2017-21_816 Arapahoe Ave_Disposition Packet
N O T I C E
FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE CITY OF BOULDER BOARD OF ZONING
ADJUSTMENT DISPOSITION OF ZONING CASE
DOCKET NUMBER 2017-21
CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR A VARIANCE OF THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 9-7-1,
B.R.C. 1981 AT 816 ARAPAHOE AVENUE OF JOSE JIMENEZ PALACIOS AND YUMI ROTH, WHOSE MAILING
ADDRESS IS 816 ARAPAHOE AVENUE, BOULDER, COLORADO 80302.
On June 21, 2018, the City of Boulder Board of Zoning Adjustment, a quorum being present, held a public hearing,
after giving notice as required by law, on the application for the following variance:
As part of a proposal to allow an existing 48 square foot detached shed to remain in the front yard of a single-family
home, the applicants are requesting a variance to the front (north) and interior side (east) yard setback requirements for an
accessory structure in the RMX-1 zoning district. The resulting front yard setback will be approximately 35 feet where
55 feet is required and 35 feet exists today. The resulting interior side yard setback will be approximately 1.2 feet where
3 feet is required and 1.2 feet exists today. Section of the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9-7-1, BRC 1981.
Based on our field investigation and the relevant testimony, exhibits, and other evidence introduced at the hearing,
and in accordance with the applicable provisions of the Boulder Revised Code, 1981, we find by a preponderance of the
evidence that the criteria for granting a variance have been met, and grant the variance as requested subject, however, to the
following conditions:
1) The subject shed shall be removed if there is any future development on the property.
2) That a 1-foot 8-inch maintenance easement onto 1655 9th Street be signed and recorded with the Boulder
County Clerk & Recorder Office within 90 days of today, June 21, 2018. Should a maintenance easement –
deemed acceptable by the City of Boulder Planning Department – not be recorded within this time, approval
of BOZ2017-00021 will be null & voided and the application denied.
This variance is limited to the use and structure for which it was requested, including the location on the lot and
maximum height, as approved by the Board of Zoning Adjustment.
This variance was approved by the vote of 3-1 (M. Hirsch opposed, J. Rudd absent).
EXECUTED this 21st day of June 2018, effective as of, June 21, 2018.
Michael Hirsch, Presiding Officer of the Board at the Meeting
By: ______________ ________________________
Robbie Wyler, Secretary to the Board of Zoning Adjustment
This decision constitutes a final decision as of the date of the hearing at which it was reached. If a variance was granted, the
variance expires within 180 (one hundred eighty) days from the date on which it were granted unless a building permit for
such variance is applied for within such period.
CITY OF BOULDER
Planning and Development Services
1739 Broadway, Third Floor • P.O. Box 791, Boulder, Colorado 80306-0791
phone 303-441-1880 • fax 303-441-3241 • email plandevelop@bouldercolorado.gov
www.boulderplandevelop.net
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 1 of 28
Revised May 2017
400.pdf
City of Boulder Planning and Development Services
1739 Broadway, third floor • PO Box 791 • Boulder, CO 80306
Phone: 303-441-1880 • Fax: 303-441-3241 • Web: boulderplandevelop.net
BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT (BOZA)
VARIANCE APPLICATION
APPLICATION DEADLINE IS 4:00 P.M. ON THE THIRD WEDNESDAY OF EACH MONTH.
MEETING DATE IS 5:00 P.M. ON THE SECOND THURSDAY OF THE FOLLOWING MONTH.
Submittal of inaccurate or incomplete information will result in rejection of the application.
STAFF USE ONLY
Doc. No. _______________ Date Filed _________________Zone______________Hearing Date _____________
Application received by: Date Fee Paid Sign(s) Provided
GENERAL DATA
(To be completed by the applicant.)
•Street Address or General Location of Property:
•Legal Description: Lot Block Subdivision (Or attach description.)
•Existing Use of Property:
•Description of proposal:
*Total floor area of existing building:*Total gross floor area proposed:
*Total building coverage existing:*Total gross building coverage proposed:
*Building height existing:*Building height proposed:
*See definitions in Section 9-16-1, B.R.C. 1981.
