~~~~ ~~~~~~ /~ ~ ~,~~ ~~ ~~ ' /' ~ i~ ~~' . ~ ~ i ~ ~i ~ ~ ~ / % ~ ~~ ~~ i V ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ /~ ~. i ' ' i / / ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ /~~~ ~ ~, ' ~~~ ~ ~/ ~i / / / / ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ .L~~ ~ ~ / i , ~ / ~ / / ~ d ~ i ~ ~ ~ , ~ // /~ / / // ~0 //~. ~/~/~/~j/~~/~.;///;~// /~~/~~~%~ "ii~`~~~'~ i~ ~/ i ,,%..i , ~/,6, _ . . . , , , i i i ; i / :"/' ~/~/~ ~~~~ ~! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~ , ~// ~ ~ / / i/' ~~~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ '~/ / / ~ ,~ ~ //, ' ~ / ~ ~,~ t ~ ~~~~~ ~ i , ~ ! ~ , ,~ / / ~ , ~~,. `i '///~ ~''~j", "~j~. _ , ' /, , , ~ ,, /i , ; 'i/; ~; i, ~ ~ i~; ,~ ~/% /,' ~ ~ ;/~ ~/. , ~ ~i~ , ~ i / v ~ ~ , ~ ~ /j ~ \~~ % ~ , ~ ; i ; /~ ~' ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~)C " ~ , /~~ ~ , _ i.~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ / ~~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ i ~~ ~~ ~ ~ % ~ i / / . . . i ~ / i ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ,~~ , i / .~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~~ ' / ~ % ~ ~ i ~ ~ i ~ , i / ~ ~ - i ~ ~ " / " '/~~/ //~j / ~ /~~ ~~~~ /~~ % i ~ ~ ~~%~ ~i~~~'~/ ~~ ~ j i,!; %/_ //~!/~ ~"_ ` ~ ~~~,~~ , ~ i i~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ ~ ~ / ,, ~ ~ i , ~ ~% / ~ i /~ ~ W i ~ i / ~ ~ , : / i~ ~ ' /% i/ ~/~ Q i~ u > ' ~j ' ~i / ~ , i ~ ~ ~ ~'~ a F ~ ~ i ' i i i/ i ~ ~ ~/ ~ ,~ ~ ' ' ~ ; / / ' : ; ; n : i i : . N O $ ej_ y ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ 43~ia a ~ 7 ~~~~~~ ~ m ~~~~~~ ~ f ~ ~TZ ~ m ~ ~ 0 I ~ C i i i~ /~. ~ I '~; ~i ~ ~ i , ~ ~ / ~ ~ i ~~i ~ i i/ i i j. i. ~~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / , . ~ ,i ~~`; ~ . . L ATTACHMENT C NORTH BOULDER VILLAGE CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW PLANNING BOARD COMMENTS EXCERPTED FROM THE FEBRUARY 7, 2002 PLANNING BOARD MINUTES Public hearing and consideration of Concept Review LUR2002-00002, North Boulder Village, for a mixed use plan comprised of 221 dwelling units and 30,000 square feet of retail space located at the southeast corner of Broadway and Yarmouth Avenue. P. Pollock reminded the Board that when Safeway owned the above parcel, a portion of the land was dedicated to the city. He said that he has been working with a number of city departments to anticipate their interests and needs for development of this site and working with the developer to determine how the city-owned parcel can fit in with the entire site. He said that the Board, however, is only discussing the concept plan for the privately-held portion of the land. M. Randall said that one of the key issues for the site is conformance with the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan (NBSP). He pointed out Attachment D that outlines the design guidelines recommended in the NBSP and staff's comments regarding how the proposed plan addresses each guideline. He said that the proposed plan is not a perfact match for the NBSP, but it does address a number of issues regarding community retail uses, architectural presence on Broadway and Yarmouth, a strong residential element, and connectivity with future surrounding neighborhoods. He noted that there would be a retail use along Broadway and Yarmouth, residential units to the east of the site, and neighborhood-oriented office use along 13th Street. Tim Van Meter, Architect, described the proposed development on the 5.55-acre site, including the street network, the proposed mixed-use buildings along Broadway (retail and townhouses above the retail space), the public plaza area, parking spaces and garages, live/work buildings, two and three stories of housing, a pedesMan and emergency access that links the site, carriage units above garages, the housing units facing the city parcel, and landscaped courtyards to satisfy the open space requirement. He described the different housing types, including live/work buildings, mixed-use buildings, urban townhouses, and walk-ups with a direct entry from the outside, and presented examples of such housing in Boulder and in other cities, and the variety of building heights and building materials. He descriUed the live/work units where the first-story, at-grade building could function as a store front. Jim Loftus, Owner, said that of the 20 percant affordable housing required, ali but seven of the units will be built on the site. The Board and staff discussed the likelihood that the residents on the site would be the tenants in the offices and live/work areas; parking impacts from people who lease office space on the site but do not live on the site; whether the retail shops would service the people who live on the site (the site will be oriented to business uses that would serve the neighborhood rather than the larger city); where the surface and structured parking and garages will be built; how the wall of the structured parking lot will be treated so that it is not a blank wall (an adjacent landscape strip wi11 be bermed with landscaping, and the garage will be sunk about two feet); the request for height variances to allow for a variety of roof shapes and types; connections to the publicly- owned parcel of land; other scenarios for the publicly-owned site (kaep all the davelopment as is represented in the concept plan, expand the potential for the housing development from this developer onto the public site, and create library space); access to the village center from the Agenda Item # ,n1) Page #~_, , mobile home park; the square footage of the commercial space; and whether all the aFfordable housing will be on site (15 percent of the affordable housing will be off site). The Board and staff further discussed the characteristics of the private courtyards and the residents they wil] serve; the size of the living units (there will be a wide variety of one-, two- and three-bedroom aparhnents, townhouses, and lofts); the number of acres on the site devoted to housing (about three acres); how live/work units are allowed in BMS-X zoning (the units would have to be designed as conventional dwelling units that happen to have an internal connection to a non-residential space on the ground floor); the kinds of retail uses that would be allowed in a ]ive/work space (any non-residential uses cunently allowed in the zoning category would be allowed, although some non-residential uses, such as a restaurant, would not be allowed because the units would be built to residential standards); whether the live/work units can be divided so that one owner can purchase the residential portion and another owner can purchase the office space (all the standard mechanisms for ownership would be available, including splitting the interest; however, the space can be designed in such a manner that requires internal connections and prohibits those connections from being blocked off, and by-laws could be developed that could restrict such splitting of ownership); housing density (about 50 units per acre); the Fourmile Canyon Creek improvements that would affect the publicly-owned and privately- owned parcels; that 13th Street would continue across Fourmile Canyon Creek as a pedestrian/bicycle connection to the parcel to the south and that 14th Street would be the through street for the north/south connection; the proximity and connectivity to the park site at the Holiday Drive-In Theater site and to the village green to the south; and the transit center that would serve the site. Public Participation: Eleanor Depuy, 1509 Cascade: She said that the proposed plan includes very little play space for children and pets. Return to the Board: The following comments were made by individual Board members, not by consensus: Compliance with the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan . Since the NBSP is now seven years old, there is a need for an update. The village center is not becoming a small compact mass as was mentioned in the NBSP but is becoming more linear down Broadway. . The concept plan does not comply with the goals and objectives of the NBSP because there is no center in the village center. Consider a more vibrant community center, such as a place for people to gather, rather than a strip where people walk up and down the street. Concentrate the commercial uses and buffer the village green with a less intense use, such as residences. . There is concern about the lack of public input and discussion since the restrictive covenent precluded the possibility of building the kind of village center that had been envisioned in the NBSP. There needs to be a subcommunity-wide discussion about how to meet the goals and objectives in the NBSP before the Board setCles on the concept plan for this site. Agenda Item #~Q_ Page #~~ The NBSP states that there should be varied housing types, including attached and detached housing, for a wide range of incomes that appeal to families, seniors, and adults; however, the proposed plan appeals only to adults. The concept plan does not provide any detached housing that would provide for young families with children and does not further a balanced community. We are placing a San Francisco-type development on the edge of town that does not make sense. This site will be the most dense placa in ail of Boulder. Connections Give more attention to developing 13th Street from the proposed site to connect to the village green on the south side and to the park and Studio Mews on the Holiday Drive-In Theater site, The focus of 13th Street was intended to be a continuation of the bicycle/pedestrian path, but the concept plan is proposing that this street will be the most heavily trafficked street. Fourteenth Street should be the through street or car oriented street, and 13th Street should serve primarily bicyclists and pedestrians with a central plaza as its focus to conform with the guidelines in the NBSP. . Provide circulation connections in a bigger context with the adjacent developments. Concept Plan . Provide a more detailed plan for the plaza azeas. It will be important to see that there is space provided to allow for a lot of different activities. . Since the grade is much higher on the subject property along 14th Street from the adjacent parcel, provide two-story buildings instead of three-story buildings to provide a transition to the mobile home park. . Create more spaces in the center of the site for people to congregate. . The height variation is appropriate because the architects should be frae to explore different shapes for the different portions of this sita. . The mix of housing types that is proposed for the site is appropriate. . In order to reduce the energy flows in buildings, the developer should make application to the Colorado Home Builders Association to ensure that the development is a certified built green community. . The proposed concept plan is a vast improvement on the earlier concept plan for the site. However, it is difficult to see how the proposed development will work without having a proposal for the publicly-owned parcel. Having the two plans evolve together would enable the Board to see the connections and how the two sites will function together. Agenda Item #~~ Page #~ . Place some of the commercial use, such as a coffee house, against the village green to allow customers to look out on a park rather than a parking lot. . Let the developer go forward with the plan because the city staff is working with the surrounding property owners to try to figure out what will happen on those parcels and to promote the village concept. The four key issues have been dealt with in the proposed plan. . There is a population base that will actually support the commercial space proposed. . The variety of housing proposed on the site has not been built for many years. There are people in town who want to live in apartments, and this type of housing will be valuable in adding to the community. Provide more three-bedroom dwelling units on the site to accommodate different groups ofpeople. . Integrate the commercial center by placing next to the village green. . Provide transitions between the village center uses and existing surrounding residential areas to the east and to the south. . Provide all affordable housing on the site. The cash-in-lieu was allowed primarily for small sites where affordable housing could not be accommodated and not for large sites where the developer simply did not want to build the affordable housing on the site. . The cash-in-]ieu program was established so that it would work for people financially. The money from the fund enables the city to buy property throughout the city rather than having all the housing in new developments. Village Center . The Holiday Drive-In Theater site will probably become the village center as proposed in the NBSP rather than the proposed site. Consider how to get people back and