The URL can be used to link to this page

10.08.24 BOZA Packet NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE GIVEN BY THE CITY OF BOULDER, BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT, AT THE TIME AND PLACE SPECIFIED ABOVE. ALL PERSONS, IN FAVOR OF OR OPPOSED TO OR IN ANY MANNER INTERESTED IN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING VARIANCES FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS, TITLE 9, BOULDER REVISED CODE 1981; MAY ATTEND SUCH HEARING AND BE HEARD IF THEY SO DESIRE. (APPLICANT OR REPRESENTATIVE MUST APPEAR AT THE MEETING.) 1. CALL TO ORDER 2. BOARD HEARINGS A. Docket No.: BOZ2024-00009 Address: 2050 Mesa Drive Applicant: Calisle Dean Bulk Plane Variance: [Returning Item Issued a Continuance at the August 13, 2024 BOZA Meeting] As part of a proposal to construct a new single-family house on a substandard-sized vacant lot, the applicant is requesting a variance to the bulk plane requirements for a principal structure in the RMX-1 zoning district. The revised design results in a vertical bulk plane projection beyond the plane at the west side of the proposed house by approximately 4 feet (at the greatest vertical measurement). Section of the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9-7-9, BRC 1981. B. Docket No.: BOZ2024-00011 Address: 1313 7th Street Applicant: Fred & Lisa Corrado Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to reconstruct and increase in height a portion of the home’s roof, the applicant is requesting a variance to both the rear (west) and interior side (north) setback standards for a principal structure in the RL-1 zoning district. This home is located on a substandard-sized lot and no new/additional floor area is proposed. The resulting rear setback will be approximately 3.9 feet (at the closest point) where 25 feet is required and approximately 3.9 feet exists today. The resulting interior side setback will be approximately 3.6 feet (at the closest point) where 5 feet is required and approximately 3.6 feet exists today. Section of the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9-7-1, BRC 1981. C. Docket No.: BOZ2024-00012 Address: 2715 Elm Avenue Applicant: Kyle Luh Parking Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to recognize and establish conforming off-street parking for the single-family home onto an existing driveway with access off Elm Avenue - a property that currently does not have conforming parking due to a prior attached garage conversion - the applicant is requesting a variance to the front yard landscape setback standards for parking in the RL-1 zoning district. The subject 9-foot-wide by 19-foot-deep parking space will be located approximately 13.7 feet from the front/south property line where 25 feet is required and no conforming or recognized parking exists at this location today. Sections of the Land Use Code to be modified: Sections 9-7-1 & 9-9-6, BRC 1981. D. Docket No.: BOZ2024-00013 Address: 435 Dewey Avenue Applicant: Kim Parsons Setback Variance: As part of a proposal to reconstruct and expand a portion of the home recently damaged by a fire, the applicant is requesting a variance to the interior side (west) setback standards for a principal structure in the RL-1 zoning district. The resulting side setback will be approximately 2.2 feet where 5 feet is required and approximately 2.2 feet exists today. Section of CITY OF BOULDER BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MEETING AGENDA DATE: Tuesday, October 8, 2024 TIME: 4 p.m. PLACE: Virtual Meeting the Land Use Code to be modified: Section 9-7-1, BRC 1981. 3.GENERAL DISCUSSION A. Approval of Minutes: B.Matters from the Board C. Matters from the City Attorney D. Matters from Planning and Development Services 4.ADJOURNMENT For more information call Robbie Wyler (wylerr@bouldercolorado.gov), Brian Holmes (holmesb@bouldercolorado.gov) or Thomas Remke (remket@bouldercolorado.gov). Board packets are available after 4 p.m. Friday prior to the meeting, online at www.bouldercolorado.gov. * * * SEE REVERSED SIDE FOR MEETING GUIDELINES * * * BOZ2024-00009 BOZ2024-00011 BOZ2024-00012 BOZ2024-00013 CITY OF BOULDER BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT MEETING GUIDELINES CALL TO ORDER The board must have a quorum (three members present) before the meeting can be called to order. AGENDA The board may rearrange the order of the agenda or delete items for good cause. The board may not add items requiring public notice. ACTION ITEMS An action item requires a motion and a vote. The general format for hearing of an action item is as follows: 1. Presentations • Staff presentation.* • Applicant presentation.*Any exhibits introduced into the record at this time must be provided in quantities of seven to the Board Secretary for distribution to the board and admission into the record. • Board questioning of staff or applicant for information only. 2. Public Hearing Each speaker will be allowed an oral presentation.* • Speakers should introduce themselves, giving name and address. If officially representing a group, homeowners' association, etc., please state that for the record as well. • Speakers are requested not to repeat items addressed by previous speakers other than to express points of agreement or disagreement. Refrain from reading long documents, and summarize comments wherever possible. Long documents may be submitted and will become a part of the official record. When possible, these documents should be submitted in advance so staff and the board can review them before the meeting. • Speakers should address the Land Use Regulation criteria and, if possible, reference the rules that the board uses to decide a case. • Any exhibits introduced into the record at the hearing must be provided in quantities of seven to the Board Secretary for distribution to the board and admission into the record. • Citizens can send a letter to Planning and Development Services staff at 1739 Broadway, Boulder, CO 80302, two weeks before the board meeting, to be included in the Board packet. Correspondence received after this time will be distributed at the board meeting. 3. Board Action • Board motion. Motions may take any number of forms. With regard to a specific development proposal, the motion generally is to either approve the project (with or without conditions), to deny it, or to continue the matter to a date certain (generally in order to obtain additional information). • Board discussion. This is undertaken entirely by members of the board. The applicant, members of the public or city staff participate only if called upon by the Chairperson. • Board action (the vote). An affirmative vote of at least three members of the board is required to pass a motion approving any action. If the vote taken results in a tie, a vote of two to two, two to one, or one to two, the applicant shall be automatically allowed a rehearing. A tie vote on any subsequent motion to approve or deny shall result in defeat of the motion and denial of the application. MATTERS FROM THE BOARD, CITY STAFF, AND CITY ATTORNEY Any board member, Planning and Development Services staff, or the City Attorney may introduce before the board matters, which are not included in the formal agenda. VIRTUAL MEETINGS For Virtual Meeting Guidelines, refer to https://bouldercolorado.gov/boards-commissions/board-of-zoning-adjustments- boza-agenda page for the approved Board of Zoning Adjustment Rules for Virtual Meetings. *The Chairperson, subject to the board approval, may place a reasonable time limitation on presentations. x x x x 06.19.2024 2050 Mesa supplemental narrative 09.09.2024 at the first review of this project [august 13 2024] it was agreed that all required criteria { [h] [1] [A] [B] [C] and [D] and [h] [5] [A] [B] [C] and [D] } had been met with the exception of [h] [1] [C] and [h] [5] [C].... this narrative explains why the project.... redesigned based on the continuance granted in the august 13th meeting.... now conforms to 1.C and 5.C.... in the 1980s seven bluff street properties were granted PUDs and each were subdivided into two "non standard"lots: the original lot on bluff with existing house and the additional lot on mesa drive above.... 2050 mesa is the last to be built out.... this project began jan of 2019 with a program for a 2500 square foot 3 bedroom single family detached dwelling on a nonstandard lot in the RMX-1 zone.... the topography and size of the lot dictated the arrangement of programed spaces along with the siting and massing of the building.... in june of 2019 this original design was submitted for site review requesting a height modification.... which in turn led to 4 1/2 years of negotiations with city staff and attorneys resulting in significant changes in design parameters.... the building was redesigned within the new parameters.... the topography and size of the property had necessitated multiple levels and the owner was now anticipating this to be his last home....it was decided to include an elevator in the program anticipating a future necessity.... this design.... with elevator.... was submitted to boza on aug 13th requesting a variance from the side yard bulk plane requirements.... the board recommended a continuance.... this submittal is a redesign of the aug 13th proposal.... the stair to the west of the elevator has been removed and the garage roofs were then modified.... the upper level roofs on the east side were changed to eliminate any encroachment into the east bulk plane.... the only remaining encroachment is roughly 30 square feet into the west bulk plane as a result of the upper 4 feet of the elevator shaft and its landing....both of which have been designed with minimum ceiling height per code.... to avoid the remaining 30 square feet of side yard bulk plane encroachment requires relocating the elevator and its landing and as i have pointed out.... the difficulty of the site has ultimately dictated the location of the elevator.... which must serve the garage level and the three main levels of the house.... the property cannot reasonably be developed in conformity with the provisions of the side yard bulk plane ordinance....this is the minimum variance that will afford relief and is the least modification of the provision.... the remaining 30 square feet of encroachment does not substantially impair the reasonable use and enjoyment of the property to the west christopher melton architect *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* ORTHO VIEW *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* ORTHO VIEW *October 8, 2024 BOZA 2nd Hearing Revised Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* x x x x 06.19.2024 *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENTS APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM Required for Certain Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical Document Review, and Board of Zoning Adjustment Applications I, , am filing a Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical for the property (PRINT PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION) and agree to the following: 1. I understand that I must use the sign(s) that the city will provide to me at the time that I file my application. The sign(s) will include information about my application and property location to provide required public notice. 2. I am responsible for ensuring that the sign(s) is posted on the property described above in such a way that meets the requirements of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981 (listed above), including visibility of the sign(s) and time and duration of the sign(s) posting, and including reposting any signs that are removed, damaged, or otherwise displaced from the site. As necessary, I shall obtain a replacement sign(s) from the city for reposting. 3. I understand that certain future changes to my application, including but not limited to, changes to the project description or adding a review type, may require that I post a new sign(s). The city will notify me if such a reposting is required and provide me with a necessary replacement sign(s). 4. I understand that failing to provide the public notice by sign posting required by the city’s land use regulation may result in a delay in the city’s issuing a decision or a legal challenge of any issued decision. NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON DATE Please keep a copy of this signed form for your reference. If you have any questions about the sign posting requirements or to obtain a replacement sign, please call 303-441-1880. CITY CODE REQUIREMENT FOR SIGN POSTING OF LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATIONS - Excerpt of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981: Public Notice of Application: The city manager will provide the following public notice of a development review application: (1) Posting: After receiving such application, the manager will cause the property for which the application is filed to be posted with a notice indicating that a development review application has been made, the type of review requested, and that interested persons may obtain more detailed information from the planning department. The notice shall meet the following standards: (A) The notice shall be place on weatherproof signs that have been provided by the City and placed on the property that is the subject of the application. (B) All such notice shall be posted no later than ten days after the date the application is filed to ensure that notice is posted early in the development review process. (C) The signs shall be placed along each abutting street, perpendicular to the direction of travel, in a manner that makes them clearly visible to neighboring residents and passers-by. At least one sign shall be posted on each street frontage. (D) The signs shall remain in place during the period leading up to a decision by the approving authority, but not less than ten days. (E) On or before the date that the approving authority is scheduled to make a decision on the application the city manager will require the applicant to certify in writing that required notice was posted according to the requirements of this section. (PRINT NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON) Document Review, or BOZA application [on behalf of] located at (PRINT NAME OF OWNER(S) IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT/CONTACT) . I have read the city's sign posting requirements above and acknowledge Peter Carey Calisle Dean 2050 Mesa Drive, Boulder Colorado Peter Carey 06/18/2024 *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* 2050 Mesa narrative a brief history....the owner.... calisle dean.... applied for and obtained a PUD and subsequent subdivision of a standard lot [2049 bluff street] creating two non-standard lots [2049 bluff street and 2050 mesa drive].... this occurred in 1986 - 1987.... in 2019 the owner applied for a height modification on the non- standard mesa lot through site review.... city staff determined that the two non-standard lots were now merged and the mesa lot no longer existed as a non-standard building site....[attachment A]....in 2023 city council overruled this determination reinstating provisions of the 1987 PUD/subdivision and reestablishing the two non-standard lots .... [attachment B].... this project is designed for the 2050 mesa lot and requires a minor variance from the current side yard bulk plane restrictions.... 