Disposition of Approval & Application Packet BOZ2021-16 516 Maxwell Avenue
N O T I C E
FINDINGS AND DECISION OF THE CITY OF BOULDER BOARD OF ZONING
ADJUSTMENT DISPOSITION OF ZONING CASE
DOCKET NUMBER BOZ2021-00016
CONCERNING THE APPLICATION FOR A SETBACK VARIANCE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 9-7-1,
B.R.C. 1981 AT 516 MAXWELL AVENUE, BOULDER, COLORADO OF BRANDIE EMERICK, WHOSE
MAILING ADDRESS IS 521 MAXWELL AVENUE, BOULDER, COLORADO 80304.
On September 9, 2021, 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 construct a rear 2-story addition onto the single-family home, the applicant is requesting a
variance to the east side yard setback for a principal structure in the RL-1 zoning district in order to meet the
minimum combined side yard setback requirement. The resulting east setback will be approximately 7.5 feet (taken
from the addition) where 13.1 feet is required and 10.7 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:
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 4-1 (N. McCord opposed).
EXECUTED this 9th day of September 2021, effective as of, September 9, 2021.
J. Lester, 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 26
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 2 of 26
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 3 of 26
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 4 of 26
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 5 of 26
Page 1 of 3
August 10, 2021
Board of Zoning Adjustments-
RE: Side Yard Setback Variance for 516 Maxwell
Due to the unusual historic house placement (1.9’ to West property line) the allowable setbacks would only leave 17’
wide area of buildable area, in an area which is not realistic in design due to solar shadow restrictions.
We are requesting a Variance for the East Side Yard Setback for an addition in the rear of the existing home located at
516 Maxwell. We are requesting a 7’-6” East Side Yard Setback, where 13.1’ is required and 10.7’ is existing.
The family would like to propose an addition that will allow for the family of 4 to live at the house. Currently the house
only has one bedroom upstairs and the proposed addition is comprised of adding 2 new bedrooms upstairs which would
allow this working Boulder family to have the family bedrooms together on the same floor. All design studies that would
be in compliance with the existing prescribed setbacks have proved to be unobtainable and unrealistic (prescribed
setbacks only leave a 17’ wide space, the location of which would prohibit a 2 story addition due to Solar). Below we
have detailed how the proposed addition would be to the satisfaction of all requirements outlined in paragraph (1) and
paragraph (5) of the Subsection.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 6 of 26
Page 2 of 3
(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;
From the attached survey, the total lot area is 6,355sf and the lot dimensions are approximately 181'-0" deep by 35'-0"
wide. The prescribed setbacks (13.1’ allowed East side yard setback, where 10.7’ is existing and 7.5’ is proposed and 5’
allowed West yard setback, where 1.9’ is existing and 5’ is proposed) for this lot would only allow for a 17’ wide strip of
buildable land, the location of which would not allow for a 2 story structure due to solar restrictions so an addition in
this by-right area is ruled out as a viable option. This unusually small existing West yard setback combined with the
narrowness of the lot is uncharacteristic of the neighborhood and any addition of this prescribed size would be
impossible to meet the needs of the family. We are asking for a 7’-6” East side setback, which is a common setback for
houses in the RL zoning district.
(PLEASE SEE A1.01 FOR THE SETBACKS- EXISTING AND ALLOWED ARE DETAILED ON THE EXISTING SITE PLAN AND THE
PROPOSED SETBACKS ARE DETAILED ON THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN)
(B) The unusual circumstances or conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood or zoning district in which the
property is located;
516 Maxwell is an unusually small lot with a square footage of only 6,355 sf and dimensions of approximately 181'-0" x
35'-0". The historic house (built in 1911) was placed unusually close to the West lot line (1.9’) which was allowed at the
time of building. This size of lot is unusually small for the neighborhood and the RL-1 zoning district where a 7,000 sf lot
size is the code minimum. The existing house is 1,579sf and the proposed addition will increase the FAR size to a very
modest size of 2,578 sf which is still below the 3,376 sf allowed FAR for the lot.
