HomeMy WebLinkAbout02.06.24 PB Packet REVISED
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
3. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS/CONTINUATIONS
A. CALL UP ITEM: Site Review to redevelop 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave. with eight attached
residential dwelling units with underground parking and two at-grade parking spaces behind the
building. The development is proposed to be three stories in height that will not exceed the by-
right height of 38 feet. A subsequent preliminary plat under case no. LUR2023-00004 was
approved to combine the two lots. The call-up period expires on Feb. 7, 2024.
B. CALL UP ITEM: Use review to allow residential uses on the ground floor facing a street in an
Industrial-Service 1 zone district. The proposal includes the redevelopment of the existing site
with two new residential buildings containing 21 three-story townhouse units with private
garages. The call-up period expires on Feb. 12, 2024.
4. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
A. AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of a Site Review Amendment and
Height Modification request to allow for up to seven feet six inches of additional height for
each townhome building within the approved Shining Mountain Waldorf School PUD,
allowing for a pitched roof design on the third level. Reviewed under case number LUR2023-
00050.
B. AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and recommendation to City Council regarding proposed
Ordinance 8620, amending Title 9, “Land Use Code,” B.R.C. 1981, to clarify existing code
sections, update graphics, and improve the clarity of the code, and setting forth related details.
C. AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of a standard wetland permit
application for the proposed renovation of the Chapman Drive Trailhead and construction of a
pedestrian bridge over Boulder Creek generally located at 38474 Boulder Canyon Drive in
Boulder County (WET2023-00020).
5. MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY
ATTORNEY
A. MATTERS: SBC Flood Mitigation Project Spillway Annexation
B. INFORMATION ITEM: Update on the Boulder Airport Community Conversation (no
presentation)
6. DEBRIEF MEETING/CALENDAR CHECK
7. ADJOURNMENT
For more information call (303) 441-1880. Board packets are available after 4 p.m. Friday prior to the meeting, online at www.bouldercolorado.gov.
* * * SEE REVERSED SIDE FOR MEETING GUIDELINES * * *
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD MEETING AGENDA
DATE: February 6, 2024
TIME: 6 p.m.
PLACE: Hybrid Meeting
CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD
VIRTUAL MEETING GUIDELINES
CALL TO ORDER
The Board must have a quorum (four 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.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
The public is welcome to address the Board (3 minutes* maximum per speaker) during the Public Participation portion of the meeting regarding
any item not scheduled for a public hearing. The only items scheduled for a public hearing are those listed under the category PUBLIC HEARING
ITEMS on the Agenda. Any exhibits introduced into the record must be provided to the Board Secretary for distribution to the Board and
admission into the record via email 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting time.
DISCUSSION AND STUDY SESSION ITEMS
Discussion and study session items do not require motions of approval or recommendation.
PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS
A Public Hearing item requires a motion and a vote. The general format for hearing of an action item is as follows:
1. Presentations
• Staff presentation (10 minutes maximum*).
• Applicant presentation (15-minute maximum*). Any exhibits introduced into the record at this time must be provided to the
Board Secretary for distribution to the Board and admission into the record.
• Planning Board questioning of staff or applicant for information only.
2. Public Hearing
Each speaker will be allowed an oral presentation (3 minutes maximum*). The pooling of time will not be allowed.
• Speakers should introduce themselves, giving name and address. If officially representing a group, homeowners' association,
etc., please state that for the record as well.
• The board requests that, prior to offering testimony, the speaker disclose any financial or business relationship with the
applicant, the project, or neighbors. This includes any paid compensation. It would also be helpful if the speaker disclosed any
membership or affiliation that would affect their testimony.
• 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 via email 24 hours prior to the scheduled meeting time and will become a part of the official record.
• 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 emailed to the Secretary for distribution to the Board and
admission into the record 24 hours prior to the meeting.
• Citizens can email correspondence to the Planning Board and staff at boulderplanningboard@bouldercolorado.gov, up to 24
hours prior to the Planning Board meeting, to be included as a part of the record.
• Applicants under Title 9, B.R.C. 1981, will be provided the opportunity to speak for up to 3 minutes prior to the close of the
public hearing. The board chair may allow additional time.
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 Chair.
• Board action (the vote). An affirmative vote of at least four members of the Board is required to pass a motion approving any
action. If the vote taken results in either a tie, a vote of three to two, or a vote of three to one in favor of approval, the applicant
shall be automatically allowed a rehearing upon requesting the same in writing within seven days.
MATTERS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD, DIRECTOR, AND CITY ATTORNEY
Any Planning Board member, the Planning Director, or the City Attorney may introduce before the Board matters which are not included in the
formal agenda.