Name of Owner:
•Address:Telephone:
•City: State: Zip Code: Email:
Name of Contact (if other than owner):
•Address:Telephone:
•City: State: Zip Code: Email:
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 2 of 28
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 3 of 28
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 4 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 1 of 20 29-May-2018
JIMENEZ / ROTH RESIDENCE
816 Arapahoe Avenue
Boulder, Colorado
Board of Zoning Adjustment (BOZA) Setback Variance Application
PROJECT NARRATIVE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Board of Zoning Adjustment (BOZA) Setback Variance Application has been
prepared for the proposed yard and garden shed at the Jimenez/Roth Residence, located at
816 Arapahoe Avenue in Boulder, Colorado.
2.0 PROJECT BACKGROUND
We purchased the property in 2004. Our single family residence was expanded in 2012-
13 with a new 488 SF building addition connected to the south side of the existing home.
A new 273 SF one car garage was also constructed at the same time. In order to preserve
the streetscape and modesty of the original home, we opted to build in the rear of our lot
rather than expand into the front yard. In the RMX-1, that setback would have been 25’
where our house currently sits at 45’. Our home is currently 1,527 SF with no basement.
No additional floor area can be added to the existing house due to the floodplain
development regulations, unless the original solid brick house is elevated to the flood
protection elevation of ~3’ above ground level (which is significantly cost prohibitive).
The site is heavily impacted by the regulatory floodplain. The entire site is located within
the 100-year floodplain. About 30% of the site is also located in the conveyance and
high hazard zones. This includes part of the Gregory Creek stream bed, which transects
the property and alters the landscape. About 40% of the site is also located in the
regulatory wetland area, which also restricts development.
The site is zoned RMX-1. The setbacks are as follows:
Table 7-1 Form and Bulk Standards – B.R.C. 1981 Zoning RMX-1 – Form Mod. D
Principal Building and Uses Accessory Building and Uses
Front: 25’ Front: 55’
Side 5’ minimum
15’ total
Side 0’ or 3’
Rear: 25’ Rear: 0’ or 3’
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 5 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 2 of 20 29-May-2018
Figure No. 1 – Overall Site Aerial
Figure No. 2 – Site Location Plan
Project Site
Project Site
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 6 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 3 of 20 29-May-2018
Figure No. 3 – 100-Year Regulatory Floodplain, Conveyance and High Hazard Zones
(from the City’s website).
Figure No. 4 – Map of the site showing the regulatory wetland boundary (from the City’s
website).
Project Site
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 7 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 4 of 20 29-May-2018
Figure No. 5 – Photograph of the proposed yard and garden shed.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 8 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 5 of 20 29-May-2018
3.0 PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS
We are requesting a front yard setback variance for the construction of a small 5.5’ x 8.3’
(45 sq. ft.) yard and garden shed. The existing building meets the principal building
setback requirements. The yard and garden shed is located 35’ from the front property
line, where 55’ is required. The shed is located 1.3’ from the side property line where 0’
is required. We are currently in discussions with the adjacent property owner and are
working towards obtaining a maintenance easement once the BOZA setback variance and
floodplain development permit has been approved.
4.0 DISCUSSION
Background:
We both teach at the University of Colorado. We have lived in the house for 14 years.
We have a four year old son, and an elderly parent who visits regularly (and will in the
future move into this house so that we may assist with her care). As one of us, Jose-Luis
Jimenez, is a climate scientist, we have chosen a lifestyle that minimizes our carbon
footprint, e.g. we walk to work most days and when possible run errands on our bicycles
or on foot. This aligns with the city’s climate change plans. This is a mixed neighborhood
with a high proportion of student rentals for which the upkeep rate is variable, and with
high tenant turnover. We strongly believe (as one of our neighbors said in her letter of
support to us) that “long term residents are vital anchors in building community in our
neighborhood,” and over the last 14 years we have consistently maintained and improved
the character of the neighborhood. E.g. we routinely clean up trash and animal waste
during weekends, not just on our property but on the surrounding streets and properties.
