Loading...
2 - Minutes, June 14, 2007CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD ACTION MINUTES June 14, 2007 1777 Broadway, Council Chambers A permanent set of these minutes and a tape recording (maintained for a period of seven years) are retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). Minutes and streaming audio are also available on the web at: http://www.ci.boulder.co.us/planning/planningboard/agendas PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Elise Jones, Chair Bill Holicky Willa Johnson Phil Shull Adrian Sopher Richazd Sosa PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Andrew Shoemaker STAFF PRESENT: Brent Bean, Senior Planner Charles Ferro, Planner II Jerry Gordon, Deputy City Attorney Cristina Martinez, Civil Engineer I Elaine McLau~hlin, Senior Planner Cindy Pieropan, Housing Planner Robert Ray, Land Use Review Manager Mary Ann Weideman, Administrative Services Manager 1. CALL TO ORDER Chair, E. Jones, declared a quorum at 5:08 p.m. and the following business was conducted. 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES On a motion by W. Johnson, seconded by A. Sopher, the Planning Board approved (6-0, A. Shoemaker absent) the May 17, 2007 Planning Board minutes as amended. 3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION Jeff McWhirter, 5435 Illini Way, commented on environmental factors related to the Hogan-Pancost development proposal and urged the Planning Board to visit the site. 4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS 1409 North Street The Planning Board clarified some information regarding the Floodplain Development Permit at 1409 North Street and did not call-up this item. 5. ACTION ITEMS A. Public hearing and considerarion of Concept Plan Review and Comment #LUR2007-00001, Landmark Lofts II, for the property located at 970 28`" Street The proposal includes development of 130 residential units with underground parking and 2,000 square feet of retail space on 2.45 acres of property in the Residential High-3 (RH-3) zoning district. Case Manager: Charles Ferro Applicant/Owner: Jim Chanin Staff Presentation Charles Ferro, Planner II, presented the case to the board. Applicant Presentation Jim Chanin, Applicant, presented the proposal. Public Hearing No one spoke to this item. Board Discussion The Planning Boazd discussed the following key themes: Euclid Avenue The "main streeP' aspect of Euclid Avenue requires additional wark and needs to be present on both sides of the street. The front doors and pathways need to be included on the site plan. The Planning Board commented on having a better understanding of the parking on Euclid, especially the diagonal parking. Open Snace The Planning Board commented on continuing to work on the initial open space entry, providing solar access into the internal courtyards and ensuring the courtyards are socially functional. Parking Entrance The Planning Board noted that the parking garage entry disrupts the path. However, it was noted that the access on the north side of the property is required fire access from Phase I. The Board stated a parking management methodology would be helpful. Affordable HousinQ Cindy Pieropan, Housing Planner, commented that it is not the City's preference to have affordable housing units at this site and is considering some off-site options. Architecture The Planning Board expressed concern about the wmulative look along Euclid Avenue. The Board commented that the profile along 28`h Street and Euclid Avenue needs to work together. There needs to be cohesiveness and continuity between the buildings. Hei t The Board commented that due to visibility issues, the mechanical units should be behind something other than standard screening. Church in Phase III The Board expressed concern about the view and how much of the Church will be preserved. Motion No action is required on behalf of the Planning Board. Recess The Planning Board recessed at 6:47 p.m. and reconvened at 7:03 p.m. B. Public hearing and consideration of Concept Plan Review and Comment #LUR2007-00012, Violet Crossing, for the property located at 4474 N. Broadway. The proposal includes development of 78 residential units and approximately 9,400 square feet of retail / office area on 4.66 gross acres, in the Mixed Use Two (MU-2) and Residential-Medium Two (RM-2) zoning districts. Case Manager: Charles Ferro ApplicanUOwner: Terry Palmos Staff Presentation Charles Ferro, Planner II, presented the case to the board. Applicant Presentation Nancy Blackwood, Oz Architecture, presented the proposal. Public Hearing Susan Peterson, 4347 13`h Street Elizabeth Black, 4340 N. 13ih Street, pooled time with Winn Franklin, 4380 13`h Street Jim Miller, 4390 Broadway Stephen Schaller, 1480 Quince Avenue Jason Bush, 2990 Shady Hollow Drive Steve Haskins, 90 Lee Hill Road Ed Byrne, 4324 Snowberry Court Astrid Paustian, 4390 13~h Street Andy Allison, 1056 Terrace Circle Charissa Pateel, 4436 