ADJOURNMENT
The Board's goal is that regular meetings adjourn by 10:30 p.m. and that study sessions adjourn by 10:00 p.m. Agenda items will not be
commenced after 10:00 p.m. except by majority vote of Board members present.
VIRTUAL MEETINGS
For Virtual Meeting Guidelines, refer to https://bouldercolorado.gov/government/board-commission/planning-board page for the approved Planning Board's Rules
for Virtual Meetings.
*The Chair may lengthen or shorten the time allotted as appropriate. If the allotted time is exceeded, the Chair may request that the speaker conclude his or her
comments
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Board
FROM: Alison Blaine, Case Manager
DATE: January 10, 2024
SUBJECT: Call Up Item: Site Review to redevelop 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave. with
eight attached residential dwelling units with underground parking and two at-
grade parking spaces behind the building. The development is proposed to be
three stories in height that will not exceed the by-right height of 38 feet. A
subsequent preliminary plat under case no. LUR2023-00004 was approved to
combine the two lots. The call-up period expires on Feb. 7, 2024.
ADDRESS: 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave.
PROJECT NAME: 1501 AND 1509 ARAPAHOE AVE
CASE NO: LUR2023-00002
Provided as Attachment A is the Notice of Disposition of Approval for the above-referenced Site Review to
redevelop an existing site with attached residential dwelling units. The project proposes a third story not to
exceed the by-right height of 38 feet. There are no additional modifications to the Land Use Code
proposed. The project was reviewed as a Site Review, subject to the review criteria under the Land Use
Code section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981 (refer to Attachment B). The project plans are provided in
Attachment C. Per Section 9-2-14(g), B.R.C 1981, Site Reviews are subject to call up by the Planning
Board. Planning Board may call up the decision on or before Feb. 7, 2024. Please direct any clarifying
questions during the call up period to the case manager, Alison Blaine, at blainea@bouldercolorado.gov.
Background. The subject site is
located at the northeast corner of 15th
St. and Arapahoe Ave., directly across
from Boulder High School, and within
the Goss-Grove Neighborhood. The
0.3-acre (13,370 square feet) site
includes 1501 Arapahoe Ave. and
1509 Arapahoe Ave. Following Site
Review approval, the Applicant will
complete the subdivision process to
combine the two lots. Refer to Figure 1
for an aerial photo of the site.
In 1974, the site was approved for an
approximately 1,400 square-foot building to be used as a restaurant. The subject site has been approved
for subsequent reviews such as landscaping improvements and expansion of services. Currently, a majority
of the site contains surface parking and is still operating as a restaurant. Refer to Figure 2 for existing
conditions.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Subject Site Goss Grove
Boulder High School
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 1 of 78
The site is located within the Non-
Historic and Interface Area of the
Downtown Urban Design Guidelines.
Refer to Figure 3. The scope of the
project required a review before the
Design Advisory Board (DAB). Refer to
“Review Process” for additional
details.
The entire property is within the
Downtown – 1 (DT-1) zoning district,
which is described in Section 9-5-
2(c)(3)(A), B.R.C. 1981, as “A
transition area between the downtown
and the surrounding residential areas
where a wide range of retail, office,
residential, and public uses are
permitted. A balance of new
development with the maintenance
and renovation of existing buildings is
anticipated, and where development
and redevelopment consistent with the
established historic and urban design
character is encouraged.” Attached
dwelling units are a permitted use in
the DT-1 zoning district. The site is
surrounded by DT-1 to the west and
north, as well as RMX-1 to the east
and north. The zoning changes to
RH-1 on the southern side of
Arapahoe Ave. Refer to Figure 5.
The subject site is designated as
“Regional Business” in the Boulder
Valley Comprehensive Plan
(BVCP), which is defined as
“Consists of major shopping
facilities, offices, financial
institutions and government and
cultural facilities. Housing
compatible with the surrounding
business character and as a
transition to other residential areas
will be encouraged and may be
required.” Refer to Attachment B
for staff’s analysis of BVCP
Policies.
Figure 2. Existing Conditions
Figure 3. Non-Historic and Interface Area of the Downtown Urban Design
Guidelines
Figure 4 Zoning Map
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 2 of 78
Prior Approvals. Prior approvals on the property include:
•P-74-9: Request to add an addition to the existing building, which was never completed.
•P-75-26: Approved site upgrades as part of a new restaurant use on the property.
•P-80-38: Amended PUD to provide indoor seating.
Surrounding Context. The proposed project is located in an area that transitions from commercial uses in
the DT-1 zone, to mixed density residential to the north and east, as well as high density residential to the
south. The interface area includes a mix of building forms and density. Properties to the north along 15th St.
contain one-, two-, and three-story commercial and attached residential buildings. The context of the area
to the north and east is comprised of mixed density residential, including one- to two-story single-family
houses, duplexes, triplexes, and multi-family condos. The proposed third story addition is consistent with an
adjacent development on the western side of 15th St. The proposed project intends to act as an anchor on
the corner of 15th and Arapahoe Ave.