forth between the smaller village centers, in particular, pedestrians and bicyclists. . Most of the people who live on the site will probably get in their cars to go elsewhere for shopping rather than walk to the limited amenities provided on the site. There needs to be a mini-center on this site that attracts some people to the area, such as a small restaurant. . Provide space on the site that could accommodate a type of farmers' muket since this use is specifically called out in the NBSP. Provide such space on the village green site. . The village center as proposed in the NBSP is located in a much wider area than on the proposed site, and it is expected that the other areas will become a part of the village center. It is important to make sure that the village green portion becomes part of the center as well. . The proposed development for the site is becoming an epicenter of the entire village center. There will be other development across the street to the west of Broadway, and the village center is not the center of the proposed site. We have to be careful in insinuating the entire village center onto one property. Agenda Item # ~ ~ Page #~,~ . Provide more of what the NBSP envisions if there is less of the village center on this site, such as more civio-type uses on the site (day-care, a meeting place, more grassy areas). A center is a place that people will come to for a wide variety of activities; in the proposed plan, the public areas are semi-private. . Provide more commercial development along Yarmouth to 13th Street rather than place all commercial along Broadway. Transportation and Parking . Provide additional parking spaces to accommodate the two-car families and ensure that the parking lot and the civic space do not become the overflow parking for this development. . Underground the parking and make the surface parking a gathering space or center for the commercial spaces. . Disaggregate the costs of providing parking spaces from the costs of the development. . The NBSP states that off-street parking should be behind and to the side of buildings and not in tha front and that parking should be dispersed into small strategically located lots. The idea that the developer could move the parking underground and densify more is not what people wanted to see. . Provide a Transportation Demand Management plan for the site. . Provide a transit stop next to the village green area. Agenda Item #~_ Page #~ _ ~ ~- MPLOY~MENT & ~ ~ -- RETAIL CENTERS Employment and Retail Centers ~ ~ ' a va fD ~ C A7 ~ ~ co ~ ~ A~ A ~ v1 GoaLs • Provide a complementary, pedestrian- oriented mix of public and private facilities to meet the needs of the subcommuniry, in orderto increase convenience and reduce auto trips. • Design neighborhood and subcommuniry centers to foster a sense of community by creating vibrant peopfe and activiry places. This includes: ease of access, safety, and appropriate scale. OBJECTIVES • Provide additional services in a way that contributes positively to the urban design of the subcommunity. • Commercial areas in North Boulder should: • provide a vital community center for the subcommunity; • serve a broad spectrum of economic activiry; • reduce vehicle miies aavelled and trip volumes ciry-wide; • reduce vehicle miles aaveiled and trip voiumes within the subcommunity; • be easily accessible by bicycfe and on foot. • Office/ Light Industrial areas in North Boulder should: • provide tive-work or workshop opportunities; • reduce vehicle miles travelled and trip volumes city-wide: • be easily accessible by bicycle and on foot; • preserve or maintain opportunities for small businesses; • allow some residential uses. BACKGROUND Every subcommuniry needs a spectrum of cen- ters, of different uses and sizes. The North Boulder Subcommunity Plan aims to strenb h- en.the centers that already exist in the sub- community and to create new ones (see map on the upper right). New centers should be planned, located and designed to ensure that each center meets recreational, cultural, social, and retail needs at the neighborhood or sub- communiry level; fits into its surrounding context; thrives over time; and becomes a special place. Different types of uses can be combined in one center, such as shopping w~ith a transit center, a park or public meeting space. Housing can be part of a center, too. This section addresses centers primarily serv- ing employment and commercial functions; the next section (section 7) addresses commu- niry fa~ilitiec. tk~at is. centers fpr civic, educa- tional and public activities. Some centers are a combination of public and private services/facilities. In the 1992 North Boulder Subcommuniry survey, approximately 14% of respondents said they do most of their shopping at North Boulder Shops, whiie the largest percentage said they do most of their grocery shoppin; oufside the subeommunity. (See table to the risht). Afbertsons grocerv store, in the Dia~onal Plaz,a, is immediately adjacent to the subcommunity's southeast corner. North Boulder residents also grocery-shop farther away, in the Crossroad Mall area, where numerous grocery stores are located. The Counry Complex, at Broadway and iris, is a major employment center in the subcommu- niry. A aumber of Counry and non-profit agency offices are located there, artd, because many of the offices provide social services, this center is a destination for both workers and social service customers. Wonderland Hil! subdivision has a smal! cen- ter of professional affces, that is, offices that do not directly serve customers or clients. These offices aze used primarily by Wonderland Hilt residenu. . RECOMMENDATIONS • Create a mixed-use center to serve ihe entire North Boulder Subcommunity at Broadway and Yarmouth. (See diagram below, right). This mixed-use center. referred to as the "Vitlage Center", shouid pravide a grocery store, housing, offices, and a variety of retail and commercial ser- vices that subcommuniry residents now drive south to find. • Provide a library, postal station, and other civic uses in the Village Center or in neighborhood centers. • Incorporate office uses into existing commercial zone districts (the Villa~e Center and the Yartnouth azea). • Encourage home offices throughout the subcommunity. Allow home offices to have a timited number af emptoyees, if impacts can be managed. •!n new neighborhoods in the subcommuni- ty,introduce pedestrian-oriented, appropri ~tely-scaled neighborhood centers that pr~v.UC gUVt~3 ililQ SC'YViC25 ~Oi i525~iiF3~~- hood needs. • Allow a smal( amount of non-service o~ce by use review in neighborhood commercial centers in order to encourage mixed uses and reduce vehicle trips. (Non-service office uses are those that do not directly serve customers or clients, so that only the office workers travel to and from that location). Where North Boulder residents most often shop for groceries (1992) Grocery StoreJArea of Town Peramtage of R°~P0"~' thtippiry at ihis StorelArea Norih 8oulder Market 14.4% Kng SooperslSafeway ~ Xrcls 3g.196 Albertsons ~ Diagonal Plaza 25.5% Ideal or Colony ~ Cmty Plaza 14.U96 Wild Aats 1.8% Safaway (c~ Baseline 1.096 Alfalfa's 1.7% King Soopers {~ Gunbartel 1.396 Icng Saopers @ Table Mesa 0.9% Other .396 TOTAL 100.096 Thit chon sumraari:ea the n.ruh.r vJo qLettion in 1he l992 (Jorfh Boulder resrdem svn•n• uhieh asked, "{Yhere do yvv mosr ojten shop jor grxeries? " The largest percemage oj rcspondenrs smred thar rhev do most of their grocerv shop png outride ojthe Subcommun~ry. Soarce.• 199? North Bvulder Sabcomnrunrrv Sarve~: Question !0, Ciry of Boufder Crrue~Jor Poliry and Program Analvsir. ~5 ~~ . ~"~° " ~:s:.~: a ....: A...<. x `' noxrs ~• BLDA a; saors: ~_ ~ ~~ ,.~_. . ~ ~COUNTV ~ COMPLfX A'onh Boulder curnntlv har m~o .rhopping.~ o~~e cenrer:, if'/!/ow Sp~rhgr and Nor~h Boulder Shops. 7T~cvprtn•ide rteighborhood-scale sen•mes ro loca! residenrs. ~ % The nnv t illage Center should be locored in areas !•6 on rhe map abme. The drfferrnt areas should prwide a mutnre oJuses as dtsai6ed be/ow. Artas south oJihe Crcek (7-9 on the map) shovld pro- vide a rranrition to the neighbor• hoods in the sumounding crca. / West oj8roodway. nanh oj Yarmourh: Thrs ana ahoufd provide a miz ojoffice and indusviaf/ work- shop u.res, with a amaf! amount ojrerail user along Broadway. Induuria! we.r tkould bt lotaa ed in rhe western ponion oJthe ana, adjaeent to the properriss zoned jor serviee industriaf vses. Buildingsshou/Cbt located ar the corner aj B~aadway and Yarmouth rn cnare a "srreer wal("along Broadwoy and Yarmouth. 1/3 Eas~ ojBroaAway, nonA aj Yarmouth, B~ocdway fo 13~h Slnel: This arca shorrld provrde a miz OlO,ffCl, KSld[pl/OI, QHd JOAIf retail utts and ahould yrrn~ide a nanunon oenveen the more intensivs rcmi!/offrtt/ civie uaes aov~h ofYarmomh and rhe live/ work +vet ~o the rtorrk. I West ojBroadway, south aj Yar~no4rh ro Creek: 7T7is aree should inclade a con- tinuation ojthe Irnear greemvay along Fourmile Comvn Cnek, wrth a landsrnpr empharis at Brtwdway ~ ~ht Cnek Odce and naideniia! uses in th~s area should provide an arr~acm•e rneet prrsnn olong Broadway: a siw!! anorn~ of KfO7I. SYCh OS O ICSfOL/QN. woyld alro bt appr~prme olong Broadway. 77+t wes+ern portion oj~his ana, whieh u ~ Park/Open Land ~ Mixed Density Residential lndusiria! ~~ Mixed-use Office/ Residential ~ vllage Center (mixed uses throughout) adjacem ~o rhe een~ica-indusni• a( area, shou/d inc(ude primari- !v ojlrce or indutvra! utcs. S Broudway 10 /3th Strea, sourh oJYarmoulh (o Crtth: Thra areo thou/d includt dit highest inrensity and mu oj rcre.r rn the Yi!lage Crrari Ure,r should include reroil, office, crvic, and residentiaL • Locorions jor crvic ures, such as day care, post office, tranrir/ recycfing ten~e~ lr6rary/mrr~- rag rpnce, should alro (x pc- vided hen. Buildrngs should 6e locared ar the corner oj Braodway and Yarmovrh to cn- aie a "sneet waf!" along Broadwav and Yarmoarh. 6 Eas~ oJ131h Sntet, soulh oj Yarmoulh ta t6r Creek: This area should a(so inclnde a ~nizojrctail, ofjice, crvra and resideNial usts, bn1 shov/d pm~ vide a transinon to the adjacent residentia! neighborhood fo +he easc The rransNion ana s6ould include lown empecr/ infensiry uses. i i'r"esr uj urval~oy, eou~l. cjrh.e Creek: This areo rs adjacent fo res~den- rml arcat on two srdes and rhovld pmvdt mued dentrty nsidentmf rrses at art m•eraf! densiry ojapprox~ma~ely 8•11 dwelling unirs/ acre. 8/9Eas! ojBroadwap, sou~b ajlhe Cnek: Thra asea rhould proride n tronsmon jrom.ihe tili~r Cen~er ro ner;i6~nniw~ds m tFe ~rroudln~:rrevs. Appropnore ~~tludk~iaaf:+nral. Jome O~['C 1L7[S, YAd ~ICI$~1bOII1oOC• .rcak ~e:rmrrwnKrJ w help frumr" fIl! 17II08[ $~KII. a ~ W'y' M+71 ~ ~~.y V Proposed Village Center , Y Or4 ~ ~ ~ m ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~d m aa ~ ~ \ ~ The new Village Center should contain a mix of uses and a pedestrran-iriendly atmosphere. It should contain good connections to the surrounding areas (across Yarmouth, Broadway, and to the adjacent mobile home park). Thirteenth Street should serve as a main street and be designed primarrly for pedestrrans and bicyctists, wrth a plaza as its central locus. A large viflage green along the Fourmile Canyon Creek should serve as a gateway and passive recreation area. Village Center A new Village Center is proposed at the heart of North Boulder, strategically located along a major transit line and the junction of the 13th Street and Fourmile Canyon Creek bicycle/ pedestrian corridors. The purpose of the Villa~e Center is to serve the needs of the sub- communin. upsrade the appeazance of the Broadway corridor, and provide a vital activiry focus for the subcommuniry. It should encompass all four comers of the Broadway/ Yarmouth intersection and continue south to Fourmile Canyon Creek (see sketch above). The emphasis should be on mixed uses throu~houtthe area, with no sin'le-use zones. Retail, office, li~ht industrial, residential, and civic uses uses should be mixed vertically and horizontally. Live/ work opportunicies should also be created in the Villaee Center. The streets in the Villa~e Center should be designed with the pedestrian in mind. They should have activities, pedestrian-interest win- dows, and front doors along the street. Thineenth Street should be desiened primarily for pedestrians and bicycles, with a plaza, or gathering area as its central focus. A villa~e green, straddlina both sides of Fourtnile Canyon Creek, east of Broadway, should be the central focus of the Village Center. Itwill act as a eateway, gathering area, and transition between the higher inten- sity mixed uses north of the Creek and the lower density uses south of the Creek. A lin- ear greenway should continue aione the Creek, conneciin~ to parkland to the east. The area south of the Creek is outside the Village Center. It should provide a transition to the surrounding residential areas (see description of uses on p.15). The total amount and mix of land uses that are recommrnded in the Village Center are approximately: 85,000 square feet of new r.tai'.'