Broadway Sally Martin, 1527 48`h Street Cam Fraser, 1205 Upland Avenue Board Discussion Phil Shull: • Requested more information regarding parking configurations, sections of parking garages, connections between buildings, as well as interna] floor plans of Phase Il. buildings. He said the parking garages must be highly functional. • Requested more information regarding sunlight penetration into courtyard areas at Site Review. • Expressed some concerns over traffic at 28°i Street access. • Expressed that student housing developments are not generally attractive for families in need of affordable housing. He supported off site options. • Would like a better understanding of the streetscape along Euclid. • Preferred that there not be a proliferation of stair towers. Adrian Sopher: • Expressed concerns regazding proposed trees over the parking garages. Recommended four feet of soil on the parking deck to accommodate large trees. • Requested additional information on building floor plans. • Would ]ike to see a better relation and connection between open spaces on the west side of 2A and the east side of 2A. Opens space on-site should be better integrated west to east. • Would like to see the applicant do more to increase the value of the open spaces and buildings on the north side of the site, similar to the streetscape that is proposed along Euclid. • The treatment of Euclid will be very important to the success and pedestrian scale of Phase II and Phase III. • Phase III relation to the existing First Christian Church will also become very important. • Sense of arrival from 28`h will also be very important. • Larger open spaces are fine but smaller, more intimate spaces with permeability are also important. • Views through building IIA are very impoRant from 28`h as well as from the interior of the site. Modifications to building IIA should be explored to open up views and provide a link between spaces. • A variety of roof forms are proposed along 28`h. He would like to know more about how they will all work together at Site Review and said too much complexity in the forms can be confusing. • Brownstones along Euclid should have individual entrances from the street in both phases. • Parking on Euclid should be parallel, not aogled. Richard Sosa: • Likes linkages and connections to Phase I and III. • Phase III retail (on southeast corner of Euclid and 28~') should be more sensitive to the church and should be one story. • Open spaces behind building 2A are semi private and may benefit from being disconnected from 28`h Street. • The treatment of Euclid will be very important to the success and pedestrian scale of Phase II and Phase III. Willa Johnson: • Liked the corner retail anchor on the northeast corner of Euclid and 28`h • Did not like the retail anchor on the southeast corner of Phase III. She said the church should remain prominent. • Phase II should address Euclid in a similar manner as Phase II and should be pedestrian oriented. • Expressed concerns regarding shade and open spaces and felt that the height of 3B along Euclid should be lowered to allow additional sunlight in to the courtyard. • Expressed concerns regarding the access along 28`h disrupting a pedestrian corridor. Bill Holicky: • Overall, he liked the site plan. • Views through building IIA are very important from 28`h as well as from the interior of the site. Modifications to building IIA should be explored to open up views and provide a link between open spaces. • Would like to see a better relation and connection between open spaces on the west side of 2A and the east side of 2A. Opens space on-site should be better integrated west to east. • Pedestrian access west to east from 28`h is important. • Liked individually access brownstone units on Euclid. • Having additional building height along 28`h is supportable if the design is appropriate. Elevations along 28`h should be cohesive. Elements should hold the corner but not overwhelm the streetscape or the church. He supported making the corner mare prominent and take mass and volume out of the mid section of the building. • Mechanical units should be hidden and designed into the building rather than using screening. • The church should remain the most prominent element along 28`h. Two story maximum. • Balconies should have closed rails. • Open spaces areas should be less specific and multi-purpose. • Likes internal pathways but pathways may be simplified. Elise Jones: • Rooflines on the north side of building one should be reconsidered to be more interesting. • Views through building IIA are very important from 28`h as well as from the interior of the site. Modificarions to building IIA should be explored to open up views and provide a link between open spaces. • Would like to see a better relation and connection between open spaces on the west side of 2A and the east side of 2A. Opens space on-site should be better integrated west to east. • Plaza spaces should be kept