Project Proposal. The proposal involves redevelopment of the existing site. The site currently contains a
restaurant use, which is proposed to be replaced with an attached residential development with eight
dwelling units. Per Table 9-1, one parking space is required for each dwelling unit in a DT zone. A total of
eight spaces are provided, which meet the parking requirements of the Land Use Code. Six of the eight
parking spaces will be located below grade with two surface level parking spaces located behind the
building, accessed from the alley along the northern edge of the property. Each unit will have its own
parking space. Refer to staff’s criteria analysis in Attachment B regarding the submitted Transportation
Demand Management (TDM) plan, as well as the TDM included in Attachment E.
The site proposes a mix of useable
open space, including a common
gathering space for tenants and private
rooftop decks for each unit. The
gathering space includes shade,
seating, and a grilling area and is
surrounded by landscaping and near
an internal courtyard.
The site provides landscaping along
the public rights-of-way in the form of
planters, tree lawns, and street trees.
Landscaping is proposed throughout
and site and in the rear yard to screen the surface parking from the alley and adjacent uses. An existing
healthy, long-lived tree will be preserved on the northwest corner of the site.
The proposal includes a third story, which exceeds the maximum of two stories. However, the building will
not exceed the by-right height of 38 feet. There are no other modifications to the standards in the Land Use
Code as part of this proposal. As required per Table 7-1, a third story in a DT-1 zone must be setback 15
feet from the property line to help reduce the scale and mass of the building. The applicant has indicated
that they will meet Inclusionary Housing requirements with a cash-in-lieu contribution. Compliance with
Inclusionary Housing requirements must be demonstrated prior to a building permit application.
Figure 5. Proposed Rendering Along 15th St.
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 3 of 78
The building form, such as the setback third story, and design details like stoop features, awnings,
projecting bays, stone wainscoting, and attractive landscaping create visual interest at the ground floor and
reinforce the human-scale element. The location at the corner of 15th St. and Arapahoe Ave.is well linked to
surrounding transit systems, the Downtown area to the north, and the Boulder Creek bike path to the south.
Users of the site have access to the public right-of-way directly from their individual units and can access
the two crosswalks on the corner for safe and convenient access. There are additional internal walkways
including a path connecting the gathering space to 15th St. and an internal walkway along the eastern edge
to connect rear parking to eastern units and the Arapahoe Ave. right-of-way.
Review Process. A Site Review is required because the proposal requests to exceed the two-story limit in
a DT-1 zoning district. Site Reviews are subject to the Site Review criteria in Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C.
1981. Refer to Attachment A for the conditions of approval. Per Section 9-2-14(g), B.R.C 1981, Site
Reviews are subject to call up by the Planning Board. The existing building, built in 1976, is less than 50
years old and therefore did not require review by Landmarks.
DAB Review. The proposal is located in the Non-Historic and Interface Area of the Downtown Urban
Design Guidelines. Exterior changes to properties in this area require review by the Design Advisory Board
(DAB). The proposed building and site design changes were reviewed by DAB at their Oct. 11, 2023,
meeting. Information from the meeting include the meeting video and staff memo and applicant’s DAB plan
set. The meeting minutes are included in Attachment G. Generally, the Board was supportive of the
proposed design but recommended two key refinements:
-Criterion 2.1.A: Better articulation or variation on the Arapahoe Ave. façade. This could include
changes to the setback and planted buffer to match the three-story building on the other side of 15th St.
-Criterion 2.1.F: Improved cohesion with the western elevation and stylistic changes to improve the
architectural legibility of the southern façade and better articulate the two different units.
The Applicant revised the southern elevation townhouse bay pattern and articulation by creating a vertical
line between the two units, reconfiguring the cladding along that elevation, and introducing the projecting
window similar to the west elevation. The Applicant did not change the setback variation fronting Arapahoe
Ave. See below for a before and after of the southern façade.
Figure 6. Southern Facade - Before DAB
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 4 of 78
Figure 7. Southern Facade - After DAB
On balance, staff found that the project met the Design Guidelines. A detailed summary of the staff
responses to the building design are located in Attachment B.
Analysis. A Site Review application is subject to the evaluation of the project with the Site Review criteria
in Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981. The analysis of these criteria is found in Attachment B. Per Section 9-
4-2, B.R.C. 1981, applications for Site Review are subject to call up by the Planning Board. There are no
proposed modifications to the Land Use Code apart from the third story height. The proposed development
meets setback, density, and height requirements.
The proposal is consistent with the development standards of the Land Use Code and, on balance, is
consistent with the Site Review criteria. As noted above, staff reviewed and found the project consistent
with the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines. Refer to Attachment A for the conditions of approval. Refer
to Attachment B for analysis of review criteria.