2050 mesa is one of seven nonstandard lots along the south side of mesa [attachment C] all of which were developed with PUD/subdivisions in the 1980's allowing setback and height variances from the MR-E zone in effect at the time.... this zone did not require side yard bulk plane conformance…. the original lots sloped down from mesa to bluff street below.... mesa was constructed on fill which created a steep slope off the south side.... car access to the seven lots from mesa was not originally a consideration.... all the lots were accessed from bluff.... at 2050 there is a ten foot drop from the street to the required two foot front yard setback which effectively places the top of the twelve foot bulk plane fence two feet above the garage floor at that point.... this initial abrupt drop off makes it extremely difficult to build within the constraints of the bulk plane while taking advantage of the four foot west side yard setback.... this design is a 2600 square foot three bedroom house on three levels with the lower level being a walk- out basement.... top of slab at the lower level is one foot below the lowest point on the property…. there is an elevator.... anticipating a future need.... which connects the garage level with the three other levels.... the garage is located with a drive perpendicular to mesa at the lowest possible point.... the ceiling heights where encroachment into the bulk plane occurs have been restricted to code minimum [seven feet for habitable spaces].... the house has been sited and designed to take advantage of and expand the east neighbors open space which is a unique feature along mesa drive [attachment C].... the program for this house is modest and compatible with its neighbors.... the highest point on the north elevation is thirteen feet above the street and set back forty feet from the street…. every effort has been made to lower the building into the site and articulate the overall mass… the topography and size [fifty feet wide.... forty four hundred square feet total lot area] have created a difficult design challenge even with the modest program.... the structure being proposed is compatible in floor area, building coverage, height, and massing with the neighborhood,,,, as mentioned the development along the south side of mesa resulted from PUD's and subdivisions in the 1980's similar to those reinstated by city council for 2050 mesa in ordinance 8579 [attachment B].... the ordinance speaks directly to the consistency and compatibility in chapter M.... this building will finally replace the "missing tooth" in the neighborhood which has for decades been otherwise fully developed.... the "reasonable use and enjoyment" of mesa residents will only be enhanced.... as pointed out in the above narrative the variance sought is the minimum required to obtain relief from site difficulties and restraints of the side yard bulk plane.... the proposed design will not conflict with the provisions of section 9-9-17.... solar access area II.... christopher melton architect *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* 1 2050 MESA 07.15.2024 BOZA VAR IANCE CRITERIA RESPONSE (h) CRITERIA FOR VARIANCES The BOZA may grant a variance only if it finds that the application satisfies all of the applicable requirements of paragraph (1), (2), (3), OR (4) of this Subsection AND the requirements of paragraph (5) of this Subsection. Paragraph 1 (1)Physical Condition Disability (A)There are: (i)Unusual physical circumstances or conditions, including, without limitation, irregularity, narrowness or shallowness of the lot, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the affected property; or (ii)There is a physical disability affecting the owners of the property or any member of the family of an owner who resides on the property which impairs the ability of the disabled person to utilize or access the property. Reply: (i) The site at 2050 Mesa has unusual physical circumstances and conditions. There is a ten-foot drop from the street to the required two-foot front yard setback which effectively places the top of the twelve-foot bulk plane fence two feet above the garage floor at that point. The proposed finished floor of the main level will be 10 feet lower than the street. The site is also narrow at 50’ wide. Every effort has been made to set the home as low as possible to limit the encroachment into the bulk plane. (ii) There are anticipated physical disabilities affecting the owners and members of the family. As they age, they would like to still enjoy the home. An elevator has been provided in the design with this in mind. Ceiling heights are set at code minimums of 7 feet in impacted areas. Elevators, chimneys as well as parapet relief are shown and could be excluded per code, but as the overall bulk plane encroachments appear to be minimal were included to simplify this application. *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* 2 and (B)The unusual circumstances or conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood or zoning district in which the property is located; and (C)Because of such physical circumstances or conditions, the property cannot reasonably be developed in conformity with the provisions of this chapter; and (D)Any unnecessary hardship has not been created by the applicant. Reply: (B) These unusual circumstances and conditions are unique to this property. This zone did not require side yard bulk plane conformance when the property was purchased, and Mesa was constructed on fill which created a steep slope off the south side to the lot and (C) Because of such circumstances and conditions, the property cannot be developed in conformity with the provisions of the chapter; with a steep slope to the street and a narrow lot as noted, the proposed design works to mitigate these issues. (D) No unnecessary hardship has been created by the applicant. Every effort has been made to set the home as low as possible to limit the encroachment into the bulk plane. (5) Requirements for All Variance Approvals (A)Would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the lot is located; (B)Would not substantially or permanently impair the reasonable use and enjoyment or development of adjacent property; (C)Would be the minimum variance that would afford relief and would be the least modification of the applicable provisions of this title; and (D)Would not conflict with the provisions of Section 9-9-17, "Solar Access," B.R.C.1981. *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* 3 Reply: (A) The proposed design will not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district. The neighborhood is very diverse with many unique homes as well as the senior center across the street. (B) The proposed design will not substantially or permanently impair the reasonable use and enjoyment or development of adjacent property. There is an open area to the east of the property to help preserve the existing view from that lot. The existing home to the west will maintain their primary views to the south and west. The proposed design limits windows looking west to preserve privacy for both parties. (C) The proposed design will be the minimum variance that will afford relief and will be the last modification of the applicable provisions of this title. The design is a balance between site constraints and function and the encroachment into the bulk plane is primarily to the sides of the lot.; and (D) The proposed design will not conflict with the provisions of Section 9-9-17, Solar Access B.R.C. 1981. The north south orientation of the lot as well as the topography will help to maintain solar access to adjacent properties. Please refer to the narrative provided by the architect Christopher Melton for a complete summary of the site and the design process to date. Thank you for your time and consideration, this plan took four years to come to fruition, we feel this design is most suited for the site, our neighborhood and will be an asset to the community. Sincerely, Peter Carey Applicant *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" NORTH ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" EAST ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" WEST ELEVATION 45' 50' 55' 60' 65' 70' 75' 80' 85' *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* SCALE :: 1/8" = 1'-0" SITE PLAN *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* ORTHO VIEW *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* 2050 Mesa site photos: View of site from Mesa looking south View from site looking south *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* View from site looking north to Mesa View from site looking east *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* View from site looking west *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* *August 13, 2024 BOZA 1st Hearing Materials* Revised October 2023 1 City of Boulder Planning and Development Services 1101 Arapahoe Avenue • Boulder, CO 80306 Phone: 303-441-1880 • Web: boulderplandevelop.net BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT (BOZA) VARIANCE APPLICATION FORM APPLICATION DEADLINE IS THE SECOND MONDAY OF EACH MONTH. MEETING DATE IS 4PM (MST) ON THE SECOND TUESDAY OF THE FOLLOWING MONTH. *Submittal of inaccurate or incomplete information and materials may result in rejection or delay of the application.* GENERAL DATA (To be completed in full by the applicant.) • Street Address or General Location of Property: • Legal Description: Lot Block Subdivision (Or attach description.) • Lot Size: • Existing Use of Property: • Detailed Description of Proposal (Specific Variance[s] Requested Including All Pertinent Numerical . Values (e.g.: Existing, Required and Proposed Setbacks for the Subject Setback Variance): *Total gross floor area existing: *Total gross floor area proposed: *Total gross building coverage existing: *Total gross building coverage proposed: *Building height existing: *Building height proposed: *See definitions in Section 9-16-1, B.R.C. 1981. ♦ Name of Owner: • Address: Telephone: • City: State: Zip Code: Email: ♦ Name of Contact (if other than owner): • Address: Telephone: • City: State: Zip Code: Email: Buena Vista Heights 5003 SF single family residence Remove existing roof from and install new roof to a portion of an existing home that is positioned within a required rear yard setbak. There is no new floor area proposed. The new roof will be taller than the existing roof. The new roof will be compliant with all other planning and zoning criteria, including height, solar access and bulk plane 2319 SF 2319 SF 1056 SF 1056 SF Fred and Lisa Corrado 1313 7th Street Boulder CO 80302 Kyle Callahan Clearwater design studio 2975 Valmont Road, suite 100 303-545-2007 Boulder Colorado 80301 kyle@clearwaterdesignstudio.com lisa@lisacorrado.com 203-233-9523 2 APPLICATION TYPES (Check All That Apply For This Application)  Setback (BRC 9-7-1)  Porch Setback & Size (BRC 9-7-4)  Building Separation (BRC 9-7-1)  Bulk Plane (BRC 9-7-9)  Side Yard Wall Articulation (BRC 9-7-10)  Building Coverage (BRC 9-7-11 or BRC 9-10)  Floor Area Ratio (BRC 9-8-2)  Parking in Front Yard Landscape Setback (BRC 9-7-1 & 9-9-6)  Size and Parking Setback Requirements for Accessory Units (BRC 9-6-4)  Cumulative Accessory Building Coverage (BRC 9-7-8)  Mobile Home Spacing Variance (BRC 9-7-13)  Use of Mobile Homes for Non-Residential Purposes (BRC 10-12-6)  Solar Exception (BRC 9-9-17)  Sign Variance (BRC 9-9-21)  Fence and Wall Variance (BRC 9-9-15) 3 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS All variance applications are electronic submittal and review. Visit the Planning & Development Services Online Center for additional information & guidance on the application process and how to apply. As a minimum, the following items MUST ultimately be provided for an application to be considered complete:  A completed and signed BOZA Application Form;  If the applicant is other than owner(s), a written consent of the owner(s) of the property for which the variance is requested;  A detailed written statement thoroughly describing the variance request(s) and addressing all pertinent review criteria for approval – see BOZA Info & Criteria Guide;  A signed and stamped Improvement Location Certificate or Site Improvement Survey and legal description by a registered surveyor;  A site development plan including setbacks, building elevations, interior layout/floor plans and any other pertinent exhibits;  A demolition plan clearly differentiating between existing/remaining and proposed portions of the structure(s);  Any other information pertinent to the variance request (e.g. neighbor letters, photos, historic records/approvals, renderings, etc.);  A completed and signed ‘Sign Posting Acknowledgement Form’ Note: The applicant is responsible for posting the property in compliance with city requirements. Obtaining sign(s) will be messaged to an applicant once it has been placed on an agenda. The applicant will be responsible for posting the required sign(s) within 10 days of the hearing date. Failure to post the required sign(s) may result in the postponement of the hearing date.  A Board of Zoning Adjustment application fee (as prescribed in the current ‘Schedule of Fees’ which can be found at bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop). NOTE: SEE SECTION 9-2-3(l), B.R.C. 1981 FOR VARIANCE EXPIRATION INFORMATION Applicant Signature ______________________________________Date__________ Owner (if other than Applicant) Signature _________________________Date__________ 08/26/2024 SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENTS APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM Required for Certain Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical Document Review, and Board of Zoning Adjustment Applications I, , am filing a Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical for the property (PRINT PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION) and agree to the following: 1. I understand that I must use the sign(s) that the city will provide to me at the time that I file my application. The sign(s) will include information about my application and property location to provide required public notice. 2. I am responsible for ensuring that the sign(s) is posted on the property described above in such a way that meets the requirements of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981 (listed above), including visibility of the sign(s) and time and duration of the sign(s) posting, and including reposting any signs that are removed, damaged, or otherwise displaced from the site. As necessary, I shall obtain a replacement sign(s) from the city for reposting. 3. I understand that certain future changes to my application, including but not limited to, changes to the project description or adding a review type, may require that I post a new sign(s). The city will notify me if such a reposting is required and provide me with a necessary replacement sign(s). 4. I understand that failing to provide the public notice by sign posting required by the city’s land use regulation may result in a delay in the city’s issuing a decision or a legal challenge of any issued decision. NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON DATE Please keep a copy of this signed form for your reference. If you have any questions about the sign posting requirements or to obtain a replacement sign, please call 303-441-1880. CITY CODE REQUIREMENT FOR SIGN POSTING OF LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATIONS - Excerpt of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981: Public Notice of Application: The city manager will provide the following public notice of a development review application: (1) Posting: After receiving such application, the manager will cause the property for which the application is filed to be posted with a notice indicating that a development review application has been made, the type of review requested, and that interested persons may obtain more detailed information from the planning department. The notice shall meet the following standards: (A) The notice shall be place on weatherproof signs that have been provided by the City and placed on the property that is the subject of the application. (B) All such notice shall be posted no later than ten days after the date the application is filed to ensure that notice is posted early in the development review process. (C) The signs shall be placed along each abutting street, perpendicular to the direction of travel, in a manner that makes them clearly visible to neighboring residents and passers-by. At least one sign shall be posted on each street frontage. (D) The signs shall remain in place during the period leading up to a decision by the approving authority, but not less than ten days. (E) On or before the date that the approving authority is scheduled to make a decision on the application the city manager will require the applicant to certify in writing that required notice was posted according to the requirements of this section. (PRINT NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON) Document Review, or BOZA application [on behalf of] located at (PRINT NAME OF OWNER(S) IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT/CONTACT) . I have read the city's sign posting requirements above and acknowledge Department of Planning and Development Services 2045 13th Street Boulder, CO 80302 Subject: Board of Zoning Adjustment (BOZA) required documents and submittals This letter is to authorize Kyle Callahan to act as my agent and and submit & sign Board of Zoning Adjustment (BOZA) required documents and submittals. I certify that I am the owner of the property for which this applies: 1313 7th Street Boulder, CO 80302 My agent can be reached at:  303-956-1443 kyle@clearwaterdesignstudio.com Owner Signature Printed Name Date Docusign Envelope ID: 45503730-7F32-4E57-8ACA-D343B86BA743 LISA 8/13/2024 CORRADO C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o . A r c h i t e c t u r e 2 9 7 5 V a l m o n t R o a d , B o u l d e r , C o l o r a d o 8 0 3 0 1 303.545.2 0 0 7 Architecture Planning Interiors Landscape Design C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o A R C H I T E C T U R E