Item 4A - 5675 Arapahoe
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD
MEETING DATE: February 21, 2023
AGENDA TITLE: Concept Plan Review and Comment Request for a proposal to redevelop
5675 Arapahoe with two new three-story buildings for technical office/ research and
development uses totaling approximately 200,000 square feet in floor area at a height of
approximately 45 feet and with subterranean parking. Reviewed under case no. LUR2022-
00040.
Applicant: Amanda Johnson, OZ Architecture
Owners: Kyle Flippen
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS
Brad Mueller, Director Planning & Development Services
Charles Ferro, Development Review Manager
Chandler Van Schaack, Principal Planner
OBJECTIVE
1. Planning Board hears staff and applicant presentations
2. Hold Public Hearing
3. Planning Board to ask questions of applicant, the public, and staff
4. Planning Board Discussion and comment on Concept Plan.
SUMMARY
Project Name: 5675 Arapahoe Avenue
Location: 5675 Arapahoe Ave. Size of Property 9.5 acres (413,983 Sq. Ft.) Zoning: IG (Industrial - General)
Comprehensive Plan: Light Industrial
KEY ISSUES FOR CONCEPT PLAN DISCUSSION
Staff has identified the following key issues to help guide the board’s discussion:
1. Is the proposed concept plan compatible with the goals, objectives, and recommendations
of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP)?
2. Does Planning Board have feedback to the applicant on the conceptual site plan and
architecture?
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is for Planning Board to review and comment on the Concept Plan for
the above reference project. Per Section 9-2-14, B.R.C. 1981, the project requires Concept Plan
review and comment prior to Site Review because the site is over 5 acres, the proposal is greater
than 100,000 square feet and a height modification would be required (Table 2-2 of Section 9-2-
14, B.R.C. 1981).
PUBLIC FEEDBACK
Consistent with Section 9-4-3, Public Notice Requirements, B.R.C. 1981, staff provided
notification to all property owners within 600 feet of the subject location of the application, and
signs have been posted by the applicant indicating the review requested. Staff has not received
any inquiries about the project.
BACKGROUND
As shown below in Figure 1, This subject property is located less than one-quarter mile east of
the 55th Street and Arapahoe Avenue intersection, on the north side of Arapahoe, near the
eastern edge of the city and within the IG (Industrial-General) zone district.
Figure 1- Existing site and its surroundings
The site is roughly 9.5 acres and is currently vacant. City records indicate that the property was
annexed in 1987. Climate controlled self-storage was approved as part of Site and Use Review
applications for the property in 2010 replacing an office building on the site. The site has been
cleared for the use but has since never been developed. The subject site is within the boundaries
of the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan (EBSP). The land use designation is Light Industrial
and the site is not within an area of change although it is proximate to the 55th and Arapahoe
Station Area. Additional information can be found under the project description below.
Much of the surrounding development on the north side of Arapahoe Avenue is characteristic of
Industrial-General land uses and includes a variety of warehouse, manufacturing, and auto-
service oriented uses. Land uses immediately surrounding the subject property include
ScienTech Inc. research and manufacturing to the west, Burning Tree office warehouses to the
east, the Union Pacific Railroad to the north, and across Arapahoe Avenue from the site is the
Flatirons Municipal Golf Course. The entry to the Golf Course aligns with the existing east entry
to the subject property. At the intersection of 55th and Arapahoe are the Boulder Dinner Theater,
offices, and gasoline stations. Just to the west of the intersection of 55th and Arapahoe, there is a
commercial area that includes a car rental office, sandwich and coffee shops, a liquor store,
insurance agency, copy shop and other retail uses. There is no identifiable architectural
character to the area, with parcels developing over time. Pictures of the site and immediate
context are shown for context.
Figure 2- Existing site as seen from Arapahoe Ave.
Figure 3- Existing office building and bus stop immediately east of site
Figure 4- Existing Scientech Research & Manufacturing building to the west
Figure 5- Flatirons Golf Course across Arapahoe to the south
The 9.8-acre site was formerly Granville-Phillips, a research and development facility with one
main building of approximately 20,000 square feet and two other small, detached storage
buildings on the site. The essentially flat site slopes gently from south to north with a 13-foot
grade difference over the 1,174-foot deep site. A significant site feature is the existing,
approximately one-half acre, man-made pond. The pond and Dry Creek No. 2 Ditch are
designated wetlands as set forth in the city’s Wetland Regulations. The pond is considered the
origin of Dry Creek Ditch No. 2 that flows from the pond off the property toward the northwest.
The ditch eventually flows below the railroad bridge west of the site. Several prairie dogs are
located on the north end of the site that could impact the concept plan.
The property is also in the 100-year, conveyance and high hazard floor boundaries, which will
require Floodplain Development Permits for work in those areas (see Figure 6 below). In
addition, there are a number of large, long-lived trees on the south side of the pond between the
Arapahoe Avenue right-of-way and the pond.
Figure 6 – Map showing designated wetlands, Conveyance and High Hazard Flood Zone on subject property
PROCESS
Concept Plan is the initial step in the Site Review process, for which the property is eligible
under thresholds established in the Land Use Code section 9-2-14(b)(1)(C), B.R.C. 1981. The
next step would be a required Site Review application. The mandatory Concept Plan and Site
Review threshold is met by both the 9.5-acre size of the site which exceeds the five-acre
threshold for the IG zoning district as well as the proposed project size of 200,000 square feet
which exceeds the 100,000 square foot floor area threshold for the IG zoning district. The
purpose of Concept Plan is to review a general development plan for the site, evaluate general
architectural characteristics, land uses, and transportation considerations.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Figures 7 and 8 below depict the proposed site plan and building elevations for the project,
which consists of redevelopment of 5675 Arapahoe with two new three-story buildings of
approximately 200,000 square feet in total floor area at a height of approximately 45 feet, with
60 surface parking spaces and roughly 500 subterranean spaces. The proposed plans are found in
Attachment A and the written statement within Attachment B.
Figure 7- Site Plan of proposed project
Figure 8- Section drawing of proposed buildings looking east-west
Land Use - The proposed land use for the site is technical office, which is currently a permitted
use in the Industrial – General (IG) zone. However, it should be noted that the technical office
definition is proposed to be consolidated into a general office use category as part of the use
table and standards module two code update, which is scheduled for 3rd Reading at City Council
on February 16, 2023 (the City Council memorandum and attachments can be found HERE). In
addition, the ordinance proposes amending the current “medical laboratory” use type with an
updated title, “research and development,” and creating a more generalized definition. This use
would now include research and experimental development in industrial, biotechnology, life
sciences, medical, computer hardware or software, and electronics industries. Research and
development uses, which are currently typically classified as “manufacturing use,” “technical
office,” or a mix of both, would be more clearly defined to incorporate labs, offices,
warehousing, and light manufacturing within the overarching research and development use.
Unlike the proposed limitations for offices, research and development uses would be permitted
uses in the IG and IM districts without any size restrictions. This supports the BVCP policies on
uses intended for the industrial areas and aligns with community feedback on appropriate uses
for Boulder’s industrial areas.
If passed by City Council, research and development uses would be permitted uses in the IG
zone. If the proposed use does not fit under this definition and qualifies as an “office”, it would
be subject to Use Review because the proposed project is over 50,000 square feet in size. In
addition to the typical use review criteria, the applicant would have to demonstrate that the
primary use of the surrounding area would remain industrial and any newly constructed office
building would have to be designed to allow the building to be easily adapted for industrial or
research and development uses in the future (such as higher ceiling heights or integration of
loading doors). Non-residential uses on the site would still be subject to the IG zone’s 0.5 FAR (Floor Area Ratio) limit.
East Boulder Subcommunity Plan (EBSP) - The subject site is within the boundaries of the
EBSP. The land use designation is Light Industrial and the site is not within an area of change
although it is proximate to the 55th and Arapahoe Station Area. While the site is within an area
not subject to place types or land use changes, it is identified as a future area of study with the
following statement on page 33 of the plan:
2D. Industrial Access off of East Arapahoe - The East Boulder Subcommunity Plan
recommends a continued land use of Light Industrial in the area located between
Flatirons Golf Course and the existing rail. The plan also recommends a future for
transit-oriented development at 55th and Arapahoe and recognizes the Mixed-Use
Residential future of the site at 5801 Arapahoe Ave (commonly known as Waterview). To
accommodate Light Industrial operations and access in this area as well as increase
safety for new residential and mixed-use development of surrounding properties, this
area should be pursued for further study. Potential issues to evaluate include increased
network access through the area and consolidation of curb cuts along Arapahoe Avenue.
Architecture and Massing- The application states that “The architecture is being proposed as
best-in-class design to support technical office users.” However, there is little information on the
general design of the buildings included in the application materials other than the site plan and
building cross sections shown in the figures above. The plans indicate a height of 45 feet, which
is allowable per the Conditional Building Height standards in Section 9-7-6 of the Land Use
Code because the property is not adjacent to any properties with residential zoning or land use
designations..
Per Table 8-1 of Section 9-8-1, “Intensity Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, the IG zone has a FAR
maximum of 0.5 FAR. Building massing is determined by a combination of the FAR limit,
underlying setbacks and height limits and conformity with the Site Review criteria of Section 9-
2- 14(h), B.R.C. 1981. Based on the submitted plans Building A would have 84,600 square feet
and Building B would have 121,800 square feet for a total of 206,400 square feet of floor area.
This would equate to a 0.498 FAR.
Given the lack of architectural detail included in the plan set, staff’s comments to the applicant
included several general considerations for preparing a Site Review submittal if the project is to
move forward. The applicant has been encouraged to pursue a design that is unique rather than a
tilt up industrial or standard suburban office building, with angled roofs, inviting pedestrian
entrances and thoughtfully designed parking and outdoor areas. Per the Site Review criteria,
buildings would be required to have high-quality, durable building materials and a high level of
transparency with window glazing on each floor.
On-site Open Space- Figure 7 best shows how the open space would be arranged on the site.
Open space would be subject to the requirements of Section 9-9-11, “Useable Open Space,”
B.R.C. 1981 and the open space criteria within the Site Review criteria (9-2-14(h)(2), B.R.C.
1981). With a building at 45 feet, the site would have to be at least 15% open space, which
appears to be met with much of the greenspace around the buildings and naturalized areas in the
south portion of the site.
