5B - Use Review LUR2007-00027 for the property located at 1723 Canyon Blvd - conversion from a residCITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA 1TEM
MEETING DATE: September 6, 2007
Agenda Item Preparation Date: August 21, 2007
AGENDA TITLE:
Public hearing and consideration of non-conforming Use Review #LUR2007-00027, for the
property located at 1723 Canyon Boulevard, in the Residential High-2 (RH-2) zoning
district. The proposal is a conversion from a residential use to a non-residential
acupuncturist's oftice.
Applicant: Stephen Vosper, Architecture, lnc.
Owner: Ted and Livia Hall
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT:
Ruth McHeyser. Acting Planning Director
Robert Ray, Land Use Review Manager
Elaine McLaughlin. Case Manager
OBJECTIVE:
Define the steps tor Planning Board consideration of this request:
1. Hear applicant and staff presentations
2. Hold public hearing
;. Planning Board discussion
-Is the request consistent with required [Jse Review criteria'?
4. Planning Board take action to approve, approve with conditions or deny
SUMMARY:
Proposal: The applicant is requesting a Use Review to convert the existing residential
use to an att3ce use as an acupuncturist oftice.
Project Name: 1723 Canyon Residential Conversion Use Review
Location: 1723 Canyon Boulevard
Size of Tract: O.Q9 Acres (3,839 square feet)
Zoning: Residential High Density-Two (RH-2)
Comprehensive Plan: High Density Residential (HR)
BACKGROUND:
Per Section 9-2-15(d)(1), B.R.C., 1981, Planning Board approval is required for Use Review
applications which propose a non-residential use in a residential zoning district.
A~enda Item # SB Pa~e# 1
Zoning
"I~he subject property is located mid-block on the north side ofCanyon Boulevard between 17'~' and
18`~' Streets near the western edge of the RH-2 (Residential High Density-2j zone district. The
property is located within a half block of areas zoned BT-? (Business Transition -2) and DT-5
(Downtown - 5) the latter of which is the highest intensity zone district. According to Section 9-5-
2(e), B.R.C.1981 the purpose of properties zoned RH-2 is to provide, "cn•eu.ti~ ~~r•imcrril~' 11.5'L'GI f01' C!
vc~riety nf ty~es c~f~utluehed re.sider~liul trnits• irrclirclir~~~, i~~iihoirt linaitcr~ion, u~~a~~tmc~j~t hzrilc~in~~.~~ crr~cl
s~~ecific comple»7emary t~.s~e.s ti~~~here app~°op-•iule.
The property is also located within the Chamberlain Historic District - a local historic district su6ject
to the provisions of the historic preservation ordinance.
Subject Property within the RH-2 Zonc District and Chamberlain Historic District
~; ~+ ~ ~~ . ~~~~~,,~~~ _r_ ' ~ MU 3 ti, ~- ,
, ~ _~- `~,4 J , ~
°.G~ °~~~` ~ , ~'~ t 1K ~,~~r ' ~` ~~ 'i ~ ~ ~ ,1 ~
' ~ 1 _~ ,-t ' . T ' ~' ,
~--" ' ~ i
i `~ ~ ^1~~ `~` , ` 1''~ = 1 ' i ~ ~
~-. r_ L,.~ 1 ~_ - a ~ / / /
_y--~ t L,jl ~ _ 'i ~ ~
~'"~ ~ } ~-- ~ ' ~ % ~~~/j ~%
i ` ~ ';, ~1 ' ~ s~ % ~ .-'~
f ~ ~~1' DT-5 ~ ~~ ', _,~ ~ o~s~t' .; ~;~ % ~ .~
'`1 J J ( i ° '1 t,r '•, ~~f1~51~ ~'~/ ~ - r.~ ~',~
~ i~ ~ ~ etla ~ --i ~~~ ; ~;f ; ~ '~ .~ ' `^,~1
i ~ ±'~ ~- ~,11~~ _.:~'i~,si!~ ./ ~ l•~ ~
~ ~, ~ '~ ~~'°~~ s % %~'' ~'~ ~~~ RH-2 ~ ;~
, i,.s, t - ~ __ _,~`'~` !. "f _ ~'/ + a . i ~
.a'°°~' ~~ ~~~ ~. v r ~, ;
~ - ~ ~
~ ir
~r~r ~; ~ ^' ~ ' ,-~ ~~~_r,~r- r' 1723 CANYON BV I,~.'' .
'_ / / / 7', ~ t =% . ,
` ~'~ . 1 - ~~j. _ ~ % .3/ ~ ~ ~ ,
1 ~~~~~7 b ~, ~ ~ :"; . ', r~r~~ •~ ~ •
t, 1_ 1~~ ~. ~Ti .y ~~ ~%{, i ~ ~.
i~' . . 1Li ~ 6`'~ ~// / / %
*s~ / ~ ~ , %:i
/ i ' ~ /
r-y~ ~'~ i /,~i~ / ; ,.~~ /~ ,.,, .,~! r<%
~' ~ ` i ",_, ~ ~ . <~:%-i5~/.-i/.ii%G%o5:~ ~ . _/,.=1
t ~_~~G, c=~ --~+~ ~ _1 '~ ~~
~ ~ ~: .- - ~~~ ~ -" BT-2 ~ ', CI ~ts ~ ~
, ~.~
, . ~-
_} (,
,, ~ %'~ ~ ~ [~ C~
- ~~ ~-~~ ~,-~ ~ ' ~ ~
1 ~ ~~ 1 ~.~ ~~, ~ ~ ~ ~
1 '~ '
`' ' ~ ~ ~
Sitc Context
Because of the close proximity to higher intensity zone districts, the surrounding area is
characterized by a mix of uses that incl~ide high and low~ density residential development.