Public Comment. Consistent with Section 9-4-3, Public Notice Requirements, B.R.C. 1981, staff provided
notification to all property owners within 600 feet of the subject location of the application. Staff received
public comments from four neighbors. Two neighbors opposed and one supported the project. The fourth
neighbor communicated over the phone and requested more information about the process. Comments are
included in Attachment F. Also included in Attachment F is a list of neighbor support that was submitted
by the applicant as part of the initial application.
Conclusion. This proposal was approved by Planning and Development Services staff on Jan. 24, 2024
and the decision may be appealed by the applicant or any interested person or called up by a member of
the Planning Board on or before Feb. 7, 2024. The applicant or an interested person may appeal the city
manager’s decision by delivering a written notice of appeal to the city manager. A member of the Planning
Board may call up the manager’s decision upon written notification to staff or by making a verbal request,
on the record, at a regularly scheduled board meeting. Questions about the project or decision should be
directed to Case Manager, Alison Blaine at blaine@bouldercolorado.gov.
Attachments.
Attachment A: Notice of Disposition
Attachment B: Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 5 of 78
Attachment C: Applicant’s Plan Set
Attachment D: Applicant’s Written Statement
Attachment E: Applicant’s TDM Plan
Attachment F: Neighbor Comment
Attachment G: DAB Meeting Minutes
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 6 of 78
CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NOTICE OF DISPOSITION
You are hereby advised that the following action was taken by the Planning Department based on the standards and
criteria of the Land Use Regulations as set forth in Chapter 9-2, B.R.C. 1981, as applied to the proposed development.
DECISION: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
PROJECT NAME: 1501 AND 1509 ARAPAHOE AVE
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
Site review to redevelop 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Avenue with 8 attached
residential dwelling units. Development is proposed to be three stories that
meet the by-right height of 38 feet. Related to Preliminary Plat LUR2023-00004.
1501 and 1509 ARAPAHOE AVE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit A
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
APPLICATION:
ZONING:
CASE MANAGER:
ADMIN BROWN DEVELOPMENT GROUP, BROWN DEVELOPMENT GROUP
STEPHEN BROWN, BROWN DEVELOPMENT GROUP
1509 ARAPAHOE LLC
WHIT COLLINS
Site Review, LUR2023-00002
Downtown 1 (DT-1)
Alison Blaine
VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT: No; the owner has waived the opportunity to create such right under Section 9-
2-20, B.R.C. 1981.
APPROVED MODIFICATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS:
•Section 9-7-1, B.R.C. 1981: Bulk and Density Standards, Maximum number of stories
Approved with Conditions On:
Date
By:
Brad Mueller, Director of Planning & Development Services
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 7 of 78
Address: 1501 AND 1509 ARAPAHOE AVE 2
This decision may be appealed to the Planning Board by filing an appeal letter with the Planning Department within two
weeks of the decision date. If no such appeal is filed, the decision shall be deemed final fourteen days after the date
above mentioned.
Appeal to Planning Board Expires:
Final Approval Date:
IN ORDER FOR A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION TO BE PROCESSED FOR THIS PROJECT, A SIGNED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL PLANS FOR CITY SIGNATURE MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH DISPOSITION CONDITIONS AS APPROVED SHOWN ON THE FINAL PLANS. IF
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT SIGNED WITHIN NINETY (90) DAYS OF THE FINAL DECISION DATE,
THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRES.
Pursuant to Section 9-2-12 of the Land Use Regulations (Boulder Revised Code, 1981), the Applicant must begin and
substantially complete the approved development within three years from the date of final approval, or in compliance
with the phasing plan if one was approved. Failure to "substantially complete" (as defined in Section 9-2-12) the
development within three years or in compliance with the phasing plan, if one was approved, shall cause this
development approval to expire.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1.The Applicant shall ensure that the development shall be in compliance with all plans prepared by the
Applicant on January 15, 2024 and the Transportation Demand Management (“TDM”) Plan dated January 12, 2023,
all on file in the City of Boulder Planning Department, except to the extent that the development may be modified by
the conditions of this approval.
