Loading...
07.12.2018 BOZA Summary Minutes_signed CITY OF BOULDER BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT ACTION MINUTES July 12, 2018, S p.m. 1777 Broadway, Council Chambers Board Members Present: Michael Hirsch (Chair), Jill Lester, David Schafer, Ellen McCready, Jack Rudd Board Members Absent: None City Attorney Representing Board: Erin Poe Staff Members Present: Brian Holmes, Robbie Wyler, Cindy Spence 1. CALL TO ORDER: M. Hirsch called the meeting to order at 5:07 p.m. 2. BOARD HEARINGS: A. Docket No.: BOZ2018-15 Address: 4285 Graham Court Applicant: Keeli Biediger Parking in Landscape Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to establish parking on the property, the applicant is requesting a variance to the minimum front(southeast) yard landscape setback for the recognition of two parking spaces on an existing 18'4"wide driveway/parking area located entirely within the front yard. The resulting front (southeast) yard setback for both spaces will be 6 feet where 25 feet is required and no conforming parking exists on site today. Sections of the Land Use Code to be modified: Sections 9-7-1 & 9-9-6, BRC 1981. Staff Presentation: R.Wyler presented the item to the board. Board Questions: R. Wyler and B. Holmes answered questions from the board. Applicant's Presentation: Harmon Zuckerman, with Frascona Joiner Goodman and Greenstein, PC, and Keeli Biediger, the applicant, presented the item to the board. Board Questions: Harmon Zuckerman, representing the applicant, answered questions from the board. Public Hearing: No one from the public addressed the board. Board Discussion: • J. Lester said, regarding the issue of minimum hardship, the applicant has created this hardship, The existing condition did not exist prior to 2013. • M. Hirsch stated that this is not an environmental issue, but more of a visual item. He added that the criteria is set and has been used for long time. He reminded the board that BOZA has set precedent on ADU requests in the neighborhood before specifically for parking in the front setback, some of which have been denied. Currently, nearly every house has doubled parking in that neighborhood which is not enforced neighborhood- wide. • J. Rudd agreed that a majority of the houses have two parking pads. Historically, the discussed area has been used for parking, therefore it seems to be an easy leap to place concrete there. However by introducing ADUs into this request, it makes it more complex. • J. Lester stated that she is opposed to the application as submitted. She would approve of a single 9'19"parking space and if City Council would approve of the ADU code double- wide driveways,but it is not for BOZA to do at this time. The City Council is responsible for this confusion in the law and this does not qualify as a hardship at this time. • M. Hirsch reminded the board, after a visit to the site and the neighborhood,that they can continue this item until City Council makes decision regarding ADUs and parking. • D. Schafer agreed that currently there are a lot of existing double car pads in the neighborhood. He suggested an approval as built but only grant a single car to park. • E. McCready advised that they may be setting precedent. In this neighborhood, the double parking pads are everywhere. • J. Lester said she would support waiting on City CounciI's decision. There is the concern of permeability of the ground as it is paved over which is an environmental issue. Her second concern was landscape appeal and not wanting the neighborhood to look like a parking lot. She suggested a continuance of 90 days to let City Council discuss the issue with allowing a parking space for ADUs. • D. Schafer said that by not coming to decision and giving the applicant closure, we would be causing more hardship. He recommended a minimum variance which would be two feet of concrete but to not allow two cars to park there. That would be putting the applicant in the same position as the neighbors and give consistency. It would also put them on the same level of possible enforcement_ But it would also give the applicant a foothold if City Council declares additional parking is necessary for ADUs. In addition, he stated that this proposal should be consistent with past decisions. • M. Hirsch agreed that the issues should not be convoluted based on what may or may not occur with City Council. • J. Rudd reminded the board that the applicant is not asking for an ADU,but a parking setback. • All board members were opposed to approving the application as submitted. They discussed possible conditions with an approval_ • D. Schafer said the item is compliant with Criteria 5 in that it does not alter the character of the neighborhood nor does it affect the enjoyment of the adjacent neighbors as they are in support. • E. McCready said it also meets Criteria 1 because the usual physical circumstance is the location of the house on the lot does not allow the creation of a parking space to the side or access to the side of the home. That circumstance was not created by the applicant. Motion: On a motion by E. McCready, seconded by D. Schafer, the Board of Zoning Adjustment approved 5-0 the a1212lication (Docket BOZ2018-15 with the condition of maintaining the exiting 18'4"wide Darking area located entirely in the front yard setback but serving onl one parking space meeting Criteria 1 and 5. The board discussed Iteral 2C next. B. Docket No.: BOZ2018-16 Address: 5000 Butte Street#183 (located on Vail Circle) Applicant: Sam Shrestha Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to