_OA00 sq. ft. of n.w civic: 170 ne~c res- iden[ial units, and 147,000 sq ft. of new office uses. Thr~ e sL•uild be flexibility t^ alle~+• or encourn~; some of the office use to convert to residential use, so lone as the traffic impacts are no~ increased and the development guide- lines are complied with. ;.. ~. .V:F~:.:..'~.:d39.... llnvnlnnw~ rtr - r r ~; _:.. ~ ~ .:~ ~~ 'c~« ~c-a Ilses and Phasusg~~ ~ s ~~~ .N . ~ ,..ia_:,.4?~. .~~ PIC'V~CQ,~fl1'!ZOlitQlQJ7~VCl1JC(l~ Ji11w1WIE Of 11SES:NT~2lOlII COIf1tAC7 .n.. C3Q~ t1ES~C7l~1Qji Q,~ICP~ Oj1Cn~'-, ' .-- • . ~-~. ~~~~.,~,s>~~~~ _ i! ttl RtfiJd. d care uses, 6tuTdGrg : r ~< .-- . ~ .. " , --s:~ ' ... l~ ",,., ~,. ,: ~ the'Fowrnlle-;;: - ~ac~ develop- ' iri confor- ;:°. ',E Sqtdy-:;,;~~. .__ va:::;.::. ~ng Areas :at a oughout the Yllage°; ide.bua and bike rout~ ches, i+nd bus sbelter parY.in~ in ihe VUage Center sh,ould be locatec' behind buildings, in sma11 strdtegically-located lo~. and along streets. Nor[h Boulder Village Site Review Compliance with North Boulder SubcommunitV P~an, Recommendations and Guidelines ~ QQ A 7 G A~ rr '. ~ ~ ~ ~ '0 m OQ A ~ ~ RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE SUBCOMMUNITY PLAN 1) Create a mixed-use center to serve the entire subcommunity at Broadway and Yartnouth. It should provide a grocery store, housing, offices, and a variety - of retail and commercial services that subcommunity residents now drive south lo find. 2) Provide a library, postal statioq and other civic uses in the Village Center or in neighborhood centers. 3) Encourage home onces throughout the subcommunity. Allow home offices to have a limited number of employees, if impacts can be managed. 4) In new neighborhoods in ihe subcommunity, introduce pedestrian-oriented, appropriately-scaled neighborhood centers [ha[ provide goods and services for neighborhood needs. 5) Aliow a small amount of non-scvvice o~ce by use review in rzeighborhood commercial centers in order to encourage mixed uses and reduce vehicte trips. (Non-service office uses do not directly serve customers or clients, so tha[ only the employees travel to and from that location). StaffComments: TTve property covered b}~ this SiCe Review canr:ot provide a grocery because of restrictions placed on such developn:eir[ by private Cove~:m~t (ihe previous owner, Sajeway, recorded the Covenant to prevent the constructian oja rompeting grocery). The project description does not ofJ"er a list ojneeded services that might be met by the project. The sitejor a Library and Village Green was previous[y dedicated to, and is now awned by, the Ciry ojBoulden T/irs land is adjacen[ to Uve project area is readily accessible jrom the proposed developmenl. The developer is in negaiation with the city to provide significant improvements to this area. Ciry ordinance provides opponunities for home o~ces. TT~e site plnn provides jar mued use apportunities. Same o~ces space is indicated nlong 13`" Street witG residences above. T/ie Site p/an proposal suggests a pedestrian orienta[ion with w~el[ landscaped streets, commercial and residential buildings dose to tbe sidewulks. The Site plm: provides jor activities suc% as sidewalk caje, sigimge with pedeslriun scale, rypes ojuse and hours of operatia:, etc., that migHt encourage pedestrian use. 77~e site plmf pravides 30, 000 sqimre feet ojnoirresidentinl spa~e ivhrrh will be predominately retail, resiaurant oriented. The Site plan does not indicate wh¢ther nwr-service oJfice will he limited. ~ "'j y ~ n x ~ ~ z y ~ a ~ ~ a d ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ b m ~ ~ ~ ~ Description of Land Uses by Block: 6) Broadway to 13th Street, south of Yarmouth to Creek: This area should include the highes[ intensity and mix of uses in the Village Centec Uses should include retail, office, civic, and residential. Locations for civic uses, such as day care, post office, transiUrecycling center, library/meeting space, should also be provided here. Buildings should be loca[ed at the comer of Broadway and Yannouth to create a "stree[ wall" along Broadway and Yazmouth. 7) East ot 13 Street, south of Yarmouth to the Creek: This area should also include a mix of re[ait, office, civic, and residential uses, but should provide a transition to the adjacent residential neighbofiood to the east. The transition azea should include lower impacUintensity uses. The site plan indicates a s[rong commercia[ presence along both Yarmouth and Broadway. The Libran~ and possibly other civic spaces are to located on land dedicated to the City and adjacent !o the soutTt side ojthe site. The corner is desigued as an attractive plaza to bring attention and activity. The ste plan provides for only residential use east of 73'" Streel. The adjoining residential area to tHe east is the Boulder Meadows Mobile Home Park, and it is separaled from the si[e by a significant change in elevatiai (the Park is several jeet lower). ~ 00 A O O. A~ rr M A ~ ~ 'b ~ (IC ~ ~ ~ Village Center Development Guidelines: A. Uses and Phasing l. Provide a horizon[al and vertical mixture of uses: retail/ commercial, residential, office, open areas, and civic uses. 2. Provide a wide range of dwelling [ypes for a range o( incomes. Provide housing which appeals to families, seniors, and adul[s. Vary housing types and sizes and include at[ached and detached houses, apartment buildings, and apartments above shops or offices. 3. Provide a large village green on both sides of Fourmile Canyon Creek (at least 300' x 300' at Broadway, and at leas[ 100' on eillier side of the Creek for the remaining distance of lhe Village Center), with a transit center nearby and adequate bike parking_ 4. Provide space and utility secvices for a public fartner s market and other ou[door neighborhood retail uses. 5. Provide locations (or a public library, transit center, police annex, and post office in the a~ea (see section 7). 6. Phase the developmenl of buildings over time in completed sections, preferably in incremen[s of different uses; avoid an unfinished appearance at any stage of the development. Commercial arrd residen[ial uses are miced along tAe Broadway and Yarmouth sides ofthe site. Residential uses predominate along 13`" and 14`^. TTve site is well connected to the civic use site to the site. The Site plan depicts a[ least S housing types of various bedroon: sizes up to 3 bedrooms. A portion ojthe park space known as the Village Green will be improved by the developer and is current[y berng negofia[ed with tHe Ciry ofBaulder. The Site plan does provide a large plaza area on [he east side of Broadway which could be used jor such purposes. It is anticipated lhat outdoor cafe and other similar uses could be [ocated near the plaza.. The library site was dedicated to the Ciry of Boulder and is not a pan ojthe subject site. The NBSC Plan indicates that the (ibrary and Village Green should have access to the Village Center. The phasing plan indicates that almost all site improveinents will be rompleted in ihe first phase. Some ojthe '[ownhome'style units wi[1 be compleled hy athers later. B. Building and Site Design 1. Provide one and two-story buildings along the street with pedestrian-interes[ windows on the ground iloor and office or residen[ial uses above. 2. Provide pedes[rian-scale azchitecture throughout the area. Minimize blank walls and leti over space. Provide pedestrian entrances to buildings from all streets. 3. Closely line storefronts along the sidewalk in order to create a pedestrian-friendly setting. To avoid monotony, storefronts may be staggered -- some should be located immediately adjacen[ to the sidewalk, others should be slightly setback [o provide sea[ing or a plaza/ landscape area. 4. Encourage the devetopment of facilities at a neighborhood scale. 5. If there is a Village Center anchor store, it should avoid a single-entry ~ design. It may be appropriate to provide individual street entrances to ~+ non-grocery sales areas. A 7 ~ 6. Design buildings with flexible spaces that can accommodate different i.r uses over time. ~ ~ ~ 7. Locate the highest intensity uses with the most density at the core of the . ~k Village Center; decrease the intensity/ density as the distance from the core increases. 8. Provide transitions be[ween the new Village Center uses and exis[ing sunounding residential areas. 'ti A~ ~ 9. Face compalible building types across the street from one another. A ~ Changes in use should occur at the reaz or side property line rather than ~ down the middle of the street The e[evations indicates a stroi:g architectural style and crealing interesting outdoor spaces plazas and pedestrian ways. Contmercial fiuildings on Broadway have business windows at street level. The plan is pedestrian oriented, there are hvo plazas aa Broadway and an easL west pedestrian [inkage to the residential area. There is an emphasis on pedeshian access a(ong 13'^ Street. Most building in the plan are street oriented.. Architeclural eleva[ions imply staggered fron[s a~:d the plaza areas indicate opportunities jor outdoor eating areas. The proposal does not include a description ofdesired jacilities and uses. No single large store has fieen identified, no grocery is possible on the site because ofprivate covenmrt restriction. No description ojthe interior space in provided in the Srte plan. However it is likely that the tenant mix will vary over time. The Core area is loosely defined in the NBSC Alan as !he rntersection of Yarmouth mtd Broadway. Tke site plan does provide a jocal point at the corner, the building will likely be at the macimum pern~itted keight. The only adjacer~t resideiitial use is the Boulder Meadows Mobile Home Park to the east ojthe si[e. TGe Si[e p[an shows attached resideniial units jacing the Meadows over proposed l4'h Slreet. Only l3rd Street and Rosewood Avenue have jacfng bvildings and fio0i sides are pr¢dominately residentiul. ~ OQ ~ O G A'+ -r eM N ~ ~ b m OQ A ~ I 10. Throughout the Village Center, plant trees for shade, separation, and buffering from traffic flow and auto parking. 11. Design with noise protection from Broadway and Yazmouth in mind. For residential and child caze uses, employ noise-sensi[ive building placement, height~ and orientatioq room layout, and special wnslruction ma[erials, 12. Reclaim and pro[ect the Fouvnile Canyon Creek. Set back development from the Creek in confortnance with the Creek Study. Site plan indicates that street trees wi116e used eztensively. The Broadway fronmge should provide adequate noise mitigation for the residential uses to the east. The Fourmile Creek floodway, and associated park ar¢ not a part oJthe site. TT:ese areas have been dedicated to the Ciry of Bouldec Plans for the improvement of the Creek are current[y 6eing designed. ~ QQ A ~ C A~ N ~ ~ ~ S 'ti7 ~ aq ~ ~ C. Streets and Parking Areas 1. Design streets to be multipurpose public spaces --comfoRable for the pedes[rian and bicyclis[-- not just as roads for cars. 2. Design 13th Street to serve primarily bicyclists and pedestrians, wi[h a central plaza as its focus. 3. Design residential streets to be as narrow as possible. 4. Develop alleys for service access to buildings. 5. Bury power lines and add landscaping in the Broadway comdor. 6. Provide on-street pazking on all streets in the Village Center 7. Locate off-street pazking behind and [o the sides of buildings, not in the front. Disperse parking into small, strategically-located lots. 8. Desig~ parking areas with an emphasis on high-quality pedestrian access and circulation. Plant street hees and landscape sh'ips in parking areas and along walkways. 9. Provide sufficient, comeniently bcated bicycle and bicycle trailer parking, covered where possible. The proposed court~~ards imply that most public space will be behind the s[reet frontage. TAe streets will accommodate all modes ojtravel. All streets are accessible by cars and jor parking, 13'" provides the main access to the structured parking behind the residerttial sheet jrontage. An eart-west pedestrian oriented p[aza connects the commercial jrontage along Broadway with the residential area. Stree[s are designed to meet the City's minimum requirements. Some alleys are praposed for residential use, but most residential parking will be within structures below ground. The developmen[ ojthe property will conform fo Citi~ Development Standards which generally include the undergrounding ojutilities. All streets, including Broadway, will have on-street para[Ie[ parking. The site p/an indicates that parking will be concentrated in central lots hehind the buildings with some structured parking. The central parking areas are accessib[e to the pedestrian plazas. Bicycle parking must be accommodated in ca jormance with the development standardr. ~ ~ 00 A 7 C v ~r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. '~y s~ oc ~ ~ ~1 :~,1 D. Transporta[ion Connections 1. Provide a grid of stree[s at walkable intervals, to provide a pedestrian orientation for the cen[er and [o avoid problems found in suburban super-bbck" shopping cen[ers. 2. Provide direct pedestrian and bike access from the Village Center to [rails in the area and comply, at a minimum, with the Transportation Plan. 3. At the trnnsit center and in other locations throughout the Viltage Center, provide bus and bike route signage, benches, and bus shelters. E. Residential Uses l. Locate residen[ial areas within lhe Village Center in desirable bcations (wi[h good views and in quiet areas), and provide good access to neighborhood ameni[ies such as parks and open areas. 