Variance Narrative - 1313 7th Street Proposal to reconstruct a portion of the existing roof at a higher elevation above that portion of the home that is located within the north side yard and west rear yard setbacks. Variance required The homeowners for 1313 7th street seek relief from the requirements of Boulder Revised code section 9-7-1 Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards. The existing home onsite is being considered under Boulder Revised Code section 9-10-3 (a)(3) Changes to non-standard buildings, which provides for modification to a non-standard building that is not in conformance with the provisions of Chapter 9-7 Form and Bulk Standards. Project Background The home at 1313 7th street was initially constructed in 1904. The home is built of brick masonry bearing wall construction atop a stone rubble foundation. The basement of the home is partly tall crawl space (6’-2” clear floor to bottom of joists) with a concrete slab, and partly short crawl space (3’-0” tall from dirt floor to bottom of joists). Thus the entire basement is too short to be considered occupiable space by building code standards, which require a minimum height of 7’-0”. There are 750 gross square feet in the crawl space, none of which contributes to the floor are of the building due to the perimeter wall height (<3’) and to being unoccupiable space (<7’ tall). The following shows the original crawl space floor plan: Page 2 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Above the basement are two floors of occupiable space. The main floor perimeter walls are two wythe brick masonry, un-insulated, with lathe and plaster interior finish. The interior walls are wood framed with lathe and plaster finish. Windows are typically single pane, single hung in design. An existing wood “U shaped” stair connects the first floor with the second floor, rising from the foyer to the central hall on the second floor. The roof is of a gambrel style, with vertical walls facing north and south that define the second-floor perimeter, and sloped walls on the east and west. The steeper sloped walls of the gambrel roof are pitched at a 2 to 1 slope (24/12), while the upper roof is pitched 6/12. The roof encloses the second-floor space. There exists a covered front porch on the east facade. Based upon empirical evidence, it appears that the west side of the home once included a rear covered porch that entered directly into the kitchen, as was typical at the time. The west side also, most likely, had a basement access scuttle protecting the stairs to the basement, which continue to exist – now within the exterior envelope. As near as we can tell, the original first floor plan was as shown on the left below, containing 750 SF of space, and the second floor on the right, with 560 SF of space. We have been unable to locate any specific records that indicate the dates when the west side porch was removed and the larger, two-story addition was created. Speculation is that it occurred in the late 1920’s – early 1930’s from assessor records, that indicated a “Garage and Page 3 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Sleeping Porch”. The space proportions are inadequate to meet current garage and parking space requirements, the space being a little less than 15’ deep where 19’ would be required by code. Further consideration of the appraisal records leads to our understanding that the west addition was remodeled in 1949 and again in 1957, with much volume being added to the house. Because garage portions of the property were not counted as part of the appraised floor area, we assume that the space was converted to finished interior space at that earlier time. We speculate that the owner at the time created the addition herself, being somewhat handy and frugal. The construction techniques and interior proportions and finishes seem to bear witness to that fact. The following image shows the original footprint of the home built in 1904 on the right side of the plan, and the mid-century addition constructed circa 1920’s and remodeled in 1949 on the left, shaded light red. From the image, one can see that the addition was constructed entirely within the rear yard setback. The rear yard setback is seen passing through the original home, near the west exterior wall of the original house. The circa 1920’s addition on the northwest side of the original home is two stories in overall height, although neither floor conforms to the building code definition for occupiable floor area. Consider the building cross section below, which cuts through this portion of the house. The light red polygon at the top of the drawing shows the existing ripped 2 x 12 roof structure. Not only does this roof structure fail calculations for a structurally sound roof, it also is positioned only 5’-11” above the floor, where at least 6’-4” is required by code for dropped structural elements (IRC section R305). Page 4 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o The maximum height in the upper room is 6’-8” +/- at the ridge between dropped structural elements, which is lower than the minimum height of 7’, which per code must be the height in 50% of the room in order for a sloped roof to be considered covering occupiable space. The roof framing seems to be 2 x 4 ladder framed rafters apparently dropped between the ripped 2 x 12’s, which is uninsulated (R2.5 per the existing HERs rating). This second story of this 1920’s addition is the focus of this variance proposal. As currently constructed, both floors of the addition are unoccupiable from a building code standpoint, and the walls and roof are significantly deficient in structural and in thermal performance. The goals for both the homeowners and the Architect for this project and space are that: 1. the resulting design must retain all existing lower-level and upper-level floor area. 2. the resulting second floor must meet the code definition for occupiable space in terms of the height and size of the rooms. 3. that the roof above be constructed with correctly sized and placed framing members of sufficient strength and placement to ensure long term durability and to be designed to carry the load of a solar array. 4. That the new roof framing be sufficiently insulated to significantly improve the thermal performance of the home. 5. the exterior walls and roof be insulated to maximize the performance of the thermal envelope. 6. space allowing, the second floor is to contain a small but sufficient full bath, and all fixtures in this bath are to comply with the building code for access and spacing. None of these goals are possible to achieve with the current configuration of the roof. Thus our proposal is to remove the existing roof entirely over this non-conforming portion of the Page 5 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o house and construct a new roof in the former roof’s location. The new roof would be both higher at the bearing elevation at the perimeter (for head clearance) and steeper (to allow for adequate framing members and closed cell spray foam). We recognize that the roof is constructed entirely within the rear yard setback, and we are seeking a variance from code section 9-7 form and bulk limits and specifically property line yard setbacks to allow our construction of this a new, code compliant, insulated, durable roof within the required rear yard setback. Proposed Alterations To achieve our goals stated above – the occupiable roof height and code compliant insulation values, we propose the following scope of work: 1 – Remove the existing low pitched roof plane and roof framing in its entirety shown light red below: 2- extend the second floor perimeter walls vertically to provide an interior wall height / structural bearing elevation of 7’-3” +/-, increasing the height of the walls by 1’-4” (refer to building section below): Page 6 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o 3- install new roof framing with a structural ridge beam and 2 x 10 rafters and insulate the roof with closed cell foam insulation for an insulation value of R64. By doing so, the space will become occupiable floor area and will meet prescriptive performance requirements for insulation values. The floor area / building coverage / footprint will not be increased. The roof will create additional volume but will not violate either the solar height/shading limits nor will it violate the bulk plane regulations. The following two images show before (left) and after (right) conditions for the roof design: Page 7 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o ` Off Street Parking One item that will be considered by the regulatory agency along with this Variance application is the requirement of off-street parking. Although we recognize the off-street parking criteria as part of the zoning code, we need to convey the following crucial pieces of information: 1. As currently configured, there is no off-street parking associated with this lot. The homeowners park their vehicle in public parking spaces on the street in front of the home. 2. There was a garage on this site – approximately 15’ deep – during the time of the County assessment appraisal of the 1920’s. That space did and does not conform to current parking space size standards. 3. That garage space seems to have been built without the benefit of a building permit. 4. From inspection of the County assessment records, it appears that the parking garage was reconfigured in 1949 to become interior space – which was prior to the off-street parking requirement being established in Boulder in the 1950’s. 5. The current building configuration of existing construction prevents access from the alley. Thus, providing parking at this site would require access from 7th street. 6. Creating parking access from 7th street would eliminate at least one publicly available space of on-street parking and, most likely, cause the removal of at least one street tree that is recorded in the City database of trees – tree 81009 (catalpa) and tree 57928 (silver maple). Due to these considerations listed above, we have suggested that off street parking not be included in this Variance consideration. We conferred with planning staff in February of this year and received concurrence that the off street parking would be moot at this site due to these above listed considerations. A copy of an email discussion from February 15 is provided for reference. Page 8 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Variance Review Criteria Per BOZA variance criteria, we are to satisfy the requirements of applicable paragraphs 1 – 4 , and paragraph 5 for the BOZA to grant the variance from the rear yard setback requirements of code section 9-7-1 of the BRC. Upon review of the criteria for variance approval, we have determined that the proposed roof change will satisfy criteria 1, criteria 2, and criteria 5. Criteria 1- Physical Conditions of the house and lot (1)(A)(i) There are unusual physical circumstances or conditions, including without limitation, irregularity, narrowness or shallowness of the lot, or exceptional topographical or other physical conditions peculiar to the affected property The lot is a portion of several lots that were subdivided, we assume, at the time that the Buena Vista Heights subdivision was created. The lot dimensions are roughly 70’ x 71.3’, yielding a lot size of 5,303 SF as per our surveyor’s calculations, where 7,000 SF is the required lot size in the RL-1 zone district. By removing from consideration for the development of this lot both the front yard and rear yard setbacks (25’ each), we are thus left with only approximately 20’ depth of developable area on the site. and thus the addition constructed 70 +/- years ago extends into the rear yard setback. It is important to recognize that setback requirements did not exist at that time of construction. (1)(B) The unusual circumstances or conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood or zoning district in which the property is located. Using the City of Boulder emap and performing a visual inspection, we can see several similarly sized and oriented parcels, including the 4 lining the block face between Pleasant and University on the west side of 7th street. Far and away, however, the lots in this neighborhood and zone district maintain the more rectangular proportions of +/- 140’ deep and 50’ wide (a 7,000 SF lot conforming with RL-1 standards). The following is a screenshot from the neighborhood – showing the subject property outlined in green along with the three similar adjacent properties, plus a good portion of the rest of the neighborhood. Most lots retain distinct rectangular proportions. Page 9 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o (1)(C) Because of such physical circumstances or conditions the property cannot reasonably be developed in conformity with the provisions of this chapter. The resulting lot size for this lot is 70’ x 70’. Due to an adjacency, the front lot line is on the east, facing 7th street. Thus the rear property line is on the west and is interior. The resulting developable area is thus 20’ deep, considering 25’ front and rear yards. A traditional, more common lot of 50’ x 140’ dimensions leaves a developable footprint of 35’ x 90’ deep. This consideration is coupled with the overriding fact that the building footprint exists currently, and has for +/- 100 years. The existing building footprint is tucked away west of and entirely behind the original building and is unseen from the public way along 7th street. (1)(D) Any unnecessary hardship has not been created by the applicant. The lot is configured as originally platted. The home has existed as is current since the late 1940’s, making it nearly 80 years old. The current residents purchased the property in the spring of 2024. The homeowners did not create this hardship – the existing structure is older than they. Criteria 2- Energy Conservation (A) The variance will permit construction of an addition to a building that was constructed before January 1, 1983. The home on this site was initially constructed in 1904, and the addition which we choose to modify be replacing the roof seems to have been constructed in the late 1920’s, renovated in the late 1940’s, although the exact date is unknown. It was without a doubt constructed prior to 1983. (B) The proposed addition will be an integral part of the structure of the building. The roof that we are seeking the variance to rebuild is certainly integral to the structure. The portion of the roof proposed to be replaced will serve two functions as a component of an energy conservation strategy for the home. 1. By virtue of the framing members used in its construction, we will be creating an insulation cavity within which we will install closed cell foam insulation. This insulation system will provide an insulation value of approximately R64. The current roof provides R2.5, thus nearly a 25x performance boost. 2. The structural capacity, shape and orientation of the existing roof is unacceptable for a high performance photovoltaic solar array. First – the structure of the roof is far under designed to be able to support the additional load of the PV panels. There is no space below the existing structure of the roof to augment its capacity as the roof framing is already too low to consider the space occupiable – additional structure would compound this shortcoming. Page 10 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o 3. At a +/- 1/12 pitch, the existing roof is too flat to generate adequate power during at least 4 months of the year, when the sun angle is low, adjacent trees shade the array, and snow would collect on the array and remain. Alternatively, the replacement roof in the proposed design has a steeper pitch, oriented to better collect solar energy during all times of the year. 4. The size of the roof facing south is larger on the proposed roof form than the existing roof – thus providing the opportunity to install a larger array of photovoltaic panels and collect more energy and generate additional power. 