Lot Restrictions:
Our existing single family residence is a total of 1,527 SF with no basement nor usable
attic. Our main residence cannot be expanded at all due the 100-year floodplain
development regulations unless the entire original brick home is raised 3 ft to be above
the current base flood elevation level (see below: Development potential for 816
Arapahoe Avenue). The entire site is located within the 100-year floodplain. The back of
the property and a substantial fraction of the east side (about 30% of the property area)
are located in the conveyance and/or high hazard zones, including the Gregory Creek
stream bed. About 40% of the property area is located in the regulatory wetland zone.
These conditions limit the accessory building options at the site. The City’s floodplain
development regulations prohibit basements and taller crawl spaces in the floodplain,
which severely limits the interior storage options. The roof is shallow and there is no
attic storage. Exterior storage is limited by the Conveyance, High Hazard, and Regulatory
Wetland zones in the back of the property, which limit construction of new structures.
In addition, the lot is long and narrow, and there is literally nowhere where such a small
yard and garden shed could be located while complying with all the required setbacks and
regulations, and without blocking critical access from the parking and loading/unloading
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 9 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 6 of 20 29-May-2018
area into the property and professional work space. See Appendix 1 for a plan of the site
with all the limitations shown.
Development potential for 816 Arapahoe Avenue:
On May 14, Yumi met with a Project Specialist (Matt Thompson) in Planning and
Development to better understand how our lot could be developed. If we were to raise the
original 1950 structure by 3 ft to conform to current flood regulations, our lot (8922 sq ft)
and zoning (RMX-1) would allow us to have total building area of 4190 sq ft with total
building coverage of 2834 sq ft (compared with current built area and coverage of 1836
sq ft). Due to floodzone restrictions in our back area we would need to realize any
addition on the north side of the lot, essentially the front yard. Based on our home’s
current location and the front and side yard setbacks for RMX-1, we could build an
additional 667 sq ft as well as add a 240 sq ft covered front porch in what is currently our
front yard. The principal face of our house currently sits 45 ft from the property line. This
development would move the front face to 25 ft and the front porch to 17 ft from the
property line adjacent to Arapahoe Avenue. Moreover, once we accounted for solar
setbacks, we could build a 1754 sq ft second floor over the front yard addition and the
existing house. The possible new front year development area is shown in Figure 6, while
the possible second floor is shown in Figure 7.
We have been sensitive about how we developed our property, hoping to preserve the
original principal structure as it faces Arapahoe Avenue. We added modestly to our home
in 2014, building what we could at rear of our house. That addition is barely visible from
the front yard, a feature that many residents in the neighborhood appreciate.
Certainly the site could accommodate a much larger structure, 3 times the size of our
current home. This would clearly substantially change the character of the neighborhood,
it would also be cost prohibitive for anyone but the wealthiest residents or developers.
The 45 sq ft shed represents the most modest and minute addition that provides our
family with maximum utility while still preserving the character of the neighborhood.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 10 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 7 of 20 29-May-2018
Figure No. 6: Illustration of the potential area that could be developed in the front yard of
816 Arapahoe, if the 1950 structure was elevated by 3 ft to comply with flood
regulations. Top: plan view within the survey of the property. Bottom: illustration on a
photograph. In this illustration the main building complies with the 25 ft front yard
setback as well as the side setbacks, and the front porch is allowed to extend to a 17 ft
setback per city code.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 11 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 8 of 20 29-May-2018
Figure No. 7: Illustration of the potential area that could be developed as a 2nd floor for
816 Arapahoe, if the 1950 structure was elevated by 3 ft to comply with flood
regulations. Top: plan view within the survey of the property. Bottom: illustration on a
photograph. In this illustration the main building complies with the 25 ft front yard
setback as well as the side setbacks, and the front porch is allowed to extend to a 17 ft
setback per city code.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 12 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 9 of 20 29-May-2018
We feel so strongly about our need for the front shed that we would be happy to submit to
a condition of development from the city, essentially agreeing to remove the 45 sq ft
structure should we ever further develop the site based on our allowable building area and
coverage.