Parking- The parking standards are found in Section 9-9-6, B.R.C. 1981. Parking in the IG zone
is one parking space for every 400 square feet of floor area. Based on the square footage above,
the site would require 516 parking spaces unless a parking reduction were requested. The site
plan indicates 500 subterranean parking spaces and 60 surface parking spaces but it is currently
unclear whether the proposal would meet the parking requirements at this time. Regarding the
location of the parking area, in the written comments to the applicant staff has indicated that at
time of Site Review it will be necessary to relocate the surface parking lot away from the front of
the project to a less visible location.
CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA, SECTION 9-2-13(e), B.R.C. 1981
Guidelines for Review and Comment: The following guidelines will be used to guide the
Planning Board's discussion regarding the site. It is anticipated that issues other than those
listed in this section will be identified as part of the Concept Plan review and comment
process. The Planning Board may consider the following guidelines when providing
comments on a concept plan:
(1) Characteristics of the site and surrounding areas, including, without limitation, its
location, surrounding neighborhoods, development and architecture, any known natural
depressions, steep slopes and prominent views to and from the site;
This subject property is located less than one-quarter mile east of the 55th Street and Arapahoe
Avenue intersection, on the north side of Arapahoe, near the eastern edge of the city and within
the IG (Industrial-General) zone district. Much of the surrounding development on the north side
of Arapahoe Avenue is characteristic of Industrial-General land uses and includes a variety of
warehouse, manufacturing, and auto-service oriented uses. Land uses immediately surrounding
the subject property include ScienTech Inc. research and manufacturing to the west, Burning
Tree office warehouses to the east, the Union Pacific Railroad to the north, and across Arapahoe
Avenue from the site is the Flatirons Municipal Golf Course. The entry to the Golf Course aligns
with the existing east entry to the subject property. At the intersection of 55th and Arapahoe are
the Boulder Dinner Theater, offices, and gasoline stations. Just to the west of the intersection of
55th and Arapahoe, there is a commercial area that includes a car rental office, sandwich and
coffee shops, a liquor store, insurance agency, copy shop and other retail uses. There is no
identifiable architectural character to the area, with parcels developing over time.
The 9.8-acre site was formerly Granville-Phillips, a research and development facility with one
main building of approximately 20,000 square feet and two other small, detached storage
buildings on the site. The essentially flat site slopes gently from south to north with a 13-foot
grade difference over the 1,174-foot deep site. A significant site feature is the existing,
approximately one-half acre, man-made pond. The pond and Dry Creek No. 2 Ditch are
designated wetlands as set forth in the city’s Wetland Regulations. The pond is considered the
origin of Dry Creek Ditch No. 2 that flows from the pond off the property toward the northwest.
The ditch eventually flows below the railroad bridge west of the site. Several prairie dogs are
located on the north end of the site that could impact the concept plan. One criterion that will be
considered at Site Review is that the plans preserve or mitigate adverse impacts to prairie dogs..
At the time of Site Review, mitigation of adverse impacts to prairie dogs will be required and the
applicant will have to comply with the wildlife protection ordinance, which is codified in
Chapter 6-1, Animals, of the Boulder Revised Code. There are a number of large, mature trees on
the south side of the pond between the Arapahoe Avenue right-of-way.
(2) Community policy considerations including, without limitation, the review process and
likely conformity of the proposed development with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive
Plan (BVCP) and other ordinances, goals, policies, and plans, including, without limitation,
sub-community and sub-area plans;
BVCP Land Use Designation:
The Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan (BVCP)
Land Use designation for the
site is Light Industrial, which is
described in the BVCP as areas
consisting primarily of research
and development, light
manufacturing and assembly,
media and storage or other
intensive employment uses. The
site is located in the East
Boulder subcommunity, which
was recently adopted by City
Council.
BVCP Policy 2.21, Light Industrial Areas (below), includes specific guidance for Boulder’s light
industrial areas including guiding principles which focus on preserving established businesses,
encouraging more housing in appropriate locations, offering a mix of uses and exploring more
enhanced transportation amenities and parking management strategy. See this link for page 46
of the BVCP on light industrial areas.
Figure 9- BVCP Land Use Designations on and around the site
2.21 Light Industrial Areas The city supports its light industrial areas, which contain a variety
of uses, including technical offices, research and light manufacturing. The city will preserve
existing industrial areas as places for industry and innovation and will pursue regulatory
changes to better allow for housing and retail infill. The city will encourage redevelopment and
infill to contribute to placemaking and better achieve sustainable urban form as defined in this
chapter. Housing should occur in a logical pattern and in proximity to existing and planned
amenities, including retail services and transit. Analysis will guide appropriate places for
housing infill within areas zoned Industrial General (IG) (not those zoned for manufacturing or
service uses) that minimize the potential mutual impacts of residential and industrial uses in
proximity to one another.
Other important BVCP policies to consider with this proposal are listed below:
• 2.03 Compact Development Pattern The city and county will, by implementing the
comprehensive plan (as guided by the Land Use Designation Map and Planning Areas I, II, III
Map), ensure that development will take place in an orderly fashion, take advantage of existing
urban services, and avoid, insofar as possible, patterns of leapfrog, noncontiguous, scattered
development within the Boulder Valley. The city prefers redevelopment and infill as compared to
development in an expanded Service Area to prevent urban sprawl and create a compact
community.
• 2.26 Trail Corridors/Linkages In the process of considering development proposals, the city
and county will encourage the development of paths and trails where appropriate for recreation
and transportation, such as walking, hiking, bicycling or horseback riding. Implementation will
be achieved through the coordinated efforts of the private and public sectors.
• 2.41 Enhanced Design for All Projects Through its policies and programs, the city will
encourage or require quality architecture and urban design in all development that encourages
alternative modes of transportation, provides a livable environment and addresses the following
elements:
a) Area planning. Where there is a desire to improve the character of the surroundings, a new
character and positive identity as established through area planning or a community
involvement process should be created for the area as the city work plan and resources
allow.
b) The context. Projects should become a coherent part of the neighborhood in which they are
placed. Special attention will be given to protecting and enhancing the quality of established
residential areas that are adjacent to business areas.
c) Relationship to the public realm. Projects should relate positively to public streets, plazas,
sidewalks, paths and natural features. Buildings and landscaped areas—not parking lots—
should present a well designed face to the public realm, should not block access to sunlight
and should be sensitive to important public view corridors. Future strip commercial
development will be discouraged.
d) Ditches. Project sponsors should collaborate with irrigation ditch companies on design and
construction. Where possible, project elements should educate and inform about the
connection between irrigation ditches and agricultural lands.
e) Transportation connections. Projects should provide a complete network of vehicular, bicycle
and pedestrian connections both internal to the project and connecting to adjacent
properties, streets and paths, including dedication of public rights of way and easements
where required.
f) Parking. The primary focus of any site should be quality site design. Parking should play a
subordinate role to site and building design and not jeopardize open space or other
opportunities on the property. Parking should be integrated between or within buildings and
be compact and dense. The placement of parking should be behind and to the sides of
buildings or in structures rather than in large street facing lots. Surface parking will be
discouraged, and versatile parking structures that are designed with the flexibility to allow
for different uses in the future will be encouraged.
g) Human scale and art in public spaces. Projects should provide pedestrian interest along
streets, paths and thoughtfully designed public spaces that support a mix of events,
destinations and art. Projects should model investment in public art in the city, and the city
should encourage individuals, businesses, organizations and developers to invest in
improvements to public spaces through the addition of meaningful, innovative and quality
works of art.
h) Permeability. Create permeability in centers with a mix of semi public and public spaces that
are connected visually for intuitive navigation. Include civic and cultural uses as well as
outdoor seating, shade trees and green spaces in the public spaces to create a unique
identity and sense of place. Projects should provide multiple opportunities to walk from the
street into projects, thus presenting a street face that is permeable. Where appropriate, they
should provide opportunities for visual permeability into a site to create pedestrian interest.
i) On site open spaces. Projects should incorporate well designed functional open spaces with
quality landscaping, access to sunlight and places to sit comfortably. Where public parks or
open spaces are not within close proximity, shared open spaces for a variety of activities
should also be provided within developments.
j) Buildings. Buildings should be designed with a cohesive design that enhances the streetscape
and is comfortable to the pedestrian. Buildings should demonstrate approachability and a
relationship to the street, with inviting entries that are visible from public rights of way,
multiple entrances and four sided design. Foster appeal of buildings through attractive, well
designed architecture made of high quality, long lasting materials and innovative
approaches to design.
• 3.06 Wetland & Riparian Protection Natural and human-made wetlands and riparian areas are
valuable for their ecological and, where appropriate, recreational functions, including their
ability to enhance water and air quality and reduce the impacts of flooding. Wetlands and
riparian areas also function as important wildlife habitat, especially for rare, threatened and
endangered plants, fish and wildlife. Because they have historically been so scarce in the Front
Range and because of continued degradation, the city and county will continue to develop and
support programs to protect, enhance and educate the public about the value of wetlands and
riparian areas in the Boulder Valley. The city will strive for no net loss of wetlands and riparian
areas by discouraging their destruction, or requiring the creation and restoration of wetland
and riparian areas in the rare cases when development is permitted and the filling of wetlands
or destruction of riparian areas cannot be avoided. Management of wetland and riparian areas
on city open space lands is described in the OSMP Grasslands Ecosystem Management Plan.
• 3.21 Preservation of Floodplains Undeveloped floodplains will be preserved or restored where
possible through public land acquisition of high hazard properties, private land dedication and
multiple program coordination. Comprehensive planning and management of floodplain lands
will promote the preservation of natural and beneficial functions of floodplains whenever
possible.
• 3.23 Non-Structural Approach to Flood Management The city and county will seek to preserve
the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains by emphasizing and balancing the use of
nonstructural measures with structural mitigation. Where drainageway improvements are
proposed, a non-structural approach should be applied wherever possible to preserve the natural
values of local waterways while balancing private property interests and associated cost to the
city.
• 4.08 Energy Efficient Building Design The city and county will pursue efforts to improve the
energy and resource efficiency of new and existing buildings. The city and county will consider
the energy consumption associated with the building process (i.e., from the raw materials
through construction), improve regulations ensuring energy and resource efficiency in new
construction, remodels and renovation projects and will establish energy efficiency requirements
for existing buildings. Energy conservation programs will be sensitive to the unique situations
that involve historic preservation and low income homeowners and renters and will ensure that
programs assisting these groups continue.