4 panels could be installed on the new roof yielding an array with +/- 1,600 W. Assuming that the existing roof could even support a solar array (it can’t), only 3 panels could be installed, thus a 33% boost in potential PV production, notwithstanding the performance boost from the new roof form due to a better pitch and orientation. (C) The proposed addition will qualify as a “solar energy system” as defined in section 9-16, “Definitions”, BRC 1982, or will enable the owner of the building to reduce the net use of energy for heating and cooling purposes by a minimum of 10% over the course of a year of average weather conditions for the entire building. The new roof form proposed by this variance documentation will create a suitably oriented and sloped roof on this home to support a proposed Photovoltaic solar array as shown on the roof plan. The current roof has neither the appropriate pitch (1/12 pitch) to collect energy, it is also built with framing members that are undersized to the point of not supporting themselves, much less the addition of load imposed by solar panels. The existing insulation values have been reviewed by the Architect and by the energy rater (Scott Homes Team – Luke Griess) and found to be severely deficient, with the uninsulated roof and minimal wall insulation in the cavities of the existing 2x4 construction. The City of Boulder Energy Conservation Code (COBECC) requires R49 and R20 respectively. Our energy rating team has executed an energy analysis on both the existing construction and the post-construction energy performance attributes. The findings are striking, with this simple change having a profound impact upon the overall energy consumption of the house. Performing an as-built analysis of the existing home, the energy rater has found that it has a HERs rating of an abysmal 378. Modelling our proposed improvement attributed to the walls, roof, and windows in the proposed alteration finds the HERs rating to decrease to 131. This reflects a performance enhancement of 69%. Inspection of the included baseline (existing as-built conditions) HERs report, page 5, shows that the existing heating and cooling energy load is 2,968.7 therms (296,870 MBTU) and 2,868.5 kWh (9,788 MBTU) for a combined value of 306,658 mbtu. Inspection of the included HERs report for the proposed renovation, page 6, shows that the alteration proposed by this variance results in energy consumption for heating and cooling to be 854.4 Therms (85,440 MBTU) and 5,462.5 kWh (18,639 mbtu) for a combined value of 104,079 mbtu and thus a reduction annually equal to Page 11 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o 202,579 mbtu, which is a reduction of 66.1% for theenergy requirement to heat and cool the home. Reports from the energy rating team are provided as an attachment to this variance application (D) The cost of constructing any comparable addition within existing setback lines so as to achieve comparable energy purposes would be substantially greater than the cost of constructing the addition which is proposed for the variance. The cost of creating a conforming addition is significantly beyond the cost proposed by this variance. Estimates using the City of Boulder’s recognized construction cost of $167 per square foot would amount to approximately $126,000, without considering the cost of the solar array. The cost for the roof change proposed by this variance, including demolition, framing, drywall, insulation and exterior finish would be closer to $16,000. Criteria 5 – Requirements for all variance approvals (A) Would not alter the essential character of the neighborhood or district in which the lot is located. The work proposed by this variance is unseen from the public way and will have no impact on the character of the neighborhood. Conversely, were the homeowner to construct a conforming addition within the defined footprint of the existing setbacks, such change would have a substantial negative impact on the neighborhood and on the house itself by:  significantly increasing the visual bulk of the structure apparent from 7th street.  Significantly increasing the visual bulk of the structure apparent from neighboring properties both south and west of this existing structure.  eliminating open yard space and existing mature vegetation. This proposed change is consistent with houses in the neighborhood, whereas a conforming addition would be an egregious assault on the neighborhood character. (B) Would not substantially or permanently impair the reasonable use and enjoyment or development of the adjacent property The neighbors of the residences adjacent to the property have been invited to review the content of this variance proposal and found that the change would have no effect on their use and enjoyment of their properties. A compliant development as alluded to above would have significant impact to their use and enjoyment of their properties, from both a bulk and visual standpoint. (C) Would be the minimum variance that would afford relief and would be the least modification of the applicable provisions of this title. The proposal is the minimum variance the homeowner would consider effective in achieving their goals for the home and for the neighborhood. (D) Would not conflict with the provisions of Section 9-9-17, “Solar Access”, BRC 1981. The solar shading impacts have been investigated and found to be compliant as shown on sheet 1 of the included plans. 6/21/24 XXXXX XXXXXXXXXXXXGGGSHEET INDEXSHEET INDEX SYMBOL LEGENDSYMBOL LEGEND GENERAL SYMBOL LEGENDGENERAL SYMBOL LEGEND TILE Library P-1 # 5 BUILDING MAJOR SECTION BUILDING EXTERIOR ELEVATION CONSTRUCTION DETAIL PLAN INTERIOR ELEVATION CONSTRUCTION DETAIL SECTION BUILDING MINOR (WALL) SECTION RM NAME & KEY NOTE EQUIP. SPEC (RE:SPEC.) FINISH HEIGHT FLOOR FIN. SPOT ELEVATION FINISH MATERIAL TRANSITION 112'-4 1/2" CPT CARPET FFEL +36" # DOOR MARK BLOWN CELLULOSE INSULATION (WET-WALLS & DRY-CLG) WINDOW MARK A 2 A8 3 A8 A8 3 A6 3 A8 # AD AREA DRAIN FINISH CALLOUT FD FLOOR DRAIN VOID FORM (RE:STRUCT) CONCRETE COMPACTED BACKFILL UNDISTURBED SOIL STUCCO (IN ELEVATION) HIDDEN BELOW 2x6 FRAMED WALL 2x4 FRAMED WALL CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF CLOSET ACCESSORIES OR HIDDEN MILLWORK CLEAN WASHED GRAVEL FOR DRAIN EMBED GYPSUM WALLBOARD (IN SECTIONS & DETAILS) FIBERGLASS THERMAL BATT INSULATION SOFFIT / OR CEILING DETAIL ABOVE EXPANDED POLYSTYRENE INSULATION (EPS) CLOSED CELL SPRAY FOAM INSULATION 3 / A8PLANNING INFORMATIONPLANNING INFORMATION GOVERNING REGULATIONSGOVERNING REGULATIONS WEST (REAR) REQUIRED CLIMATIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIACLIMATIC AND GEOGRAPHIC DESIGN CRITERIA NORTH (SIDE) MAXIMUM HEIGHTMAXIMUM HEIGHT PROVIDED (EXISTING) LEGAL DESCRIPTION:LEGAL DESCRIPTION: EAST (FRONT) SOUTH (SIDE) SETBACKSSETBACKS MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE PROVIDED 29'-4" B PROJECT ADDRESS:PROJECT ADDRESS: SEISMIC CATEGORY WIND LOAD 165 MPH (Vult) 32"FROST LINE DEPTH 40 LBS/SQFTGROUND SNOW LOAD RESIDENTIAL LOW-1 (RL-1)ZONING CLASSIFICATION:ZONING CLASSIFICATION:LOT AREA: LOT AREA: 5'-0" MINIMUM 15'-0" COMBINED 25'-0" FLOOR AREAFLOOR AREA UNFINISHED SPLIT UPPER LEVEL 1313 7TH STREET BOULDER, CO 80302 BASEMENT TOTALTOTAL EXISTING 423 SF 1,896 SF1,896 SF 175 SF 0 SF FINISHED 0 SF 20'-8" UPPER LEVEL DECK 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. NOTES:NOTES: NOT INCLUDED IN TOTALS. EXISTING LEVEL NOT OCCUPIABLE - PER IRC R305.1. MAX HEIGHT = 6'-8", BOTTOM OF BEAMS = 5'-10". CEILING HEIGHT TO BECOME OCCUPIABLE PER THIS VARIANCE NOT OCCUPIABLE - PER IRC R305.1. BOTTOM OF CEILING STRUCTURE = 6'-2". NOT OCCUPIABLE - PER IRC R305.1. BOTTOM OF CEILING STRUCTURE = 6'-10". NO BASEMENT WALL HAS A PERIMETER > 36". N 70 FT LOTS 3-4 BLK 1 BUENA VISTA HEIGHTS 25'-0" FRONT PORCH 423 SF423 SF 0 SF 0 SF 5,003 SF / 0.11 ACRES UTILITY PROVIDERS:UTILITY PROVIDERS: MUNICIPALWATER ELECTRIC XCEL ENERGY MUNICIPALSANITARY XCEL ENERGYNATURAL GAS City of Boulder Revised Code 1981 All other appropriate County, State and Federal regulation including but not limited to: 2018 International Building Code 2018 International Plumbing Code 2018 International Existing Building Code 2018 Green Construction Code 2018 International Residential Code 2018 International Code Council Performance Code 2018 International Energy Conservation Code 2018 International Swimming Pool and Spa Code 2018 International Fuel Gas Code 2023 National Electric Code (NEC) 2018 International Mechanical Code 25'-10" 22'-1" 3'-11" SITE PLAN SYMBOL LEGENDSITE PLAN SYMBOL LEGEND EASEMENT PROPERTY LINE SETBACK (MIN.) FIRST FLOOR 0 SF SPLIT LOWER LEVEL 311 SF SECOND FLOOR 0 SF 0 SF 713 SF 226 SF 646 SF OCCUPIABLE OCCUPIABLE TOTALTOTAL 1,585 SF1,585 SF 0 SF0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF0 SF 713 SF713 SF 226 SF226 SF 646 SF646 SF UNFINISHED NEW 0 SF0 SF 0 SF FINISHED 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 0 SF 226 SF226 SF 0 SF 176 SFMAIN LEVEL DECK (<30" height)0 SF 0 SF0 SF 0 SF 147 SF EXISTING, NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE NOTES 3, 5 1 1 1 4 2 TOTAL 2,319 SF2,319 SF 423 SF423 SF 175 SF 147 SF 311 SF311 SF 713 SF713 SF 646 SF646 SF 176 SF 0 SF MAX. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREAMAX. ALLOWABLE FLOOR AREA 3,101 SF3,101 SF PROVIDED = 1,585 SFPROVIDED = 1,585 SF MAX. ALLOWABLE BUILDING COVERAGEMAX. ALLOWABLE BUILDING COVERAGE 2,051 SF2,051 SF PROVIDED = 1,056 SFPROVIDED = 1,056 SF MAXIMUM HEIGHT LIMITED PER BOULDER REVISED CODE SECTION 9-10-3, TABLE 10-1 FOR NON-STANDARD LOTS 3'-7" 5438.995438.99 INTERPOLATED GRADE ELEVATION AT PROPERTY LINE 5438.99 ACTUAL GRADE ELEVATION AT PROPERTY LINE PER SURVEY JJ TYPICAL SHADOW CASTING POINT WITH SHADOW CASTING PATH AT 10AM/2PM BOZA REQUIREMENTSBOZA REQUIREMENTS UNUSUAL PHYSICAL CONDITIONS 1. NARROW LOT WITH SETBACKS THAT ONLY PROVIDE 20' OF BUILDING AREA 2. BUILDING WAS ORIGINALLY CONSTRUCTED IN 1904 WHEN THERE WASN'T PARKING REQUIREMENTS 3. 1930S ADDITION WAS TOO NARROW TO BE CONSIDERED A GARAGE ACCORDING TO CURRENT CODE 4. CEILING HEIGHT OF 1930S ADDITION IS TOO LOW TO BE CONSIDERED OCCUPIABLE ENERGY PERFORMANCE & IMPROVEMENTSENERGY PERFORMANCE & IMPROVEMENTS ACCORDING TO CRITERIA 2 (C), THE NET USE OF ENERGY FOR HEATING AND COOLING PURPOSES MUST BE IMPROVED BY A MINIMUM OF 10% OVER THE COURSE OF A YEAR OF AVERAGE WEATHER CONDITIONS FOR THE ENTIRE BUILDING. THE TABLE BELOW SHOWS THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED ENERGY PERFORMANCE AND THE PERCENTAGE IMPROVEMENT. BASELINE HERS PROPOSED HEATING & COOLING 104,079 MBTU 131 306,658 MBTU 378 % IMPROVEMENT 66.1% 69% PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE N 90° 00' 00" E 70' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEN 0° 00' 00" E 70' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE N 90° 00' 00" W 70' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINES 0° 00' 00" W 70' - 0"(RECORDED)(RECORDED)PROPERTY LINE (MEASURED)PROPERTY LINE (MEASURED)7TH STREET7TH STREETALLEYALLEY N 70 FT OF N 70 FT OF LOTS 3-4LOTS 3-4 S 50 FT OF LOTS 1-2S 50 FT OF LOTS 1-2 REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK - 10'-0"REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK - 10'-0" REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK - 5'-0"REQUIRED SIDE SETBACK - 5'-0"REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK - 25'-0"REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK - 25'-0"REQUIRED REAR SETBACK - 25'-0"REQUIRED REAR SETBACK - 25'-0"EXISTING, NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE - STRUCTURE PROJECTS INTO REQUIRED REAR YARD AND SIDE YARD SETBACKS EXISTING, NON-COMPLIANT STRUCTURE - STRUCTURE PROJECTS INTO REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACK UPPER LEVEL DECK - EXTENT SHOWN DASHED LOWER LEVEL DECK <30" ABOVE GRADE EXISTING COVERED FRONT PORCH EXISTING ROOF OVERHANG SHOWN DASHED 25'-0"20'-0"25'-0"20'-0"5437.5 MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGEMAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE PER TABLE 7.2 OF THE BRC, AND LOT SIZE = 5,003 SF, THE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE IN SQUARE FEET IS CALCULATED BY (LOT SIZE X 0.2) + 1,050. ALLOWABLE BUILDING COVERAGE = 2,050.6 SF. 2,050.6 SF. COVERAGE ELEMENTCOVERAGE ELEMENTCOVERAGECOVERAGE INCLUDEDINCLUDEDNOTESNOTESSYMBOLSYMBOL PRIMARY RESIDENCE1,056 SF1,056 SF COVERED FRONT PORCH188 SF0 SFFRONT PORCH EXCEPTION OPEN UPPER DECK143 SF0 SFADDITIONAL DECK EXCEPTION OPEN LOWER REAR DECK185 SF0 SF< 30" ABOVE GRADE TOTAL BUILDING COVERAGETOTAL BUILDING COVERAGE1,056 SF1,056 SF PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE N 90° 00' 00" E 70' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEN 0° 00' 00" E 70' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINE N 90° 00' 00" W 70' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINES 0° 00' 00" W 70' - 0"5440.1 5440.6 5441.4 5441.5 5441.8 5442.2 5442.4 5440.6 5440.1 5439.6 5439.4 5438.7 5438.5 5438.1 5437.95438.65439.05439.05439.35438.8 GGEE LL 5439.875439.87 FF 5439.265439.26 5439.15439.1 5440.465440.46 II JJ 5439.4 5439.155439.15 5438.995438.99 5439.115439.115439.375439.37 5438.825438.82 ALLEYALLEY ISSUE DATE SHEET INDEX, GENERAL NOTES, PLANNING INFORMATION, REGULATORY CODES Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 1 ARCHITECTURAL 1 SHEET INDEX, GENERAL NOTES, PLANNING INFORMATION, REGULATORY CODES 2 BASEMENT & MAIN SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLANS 3 MAIN & UPPER SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLANS 4 ROOF PLAN 5 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 6 EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 7 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION 8 WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION 9 CROSS SECTIONS 1/8" = 1'-0"1Site Plan NN 5 5 10 15 20 1/8" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/16" = 1'-0"3Coverage Plan 1/8" = 1'-0"2Solar Shading Study Plan UP UP GRAPHIC SYMBOL LEGENDGRAPHIC SYMBOL LEGEND 2x4 INTERIOR - WOOD STUD WALL AT 16" OC, 1/2" DRYWALL BOTH SIDES, SECURE TOP AND BOTTOM TO STRUCTURE 2x6 EXTERIOR - INSULATED WOOD STUD WALL AT 16" OC, 1/2" DRYWALL INTERIOR, 1/2" STRUCTURAL SHEATHING WITH TYVEK EXTERIOR, INSULATED PER ICC REQ'TS OR BETTER, W/ EXTERIOR FINISH PER ELEVATIONS NATURAL GAS SUPPLY FOUNDATION DRAIN 8" CONCRETE FOUNDATION WALL NG 2x6 INTERIOR - WOOD STUD WALL AT 16" OC, 1/2" DRYWALL BOTH SIDES, SECURE TOP AND BOTTOM TO STRUCTURE 2 9 1 9 BASEMENT STORAGEBASEMENT STORAGE POWDER RMPOWDER RM UNOCCUPIABLEUNOCCUPIABLE WORK ROOMWORK ROOM MUDROOMMUDROOM LAUNDRY RMLAUNDRY RM MECHANICALMECHANICAL 2 9 1 9 BASEMENT STORAGEBASEMENT STORAGE POWDER RMPOWDER RM UNOCCUPIABLEUNOCCUPIABLE WORK ROOMWORK ROOM MUDROOMMUDROOM LAUNDRY RMLAUNDRY RM MECHANICALMECHANICAL CLOSETCLOSET EXISTING STAIR TO BASEMENT ISSUE DATE BASEMENT & MAIN SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLANS Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 2 NN 2 2 4 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing Basement and Lower Split Floor Plan 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed Basement and Lower Split Floor Plan DN DN GRAPHIC SYMBOL LEGENDGRAPHIC SYMBOL LEGEND 2x4 INTERIOR - WOOD STUD WALL AT 16" OC, 1/2" DRYWALL BOTH SIDES, SECURE TOP AND BOTTOM TO STRUCTURE 2x6 EXTERIOR - INSULATED WOOD STUD WALL AT 16" OC, 1/2" DRYWALL INTERIOR, 1/2" STRUCTURAL SHEATHING WITH TYVEK EXTERIOR, INSULATED PER ICC REQ'TS OR BETTER, W/ EXTERIOR FINISH PER ELEVATIONS EXISTING WALL TO REMAIN (THICKNESS VARIES) 2x6 INTERIOR - WOOD STUD WALL AT 16" OC, 1/2" DRYWALL BOTH SIDES, SECURE TOP AND BOTTOM TO STRUCTURE OPEN TO BELOWUPUP 2 9 LISA'S OFFICELISA'S OFFICE STORAGESTORAGE BATHROOMBATHROOM 1 9 KITCHENKITCHEN DINING ROOMDINING ROOMFAMILY ROOMFAMILY ROOM FOYERFOYER COVERED FRONT'COVERED FRONT' PORCHPORCH CLOSCLOS LANDINGLANDING LANDINGLANDING LAV TOILET BENCH SHOWER FUR OUT WALL FOR INSULATION NEW TEMPERED WINDOWNEW WINDOW - U0.27 NEW WINDOW - U0.27 NEW WINDOW - U0.27 SHED ROOF BELOW (EXISTING) INSULATE EXISTING 2X4 WALL WITH CCSPF - R24 TYP EXISTING DECK ABOVE UP UP KITCHENKITCHEN DINING ROOMDINING ROOMFAMILY ROOMFAMILY ROOM FOYERFOYER COVERED FRONT'COVERED FRONT' PORCHPORCH CLOSCLOS LANDINGLANDING OFFICEOFFICE (UNOCCUPIABLE)(UNOCCUPIABLE) CLOSCLOS 3 9 4 9 ISSUE DATE MAIN & UPPER SPLIT LEVEL FLOOR PLANS Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 3 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed Main and Upper Split Floor Plan NN 2 2 4 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing Main and Upper Split Floor Plan GRAPHIC SYMBOL LEGENDGRAPHIC SYMBOL LEGEND UPPER ROOF FACE OF STRUCTURE BELOW GUTTER GUTTER DOWN SPOUT ROOF PITCHRISERUN EXISTING TO REMAIN 2 9126121 1261 9 SOLAR READY ZONE - +/-1,600 W 1211213 9 4 9 EXISTING ROLL ASPHALT ROOFING OVER EXISTING ROOF FRAMING ISSUE DATE ROOF PLAN Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 4 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed Roof Plan NN 2 2 4 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing Roof Plan NEW ROOF FRAMING AND ASPHALT SHINGLE FINISH - INSULATE WITH CCSPF (R64) NEW ROOF - EPDM MEMBRANE AT LOW PITCH ROOF TIE NEW ROOF TO EXISTING ROOF FRAMING - FLASH AND SEAL TO PREVENT INFILTRATIONVALLEYVALLEY Main Floor 100' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEFRONTFRONTSETBACKSETBACKREARREARSETBACKSETBACKUpper Split Level 103' - 7" EXISTING SHAKE SHINGLES NEW WALL - MATCH EXISTING FINISH 12 1 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF Low Point - 5437.5 94' - 11" 70'-0" 25'-0"25'-0"20'-8"16'-0"Main Floor 100' - 0" Upper