Use and Safety:
There is a small storage shed at the back of our home, that we use for car-related and
bike-related items, required all-weather storage for electric bikes, larger professional
sculpture tools (e.g. chop saw, table saw etc.) and other personal items which need to be
stored in a dry location. These items are frequently accessed, and it would not be
practical to keep them at a distant storage unit. The one car garage is currently being
used as a professional art studio for Yumi Janairo Roth (http://www.yumijroth.com).
Figure No. 8 – Sample large-scale sculptures produced in studio
The garage/studio space is compact and there is a need for large 2D and 3D sculpture
projects to move around the space. The space has to be kept very clean to avoid soiling
the artwork, and there is a need for storing various art supplies, tools, and past projects.
Therefore, garden, automotive, e-bike, and large tool storage opportunities in the garage
are not feasible. Moreover because of the scale of Yumi’s work and the frequency of her
exhibition schedule, she needs free, clear, and direct access to the studio and workspace
to safely load and unload crates of sculpture, ranging from 250-350 lbs, raw materials,
and large power tools.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 13 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 10 of 20 29-May-2018
Figure No. 9 – Unloading and moving crated sculpture to studio
We built the small yard and garden shed mainly for the purpose of storing frequently
used lawn equipment, gardening supplies, tools, a larger mosquito trapping device (to
protect our family from West Nile virus) strollers and other outdoor items in a secure
location. These items are frequently used, so that an offsite storage would not be feasible.
Many homeowners may just pile some of these items on the side of the house. However,
this is not possible for items like the mosquito trap, which needs to be protected from the
elements during winter, and well as e.g. the strollers. Moreover, there are multiple shears,
branch saws, digging tools and lawnmover that would be dangerous for our son, as well
as for his grandmother. It is also important to keep the tools dry to avoid oxidation of
metal parts and rotting of wood parts, and to keep them away from raccoon, dog (and
sometimes human) excrement, which is frequently found around the property. We also
wanted to screen the items from view, and wanted a secure space for our tools and
equipment. There are times when homeless individuals are found camping in the creek
on, or just feet from our property. Intoxicated students often enter the property on
weekend nights, and we have had to call Boulder Police more than once on such
occasions. So, the desire to have these items stored securely is a real need in our
neighborhood. Otherwise, valuables left unattended would be damaged or stolen or
present a safety hazard to individuals coming onto the property and a liability to us.
Most families would have the opportunity to store items inside, either in a basement,
crawlspace, or larger garage attached to the house. These opportunities are not available
to us. We have made due with our modest residence and lack of interior storage spaces.
But there are still some storage and safety requirements that we would like to meet with
the proposed yard and garden shed.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 14 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 11 of 20 29-May-2018
Precedent:
We understand that not setting precedent is one important consideration when evaluating
a variance request. We believe that this request, if approved, would not set a precedent for
two main reasons:
• Ours is a unique lot with a stream bed that transects and limits the property. It is
narrow and has an extreme number of complex limitations on its development, which
other single family homes in our neighborhood do not have. Moreover, it abuts a
corner lot whose principal structure faces 9th Street. Thus, a similar variance request
for a different neighbor would fail to qualify for a variance unless it had a similarly
extreme set of restrictions.
• There are two properties in our immediate vicinity that have been granted front yard
setback variances for accessory structures. The historic property at 800 Arapahoe
received a front yard setback (46’ when 55’ is required) for an accessory structure
(case BOZ2015-00010). The City of Boulder-owned property at 929 Marine St.
includes a <100 sq. ft. shed with ~42 front yard setback and with electrical power.
Both properties and accessory structures are shown below.