• 5.01 Revitalizing Commercial & Industrial Areas The city supports strategies unique to
specific places for the redevelopment of commercial and industrial areas. Revitalization should
support and enhance these areas, conserve their strengths, minimize displacement of users and
reflect their unique characteristics and amenities and those of nearby neighborhoods. Examples
of commercial and industrial areas for revitalization identified in previous planning efforts are
Diagonal Plaza, University Hill commercial district, Gunbarrel and the East Boulder industrial
area. The city will use a variety of tools and strategies in area planning and in the creation of
public/ private partnerships that lead to successful redevelopment and minimize displacement
and loss of service and retail uses. These tools may include, but are not limited to, area
planning with community input, infrastructure improvements, shared parking strategies, transit
options and hubs and changes to zoning or development standards and incentives (e.g.,
financial incentives, development potential or urban renewal authority).
Projects are preliminarily assessed for compliance with the BVCP Land Use Designation and
policies as part of Concept Plan and then are required to demonstrate compliance at time of Site
Review. A discussion of the projects preliminary compliance can be found in the Key Issue
Discussion that follows this section.
Zoning. As shown in Figure 10, the zoning on the site is Industrial - General (IG). IG areas are
described in Chapter 9-5 of the Land Use Code as “areas where a wide range of light industrial
uses, including research and manufacturing operations and service industrial uses, are located.
Residential uses and other complementary uses may be allowed in appropriate locations.”
Figure 10- Zoning on and around site
(3) Applicable criteria, review procedures, and submission requirements for a site review;
If the applicant moves forward with the proposal, approval of a Site Review application would
be required to build the project as proposed. Decision on the application would be based on the
Site Review criteria of Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981. Submittal requirements are based on
those specified in the land use code, including but not limited, detailed site plans, landscape
plans, floor plans and elevations, preliminary stormwater and utility plans etc. Site Review is
required due to the size of the proposed project and the size of the site.
At the time of Site Review, the proposed project will be evaluated for conformance with the
following:
• The land use designation in the BVCP;
• All relevant policies of the BVCP;
• The Site Review criteria of the Land Use Code, Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981;
• Zoning regulations, unless modified through Site Review;
• The criteria of Section 9-9-11 of the Land Use Code for usable open space. A detailed
open space diagram will be necessary at Site Review.
• The City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards (DCS).
It should be noted that that Ordinance 8515 is also scheduled to be considered for adoption on
February 16, 2023. If adopted, it would change the site review criteria for projects for which a
site review application is filed on or after July 1, 2023.
At the time of Site Review, the following items will also be required to evaluate the consistency
with the standards:
a. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan that outlines strategies to mitigate
traffic impacts created by the proposed development with implementable measures for
promoting alternate modes of travel.
b. Traffic Impact Study is required since the project’s trip generation is shown to exceed the
residential development threshold of 20 vehicles trips or greater during any single hour in
the peak period.
c. Preliminary Storm Water Report and Plan to address storm water runoff, water quality
treatment issues, and detention ponding. Existing detention ponds are present on the
proposed site.
d. Utility Report to establish the impacts of this project on the City of Boulder utility
systems and outline water main and wastewater main construction necessary to serve the
development and perpetuate the overall system.
e. A water system distribution analysis in order to assess the impacts and service demands
of the proposed development and to demonstrate conformance with the Treated Water
Master Plan, October 2011.
f. A collection system analysis to determine any system impacts based on the proposed
demands of the development and to demonstrate conformance with the city’s Wastewater
Collection System Master Plan, July 2016.
g. A landscape plan that is consistent with, and exceeds, city code requirements.
h. A detailed tree inventory including the species, size and condition of all existing trees on
the site.
(4) Permits that may need to be obtained and processes that may need to be completed prior
to, concurrent with, or subsequent to site review approval;
Following Site Review, detailed Technical Documents of the development would be required
and would include final site development plans, landscape plans, and construction drawings
(stormwater, utility, transportation etc.). If buildings are proposed within the regulatory
floodplain, Floodplain Development Permits for the buildings and parking garage would be
required following Technical Document review. All buildings would require building permits.
(5) Opportunities and constraints in relation to the transportation system, including,
without limitation, access, linkage, signalization, signage, and circulation, existing
transportation system capacity problems serving the requirements of the transportation
master plan, possible trail links, and the possible need for a traffic or transportation study;
Per Table 2-1 of the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards, a minimum separation
of 250 feet is required between site accesses along an arterial roadway (Arapahoe). The two
existing access drives do not have adequate separation from the adjacent properties. Shared
access with the adjacent properties should be pursued. In the event that shared accesses cannot
be obtained, the westernmost Arapahoe access is required to be restricted to emergency access
only and Lot 2 will not be permitted to be served from Arapahoe. Regarding transit, the site is
served by access to RTD along both Arapahoe and 55th Street. Trip Generation will be required
prior to the time of Site Review to determine if a traffic study will be required.
Further, the site is located adjacent to the future alignment of the Regional Transportation
District’s (RTD) FasTracks Rail Corridor that will connect Denver to Boulder and Longmont.
The RTD proposed that a passenger station be located along the section of this corridor between
55th and 63rd Streets in Boulder. Currently, there is no public funding to build this station and
other related facilities. RTD has proposed that interested private developers work with RTD,
local jurisdictions and other property owners to construct a passenger platform and related
facilities at this proposed station location. The City's position on this issue at this time is neutral,
and thus, it cannot offer a commitment to support zoning changes or any other public resource
investments that may be required to approve a transit-oriented development at this location.
A multi-use path exists along Arapahoe Avenue. At the time of Site Review, survey documents
are required that clearly show and dimension the existing multi-use path, landscape buffer, and
any associated access easements. In the event that the existing multi-use path is not 12 feet wide
with an 8 foot wide landscape buffer, the path will not be required to be reconstructed,
however, a public access easement will be required to dedicate an area 21 feet off the back of the
existing curb (to cover the future sidewalk width plus one foot beyond the back of walk).
(6) Environmental opportunities and constraints including, without limitation, the
identification of wetlands, important view corridors, floodplains and other natural hazards,
wildlife corridors, endangered and protected species and habitats, the need for further
biological inventories of the site and at what point in the process the information will be
necessary;
Regulatory wetlands have been identified on subject property. As noted above, any proposed
development or improvements within the regulatory wetland or buffer will require a wetlands
permit. Further, the applicant would be required to demonstrate minimization of impact and
that the project is in the public interest given functional values and the public need for the
proposed regulated activity. In addition, using the existing pond as the stormwater outfall
would negatively impact the wetland area and is not an acceptable drainage solution. The
property is also in the 100-year flood plain and conveyance zone which will require Floodplain
Development Permits for work in those areas.
In addition, there are a number of large, long-lived trees on the south side of the pond between
the Arapahoe Avenue right-of-way and the pond. The site also is located within the 100-year,
conveyance and high hazard flood boundaries under the city’s current regulations.
(7) Appropriate ranges of land uses;
The proposed land use for the site is consistent with the BVCP land use designation for the site
(Light Industrial) and the underlying zoning (Industrial - General) reflects the usage of the site
and is consistent with the character of the surrounding area which is largely industrial on the
north side of Arapahoe Avenue. The BVCP encourages a mix of uses in industrial areas. An
ordinance is proposed to the IG zones which will permit up to 5,000 square feet of retail on IG
sites as well as restaurants as a by-right use – both of which would require integration into any
light industrial, research and development or office buildings. (8) The appropriateness of or necessity for housing.
The subject area is zoned I-G (Industrial General) and Light Industrial within the BVCP.
Housing is not an identified use for this location, although residential uses are allowable in the
IG zone district through use review for properties that meet the specific use standards for
residential uses found in Section 9-6-3(a)(2), B.R.C. 1981. The subject property is not eligible
for residential uses because it does not meet the one sixth contiguity requirement outlined in the
above code section.
KEY ISSUE DISCUSSION
Key Issue #1: Is the proposed concept plan compatible with the goals, objectives, and
recommendations of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP)?
As mentioned above, The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use designation
for the site is Light Industrial, which is described in the BVCP as areas with uses consisting
primarily of research and development, light manufacturing and assembly, media and storage or
other intensive employment uses.
BVCP Policy 2.21, Light Industrial Areas (below), includes specific guidance for Boulder’s light
industrial areas including guiding principles which focus on preserving established businesses,
encouraging more housing in appropriate locations, offering a mix of uses and exploring more
enhanced transportation amenities and parking management strategy. See this link for page 46 of
the BVCP on light industrial areas.
2.21 Light Industrial Areas The city supports its light industrial areas, which contain a variety
of uses, including technical offices, research and light manufacturing. The city will preserve
existing industrial areas as places for industry and innovation and will pursue regulatory
changes to better allow for housing and retail infill. The city will encourage redevelopment and
infill to contribute to placemaking and better achieve sustainable urban form as defined in this
chapter. Housing should occur in a logical pattern and in proximity to existing and planned
amenities, including retail services and transit. Analysis will guide appropriate places for
housing infill within areas zoned Industrial General (IG) (not those zoned for manufacturing or
service uses) that minimize the potential mutual impacts of residential and industrial uses in
proximity to one another.
As mentioned above, the subject site is also within the boundaries of the East Boulder
Subcommunity Plan. The land use designation is Light Industrial and the site is not within an
area of change although it is proximate to the 55th and Arapahoe Station Area. While the site is
within an area not subject to place types or land use changes, it is identified as a future area of
study with the following statement on page 33 of the plan:
2D. Industrial Access off of East Arapahoe - The East Boulder Subcommunity Plan
recommends a continued land use of Light Industrial in the area located between
Flatirons Golf Course and the existing rail. The plan also recommends a future for
transit-oriented development at 55th and Arapahoe and recognizes the Mixed-Use
Residential future of the site at 5801 Arapahoe Ave (commonly known as Waterview). To
accommodate Light Industrial operations and access in this area as well as increase
safety for new residential and mixed-use development of surrounding properties, this
area should be pursued for further study. Potential issues to evaluate include increased
network access through the area and consolidation of curb cuts along Arapahoe Avenue.