Immediately adjacent to the property an the west is an eight unit apartment building; fiirther to the
west and directly north are other multi-family residential developments of varying sizes from
duplexes to three-unit apartments buildings. Immediately adjacent to the east is a duplex and two
doors down is a small law otfce housed within a landmarked property built in 1910, and converted
A~enda ltem # 5B Pa~e# 2
to an oftice in 1978 as spearheaded by Historic Boulder to rehabilitate and landmark the property. A
half-block to the west are offices, Advantage Bank, and some limited retail and residential. Across
the four lane arterial of Canyon Boulevard, to the southwest is the Wells Fargo bank, and directly
across Canyon Boulevard to the south are primarily multi-family ranging in sizes from triplex to
multi-unit condominiums.
History
The existing home on the property was built around 1898. Because the two-story masonry building
was identitied as being a good representative example of~ a front-gabled, regularly-coursed vernacular
stone building, it has been identified as a contributin~ resource to the Chamberlain Historic District.
fn 1898, the home was occupied by a local physician, Frank Parks. By 1900, Frank Swerdfeger, a
horseshoer, lived in the house. From 1949 until 2006, the home was occupied by a single parent w-ho
raised her family there. According to the applicant, when the most recent long-term owner tirst
moved t~ the home in 1949 Canyon Blvd. was a two lane dirt road called Water Street with a train
line running down the middle of the street. It was also noted all of the homes alon~ Canyon
Qoulevard originally had generous tront yards that over time became roadway right-ot=way.
Existing Site
At present, the existing residence is vacant. There is no on-street parking on Canyon Boulevard
adjacent to the property; and the current contiguration of the front vard setback from the Canyon
Boulevard curb is 12-feet from the frant of the home, and seven feet from the front porch. Parking
for the site is accessecl by private access alley easement.
Project Description
The applicant proposes to rehabilitate the existing, contributing structure and remodel the interior
into three acupuncture treatment rooms with a reception area at the back of the building. An existing
enclosed porch would be remodeled into an unenclosed porch consistent with the historic
confi~uration of the Ilouse. A single car garage is planned in a tandem contiguration at the rear of
the property along with two head-in parking spaces accessed from the alley. The applicant has
indicated that the owners of the property, both acupuncturists, would use the garage space, while the
Agenda Item # SB Page# 3
two parking spaces would be earn~arked for clients. New walkways and garden space are proposed at
the rear of the structure, planned as the main entrance to the oftice. Due to the deficiency of on-site
parking available to serve the property, per Section 9-16, B.R.C., 1981. this application includes a
thirty-three percent parking reduction request (two spaces where three are required). Similarly, the
applicant is required to have an ADA accessible space for the office use.
KEY ISSUE ANALYSIS:
Is the request consistent with reyuired Use Re~•ic~~~ criteria?
Attachment C presents a consistency analysis of the proposed project with the LJse Review Criteria.
In `~eneral, statt~ tinds consistency with the Use Review criteria «ith the exception of the primary
criterion related to this project, Giterion #6t: con~~ersion ot~dw-elling units to non-residential uses.
Summary of Consistenc,y ~vith the Use Review Criteria. Regarding consistency with use criteria
#'s l, ?A. 2B, ;, 4 and ~: the proposed use is consistent with the purpose of the zoning district
(Criterion 1): the use could also provide a service to the surrounding neighborhood (Criterion #2A)
and a small oftice is a compatible transition betw~een hi~her and lower intensity uses (Criterion.#2~)
Re~ardin~ rationale #i, staFt~ tinds the location. size, design and operatin~i characteristics of the
proposed development are such that the use ~~~ill be reasonably compatible ~~ith and ~~ill have
minimal impact on the use ~f nearby properties. ~The proposed use ~ould not impact intrastructure as
is rec~uired in Criterion #4. W'ith the eYCeption of a small sign proposed in front of~the buildi~l~ that
indicates the use, the rehabilitation of the historic buildin~ and the use as an acupuncturist otfice will
not chan~,,e the predominant character of the surroundin~~ area as is required in Criteria #~.
Inconsistencv with l~se Review Criteria. A con~~ersioil of use from residential to non-residential
req~~ires th~it the use must meet ull ot~the use review criteria. l_lse Review Giterion #6 found in
Section 9-2-1 >(e)(2)(D)(6), B.R.C. 1981 stipulates. ""There ,sl~tall hc~ u pre,~~trmption a~~uirr.sl
crp~~r•oi~i»~; 11~e rom~e~~.~~iora n~~c/tirellii~K tmil.c irr ~hc~ ~•c~.sicler~li~~l ~aninK clrstricls !o rann-re.ciclentiul uses
that ure ullmrec! j~in•,suun! to n u.se ~~evie-r. ~~r throtrgh !he chcirt,~e ~~f one non-coy~~ormis~~,~ u.se to
ClYlOI~1C'1' YlOY!-COI'1f01'/Y1/f7~~~ 11.1'C'. T~?E' f71'C'.~'t11I1]7!!O1? Ll~,'Clll7.1'I .1'l~lC11 U COYlVPI'S'IOYl /YfCIV ~7P Ol'~1'~'O111C' h~' U
finc~ling ~hn~ Ihe u.s~e to he c~pprnved .ser~~e.s a~~n~/zer• co»~pelli~~~~ .s•~~ciu1. hrrmu~~7 serrices. ~orernrner7lal.
or rec~•eutini7ul s~ec~cl i» Jhe cn~~~n7irnitv i»cli~c/rng, tii•ilhotri lrntilu~ion, a t~se fo~° u~~cri~' care cenler,
J)UI"~C. TL'll~Tiurr.~~ c~.ti~.~~c~r~7h11', .5'OC(Ul ,SC'!'1'1CC' 7!A'P, hCl1C'i'O~L'j71 ll/'~'Q711_'G11011 1ISL'. p1'1 Ol' Cl"Cl~l .SIIfCIlO .~'J7UCE'.
77'lllS'C'111I7. Ol' Cll? L'Cf1fCUll~YlLlj 11SB.