(C) Because of such physical circumstances or conditions the property cannot reasonably be developed in conformity
with the provisions of this chapter;
We believe that the 13.1’ setback allowed in conformity with the existing prescribed setbacks would not allow for a
reasonable development for a new home or a reasonable addition to the existing home, especially considering the by
right area on the lot is located in a place where solar shadow would prohibit a 2 story addition. The proposed setbacks
are 5’ on the West and 7.5’ on the East allowing the design to be more centered in the lot, creating a solar shadow
compliant design and a more balanced property.
(D) Any unnecessary hardship has not been created by the applicant.
The historic house placement, and the unusually narrowness of the lot has not been created by the applicant. The
applicant would like to propose a modest addition which will allow for 3 bedrooms upstairs. The house was built in 1911,
and at the time they did not subscribe to the modern setback and zoning restrictions.
(PLEASE SEE A2.02 TO SEE ALL THREE BEDROOMS ON THE SAME LEVEL)
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 7 of 26
Page 3 of 3
(5) Requirements for All Variance Approvals
(A) Would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the lot is located;
This proposed addition will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood and has been designed in accordance
to the Mapleton Hill Historic District Design Guidelines. The proposed changes to the house will restore several historic
features that have been lost including an arched covered porch on the second floor, front porch details and restoring
historic window patterns. Landmarks Design Review Committee has reviewed the design proposal, is in support of the
addition and has issued a Landmark Alteration Certificate.
(B) Would not substantially or permanently impair the reasonable use and enjoyment or development of adjacent
property;
We believe that the proposed addition will not impair the reasonable use, enjoyment or development of any adjacent
properties because the addition will be on the back of the house, there will be no change to the building height and the
size and design of the proposed addition is appropriate with the neighborhood and the surrounding houses. The
addition roof ridge will be lower than the existing roof to reduce the bulk and visibility. The surrounding house existing
setbacks are approximately 3.7’ (510 Maxwell to the property line) and 4.8’ (520 Maxwell to the property) as seen on
the Survey or Site Plan.
(C) Would be the minimum variance that would afford relief and would be the least modification of the applicable
provisions of this title; and
This proposal is modest in size and bulk, asking only for a design which allows for the family’s bedrooms to be together
on the same floor. The addition has been designed to step inward from the existing house to create a stair separation
element and the proposed new ridge is carefully designed to be below that of the existing ridge. The addition has been
designed to be the smallest of that which will afford the relief of a 3 bedrooms together on the same floor. We studied
proposals which would farther reduce the size of the proposed addition, but after studies this design is the minimum
square footage and bulk that is appropriate.
(D) Would not conflict with the provisions of Section 9-9-17, "Solar Access," B.R.C.1981.
The proposed design will not conflict with the provisions of Section 9-9-17.