Overall, while the exact use classification of the proposed project following adoption of the
proposed use table and standards module two code update is still unknown, both office uses and
research and development uses are consistent with the Light Industrial land use classifications
found in the BVCP and EBSP. Therefore, staff finds the current proposal to be generally
consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan.
Key Issue #2: Does Planning Board have feedback for the applicant on the conceptual
site plan and architecture?
Staff’s assessment on the proposed site design and building design are provided below. Overall,
staff finds the proposed site design and building design are well contemplated and on the right
track to meeting the city’s Site Review criteria. Suggestions for improvements are provided
within the staff assessments for Planning Board consideration.
Site Design
There are challenges to the comprehensive site design that will need to be addressed prior to any
Site Review application. Access points need to be consolidated to one point and the amount of
circulation and surface parking on the site should be further minimized and consolidated to better
meet the Site Review criteria. In line with policy goals to consolidate access points along
Arapahoe, a singular access with shared access with the neighboring property to the east should
be considered. The approach to the building should derive from this point and how it enters the
site and how the buildings are situated on the property and their visibility from the front of the
property are important. In all, the current design has a strong automotive focus and staff
recommends that the focus be more on the pedestrian in terms of access and design interest and
with less of a suburban office park model. Further adding to the auto-oriented design is how the
garage entry is directly on the face of the building. This should be moved to a "back of house"
location and additional "back of house" operations including loading etc. should be more
concealed from visibility on the site.
Staff otherwise recommends attention to employee outdoor open space between the buildings.
Attention to the surface treatments, landscaping and how the trees will fair over a parking
structure should be further explored to ensure that the space is attractive and functional for use.
Further, the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan has a planned multi-use path connection on the
north side of the property by the BNSF railway that may require construction as part of any Site
Review application. While it would be an isolated segment in the interim before adjacent
properties redevelop, other pathway connections to the multi-use path should be provided so that
users of the site would be able to access it. Lastly, some attention should be given to how the
open space on the south side of the property would operate. The trees and wetland in that area
could be a visual amenity and potentially a place for paths to the extent consistent with wetlands
regulations.
Building Design
As discussed above, the current submittal does not include architectural renderings or complete
building elevations, so it is not possible for staff to provide a detailed analysis of the project’s
conformance with the Site Review criteria pertaining to building design. For the purpose of the
Planning board discussion, staff has listed several of the relevant Site Review criteria below:
(F)Building Design, Livability and Relationship to the Existing or Proposed Surrounding Area:
i. The building height, mass, scale, orientation, architecture and configuration are
compatible with the existing character of the area or the character established by adopted
design guidelines or plans for the area;
ii. The height of buildings is in general proportion to the height of existing buildings and the
proposed or projected heights of approved buildings or approved plans or design
guidelines for the immediate area;
iii. The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from adjacent
properties;
iv. If the character of the area is identifiable, the project is made compatible by the
appropriate use of color, materials, landscaping, signs and lighting;
v. Projects are designed to a human scale and promote a safe and vibrant pedestrian
experience through the location of building frontages along public streets, plazas,
sidewalks and paths, and through the use of building elements, design details and
landscape materials that include, without limitation, the location of entrances and
windows, and the creation of transparency and activity at the pedestrian level;
vi. To the extent practical, the project provides public amenities and planned public
facilities;
vii. The project incorporates the natural environment into the design and avoids, minimizes
or mitigates impacts to natural systems;
viii. Buildings minimize or mitigate energy use; support on-site renewable energy generation
and/or energy management systems; construction wastes are minimized; the project
mitigates urban heat island effects; and the project reasonably mitigates or minimizes
water use and impacts on water quality;
ix. Exteriors of buildings present a sense of permanence through the use of authentic
materials such as stone, brick, wood, metal or similar products and building material
detailing;
CONCLUSION
No action is required by Planning Board. Planning Board, Public and staff comments will be
documented for use by the applicant. Concept Plan review and comment is intended to give the
applicant preliminary feedback on the development concepts, and direction for site review
applications.
By:
Brad Mueller, Secretary to the Planning Board
Attachments:
A: Proposed Plans
B: Applicant’s Written Statement
C: DRC Comments on proposal
5675 ARAPAHOE AVENUE | BOULDER, COLORADO | INITIAL ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPT | 7.26.2022
CONCEPT - SITE PLAN
0 30 60 120
FIRE AND SERVICE ACCESS
FIRE AND SERVICE ACCESS
60 SURFACE SPACES
ACCESS TO
500+/- BELOW
GRADE SPACES
ARAPAHOE ROADACCESS TO BIKE PATHBNSF RAILWAY110
™94™94™300™
300™170™BUILDING A - 28,200 GSF
(PER PLATE)
BUILDING B - 40,600 GSF
(PER PLATE)
5675 ARAPAHOE AVENUE | BOULDER, COLORADO | INITIAL ARCHITECTURAL CONCEPT | 7.26.2022
CONCEPT - DIAGRAMMATIC SECTION (EAST TO WEST)
0 15 30 60* SECTION IS MEANT TO (SIMPLY) ILLUSTRATE THE POTENTIAL ADJACENCIES BETWEEN
THE TWO BUILDINGS, IDENTIFY POTENTIAL FLOOR-TO-FLOOR HIEGHTS, AND ESTABLISH
THE OVERALL BUILDING HEIGHTS GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS OF THE EXISTING SITE
TOPOGRAPHY.
POTENTIAL FOR
MEZZANINE &
26™ CLEAR
LAB SPACE
9/29/2022
Page 1 of 2
3003 LARIMER ST (303) 861-5704
DENVER, CO 80205 OZARCH.COM
Written Statement for Concept Plan Review
5675 Arapahoe Ave., Boulder, CO
As Required for a Concept Plan Application, the below topics discuss how our
project proposes to responds to environmental, transportation management, and
applicable land use.
Zoning & Land Use Summary
In response to: Proposed land uses and if it is a development that includes
residential housing type, mix, sizes, and anticipated sale prices, and the percentage
of affordable units to be included; special design characteristics that may be
needed to assure affordability.
The proposed project at 5675 Arapahoe Ave. is designed to fit within the current
zoning and land use designations. The proposed land uses for this concept plan is
a technical office use. Additionally, it complies with the future, proposed
designations within the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan. We are not requesting
any variances to height, FAR, parking, setbacks, etc.
Architectural Character
In response to: Techniques and strategies for environmental impact avoidance,
minimization, or mitigation;
The architecture is being proposed as best-in-class design to support technical
office users. Sustainability strategies will be explored as the project advances such
as solar, energy efficiency measures, sensitivity to the carbon footprint, and exterior
materials that are reflective of the place. Sensitivity is taken to properly scale and
organize the buildings to protect views of the Flatirons, respect the adjacent
floodplain and pond, and enhance the existing vacant lot with a biophilic courtyard.
Connectivity to adjacent trails and transportation systems are also being considered
so the project can intentionally fill the gap between adjacent sites.
Travel Demand Management
In response to: Techniques and strategies for practical and economically feasible
travel demand management techniques, including, without limitation, site design,
land use, covenants, transit passes, parking restrictions, information or education
materials or programs that may reduce single-occupant vehicle trip generation to
and from the site.
While a robust TDM plan will be submitted with the Site Review Application we see
the following opportunities to supplement transportation to/from this location and the
visual impact of parking structures on the property.
Attachment B - Written Statement
9/29/2022
Page 2 of 2
To responsibly organize the travel to/from the site, the project currently proposes a
below-grade parking garage that is quickly accessed from the existing curb cuts. In
addition to the parking being below grade, this approach provides ample site area
to be landscaped with native species and outdoor trails and plaza. A clear loop
around the site is intended to remain for life safety and delivery trucks to avoid
conflict between these functions and vehicular traffic. Solar charging stations will be
provided along with long term and short term bike storage to promote and support
alternate methods of transportation.
Attachment B - Written Statement
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
DATE OF COMMENTS: November 16, 2022
CASE MANAGER: Karl Guiler
PROJECT NAME: 5675 ARAPAHOE AVENUE
LOCATION: 5675 ARAPAHOE AVENUE
REVIEW TYPE: Concept Plan Review & Comment
REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2022-00040
APPLICANT: KYLE FLIPPEN
AMANDA JOHNSON, OZ ARCHITECTURE
DESCRIPTION: CONCEPT PLAN & REVIEW: Request for citizen, staff, and Planning Board input on a
redevelopment proposal of 5675 Arapahoe with two new three-story buildings of
approximately 200,000 square feet of total floor area at a height of approximately 45
feet and subterranean parking. The use of the buildings is proposed as technical
office.
I.REVIEW FINDINGS
This application will be neither approved or denied, but rather is an opportunity for the city staff, the Planning Board, and
the public to comment on the general aspects of the proposal. Refer to review comments below for staff’s initial review
comments. The Concept Plan is tentatively scheduled for Planning Board review at a public hearing on January 17, 2023.
II.CITY REQUIREMENTS
The section below addresses issues that must be resolved prior to project approval.
III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
1.Access / Circulation, David Thompson, thompson@bouldercolorado.gov At time of site review please ensure the
site plans show the permanent removal of the existing curb-cut (driveway) at the west end of the site.
2.Access / Circulation, David Thompson, thompson@bouldercolorado.gov In meeting the site review criteria for
circulation and the right-of-way improvements section of the Boulder Revised Code the project will be required to
replace the existing non-standard Arapahoe Ave streetscape section with a standard streetscape section for a
detached multi-use path. To meet this standard the site review plans will need to show a 12’ wide detached
multi-use path that is separated from the back of the Arapahoe Ave street curb by an eight-foot-wide landscape
area. If required, the project will be required to dedicate right-of-way to the city to accommodate these Arapahoe
Ave streetscape improvements.
3.Access / Circulation, David Thompson, thompsond@bouldercolorado.gov Staff will require the site to be served by
a single access point (curb-cut) consistent with the City’s Site Access Control Standards as there appears to be the
ability to provide an emergency / delivery truck turnaround on the site. It is staff’s preference to locate the curb-cut
providing access to the site at the east end of the property and close to the property line. This to allow the
opportunity for a future shared driveway with the 5721 Arapahoe Ave property.