2. Locate, lay out and conslruc[ residential units to shietd residents from noise and traffic impacts. S:~PLAN~Usecs~AMikeW OBOguidelines7-11.wpd The site plan depicts a grid ojstreets with pedestrian access. The grid is slightly modified firout the NBSC Plan to accommodate the preferred alignment ojstreets in accordartce with staffrecommeridatiau. The site plan indicates connections alorsg streets and adjacent parking areas. The NBSC Plan generally depicts a'Super Stop"at the in[ersec[ron of Yarmouth and Broadwa}~. The plaza area shown at the corner may accommodate hus jacilities if appropriate (ihe stop may have to be on !he north side ojthe intersection). The residential areas are predominately located away jrom Broadway and Yarmouth and are not likely to be impacted by ~~orse. The parking and [arge courryards central to tlie residential areas wi11 preserve some westerly views. As depicted in the Si[e plan the majoriry ofunits will not fie impaeted by noise. Some units faci~:g Broadway and Yarmouth maV need same attenuation. ATTACHMENT F SITE REVIEW General Criteria No site review application shall be approved unless Ihe approving agency finds that: Boulder Vallev Comurehensive Plan: Yes The proposed site plan is consistent with the purposes and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Yes The proposed development shall not exceed the maximum density associated with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan residential land use designa6on IL Site Desien: It urilizes site design techniques which enhance the quality of the projact. In detercnining whether this subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the following factors: A. Open space, including without limitation, parks, recrearion areas, and playgrounds: X 1. Useable open space is arranged to be accessible and func6onal; The usea6le open space is provided in a manner consistent with an ur6an center, substantial areas along sidewalks, plazas, courryards, an~! respects the park space on the south side. X 2. Private open space is provided for each datached residential unit; all residences have access to adjacent open space. na 3. The project provides for the preservarion of natural features, including without limitation healthy long-]ived trees, terrain, and drainage areas; no natw~nl features exist on the site as it is largely vacant, flat and unimproved. X 4. The open space provides a relief to the density, both within the project and from sunounding development the type and quantity of open spaces provided is consistent with a dense and highly diversifted urban cencer. X 5. If possible, open space is linked to an area- or city-wide system. The plan provides an important link to the north south ped/bike system running west of and parallel with Broadway along 13`" nnd 14`" Streets. B. Landscanin2: X 1. The project providas for a variety of plant and hard surface materials, and the selection oF materials provides a variety of colors, and contrasts; X 2. The project provides significant amounts of plant material sized in excess of the landscaping requirements of Sections 9-33-2 and 9-3.3-3, "Landscaping and Screening Requirements," and "Landscape Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981; and X 3. The setbacks, yards, and useabie open space along pu6lic rights- of-way are landscaped to provide attractive slreetscapes, to enhance architectural features, and to contribute to the development of an attractive site plan. C. Circulation, including without limitation the transportation system that serves the property, whether public or private and whether conshucted by the developer or not: X 1. High speeds are discouraged or a physical separation between streets and the project is provided; interior streets are relatively nan•ow and accentuates the pedestrdan realm. X 2. Potential conflicts with vehicles are minimized; Agenda Item #_~~ Page #~~ X 3. Safe and convenient connections accessible to the public within the project and between the project and existing and proposed 4ansportation systems are provided, including without limitation streets, bikeways, pedestrian ways and trails; bus routes nor•th/south nnd east/west are conveniently accessible. X 4. On-site facilities for external linkage are provided with other modes of transportation, where applicable; X 5. The amount of land devoted to the street system is minimized; the street netwark is in compliance with the NBSC Plan and the recommendations of the transportation division. X 6. The project is designed for the types of ttaffic expected, including without limitation automobiles, bicycles, and pedestrians, and provides safety, separation from living areas, and control of noise and exhaust; and X 7. City construction standards are met, and emergency vehicle use is facilitated. D. Parkine: X 1. The project incorporates into the design of parking areas measures to provide safety, convenience, and separation of pedestrian movements from vehicular movements; as ezpected in the BMS-X and RMS-X zones there is heavy emphasis on street (curb-side) parking. The parking provided only sdightly exceeds the reguirement and does not ezceed the allowed maximum in dhe commercial areas. X 2. The design of parking areas makes efficient use of the land and uses the minimum amount of land necessary to mee[ the parking needs of the project; parking is provided in 4 ways: curb-side, open parking lot, private garages, and underground. Relatively few private parking spnces nre actually visdbde from any adjacerot street. X 3. Parking areas and ]ighting aze designed to reduce the visual impact on the project, adjacent properties, and adjacent streets; and X 4. Parking areas utilize landscaping materials to provide shade in excess of the requirements in Section 9-33-12, "Parking Area Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981. E. Building Design. Livabiliri, and Relationship to the Existin og r Proposed Surrounding Area: x 1. The building height, mass, scale, orientarion, and configuration are compatible with the existing character of the area or the character established by an adopted plan for the area; The rlesign character is compatible with the type of development estnblished by the NBSC Plan for an urban center. X 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 proposed project comprises a substantial portion of the "Village Center" area depicted in the NBSC Plan. The use of 3-story buildings and high density housing in the village center is intended to create a recognizable sense ofplace for North Boulder. x 3. The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from adjacent properties; although sharlows are within those allowed, the development of 9 vacant acres of land will substantially alter the views adjacent neighbors have of the foothills and mountain backdrap. The project will preserve view 'corrirlors' along Yarmouth, 13`~' and /4`h streets. In genera! the orientation of the 6uildings is established by the required network/grid of streets. Height and densiry of development is as permittert. X 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; North Boulder is an eclectic mix of industry, Agenda Item #~ Page # ~~ storage, mobile homes, older traditiona/ homes, and newer modern homes. The archirecture of the project is n reJlection of this mixed environrnent. X 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 plan emphasizes the pedestrian environment with wide well lanrlscaped waJk areas, the street scape is that of "new ur6anism" with buildings close to the street, hidden parking at the rear, mrsed residential, and open p/aza areas. X 6. To the extent practical, the project provides pubiic amenities and planned public facilities; al! projected pub/ic faci[ities have been provided, the applicant is assisting the provision of open space and library at the south end of the site. X 7. For residentia] 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; The project is comprised of a wide variety of housing types and sizes including townhomes, Jofts over commercial, carriage units over parking, live/work, and /, 2, and 3 bedroom apartments an~l conrlominiums with covered parking. X 8. .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; Noise should not be any factor at all within the project. Some units above commercia! may need specinl noise design features to protect from Broadway. X 9. A lighting plan is provided which augments security, energy conservation, safety, and aesthetics; Lighting will be provided in accordance with Ciry ofBoulder stanrlards. X 10. The project incoiporates the nahual environment into the design and avoids, minimizes, or niltigates impacts to natural systems; The site does not have any significant naturnl features, the developer will prrrticipate in the development oja portion of the public open space at the south end of the sate. X 11. Cut and fill are minimized on the site, and the design of buildings conforms to the natural contours of the land. Grading of the site will conform to the existing grade, some fill is necessary at the edge ofBroadway in order to bring the buildings to the level of the street and create the desired perlestrian environment. F. Solar Sitine and Conshvction: For the purpose of ensuring the maximum potential for utilizarion 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 potenrial for the use of solar energy in accordance with the following solar siting criteria: X 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 consfraints may justify deviations from this criterion. Most buildings within the project have significant southerly or westerly ezposure, no buildings have onlv a northerly orientation. No properties outside of the project are impacted by the shadow of the proposed buildings. X 2. Lot Lavout and Buildine Sitine. Lots are oriented and buildings are sited in a way which maximizes the solar potential of each principal building. Lots are designed to facilitate siting a Agenda Item #~_ Page # v?/~ struchtre which is unshaded by other nearby shvcmres. Wherever practical, buildings are sited close to the north lot line to increase yard space to the south for better owner control of shading. X 3. Buildin~ Form. The shapes of buildings are designed to xnaximize urilization of solar energy. Buildings shall meet the solar access protection and solar siting requirements of Chapter 9-8, "Solar Access," B.R.C. 1981. X 4. Landscanine. The shading effects of proposed landscaping on adjacent buildings are minimized. Heieht Modification Annlicarion: The following addirional application requirements apply if the development proposal includes a request for the modification of the pemvtted height: X 1. Preliminary building plans including sketches and elevations illustrating the proposed building or pole and indicaring how the height was calculated; X 2. For developments in the RBl-E, RB2-E, RB3-E, RBI-X, RB2-X, and RB3-X districts, a model, at a scale of no less than one inch equals thirty feet, of the proposed.building and all buildings and property within one hundred feet of the proposed project; ' X 3. For developments in the RB I-E, RB2-E, RB3-E, RB 1-X, RB2-X, and RB3-X districts, an illustration of the proposed building shown from street level demonshating the pedesuian view, including, without limitation, a perspec[ive, computer model, or photographic montage; X 4. A shadow analysis as indicated in Appendix "E" to this 6tle that shows the shadow cast by a thirty-five-foot building located at the required setback and the shadow cast by the proposed building; X 5. A list of the height of each principal building located or known to be proposed or approved wi[hitt one hundred feet of he proposed project; X 6. A written statement and drawings which describe the way in which the proposal accommodates pedestrians, including, without limitation, uses proposed for the ground level, percent of transparent material at the ground level, and signage and graphics; and X 7. A detailed plan showing the useable open space and a written statement of how it serves the public interest. Agenda Item # ~~ Page # d~,_ ATTACHMENT G Memorandum To: Peter Pollock From: Dick Farley, Renee Martinez-Stone Date: June 26, 2002 Via: Fax 303.441.3241/messenger Re: North Boulder Village Center Studies Attached aze the summary options from our studies of the Village Center area in North Boulder. The study area is located along Broadway between Violet and Yellow Pine, west to 11'~ St. and east to13~' St. The North Boulder Subcommunity Plan defines this generai azea as the Village Center. Our scope of work is twofold: 1) to study options for the location of a grocery store and the resulting implications on the village center. And 2) to incorporate proposed, approved and areas that need p-anning into an overall iilustrative that shows the future of the North Boulder Subcommunity (north of Violet). Our assumptions/puidelines for the Villa~e Center Studies 1. Review the azea to determine if there is an appropriate site for a grocery store. Potential sites should be consistent with locations that fall in the Village Center diagram of the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan (p. 15). The grocery store should be no larger than 40,000 SF. 2. All properties should have potential for redevelopment. 