(PLEASE SEE A1.01 PROPOSED SITE PLAN TO SEE THE VISUAL REPRESENTAION OF SOLAR COMPLAINCE)
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 8 of 26
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 9 of 26
5 4 7 0 5 4 7 054695468546754665465546468546954715471547254665467547040"2b11"8"6"stump10"12"10"11"28"12"15"16"12"leyN 89°55'18" E (m)lot 10 - not includedLCMaxwell AvenueL1L3L4L2lot 12lot 11lot 10lot 9ewalkte curbrn 3561764ls4bp1p10.8' eave30'on pinund 1"broken conc. walllsls4+p1bfplanterconcreteeogeogrrtiesfsquit claim deedrn 3167372warranty deedadjoining parcelsssswwolwmgmg2 inch gas pipelineirirubeoeoeocndtsupuolwol o l ssgws ss
5 4 7 0
5 4 7 0
5 4 6 9
5 4 6 8
54675466546554646854 6 9
5 4 7 1 5471547254665 4 6 7
5 4 7 0
40"2b11"8"6"stump10"12"10"11"28"12"15"16"12"alleyN 89°55'18" E (m)lot 10 - not includedLCMaxwell AvenueL1L3L4L2lot 12lot 11lot 10lot 9sidewalkcrete curbrn 3561764ls4bp1p10.8' eave30'iron pinfound 1"broken conc. walllsls4+p1bfconcreteeogeogrrtiesfsquit claim deedrn 3167372warranty deedadjoining parcelsssswwolwmgmg2 inch gas pipelineirirubeoeoeocndtsupuolwol
o l ssgw ss
DNEXISTING WEST SIDE YARD SETACK 1.9'EXISTING EAST SIDE YARD SETACK 10.7'ALLOWED EAST SIDE YARD SETACK 13.1'13' - 1 51/256"ALLOWED WEST SIDE YARD SETACK 5'5' - 0"BASEMENT WELL510 MAXWELL520 MAXWELL1' - 11"5' - 0"7' - 6"5486.05484.65490.24" / 12"4" / 12"5484.65482.05468.85468.05468.75466.65466.75483.25467.75467.25467.95483.25484.65469.22.5' +/-5.5' +/-7.5' PROPOSED EAST SIDE YARD SETBACK5' PROPOSED WEST SIDE YARD SETBACKPROPOSED EDGE OF HOUSEPORCH510 MAXWELL 2.5' +/-BEYOND PROPOSED HOUSE EDGE520 MAXWELL 5.5' +/-BEYOND PROPOSED HOUSE EDGE510 MAXWELL IS 2.5' +/- BEYOND PROPOSED 516 MAXWELL HOUSE EDGE510 MAXWELL WAS APPROVED IN 2005 FOR AN ADDITION THAT ALSO REQURIED A SETBACK VARIANCE FOR TOTAL SIDEYARD. ADR2005-00136Type:Administrative Setback VarianceDescription: Adm. Setback variance for total sideyard.PMT2005-03876Type:Addition to a Single Family Detached DwellingDescription:Two story addition to single family residence with finished basement. Addition to total 1,787 s.f. containing new master bedroom, 2 full baths, replacement kitchen, family room, basement rec. room. See ADR2005-00136520 MAXWELL IS 5.5' +/- BEYOND PROPOSED 516 MAXWELL HOUSE EDGE520 MAXWELL WAS APPROVED IN 2017 FOR AN ADDITION. Permit PMT2017-02001Main level addition (382 s.f.) and remodel (247 s.f.) / Upper level addition (428 s.f.) and remodel (336 s.f.) / Conversion of existing crawl space to basement under existing house and new basement walkout addition (1,427 s.f.) / New covered/sunken patio. Scope includes associated mechanical, electrical, and plumbing. Reference HIS2016-00384.BASEMENT WELL520 MAXWELL EXPANDED BASEMENT510 MAXWELL520 MAXWELLDATE:SCALE:0"1"A1.01SITE PLAN09/01/2021516 MAXWELLAVENUE516 MAXWELLBOULDER, CO 803043/32" = 1'-0"1SITE PLAN - EXISTING3/32" = 1'-0"2SITE PLAN - PROPOSED520 MAXWELL FROM 516 PROPOSED HOUSE EDGE510 MAXWELL FROM 516 PROPOSED HOUSE EDGEBOZA Disposition of Approval Page 10 of 26
676767
! (
% % %
,$5$5,$$$$,5$5$$,$$$,5$ % % %''''
!
''''
)
! "
#$% % &' ' !)' % &' ' !)'
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 11 of 26
*4
67674 674
*
+,-.
! (
!&$'
( % %
( %
"
,$$$$5$5$5$$,$$$,5$ % % %''''$ $,$$ $$
' /$' ''''
! "
#$% % &' ' ! )' % &' ' ! )'
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 12 of 26
4
!
!* ('
!
% %
% ! ,$$$$,$$5$$$,$
"
"
(
((%'$ ( (
((0' (
!