4.Addressing, Alison Blaine, Address Administrator - 303-441-4410, blainea@bouldercolorado.gov
Each new building is required to be assigned a street address following the city ’s addressing policy. The city is
required to notify utility companies, the County Assessor’s office, emergency services and the U.S. Post Office of
proposed addressing for development projects. Please submit an Address Plat and list of all proposed addresses
as part of the Technical Document Review process.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
5.Building Design Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
There is little information on the general design of the buildings so staff will provide some advice for preparing a
Site Review submittal if the project is to move forward. As the buildings would inherently be more set back from the
street, staff recommends a design that is unique and less so that is just a tilt up industrial or standard suburban
office building. Per the Site Review criteria, buildings would be required to have high-quality, durable building
materials and a high level of transparency with window glazing on each floor. Attention to an inviting pedestrian
entrance to each building should be done and as stated in the site design comments, the garage access should be
relocated as to not be on the front face of the building. Staff recommends the use of angled roofs to contribute to a
unique design and also an asset in minimizing visibility of rooftop mechanical equipment. One recent industrial
building example meeting these design elements is a proposed building at 3825 Walnut, which is shown in the
rendering below:
6.Chris Ricciardiello; ricciardielloc@bouldercolorado.gov; (303) 441-3138: ARAPAHOE STREETSCAPE/STREET
TREES: Per Land Use Code 9-9-13(b), B.R.C. 1981, street trees shall be planted along the full length of public and
private streets. The Arapahoe Ave. frontage measures about 367’ which translates to a required total of street
trees along this frontage of 9 trees. When landscape improvements are triggered relative to proposed new
development in accordance with the Land Use Code Section 9-9-12(b)(1), B.R.C. 1981, the applicant is
responsible for providing large maturing street trees (over 45' mature height), 30’ – 40’ spacing, within 4’-5’ of the
existing attached sidewalk, and a minimum of 10' from underground utilities. See Land Use Code 9-9-13(b), B.R.C.
1981 – Streetscape Design Standards. Street trees proposed for planting shall be deciduous species with an
installed size of no less than 2” caliper and shall be selected only from the current City of Boulder Approved Tree
List. Examples of acceptable species for this use are State Street Maple, (Fall Fiesta, Caddo, Legacy) Sugar
Maple, Common Horsechestnut, Pecan, Shagbark Hickory, Western Catalpa, Common Hackberry, Sugar
Hackberry, Turkish Filbert, Kentucky Coffeetree, Sweetgum, White Oak, Swamp White Oak, Shingle Oak, Bur
Oak, Chinkapin Oak, Chestnut Oak, Japanese Pagodatree, (Accolade or David) Elm. Provide a Landscape Plan in
accordance with Land Use Code Section 9-2-14(d)(13), B.R.C. 1981 to include street tree plantings as defined
above while specifying multiple approved species (Boulder Design and Construction Standards, Table 3-2) to
ensure plant diversity.
7.Chris Ricciardiello; ricciardielloc@bouldercolorado.gov; (303) 441-3138: EXISTING TREES/TREE INVENTORY:
Provide a Tree Inventory in accordance with Land Use Code Section 9-2-14(d)(18), B.R.C. 1981 to include “the
location, size, species, and general health of all trees with a diameter of six inches and over measured fifty-four
inches above the ground on the property or in the landscape setback of any property adjacent to the development.
The inventory shall indicate which trees will be adversely affected and what if any steps will be taken to mitigate the
impact on the trees. The tree inventory shall be prepared by a certified arborist that has a valid contractor license
pursuant to Chapter 4-28, "Tree Contractor License," B.R.C.”.
8.Chris Ricciardiello; ricciardielloc@bouldercolorado.gov; (303) 441-3138: LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: The
project will trigger landscape requirements in accordance with the City of Boulder Land Use Code, Sections 9-9-12,
9-9-13, and 9-9-14, B.R.C. 1981. Applicable requirements include street tree plantings and overall site landscape
plantings as outlined in 9-9-12(d) and 9-9-13, interior parking lot landscaping per section 9-9-14(d) and parking lot
screening per section 9-9-14(b). Include a summary table of landscape requirements per section 9-9-12(d)(1)(J),
B.R.C. 1981 to determine the extent of required landscape improvements.
9.Chris Ricciardiello; ricciardielloc@bouldercolorado.gov; (303) 441-3138: WETLAND AS POTENTIAL AMENITY: It
appears from the concept plan submitted with the application for 5675 Arapahoe Ave that the existing wetland and
riparian area closer to the Arapahoe right-of-way may be utilized as a natural site amenity provided any potential
improvements meet all flood and wetland regulations limiting improvements to the outer buffer. Begin to define the
nature of this element in the landscape as it relates to potential user activities and integrated site improvements.
10.CONCEPT PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA, SECTION 9 2 13(e), B.R.C. 1981
Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
Guidelines for Review and Comment: The following guidelines will be used to guide the planning board's
discussion regarding the site. It is anticipated that issues other than those listed in this section will be identified as
part of the concept plan review and comment process. The planning board may consider the following guidelines
when providing comments on a concept plan:
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
(1) Characteristics of the site and surrounding areas, including without limitation, its location,
surrounding neighborhoods, development and architecture, any known natural features of the site including
without limitation, mature trees, watercourses, hills, depressions, steep slopes, and prominent views to and
from the site;
This subject property is located less than one-quarter mile east of the 55th Street and Arapahoe Avenue
intersection, on the north side of Arapahoe, near the eastern edge of the city and within the IG (Industrial-General)
zone district. Much of the surrounding development on the north side of Arapahoe Avenue is characteristic of
Industrial-General land uses and includes a variety of warehouse, manufacturing, and auto-service oriented uses.
Land uses immediately surrounding the subject property include ScienTech Inc. research and manufacturing to the
west, Burning Tree office warehouses to the east, the Union Pacific Railroad to the north, and across Arapahoe
Avenue from the site is the Flatirons Municipal Golf Course. The entry to the Golf Course aligns with the existing
east entry to the subject property. At the intersection of 55th and Arapahoe are the Boulder Dinner Theater, offices,
and gasoline stations. Just to the west of the intersection of 55th and Arapahoe, there is a commercial area that
includes a car rental office, sandwich and coffee shops, a liquor store, insurance agency, copy shop and other
retail uses. There is no identifiable architectural character to the area, with parcels developing over time.
The 9.8-acre site was formerly Granville-Phillips, a research and development facility with one main building of
approximately 20,000 square feet and two other small detached storage buildings on the site. The essentially flat
site slopes gently from south to north with a 13-foot grade difference over the 1,174-foot deep site. A significant site
feature is the existing, approximately one-half acre, man-made pond. The pond and Dry Creek No. 2 Ditch are
designated wetlands as set forth in the city’s Wetland Regulations. The pond is considered the origin of Dry Creek
Ditch No. 2 that flows from the pond off the property toward the northwest. The ditch eventually flows below the
railroad bridge west of the site. Several prairie dogs are located on the north end of the site that could impact the
concept plan. One criterion that will be considered at Site Review is that the plans protects prairie dog habitat. At
the time of Site Review, the applicant will be required to provide a plan for the management of the prairie dogs on
the site. There are a number of large, mature trees on the south side of the pond between the Arapahoe Avenue
right-of-way.
(2) Community policy considerations, including without limitation, the review process and likely
conformity of the proposed development with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and other ordinances,
goals, policies, and plans, including without limitation, sub community and sub area plans;
The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use designation for the site is Light Industrial, which is
described in the BVCP as areas consisting primarily of research and Land development, light manufacturing and
assembly, media and storage or other intensive employment uses. The site is located in the East Boulder
subcommunity, which was recently adopted by City Council.
BVCP Policy 2.21, Light Industrial Areas (below), includes specific guidance for Boulder’s light industrial areas
including guiding principles which focus on preserving established businesses, encouraging more housing in
appropriate locations, offering a mix of uses and exploring more enhanced transportation amenities and parking
management strategy. See this link for page 46 of the BVCP on light industrial areas.
2.21 Light Industrial Areas
The city supports its light industrial areas, which contain a variety of uses, including technical offices, research and
light manufacturing. The city will preserve existing industrial areas as places for industry and innovation and will
pursue regulatory changes to better allow for housing and retail infill. The city will encourage redevelopment and
infill to contribute to placemaking and better achieve sustainable urban form as defined in this chapter. Housing
should occur in a logical pattern and in proximity to existing and planned amenities, including retail services and
transit. Analysis will guide appropriate places for housing infill within areas zoned Industrial General (IG) (not those
zoned for manufacturing or service uses) that minimize the potential mutual impacts of residential and industrial
uses in proximity to one another.
Of equal relevance to this proposal are the following BVCP policies that relate to requests for additional height and
intensity (e.g., floor area):
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
2.35 Building Height
The city will review and update site review regulations to provide clear guidance on height and intensity of land
uses and to address relationship of building height to aesthetics and view protection. The city will consider additional height (up to the City Charter 55 foot height limit) as an incentive in exchange for community benefits
that further other community objectives such as the provision of permanently affordable housing (as described in
Policy 1.11).
Other important BVCP policies to consider with this proposal are listed below:
1.10 Jobs: Housing Balance
Boulder is a major employment center, with more jobs than housing for people who work here. This has resulted in
both positive and negative impacts, including economic prosperity, significant in commuting and high demand on
existing housing. The city will continue to be a major employment center and will seek opportunities to improve the
balance of jobs and housing while maintaining a healthy economy. This will be accomplished by encouraging new
housing and mixed use neighborhoods in areas close to where people work, encouraging transit oriented
development in appropriate locations, preserving service commercial uses, converting commercial and industrial
uses to residential uses in appropriate locations, improving regional transportation alternatives and mitigating the
impacts of traffic congestion.
2.03 Compact Development Pattern
The city and county will, by implementing the comprehensive plan (as guided by the Land Use Designation Map
and Planning Areas I, II, III Map), ensure that development will take place in an orderly fashion, take advantage of
existing urban services, and avoid, insofar as possible, patterns of leapfrog, noncontiguous, scattered development
within the Boulder Valley. The city prefers redevelopment and infill as compared to development in an expanded
Service Area to prevent urban sprawl and create a compact community.