3. Incorporate two proposed plans into the village center studies: North Boulder Village and the proposed plan for the Pablic Library. 4. Prepare plans consis[ent with existing zoning and parking ratios. 5. Implement the proposed street system as defined in the North Boulder Subcommunity Right-of-way Plan. 6. Floodplain issues west of Broadway will be addressed and mitigated at a later date. 7. Utilize the north Broadway streetscape assessment and draft recommendations along Broadway as they relate to future r.o.w, and general streetscape improvements. A summary of our work Our study looked at several potential locations for the grocery store. A few locations were eliminated due to zoning, lot size/depth, access or the general impact on the sunounding area. Two locations with the best potential were the area northeast of the intersection of Yarmouth/Broadway and the properties west of Broadway between Yazmouth and Rosewood. We studied these two areas exploring various site configurations and their urban design impact on the village center. The two best locations for a grocery store are presented below described as op[ion 1, and option 2a&b. The benefits and limitations of each option are summarized below. Agenda Item #_(~ Page #~~_ Option 1- Central Grocery Store Benefits: a. This option creates a Village `Center of gravity' that, by physical proximity, integrates retail, mixed use development, a main street chazacter along Broadway with an adjacent greenway trail system and civic focal point (village green and library). b. A grocery store aYthis location complements the North Boulder Village project by focusing retail and mixed-use development d'uectly across Broadway. A two-sided main street results. c. "Main StreeP' character is the focal point for activity. 11'" and 13`" Street provide more quiet pedestrian options. d. The development pattern is consistent with the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan. e. Retail, residential and public amenities aze integrated creating interesting points of interface and possibly greater opportunities for mixed-use development. Limitations: a. Primary access for the grocery store is not directly at the front door. b. Between Yarmouth and Rosewood, the properties west of Broadway aze currently zoned for a pattern that is half business main street (BMS) and half industrial (IMS). All properties must be consolidated and rezoning is required of the western half of the properties that aze zoned IMS. c. Views of the grocery store are limited by other retail along Broadway. Option 2- North Grocery Store Benefits: a. Access for grocery store is located at a full intersection, Yarmouth/Broadway. b. Retail is focused at the 100% intersection of Yarmouth/Broadway consistent with the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan. c. This option implements the existing zoning. d. The location of the grocery store reinforces 13~' Street as a vital local connection. e. The grocery is quite visible from Yarmouth. Limitations: a. Option 2 focuses retail along the east side of Broadway (similaz to North Boulder Village) creating a one sided "main street". New retail on the west side may develop more slowly. b. This option disperses the retail activity of the village center, possibly separating most of the village center's retail potential from the center's civic fceal points (village green, trail system and library). c. The physical location of the grocery store and the library create emphasis, activity and focus on 13'~ Street instead of on Broadway. d. This option provides less integration between uses. Retail, residential and public amenities aze sepazated diffusing the perception of the actual village "center". e. It is difficult to locate a real street between a grocery store and its pazking. It inevitably tums into a drive for the store or is impacted by the activities and functional needs of the store. Agenda Item # G,/Z_ Page #~Q_ f. The bicycle function, and pedestrian orientation, of 13'" St. is seriously eroded by the multiple access points of the grocery store's parking lot, and the ever-active pedestrian crossings between the store and the pazking lot. In option 2, the north grocery store location (speciFically the block northeast of Yarmouth/Broadway) raisas some key issues for consideration. a. Activating Broadway with stteet oriented retail is a desired outcome. Assuming street retai] along Broadway is provided, 13'" Street must jog to the east to accommodate a 40,000 SF grocery store. A jog is not necessary if the store is reduced to 32,000 SF. If street oriented retail is not desired, a 40,000 SF grocery store can be located along Broadway; no jog results in the alignment of 13~' Street. b. A jog in 13~' St. reinforces the grocery store as an inteiruption, and a visual tersninus to 13~' St.. This jog, and resulting focal point, could be good in that it confirms the grocery store as the effective center of the neighborhood, or bad because the identity of 13'" Street evaporates at the store. c. To maintain the pedestrian function of 13'" St., it is critical to provide a wide sidewalk with street trees along the face of the grocery store. Delineating the public realm of the street will be critical. Agenda Item #~_ Page # "",~D ~ ~ - ~ ~ - _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ , lvri~trn~ ~~- ~ ~ ~ > ~ -- 1 ~ ; f ; .`~,~~<;•`• .~;~ =~ • .j' ,.:•• .. ~ ' I ,`ay~;~~ ~~ J: ,'A..~. ~ ~ ' iJ (. ^ .•' • ' ~"~in.~~":~w. _.~ . ~.:i'`;... ~ y.._ . ~ ~ ~~ ~± ~ ~~- .~'~..~ , ~~;~ ' • I ••~ ~:~' ~' Option 1- Central Grocery Store ~,,, ~---~-°--E~ ' .~ ~ Boulder, Colorado s~,. ) ' ~' Civitas Inc., Perspectlve311.C ~ • ]uac27,2002 . ~___.-__.____Jc~ i'_'.~ /~`_"" -`~ /'"'_._..____...__... ,. _.._..,._,._.. "'1 ~l ('~__.l (^ . `-,"1 ~ ~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ b ~ ~ -- - ~ ~ ~ . ~~~ ~ ~~ Q a ~ 1 _ ~ ~ ~ ~ UQ ~ ~ ~ R. A~ M.r ~ ~ 3 ~ ~ b ~ -- ,~ a~ v~a ~ ~ ~ - ^ ~ lyTVr-t~ Grc,~ery ~tore IO Sl~ wqiner retail, 13i6 St. u not eligaed ado uve3I].C . - / I / --^._....~ ~.._..............__,....,~..._...._.._.._-~ /',, 1 1 ~ I - • ~ I, I 1~ r~ II I . ~.. I ~ Wll ~ ~ ' I ,,,,,,, ," I ~ ~ I i"'ii~liii~ ~' _ ~ ~ I ~. I - " __ _ I . °~'°~',~` #'y 0 3Z, ~oa +h " Zb a C~cil~,~ , :,~~ I; ; , , ;.. ~ ~ ~; , ~ ~,. ~ ,,, - , ~ ~ . ;. ,, ,~_ - - , „ J._ ~, .;=-:;._ . - ~_ - +j' ''(- :.'W -_ - , , ~ r -`. r -fi.- -' ~ - ~ i~ ' ~ ~ j il . - ~~t, ~~~ . - ' S ~ ~ "~ - ~~ `~-- _ :-j" ' 's ~ : ~ ':: _ ~1 ! . ~ . ~.... .._.: . .-• - ~~ . ti~ • r ..~.. , ,L ! i '. :. ~~ : 4; 1 1 ,~ . ~ . _" ~'l:~-~ ~ _'" ~ ..~~ ~ '~/ '1 ~ ~!' ~ v ~ )~ ~~ ` ~`~ ~ \ ~~ V ~ ) ~ ~ ~ ~~ I r P '' \ + ~i 1{I~~.,: _,,~ k~~,~ , ~ '' _ ~7 I` ~~ ~'yr .`i~~51~t {.~ ~ 2~"~~i'~' ~i. . _ `~Li J, `~ • ~+ ' I ' ' i+..;: l,`~, ~ I'( ~~ ..- '7i" ~ n ~ - `'.~ \9 ~ ~ I • ~ ~ ~ ' ,~. , J( ~ . ~ ~ ~~i• '~ji`:.A( i _-- ~ • ~, ~° ~ ~u~ ~ ~ ! , ~ 1 ; •' ` , 7\~ '3"s~ , ~` r /' ~. .-.~ aJ..+=._.. - .~ry'L: ~` ' ~ i i~, • l.~'~l\,\\ _ ~~ i ~ `J, ,~'(:•'4'~, ``~ `~'' ~w1~ b f ~ - I _ ..~~;~ •3 ~! ~ :'.~..~' •, I ~x.l:~,~~~~y~l ~,~ •A:i:, ~ .,:.:~ ''y:~' ' ~ ~ ~. ~...~~ ;, ,~.• ,'. _ ~ ~~ ~..,~s.~. . . ~ ~ : ti,.,,~~, , . ~ ~~`' Option 2b - North Grocery Store ~ ~~ "'~ ~~ i~; • ~•' Smrller Gracery etore (32,200 SF) wAiner retail, 13'~ St. ie aliQned I " ~ ) ~ Boulder, Colorado ; ~ Civitas Inc., Perspective3 LI,C ~`~1 ~ _~ ~ _ - .._. lune 27, 2002 --- ~ ..._...._.._...._._,,...._ ~ -`~ ~ ~ f _.. - \ / , _ ,._.,_... ~ ~ ( 1 ( . D CL C~ rr '. ~ ~ ~ ~ _ - ~ UQ ~ • ~ ~ `~,ll i W ; ~6~ , ~~~ ~ tF ~ ~ p y~~ h~ ~.. .. .. ATTACHMENT H DRAF'T - June 18, 2002 I see the evolution of the North Boulder viliage as two deals in the making. First, land acquisition and preparation of a site that will easily accommodate a pubIic building such as a library. The second part of the deal PART I - Site Preparation 1. Old Rosewood Avanue Right of Way a. The City agrees to vacate the right of way. The northern 30 feet will attach to the Loftus Parcel and the southern 30 feet will attach to the public party. Each party wiil quit claim any interest that it may have in the land that it will receive as part of the vacation. c. To the extent that they are not used building floor area limitations on the public parcel, and open space and density transfers that benefit the parcel d. Raise the amount of the floor azea permitted on the public parcei to approximateiy 21,000 sq.ft., above grada. e. Release the covenant to split the construction costs of old Rosewood Avenue right of way. 2. Roundabout. Loftus will construct the roundabout that will be located at the terminus af 13`" Sh•eet on the south. It will be tocated, more or less, in the otd Rosewood Avenue right of way. 3. Plaza improvements to the Village Green. Loftus will build some type of plaza adjacent to the building on the southwest corner of his property on the City's portion of the vacated old Rosewood Avenue right of way. 4. The Trapezoid Parcel, presently owned by Boulder Meadows - Uniprop. The City will purchase the property and pernut Loftus to do the following: a. Construct a drainage conveyance pipe that will empty into a water quality detention pond. The detention pond will be sized so that it can accommodate the water quality treatment needs of the Loftus property and the Library Parcel. After the landscaping K:V'LCUM-rosewaod-deal.j ud.wpd Agenda Item # ~ ~ Page #~_ has been established, the City will assume the responsibility for maintaining the improvement. . b. Allow Loftus to cross the trapezoid with its sewer main that will connect into the City's system in the southern part of the public patcel. 5. StaeingArea. The City will give Loftus pernnission to use the public parcel as a construction staging area 6. Landscaoine. Loftus will provide landscaping on all of the areas outside of the 100 year flood plain of Four Mile Creek, not including the building envelop for the librazy and the library pazking lot to a Parks department standard and maintain the landscapin~ for two yeazs after installation. PART II - Library Building Library Shell Construction - Basic idea - The City would exchange development excise ta~c payments for construction the shell of the building by Loftus. ~-:_ ~ ,,. . _. .._~' i , ~•~ __.._._. ,...._._ _,„ , ~ .~.-_ / /~~~ t v~'~~, \ ~ v~ ..., ~?'l ~ ~.~ ~ ~~ ,~ .~:~' ~,~.~ -, _ n ~ ~,~'~~ . , ~ ~`~ ~ ,~ ,i',~11~~ ,' ,,~,~ ~: l._ _. f 'C/} w~~''~ ~; ~ ~ _, K:IPLCU\m-rosewaoE-dtal.jud.wpd Agenda Item #_~ Page # ~ ATTACHMENTI a~~~~ ~~ ~ CITY OF BOULDER Pianning and Development Services 1739 Broadway, Third Floor • P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306-0791 phone 303-441-1880 • fax 303-441-3241 • web bnulderplandevelop.net CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS DATE OF COMMENTS: June 27, 2002 CASE MANAGER: Mike Randall PROJECT NAME: NORTH BOULDER VILLAGE LOCATION: 4520 N BROADWAY COORDINATES: N08W06 REVIEW TYPE: Sita Revlew Review of Revisions No. 1 REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2002•00099 DESCRIPTION: SITE REVIEW: A mixed use development comprised of 40,337 sf of commercial, 223 units of housing on 8.5 acres. REQUESTED VARIATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: A height variation to 44 feet is requested. I. REVIEW FINDINGS Application meets all criteria; minor documentation corrections must be submitted prior to Planning Board scheduling. Recommendation of approval will be conditioned as follows: 1. The applicant must complete the renogiatied covenant concerning the City of Boulder and the dedicated Rosewood Avenue and Library site. 2. The applicant must complete the vacation of Rosewood Avenue. 3. The applicant must adhere to the Conditions of Approval attached to these comments. 