Staff detines a`'compelling social or human services need" as an entity or service. such as a non-
profit, whose primary mission is to provide services to traditionally underserved segments of the
population, such populations would include low income households or disabled persons, or an entity
that provides needed social services not generally available in the area, such as a day care center or
senior center. The applicant has noted that their current clientele includes both students and elderly
patients, members of both groups of which receive discounted sen ices. Staff~ notes that there are a
number of other acupuneturists in Boulder, approximately 10 within a two-mile radius, although it is
unkno~~n if these other acupuneturists ofter discounted rates to certain client groups. Staff tinds the
conversion ot~ this residence to a non-residential use is not supportable under staff s interpretation of
the use servins~ a"compelling need."
A~enda Item # SB Page# 4
PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS:
Rec~uired public notice was given in the form of written notification mailed to all property owners
within 600 feet of the subject property and a sign posted on the property for at least 10 days. All
notice requirements of Section 9-4-2, B.R.C. 1981 have been met. One comment was received
regarding the application from the Whittier Neighborhood Association indicating their objection to
the proposed project. That letter i5 provided in Attachment D.
STAFF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION:
Planning statf finds that the proposed conversion of the residential use to non-residential for the
proposed use is not consistent with the Use Review criterion #6 Therefore, staff recommends that
Planning Board deny Use Review #LUR2007-00027 incorp~rating this statt memorandum and the
attached Use Review Criteria Checklist as tindings of fact.
Approved By:
( -
Ruth McHeyser. Acting lanning Director
Planning Department
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Vicinity Map
Attachment B: Development Review Comments
Attachment C: Use Revie~~ Criteria dated August 3, 2007
Attachment D: Comment Letter Received
Attachment E: Applicant's Written Statements
Agenda Item # SB Pa~e# S
ATTACHMENT A
Vicinity Map
City of Boulder Vicinity Map
t ~- _ , ~ , , ~~,
_ , ~ `, _ _ _ - - _
,
~,
, ~~
pear~ st M ~ j - 3
~ ~ __
~~,, ~, , 1 - ~ : t~Y , ,r ~,
'~
,, _ , ; v = -,` ,, ~
',DT- Z } , ~~, , ~ ~.--,
. ~,10 _-__- = 1 ~ `~~ ' ~- ,
. ;;
, ~ , ~_-~ ~
_ ti, ~ ~
.
~'~j
~
'
~
~
1
I
f
~~
1
'
DT~S
~ ,
~,
,
`
St ~ ~,
' W alnut = ,, 1
', ',~__- ~ ~_ ,
~ ~` ~\ + ~ ~ - ~
_ ~,
_ _~~ - ~ ~~~-~ '~ ~ -
~
'
= ~ _ _ ~- ~
D T- 2~; ;
-
_ ~
~ ~ ~ ~.~ ~ ~ ~ -
~ - _
`_
;~,
N ~ _
1
~
~
~ ~ 1~ - -- -
~ ,_: Canyon Bv
N - ~-T Subject Area
, 1723 Canyon Blvd
_
-
Z RH-Z ~.~ f
-
- BT
___~- , ~ ~
`
5
~,
~ I
-
~~ ~~~
_
~ - _
- -
--1
B ~ r i
.~ -- ~ ~ -
~ '~
i
~
•
- ~ - 5ubject
~
~r
i ~
~ ..
I
•
~ ~ ..
~ --- -
_
'1` I I I _l T~_ I
~ I
~~ I I
~ ' ~
Location: 1723 Canyon BJvd
Project Name: 1723 Canyon Blvd
-
C'ity n~~ ~%~~~
ld
R
~
Review T e: Use Review
Review Number: LUR2007-00027 N 0 RT H oz~
er
7he mfWmaUOn tlep~ctetl on this map ~s Grw~ded
as graphiml re0~~~~6on only The City d Boultler
P~~'~des no wananty expreseed or implled, as to
A licant: Jeffie Almeter
PP Y
(Architecture /ne) 1 ineh equals 200 feet theaccuracyand/awmplefene86o1tM1einformation
corKamedhereon
A~enda Item # SB Page# 6
~~
~
ATTACHMENT B
Development Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
1739 Broadway, Third Floor • P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306-0791
phone 303-441-1880 • fax 303-4413241 • web boulderplandevelop.net
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
DATE OF COMMENTS: August 3, 2007
CASE MANAGER: Elaine McLaughlin
PROJECT NAME: 1723 CANYON USE REVIEW
LOCATION: 1723 CANYON BL
COORDINATES: N03W05
REVIEW TYPE: Use Review
REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2007-00027
APPLICANT: Architecture Inc.
DESCRIPTION. Convert existing 1,000 square foot single family detached, historically
contributing building into 866 square foot acupuncture services office,
remove enclosure of porch, add two parking spaces and a new tandem
garage at the rear of the site.
REQUESTED VARIATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS Parking Reduction of 33 percent
(two spaces provided where three are required-.
I. REVIEW FINDINGS
Although the applicant is proposing to rehabilitate a contributing resource to the Chamberlain Historic district
thereby fostering spec~fic policies within the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, the application does not
meet the finding that the proposed conversion to a non-residential use serves a compelling social, human
services, governmental, or recreational need in the community as required by the Use Review Criteria
(Section 92-2-15(e)(2)(D)(6), B.R.C. 1981. Therefore, staff is unable to support the use conversion request
and will be fonvarding a recommendation of denial to the Pianning Board at a hearing scheduled for
September 6, 2007 at 6:00 P M. in the City Council Chambers located at 1777 Broadway.
II. CITY REQUIREMENTS
Housing and Human Services (from Michelle Allen, Housing Planner (303) 441-4076)
The use review criteria found in Section 9-2-15(e)(2)(D)(6), B.R.C. 1981 states: "There shall be a
presumption against approving the conversion of dwelling units in the residential zoning districts to
non-residential uses that are allowed pursuant to a use review, or through the change oi one non-
conforming use to another non-conforming use. The presumption against such a conversion may be
overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social, human services,
governmental, or recreational need in the community including, without limifation, a use for a day care
center, park. religious assembly, social service use, benevolent organization use, art or craft studio
space, museum, or an educational use "
The presumption is against conversion of dwelling units to non-residential uses. A compelling social or
human services need is interpreted by the Division of Housing and Human Services as an entity or
service, such as a non-profit, whose primary mission is to provide services to traditionally underserved
segments of the population such as low income households or disabled persons or an entity that
provides needed social services not generally available in the area such as a day care center or senior
center Staff notes that there are approximately 100 other acupuncturist offices located within the City
of Boulder, approximately 10 within a one-mile radius of the site, and the City has several areas zoned
A¢enda Item ~- SB Pa¢e# 7
specifically for office uses to accommodate the need for medical office space. Given this, housing and
human services staff finds that the applicant has not made the case that the proposed conversion
serves a compeliing social, human services, governmental, or recreational need in the community.