800 Arapahoe Ave 929 Marine St.
Figure No. 10 – Properties with accessory structures inside the 55’ front yard setback
Sight Lines:
The typical front yard setback is designed so that all homes on a block have a uniform
distance from the road to give a pleasant visual appearance of uniformity, and leave sight
lines open along the whole block. Therefore, we would never ask for an accessory
structure on the west side of our own front yard, nor would it be appropriate in our
neighbor to the west’s front yard as the sight lines in those areas are currently unbroken
and respect the uniform fronts of the principal structures on the lot. However, our yard is
the effective endcap to the street, with a natural stream, a dense line of large trees and
hedge row, and a fence line which we designed to match the style of our home, and even
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 15 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 12 of 20 29-May-2018
a concrete barricade over Gregory Creek where it passes under the street. All of these
features combined give the visual appearance of an endcap to the block, and break the
sight lines. On the other side of these natural dividers is a corner lot where their back yard
faces our front yard, further giving our yard the appearance of a natural end to the
uniformity. Therefore, we placed the yard and garden shed along these features, not
haphazardly protruding into the uniform front yard spaces, but grounded to and resting on
a natural endcap where all of these other items give this accessory structure visual
foundation. Likewise the large mature trees and hedge row give the shed an appearance
of being insignificant against the backdrop, further blending it into the surroundings.
Great effort was put into designing the materials to coordinate with the natural wood
fencing, the architectural style of the home, the aesthetic of the city, and the natural
appearance of the mature tree line. So while we understand the intent of the front yard
setback rules on typical lots, our lot is not typical (more so because of the actual physical
and regulatory restrictions of the site), and therefore in our unique situation we feel the
location of the yard and garden shed follows the intended spirit of the setbacks by
aligning structures such that sight lines are uniform and coordinated with the other
elements.
5.0 SETBACK CRITERIA
(h) CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES
The BOZA may grant a variance only if it finds that the application satisfies all of the
applicable requirements of paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of this Subsection and the
requirements of paragraph (5) of this Subsection.
(1) Physical Conditions or Disability
A. There are:
(i) Unusual physical circumstances or conditions, including, without limitation,
irregularity, narrowness or shallowness of the lot, or exceptional topographical or
other physical conditions peculiar to the affected property; or
The entire site is located within the 100-year floodplain. The back and east side
of the property are located in the conveyance, high hazard, and/or regulatory
wetland zones, including the Gregory Creek stream bed which further minimizes
available level ground. Additionally, along the west side of our property is a 20’ x
3’ easement. The property is narrow and due to the required setbacks there is
literally no alternative space to locate an accessory structure. These conditions
limit the storage options at the site.
The City’s floodplain development regulations prohibit basements and taller
crawl spaces in the floodplain, which severely limits the interior storage options.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 16 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 13 of 20 29-May-2018
Exterior storage is limited by the Conveyance and High Hazard Zones in the back
of the property.
(ii) There is a physical disability affecting the owners of the property or any member of
the family of an owner who resides on the property which impairs the ability of the
disabled person to utilize or access the property; and
The 4 year old and the 74-yr old parent need to be safe from tools such as saws,
shears, lawnmower, weedwacker, shovels, fertilizer and other chemicals, etc.
B. The unusual circumstances or conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood or
zoning district in which the property is located; and
As noted in Section A, the entire site is located within the regulatory 100-year
floodplain, much of it is located within the conveyance, high hazard, and/or
regulatory wetland zones, and the property is long and narrow, and made
narrower by the conveyance flood zone and the Gregory Creek stream bed on the
east side, leading to lack of any alternative locations for a small yard and garden
shed. These conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood. In particular,
most adjacent single family lots are larger, regularly shaped, and do not have the
flood, wetland or stream bed limitations.
In addition, the proposed location is quite far from the front edge of the property
(35’), much farther than most houses in this neighborhood are from their front
property lines (typically 12’ further to the west).
C. Because of such physical circumstances or conditions the property cannot reasonably
be developed in conformity with the provisions of this chapter; and
As noted in Section A, the entire site is located within the regulatory 100-year
floodplain, much of it is located within the conveyance, high hazard, and/or
regulatory wetland zones (including the Gregory Creek stream bed). The property
is long and narrow, leading to lack of any alternative locations for a small
accessory structure. These conditions precludes development in conformity with
the zoning requirements.