4. Significant concerns remain for the final engineering of street and utility improvements: the plans submitted to date are not approved and are not final, the process for obtaining approval of final plans is Technical Documents. II. CITY REQUIREMENTS AccesslCirculation Traffic Imoact Studv The traffic study needs minor corrections. Two copies need to be submitted on or before July 1, 2002 in time for review by Planning Board and/or interested members of the public. These corrections are: 1. Page 9 contains a reference to the Skip transit route's headway being a minimum of 2 minutes, The planned headway for this route is a minimum of 6 minutes. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 2. On page 22 under the Progression Analysis section, it is unclear which signal (Violet or Yarmouth) is referenced in the second paragraph. Please clarify this reference. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 3. The two final copies submitted to the city need to be signed and sealed by a Colorado registered professionai engineer. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 Site Plans A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan must be provided to show how a significant shift away from Single Occupant Vehicle (SOV) trips will be achieved. Staff recognizes that the nature of this mixed use development and the design of the site supports transit, pedestrianism, and bicycles. However, Planning Board will be holding high Address: 4520 N BROADWAY Agenda Item # ~~ n Page #~ expectations with regard to TDM for this location. Programmatic TDM strategies that work with the nature and design of this site will be needed to further support a significant mode shift. City staff will be available to work with the applicant to aid in the creation of and, in some cases, help fund TDM programs. Some suggestions to achieve this requirement include: • Provision of RTD transit passes for employees on-site such as the Employee Eco-Pass program • Removing the cost of parking (referred to as unbundling parking) from residential and/or retail leases and charging for individual spaces to create an incentive to provide iess long-term empioyee parking • Improvements to transit stops along Yarmouth and/or Broadway • Provisions of additional covered bicycie parking in retail areas for employees and customers • Use of employee and residential transit coordinators to promote and encourage transit, carpooling, and non- vehicular travel options • Preferential on-site parking for employee car-pooling • Car share program for residents and employees 2. In order to maximize use of the transit available in the area and to achieve provision of transit passes, an escrow or other financial guarantee of $18,000 will be required to assure the provision of transit passes for ali on-site employees. This dollar amount roughly corresponds with the costs of providing three consecutive years of passes for 120 employees. This amount will be returned to the applicant if contracts with RTD can be provided yearly for three consecutive years. If these cannot be produced, the city will use the escrow money, and if money remains at the end of the three year period, the remainder will be returned to the applicant. Staff encourages the applicant or his tenants to pursue passes without the city's intervention. To help achieve this goal, GO Boulder will match 50% of the first year's costs and 25% of the second year's costs for each business that provides passes without the city's use of escrow money. 3. The previous comments regarding additional right-of-way width for Yarmouth have been resolved as shown on the current Site Review submittal. Initial discussions indicate that should timing permit, the developer will complete construction of this portion of Yarmouth consistent with what would othenvise be required to be reimbursed for the city project. Under this scenario, the developer will not be responsible for providing a reimbursement to the city for the Yarmouth project. The estimated cost for the work on Yarmouth for this site is $87,000. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 4. The private maintenance for additional amenities within alleys as described in the response to comments is supportable by staff. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 5. Discussions with the applicant on how the Rosewood/Broadway intersection would function indicate that left turns out to Broadway wili be discouraged by not building a left-turn lane. In future reconstruction of Broadway, a center median may be built in such a manner to further restrict exiting left turns while still allowing entering left turns onto Rosewood. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 6. After further coordination with other development proposals south of this site, staff supports the proposal to amend the NOBO plan in the following manner: a) Extend the proposed alignment of 14~h south to Violet. b) Remove the vehicular donnection of 13`" Street between Rosewood and Violet. c) Create a proposed multi-use path connection between Rosewood and Violet aiong the 13t6 Street alignment. d) Relocate the pedestrian connectivity east to the mobite home park south to the lot south of this development. This is due to the location of mobile homes and grade changes making the alignment shown on the plan infeasible. 7. The sidewalk on the south side of Yarmouth needs to be contained in easement or right-of-way along the entire length of the property. The right-of-way width near Broadway is 34 feet wide, and this width is required along the entire frontage along Yarmouth. It is unclear from this drawing if this is shown correctly, however the sidewalk itself is in the correct location, so this would have no impact on the site plan. Therefore, this issue can be clarified with the Preliminary and Final Plat. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 S. The plans show a break in the row of on-street parking along the east side of Broadway between Rosewood and the bridge. It is appears that two or three additional spaces could fit within the break in parking. Please clarify why this break occurs. Additionally, see informationai comments below with regard to CDOT's input on this issue. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 9. The plans for the podium parking indicate that the full-size spaces are 18'-6" long. The requirement for full-size spaces is 19 feet long. Steve Durian, 303-441-4493 Agenda Item # ~ ~ Page #~'~ Address: 4520 N BROADWAY Drainage 1. The Preliminary Drainage Report indicates that no offs'rte Flows enter the site because entrances to the site have been designed with a high point six inches above the flowlines in Yarmouth Avenue and Broadway. City standards allow depths up to 48-inches above flowline for arterial streets during the major storm event, U an analysis of existing and future offsite flows, it wouid seem prudent to assume that llows in the adjacent streets are the maximum allowable when assessing offsite impacts: Additionat analysis will be required at the timellof Techn cal e Document Review. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 2. The applicanYs written response indicates that all building entrances have a high point 6lnches above the Flowline of North Sroadway and Yarmouth Avenue. As indicated above, fhe citys Design and Construction Standards require that arterial streets be designed so that the depth at the flowline does not exceed 18-inches. Final drainage plans submitted for Technical Document Review will need to demonstrate that buildings will ~ot be inundated by on-site or off-site flows, Includtng the 100-year storm event. The applicant is advised that if modification of building heights is necessary to address drainage issues, this could require a Site Review Amendment or Minor Modification. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-441g. 3. The applicanPs written response to city commenfs regarding groundwater discharge from the underground parking garages indicates that these flows are anticipated to be connected to the sanitary sewer system. The only parking garage flows that can be discharged to the sanitary sewer are those from interna! garage floor drains that collect snow melt and similar runofF from cars. Discharge of groundwater or sform runoff to the sanitary sewer system is prohibited under Section 11-3-4, "General Prohibitions," Boulder Revised Code, 1 gg1, As indicated previously, groundwater can generally not be surtace discharged to the public right-of-way without violation of Section 8-2-g, "p~scharging Water Prohibited," Boutder Revised Code, 1981. The applicant is advised that if storm sewer is nok provided and groundwater discharges result in violations, the applicant wilt be required to consiruct appropriate storm sewer facilities to remedy the violation. This will be a requirement of the Site Review approval. Please note that constructing a storm sewer after the Fact may require relocation of existing utilities and wi!! require street reconstruction at the applicanPs expense. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 4. At the time of Technical Document Review, the applicant will need to demonstrate that grading along North Broadway will alfow the existing storm sewer inlets to function with the new flowline afignment. It appears that there could be some benefit to relocating inlets to the new flowline rather than removing parking at those locations. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4478. 5. Constructiort of the proposed water quality pond on City of Boulder property will require a separate agreement between the applicant and the city. Approval of the Site Review does not constitute approval of construction on the ciry owned parcel. Jeff Arthur, public Works, 449-4418. 6. The street flow calculations provided are based on a full 34-foot width street. At a number oF locations on the site, the street section has been narrowed due to intersection neck-downs, etc. F'rrtal design wiii need to account for any reduced flow capacity due to tfiese constrictions. Jeff Arthur, Pub(ic Works, 441-4418, Engineering 1• Engineering plans and reports submitted in support of Land Use Review apptications are reviewed only for conceptual conformance with city standards. Final engineering plans and reports submitted for Technical Document Review shalt meet all requirements of the Design and Construction Standards (DCS} and Boulder Revised Code, 1981. If elements of the approved Land Use Review preclude the development of plans meeting these requirements, the applicant shall be required to modify the Land Use Review approval through the appropriate city review process. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418, 2. As proposed, this Site Fteview requires the use of land not curcently under the applicanYs ownershi Site Review does not constitute approval for construction of improvements on cit parties. Prior to application for Technical Document Review of final engineering plans the app ica ~~ ~q~ ~d to ther obtain legal rights for construction and maintenance of any improvements located on other properties. In the case of improvements on land owned by the city, this wili need to consist of a legal agreement acceptable to the city. In the event that improvements are to be constructed on land owned by a third party, the applicant wilt be responsible for obtaining rights-of-way or public easements in accordance with the Boulder Revised Code, 1981, and Design and Construct'ron Standards. Jeff Arlhur, Public Works, 441-4418. Atldress: 4520 N BROADWAY Agenda Item #_ ~~ page #~ 8' 3. The applicant has not provided a Preliminary Subdivision Plat at this time. The applicant is advised that many city engineering requirements are related to how properties are subdivided. Additional comments or requirements may be applicable upon review of a Preliminary Subdivision Plat which could impact the Site Plan and result in the requirement of a Site Review Amendment or Minor Modification. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 4. The applicant must obtain approval of the following engineering related documents throughout the citys Technical Document Review process prior to application for any building permits. Applicatiorr forms detailing specific submittal requirements are available at the Planning & Development Services Center. Ail documents must be in accordance with the Boulder Revised Code, 1981 and the Design and Construction Standards. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441- 4418. a) Final Subdivision Plat b) Final Construction Plans 1) Street Plans & Profiles 2) Utility Plans & Profiles 3) Stormwater Plans & Profiles 4) Final Stormwater Report Fire Protection 1. Closer review indicates that an additional fire hydrant is required, probably centered between Bldgs. A, B, C and D in the private drive in Block 2, to bring these buildings within 175-feet of the nearest hydrant. Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350. 2. Please show fire service line(s) for Block 2 buildings on master utility plan. Adrian Hise, 303-441-3350. Housing and Human Services 1. Applicant has indicated that to meet the 20% permanently affordable requirement for the proposed 223 units, 37 units will be provided on site, with S units compensated through cash-in-lieu. This constitutes approximately 17% the requirement being met with on-site units. The cash-in-lieu contribution for attached units is the lesser of $16,840 or $70.17 multiplied by 20% of the total floor area of the market rate units. Note that these are year 2002 figures, which are adjusted annually. Assuming that these are attached units and that the average square footage of the market rate units will be 1200 square feet, cash-in-lieu would be calculated as follows: 223-proposed total number of units, times 20% inclusionary zoning obligation = 44.6 37 = proposed number of permanently affordable on-site units 37 x 5= 185 units "accounted" for through on-site units 223 - 185 = 38 units "unaccounted" 38 x$16,840 (cash-in-lieu for attached units) _$639,920 2. Applicant has discussed the possibility of working with Boulder Housing Partners for the permanently affordable units. Boulder Housing Partners has expressed a preference for the units to be clustered in specific buildings rather than dispersed throughout the development for financing, tax credit, and management reasons. While dispersal of permanently affordable units is generally encouraged, staff acknowledges that this is an acceptable option. 3. Applicant has been advised of the size requirements for the permanently affordable units. Additional information on square footage of the market rate units and the permanently affordable units will be required as plans progress. 4. Covenants to secure the permanent affordability of the units must be signed or any applicable cash-in-lieu contribution must be made prior to application for building permits. Linda Hill-Blakley, Housing Planner, 441-3157 Landscaping 1. As indicated in previous Utility comments, trees are not permitted within 10-feet of utility mains and services. The plans continue to have a number of conflicts. Prior to approval of a final landscape or utility plan, the applicant will need to relocate trees or utilities to address this requirement. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 2. No further requirements. See informational comments below. Bev Johnson, 303-441-3272. Legal Documents Agenda Item #~_ Page #~ Address: 4520 N BROADWAY 1. Authorization is still required for Four Mile Canyon Creek, LLC prior to preparation of the the development agreement on this project. 2. Much of this approval is dependant upon the negotiations taking piace with respect to the parcel owned by the adjacent property owners (trapezoid parcel) as weli as the on-going negotiations with the city Library. (Melissa Rickson - CAO) 3. An existing right-of-way exists where the old Rosewood alignment was anticipated. A right-of-way or transportation easement can only be vacated by City Councii action. Before a final plat can be approved, this right-of-way will need to be vacated. Steve Durian,303-441-4493 Parking Correct the parking calculation as follows: a. Residential parking requirement: 1 space per each dwelling unit = 223 spaces for 223 units, 248 spaces provided b. Non residential parking required: 1 space per 500 square feet = 81 spaces for 40,337 sf, 93 spaces provided " Total required = 303 Total provided = 347 c. On street parking provided 55 spaces Total ProJect = 396 spaces ("Note: the maximum non-residential parking that could be provided is 1:300 = 134 spaces) Parks and Recreation 1. A detailed landscape design for the city-owned parcel, including the "village green," library, and detention area, must be submitted for review and approval by the Parks and Recreation Department. 2. Landscape instailation will be pertormed by the developer and the landscaping will be maintained by the developer for two years following installation. Utilities 1. There are a number of outstanding issues on the proposed Civil Utility Pian. The applicant is advised that if Preliminary/Finai Subdivision Plats and Utility Construction plans cannot be developed in accordance with city standards due constraints imposed by the Site Review plan, the applicant will be required to obtain a Minor Modification or Site Review Amendment as appropriate. 2. Comments previously provided under Engineering requested that lots and blocks be shown on the p~ans. The appiicanPs response indicates that blocks have been shown. Staf( assumes from this response that blocks will not be further subdivided into lots. The applicant is advised that the manner in which a property is subdivided has a significant impact on utility requirements. 3. As indicated in previous comments, the city will allow one domestic water service, one fire sprinkler line, and one sanitary sewer service for each structure. Multiple services to a single structures, as shown on the plans, are oniy permitted where the structure is located on more than one legal building lot. Multiple services are not provided for condominium units. Please note that the city does encourage the use of private metering inside the structures as this tends to promote water conservation. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 4. The Civil Utility Plan shows trees as required, but it is not clear that the locations are identical to those shown on the Landscape Plan. Final utility drawings should include the tree layer from the landscape plan as a faded background layer to ensure that no tree/utility conflicts exist, particularly as separate changes to each drawing are made. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 5. City standards require that utility mains and services be located a minimum of 10-feet from existing and proposed trees. The Civil Utility Plans shows numerous conflicts with this standard including trees located directly over services. Revisions are necessary prior to approval of a final landscape or utility plan. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 6. All utility services must be connected to a pubiic main. Shared services and private mains are not acceptable. For example, Block 2, Building D shows branching sewer services beyond a terminus manhole. This and similar deficiencies will need to corrected on the final plans. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. Agenda Item #_ ~~/~ Page #~ Address: 4520 N BROADWAY 7. The Civil Utility Plan does not meet ciry standards for gate valve placement. A minimum of two valves are required at all tee connections and a minimum of three valves is required at all cross type connections. Please refer to DCS 5.08(C) for detailed valve and isolation requirements. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 8. The Civil Utility Plan shows a sanitary sewer manhole located in a parking space east of building F. This is not acceptable as the manhole wilt be inaccessible when a car is parked at this location. The applicant needs to either relocate the manhole or eliminate the parking space. Previous staff comments indicated that it was not acceptable to locate sewer manholes in parking spaces. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 9. Ciry standards require that Utility Plans show existing and proposed water meters (DCS 4.03). Meters are not shown. on the plans. Water meters must be located in landscaped areas and cannot be located in sidewalks, driveways, streets, etc. Jeff Arthur, Pubiic Works, 441-4418. 10. The Civil Utility Plan shows water services to Block 3, Building A located in a private drive lane. It is not clear from the plans where the required water meters will be located. Water meters must be located in landscaped areas and cannot be located in driveways, sidewalks, streets, etc. The applicant needs to relocated water service to this structure or clarify meter iocations. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 11. Biock 4, Buiiding H- There is a set of annotations for a water/fire service that does not point to anything. Please clarify. JeffArthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 12. The proposed water line loop across the publicly owned parcel is unacceptable as shown. The following speciflc deficiencies were noted. Please refer to the city's Design and Construction Standards for complete requirements: a) The line is not adequately separated from proposed trees. b) The line is shown going under a proposed building footprint. c) There are no valves shown at three of the four tees, and only one valve shown at the fourth. d) No fire hydrants are shown. Hydrants are required to meet spacing requirements and to allow testing and flushing of the line. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 13. The proposed sewer service to the publicly owned parcel is shown connected to a manhole. This service does not appear to meet city criteria for connection of a sewer service to a manhole. Please refer to DCS Section 6.08 for detailed requirements. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 14. The sanitary sewer manhole at the corner of Rosewood Avenue and the access to Block 3, Building C is shown with no grade drop. A drop is necessary to avoid loss of velocity around the proposed bend. Please refer to DCS Section 6.07 for detailed requirements. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. 15. East of Block 1, Building A1, there are two sewer manholes located within 10-feet of each other. It is unclear why two manholes are being provided in such close proximity to each other. This does not appear cost effective, nor is it desirable from a maintenance perspective. Please clarify. Note that if Block 1 is a single structure connected by underground parking, only one sewer service will be permitted. Jeff Arthur, Public Works, 441-4418. Agenda Item # ~~ Page #_yL_ ATTACHMENT J Ap~u is~, aooa ZOOx Z G~'~'~? To: City of Boulder Planning Department ~~~~~'" From: Representatives fromYazmouth Pazk Owner's Association Boazd Re: North Boulder Village, Site Review Submittal We haue recently reviewed the prelinrinary plans for the development of the pazcel of land on the south-east corner of Yarmouth and Broadway in North Boulder. We have several concerns which we would like to inform you of. We are representative board members from the small mixed-use development at 1435 and 1455 Yarmouth Two of us were developers of that project and we all have a long-term interest and committment to the development of North Boulder with strong design standazds and with a commitment to open space and the quality of life standards. Our concerns about the "North Boulder Village": 1) The Srst is that we think that a 55-foot height exemption request is completely unreasonable. It does not fit with the scale of North Boulder and would block views of the foothills. 2) The second is that the "North Boulder Village" as shown in the site review submittal has some commercial along Broadway, but does not create the sense of "village center" that has been envisioned in the North Boulder Plan, and was being designed in the "Safeway ProjecY'. The previous design incorporated residential and business space in a lazge shopping center azea designed to serve the whole North Boulder community. The lack of a grocery store is a loss to the neighborhood and the whole concept of the village center needs to be revisited by the plauniug board in light of the history of the vazious parcels that remain to be developed. We need a local grocery store and it appeazs at this time that there is no suitable zoning for one. 3) The third is that the "North Boulder VIDage" does not seem to have a well- designed open space plan even for it's own residents. There don't seem to be any play areas for children or pleasant places for the residents to mix with rest of the locai community. This level of density needs to be supported by an open space plan that is thoughtful and community minded, not just left over spaces between large buildings. 4) The portion of this project on city property on the south seems inappropriate. While most developers would love to be able to use the adjacent property they aze not allowed to do so. The detention azeas offer the possibility of enhanced public open space when thoughtfully placed and designed. In line with the cover statement of environtnentally intelligent budding design being crucial to the world's future the storm water system could also use some of the more responsible design features of bio remediation and absorption. 5) There is no design response to the future library. It is an important part of our community's future and our village center should respect that. Agenda Item #~_ Page #_~!