open and less structural. Spaces should be oriented toward student residents The Planning Board discussed the following key themes: Hei t The Board was agreeable to the idea of a variance for three stories at the north side of the site provided the height was minimized. Villa~e Green The Board commented that the 150 feet included in the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan should be maintained as much as possible. However, the 150 feet doesn't necessarily need to be a constant given the color garden, etc. Parkin¢ The Board mentioned the idea to address on-street parking to potentially slow traffic. The Board is willing to adjust setbacks to accommodate on-street parking. However, the directive far the past three years has been to maintain Violet as rural so this idea would have a significant impact to the plan. The Board questioned the access from 14~h Street to the buildings and parking in the courtyard and expressed concem about parking on the east side near the park space. Additionally, access over the water quality pond seemed awkward. The Board stated that the parking plan is not the best but is willing to work with it given past Board direction. However, the Board would like to see something even better, including more trees in the center of the parking lot. The Board expressed concern regarding building G and F's garage doors facing City owned park property and said that the applicant should experiment with reorienting G and F towards Violet to hide parking from Violet and adjacent open space. Amendment to North Bouider Subcommunitv Plan The Board had no concerns with the amendment to the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan for the 13`h Street and 14« Street connections. Architecture The Board commented that transitional architecture seems appropriate on the site and the pedestrian experience should be addressed at all access points. The Board also commented on eliminating or reducing the number of azchitectural bridges. The Board expressed the need for multiple building types and sizes to address the different areas on the site and said that larger building modules will not work for all areas of the site (and that smaller modules throughout the site should be considered at Site Review). The Board also expressed concerns regarding the proposed architecture being somewhat cold and busy and said a transitional blend of traditional and contemporary references would be appropriate for the site. OfficelRetail The Board was pleased with the non-residential uses. The Board commented on including residential uses in Building B. The Board expressed concems that buildings D and E do not have office potential and that first floor office spaces (on Broadway) will do little to active the sidewalks as engaged public spaces. Similarly, spaces between buildings Al, A2, BI, and B2 have to be functional and inviting for pedestrians in order to be useable. The board also expressed concem that a 1,500 square foot restaurant would be supportable. Motion No action is required on behalf of the Planning Board. Recess The Planning Board recessed at 9:03 p.m. and reconvened at 9:10 p.m. C. Public hearing and consideration of Site Review #LUR2006-00072, First Presbyterian Church, for the property located at 1603 Walnut Street. The proposal includes demolition of existing "Annex" building and development of a new 30,781 square foot "Annex" building as part of the overall First Presbyterian Church campus in the Downtown -5 (DT-5) zoning district. The application includes a request for a maximum building height of 51 feet, along with modi£cations to setback and land use intensity standards. Case Manager: Elaine McLaughlin ApplicanUOwner: Tom Zimmerman/The First Presbyterian Church of Boulder, a Colorado Non-Profit Corporation Staff Presentation Elaine McLaughlin, Senior Planner, presented the case to the board. Applicant Presentation Tom Zimmerman, Applicant, presented the proposal. Public Hearing Jon Olsen, 1637 Pearl Street, #301 Alexander Bracken, 125 Brittany Lane, Lafayette Marlys Lietz, 4176 St. Croix Jim Fletemeyer, 1540 Cress Court John Spitzer, 2323 20`h Street Board Discussion The Planning Board discussed the project and provided the following direction for the Applicant to address: 1) Streetscape canopy, 2) Articulation of building massin~, especially at the tower 3) Relief from the two-story Walnut faqade, and 4) Stair location on 16` Street. The Board also noted as a matter of advisement that the Applicant should consider outdoor open space for youth. Motion On a motion by W. Johnson, seconded by R. Sosa, the Planning Board continued (6-0, A. Shoemaker absent) this item within 40 days of June 14, 2007. Recess The Planning Boazd recessed at 10:50 p.m. and reconvened at 10:55 p.m. D. Public hearing and consideration of Site Review # LUR2007-00002 for the property located at 1655 Walnut. The proposal includes development of a four-story building with up to thirty