2.Upon the execution of development agreement required by section 9-2-9, B.R.C., 1981, this approval
supersedes the conditions of approval contained in the following approvals:
•Planned Unit Development #P-74-9
•Planned Unit Development #P-75-26
•Planned Unit Development #P-80-38
3.Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit, and obtain City Manager approval of, a Technical
Document Review application for the following items:
a.Final architectural plans, including material samples and colors, to ensure compliance with the intent
of this approval and compatibility with the surrounding area. The architectural intent shown on the
plans prepared by the Applicant on January 15, 2024 is acceptable. Planning staff will review plans to
assure that the architectural intent is performed.
b.A final site plan which includes detailed floor plans and section drawings.
c.A final utility plan meeting the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
d.A final storm water report and plan meeting the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
e.Final transportation plans meeting the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards for all
transportation improvements. These plans must include but are not limited to: alley access pavement
section and detailed plans with final surface grades.
f.A detailed landscape plan, including size, quantity, and type of plants existing and proposed; type and
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 8 of 78
Address: 1501 AND 1509 ARAPAHOE AVE 3
quality of non-living landscaping materials; any site grading proposed; and any irrigation system
proposed, to ensure compliance with this approval and the City's landscaping requirements. Removal
of trees must receive prior approval of the Planning Department. Removal of any tree in City right of
way must also receive prior approval of the City Forester.
g. A detailed outdoor lighting plan showing location, size, and intensity of illumination units, indicating
compliance with section 9-9-16, B.R.C.1981.
h. A detailed shadow analysis to ensure compliance with the City's solar access requirements of section
9-9-17, B.R.C. 1981.
i. An address plat following the city’s addressing policy to create a new address.
4. Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit for and receive approval of a Technical Document
Review application for a Final Plat, and execute a subdivision agreement meeting the requirements of Chapter 9-12,
“Subdivision,” B.R.C. 1981, and which provide, without limitation and at no cost to the City, for the following, unless
otherwise approved by the City Manager:
a. The dedication, to the City, of all rights-of-way and easements shown on the approved plans or necessary
to serve the development.
b. A financial guarantee, in a form acceptable to the City Manager, in an amount equal to the cost of
constructing all public improvements necessary to serve the development.
c. The construction of all public improvements necessary to serve the development.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall submit a financial guarantee, in a form acceptable to the
Director of Public Works, in an amount equal to the cost of providing eco-passes to the residents of the development
for three years after the issuance of a certificate of occupancy for each dwelling unit as proposed in the Applicant’s
Transportation Demand Management (TDM) plan.
6. The Applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all stormwater quality improvements and stormwater
detention improvements, including but not limited to permeable parking lot paving.
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 9 of 78
Address: 1501 AND 1509 ARAPAHOE AVE 4
Exhibit A
Legal Description
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 10 of 78
CRITERIA CHECKLIST AND COMMENT FORM
SITE REVIEW
SECTION 9-2-14
(h) Criteria for Review: No site review application shall be approved unless the
approving agency finds that:
(1)Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan:
(A) The proposed site plan is consistent with the land use map and the service area map
and, on balance, the policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan.
The site is designated as Regional Business in the BVCP. There is no maximum
residential density under this designation and is defined as “Consists of major
shopping facilities, offices, financial institutions and government and cultural
facilities. Housing compatible with the surrounding business character and as a
transition to other residential areas will be encouraged and may be required.”
The current proposal is consistent with the following BVCP goals and policies:
2.03 Compact Development Pattern
2.10 Preservation and Support for Residential Neighborhoods
2.33 Sensitive Infill and Redevelopment
2.36 Physical Design for All People
2.41 Enhanced Design for All Projects
7.11 Balancing housing supply with employment base.
(B) The proposed development shall not exceed the maximum density associated with
the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan residential land use designation.
Additionally, if the density of existing residential development within a three-
hundred-foot area surrounding the site is at or exceeds the density permitted in the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, then the maximum density permitted on the
site shall not exceed the lesser of:
There is no maximum residential density for the Regional Business land use designation.
The project conforms with the density limitations of the zone.
___ (i) The density permitted in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, or
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 11 of 78
___ (ii) The maximum number of units that could be placed on the site without
waiving or varying any of the requirements of Chapter 9-8, "Intensity
Standards," B.R.C. 1981, except as permitted for building sites with
permanently affordable units meeting the requirements of Paragraph 9-10-
3(c)(4), "Nonconforming Permanently Affordable Units," B.R.C. 1981.
(C) The proposed development's success in meeting the broad range of BVCP
policies considers the economic feasibility of implementation techniques
required to meet other site review criteria.
The development would not be rendered infeasible in meeting the BVCP policies
or the site review criteria based upon the requirements and recommendations
made within these comments.
(2) Site Design: Projects should preserve and enhance the community's unique sense of
place through creative design that respects historic character, relationship to the natural
environment, multi-modal transportation connectivity and its physical setting. Projects
should utilize site design techniques which are consistent with the purpose of site
review in Subsection (a) of this section and enhance the quality of the project. In
determining whether this subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the
following factors:
(A) Open Space: Open space, including, without limitation, parks, recreation areas
and playgrounds:
(i) Useable open space is arranged to be accessible and functional and incorporates
quality landscaping, a mixture of sun and shade and places to gather;
The site design is urban in character and has a small on-site open space
requirement. The project exceeds the open space requirement with the
provision of private roof decks for each unit, a courtyard with decorative
pavers, and a common gathering area with seating and a grill. Quality
landscaping is incorporated throughout the site in the form of planters and
landscape beds. Useable open space is accessible from internal walkways and
from 15th Street. There is a mixture of sun and shade with the roof-top patios
and shade trees next to the common gathering space.