The block in question is included in the Downtown Interface area as defined in the Downtown Design
Guidelines. The guidelines express a desire to maintain the diverse residential architectural character
of the interface area. Section 3.1 (A. ) states "Although the rehabilitation of buildings for office use is
possible to maintain the neighborhood's character and scale, conversion of historic residential
buildings to commercial or mixed uses is appropriate only when the residential use is no longer
feasible."New housing in the city ranges from 600 square feet to 5,000 square feet trending towards
larger homes. Given the trend for new single family homes to be larger, it is important to retain the
modest or smaller sized existing single family homes. Smaller sized units are desirable in that they
contribute to the city's environmental and sustainability goals.
Landmarks (James Hewat, Historic Preservation Planner 303 441 3207)
The property at 1723 Canyon Btvd. has been identified as a contributing resource to the Chamberlain Historic
District. Constructed prior to 1898, in that year the house was occupied by local physician Frank Parks. By
1900, Frank Swerdfeger a horseshoer, lived in the house.
The historic survey of the property identifies the two-story masonry building as being a good representative
example of a front-gabled, regularly-coursed vernacular stone building that contributes to the Chamberlain
Historic District.
On May 16'", the Landmarks Design Review Committee (LDRC) reviewed plans to construct a 300 sq. ft.
garage at the rear of the property, to add a porch at the rear of the house, and restore the exterior of the
house. The LDRC found that the proposal for sensitive historic rehabilitation of the property is consistent with
the Chamberlain Historic District Guidelines, the General Design Guidelines, and the historic preservation
ordinance, but requested that details regarding the rehabilitation and new construction on the property be
submitted to staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of a landmark alteration certificate.
Because the building is a contributing resource to the landmark district and, thus will be preserved under the
historic preservation ordinance, the proposal is consistent with Section 2.33 of the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan, Preservation of Historic and Cultural Resources. Staff encourages the property owner to
take advantage of the state historic preservation tax credit program which provides for up to 20 percent of the
project cost up to $50,000, for the rehabilitation of the house.
Land Use (Elaine McLaughlin, Case Manager 303.441.4130)
There are several factors staff reviewed to determine consistency with the Use Review criteria in the
conversion of residential to non-residential use, including: an understanding of the ~obs to housing balance
within the Ciry of Boulder; the percent change in residential units within the downtown area surrounding the
subject site; the feasibiliry of maintaining the residential use; and recent indicators of such use conversions
within the downtown area.
Jobs to Housing Balance. The Ciry of Boulder has an imbalance between the number of jobs within the ary
in comparison to the number of residential units available According to the Denver Regional Council of
Governments (DRCOG), in 2006 there was a ratio of one housing unit for every two ~obs in Boulder. This
imbalance is noted within Section 1.21 of the Bouider Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) as placing a"high
demand on existing housing." Within Policy 7.13 it states, "The city will evaluate and revise ifs land use
regulations to reduce the opportunities for the conversion of residential uses to non-residential uses or to
require mitigation (or residential units lost through the redevelopment of existing housing or the conversion of a
residential use to a non-residential use."Policy 2.16 of the BVCP also notes, "Existing, legally established
residential uses in non-residential zones will be preserved or replaced in kind; non-residential conversions in
residential zoning districts will be discouraged except where there is a clear benefit or service to the
neighborhood." Staff notes that the imbalance in jobs to housing is reflected in BVCP policies to discourage
conversion of residential to non-residential uses, unless there is a benefit or service to the neighborhood. With
approximately 100 acupuncturists in Boulder, and approximately 10 within a two mile radius of the project site,
Aeenda Item # SB Paee# 8
staff notes that conversion of a small house to an acupuncturist office would not provide the "clear benefit or
service" that is anticipated by the BVCP.
Increase in Number of Residential Units in Downtown. While the ratio of jobs to housing remains
imbalanced within the City, the Comprehensive Plan on page 74 notes that, "Since the implementation of the
Downtown Alliance recommendations, the downtown has experienced substantial development including the
addition of residential units, commercial space, three parking structures (one private, two public) and the
completion of the 9t6 and Canyon Urhan Renewal project- the 200 room St. Julien Hotel." To quantify the
addition of residential units in the downtown, staff found the following conclusions: in an area slightly expanded
from the downtown roughly bounded by 6~" Street on the west; Folsom on the east; Mapleton on the north; and
University on the south and between the years 1995 and 2000, there were 35 new residentiai dwelling units
built. Then, in the five years following between 2001 and 2006, there were 216 new dwelling units built in the
downtown. In the Downtown Alliance Update of March 2006, it was noted that within the Centrai Area General
Improvement District (CAGID) boundaries, between 2000 and 2005, the net square footage increase of
residential was 250%. It is important to note that the significant increase in the number of residential units in
the downtown was primarily multi-family (75%). The BVCP policies point to maintaining a"mix" of residential
rypes throughout the city. Policy 7.06 states, "the city and county, through their land use regulations and
incentive programs will encourage the private sector to provide and maintain a mixture of housing types with
varied price ranges and densities, which attempt to meet the affordability needs of a broad range of the
Boulder Valley population."