Split Level 103' - 7"5'-11"7'-0"Low Point - 5437.5 94' - 11"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEFRONTFRONTSETBACKSETBACKREARREARSETBACKSETBACK70'-0" 25'-0"25'-0" ISSUE DATE NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 5 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed North Exterior Elevation 2 2 4 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing North Exterior Elevation Main Floor 100' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINENORTH SIDENORTH SIDESETBACKSETBACKNEW ROOF OVERHANG BEYONDSOUTH SIDESOUTH SIDESETBACKSETBACKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEMain Floor 100' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINENORTH SIDENORTH SIDESETBACKSETBACKSOUTH SIDESOUTH SIDESETBACKSETBACKPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEISSUE DATE EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 6224 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed East Exterior Elevation 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing East Exterior Elevation Main Floor 100' - 0"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEFRONTFRONTSETBACKSETBACKREARREARSETBACKSETBACKUpper Split Level 103' - 7" EXISTING SHAKE SHINGLES EXTEND EXISTING WALL - MATCH EXISTING FINISHES 121 ASPHALT SHINGLE ROOF Low Point - 5437.5 94' - 11"20'-8"16'-0"Main Floor 100' - 0" Upper Split Level 103' - 7"5'-11"7'-0"Low Point - 5437.5 94' - 11"PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEFRONTFRONTSETBACKSETBACKREARREARSETBACKSETBACKISSUE DATE SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 7224 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed South Exterior Elevation 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing South Exterior Elevation Second Floor 109' - 8 7/8" Main Floor 100' - 0"SOUTH SIDESOUTH SIDESETBACKSETBACKNORTH SIDENORTH SIDESETBACKSETBACKUpper Split Level 103' - 7" 126126 EXISTING SHAKE SHINGLES NEW WALL - MATCH EXISTING FINISH BULK PLANE PROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINEPROPERTY LINELow Point - 5437.5 94' - 11"29'-4"20'-8"Second Floor 109' - 8 7/8" Main Floor 100' - 0" Upper Split Level 103' - 7" Low Point - 5437.5 94' - 11" BULK PLANE 29'-4"ISSUE DATE WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 8224 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE 1/4" = 1'-0"1Proposed West Exterior Elevation 1/4" = 1'-0"2Existing West Exterior Elevation Lower Split Level 96' - 5" Upper Split Level 103' - 7"5'-11"1'-4"NEW 2 X 10 ROOF FRAMING TO BE INSULATED WITH CCSPF TO R64 EXTEND EXISTING WALL AND INSULATE TO R24 EXISTING 2 X 4 WOOD FRAME WALL TO BE INSULATED TO R24 12 6 12 6FUTURE SOLAR ARRAYEXISTING ROOF FRAMING - REMOVED NEW TRANSOM WINDOWS EXISTING FLOOR EXIISTING STONE FIREPLACE ENCLOSURE AND CHIMNEY TO REMAIN CLOSET7'-3"5'-0"NEW RIDGE BEAM Second Floor 109' - 8 7/8" Lower Split Level 96' - 5" Upper Split Level 103' - 7"7'-9"11'-2"7'-0"5'-3" 4'-11" NEW WALL OF ADDITION TO BE INSULATED TO R24 EXISTING UN-INSULATED WALL TO BE INSULATED TO R24 NEW ROOF FRAMING TO BE INSULATED TO R64 NEW ROOF FRAMING TO BE INSULATED TO R64 OFFICE WORKROOM SLOPED DRYWALL CEILING BEYOND TRANSFER BEAM EXISTING FLOOR Second Floor 109' - 8 7/8" Lower Split Level 96' - 5" Upper Split Level 103' - 7"6'-8"5'-11"1'-2"Lower Split Level 96' - 5" Upper Split Level 103' - 7"6'-0"6'-8"ISSUE DATE CROSS SECTIONS Variance to Revise Roof above portion of Non-standard Building Fred & Lisa Corrado Residence 8/26/2024 9 1/4" = 1'-0"1Section 7 1/4" = 1'-0"2Section 5 1/4" = 1'-0"3Section 5 Existing 1/4" = 1'-0"4Section 7 Existing 2 2 4 6 8 10 1/4" = 1'-0" 0 FEETSCALE Scott Home Inspection LLC 3728 W CR10 Berthoud, CO 80513 www.scotthomeinspection.com 970-532-2424 303-373-2424 1313 7th St Boulder CO 80302 August 22, 2024 Version 1 Both a Baseline HERS report and a Projected HERS report have been prepared, to demonstrate at least a 10% in estimated annual energy use for the home. With the planned improvements, we are showing a 69% reduction. Baseline HERS score on existing home: 378 Baseline estimated annual consumption: 334.8 MBtu Projected HERS score on improved home: 131 Projected estimated annual consumption: 127.5 MBtu This is a 69% reduction in the estimated annual energy consumption. Baseline HERS score on existing structure generated using the following site gathered details: - Uninsulated and unconditioned crawlspace and cellar areas - Uninsulated existing walls throughout. The double brick walls have no insulation, and the 2x4 framed walls have no cavity insulation. - Uninsulated ceiling at the rear 1940’s addition, minimal insulation at the original home’s attic, estimated at R-3 - Most windows are single pane, with the exception of a few windows that have been retrofitted with thin double pane - 80 AFUE existing furnace, no cooling - 0.58 UEF 40 gallon water heater - Air leakage measured at 16.8 ACH50 - Existing appliances - 25% LED lighting Projected HERS score from construction plans generated using the following: - R-19 draped insulation at conditioned crawlspace and cellar - Existing original home double brick and 2x4 upper walls remain uninsulated, with the exception of the rear wall adjacent to attic, which is insulated to R-19 - 2x4 walls at 1940’s addition insulated with R-24 closed cell foam - R-49 at existing attic space - R-64 closed cell foam at raised ceiling at 1940s addition - Most windows replaced, with 0.27 U value avg. The existing older double pane windows are assumed to remain. - 80 AFUE existing furnace to remain - Ductless minisplit for 1940s addition heating and cooling, 10 HSPF2, 17 SEER2 - Existing 0.58 UEF 40 gallon water heater to remain - Improve to 100% LED lighting - All new appliances - Improved air leakage, estimated at 5 ACH50 or lower. This will require significant air sealing efforts throughout the remodel process to achieve. Please review these documents and their information and contact me with any questions you may have Luke Griess, ACI Scott Home Services, LLC 970-532-2424 303-373-2424 luke@ScottHomeInspection.com Baseline HERS Report Scott Home Inspection LLC 3728 W CR10 Berthoud, CO 80513 www.scotthomeinspection.com 970-532-2424 303-373-2424 1313 7th St Boulder CO 80302 August 22, 2024 Version 1 Both a Baseline HERS report and a Projected HERS report have been prepared, to demonstrate at least a 10% in estimated annual energy use for the home. With the planned improvements, we are showing a 69% reduction. Baseline HERS score on existing home: 378 Baseline estimated annual consumption: 334.8 MBtu Projected HERS score on improved home: 131 Projected estimated annual consumption: 127.5 MBtu This is a 69% reduction in the estimated annual energy consumption. Baseline HERS score on existing structure generated using the following site gathered details: - Uninsulated and unconditioned crawlspace and cellar areas - Uninsulated existing walls throughout. The double brick walls have no insulation, and the 2x4 framed walls have no cavity insulation. - Uninsulated ceiling at the rear 1940’s addition, minimal insulation at the original home’s attic, estimated at R-3 - Most windows are single pane, with the exception of a few windows that have been retrofitted with thin double pane - 80 AFUE existing furnace, no cooling - 0.58 UEF 40 gallon water heater - Air leakage measured at 16.8 ACH50 - Existing appliances - 25% LED lighting Projected HERS score from construction plans generated using the following: - R-19 draped insulation at conditioned crawlspace and cellar - Existing original home double brick and 2x4 upper walls remain uninsulated, with the exception of the rear wall adjacent to attic, which is insulated to R-19 - 2x4 walls at 1940’s addition insulated with R-24 closed cell foam - R-49 at existing attic space - R-64 closed cell foam at raised ceiling at 1940s addition - Most windows replaced, with 0.27 U value avg. The existing older double pane windows are assumed to remain. - 80 AFUE existing furnace to remain - Ductless minisplit for 1940s addition heating and cooling, 10 HSPF2, 17 SEER2 - Existing 0.58 UEF 40 gallon water heater to remain - Improve to 100% LED lighting - All new appliances - Improved air leakage, estimated at 5 ACH50 or lower. This will require significant air sealing efforts throughout the remodel process to achieve. Please review these documents and their information and contact me with any questions you may have Luke Griess, ACI Scott Home Services, LLC 970-532-2424 303-373-2424 luke@ScottHomeInspection.com Projected HERS report 1 Kyle Callahan From:City of Boulder <boulder@user.govoutreach.com> Sent:Thursday, February 15, 2024 1:22 PM To:Kyle Callahan Subject:Message About Request # 136428 [6335373061633639] ---If replying by email, enter your reply above this line--- Dear kyle, Hi Kyle- My pleasure and if the prospecƟve property owners are now proposing interior renovaƟons rather than a replacement/expansion, and the exterior walls and roof are to remain as is, then it appears you’d be meeƟng 9-10-3 and would not need to seek a setback variance via BOZA. Just the building permit. And interior work likely won’t tricker Historic review either. By the looks of it, a lot of non-permiƩed “stuff” has occurred in the subject rear addiƟon so bringing all of that up to code or to how the homeowners would want won’t be of issue from a zoning standpoint. Regarding parking, I did a liƩle more digging and chaƩed with Brian and a few folks and it looks like it’s been quite some Ɵme since this property has had recognized parking, let alone conforming parking. If you’re able to verify the rear addiƟon/porƟon to the home was completed pre-1950’s when Boulder’s parking standards were established, I think we can get to where we won’t require parking at Ɵme of building permit given this background and history. And unless the homeowners want off-street parking, dealing with a new curb cut along 7th or parking setback variance won’t be necessary. -Robbie This is in reference to the Problem you submiƩed on: 02/07/2024 10:13 AM DescripƟon: Sorry to be so late, Kevin - I had a packed aŌernoon. I spoke this aŌernoon with Fred about his discussion with you today. I’d like to shed a liƩle light on the proposed alteraƟons and ask if you would help us understand the opportuniƟes and limits. Fred and Lisa are buying the home with the intent to relocate here from back east. To make the home work for their lifestyles and enjoyment, certain alteraƟons are needed. My quesƟons center on code secƟon 9-10-3 of the BRC. The home is located facing 7th, just north of Pleasant. In 2013, Gregory Creek surged downhill about 150’ east of here - cascading through another client’s lot (Nancy Pierce’s, at 711 University). That event gave us all a healthy respect for the extraordinary damage potenƟal caused by extreme events like the flood, but also regard for the more mundane, yet regular onslaught over Ɵme of lesser episodes. The west side addiƟon to the home at 1313 7th was simply built too low and close to grade. This is abundantly clear while standing in the backyard with Fred and Lisa this past week. There’s a preƩy cool brick paver courtyard just south of this addiƟon - Ɵlted maybe 2% down towards the north - towards the home. The effects of water over Ɵme flowing against, and maybe into, the home are made clear by the degradaƟon of the siding that’s about an inch above grade, and the residual sandy deposiƟon adjacent to the foundaƟon. The floor slab directly inside the home is about 30” below this paver paƟo, and the second floor of the addiƟon is about 8’ above the slab. My first inclinaƟon is to raise the lower floor of the addiƟon to a point that is above the adjacent grade - that’s about 36” - 42”. Doing that would significantly reduce the potenƟal for conƟnued damage to the home and exterior finish / 2 sheathing from overlot drainage. That would also necessitate raising the second floor as well - to allow the lower floor space to be occupied - thus the second floor would need to be raised 4’ or more - likely so that the sheathing of the second floor could be used to brace the exisƟng lower floor walls. Then - of course - the roof would follow suit and be raised as well. Suddenly, we’re liŌing the enƟre west side of the house to match the floor elevaƟons of the original home. The scanned sketches aƩached to this email outline this scope. The yellow region on the first page shows the footprint of the home highlighƟng the approximate posiƟon for the home’s encroachment into the rear yard setback. My proposed alteraƟons would result in no addiƟonal coverage (actually, a liƩle less coverage by removing a masonry chimney) and no new floor area. The posiƟon of the home being directly south of the alley likely makes this alteraƟon possible from a solar shading perspecƟve, and judicious treatment of the roof form would allow our managing the bulk plane, too. However, the rear yard setback becomes the pacing consideraƟon, for the addiƟon to the west of the home was built to about 4’ from the west property line. Chapter 9-10-3 of the BRC provides direcƟon relaƟve to altering non-standard homes on Non-standard lots. SecƟon 9- 10-3 (a) (2) in parƟcular addresses maintaining a non-standard setback. SecƟon (A) below indicates that setback can be maintained if one keeps the exisƟng foundaƟon and exterior walls - which would be our intent. SecƟon (3) below this indicates that a variance would need to be granted. These code secƟons seem to allude to our being able to accomplish this scope! However, conƟnuing along in this code secƟon, and this also being a non-standard lot in addiƟon to non- standard house, code secƟon 9-10-3 (b) (4) suggests that a variance would be granted if “(A) the building modificaƟon meets the setback requirements of secƟon 9-7-1....”. My concern here being that we have a non-standard building on a non standard lot. To raise the west porƟon of the house will involve raising the elevaƟon of the structure above it’s exisƟng wall and roof height. The exisƟng lower level exterior walls would be preserved as required by this code secƟon. However, the upper porƟon created by extruding the form verƟcally above the exisƟng first floor walls, would result in the alteraƟon to the walls and roof being posiƟoned within the rear yard setback. If doing so, the code secƟon seems to indicate that a variance would not be granted, as the modificaƟon which results in our extruding the upper level walls and roof would not conform to secƟon 9-7-1 of the BRC. A small snip of this concept is sketched in the lower right of page 3 of the aƩached sketch. There’s a lot riding on the opportunity for the Corrado family being able to raise the west side of the home with it remaining in the rear yard setback. To be prevented from this would result in the need to create an enƟrely new addiƟon south of the exisƟng home. That is a configuraƟon that Fred and Lisa would not want as it would eradicate a significant porƟon of the south yard - one of the more endearing aspects of the home. The Ɵmeline to understand this opportunity is brief - The Corrado family has made an offer to purchase the home which has been accepted. We recognize that it would not be possible to design and apply for and approve a variance in this short Ɵme frame. However, we ask that perhaps you would share this conceptual plan and narraƟve with a planner possessing extensive experience in maƩers of non-standard home alteraƟons. Perhaps Brian Holmes? I have great respect for your and Brian’s histories in these kinds of consideraƟons, and your deep com prehension of subtly nuanced projects. I would be available for a call, an online team meeƟng, or, dare I say it, an actual face to face site visit (?) if that would be possible. Thanks for your help, Kevin - I look forward to working with you to determine a path forward, and to a good project and a fantasƟc new family moving here. K Clearwater Design Studio - Architecture Kyle Callahan (He/him/his) Founder, Architect You may reply to this email to send a response or you can view this request online at: <hƩp://user.govoutreach.com/boulder/case.php?id=7445627&access=6335373061633639> Thank you for your Ɵme. 3 From:Thomas Krueger To:BOZA Subject:docket #BOZ2024-00011 (1313 7th St.) Date:Monday, September 30, 2024 6:34:57 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Board Members and Staff: We are residents of 655 Pleasant St, and we share a portion of our east property line with the west property line of 1313 7th St. We are enthusiastically in support of the variance request submitted by Fred and Lisa Corrado. The house and a structurally suspect addition significantly predate current zoning requirements. The previous owner was on the property for many years, and chose to defer a lot of maintenance. When the house went on the market, we were concerned that, as so frequently happens in Boulder, the structure would be razed or used as a student or short-term rental. So we were pleased to learn that the Corrados are willing to make this their home and have embarked on an extensive home improvement project. The variance request is the minimum required to provide structural integrity and improve energy efficiency as part of that project. We enthusiastically recommend board approval of the variance request. Thomas Krueger Sheila Goetz Revised October 2023 1 City of Boulder Planning and Development Services 1101 Arapahoe Avenue • Boulder, CO 80306 Phone: 303-441-1880 • Web: boulderplandevelop.net BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT (BOZA) VARIANCE APPLICATION FORM APPLICATION DEADLINE IS THE SECOND MONDAY OF EACH MONTH. MEETING DATE IS 4PM (MST) ON THE SECOND TUESDAY OF THE FOLLOWING MONTH. *Submittal of inaccurate or incomplete information and materials may result in rejection or delay of the application.