D. Any unnecessary hardship has not been created by the applicant.
As noted in Section A, the entire site is located within the regulatory 100-year
floodplain and much of it is located within the conveyance, high hazard, and/or
regulatory wetland zones, including the Gregory Creek stream bed. The property
is long and narrow, with usable terrain narrowing further at the south end,
leading to lack of any alternative locations for a small accessory structure. These
hardships have not been created by the applicant.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 17 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 14 of 20 29-May-2018
(5) Requirements for All Variance Approvals
A. Would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the lot
is located;
The proposed yard and garden shed will not alter the essential character of the
neighborhood. The properties located on Arapahoe Ave. between 7th and 9th St.
include only 2 single family homes (ours and the historic Hannah Barker house),
4 rental duplex/triplex, and 4 large multi-family rental and condominium
complexes, and one office building. The dates of constructions range from 1870s
to early 2000s and the structures are heterogeneous in scale and style.
The proposed yard and garden shed is small, modest, and matches the
architectural character of our home. It would not alter the architectural character
of the neighborhood. The yard and garden shed is integrated into the landscape,
surrounded by mature shrubs and trees that we carefully maintain. The yard and
garden shed abuts the rear of an adjacent property, which faces 9th Street (1655
9th St).
In addition, the owners of all 6 the adjacent and/or closest properties on
Arapahoe Ave have written to support this variance. This include the owners of
the two Historic properties in this area (the Highland School and the Hannah
Barker House), one of which has recently received a front yard setback variance
for an accessory structure (case BOZ2015-00010). See letters in Appendix 2 at
the end of this document.
B. Would not substantially or permanently impair the reasonable use and enjoyment or
development of adjacent property;
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 18 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 15 of 20 29-May-2018
The proposed yard and garden shed will not impair the reasonable use and
enjoyment or development of adjacent property. The main entrance of the
adjacent property faces 9th St., and the shed abuts the rear of their property,
about 75 ft from their main structure. We have been in discussions with the
adjacent neighbor and they are agreeable to this proposal. In fact, the closest
adjacent neighbor has written a letter in support of this variance request (as have
all other adjacent and nearby neighbors), which is attached in Appendix 2.
C. Would be the minimum variance that would afford relief and would be the least
modification of the applicable provisions of this title; and
The proposed yard and garden shed will be the minimum variance that would
afford significant relief and would be the least modification of the applicable
provisions of this title. The shed cannot be moved farther away from the front
property line to increase the setback distance, as it would then fail to respect the
proper setback vs. the main house. The shed is small, only 5.5’ x 8.3’ and only 6’
tall. This would constitute the least modification to the zoning requirements.
D. Would not conflict with the provisions of Section 9-9-17, "Solar Access,"
B.R.C.1981.
The proposed yard and garden shed will not conflict with the solar access
requirements. The property is located in Solar Access Area II, which is protected
with a 25 foot solar fence. The 6’ tall shed would not violate the solar fence.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 19 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 16 of 20 29-May-2018
APPENDIX 1 – MAP OF SITE SHOWING LIMITATIONS ON SHED LOCATION Arapahoe AveTurner AlleyNot possible
because of
flood ot
wetland
zones
55’ front
setback House
Pre-existing 4’
easement to neighbor
(before we owned)
Exit
Pathway
Setbacks
Art
Studio
Driving Access for
Large Materials and
Artworks 8
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 20 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 17 of 20 29-May-2018
APPENDIX 2 – LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM NEIGHBORS
Map showing the adjacent properties for which the owners have provided letters
supporting this variance
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 21 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 18 of 20 29-May-2018
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 22 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 19 of 20 29-May-2018
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 23 of 28
Jimenez / Roth Residence BOZA Variance Application
Written Statement Page 20 of 20 29-May-2018
6.0 SUBMITTAL DOCUMENTS
The following materials have been prepared and included with this Board of Zoning
Adjustment (BOZA) Setback Variance Application.
1. Board of Zoning Adjustment (BOZA) Application Form
2. Written Statement
3. Improvement Survey Plat
4. Site Development Plan
5. Sign Posting Acknowledgement Form
6. Electronic Files
7. Application Fee
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 24 of 28
802 Marine Street
Boulder CO
October 9, 2017 `
Dear Board of Zoning Adjustment:
This letter is to express my views on Docket No. BOZ2017-21, a proposed variance for setback. The
property at 816 Arapahoe Avenue seeking a variance is close to my property, at 802 Marine Street. I
cannot attend the hearing on October 12 (per a mailed notice I received), so I am emailing my
comments.