Feasibility of Maintaining the Residential Use. Affordability of maintaining residential units within the
downtown is discussed in the Downtown Design Guidelines 3.1(A) as noted above, "Although the rehabilitation
of buildings for office use is possible to maintain the neighborhood's character and scale, conversion of
historic residential bwldings to commercial or mixed uses is appropriate only when the residential use is no
longer feasible."The applicant has noted that the value of the land is such that maintaining the small
residential use in the context of Canyon Boulevard is infeasible. The applicant also notes that Canyon
Boulevard in the immediate context of the project site has evolved over time to become less of a residential
"neighborhood." In the applicanYs written statement, it was noted that homes along Canyon Boulevard used to
have broad front yards, and pointed out that over time those yards have given way to a right-of-way that
supports an important east-west arterial linking Boulder to the communities west through the Canyon.
According to the applicant, the small, 866-square foot home is twelve feet from the Canyon Boulevard curb,
unlike several of the adjacent residential buildings that are typically 20 to 25-feet from the curb along Canyon,
which makes the viability of maintaining the small residential use in a highly urbanized context infeasibie. it
was also noted by the applicant that there are constraints to making the existing residential use more livable,
and noted that recent attempts to construct additions to the rear of the historically contributing house on a 22-
foot wide lot required significant variances from the code which were denied. While staff notes the constraints
of the site, nonetheless it is concluded that an expansion of the resident~al to the rear of the site is not
unachievable or infeasible given an appropriate design solution.
Recent Conversions from Residential to Non-Residential. There have not been a signiticant number of
conversions of residential to non-residential use within the downtown. To determine the impact of conversion
of residential units in the downtown, staff found that from 1995 to 2000 there were approximately three
conversions from residential to non-residential uses, one of which was a conversion to a bed and breakfast;
the other to an office for the Historic Boulder organization, and another to a day care. However, from 2001 to
2006 (the same period of time that residential units increased three-fold in the downtown) there was one
conversion of residential to office in the downtown at the Earl House, where it was converted to an office but in
which two residential units also remained. Staff finds that this indicates the effective implementation of the use
criteria for the presumption against conversions of residential.
Neighborhood Comments
One comment letter was received from the Whittier Neighborhood Association indicating its opposition of the
conversion of residential units to non-residential uses.
Parking
1. There are three parking spaces shown on the site. The 866 square foot proposed building requires
Aaenda Item # SB Pa¢e# 9
1 space per 300 square feet of floor area, equivalent to 2.88 parking spaces. The "rounding rule" of
Section 9-9-6(c)(1), B.R.C. 1981 notes that when parking requirements result in a fraction, the
fraction shall be rounded to the next higher whole number, when the required number of spaces is
five or less. In this case, the rounding rule requires rounding up to three required parking spaces.
2. Within the three spaces shown, the space included within the garage wouldn't count toward
required parking, because it is considered a"tandem" space. If the applicant would like to pursue
the tandem space, a parking reduction approval would be required. Having two parking spaces
provided where three are required equates to a 33 percent parking reduction, when there is one
space not provided where three are required As noted in the previous comment letter and
addressed by the applicant, the expected use and frequency of patienUclients is such that additional
parking beyond the three required is not anticipated. Requests for non-residential parking
reductions of 33 percent are processed through staff level review per code Section 9-2-1, B.R.C.
1981. Staffs concerns about a parking reduction is that visitors to the site would likely park on
either 17`" or 18`h streets, with on-street parking not permitted on Canyon Boulevard. Because of
the proposed reception area shown at the rear of the structure, pedestrians would be required to
access the office via the alley. Staff notes that the alley is currently in a deteriorated state, requiring
improvements to allow pedestrian or bicycle access
AccesslCirculation/Parking (Michelle Mahan, 303-441-4417)
Federal ADA reguiations require that the ADA parking space be 8 feet wide with an additional 8 foot wide
diagonally striped aisle for a van accessible space. Plans would need to be revised accordingly.
Site Design
As noted within the access and circulation section, if a parking reduction is pursued, any additional parking
would need to be found along 17~" or 18m streets, given that Canyon Boulevard has no on-street parking.
Because of the current deteriorated condition of the non-public alleyway, patients accessing the office from
17'" or 18'" should be routed to the Canyon entrance, rather than from the rear of the property. This would
require a reconfiguration of the interior of the space with regard to the location of the reception area.
INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
Zoning
As noted in section 9-5-2(c), B R.C. 1981, the zoning district purpose for Residential - High 2(RH-2)
states: "High density residential areas primarily used for a variety of types of attached residential units
including, without limitation, apartment buildings, and where complementary uses may be allowed."
The zoning appears to provide for uses other than residential with the statement of, "where
complementary uses may be allowed "
IV. NEXT STEPS
A Planning Board hearing is scheduled for September 6, 2007 Staff is recommending denial based on the
presumption against conversion of residential to non-residential without the provision of "compelling human or
social services "
Aeenda Item # SB Pa¢e# 10
ATTACHMENT C
Use Review Criteria Analysis
V. CITY CODE CRITERIA CHECKLIST: USE REVIEW
~ (1) Consistencv with Zonine and Non-Conformitv: The use is consistent with the purpose of
the zoning district as set forth in Section 9-5-1, "Zoning Districts Established," B.R.C. 1981,
except in the case of a non-conforming use;
The RH-2 zone is defined in Section 9-5-2(c), B.R.C. 1981 as, "High density residentia/
nreas primarily used for a variety of rypes of attached residentin! units, including without
limitation, npnrtment bui[dings, nnd where complementary uses may be al[owed. " A
small acupuncturist's oftice is considered consistent with the zoning as a
"complementary use" to higher density residential uses.
~ (2) Rationale: The use either:
~ (A) Provides direct service or convenience to or reduces adverse impacts to the
surrounding uses or neighborhood;
The provision of acupuncture services could serve both the surrounding high
density residential neighborhood as well as the greater Boulder area. Staff
interprets "direct services or convenience" to the surrounding neighborhood as
a provision of acupuncture services that could directly serve the surrounding
neighborhood. The project site is integrated into an existing context with a mix
of uses, including residential. This medical offce use could serve not only the
downtown residential neighborhood, but office workers in the nearby Business
Transition (BT-2) and Downtown (DT-2) zones.