place a mobile home on a lot within Vista Village, the applicant is requesting a variance to the rear(west) setback from the boundary of the mobile home park. In a mobile home park context, this setback is measured from the development property line to the mobile home and, in this case, the resulting rear setback will be approximately 10.5 feet where 20 feet is required and no mobile home exists today on this lot. Section of the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9-7-13, BRC 1981. Staff Presentation: R. Wyler presented the item to the board. Board Questions: R. Wyler and B. Holmes answered questions from the board. Applicant's Presentation: Sam Shrestha, the applicant, presented the item to the board. Board Questions: Sam Shrestha, the applicant, answered questions from the board. Public Hearing: No one from the public addressed the board. Board Discussion: • M. Hirsch said this new home would be in keeping with existing homes in the area. There has been an upgrading with modular homes and they are now larger. • J. Rudd as the older homes are replaced with these newer homes, they are usually wider. Motion: On a motion by J. Lester, seconded by D.Schafer, the Board of Zoning Adjustment approved 5-0 the application (Docket BOZ2018-16) as submitted. C. Docket No.: BOZ2018-18 Address: 985 Gilbert Street Applicants: Lon & Lauren McGowan Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to place an in-ground swimming pool in the rear(west) yard of the property, the applicants are requesting a variance to the minimum landscape setback requirements of the RE zoning district. Because this property fronts onto Gilbert Street to the east and its rear yard backs onto 5`h Street to the west it is considered a"Through Lot"and pursuant to Boulder Revised Code Section 9-7-2(b)(7), the rear yard shall have a minimum landscaped setback equal to the minimum front yard landscaped setback from a street for all buildings and uses required for that zone. And pursuant to Boulder Revised Code Section 9-9-19, swimming pools may not be located in any required front yard or side yard abutting a street. The resulting west yard setback taken from the swimming pool will be 2 feet where 25 feet is required and no swimming pool exists today. Section of the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9- 7-1, BRC 1981. Staff Presentation: R. WyIer presented the item to the board. Board Questions: R.WyIer and B. Holmes answered questions from the board. Applicant's Presentation: Tasha Power, with Berg Hill Greenleaf Ruscitti, LLP,presented the item to the board. Board Questions: Tasha Power, representing the applicant, answered questions from the board. Public Hearing: John Smart spoke in opposition to the project. He would like to have the existing foliage maintained, the existing one-lane road could potentially be dangerous, and suggested the proposed pool could be pushed closer to the home. Board Discussion: • M. Hirsch stated the vegetation appears to be in the Right of Way, therefore, it should stay in place. He said that area is steep and due to this typography, the proposed pool may be difficult to see from the road. • D. Schafer said there would not be much impact on 5`h street. Motion: On a motion by D. Schafer, seconded by J. Lester, the Board of Zoning Adjustment approved 5-0 the application (Docket BOZ2018-18) as submitted. D. Docket No.: BOZ2018-19 Address: 5000 Butte Street#64 (located on Berthoud) Applicant: Sam Shrestha Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to place a mobile home on a lot within Vista Village, the applicant is requesting a variance to the side(north) setback between neighboring homes. In a mobile home park context, the side setbacks (separation) is measured from mobile home to mobile home. In this case the resulting north side setback will be approximately 13.5 feet where 15 feet is required and approximately 15 feet exists today from the current home(to be replaced). Section of the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9-7-13, BRC 1981. Staff Presentation: R. Wyler presented the item to the board. Board Questions: R. Wyler and B. Holmes answered questions from the board. Applicant's Presentation: Sam Shrestha, the applicant, presented the item to the board. Board Questions: Sam Shrestha, the applicant, answered questions from the board. Public Hearing: No one from the public addressed the board. Board Discussion: • The board agreed that more of these applications may be coming to BOZA and these modular homes are excellent affordable housing alternatives. Motion: On a motion by J. Lester, seconded by J. Rudd the Board of Zoning Adjustment avoroved 5-0 the application (Docket BOZ2018-19) as submitted. 3. GENERAL DISCUSSION: A. Approval of Minutes On a motion by D. Schafer, seconded by J. Rudd, the Board of Zoning Adjustments voted 5-0 to approve the June 21, 2018 minutes. B. Matters from the Board There were no matters from the board. C. Matters from the City Attorney There were no matters from the City Attorney. D. Matters from Planning and Development Services • B.Holmes informed the board that the Chief Building Official positon with the City of Boulder has been filled. • B. Holmes proposed posNible retreat dates and informed the board staff would follow up with an email. The board discussed possible topics for the retreat. 4. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business to come before the board at this time, BY MOTION REGULARLY ADOPTED,THE MEETING WAS ADJOURNED AT 7:53 P.M APPROVED BY Board Cha' DATE