* GENERAL DATA (To be completed in full by the applicant.) • Street Address or General Location of Property: • Legal Description: Lot Block Subdivision (Or attach description.) • Lot Size: • Existing Use of Property: • Detailed Description of Proposal (Specific Variance[s] Requested Including All Pertinent Numerical . Values (e.g.: Existing, Required and Proposed Setbacks for the Subject Setback Variance): *Total gross floor area existing: *Total gross floor area proposed: *Total gross building coverage existing: *Total gross building coverage proposed: *Building height existing: *Building height proposed: *See definitions in Section 9-16-1, B.R.C. 1981. ♦ Name of Owner: • Address: Telephone: • City: State: Zip Code: Email: ♦ Name of Contact (if other than owner): • Address: Telephone: • City: State: Zip Code: Email: 2715 Elm Avenue, Boulder, Colorado, 80305 12 4 Highland Park 6,300 sf Single Family Residence Convert existing storage room to interior finished space while keeping the lot configured as is, with off-street located partly within the front yard setback 2,107 SF 2,107 SF 1,600 SF 1,600 SF 22'-6"22'-6" (no change proposed) Kyle Luh 2715 Elm Ave Boulder Colorado 80305 kyleluh@gmail.com Kyle Callahan - Clearwater Design Studio 2975 Valmont Road, suite 100 303-545-2007 Boulder Colorado 80301 kyle@clearwaterdesignstudio.com 2 APPLICATION TYPES (Check All That Apply For This Application)  Setback (BRC 9-7-1)  Porch Setback & Size (BRC 9-7-4)  Building Separation (BRC 9-7-1)  Bulk Plane (BRC 9-7-9)  Side Yard Wall Articulation (BRC 9-7-10)  Building Coverage (BRC 9-7-11 or BRC 9-10)  Floor Area Ratio (BRC 9-8-2)  Parking in Front Yard Landscape Setback (BRC 9-7-1 & 9-9-6)  Size and Parking Setback Requirements for Accessory Units (BRC 9-6-4)  Cumulative Accessory Building Coverage (BRC 9-7-8)  Mobile Home Spacing Variance (BRC 9-7-13)  Use of Mobile Homes for Non-Residential Purposes (BRC 10-12-6)  Solar Exception (BRC 9-9-17)  Sign Variance (BRC 9-9-21)  Fence and Wall Variance (BRC 9-9-15) 3 APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS All variance applications are electronic submittal and review. Visit the Planning & Development Services Online Center for additional information & guidance on the application process and how to apply. As a minimum, the following items MUST ultimately be provided for an application to be considered complete:  A completed and signed BOZA Application Form;  If the applicant is other than owner(s), a written consent of the owner(s) of the property for which the variance is requested;  A detailed written statement thoroughly describing the variance request(s) and addressing all pertinent review criteria for approval – see BOZA Info & Criteria Guide;  A signed and stamped Improvement Location Certificate or Site Improvement Survey and legal description by a registered surveyor;  A site development plan including setbacks, building elevations, interior layout/floor plans and any other pertinent exhibits;  A demolition plan clearly differentiating between existing/remaining and proposed portions of the structure(s);  Any other information pertinent to the variance request (e.g. neighbor letters, photos, historic records/approvals, renderings, etc.);  A completed and signed ‘Sign Posting Acknowledgement Form’ Note: The applicant is responsible for posting the property in compliance with city requirements. Obtaining sign(s) will be messaged to an applicant once it has been placed on an agenda. The applicant will be responsible for posting the required sign(s) within 10 days of the hearing date. Failure to post the required sign(s) may result in the postponement of the hearing date.  A Board of Zoning Adjustment application fee (as prescribed in the current ‘Schedule of Fees’ which can be found at bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop). NOTE: SEE SECTION 9-2-3(l), B.R.C. 1981 FOR VARIANCE EXPIRATION INFORMATION Applicant Signature ______________________________________Date__________ Owner (if other than Applicant) Signature _________________________Date__________ SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENTS APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM Required for Certain Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical Document Review, and Board of Zoning Adjustment Applications I, , am filing a Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical for the property (PRINT PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION) and agree to the following: 1. I understand that I must use the sign(s) that the city will provide to me at the time that I file my application. The sign(s) will include information about my application and property location to provide required public notice. 2. I am responsible for ensuring that the sign(s) is posted on the property described above in such a way that meets the requirements of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981 (listed above), including visibility of the sign(s) and time and duration of the sign(s) posting, and including reposting any signs that are removed, damaged, or otherwise displaced from the site. As necessary, I shall obtain a replacement sign(s) from the city for reposting. 3. I understand that certain future changes to my application, including but not limited to, changes to the project description or adding a review type, may require that I post a new sign(s). The city will notify me if such a reposting is required and provide me with a necessary replacement sign(s). 4. I understand that failing to provide the public notice by sign posting required by the city’s land use regulation may result in a delay in the city’s issuing a decision or a legal challenge of any issued decision. NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON DATE Please keep a copy of this signed form for your reference. If you have any questions about the sign posting requirements or to obtain a replacement sign, please call 303-441-1880. CITY CODE REQUIREMENT FOR SIGN POSTING OF LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATIONS - Excerpt of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981: Public Notice of Application: The city manager will provide the following public notice of a development review application: (1) Posting: After receiving such application, the manager will cause the property for which the application is filed to be posted with a notice indicating that a development review application has been made, the type of review requested, and that interested persons may obtain more detailed information from the planning department. The notice shall meet the following standards: (A) The notice shall be place on weatherproof signs that have been provided by the City and placed on the property that is the subject of the application. (B) All such notice shall be posted no later than ten days after the date the application is filed to ensure that notice is posted early in the development review process. (C) The signs shall be placed along each abutting street, perpendicular to the direction of travel, in a manner that makes them clearly visible to neighboring residents and passers-by. At least one sign shall be posted on each street frontage. (D) The signs shall remain in place during the period leading up to a decision by the approving authority, but not less than ten days. (E) On or before the date that the approving authority is scheduled to make a decision on the application the city manager will require the applicant to certify in writing that required notice was posted according to the requirements of this section. (PRINT NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON) Document Review, or BOZA application [on behalf of] located at (PRINT NAME OF OWNER(S) IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT/CONTACT) . I have read the city's sign posting requirements above and acknowledge August 8th, 2024 I, Kyle Luh, owner of the property at 2715 Elm Ave., consent to Kyle Callahan of Clearwater Design Studios being the applicant for the Board of Zoning Adjustment variance application. Signature (Owner) C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o . A r c h i t e c t u r e 2 9 7 5 V a l m o n t R o a d , B o u l d e r , C o l o r a d o 8 0 3 0 1 303.545.2 0 0 7 Architecture Planning Interiors Landscape Design C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o A R C H I T E C T U R E Variance Narrative - 2715 Elm Avenue Proposal to Create a Level 2 Alteration to an existing residence while continuing to maintain the existing non conforming parking in the required front yard setback Variance required The homeowners of 2715 Elm Avenue seek relief from the requirements of Boulder Revised code section 9-9-6 Parking Standards. A proposed Level 2 Alteration will convert existing unconditioned exterior enclosed storage space to interior enclosed finished space. The project will cause existing off-street parking in the front yard setback to continue. Project Background The home at 2715 Elm Avenue was initially constructed in 1952. Given the configuration of both adjacent residences located to the east and west of the home, we believe that the home was built with an enclosed garage located on the southeast corner of the home. The images below show 2705 and 2715 Elm Avenue respectively: Page 2 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o We have not discovered a permit that would suggest when the existing garage was converted from a garage to a storage room, accessible from both the interior of the home and from the existing driveway. We do have a copy of the appraisal card provided by the Boulder County Assessor that shows the garage as being there when the home was built, and other evidence that suggests it had been converted to a shed prior to February of 2001. Proposed Alterations The homeowners live in the home and have a young 3-year-old daughter in their 2-bedroom residence. They can see the value of converting the existing storage space to a finished interior bedroom, thus creating a 3-bedroom home from the 2-bedroom home. To convert the existing unfinished storage space to interior finished bedroom space, the following scope of work is required: Remove the existing exterior door accessing the shed. Add several windows on the east and south exterior walls. Build an insulated floor. Insulate and finish the interior face of the walls and roof of the shed. Install limited electrical outlets and lighting services and provide a heat source. Construct a closet. The scope of work for the level 2 alteration is shown below, highlighted in red shading Page 3 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Off Street Parking There are no construction parameters associated with the proposed alteration that run counter to City of Boulder Building regulations. The existing home conforms to maximum floor area, coverage and bulk plane regulations. The proposed alteration will be made to conform to building construction regulations and the City of Boulder Energy Conservation Code – prescriptive guidelines. However, the City of Boulder requires a minimum of one 19’ x 9’ off-street parking space for homes located in the RL-1 zone district. That parking is prohibited from being located within the required front yard setback, which cannot be accommodated due to the position of the existing home. As such, we have prepared this variance and supporting documentation to show the intended construction to take place at the home and to seek relief from the location of the off-street parking requirement from the BOZA. 1. As currently configured, there is no off-street parking associated with this lot outside the front yard setback. The homeowners park their vehicle in the existing concrete driveway in front of the home on the southeast side of the building. 2. In that location, due to the building position relative to the front property line being 32’-8 ½” north, the required 19’ deep parking space projects 11’-3 ½” into the required setback (7’-8 ½” of the required parking space is compliant with regulations). 3. The front yard setback at the required parking space is 13’-8 ½”, where 25’ is required. The off-street parking space is shown below in gray shading: Page 4 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Out of sequence construction The homeowners, in their hopeful anticipation to make the proposed improvements to their home, began the construction work in advance of applying for and receiving a building permit. In addition to the interior changes proposed, they also began construction on a new exterior storage addition attached to the east side of their home. That addition is now planned for demolition/removal, as it projects east to approximately 1’-0” from the east property line where the required side yard setback on that side is 6’-2”. The scope of work for the demolition is shown below, highlighted in green shading: Page 5 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Variance Review Criteria With the new non-compliant storage addition on the east being removed from the project, then the proposed construction will have no effect on the level of non-compliance with current zoning codes. As it has existed for an undetermined period of time, and since well before the current homeowners purchased the home, parking has been relegated to the existing driveway on the southeast corner of the home. As shown by the image below, there’s a swing door in the position where the overhead garage door once existed. The black sedan is parked on the concrete driveway in the position of the current paved off-street parking. The proposed construction project proposes to remove this door and replace it with an egress window. Per BOZA variance criteria, we are to satisfy the requirements of Variances for Parking Spaces in Front Yard Setbacks, (1) – (7). Variance Requirement 1 – The Dwelling Unit was built in a RR-1, RR-2, RE, or RL-1 zone District The zone district in which this home is situated is RL-1. Variance Requirement 2 – The Dwelling Unit originally had an attached carport or garage that met the off-street parking requirements at the time of initial development or, at the time of initial construction, an off-street parking space was not required and has not been provided. Please see the image below from a copy of an old appraisal record. The appraisal record is included with the variance submission as a separate document. The image shows the garage door on the right side of the home. The address of “2715 Elm” is shown in the foreground. Page 6 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o The following image is from the same assessor record, showing the building in plan in sketch form, with the letter “G” on the plan – identifying the 10 x 19 appendage as the garage. The Garage use is also checked on the left side of the appraisal card: Page 7 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Variance Requirement 3 – The garage or carport was converted to living space prior to January 1, 2005. The timeframe for the conversion of the garage space to interior enclosed space is not known. We have looked through the property information available with both the City of Boulder and Boulder County. We have found no permit records that indicate when this may have been completed. We suspect that the garage was converted to a storage space without the benefit of a Building Permit. We’ve researched the aerial photos back in time through 2008. During all of the overflights, the images recorded for this site include a vehicle parked in the driveway in front of the garage. We have researched Google images, which extends back to August of 2008. At that time, there was no garage in this location – a single swing door had already been installed at this time as can be seen in the image below: We were fortunate to obtain several records of transfer from the Boulder County assessor. The image below of a document dated 02/23/2001 