2.26 Trail Corridors/Linkages
In the process of considering development proposals, the city and county will encourage the development of paths
and trails where appropriate for recreation and transportation, such as walking, hiking, bicycling or horseback
riding. Implementation will be achieved through the coordinated efforts of the private and public sectors.
2.41 Enhanced Design for All Projects
Through its policies and programs, the city will encourage or require quality architecture and urban design in all
development that encourages alternative modes of transportation, provides a livable environment and addresses
the following elements:
a. Area planning. Where there is a desire to improve the character of the surroundings, a new character and
positive identity as established through area planning or a community involvement process should be created for
the area as the city work plan and resources allow.
b. The context. Projects should become a coherent part of the neighborhood in which they are placed. Special
attention will be given to protecting and enhancing the quality of established residential areas that are adjacent to
business areas.
c. Relationship to the public realm. Projects should relate positively to public streets, plazas, sidewalks, paths and
natural features. Buildings and landscaped areas—not parking lots—should present a well designed face to the
public realm, should not block access to sunlight and should be sensitive to important public view corridors. Future
strip commercial development will be discouraged.
d. Ditches. Project sponsors should collaborate with irrigation ditch companies on design and construction. Where
possible, project elements should educate and inform about the connection between irrigation ditches and
agricultural lands.
e. Transportation connections. Projects should provide a complete network of vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian
connections both internal to the project and connecting to adjacent properties, streets and paths, including
dedication of public rights of way and easements where required.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
f. Parking. The primary focus of any site should be quality site design. Parking should play a subordinate role to site
and building design and not jeopardize open space or other opportunities on the property. Parking should be
integrated between or within buildings and be compact and dense. The placement of parking should be behind and
to the sides of buildings or in structures rather than in large street facing lots. Surface parking will be discouraged, and versatile parking structures that are designed with the flexibility to allow for different uses in the future will be
encouraged.
g. Human scale and art in public spaces. Projects should provide pedestrian interest along streets, paths and
thoughtfully designed public spaces that support a mix of events, destinations and art. Projects should model
investment in public art in the city, and the city should encourage individuals, businesses, organizations and
developers to invest in improvements to public spaces through the addition of meaningful, innovative and quality
works of art.
h. Permeability. Create permeability in centers with a mix of semi public and public spaces that are connected
visually for intuitive navigation. Include civic and cultural uses as well as outdoor seating, shade trees and green
spaces in the public spaces to create a unique identity and sense of place. Projects should provide multiple
opportunities to walk from the street into projects, thus presenting a street face that is permeable. Where
appropriate, they should provide opportunities for visual permeability into a site to create pedestrian interest.
i. On site open spaces. Projects should incorporate well designed functional open spaces with quality landscaping,
access to sunlight and places to sit comfortably. Where public parks or open spaces are not within close proximity,
shared open spaces for a variety of activities should also be provided within developments.
j. Buildings. Buildings should be designed with a cohesive design that enhances the streetscape and is comfortable
to the pedestrian. Buildings should demonstrate approachability and a relationship to the street, with inviting entries
that are visible from public rights of way, multiple entrances and four sided design. Foster appeal of buildings
through attractive, well designed architecture made of high quality, long lasting materials and innovative
approaches to design.
3.06 Wetland & Riparian Protection
Natural and human-made wetlands and riparian areas are valuable for their ecological and, where appropriate,
recreational functions, including their ability to enhance water and air quality and reduce the impacts of flooding.
Wetlands and riparian areas also function as important wildlife habitat, especially for rare, threatened and
endangered plants, fish and wildlife. Because they have historically been so scarce in the Front Range and
because of continued degradation, the city and county will continue to develop and support programs to protect,
enhance and educate the public about the value of wetlands and riparian areas in the Boulder Valley. The city will
strive for no net loss of wetlands and riparian areas by discouraging their destruction, or requiring the creation and
restoration of wetland and riparian areas in the rare cases when development is permitted and the filling of
wetlands or destruction of riparian areas cannot be avoided. Management of wetland and riparian areas on city
open space lands is described in the OSMP Grasslands Ecosystem Management Plan.
3.21 Preservation of Floodplains
Undeveloped floodplains will be preserved or restored where possible through public land acquisition of high
hazard properties, private land dedication and multiple program coordination. Comprehensive planning and
management of floodplain lands will promote the preservation of natural and beneficial functions of floodplains
whenever possible.
3.23 Non-Structural Approach to Flood Management
The city and county will seek to preserve the natural and beneficial functions of floodplains by emphasizing and
balancing the use of nonstructural measures with structural mitigation. Where drainageway improvements are
proposed, a non-structural approach should be applied wherever possible to preserve the natural values of local
waterways while balancing private property interests and associated cost to the city.
4.08 Energy Efficient Building Design
The city and county will pursue efforts to improve the energy and resource efficiency of new and existing buildings.
The city and county will consider the energy consumption associated with the building process (i.e., from the raw
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
materials through construction), improve regulations ensuring energy and resource efficiency in new construction,
remodels and renovation projects and will establish energy efficiency requirements for existing buildings. Energy
conservation programs will be sensitive to the unique situations that involve historic preservation and low income
homeowners and renters and will ensure that programs assisting these groups continue.
5.01 Revitalizing Commercial & Industrial Areas
The city supports strategies unique to specific places for the redevelopment of commercial and industrial areas. Revitalization should support and enhance these areas, conserve their strengths, minimize displacement of users
and reflect their unique characteristics and amenities and those of nearby neighborhoods. Examples of commercial
and industrial areas for revitalization identified in previous planning efforts are Diagonal Plaza, University Hill
commercial district, Gunbarrel and the East Boulder industrial area. The city will use a variety of tools and
strategies in area planning and in the creation of public/ private partnerships that lead to successful redevelopment
and minimize displacement and loss of service and retail uses. These tools may include, but are not limited to,
area planning with community input, infrastructure improvements, shared parking strategies, transit options and
hubs and changes to zoning or development standards and incentives (e.g., financial incentives, development
potential or urban renewal authority).
5.02 Regional Job Center
The city supports strategies that recognize Boulder’s continued role as a regional job center, consistent with
economic sustainability goals and projected employment growth. The city and county recognize the importance of
regional planning and partnerships for housing and transportation and will continue to address impacts on housing
affordability and transportation related to their role as a regional job center.
6.18 Neighborhood Streets & Alleys Connectivity
The city recognizes neighborhood streets and alleys as part of the public realm and will plan a well connected and
fine grained pattern to facilitate public access, promote safe and convenient travel for all, disperse and distribute
vehicle traffic and maintain character and community cohesion. The city recognizes alleys in historic districts as
particularly important for maintaining character and providing travel routes for pedestrians and bicycles.
(3) Applicable criteria, review procedures, and submission requirements for a site review;
As the site is over 5 acres, the proposal is greater than 100,000 square feet and a height modification would be
required, the project requires a Concept Plan and subsequently a Site Review application. Decision on the
application would be based on the Site Review criteria of Section 9 2 14(h), B.R.C. 1981. Submittal requirements
are based on those specified in the land use code, including but not limited, detailed site plans, landscape plans,
floor plans and elevations, preliminary stormwater and utility plans etc.
(4) Permits that may need to be obtained and processes that may need to be completed prior to,
concurrent with, or subsequent to site review approval;
Following Site Review, detailed Technical Documents of the redevelopment would be required and would include
final site development plans, landscape plans, and construction drawings (stormwater, utility, transportation etc.).
Because some buildings would be within the regulatory floodplain, the conveyance zone and contain wetlands,
Floodplain and Wetland Development Permits for the buildings would be required following Technical Document
review.
(5) Opportunities and constraints in relation to the transportation system, including without limitation,
access, linkage, signalization, signage and circulation, existing transportation system capacity
problems serving the requirements of the transportation master plan, possible trail links, and the
possible need for a traffic or transportation study;
Per Table 2-1 of the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards, a minimum separation of 250 feet is
required between site accesses along an arterial roadway (Arapahoe). The two existing access drives do not have
adequate separation from the adjacent properties. Shared access with the adjacent properties should be pursued.
In the event that shared accesses cannot be obtained, the westernmost Arapahoe access is required to be
restricted to emergency access only and Lot 2 will not be permitted to be served from Arapahoe. Regarding transit,
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
the site is served by access to RTD along both Arapahoe and 55th Street. Trip Generation will be required prior to
the time of Site Review to determine if a traffic study will be required.
Further, the site is located adjacent to the future alignment of the Regional Transportation District’s (RTD)
FasTracks Rail Corridor that will connect Denver to Boulder and Longmont. The RTD proposed that a passenger
station be located along the section of this corridor between 55th and 63rd Streets in Boulder. Currently, there is
no public funding to build this station and other related facilities. RTD has proposed that interested private
developers work with RTD, local jurisdictions and other property owners to construct a passenger platform and
related facilities at this proposed station location. The City's position on this issue at this time is neutral, and thus, it
cannot offer a commitment to support zoning changes or any other public resource investments that may be
required to approve a transit-oriented development at this location.
A multi-use path exists along Arapahoe Avenue. At the time of Site Review, survey documents are required that
clearly show and dimension the existing multi-use path, landscape buffer, and any associated access easements.
In the event that the existing multi-use path is not 12 feet wide with an 8 foot wide landscape buffer, the path will
not be required to be reconstructed, however, a public access easement will be required to dedicate an area 21
feet off the back of the existing curb (to cover the future sidewalk width plus one foot beyond the back of walk).
(6) Environmental opportunities and constraints, including without limitation, the identification of
wetlands, important view corridors, floodplains, and other natural hazards, wildlife corridors,
endangered and protected species and habitats, the need for further biological inventories of the site,
and at what point in the process the information will be necessary;
Regulatory wetlands have been identified on subject property. As noted above, any proposed development or
improvements within the regulatory wetland or buffer will require a wetlands permit. Further, the applicant would be
required to demonstrate minimization of impact and that the project is in the public interest given functional values
and the public need for the proposed regulated activity. In addition, using the existing pond as the stormwater
outfall would negatively impact the wetland area and is not an acceptable drainage solution. The property is also in
the 100-year flood plain and conveyance zone which will require Floodplain Development Permits for work in those
areas.
In addition, there are a number of large, long-lived trees on the south side of the pond between the Arapahoe
Avenue right-of-way and the pond. The site also is located within the 100-year, conveyance and high hazard flood
boundaries under the city’s current regulations.