~ (B) Provides a compatible transition between higher intensity and lower intensity
uses;
There are other small offce uses in proximity to this site within the RH-2. Two
doors to the east is a law office; around the corner at 1702 Walnut is the Center
for Resource Conservation; and the September School has property at 1902
Walnut and 1833 Canyon. Small offices that are integrated architecturally into
the historic district context do provide a compatibility between the higher
intensity uses located one-half block to the west in the BT-2 and DT-2 districts,
and the residential uses that are located within the RH-2 district. Adjacent to
the west is a multi-unit apartment complex that is a higher intensity use than the
proposed acupuncture of£ce. Further, the four lane arterial of Canyon
Boulevard, which this application fronts onto serves a"high intensity" function.
With a 12-foot setback to the Canyon Boulevard curb, an office use in this
location is considered an appropriate use adjacent to a highly traveled arterial.
With the applicant's desire to rehabilitate and maintain the historically
contributing building, the improvements are considered to be consistent within
the Chamberlain Historic District.
~ (C) Is necessary to foster a specific city policy, as expressed in the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan, including, without limitation, historic preservation, moderate
income housing, residential and non-residential mixed uses in appropriate locations,
and group living arrangements for special populations; or
Aeenda Item # SB Paee# 11
The applicant has indicated a desire to maintain the historic character of the
structure, consistent with BVCP policy 2.33, Preservation of Historical and
Cultural Resources that states, `Buildings, dislricls and sites of historical,
architectura/, archaeological, or cu/tural srgnificance wil/ be identtfied and
protected...Protection ojimportant resources wil/ also be sought by the city wken a
proposa! by the private sector involves discretionary deve%pment review (e.g., site
review, use review, rezonings)." In addition, as noted, Landmarks DRC found
that the proposal for sensitive historic rehabilitation of the property is consistent
with the Chamberlain Historic District Guidelines, the Ceneral Design Guidelines,
and the historic preservation ordinance.
n/a (D) Is an existing legal no~-conforming use or a change thereto that is permitted
under subsection (e) of this section; Not applicable
~ 3) Comnatibilitv: The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the proposed
development or change to an existing development are such that the use will be reasonably
compatible with and have minimal negative impact on the use of nearby properties or for
residential uses in industrial zoning districts, the proposed development reasonably mitigates
the potential negative impacts from nearby properties;
Except for rehabilitation, the existing 1,000 square foot building will remain unchanged
on the exterior. Staff finds that the function of this office will be "reasonably
compatible with minimal negative impact of one or two on-street parking spaces being
utilized by the office.
~ (4) Infrastructure: As compared to development permitted under Section 9-3.1-1, "Schedule
of Permitted Uses of Land," B.R.C. 1981, in the zone, or as compared to the existing Ievel of
impact of a non-conforming use, the proposed development will not signiticantly adversely
affect the infrastructure of the surrounding area, including, without limitation, water,
wastewater, and storm drainage utilities and streets;
The applicant provided easement information that demonstrates ao existing access
agreement for the alleyway that accesses the rear of the property.
~ (5) Character of Area: The use will not change the predominant character of the surrounding
area; and
As a part of the Chamberlain Historic District, but located on a four-lane arterial, the
change of use to a small medicaUacupuncture office that will maintain the existing
historic fagade, will not change the predominant character of the surrounding area.
Landmarks Board and staff found the proposed rehabilitation and maintenance of the
historically contributing building to laudable.
no (6) Conversion of Dwellin¢ Units to Non-Residential Uses: There shall be a presumption
against approving the conversion of dwelling units in the residential zoning districts set forth
in Subsection 9-3.1-1(a), B.RC. 1981, to non-residential uses that are allowed pursuant to a
use review, or through the change of one non-conforming use to another non-conforming use.
The presumption against such a conversion may be overcome by a finding that the use to be
approved serves another compelling social, human services, governmental, or recreational
need in the community including, without limitation, a use for a day care center, park,
religious assembly, social service use, benevolent organization use, art or crafr studio space,
museum, or an educational use.
Aaenda Item # SB Page# 12
The conversion of an existing 1,000 square foot single family residential use to an 866-
square foot acupuncturist oftice, located within a high density residential zone district,
could be considered compatible within the context. However, the city has established a
high threshold for conversion of dwelling units to non-residential uses. As noted in the
BVCP, there is an existing city-wide jobs to housing imbalance, and policies within the
BVCP recommend against residential conversions to non-residential uses particularly
within residential zones. While a small acupuncturists office serving downtown
clientele that includes discounts for students and the elderly is arguably a"compelling
human service need," staff finds that ultimately the proposed office use does not meet
the intent of the criteria. As noted above, provision of human services typically relate to
services for low income or disadvantaged residents. Given the number of other
acupuncturists currently serving a broad range of clients throughout Boulder, and in
the downtown in particular, staff finds the conversion does not meet the threshold
established in the criteria.
Aaenda Item # SB Pase# 13
ATTACHMENT D
Comment Letter Received
~ua aa ui ui:o~p naam na~nal ~U3474~606 p.l
~hittier ~i,ghborhood ~ssociation
J~y 3i, 200~
C'~ ~~
Clt3' OE BOU1dCf
PI'°nin8 aad Devd°Pment Seivieea
1739 Bmadmay
Bouldec, CO 80306
DeaC EIlInC:
The W6ittier Neigl~borhood Anaodation oppoxs [he coaveraiou of 1723 Cmyon Bkd
from a aiuglrfam~ly zesidma into s 3-treatmmt mom xvpuacwce offica We agsee with
dx dty's dnice to xetaia zemdmtml unib iu tLe domntowa un.