shows no garage included onsite. Thus we conclude that the garage had been removed prior to this document being issued on February 23 of 2001, without the benefit of a building permit: Page 8 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Variance Requirement 4 – The current property owner was not responsible for the conversion of the parking space to living area and can provide evidence as such. The current homeowners purchased the home in 2023 with this garage conversion already having taken place and are not responsible for converting the garage to storage. That being considered, the current homeowner had chosen to go forward with a conversion of the existing storage space to interior finished bedroom space. That project is underway at this time, and currently has a hold tag / stop work order, issued 6/04/2024 (ENF2024 – 00453). Variance Requirement 5 – A parking space in compliance with the parking regulations of section 9-6-6 cannot reasonably be provided anywhere on the site due to the location of existing buildings, lack of alley access, or other unusual physical conditions. Please consider the included ILC, the front yard setback distance. At 29.9’ and 32.7’ distant from the front yard property line, the home is positioned too close to the front property line to allow for a compliant 9’ wide x 19’ deep parking space parking space to be positioned south of the home between the house and the south property setback line (25’ from the property line). Please consider the included ILC, the side yard setback distances Page 9 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o At 7.7’ east or 8.8’ west distant from the side yard property lines, the home is positioned too close to the side property lines to allow for a compliant 9’ wide parking space parking space to be positioned between the house and the side property lines. Please consider the aerial image below showing the subject parcel outlined in green, and the parking for the apartment building development north of the subject property. There is no alley access to this home, and the development north of the site is positioned immediately adjacent to this site. Please consider the aerial image below showing the subject parcel outlined in green, and the highlighted topographic lines between the parking for the apartment building development and the subject parcel. The parking lot appears to be approximately 4’ in elevation below the subject parcel. Page 10 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o Variance Requirement 6 – Restoring the original garage or carport to a parking space would result in significant economic hardship when comparing the cost of restoration to the cost of other proposed improvements on the site. Returning the existing enclosed storage room to a garage is economically infeasible. This is a small, 2 bedroom home for a young and growing family. The family needs space to accommodate the current and future children with acceptable sleeping and living space. To return the storage room to a garage would include some demolition of long-existing construction, and then the construction of a new bedroom and living space elsewhere on the site. Simply considering the current plan, a bedroom could be sized approximately 212 SF. The following is the general cost estimate, using City of Boulder standard valuation and other means of estimation: Garage conversion $ 5,300 Build new bedroom $ 35,400 Engineering and permits $ 15,000 Total $ 55,700 This would provide a garage and a bedroom for the homeowner’s expanding family, whereas the simple conversion of the existing storage room to a bedroom space be as follows: Garage conversion $ 5,300 Build new bedroom $ 0 Engineering and permits $ 5,000 Total $ 10,300 Page 11 C l e a r w a t e r D e s i g n S t u d i o The conversion of the storage space to a bedroom space is 82% more cost effective than building anew and is within the homeowner’s budget. Variance Requirement 7 – The proposed parking space t be located within the front yard setback space shall be paved, shall comply with section 9-9-5 “Site Access Control”, shall not be less than 9’ in width or more than 16’ in width, and shall not be less than 19’ in length. No parking space shall encroach into the public right of way or obstruct a public sidewalk. The proposed parking space is situated on the existing driveway which is paved. Section 9-9-5 (c) 1) Only one property access point is existing and only 1 is proposed 2) N/A – Elm Ave is a local street 3) N/A – Elm Ave is a local street 4) Only one frontage is available to this site – there is no alley, it is surrounded by developed parcels. 5) There is one existing and appropriate site access point 6) N/A only one access point is existing or proposed 7) N/A – a shared driveway not required – the lot fronts onto Elm Ave. 8) The existing driveway is 10’ wide The existing driveway is nearly 10’ wide and uniform in width from the house to the road, which falls between the minimum and maximum widths of 9’ – 16’. The distance from the face of the home to the property line is roughly 32’-8”, which will accommodate the proposed parking space that is 19’ in length. This defined parking area will not encroach upon the street ROW or the attached sidewalk which are both greater than 32’ – 8” from the face of the house (please refer to the ILC). As shown by the included site plan, and by the partial site plan on page 3 of this narrative, the parking is situated well, out of the ROW, and the projection of the parking into the required front yard setback is minimized to approximately 11’-4”. Issue Date Sheet Content 2715 Elm Ave Interior remodeling and space conversion Luh Residence 08/24/2024 2975 Valmont Road, Suite 100 Boulder, Colorado 80301 o 303.545.2007 m 303-956-1443 kyle@ClearwaterDesignStudio.com C .........D HsLJQ s WXGLR Sheet Number Issue Date Sheet Content 2715 Elm Ave Interior remodeling and space conversion Luh Residence 08/24/2024 2975 Valmont Road, Suite 100 Boulder, Colorado 80301 o 303.545.2007 m 303-956-1443 kyle@ClearwaterDesignStudio.com C .........D HsLJQ s WXGLR Sheet Number Issue Date Sheet Content 2715 Elm Ave Interior remodeling and space conversion Luh Residence 08/24/2024 2975 Valmont Road, Suite 100 Boulder, Colorado 80301 o 303.545.2007 m 303-956-1443 kyle@ClearwaterDesignStudio.com C .........D HsLJQ s WXGLR Sheet Number Issue Date Sheet Content 2715 Elm Ave Interior remodeling and space conversion Luh Residence 08/24/2024 2975 Valmont Road, Suite 100 Boulder, Colorado 80301 o 303.545.2007 m 303-956-1443 kyle@ClearwaterDesignStudio.com C .........D HsLJQ s WXGLR Sheet Number S T R 05 1S 70 SKETCH AREA TABLE ADDENDUM I D 0001881 PROP ADDRESS 2715 ELM AVENUE iu CITY BOULDER County BOULDER STATE CO ZIP is m N LEGAL LOT 12 BLOCK4 HIGHLAND PARK APPRAISER PATRICIA ROBERTS DEPARTMENT RESIDENTIAL OFFICE BOULDER COUNTY ASSESSOR APPR ADDRESS P O BOX 471 BOULDER CO 80306 oH 001I ciz w O0a2 Area of 1987 Addition 19 19 19 24 9 21 19 2hdFJor 21 24 1st Floor 22 10 9 12 Shed 10 19 l0 33 Scale 1 20 C0z0tiQJ a u Qwaa AREA CALCULATIONS SUMMARY Cods Descdphen Factor Sim Perimeter Totals NOTES REDRAWN USING ORIGINAL PRC AREA 12RSIarat Floor 1 00 1173 172 AREA UPPEBacoad Floor 1 00 301 80 SHED Shed 1 00 190 58 TOTAL LIVABLE rounded 1173 381 190 1554 APPRAISER DATE OF VISIT PFR 10 28 02 Date Drain CountyAssessorB APEX SourW RE maaeswaa i n oo Apm 51 Elem MARTIN PAR SrHi FAIRVIEW 211050 RES SOLD Area 1 SA 10 Ad Lgl Su Ma 02 23 01 14 53 Pr 225 000 Range Pr 715 ELM T LOT 12 BLOCK 4 d HIGHLAND PARK B Page 18 Sec on G Cnty BOULDER TaxIDx B Parclx L PINx W 0001891 Locale BOULDER Zip Code 80303 3331 Taxes 1 173 98 IR LoanBal 0 Pymnt CashAssume 220 500 LnTrm Yrs Water BOULDER Elec PSC Gas PSC Middle BASELINE Assoc Fee 0 Sch Dist BLDR VALLEY DIST RE2 Assc Xfer N Reserve N Total SqFt 1777 TotFinlnclBsmt 1777 FinExclBsmt 1777 BsmtSqFt LowerLevel 204 Main Level 1388 Upper Level 388 Addl Upper 0 STR 051570 Water Meter Y Water Rights N Waterfront N Zoning RES Approx L ze Approx Acr Well Permit No Garage 0 arage Type N Landsize 25 Acre Year Built 1952 New N Builder Est Comp Dt Baths B L M U Adl Tot Full 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 0 0 1 1 0 2 Rooms L F L F L F LR 19 X 11 M W DR 12 X 12 M C Kt 11 X 08 M V GR 00 X 00 FR 19 X 18 M 0 RR 00 X 00 Lu 05 X 04 M V MB 14 X 09 U C 2B X 3B X 4B X 5B X SO 11 X 07 U C To BR 2 All Beds Conform Y RI MSTR BDRM WAS REMODELED CREATING A 13 6X9 11 67X9 3 ROOM IF 3 OR 4 BDRMS NEEDED COULD EASILY BE DONE ADDITION BUILT IN 87 CREATES 2ND MSTR SUITE NEW ROOF IN 96 NEW VINYL SIDING IN 94 WAT FEATURE IN PRIVATE BACKYARD MATURE TREES OPEN SPACIOUS ROOMS 9X10 NFIN STORAGE PLEASE PICK UP LEAD BASE PAINT SELLER S PROPERTY DISCLOSSRES OSING INSTRUCTIONS AT HOUSE a cf 25 Acre Ranch Compos Roof Crawl Space Cable TV Avl South Exposr City Sewer Window Cover Washer Dryer Wood Windows Fire Alarm Deck Part Fenced Cash Conventional HyrdW in500 City Street Minimum C 1 Ph Mp Rend Two Story Forced Air Dbl Pane Win Elec Rng Ovn Eat in Kitch Wash Dry Hks Privte Owner FHA LegalDesAvl Frame Natural Gas Set Bk Therm Dishwasher Sep DiningRm Wood Floors Owner Occup VA PropDisclYes Vinyl Siding Electric City Water Refrigerator Open Flr Pln 3 4 MstrBath Deliv of Ded Single Famly LeadPaintDis LA email LA 486550 LO BOUL Fld Min C BRUREMAX @RMI NET LO Fax 303 449 8554 BRUCE HAYES 303 444 6661 SubAg 0 00 ByAg 2 80 RE MAX OF BOULDER 303 449 7000 TrnBr 2 80 LC R BE N PropDisc PrpDscl Open House Date Time Pend Date 09 24 1999 Terms CONV FIX Points Paid by Seller 0 DOM 43 Close Date 10 29 1999 Oth Consid Seller 0 Pts Pd Buyer 0 SP 220 500 SA 897871 GEOFF LUNN 303 938 1019 Misc SO MOCK MOCK REALTY COMPANY 303 494 4250 Prepared by Cindy Domenico Birgen on February 23 2001 Fom 00 Vea I 7 i RFSIfFNTIAI PRnDFRTV APPRAISAL RECORD 70 2286 0001891 0014 1 1577 05 2 02 012 12F 1 AB SCHEDULE NO 6 g9 DAF TAX AREA LOT 12 BLK 4 BO HIGHLAND PK SEC iSEC MAP NO r DIST 2715 ELM AV BO BUSTAMANTE PAULINE IAF 2715 ELM AVENUE 106 0000 00000 AGE BOULDER CO 80302 HAITYPEINSTR HABDOCFEE t I ii r I I781570288044505233960014833 79 1570 2610 4180 5233 8700 13933 00 00 107777 06 74 25500 1 112 1217 MAR 1978 LAND ATTRIBUTES SUBJECT PROPERTY APPRAISER S INTERVIEW AND VALUE ESTIMATE INCOME APPROACH WAADATE WABAPPRAISER CONFIRMEDSALE PRICE IAAOCCUPANCY OWNER TENANT IABMONTHLYRENT IACFURNISHEDUNFURNISHED IAD EST ECONOMIC RENT UNFUR WAE EST PROPERTYVALUE DATE GROSS RENTMULTIPLIER ECONOMICRENT DATA REFERENCE INDICATEDVALUEDAHZONING JAA USE IMPROVEMENTS JBA Paved Street Yr J88 Graveled Street JBC JBD Unimproved Sidewalk JAB LAND CLASS LAND VALUE CALCULATION APPROACH USED CORRELATION FOR ACTUAL VALUE DETERMINATIONJBECurbaGutterv DATE SACCODE GADSIZE BASEUNIT ADJUSTMENT FACTORS BASE UNITVALUE TOTAL LANDVALUEJBFStreetLightsi SIZE SHAPE LOCATION OTHER COMPOSITE WBADATE WBBAPPROACHUSED WBFACTUALVALUE LAND IMPSRATIO WBCDETERMINED BY JBG Alley UTILITIES JCA JCB Public Water Well Water JCC Public Sewer JCD Septic System COST APPROACHJCENaturalGas JCF Electricity DATE TOTAL R C N L D COST FACTORS ADJUSTED R C N L D ADD LAND INDICATEDVALUE ACTUAL VALUE ASSESSED VALUETOPOGRAPHYAREATIME JDA Level L FACYEAR GABLAND FABIMPS TOTAL LAND IMPS TOTAL ENTEREDBY JDB High 19 7g y egoJDCSteep 19JDDLow JDE Sloping 19 JDF Hilly MARKET APPROACH COMPARABLE SALES 19JDGRock JDH Retaining Wall SALESREFERENCE DATEOFSALE PRICE PAIDR E ONLY TIMEADJ LOCATIONADJ PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OTHER ADJUSTMENTS INDICATEDVALUE 19 JEA SHAPE ETC Representative s 19 JEB Irregular 19 JEC Cul De Sac JED Corner Reviewed b JEE View DateJEF Non St Front C F HOECKEL CO DENVER BUILDING DESCRIPTION AND REPLACEMENT COST RECORD RESIDENTIAL Az cARD OF AA TYPE NO AV APPRAISED BY AW DATE Scale AX Dote MANDESIGJ Computed byCOSTTABLEREFERENCES AB FIRST STORY AC BASEMENT Fun AD ABOVE FIRST MEI F lici Pt N r M Ffl Pitch FlatE M FR YEAR BUILT 4M 1 QP 9I ry Y a l AY Reviewed by ADJUSTED YEAR AO ROOMS AP BEDROOMS FIRST FLOOR Z 19 AO BATHS r AE CARPORT 11112113 FIRST FLOOR FIN AREA 2 13 JO Yr d T F x AF CARPORT ROOF ABOVE FIRST FIN AREA G 0 xBASEMENTFINAREA TOTAL FINISHED AREA D tti d1AGGARAGEl 1 13I x AH GARAGE WALL Al Att 4Det U R C N SQ FT FIN AREA 77 4 L1 BA TOTAL RC N Le SQ FT FIN AREA E SECOND FLOOR AND ABOVE xEFOUNDATIONAPPLIANCESANDMECHANICAL197z19 A Concrete K APPLIANCES P NO UNIT COST COST xBBlockACookingTop xC Stone B Wall Oven it 1111 O r BB TOTAL I m10BrickCDropinRangewOven E Piers D Hood Standard AO 111 1121131 HALF STORY FIN ATTIC ot eh F Mud Sills E Hood Custom Str x F Hood Custom Con F EXTERIOR W G Electronic Oven xAFrWdorShHElectric8B O BC TOTAL I t 1BCFrAsbestosFr Stucco 4 1 J Double Oven Central Vacuum AK 1111121131 PARTIAL BSMT UNPIN x D Brick Veneer K Intercom AM FM E BIk Pointed L Intercom AM F Blk Stucco M Intercom Remote Sta WAWA BI L BD TOTAL IDHLog erk PLUMBING Metal A Base r WA TOTAL BASE COST SittimoN B 3 Fixture Bath 111 QUALITY ADJUSTMENTSitftC3 4 Bath ADJUSTED BASE COSTD 2 Fixture Both G WINDOWS E Lavatory 111111 AL 111112113I FINISHED BASEMENT F Waterr Closet G Bath Tub Z OTHER ITEMS EST R C N xHROOF8RFNGHRomanTubAFireplaceBETOTALAFlatIStollShower B Yard Improvements8CShedGobleJKStollShowerwDoorKitchenSink APPLIANCES d MECHANICALC DOLLAR ADJUSTMENTS Area UnitDHipL Water Heater D E Gambrel M Laundr Tro E N Stn Moss Rock CPLienNDisosalMKW wil 0 Dishwasher Z Framing Adj PQ 1 3RI3 Fixture Bath TOTAL OTHER ITEMS RoofingObc Or liiix Separate Stock REMARKS Concrete Slab13ejRSlidinTubEncl 4 Y4 i e 1 1 CI cx e e only 11j 3 Ca i r J l 1M r1t S Woter Softener Carpet E14 l 0 T Sauna Bath M Aloe U Bidet AM 11 12 13 PORCHES ETCZ x Area Unit I NTERIOR FIN M HEATING 8 COOLING SQ FT UNI A Unfinished A Forced Air 29 1749 8 Plastered B Gravity C Drywall C Hot Wtr or Steam xDWallboardDBsmtHot Wtr Heat XEPlywoodEElectric F Hardwood Pan F Wall or Floor QUALITY ADJUSTMENT DEPRECIATION CARPORT G AirCond In Ht DuctsDucts At Time of Construction Year of Appraisal 19 19 BF x J FLOORS 9 FLR Air Cond w Own Ducts DesignCAMaximum 2 By 8F xAWoodJoistsEvaporativeCoolersDAYearBuiltGARAGEBSubfloorNOUNITExteriorCBMaximum3X1DCYear Remodeled MG x 76 EI qSoftwoodFIN J Electronic Air Cleaners DC RemodeledDHardwoodFlrHumidifiersInferiorCCMaximumil 8G xODAdjustedYearBuiltEResilientFIrgIElectWallHt750W OTHER ITEMSCOlNETVARIANCEIFromType Normal GoodF Ceramic Tile Elect Wall Ht 1500W OE Condition For Age9 REPLACEMENT COST NEWtoaeSt0AtticEx Fan w Timer MM 100 DF Functional Obsolescence 8 q Ft LBThru COrpei Wall Air Cond ADJUSTED GOOD 96TOTALQUALITY ADJUSTMENT DG Economic Obsolescence TOTAL R C N L D 9146 91ADJUSTEDGOODSqFtTOTALAPPLIANCESMECHANICAL7S SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENTS APPLICANT’S ACKNOWLEDGMENT FORM Required for Certain Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical Document Review, and Board of Zoning Adjustment Applications I, , am filing a Land Use Review, Administrative Review, Technical for the property (PRINT PROPERTY ADDRESS OR LOCATION) and agree to the following: 1. I understand that I must use the sign(s) that the city will provide to me at the time that I file my application. The sign(s) will include information about my application and property location to provide required public notice. 2. I am responsible for ensuring that the sign(s) is posted on the property described above in such a way that meets the requirements of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981 (listed above), including visibility of the sign(s) and time and duration of the sign(s) posting, and including reposting any signs that are removed, damaged, or otherwise displaced from the site. As necessary, I shall obtain a replacement sign(s) from the city for reposting. 3. I understand that certain future changes to my application, including but not limited to, changes to the project description or adding a review type, may require that I post a new sign(s). The city will notify me if such a reposting is required and provide me with a necessary replacement sign(s). 