(ii) Private open space is provided for each detached residential unit;
Each unit has an attached roof deck that provides more than 60 square feet per
dwelling unit.
(iii) The project provides for the preservation of or mitigation of adverse impacts to
natural features, including, without limitation, healthy long-lived trees,
significant plant communities, ground and surface water, wetlands, riparian
areas, drainage areas and species on the federal Endangered Species List,
"Species of Special Concern in Boulder County" designated by Boulder
County, or prairie dogs (Cynomys ludiovicianus), which is a species of local
concern, and their habitat;
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 12 of 78
The site is already developed and includes no sensitive features or species to be
protected. A majority of the trees that are proposed to be removed are invasive
to the area. However, the project will maintain the large Siberian Elm on the
northwest corner of the site, which is a healthy long-lived tree.
(iv) The open space provides a relief to the density, both within the project and from
surrounding development;
The private roof decks, common gathering space, perimeter landscaping, and
tree lawns will provide a relief to the density.
N/A (v) Open space designed for active recreational purposes is of a size that it will be
functionally useable and located in a safe and convenient proximity to the uses
to which it is meant to serve;
The open space is not designed for active recreational purposes but instead as
a place to gather. The open space is conveniently located adjacent to the uses
to which it is meant to serve.
(vi) The open space provides a buffer to protect sensitive environmental features
and natural areas; and
There are no known sensitive environmental features or natural areas on the
site.
N/A (vii) If possible, open space is linked to an area- or city-wide system.
The site is not situated near an area- or city-wide open space system. However,
the site is small and there are internal walkways for residents to easily connect
to 15th Street and Arapahoe Avenue.
_N/A__ (B) Open Space in Mixed Use Developments (Developments That Contain a
Mix of Residential and Nonresidential Uses):
___ (i) The open space provides for a balance of private and shared areas for the
residential uses and common open space that is available for use by both the
residential and nonresidential uses that will meet the needs of the anticipated
residents, occupants, tenants and visitors of the property; and
___ (ii) The open space provides active areas and passive areas that will meet the needs
of the anticipated residents, occupants, tenants and visitors of the property and
are compatible with the surrounding area or an adopted plan for the area.
(C) Landscaping:
(i) The project provides for aesthetic enhancement and a variety of plant and hard
surface materials, and the selection of materials provides for a variety of colors
and contrasts and the preservation or use of local native vegetation where
appropriate;
Landscaping is planned to be installed according to the Landscape Plan (see
Attachment A).The project provides an abundance of tree, shrub, and ornamental
grass plantings in designated landscape areas for visual and experiential
significance. In addition, the applicant has incorporated a variety of surface
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 13 of 78
treatment materials such as ground covers, sandstone pavers, stepping stones, and
paved patio areas. Ornamental trees, shrubs, and perennials will display a variety
of flower colors and seasonal interest.
(ii) Landscape design attempts to avoid, minimize or mitigate impacts on and off
site to important native species, healthy, long lived trees, plant communities of
special concern, threatened and endangered species and habitat by integrating
the existing natural environment into the project;
The project will maintain the large tree on the northwest corner of the site,
which is considered a healthy, long-lived tree. The site does not currently
contain sensitive species or environment features.
(iii) The project provides significant amounts of plant material sized in excess of the
landscaping requirements of Sections 9-9-12, "Landscaping and Screening
Standards," and 9-9-13, "Streetscape Design Standards," B.R.C. 1981; and
The proposed landscape plan specifies the planting of a large variety of shade
trees, ornamental trees, shrubs, ornamental grasses, and perennials in
quantities far greater than required by city standards to achieve areas of
garden interest, exceptional screening from neighboring properties, and the
enhancement of the existing streetscape. Of particular note, the Applicant
worked extensively with staff to preserve an existing unique, mature Siberian
Elm located along the 15th St frontage. The submitted plan also preserved
existing Siberian Elms and Boxelder along the east property line with the
provision for protection of existing Honey Locust street trees along Arapahoe
Ave frontage.
(iv) The setbacks, yards and useable open space along public rights of way are
landscaped to provide attractive streetscapes, to enhance architectural features
and to contribute to the development of an attractive site plan.
Attractive streetscapes with tree lawns and street trees are provided on the two
street frontages and the alley frontage in the rear yard. Landscaping is also
proposed along the eastern interior lot line within the sideyard setback. The
proposed landscaping on all perimeters of the site and adjacent to the access
drive and surface parking contributes to the development of an attractive site
plan.