We ate aLso wattmed the pukiog ma1 be iasufEcimc- aUhough the Planning Boud has
xamdy eced in appmving m~ap zequesa foc eedacdoa ia gackiag fo= vew mideatial
devdopmmt
'i'hank you fot yrour eonsidecrtion,
~! //~v!/`"--~'
i~
Pidri Nabee
Co-Chau Whittee Neigitbashood Aam
A¢enda Item # SB Pase# 14
ATTACHMENT E
ApplicanYs Written Statements
Response to Land Use Review Results and Comments
We are a very small Baulder busineu, husband & wife owner-operated
acupuncture practice, with the sirong intention of being a viable part of
the Boulder community. We spotted this small old house for sale nearly by
accident (not actively searching for a business location), ond thoughi
that it would be the prefect setting for our o~ce, as well as a wonderf~l
opporiunity to rescve a greot {iiile historic stone house badly in need of
attention. We love to rehabilffate older houses, and have done so twice
in other communities before relocating to Boulder. This house reolly spoke
to us, and in the process of buying ii, we learned that ihe house had
been on the market for about a year, and had been lived in for 58 years
by an elderly woman, Clotilda Parish. Ms. Parish bought the house in 1949
for ~3,600, making payments of ~40 per month as she raised her children
ihere as a single mother. At that time, Canyon Blvd ~then known as Water
St) was a iwo-fane dirt rood with a train trock down ihe middle. (She aiso
told vs that the ho~ses had nice fronts yard then, which have now been
scarified for the widening of Canyo~ Blvd). The house has had almost no
work done on ff during thai time, and is in serious need of restorafion ai
this point if it is to be preserved and endure as a part of the Boulder
landscape. The building's stone wolls oppear to be in generally good
condition, and the consensus is that the structure is well worth saving.
The point of describing a little of the house's history is to clarify how this
pari of Bouider has changed in recent years, and how ihe task of
repairing ihis little ho~se is really not feasible with maintaining its original
purpose as a residence. Jndeed. we ho~estly beGevg that #he only viable
way ihis property can be restored & used into ihe future without ~
sig~ificant altaration 8, compromisa to its historic integrity (something the
city is not likely fo look favorabiy onJ, is to carry fhe bu1ding forvvord os an
office/business.
The s¢e of the house is 880 square feel {not induding a substandard
enclosed porch on the back end of the house), and iYs in need of quite a
bit of mainienance work to bring it up to a safe & mainiainable standard
ot living (including, new elechical service, new heoting, new roof &
insulation, some foundaNon work, exterior droinage, and significant
refwbishing of ihe in#erior). 7he cost of lhese repairs, along wiih ihe
b~ilding's market value 8 morfgage costs far exceeds any reasonable
monthly housing payment anyone could make for a bv~d'ing that srr~ll in
s~ch a noisy dense area. Monfhly cosis for ihis properfy with the required
work will probably exceed $2800/month, ond both IegaAy & practically no ~
mwe than 2 people could live there. While there is other housing located
in this area, much of it is multiple unit, and the per person cost is nowhere
A enda Item # SB Pa e# 15
near the cost that this properiy wouid be. In shor~, no one will pay
$1400/monfih each to shore a tiny house in such a noisy area, so the
property's continued use as a residence is just noi realistic. Canyon Blvd
functions as a major artery to & through the downtown area, supports bus
lines and truck routes, and is really a large commercial thoroughfare,
crec~ting a living environment that just does not live up to the current
value/costs of the property at this point. However ihe costs and busy
location are not at aN in conflict with using the building us an office. So i#
seems to us that this is the best way for th9s properfy to maintain its current
historical size & configuration and get ihe attention it needs to surv'rve. If
fihe building must be maintained as a residence, I think it wifl be very
difficult to find anyons interested in paying that much to live in such a
small house in such a busy location, and i fear the property wil) go
unrefurbished because of the inequitable costs involved.
The lost size is another issue that significantly limits the property's use. The
lot is approximately 24 ff by 154 ft, which is less ihan 3,700 square feet
(smafles than many homes in Soulder!J, and parking issues wi11 always timit
the property's vs~e. 7here are curren#y 2 parking spaces at #he rear of the
property, accessible through a deeded easement with the neighboring
properties. Our intenYion as part of the requested project is to add a smatl
sin le car ara e, ivin us~`~ar~C'in'~" ~~ ~~`~` -~
._,....~ ... -.9.._, g_, 9 9 P 9~~~~I: bur acupuncfu~e" ~"
business is small, and wFiite'tfie ~p(ans show a total of'3 treatment rooms
inside the building, we never see that many pptients at one time. We
have been practicing acupuncture for well over 20 years, and have never
had multiple patient visits - it's not how we work. CuRently, we give 15 to
20 treatments e week (fairly steacfy for the iast 3 yearsi, cmnd rarely have
more fihan one patient at our office pt a time. We live nearby (on 19~
streetj, ond often commute by bicycle, carpool t~equently, and also utilize
the bus as we live on the 204 busline (an easy trip downtown). We do not
both drive ovr own cars to the office, a fact which combined with our
smoN pa#ient base ond our or-e-pt-q-time prac#ice, ieaves us to #ee! that
the existing 2 parking spaces with the addition of the requested single-car
garage will be more than sufficient for our parking needs.
This is a unique property, one at a crossroads. It needs to move forward at
this point in time, since the previous long-term owner has moved away. If
#he properfy is given a viable oppor#unity #o suwive in today's Boulder, as
a business so that the costs associated with owning 8~ repoiring it can be
realized, then this little house can have a bright long-term future while
maintaining if's histosic integrity. Because of mounting costs and the
general growth of Boulder, it seems that this property is no longer
appropriate os p residence if if is to be maintained in ii's present form As a
historic property. We feel thafi we are on excelient match fio this property,
and that we can offer it a great future as an acupuncture office.
Aeenda Item # SB Pa~e# 16
ARGHITECTUAE
PLANNING 8
IN7ER10A DESIGN
Memo
2 May 2007
To: Planning end DeveloPm~t Se~cee, CI7Y OF BOULDEfl
From: JeftreyAlmeter-ARCHITECTUREINCORPORATED
Project 1723 Cenyon Boulder.