(7) Appropriate ranges of land uses; and
The proposed land use for the site is consistent with the BVCP land use designation for the site (Light Industrial)
and the underlying zoning (Industrial - General) reflects the usage of the site and is consistent with the character of
the surrounding area which is largely industrial on the north side of Arapahoe Avenue. The BVCP encourages a
mix of uses in industrial areas. An ordinance is proposd to the IG zones which will permit up to 5,000 square feet of
retail on IG sites as well as restaurants as a by-right use – both of which would require integration into any light
industrial, research and development or office buildings.
(8) The appropriateness of or necessity for housing.
The subject area is zoned I-G (Industrial General) and Light Industrial within the BVCP. Housing is not an identified
use for this location, although it is a use that is possible if the site were contiguous to residential uses or zoning.
Contiguity would make the site eligible for a Use Review for residential uses; however, land use code changes are
in process that would make residential only eligible in industrial areas that are designated for residential in any
adopted area or subcommunity plan’s land use map or plan. In this case, the site would not be in a place
designated for housing.
11. East Arapahoe Transportation Plan, David Thompson, thompsond@bouldercolorado.gov This project is impacted
by the City’s East Arapahoe Transportation Plan (Plan). The Plan identifies future right-of-way improvements for
the Arapahoe Ave corridor between Folsom Street and 75th Street. The future Arapahoe Ave corridor
improvements will require additional right-of-way to construct. In meeting the intent of Section 9-9-8 “Reservations,
Dedication, and Improvement of Rights-of-Way”, B.R.C. 1981 the project will be required to provide a right-of-way
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
reservation area to accommodate the future Arapahoe Ave improvements identified in the Plan. Please note, the
Boulder Revised Code does not permit any structures to be placed or constructed within the right-of-way
reservation area. The specific width of the right-of-way reservation area will be determined by staff during the site
review process.
12. FLOODPLAIN & WETLAND, Christin Shepherd, ShepherdC2@bouldercolordao.gov
The proposed access drive from Arapahoe crosses the 100-year floodplain and Conveyance Zone of South
Boulder Creek. Grade changes exceeding 6-inches in the Conveyance Zone require a hydraulic analysis to ensure
that water surface elevations do not increase on surrounding properties or structures. It should be noted that the
hydraulic model for South Boulder Creek is a proprietary software called MIKE FLOOD with few engineers
nationwide experienced in the program.
The installation of a bridge, expansion of the existing crossing, or replacement of roadway over the ditch on the
property will also likely trigger a full hydraulic analysis requirement.
13. FLOODPLAIN & WETLAND, Christin Shepherd, ShepherdC2@bouldercolordao.gov
The proposed access drive from Arapahoe crosses the regulatory wetland and wetland buffer zones for the city of
Boulder. New bridges are allowed (with a Public Process Wetland Permit). A paved driveway with fill (without a
bridge) is not allowed in a wetland area.
Note that a new bridge or crossing of the ditch will likely trigger the requirement for a hydraulic analysis to ensure
that water surface elevations do not increase on surrounding properties or structures. It should be noted that the
hydraulic model for South Boulder Creek is a proprietary software called MIKE FLOOD with few engineers
nationwide experienced in the program.
14. In accordance with Section 2.04(I)(1) of the City’s DCS the driveway serving the site from Arapahoe Ave must be
constructed as a driveway ramp for a detached multi-use path as shown in technical drawing 2.21 from the City’s
DCS.
15. Land Use Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use designation for the site is Light Industrial, which is
described in the BVCP as areas consisting primarily of research and Land development, light manufacturing and
assembly, media and storage or other intensive employment uses. The site is located in the East Boulder
subcommunity, which was recently adopted by City Council. The most applicable BVCP policies are listed within
these comments. More information related to BVCP compliance is discussed below under “Concept Plan and
Comments”.
East Boulder Subcommunity Plan (EBSP): The subject site is within the boundaries of the EBSP. It’s designated
land use is Light Industrial and is not within an area of change although it is proximate to the 55th and Arapahoe
Station Area. While the site is within an area not subject to place types or land use changes, it is identified as a
future area of study with the following statement on page 33 of the plan:
2D. Industrial Access off of East Arapahoe - The East Boulder Subcommunity Plan recommends a continued land
use of Light Industrial in the area located between Flatirons Golf Course and the existing rail. The plan also
recommends a future for transit-oriented development at 55th and Arapahoe and recognizes the Mixed-Use
Residential future of the site at 5801 Arapahoe Ave (commonly known as Waterview). To accommodate Light
Industrial operations and access in this area as well as increase safety for new residential and mixed-use
development of surrounding properties, this area should be pursued for further study. Potential issues to evaluate
include increased network access through the area and consolidation of curb cuts along Arapahoe Avenue.
16. Re: East Arapahoe Transportation Plan - Please consider the planned street section for East Arapahoe, which
includes a raised bike lane; landscaping and tree canopy and a multiuse path. CDOT is currently working on
preliminary engineering for the State Highway 7 BRT project, for more information see:
https://www.codot.gov/projects/co7-brighton-boulder
17. Re: East Boulder Subcommunity Plan - The EBSP recommends the consolidation of curb cuts and shared access
along East Arapahoe to reduce conflicts between pedestrians and cyclists and vehicles. Please consider
opportunities to reduce curb cuts and consolidate access, particularly on the east side of the property.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
18. Review Process Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
Per Section 9 2 14, B.R.C. 1981, the project requires Concept Plan review and comment, because the project
exceeds 2 acres in size and 100,000 square feet per Table 2-2 of Section 9-2-14, B.R.C. 1981. The Concept Plan
is also an opportunity for the applicant to get comments from the community about the proposed plan before
moving forward. “Concept Plan Review and Comment” requires staff review and a public hearing before the
Planning Board. Planning Board, staff and neighborhood comments made at public hearings are intended to be
advisory comments for the applicant to consider prior to submitting any detailed plan documents.
19. Site Design Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
There are challenges to the comprehensive site design that will need to be addressed prior to any Site Review
application. Access points need to be consolidated to one point and the amount of circulation and surface parking
on the site should be further minimized and consolidated to better meet the Site Review criteria. In line with policy
goals to consolidate access points along Arapahoe, a singular access with shared access with the neighboring
property to the east should be considered. The approach to the building should derive from this point and how it
enters the site and how the buildings are situated on the property and their visibility from the front of the property
are important. In all, the current design has a strong automotive focus and that focus should be made more on the
pedestrian and with less of a suburban office park model. Further adding to the auto-oriented design is how the
garage entry is directly on the face of the building. This should be moved to a "back of house" location and
additional "back of house" operations including loading etc. should be more concealed from visibility on the site.
Staff otherwise commends to the attention to employee outdoor open space between the buildings. Attention to the
surface treatments, landscaping and how the trees will fair being over a parking structure should be further
explored to ensure that the space is attractive and functional for use. Further, the East Boulder Subcommunity Plan
has a planned multi-use path connection on the north side of the property by the BNSF railway that may require
construction as part of any Site Review application. While it would be an isolated segment in the interim before
adjacent properties redevelop, other pathway connections to the multi-use path should be provided so that users of
the site would be able to access it. Lastly, some attention to how the open space on the south side of the property
should be explored. The trees and wetland in that area could be a visual amenity and potentially a place for paths
so long as the wetland buffers are consistent with the allowable regulations for such spaces.
20. Traffic, David Thompson, thompsond@bouldercolorado.gov Prior to Site Review submittal a trip generation, trip
distribution and trip assignment for the project must be performed and the results submitted to staff as a Traffic
Assessment Letter for staff’s approval. Refer to Sections 2.03(J) and 2.03(K) of the City of Boulder Design and
Construction Standards (DCS) for the information to be included in the Traffic Assessment Letter. A traffic impact
study will be required for any nonresidential development that is expected to generate 100 vehicle trips or greater
during either the AM or PM peak hour. This information will also be used by staff to determine if the existing
eastbound left-turn lane on Arapahoe Ave (State Highway 7) that will serve the site will need to be improved in
order to accommodate the traffic expected to be generated by the project in meeting the design standards
contained in Section Four of the State of Colorado State Highway Access Code.
21. Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan, David Thompson, thompsond@bouldercolorado.gov At the
time of a site review application, a TDM Plan consistent with the requirements contained in Section 2.03(I) of the
DCS
and Section 9-2-14(h)(2)(D)(iv) and (v) of the B.R.C. 1981 is required to be submitted which outlines strategies to
mitigate traffic impacts created by the proposed development and implementable measures for promoting
alternative modes of travel.
22. Will Johnson, johnsonw@bouldercolorado.gov
I. CITY REQUIREMENTS
Drainage
Regarding the city’s new storm water regulations and the June 2019 adoption of the updated City of Boulder
Design and Construction Standards (DCS), this development is considered an “applicable development”. All
requirements of Chapter 7 of the DCS apply including (but not limited to) LID Techniques, Quality Design Standard
Compliance, Selection and Design of SCM’s, Preliminary Infiltration Feasibility Screening, Treatment Approach
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
Selection Criteria, Soil and Infiltration Test, etc.
Detention ponding shall be provided for all new development to ensure that storm water runoff can be conveyed to
the major drainage system without adverse impact on upstream, surrounding, or downstream properties and
facilities. Also, all proposed projects and developments over 1 acre in size shall provide Water Quality Capture
Volume and a Water Quality Outlet in accordance with the UDFCD Drainage Criteria Manual. It is unclear where
these features will be located based on the submitted site plan.
23. Will Johnson, johnsonw@bouldercolorado.gov
II. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS
Drainage
1. Storm water quality enhancement and detention ponding are issues that must be addressed during the Site
Review Process. A Preliminary Storm Water Report and Plan in accordance with the City of Boulder Design and
Construction Standards (DCS) must be provided by the applicant at time of Site Review application. The required
report and plan must also address the following issues:
• Water quality for surface runoff using "Best Management Practices"
• Minimize Directly Connected Impervious Areas (MDCIA)
• Detention ponding facilities
• Water Quality Capture Volume (WQCV)
• Storm sewer construction
• Irrigation Ditches and Laterals
• Groundwater discharge
• Wetland mitigation
• Erosion control during construction activities
2. Discharge of groundwater to the public storm sewer system is anticipated to accommodate construction and
operation of the proposed developments. City and/or State permits will be required for this discharge. The
applicant is advised to contact the City of Boulder Storm Water Quality Office at 303-413-7350 regarding permit
requirements. All applicable permits must be in place prior to building permit application. Additionally, special
design considerations for the properties to handle groundwater discharge as part of the development may be
necessary.