4. I understand that failing to provide the public notice by sign posting required by the city’s land use regulation may result in a delay in the city’s issuing a decision or a legal challenge of any issued decision. NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON DATE Please keep a copy of this signed form for your reference. If you have any questions about the sign posting requirements or to obtain a replacement sign, please call 303-441-1880. CITY CODE REQUIREMENT FOR SIGN POSTING OF LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATIONS - Excerpt of Section 9-4-3(c), B.R.C. 1981: Public Notice of Application: The city manager will provide the following public notice of a development review application: (1) Posting: After receiving such application, the manager will cause the property for which the application is filed to be posted with a notice indicating that a development review application has been made, the type of review requested, and that interested persons may obtain more detailed information from the planning department. The notice shall meet the following standards: (A) The notice shall be place on weatherproof signs that have been provided by the City and placed on the property that is the subject of the application. (B) All such notice shall be posted no later than ten days after the date the application is filed to ensure that notice is posted early in the development review process. (C) The signs shall be placed along each abutting street, perpendicular to the direction of travel, in a manner that makes them clearly visible to neighboring residents and passers-by. At least one sign shall be posted on each street frontage. (D) The signs shall remain in place during the period leading up to a decision by the approving authority, but not less than ten days. (E) On or before the date that the approving authority is scheduled to make a decision on the application the city manager will require the applicant to certify in writing that required notice was posted according to the requirements of this section. (PRINT NAME OF APPLICANT OR CONTACT PERSON) Document Review, or BOZA application [on behalf of] located at (PRINT NAME OF OWNER(S) IF OTHER THAN APPLICANT/CONTACT) . I have read the city's sign posting requirements above and acknowledge HumaNature ARCHITECTURE, LLC Honoring and Integrating Human and Nature through Sustainable Design 9 September 2024 BOZA Zoning Variance Request Street Address: 435 Dewey Ave., Boulder, CO 80304 Legal Description: West 40’ of Lots 1, 2, 3 & 4 and 10’ strip of land being a vacated alley west of Lots 1, 2, 3, & 4, and a 10’ strip of land North of Lot 1, Block 3, Mountain Heights Subdivision Existing Use - Single Family Residence Proposal: An existing small, one story home with an attic had a small ﬁre within it. It did not burn through the exterior envelope anywhere, but the entire interior was smoke damaged. Deconstruction of all interior ﬁnishes has been completed under a separate deconstruction permit. The existing northern portion of the home - a grade level space lower than the main ﬂoor, with a shed roof - is where the ﬁre occurred. Some of the roof rafters, and some of the exterior ﬁnishes were burned, so this element’s roof and walls will be deconstructed. The ﬁnished ﬂoor of that space was located right at grade, and the exterior patio directly outside of it slopes toward the home, so this ﬂoor level needs to be raised. The owner loves living in Boulder, and wants to live out her life in this home where she has been since 1990. She would like to replace the existing space that will be deconstructed, and add an art studio above it. Proposed scope of work is to deconstruct the existing northern portion of the structure, and replace it with a new addition that will have a 250 s.f. larger footprint than the existing space, and the ﬂoor level will be raised by approximately 1’. Also, a new studio space is proposed on the ﬂoor above. The existing stairs from the basement to the grade-level space, which are not code compliant, will be rebuilt to reach the new level, and the existing stairs from the grade-level space to the main ﬂoor, which are also not code-compliant, will be replaced from the new level to the main ﬂoor. A new stair, from the new addition level to the upper level studio, will be constructed. Since the existing stairs are on the West of the structure, and cannot be moved due to the layout of the basement that includes unexcavated portions, the new stairs will be located in the same area, on the West side, so as to minimize circulation space. Also, all existing windows and doors will be replaced with higher performing elements. Setback variance being requested: On the West side of the structure, the existing setback is 2.2’ at the North end of the structure where the deconstruction and new construction will be located. The new addition’s West wall will be in the same location as the existing West wall, and the new space will extend 6’ further to the North than the existing North wall. The new East wall will be moved to align with the main structure’s East wall. The replacement structure would require relief from the 5’ side yard setback, to allow it to be located 2.2’ from the property line. On the east side, the setback is over 15’. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  HumaNature Architecture LLC  Boulder, Colorado  T: 303-667-9629  James@HumaNatureArch.com Parsons BOZA Application Page 2 Written statement addressing criteria: The reasons for requesting a zoning adjustment are: 1.Physical Conditions: A.The existing structure was built 2.2’ from the West property line before current setback regulations were implemented. And the stairway from the basement to the North portion of the structure is located along the West side of the building, and cannot be relocated due to the layout of the basement, and unexcavated portions of the basement. B.This condition of proximity to the West property line does not exist throughout the neighborhood. Most houses in the neighborhood comply with the current side yard setbacks. C.In order to replace the existing structure to be deconstructed, the location of the existing west wall needs to remain where it is, to allow the existing stairs to remain where they are located, and to allow the new stairs to be constructed with minimum circulation space. D.This hardship has not been created by the applicant. The home was built in 1930, and purchased as is by the current owner in 1990. 5. General Criteria: A.This addition would not only not alter the essential character of the neighborhood, it would enhance it. The existing structure to be deconstructed is old and unattractive, and the shed roof varies from the gable roof of the main portion of the structure. The new addition will have nicer ﬁnishes, and a gable roof, harmonizing with the existing roof of the main structure. B.The proposed addition would be located on the rear of the structure, not visible from the street. The addition will be the same width as the main structure, and the roof will be only slightly higher to allow a few south-facing windows for daylight. This would not impair the reasonable use and enjoyment or development of adjacent property. No glazing will be added on the West side of the addition, so no new views onto the property to the West will be created. C.This variance is the minimum that will allow both replacement of existing structure, and the additional 6’ of space to allow the stairs to meet code and allow code compliant circulation and access to the back yard. The new structure’s roof must comply with the bulk plane requirement, which affects the layout of the new stairway accessing the upper ﬂoor. D.The proposed addition would have no effect on the solar access of the neighboring residence to the West, due to the low height of the roof eave, which complies with the bulk plane requirement. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  HumaNature Architecture LLC  Boulder, Colorado  T: 303-667-9629  James@HumaNatureArch.com Parsons BOZA Application Page 3 _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________  HumaNature Architecture LLC  Boulder, Colorado  T: 303-667-9629  James@HumaNatureArch.com View along West property line from North View along North side of existing structure to the West N 00d 08' 20" E 159.43'N 00d 08' 20" E 159.43'N 90d 00' 00" W 50.00'N 90d 00' 00" W 50.00'S 00d 08' 20" W 149.55'S 00d 08' 20" W 149.55'N 89d 52' 00" E 49.95'N 89d 52' 00" E 49.95'S 00d 08' 00" ES 00d 08' 00" E10.00'10.00'ALLEYALLEY GARAGEGARAGE RESIDENCERESIDENCE PUMPPUMP HOUSEHOUSE CONC. SIDEWALK CONC. PORCH CONC. DRIVEWAY CONC. PATIO - TO BE DECONSTRUCTED CONC. SIDEWALKCONC. STEPS DEWEY AVENUEDEWEY AVENUE CONC. DRIVEWAY THIS PORTION OF THE STRUCTURE IS THE ONLY NEW EXTERIOR ENVELOPE CONSTRUCTION 25' REAR YARD SETBACK 5' SIDE YARD SETBACKDORMER 25' FRONT YARD SETBACK10' SIDE YARD SETBACK2.2' 15.8' NOTES: 1. ALL ELEMENTS ARE EXISTING EXCEPT AS NOTED NEW DECK BUILDING FOOTPRINT ROOF OVERHANG 317.5 SF 1819 SF NN005510102020 DECONSTRUCT FOLLOWING ELEMENTS OF NORTH PORTION OF STRUCTURE- WEST FOUNDATION WALL, ABOVE-GRADE FRAME WALLS, WINDOWS, DOORS, ROOF, & INTERIOR STAIRS NOTES: ALL EXISTING WINDOWS AND DOORS TO BE REPLACED WITH WINDOWS AND DOORS OF SAME SIZE. EXISTING STRUCTURE TO REMAIN NEW ADDITION 2687 5th St.2687 5th St. Boulder, CO 80304-3255Boulder, CO 80304-3255 Tel: 303.667.9629Tel: 303.667.9629 Contractor/Consultants:Contractor/Consultants: Date:Date: Sheet NumberSheet Number Revision/DateRevision/Date Project #:Project #: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED, OR OTHERWISE USED FOR OTHER THAN THE PROJECT NAMED BELOW WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF HumaNature Architecture, LLC ©2024-HumaNature Architecture, LLC Plans Prepared By:Plans Prepared By: James Plagmann, CO Arch #305785James Plagmann, CO Arch #305785 James@HumaNatureArch.comJames@HumaNatureArch.com SheetSheet OfOf 9 September 20249 September 2024 Site Development Plan,Site Development Plan, AxonometricsAxonometrics ZV1ZV1 ParsonsParsons Residence RebuildResidence Rebuild 24102410 435 Dewey Avenue435 Dewey Avenue Boulder, CO 80304Boulder, CO 80304 Ms. Kim ParsonsMs. Kim Parsons 1" = 10'-0"1SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN 2 AXONOMETRIC - DECONSTRUCTION 3 AXONOMETRIC - PROPOSED PROJECT INFORMATION: PROJECT SCOPE: CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW TWO-STORY ADDITION TO REPLACE AN EXISTING ELEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED AFTER FIRE. TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF EXISTING BUILDING (EXCLUDING BASEMENT)- 1569 SF TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF PROPOSED BUILDING (EXCLUDING BASEMENT)- 2205 SF LOT AREA - 7974 SF MAXIMUM FLOOR AREA (7974 SF X 0.2 + 2100) = 3694 SF FLOOR AREA RATIO - PROPOSED - .23 BUILDING COVERAGE - EXISTING - 1569 SF BUILDING COVERAGE - MAXIMUM (7974 X .2 +1050) - 2644 SF BUILDING COVERAGE - PROPOSED - 1819 SF BUILDING HEIGHT - EXISTING - 19'-4" BUILDING HEIGHT - PROPOSED - 24'-5" 11 339/9/24 Main Floor0' - 0" Attic Floor 7' - 8 1/2" Basement -8' - 1" Exist. Garden Level-2' - 10" REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS AND SKYLIGHT DECONSTRUCT EXISTING ROOF, ABOVE-GRADE WALLS, WINDOWS AND DOORS Main Floor0' - 0" Attic Floor 7' - 8 1/2" Basement -8' - 1" Exist. Garden Level-2' - 10" 6 12 1/212DECONSTRUCT EXISTING ROOF, ABOVE-GRADE WALLS, WINDOWS AND DOORS Main Floor0' - 0" Attic Floor 7' - 8 1/2" Basement -8' - 1" Exist. Garden Level-2' - 10" DECONSTRUCT EXISTING ROOF, ABOVE-GRADE WALLS, FOUNDATION WALL, WINDOWS AND DOORS REMOVE EXISTING WINDOWS Main Floor0' - 0" Attic Floor7' - 8 1/2" Basement-8' - 1" Studio 7' - 3" New Garden Level -1' - 10" NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND SKYLIGHT NEW ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING NEW COMPOSITE RAILING & WOOD BALLUSTERS WOOD COLUMNS & FRAMING COMPOSITE WOOD DECKING FIBER CEMENT SIDING INSULATED FIBERGLASS SLIDING DOORS 8 121/2128 12 NEW INSULATED FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND DOORS NEW FIBER CEMENT SIDING & FASCIA NEW WOOD COLUMNS & FRAMING NEW COMPOSITE WOOD RAILING & DECKING W/WOOD BALLUSTERS BULK PLANE 005510102020 GRAPHIC SCALE Main Floor0' - 0" Attic Floor7' - 8 1/2" Basement-8' - 1" Studio 7' - 3" New Garden Level -1' - 10" NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS NEW ROOFING TO MATCH EXISTING NEW COMPOSITE RAILING & WOOD BALLUSTERS WOOD COLUMNS & FRAMING COMPOSITE WOOD DECKING FIBER CEMENT SIDING Main Floor0' - 0" Attic Floor7' - 8 1/2" Basement-8' - 1" 8 12 6 12 812 612 1/212 19' - 3 3/8"24' - 4 5/8"NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS & DOOR NEW FIBER CEMENT SIDING & FASCIA NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS 2687 5th St.2687 5th St. Boulder, CO 80304-3255Boulder, CO 80304-3255 Tel: 303.667.9629Tel: 303.667.9629 Contractor/Consultants:Contractor/Consultants: Date:Date: Sheet NumberSheet Number Revision/DateRevision/Date Project #:Project #: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED, OR OTHERWISE USED FOR OTHER THAN THE PROJECT NAMED BELOW WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF HumaNature Architecture, LLC ©2024-HumaNature Architecture, LLC Plans Prepared By:Plans Prepared By: James Plagmann, CO Arch #305785James Plagmann, CO Arch #305785 James@HumaNatureArch.comJames@HumaNatureArch.com SheetSheet OfOf 9 September 20249 September 2024 Elevations - DeconstructElevations - Deconstruct & Proposed& Proposed ZV3ZV3 ParsonsParsons Residence RebuildResidence Rebuild 24102410 435 Dewey Avenue435 Dewey Avenue Boulder, CO 80304Boulder, CO 80304 Ms. Kim ParsonsMs. Kim Parsons 1/8" = 1'-0"1EAST ELEVATION - DECONSTRUCTION 1/8" = 1'-0"2NORTH ELEVATION - DEMO 1/8" = 1'-0"3 WEST ELEVATION - DEMO 1/8" = 1'-0"4PROPOSED EAST ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"5PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"6 PROPOSED WEST ELEVATION 1/8" = 1'-0"7PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION 33 339/9/24 UP REF.DN DN UP DN DECONSTRUCT EXISTING STAIRS DECONSTRUCT EXISTING FOUNDATION WALL UNEXCAVATED UNEXCAVATED LAUNDRYLAUNDRY UNFINISHEDUNFINISHED HVACHVAC DECONSTRUCT FRAME WALLS, WINDOWS & DOORS DECONSTRUCT FRAMED FLOOR DECONSTRUCT STAIRS DECONSTRUCT WALLS DECONSTRUCT WALLS REMOVE ALL WINDOWS REMOVE DOOR EXIST. CONC. FLOOR TO REMAIN 005510102020 GRAPHIC SCALE STUDIOSTUDIO KITCHENKITCHEN OFFICEOFFICE BEDROOMBEDROOM LIVING ROOMLIVING ROOM DECONSTRUCT THIS PORTION OF FLOOR DECONSTRUCT THIS PORTION OF FLOOR DECONSTRUCT WALLS REMOVE ALL WINDOWS ATTICATTIC 6'-10 CEILING HEIGHT DECONSTRUCT ROOF ZV31 ZV3 2 ZV3 3 REMOVE EXISING SKYLIGHT UNEXCAVATED UNEXCAVATED LAUNDRYLAUNDRY STORAGESTORAGE UNEXCAVATED NEW FOUNDATION WALLS NEW STAIRS HVACHVAC 9' - 8 1/2" 11' - 3"6' - 5 1/4"10' - 10"13' - 3 7/8"13' - 4 1/2"19' - 2 1/2"18' - 5 1/2"11' - 8" MAINMAIN BEDROOMBEDROOM BATHBATH KITCHENKITCHEN OFFICEOFFICE NOOKNOOK GUESTGUEST LIVING ROOMLIVING ROOM BATHBATH WALK-INWALK-IN CLOSETCLOSET20' - 11 1/2"8' - 9"12' - 8 1/2"9' - 2" 13' - 5 1/4" 7' - 2"6' - 6"11' - 0"6' - 10 3/4"CLOSET CL. CL. 31' - 10 1/2"57' - 0 3/4"NEW STAIRS DECK ABOVE 1 HR. RATED WALL NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION: FIBER CEMENT SIDING ON RIGID INSULATION ON WEATHER BARRIER ON SHEATHING ON 2x6 STUDS W/GYP BD INTERIOR NOTES: NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS AND EXT. DOORS TO MATCH SIZES OF EXISTING REMOVED WINDOWS AND DOORS NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS SLIDING DOORS NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS SLIDING DOORS 20' - 7 1/2"STUDIOSTUDIO STORAGESTORAGE 30' - 3 1/4" OPEN TO BELOW NEW BRIDGE OPEN TO BELOW INFILLED FLOOR OPEN TO BELOW COMPOSITE WOOD DECK 18' - 2 3/4" - 7'+ CLG. HT. 10' - 0"6' - 0"NEW WALL CONSTRUCTION: FIBER CEMENT SIDING ON RIGID INSULATION ON WEATHER BARRIER ON SHEATHING ON 2x6 STUDS W/GYP BD INTERIOR NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS FRENCH DOORS NEW INSUL. FIBERGLASS WINDOWS --A054A052 SLOPE 8/12SLOPE 8/12 SLOPE 6/12SLOPE 6/12 SLOPE .5/12 ZV34 ZV3 5 ZV3 7 ZV3 6 NEW ROOF CONSTRUCTION: COMPOSITE SHINGLES ON WEATHER BARRIER ON SHEATHING ON RAFTERS PER STRUCTURAL WITH INSULATION AND GYP BD INTERIOR 2687 5th St.2687 5th St. Boulder, CO 80304-3255Boulder, CO 80304-3255 Tel: 303.667.9629Tel: 303.667.9629 Contractor/Consultants:Contractor/Consultants: Date:Date: Sheet NumberSheet Number Revision/DateRevision/Date Project #:Project #: ALL DRAWN AND WRITTEN INFORMATION APPEARING HEREIN SHALL NOT BE DUPLICATED, DISCLOSED, OR OTHERWISE USED FOR OTHER THAN THE PROJECT NAMED BELOW WITHOUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF HumaNature Architecture, LLC ©2024-HumaNature Architecture, LLC Plans Prepared By:Plans Prepared By: James Plagmann, CO Arch #305785James Plagmann, CO Arch #305785 James@HumaNatureArch.comJames@HumaNatureArch.com SheetSheet OfOf 9 September 20249 September 2024 Floor Plans, Deconstruct &Floor Plans, Deconstruct & ProposedProposed ZV2ZV2 ParsonsParsons Residence RebuildResidence Rebuild 24102410 435 Dewey Avenue435 Dewey Avenue Boulder, CO 80304Boulder, CO 80304 Ms. Kim ParsonsMs. Kim Parsons 1/8" = 1'-0"1BASEMENT - DECONSTRUCTION PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"2MAIN FLOOR - DECONSTRUCTION PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"3 UPPER FLOOR - DECONSTRUCTION PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"4 ROOF - DECONSTRUCTION PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"5PROPOSED BASEMENT PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"6PROPOSED MAIN FLOOR PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"7 PROPOSED UPPER FLOOR PLAN 1/8" = 1'-0"8 PROPOSED ROOF PLAN 22 339/9/24