Bebw ara responses ro the Written Sfatemerrt in the Lend Use Review APdication
CRITERIA E
1. Coruistency with Zonlny end Non-Contormlty
7his property is zw~ed as RH-2 Re~dendal - High 2 7rie proposed u9e of an aa~punclure olfioe would be
a oomphnentary uce, whk~h may be albwed aocwding to Cheptet &S2 (c) (1) (F~ of B.R.C. 2006.
2 AMlonale
(A~1s an ecipuru~ae office, the ow~ers will be provfding thefr services m the imrt~die~ nelghborhood
ag we~ as tlle CorrununkY of Boulder.
(B~urt~tly there are the folbwing rwn-reddentlal uses in neer proximity to tlds property but stl1 wittun
the RH-2 zone. La:ated ffi 1733 Canyon, 2 propertles East. fe a IawYers offioe. Lucated at 7702 Walrwt,
within t blodc, is the Center for Resour~ Conservatlon. The 3eptember 3dwd hes PropertY at 1902
walnut and 1833 Carryon. Due to ttie proximity to these Mher ran-residentlal uses,lhe ProPosed
pa T 2~mning dishictsWend ViV e RFI-2 zone.~bie tran~tion beMreen the hyher interreity of tlie BT-2 and
(C)N/A
(D)N/A
B.Compat~bOtty
Due to the aeMS wishes as weN as the designelion of a hi~ distric[ ihere wdl be ony mai~ and
mirar improvement work done b tlie originel sUUCWre, which wili irnprove ihe vieuel impect on the
surrWndi~9 ProPer4es. The requested angle car gar~e will be smalt and In keepirg wilh the Msroric
c~aracter of the site and ihe neigF~orhood. tt wlll help mMigate arry oN street Parkin9 corxema. Seae the
proposed otHce w0 be small in size. ard operaiin9 ~Y ~~9 ~~Y (!~Y ~) ~'^~P~~ °^
~borY~9 resMerrts will ~so be minimal. See fact aheet for rtare deta~l
4.Intnatrueture
The small number of people using this ecupuncture ottice will rat significantlY affect tt~e ebsting
inhas0ucdre~ as ttds was MeviouslY a single~family r~iderus wilh similar ulAlry. dreinage. ard street
usage.
S.Chsracter M Area
The predominerY character of ttre area aUeedY Mdudes simYar smatl businesaes ard otl'~ non aonforrMng
uses, and Ihe hisWric nature of the current buildirg will remein, so fhere wiA be no c~erge to ihe nature of
Uie neighbortwod.
6.Comerslon ot Owell~ny Unlts to Non-Rasidentiat Uses
tl~bcetlon wouldrot ~ c~haracter Vom BoU~er prope Bes in the neighb~ho d$ T~h's ~small ~
t~es bw Irr~peCt vis~IlY, P~9 will be provided an alte, aud tlre haxa ot use ere auch Mat rnost W tlie
r~eigheormg reaidenls wwla be away from nar~e. rnis acupinave oMiCe wia poviae a valuen~e numari
service ro the conx~uraty.
trrscaY~oaoaa.dx
A¢enda Item # SB Paee# 17
1723 Canyon Blvd
Ted & Livia Hall
Narrative
Our plan is to change ihe property at 1723 Canyon BNd hom a residential
dwel6ng to an acupuncture office. We wish to maintain the appearance and
historical integrily of the structure, without significanty oRering it or inaeasing its
square foolage. We wiA reconfigure the interior spaces sfighty to wft ihe needs
of an acupunctwe office, but do not wish to oBer 1he exterior of ihe bwldng
beyond mointenance freatments, with the ony iwo exceptions being ihe
addifron of a detached single-car garage at the rear of ihe properiy (acceuible
via the rear alley), and ihe altering of an e~assting encbsed porch addiion on the
back of ihe structure to become a more traditional exterior porch. We wish to
conduct our acupunct~re pracYice at the property, with parking and the primary
enfrance fo the business located ot ihe rear of the buil~ng.
The siructure at 1723 Canyon Blvd is a small old stone house in downtown
Boulder, b~ilt around 7898, which is in need of some maintenance work and
ultimately a new lease on fife. It has been inhabited by the same woman from
1949 to 2006 - she rofsed her family ihere, and when she bought the house,
Canyon Blvd was a two lane dirt road cailed Water Sireet with a train fine down
The center. Boulder has obvrousy changed a great deol since ihen, and yei this
house reaAy has~'t. As ihe new owners, R is our plan to repair and renew the
b~ilding ond to update its use, whae preserving ii's historfcal integrity, preparing it
for another hundred years of service. Canyo~ BNd has become a very busy &
noisy sheei, and the size of the property b very smaN - a 1 OOU* square foot stone
house on a lot that is 24 feet wide. We believe that the building can be
maintained in its presenl s¢e & basic configurafion, and serve a new purpose as
an office, specifically our acupuncture pracfice, rather ihan as a home,
because of its limfted size and busy bcatan.
Our }xoposed maintenance work includes the fobowing:
- re-roofing the house, ond coniroAing ihe water flow away from the
foundation
- rewiring ihe building wiih updated electrical service
- updated mechanicals (HVAC~
- updated fixtures - kitchen 8 bath
- moinienance mortm work on euterior stone walls
- foundational suppat work as necessary (as per sir~ct~ral engineer)
Our proposed remodefing work includes the folbwing:
- mirwr reconfiguraiion of rooms ins~de house
- refacing of interbr surfoces, including walls, flooring, and interior doors.
- rep~acing front & rear e~erior doors
- altering epsting encbsed porch addifan on back of house to become a
hadil'ronal open porch
Aeenda Item # SB Paee# 18
- adding a detached single c~ garage ot the back of the property,
accessible through the alley
- adding an historicaly appropriote fence along pations of ihe properly
Our proposed use changes inciude ihe following:
- cessation of reskiential use of ihe property
- beginning of use of properfy as an acupuncture office, with an rnerage
of 6 client visNs per day. 5 days o week
- ciient parking at rear of property wiih primary business enhance at rea of
building
A~enda Item # SB Paee# 19