"
$$,5,$$ % % %$5$$$%/%(
''''$5 ( ( ( ( $$,5''''
! "
#$% % &' ' "
)' % &' ' "
)'
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 13 of 26
4 5555555 % %55555 % 5
% % %,$$$$55$$,$$''''8 #9 #:55555''''55
"
! "
#$% % &' '
*' % &' '
*'
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 14 of 26
'"*
' $
*
' $ '12 '
* ' % ' '$ ' ' % ' ' $ '"*
' $
*
' $ '12 '
* ' % ' '$ ' ' % ' ' $
!
(
!
"
! "
#$% % &' "() ' % &' "() '
% &'
() ' % &' %
() '
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 15 of 26
'"*
' $
*
' $ '12 '
* ' % '"*
' $
*
' $
* ' % '12 '' $ ' '$ ' ' % ' ' $ (
!
*
(
!)
"("*"
1 2!
% "
"
! "
#$% % &' ) ' % &' ) '
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 16 of 26
'"*
' $
*
' $ '12 '
* ' % '12 '' $ ' '$ ' ' % ' ' $
!
(
*
(
(
! ((
( "*
! '"*
' $
*
' $ '12 '
* ' %
""
! "
#$% % &' % ) '
% &' ) ' BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 17 of 26
#
! "
#$%
( '
( '
( ' %
( '
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 18 of 26
#
! "
#$%"( ' "( '
"( ' %"( '
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 19 of 26
From:Wyler, Robbie
To:Wyler, Robbie
Subject:FW: 516 Maxwell
Date:Wednesday, August 18, 2021 8:56:50 AM
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Tania Schoennagel <taniaschoe@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Aug 16, 2021 at 9:06 AM
Subject: 516 Maxwell
To: <schaeffer.lr@gmail.com>
Ms Schaeffer,
We are writing in support of the proposed 516 Maxwell renovation. We live across the street at 515
Maxwell, and have seen the plans in detail. Joel Smiley has done excellent high-quality historical
renovations in the neighborhood, and we have confidence that the setback variance this unique
project seeks will be modest, appealing and appropriate, adding to the character of this historic
street and neighborhood.
Thank you,
Tania Schoennagel & Steve Leovy
--
Laura Schaeffer
Architect, LEED AP
720.243.6599 (cell)
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 20 of 26
From:Michael Wrighton
To:BOZA; Wyler, Robbie; Holmes, Brian
Subject:BOZ2021-00016 / setback variance application comment
Date:Tuesday, September 7, 2021 12:56:03 PM
External Sender
To whom it may concern,
I write regarding the application of 516 Maxwell for a setback zoning variance. I own and
reside next door to the property at 520 Maxwell.
516 is a small and charming home -- I believe it has remained that way over the years because
the lot is quite narrow and the neighborhood is historically protected. It has transitioned
between single or couple owners over the years that have typically not had children living in
the home with them.
For more than a decade, I have lived, and invested, without any variances, in my own
property on the assumption that the city would only permit building on adjoining land which
obeys the relevant setback, solar shadow, and other land use restrictions. While these rules
certainly create challenges to development, they serve to preserve the less-dense and historic
character of my neighborhood.
The proposed variance to the building code is not at all slight. The western setback is strongly
established along the entire depth of the existing house (about 25') -- not just by bay window
or anything of the sort. At the tallest point of the proposed variance (the east-side dormer), the
variance is roughly six feet into the allowed setback, 20 feet wide, and goes 25 feet up. The
applicant states that this is necessary in order to place three bedrooms on the second story.
That is likely true, however there is no code requirement or other bona-fide necessity that
makes this the only 'reasonable' development of this property. It is only a slight hardship for a
home to be limited to two second-story bedrooms (in fact it is quite a common condition in
Mapleton's single family homes on relatively narrow lots). Many homes (including my own)
have their secondary bedrooms, often occupied by children, in the basement or on the ground
floor, and are comfortably livable.