(D) Circulation: Circulation, including, without limitation, the transportation
system that serves the property, whether public or private and whether
constructed by the developer or not:
(i) High speeds are discouraged or a physical separation between streets and the
project is provided;
The layout and size of the site does not encourage high speeds.
(ii) Potential conflicts with vehicles are minimized;
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 14 of 78
Parking is located below-grade and off the alley, thus reducing the potential
for conflicts between pedestrians and vehicles. The access point meets
required site triangles. Pedestrians from the garage can enter and exit from
two staircases, one on the east and one on the west, therefore eliminating the
need to cross the access drive.
(iii) Safe and convenient connections are provided that support multi-modal
mobility through and between properties, accessible to the public within the
project and between the project and the existing and proposed transportation
systems, including, without limitation, streets, bikeways, pedestrianways and
trails;
The proposed project is located at the corner of 15th Street and Arapahoe
Avenue. Residents have access to the public right-of-way directly from their
individual units. There are additional internal walkways including a path
connecting the gathering space to 15th Street and an internal walkway along
the eastern edge to connect rear parking to eastern units and the Arapahoe
Avenue right-of-way. There are two sets of crosswalks linking the site with
uses to the south, such as the bike path, and to west.
(iv) Alternatives to the automobile are promoted by incorporating site design
techniques, land use patterns and supporting infrastructure that supports and
encourages walking, biking and other alternatives to the single-occupant
vehicle;
See answer above. Physical alternatives to the automobile will be provided by
interior connections to the public realm as well as an existing extensive
sidewalk system. The site is near bike friendly streets and the Boulder Creek
bike path. The site is about 0.2 miles from the downtown regional bus station.
(v) Where practical and beneficial, a significant shift away from single-occupant
vehicle use to alternate modes is promoted through the use of travel demand
management techniques;
A transportation demand management (TDM) plan has been submitted and
will apply to the development. The TDM plan will shift users to other modes
with an Alternative Transportation Subsidy Fund to go towards B-cycle, Car-
share memberships, and RTD passes. The site is also located in an urban area
with several bus stops a few blocks to the east and west for the JUMP. The
RTD Boulder Terminal is located two blocks to the north. Further, the Boulder
Creek Path is located directly to the south, which can be conveniently
accessed from the site by crossing Arapahoe Avenue at the crosswalk
immediately adjacent to the site. Refer to Attachment E for more information.
(vi) On-site facilities for external linkage are provided with other modes of
transportation, where applicable;
The project provides long-term and short-term bike parking for those who will
utilize bikes as a mode of transportation. The site is adjacent to several bus
stops and bus lines.
(vii) The amount of land devoted to the street system is minimized; and
The amount of land devoted to the street system is the minimum necessary to
provide access to the parking area and two surface parking spaces.
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 15 of 78
(viii) The project is designed for the types of traffic expected, including, without
limitation, automobiles, bicycles and pedestrians, and provides safety,
separation from living areas and control of noise and exhaust.
The project has been designed to accommodate vehicles in the garage and
surface parking, therefore separating living areas from the noise and exhaust
of cars on-site. Short-term bike parking is located adjacent to the building on
the street level and is separated from parking areas. The project has been
designed to have several internal walkways for pedestrians to access the
common gathering space, internal courtyard, individual units, and the public
ream.
(E) Parking:
(i) The project incorporates into the design of parking areas measures to provide
safety, convenience and separation of pedestrian movements from vehicular
movements;
The proposed parking areas meet the necessary dimensions for parking spaces
and backout movements. Pedestrians will utilize the public sidewalks
surrounding the site as well as a path on the eastern side of the property for
access to the eastern units from the surface parking. Internal walkways and an
interior courtyard separates pedestrians living in the western units.
(ii) The design of parking areas makes efficient use of the land and uses the
minimum amount of land necessary to meet the parking needs of the project;
The site is paved only in areas to accommodate the circulation and parking
need for the use and is minimized as a majority of the parking is underground.
Two surface level parking spaces are located off the access drive. The amount
of land for parking and circulation is minimized.
(iii) Parking areas and lighting are designed to reduce the visual impact on the
project, adjacent properties and adjacent streets; and
The majority of the parking is located below grade, reducing the visual impact on
the project, adjacent properties, and adjacent streets. Two surface parking spaces
are located behind the building. Any lighting installations will be subject to the
Outdoor Lighting requirements of Section 9-9-16, B.R.C.
(iv) Parking areas utilize landscaping materials to provide shade in excess of the
requirements in Subsection 9-9-6(d), and Section 9-9-14, "Parking Lot
Landscaping Standards," B.R.C. 1981.