~___ We hope that the plauning department will push this design a lot further so that it meets the standards of design that Boulder, and North Boulder in particulaz has been working on for so many yeazs. That is to design affordable housing and mixed use that is well planned and designed and pleasant to live and work in. The increased density of this parcel was given in the North Boulder Plan with the expectation that it would become a true center of activity for the neighborhood. We expect staff and the boazd to accept nothing less. Sincerely, Jim Logan, 1435 Yarmouth Suite ll 4, Boulder, Colorado 80304 Suzie Weaver, 1435 Yarmouth Sherry Wiggins, 3743 Nelson Road, Longmont, Colorado 80503 `~ ~1 ~ --- /4~ ~ ~ . C_/%l;C~~ Agenda Item # /„ n Page #,~~ April 1, 2002 City of Boulder Building Servicas Center Atta; Mike Randall P.O. Box 791 Boulder, CO 8D306 RE: North Boulder Village applicatlon ~ear Mr. Randell: I'm writing in response to the referral I received regarding the No~th Boulder Vlllaga project on the corner of Yarmouth Avenue and 9roadway. Earlier today I reviewed the plans at the office and would Iike to expreas my support of the development. The mixetl-use concept is well designed and archilecturally attractive. The 44 foot pnrtions of the development tor which the height extension is requesfed, are higher than most StruCtures In the are8, but are well deslgneQ (only segments of the structure rise to that height) and wlll not adversely impact the neighborhood character. I am relieved that signs placed on the property hy neighbors referring to the 56' structure are incorrect, according to the plans available Tor puhliC view at fhe Planning Services Center. I urge the City to approve the development in an area of town that lacks the services of most neighborhoods throughout Boulder. One of Boulder's greatest attributes is its emphasis on walking to local shopa and services rather than having ta constantly jump in a car. This proposat supplies some oi those servicea in an area oi town that is currentiy very dependent on auto use. Thank yau tor considering my commenta. Sinceraly, .~~~' ./// ~- Glen 5egrue f 1455 Yarmoufh Ave. Agenda Item #~_ Page #~~ Page 1 of ~ Mike Randall - RE: North Boulder Village 44' height variance From: "mike m. moore" <mmm@tresbirds.com> To: "'Mike Randall"' <RandallM@ci.boulder.co.us> Date: 4/2/2002 12:39 PM Subject: RE: North Boulder Village 44' height variance To: Mike Randall Re: North Boulder Village 44' height variance Mike, I have reviewed the project file at the planning services center and do not feel that the 44' variance is appropriate for the north boulder neighborhood. I live and work at 1455 Yarmouth Avenue. I believe that existingthe 35' height requirement is appropriate and I will act accordingly to contest the variance request. mmm tres birds warkshop Agenda Item # !o~_ Page # t/_5 Page 1 of 1 Mike Randall - Site Review #LUR2002-00019 From: Patricia McMahon <patmcmahon~777@yahoo.com> To: <randallM@ci.boulder.co.us> Date: 4/1/2002 3:50 PM Sub,ject: Site Review #LUR2002-00019 Mr. Randall, I am a resident of Boulder Meadows and am opposed to the site variance proposed by Four Mile Canyon Creek, LLC for 4520 N. Broadway. I do not want any of my views of the Foothills obstructed by a 44' building. Additionally, it will give the feeling of being "walled" in and we'd lose the spaciousness we love. Please consider the residents' feelings on this matter. Cordially, Patricia McMahonpatmcmahon7777@yahoo.com Do You Yahoo!? Yalioo~ Greetin~~s - send greetings for Easter, Paesoyer Agenda Item # ~o n Page #~~ Page 1 of 1 Mike Randall - Re: LUR2002-00019 FMCC project Height Varience From: debbie chambers <usacruzer@yahoo.com> To: Mike Randall <RandallM@ci.boulder.co.us> Date: 4/3/2002 3:45 PM Subject: Re: LUR2002~00019 FMCC project Height Varience Thank you for the timely response. I suspect your a very busy man. My objection is to the raising of the building height to anything over 35'. I reviewed the FMCC application in your office on March 27 and saw where there would be no 3 story buildings over 44' high. I would only expect & hoped you would have received the same ban age of correspondence had everyone known it was a 44' height variance request instead of the 55'. 35' is more than sufficient to build their 3 story building, the Nature conservancy standing at 34' located at 24th & pine is an example of what can be done under 35' and how tall that actually is. Thank You for your time Gary and Debbie Chambers > > Do You Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Greetings - send holiday greetings for > Easter, Passover > http://greetings.yahoo.com/ > Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Tax Center ~ online filing with TurboTax ht#p //taxes,yaho_o. com/ Agenda Item # (~~_ Page #~'~ Page 1 of 1 Mike Randall - Opposition to North Boulder Village Height Variance Request From: Kyle Mathews <kmathews@dawsonschool.org> To: <randallm@ci.boulder.co.us> Date: 4/3/2002 3:11 PM Subject: Opposition to North Boulder Village Height Variance Request Mike Randall, My wife and I live at 4632 14th Street in North Boulder in Yarmouth Park, just to the north of Yarmouth Street and the proposed North Boulder Village site. We spoke on the phone today briefly about the developers' plans to request a variance to the city's height restriction above 35 feet. I am strongly opposed to this type of development. I do not believe that any private development should be allowed such a variance. If passed, the three story, gabled buildings in the village will sacrifice mountain views in our North Boulder neighborhood and negatively impact those living in the Yarmouth Park area for the benefit of the developers. I have no major problem with plans to utilize this space for mixed use, but cannot support plans which negatively impact the property owners who are already there by taking away their views above the 35 foot limit. Please pass on my opposition to this plan and let me know if and when there are to be any public hearings on the variance so that I may inform all of my Yarmouth Park neighbors and attend. Thanks very much, Kyle B. Mathews 303~448~9446 Agenda Item #~_ Page #~ DEVELOPMENT.• ~ ..\~a. _ ~D ~ n ~ ~ YM ~~, c ; ~. ~ r x iF { ?v' .~ n ~ ~ Id ~'~':h'~ v' ~ ~ . ~--_ _ ~ ; _ ~_~~ ~_,.~ , -~ ^ ,_~ y`.~ ~-i--~ r-~-r~-~__~-;`~-~--'~- ~ ' ~-G---- i ,.{ . ~ ,.r-, i , ::a~ .r~~.-~c" ~~ !^~_I_j_1-.L_i_~~'./--'`~~_J i'y''T 1 __l,^ \ ~ ~r~ h'~ - J 1 n T n-r n- r; '~`-,,\ '~---~r ~~ ~~.° _ ~~iiii;iius ^ ~,~'--- / -- - _ ~ ~ j ~~ -~ ;~ = n i ~ i i ,~r~ ~ ~ ' `~•,~=%' , - ii~ll~lU~ -,--~ ~ / _ J _~ `~-~~ _ '~~~rl- ` ~ i I I~" ~ ~--~•-f"~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ni~ii~il'' '^,,'.~.~ -,e __ Krtu r ~ ~~ ~ .~ ~ h~-~ ° °'` :~~ :., ~ LOFTUS DEVELOPMENTS, LLc ARCHITECiURE & URBAN DESIGN: VAN METER WILLIAMS PaLLACK, LLP. San Francisco Denver LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE: STUDIO 2 DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERING: MB CONSULTING Planning Board Submittal June 24 2002 1 i If is our belief that environmentally intelligent building design and urban planning is crucial to the wodd's fufure, !] ~ r i~ ~-- ~ ~~ u r r- • ~,' Vicini Ma Parking Summary Garage Spaces: Parking Lots; Public Streets Total Residential Unit Mix 189 spaces 1 Bedroom: 101 units 83 spaces 2 Bedroom: 98 units 122 spaces 3 Bedroom: 24 units 394spaces Building Code: Type V 1 Hour Project Concept North Boulder ~Ilage has been designed to be part of the vision as defined by the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan. As a Mixed-Use Urban Village, it provides a varieiy of choices of urban living for people within a wide spectrum of income levels. The 8.95 acre private site plus 3 acre public site are divided into compact urban blocks by streets intentionally scaled and detailed to be appropri- ate for the shared use and enjoyment of both pedestrians and automobiles. These streets are fronted by urban buildings including mixed-use and residential blocks. A series of linked public spaces connect North Broadway to 13th Street. From there, an allee' of street trees and special paving furfher deflne an invitingly multi-use lane that continues on to the Villages eastern boundary of 14th Street, At the Building Prototypes Mixed Use: 39 Loft Units 50,864 sf residential/ 35,337 sf retail 1& 2 bedroom plus loff units 8 fee in lieu (affordable units) 2& 3 story mixed use buildings 39 garage parking spaces (i per loft) 83 retail parking lot spaces 1 space per 425 sf retail live / Work: 10 units 4,250 sf'work' total 12,000 sf "live" total 1& 2 bedroom units 3 story commercial rowhause buildings 20 enclosed pprking spaces (2 per unit in private garages) Carriage Units: 2 dwelling units 800 sf each / 1,600 sf total 2 affordable units 2 bedroom units 1 story over parking garage 1 garage parking space 1 unit Townhouses: 24 dwelling units 36,000 sf 3 bedroom units 3 story rowhouse buildings 48 enclosed pprking spaces (2 per unit in private garages) Ur Library:13,500 sf 47 parking spaces 2 story Public / Private Joint Developmen ban Block: 148 dwelling units 139,870 sf 1 & 2 bedroom units fiats, loffs and townhouse units 35 affordable units 2& 3 story courtyard buildings 148 enclosed underground parking t spaces (1 per unit) Private open space is provided to the neighbor- hood residents by means of private decks, terraces, patios, front porches and yards as well as the shared semi-public courtyard spaces, south west corner of the site, a public promenade is placed adjacent to the Village Green and Fourmile Canyon Creek. This continuous public place leads to a circular drive that terminates 13th street and will serve as a drop off and turn-pround for vehicles approaching the Community Library that encloses the Village Green and creek edge. Parking for commercial uses is provided in lots at the center of the mixed-use blocks which are screened from the view of passersby on public streets by the surrounding mixed-use buildings they serve. On street parking at the perimeter of each block contributes to the recogn¢able quality of qn urban place. Enclosed parl6ng for residents of the Urban Village is provided either within the two courfyard building's underground garages, or in above ground garages within the mixed-use blocks, Townhouses and Live/Work buildings will be designed to provide enclosed tuck-under pqrking. T Mixed-use buildings front Norfh Broadway and along Yarmouth Avenue to 13th Sheet. 13th 3treet will be ftonted on the west side by the storefronts of Live(Work buildings, The courfyard residential build- ing's urban-walkup housing provides street enclo- sure along the east side of 13th Street south to Rosewood Avenue. UrbanTownhouses front 13th Street on both sides down to the circular drive bor- dering the Village Green. The buildings and public urban spaces of Norfh Boulder Village have been designed by taking cues from the surrounding industrial area. It is a contem- porary vernacular architecture of simple, durable materials and inventive, practical urban forms. ... ~~.~ ~ ~_ List of Drawinas l. CoverSheet 2. Project Information 3. Illustrative Site Plan 4. Building Program 5. Circulation 6. Streets 7. Blocks 8. Open Space 9. Parking 10. Project Phasing 1 l, Solar Site Design and Building Design 12, Public Sheet Building Elevations 13. Protoiypical Building Elevations 14. Neighborhood Concept Images 15. Neighborhood Concept Images 16. Landscape Plan 17. Public Space: Center Plcua Plans 18. Public Space: Center Plc~a Sections 19. Public Space: Corner Plaza Plan 20. Public 5pace: Village Promenade Plqn 21. Public Space: Private Lane Plan 22, Semi Public Space: Courfyard Plara Plan 23. Block 2& 3 Urban Townhouse Design Guidelines 24. Block 4 Live / Work Design Guidelines 25. Sustainable Design Principles Site Development Program Private Site Area: Public Site Area: Total Site Area: Existing Zoning: Total Retail: Total Work: Total Residential: Total A(fordable: Total Affordabie On Site: Tofal Fee In Lieu: Open Space (Private Site): Open Spdce (Public Site): Private Unit Open Space: Total Open Space/Unit Total Floor Area : Total FAR (private only): Total FAR (with pubGc~: Total Public Sheet ROW: Maximum Bldg. Height: Tofal Number of Stories: Ratio Refail / Residential: Total Buildings; Project Density(private only) Project Density(with public): 8.95 acres private 3.07 acres public 12.02 acres total BMS-X & RMS-X 35,337 sf retail 4,250 sf work (live/work) 223 units /239,176 sf 45 units 37 units 8 units 108,010 sf 122% 53,491 sf / 41 % 16,502sf / 74 sf, we. 798 sf / unit 274,513 sf .96 .55 104,196 sf / 2,4 acres 44' 3 stories maximum 14,8% 32 structures 24.9 units/acre 18.55 units/acre Projecf Informafion DEVELOPMENl~ LOfTUS DEVELOPMENTS, L.L.i ARCHIiECTURE & URBAN DESfGN.• VAN METER WILLIAMS POILACK, L.L.P. San Francisco Denver LANDSCAPE ARCHfTECTURE: S1UDI0 2 DESIGN CIVIL ENGINEERING: MB CONSULTING Planning Board Submittal June 25, 2002 2 NO ~ ~~ T~~~~_ .