The new owner is a well-funded and highly capable property developer, I have total
confidence any work would be done to a high standard. However, in contrast to the applicant's
statement that the enjoyment of the neighboring property is unimpaired, I believe that, as
proposed, the variance would permanently impair my own property. In particular, the massing
(especially the height and low slope of the roof in the extension) would eliminate the views of
the foothills I enjoy from the western side of my home. While certainly some obstruction
would still occur in a 'by-right' project (which I have always expected would one day happen),
I believe it would be far less obtrusive.
A very similar issue was presented to the board at the August 12, 2021 BOZA meeting where
the applicant proposed to build a tall structure that would obstruct the view (at 1722 Pine St.)
over the objection of the neighboring property owners. In that case, the board rightly
encouraged the applicant to accommodate their neighbor's legitimate concerns (presumably
via a design update) over the loss of foothills view, and granted a continuance for them to do
so.
I therefore urge the board to offer a continuance to encourage the applicant to propose
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 21 of 26
building that would only intrude into the allowed setback only below 12' of elevation. I could
enthusiastically support such a project.
Respectfully,
Michael Wrighton
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 22 of 26
RE: Side Yard Setback Variance for 516 Maxwell
Dear Board of Zoning Adjustments
We are the owners and residents of 510 Maxwell Ave (one house west of 516 Maxwell Ave). We have lived
here for 29 years. Our house was built in 1894 and 516 Maxwell was built around 1898 (from the Carnegie
Library records). We agree with the applicants that this is a challenging situation. However we would like to
make some comments on their application.
1) The application says "We believe that the proposed addition will not impair the reasonable use,
enjoyment or development of any adjacent properties". We respectfully disagree: The addition would
materially reduce our views of greenery and sky. There are also considerations of privacy which the
applicants have not addressed. The impact would of course be even greater to 520 Maxwell, on the East
side of the proposed development.
2) We did an addition on our house about 15 years ago, and we were required to make the addition lower
than the original house and pulled in at both sides. The same is true for several other houses on the block
(see photos below). The applicants say "This proposal is modest in size and bulk" but we cannot agree: It is
actually larger than the original house. They also say that the roofline is lower than the original, but you
would need truly incredible eyesight to see that! We believe that if the applicants followed the same
guidelines as everyone else, a zoning variance would not be required.
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 23 of 26
3) 510 has been a small house on a narrow lot for a very long time. It was probably a 1 story building
originally, with the attic later opened up. We don't feel that the applicants have demonstrated why it needs
to be enlarged so dramatically, with an effectively 2-story addition.
[photo from ~1900]
4) Finally, we agree that the hardship of the narrow lot has not been created by the applicant, but they
were certainly aware of it when they bought this property.
In summary we do not feel that the applicants have demonstrated a true need for this variance. We would
suggest that a smaller (perhaps one-story) addition would be much more suitable for this property. We ask
the Board not to approve the current application.
Yours Sincerely
Guy and Alison Vigers
510 Maxwell Ave
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 24 of 26
From: Julie Husband
Date: Tuesday, September 7, 2021
Subject: 516 Maxwell
To: : WylerR@bouldercolorado.gov
(Updated after reviewing historic image of the building)
Dear Mr. Wyler,
I live on 5th Street around the corner from the proposed addition. I have been involved in
Historic Preservation and zoning code for 30 years. I do not support the plans for 516 Maxwell
(Historic Building). I somewhat support the footprint of the addition since it has minimized the
impact on rear yard open space, as well as efforts to “reconstruct” the front of the building to
some degree. However, it does not appear to comply entirely with the Mapleton Hill Historic
District Design Guidelines. The proposed addition does not appear to be compatible with the
historic building in the following ways:
• Two-story addition to a one-story historic building. The original building is a one-story
building with a generous opening to the attic (see historic image below).
• The 22’ side walls on the proposed building are too high (later alterations from the 50s
should not be the guiding factor.) Therefore, sideyards should not be allowed to be
reduced with this scenario.
Mitigation:
• Step down height
• Maintain regulated side yard setbacks to mitigate environmental impacts (addition,
light, air, fire and water.)
Sincerely,
Julie Husband
2530 5th St Boulder
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 25 of 26
BOZA Disposition of Approval Page 26 of 26