3. The applicant is notified that detention and water quality ponds intended to detain and treat stormwater runoff
for the entire property (not each individual lot) shall be located in “Outlots”, with maintenance responsibilities
detailed in the subdivision agreement.
4. A construction storm water discharge permit is required from the State of Colorado for projects disturbing one
(1) acre of land or more. The applicant is advised to contact the Colorado Department of Public Health and
Environment.
Groundwater
While the proposed development site is not known to have high groundwater levels, groundwater is a concern in
many areas of the city of Boulder. Please be advised that if it is encountered at this site, an underdrain/dewatering
system may be required to reduce groundwater infiltration, and information pertaining to the quality of the
groundwater encountered on the site will be required to determine if treatment is necessary prior to discharge from
the site. City and/or State permits are required for the discharge of any groundwater to the public storm sewer
system.
Irrigation Ditches
The applicant is responsible for obtaining approvals for any relocations or modifications to irrigation ditches or
laterals from the impacted ditch company. This includes the crossing of any irrigation ditch or lateral for vehicular or
utility purposes and the release of stormwater runoff into any ditch or lateral. The applicant is advised that
revisions to any approved city plans necessary to address ditch company requirements may require reapplication
for city review and approval at the applicant's expense.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
Utilities
1. A water system distribution analysis will be required at time of Site Review in order to assess the impacts and
service demands of the proposed development. Conformance with the city’s Treated Water Master Plan, October
2011 is necessary.
2. A collection system analysis will be required at time of Site Review to determine any system impacts based on
the proposed demands of the development. The analysis will need to show conformance with the city’s Wastewater
Collection System Master Plan, July 2016.
3. The applicant is notified that, though the city allows Xcel and Qwest to install their utilities in the public
right-of-way, they generally require them to be located in easements on private property.
4. The applicant is advised that any proposed street trees along the property frontage may conflict with existing or
proposed utilities, including without limitation: water, wastewater, storm drainage, flood control, gas, electric, telecommunications, drainageways, and irrigation ditches, within and adjacent to the development site. It is the
applicant’s responsibility to resolve such conflicts with appropriate methods conforming to the Boulder Revised
Code 1981, the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards, and any private/franchise utility specifications.
5. The landscape irrigation system requires a separate water service and meter. A separate water Plant
Investment Fee must be paid at time of building permit. Service, meter and tap sizes will be required at time of
building permit submittal.
(Other)
1. On-site and off-site water main and wastewater main construction per the City of Boulder Design and
Construction Standards (DCS) as necessary to serve the development, as well as perpetuate the overall system,
will be required. All proposed public utilities for this project shall be designed in accordance with the DCS. A Utility
Report per Sections 5.02 and 6.02 of the DCS will be required at time of Site Review or Preliminary Plat application
to establish the impacts of this project on the City of Boulder utility systems.
2. All proposed public utilities for this project shall be designed in accordance with the City of Boulder Design and
Construction Standards (DCS). A Utility Report per Sections 5.02 and 6.02 of the DCS will be required at time of
Site Review application to establish the impacts of this project on the City of Boulder utility systems.
3. The applicant should note that trees are not permitted within ten feet of underground utility lines. At Site
Review, the applicant will need to demonstrate that their plans can meet both landscaping and utility requirements.
4. Fire hydrants will need to be installed to meet the coverage requirements outlined in Section 5.10 of the City of
Boulder Design and Construction Standards. Per the standards, no portion of any building shall be over 175 feet of
fire access distance from the nearest hydrant. Fire access distance is measured along public or private (fire
accessible) roadways or fire lanes, as would be traveled by motorized fire equipment. All fire hydrants and public
water lines will need to be located within public utility easements.
24. Will Johnson, johnsonw@bouldercolorado.gov, DRAINAGE
Dry Creek No. 2 flows through the site and is considered a Major Drainageway, per DCS 7.07(A)(1). Per DCS
7.12(A)(2)(b) Detention is not required if runoff for the project site for the initial and major storm events from the
entire tributary basin can be conveyed directly to the major drainage system without adverse impact on upstream,
surrounding, or downstream properties and facilities and stormwater detention to meet water quality mitigation
measures is not required. If this is not feasible due to natural grade sloping towards the north-east, due to required
inlet elevations, etc., full detention (per DCS 7.12) is required.
25. Zoning Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
The site is zoned Industrial General (IG). IG areas are described in Chapter 9 5 of the Land Use Code as areas
where a wide range of light industrial uses, including research and manufacturing operations and service industrial
uses, are located. Residential uses and other complementary uses may be allowed in appropriate locations.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
26. Zoning Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
Site size
Per the submitted survey, the total site area included is 413,983 square feet or 9.5 acres.
Subdivision
No replatting proposed or anticipated.
Uses
The proposed land use for the site is technical office, which is a permitted use in the Industrial – General (IG) zone.
However, please be advised that the technical office definition is proposed to be removed from the land use code
and replaced with a new definition for “Research and Development” which is as follows:
Research and development means a facility where research and development is conducted in industries including
but not limited to, industrial, biotechnology, life sciences, pharmaceuticals, medical or dental instruments or
supplies, computer hardware or software, or electronics. The facility engages in product or process design,
development, prototyping, or testing. This use may include lab, office, warehousing, and light manufacturing
functions as part of the research and development use.
If passed by City Council late this year, research and development uses would be permitted uses in the IG zone. If
the proposed use does not fit under this definition and qualifies as an “office”, as defined below, it would be subject
to new restrictions including no office on the ground floor of a building and a floor area limitation of 50,000 square
feet for office uses per site.
Office means businesses providing professional. services to individuals or to other businesses. Examples include,
without limitation, accounting, legal, insurance, real estate, counseling, publishing, architecture, engineering,
graphic, industrial, and interior design. Facilitated arrangements such as shared coworking spaces, typically with
membership fees, are included within this use. This use does not include medical offices, or uses otherwise listed
in the use table.
Non-residential uses on the site would still be subject to the IG zone’s 0.5 FAR (Floor Area Ratio) limit. If you have
more questions about the proposed code changes impacting the IG zone, please contact the case manager.
Density
The allowable density of residential units on the site is one unit per every 1,600 square feet, if residential uses were
to be proposed. Residential uses on the site would require approval of a Use Review application.
Building Heights
The maximum permitted height in the IG zoning district is 40 feet. Please note that the height is measured from the
low point 25-feet from each building’s tallest side. The plans indicate a height of 45 feet, which would require
approval of a height modification by the Planning Board. The project could only be eligible for a height modification,
as proposed, if the following requirement were met: “The building is in the Industrial General, Industrial Service, or
Industrial Manufacturing Zoning District and has two or fewer stories or the height is necessary for a
manufacturing, testing, or other industrial process or equipment.” Please see section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E), B.R.C. 1981
related to height modifications and eligibility.
Building Massing
Per Table 8 1, of Section 9 8 1, “Intensity Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, the IG zone has a FAR maximum of 0.5 FAR.
Building massing is determined by a combination of the FAR limit, underlying setbacks and height limits and
conformity with the Site Review criteria of Section 9 2 14(h), B.R.C. 1981.
Based on the submitted plans Building A would have 84,600 square feet and Building B would have 121,800
square feet for a total of 206,400 square feet. This would equate to a 0.498 FAR.
Building Setbacks
Chapter 9 7 of the Land Use Code specifies the required setbacks for the buildings. Setback modifications can be
considered in the Site Review process and can be approved if the criteria of Section 9 2 14(h), B.R.C. 1981 are
met. It appears that the proposed buildings would meet the IG zone setbacks.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments
CITY OF BOULDER
LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS
Development Standards
Please be advised that the project would be subject to all of the development standards of Section 9 9,
Development Standards.
Parking
The parking standards are found in section 9 9 6, B.R.C. 1981. Parking in the IG zone is one parking space for
every 400 square feet. Based on the square footage above, the site would require 516 parking spaces unless a
parking reduction were requested. The site plan shows subterranean and surface parking but it is currently unclear
whether the proposal would meet the parking requirements at this time.
Warehouse or distribution facility or uses in industrial zones with accessory warehouse spaces 1 space per 1,000
square feet of floor area used for warehousing or storage of goods, merchandise, or equipment. Parking for floor
area used for associated office space or production areas and not for warehousing or storage as outlined above
shall be provided consistent with Table 9 3.
Open Space
Open space would be subject to the requirements of 9 9 11, “Useable Open Space,” B.R.C. 1981 and the open
space criteria within the Site Review criteria (9 2 14(h)(2), B.R.C. 1981). With a building at 45 feet, the site would
have to be at least 15% open space, which appears to be met with much of the greenspace around the buildings and naturalized areas in the south portion of the site.
Outdoor Lighting
Please note that development of the site will require compliance with Section 9 9 16, Outdoor Lighting.
Solar Access
Per section 9 9 17, “Solar Access,” B.R.C. 1981, the site is within Solar Access Area II, which has a 25-foot
regulatory solar fence. Section 9 9 17I(3), B.R.C. 1981 states Solar Access Area II are “designed to protect solar
access principally for rooftops in areas where, because of planned density, topography or lot configuration or
orientation, the preponderance of lots therein currently enjoy such access and where solar access of this nature
would not unduly restrict permissible development. SA Area II includes all property in RL-2, RM, MU-1, MU-3,
RMX, RH-1, RH-2, RH-3, RH-4, RH-5 and I zoning districts.”
Occupancy of Dwelling Units
Please note the occupancy limits set forth in Section 9 8 5 for the residential uses proposed for the site.
27. Zoning History Karl Guiler, guilerk@bouldercolorado.gov
City records indicate that property was annexed in 1987. Climate controlled self-storage was approved as part of
Site and Use Review applications for the property in 2010 replacing an office building on the site. The site has been
cleared for the use but since never been developed.
IV. FEES Because revisions or corrections are not required for this application, based on current development review fees, hourly
billing will not be applicable unless another application is required or the applicant revises the current proposal.
Attachment C - DRC Review Comments