My principal concern relates to the effects of reducing required open spaces. Zoning laws governing
how much of one’s land can be covered have a very important role in managing stormwater runoff and
protecting the area from flooding and/or spreading contaminants. The amount of uncovered ground that
can absorb rainwater is a key factor in reducing damage from runoff. During the major flooding in
Boulder a few years ago, a big factor in that neighborhood was from water running in the streets and
over yards, and into houses, because the land available for absorption was supersaturated. Further
diminishing the land available to absorb rain water and overflowing creeks is not in the public interest
for either private or public property.
Boulder has dedicated substantial resources to studying flooding risks and possible mitigation of these
risks. Reducing runoff has been adopted in multiple cities, including Philadelphia and Washington, DC,
as a successful strategy for improved water quality and avoiding costly renovation/expansion to water
management infrastructure. As a home owner, the increased flood risk has already cost me a lot; my
insurance has increased by thousands of dollars per year. Since the big flood (and within existing zoning
law, as I understand it), two houses were moved onto what had been a large yard just a block away,
between Marine and Arapahoe in the 900 block. And the frequency of rain fall appears to be increasing
in Boulder. Please do not further diminish percolation in that neighborhood.
I believe that this requested variance might not meet one or more of Boulder’s variance criteria:
The first paragraph of Boulder’s Administrative Setback Variance Criteria (https://www-
static.bouldercolorado.gov/docs/PDS/forms/115.pdf) states that:
Certain variance applications are considered by the Board of Zoning Adjustment at a public
hearing. The city planning staff may consider variance requests for up to 20% of the required
setback (e.g. a proposed 20 foot setback where 25 feet is required). These administrative setback
variances for up to 20% of the setback requirement must be considered through an administrative
review application.
This 20% maximum is also stated in 9-2-3(c)(1). The hearing announcement states that the front yard
setback requested by 816 Arapahoe Avenue would result in 35 feet where 55 feet is required. This 20-
foot reduction in setback would exceed the 20% limit noted in Boulder’s criteria document, and on this
issue alone appears unqualified for approval.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 25 of 28
9-2-3(h)(1) speaks to Physical Condition or Disability. The description of the variance request does not
establish physical circumstances or conditions , or disability, that require a variance.
9-2-3(h)(5)(A) protects ”the essential character of the neighborhood.” The buildings in this
neighborhood are quite varied, allowing for lots of differences. Having a shed out front, however, is not
a common feature, and seems inherently unattractive, which affects the character of the neighborhood.
9-2-3(h)(5)(B) Given the increased risk of stormwater damage to neighbors, it might “substantially or
permanently impair the reasonable use and enjoyment” of adjacent property. As noted above, it does
appear to increase neighborhood risk of damage.
Furthermore, allowing property owners to ignore zoning laws by granting variances after the fact is
unfair to neighboring properties. It also signals others that such violations will be tolerated.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment,
Odelia Funke, PhD
Information on the importance of open spaces for preventing runoff and expensive engineering fixes:
https://water.usgs.gov/edu/runoff.html
http://www.silverhillinstitute.com/pdf/dealing_with_storm_water_management.pdf
“…[R]educing the velocity of storm or surface water runoff…is done by increasing the contact time of runoff water with soil
and vegetation. This decreases the flow rate of water and may result in the removal of contaminants as well it can reduce the
potential of erosion. When flow rate is reduced, infiltration, filtration and absorption of storm water runoff can occur on a
site. This may result in improved water quality. The increased infiltration that happens in these open spaces can also lead to
ground water recharge.”
http://phillywatersheds.org/what_were_doing/green_infrastructure
https://doee.dc.gov/src
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/0710058.pdf
https://fortress.wa.gov/ecy/publications/documents/0710058.pdfhttp://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wat/wq/nps/NPS_Pollution/Storm
water_Runoff/sw_main.htm
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 26 of 28
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 27 of 28
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 28 of 28