four residential units on a 28,111 square foot site in the Downtown- 5(DT-5) zoning district. The application includes a request far a building height of up to 55 feet. The applicant is seeking creation of vested property rights in accordance with Section 9-4-12 "Creation of Vested Rights," B.R.C. 1981. Case Manager: Brent Bean Applicant/ Owner: MCV Walnut Investments LLC Staff Presentation Brent Bean, Senior Planner, presented the case to the board. Applicant Presentation Andy Bush, Owner, presented the proposal. Jeff Dawson, Architect, presented the proposal. Public Hearing George Waldie, 1825 Walnut Street Steve Clifford, 1637 Pearl Street, #302 Diane Lorenz-Olsen, 1637 Pearl Street, #301 Mim Dixon, 1618 Spruce Street Jeff Borchardt, 2800 7`h Street Sarah Schupp, 1430 55`h Street Tom Zimmerman, 2505 Walnut Street E.J. Meade, 1920 Mapleton Avenue John Hoeffler, 2088 Alpine Avenue Greg Franta, 3950 17`h Street John Spitzer, 2323 20`h Street Vicki Neighbor, 1540 Pine Street David Zessin, 1941 Peazl Street Board Discussion The Planning Board had limited discussion on the courtyard, streetscape, and massing: Courtvard The Planning Board expressed some concern about the scale of the courtyard and how it may or may not work as a quasi-public space. It was noted that the courtyard primarily benefits the residents and is an element that makes the entire building work. Streetscape The Planning Board commented that the residential use works well along Walnut, especially with it being down to the ground. However, a buffer, perhaps a garden space to create the residential feel would be beneficial. Massine The Planning Board expressed comfort with the size and scale of the 4th story. It was stated the design is very good. Motion On a motion by W. Johnson, seconded by P. Shull, the Planning Board approved (6-0, A. Shoemaker absent) Site Review # LUR2007-00002 for the property located at 1655 Walnut, incorporating the staff inemorandum dated June 14, 2007 as findings of fact, subject to the following conditions of approval: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development shal- be in compliance with all approved plans dated May 30, 2007 and on file in the City of Boulder Planning Department, except as modified by these conditions of approval. The Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions contained in PUD #P-89-27 and the Development Agreement recorded at Film No. 1617, Reception No. 1031180 on March 6, 199Q except as may be modified by this approval. 3. Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit a Technical Document Review application for the following items, subject to the approval of the City of Boulder Planning and Development Services Division: a. Final architectural plans, induding materials and colors, to insure compliance with the intent of this approva] and compatibility with the surrounding area. The architectura] intent shown on the approved plans dated May 30, 2007 is acceptable. Planning staff will review plans to assure that the architectural intent is performed: All residential units shall have a minimum 60 square foot private deck accessible from the unit shown on the final site development documents. 2. Mechanical equipment placed on the roof shall not exceed a height of 6' and shall be screened in accordance with city standards. 3. Additional landscaping shall be added along the fronts of the building between the sidewalks and patio areas, and at the enhy gate to the courtyazd. b. Final storm water plans and report in accordance with City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards far all storm water improvements. Drainage shall be constructed per Section 7.10(C)(1)(c) of the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards (DCS), an"n" value of 0.016 shall be used for all calculations involving street runoff. The Cross Section calculations in the Preliminarv Stormwater Renort - 1655 Walnut use a manning's "n" of 0.013. c. Final utility plans and report in accordance with City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards for all sewer, water, and street lighting improvements. 6. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY The Planning Board reviewed the calendar and noted that First Presbyterian Church continued item will be scheduled on July 19 as well as the Capital Improvement Program and Washingion School item. It was noted that the First Presbyterian Church item should be scheduled first. DEBRIEF/AGENDA CHECK The Planning Board expressed concern about the lengthy meeting and applications that are already scheduled into October. The Board commented on asking questions of staff prior to the meeting when possible. In the future, staFf will only schedule three projects on one night. It was noted that a DVD on transit-oriented development is available For the Planning Board to review. 8. ADJOURNMENT The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 12:43 a.m. APPROVED BY Board Chair DATE