Two shade trees are proposed to the north of each surface parking space. The
spaces will also be covered by carports. The rest of the parking will be located
below grade and not visible 15th Street or Arapahoe Avenue.
(F) Building Design, Livability and Relationship to the Existing or Proposed
Surrounding Area:
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 16 of 78
(i) The building height, mass, scale, orientation, architecture and configuration
are compatible with the existing character of the area or the character
established by adopted design guidelines or plans for the area;
The site is subject to the Downtown Urban Design Guidelines and the
proposal was reviewed before the Design Advisory Board (DAB). The building
was designed in scale to complement the development on the other side of 15th
Street, including setbacks where possible. Together, the proposed development
helps anchor the two corners from Arapahoe Avenue to the downtown. All
sides of the building have been incorporated into a cohesive design which
includes building entries with matching awnings, consistent window
configurations, balconies, planting areas, and a common gathering area and
courtyard in the rear of the building off the alley. Materials used on the
primary facades wrap around the sides of the buildings to create visual
interest and reinforce a cohesive and rhythmic design. Trash facilities are
screened and the inclusion of underground parking and landscaping in the
rear yard reduce the visual impacts of parking. While the front doors facing
the public realm include awnings to improve architectural legibility, the
exclusion of stairs provide universal access from the sidewalks along
Arapahoe Ave and 15th Street.
(ii) The height of buildings is in general proportion to the height of existing
buildings and the proposed or projected heights of approved buildings or
approved plans or design guidelines for the immediate area;
The building is located at the southwest corner of the Goss-Grove
neighborhood, which is mostly comprised of single-family homes to the
northeast. Those areas are zoned RMX-1 and anticipate development of mixed-
density. Buildings along 15th Street to the north include a mix of stories,
including one-, two-, and three-stories. The development is proposed to
include a 3rd story, which is setback from the street to encourage human-scale.
The proposed three-story development on this corner is consistent with an
adjacent three-story building on the other side of 15th and appropriately
anchors this corner. The adjacent building to the east is a multi-family, two-
story building and acts as a transition to single-family homes further east. The
north side of the lot is separated from the adjacent residential by an existing
alley.
(iii) The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views
from adjacent properties;
The solar analysis demonstrates that the shadows cast on the adjacent
property just north of 1501 Arapahoe is zoned DT-1 and is not protected by a
solar fence.
(iv) If the character of the area is identifiable, the project is made compatible by
the appropriate use of color, materials, landscaping, signs and lighting;
Overall, the character of the area is a mix of commercial and residential uses,
coinciding with the change in zoning from DT-1 to RMX-1. The interface area
includes a mix of building forms and density.
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 17 of 78
The character of the area in the DT-1 zone along 15th Street to the north
includes mostly flat-roof building forms ranging in height from one-, two-, and
three-stories. There is also a healthy mix of residential densities in the
surrounding area, including two- and three- story attached residential
buildings on 15th Street and Arapahoe Avenue. The area to the northeast is
comprised of one- to two- story single family houses, duplexes, triplexes, and
multi-family condos. The primary roof form for these buildings is pitched roof.
The proposed development, located in an interface area, completements the
form of the commercial buildings, but proposes materials such as masonry and
wood siding that complement the existing materials of the mixed density
residential. Further, stoop features and awnings match the residential
character.
(v) Projects are designed to a human scale and promote a safe and vibrant
pedestrian experience through the location of building frontages along public
streets, plazas, sidewalks and paths, and through the use of building elements,
design details and landscape materials that include, without limitation, the
location of entrances and windows, and the creation of transparency and
activity at the pedestrian level;
The project has a sidewalk perimeter with landscaping and an internal
courtyard. Overall, the building is designed with bays along the street face
emphasizing the townhouse rhythm and a pedestrian scale. The use of recessed
front doors, metal awnings, balconies, and material details like stone
wainscotting provide visual interest and establish a pedestrian scale that
engages the public realm. Further, the façade provides alternating use of
materials and projecting bays to reinforce verticality and emphasize the
demarcated units.
N/A (vi) To the extent practical, the project provides public amenities and planned
public facilities;
(vii) For residential projects, the project assists the community in producing a
variety of housing types, such as multifamily, townhouses and detached single
family units, as well as mixed lot sizes, number of bedrooms and sizes of
units;
The scope proposes 8 attached dwelling units consisting of three 4-bedroom
units and five 3-bedroom units.
(viii) For residential projects, noise is minimized between units, between buildings
and from either on-site or off-site external sources through spacing,
landscaping and building materials;
Noise mitigation will be reviewed at Technical Document review process.
(ix) A lighting plan is provided which augments security, energy conservation,
safety and aesthetics;
Lighting will be evaluated at the Technical Documents review process. All
proposed lighting fixtures must comply with the Outdoor Lighting Ordinance.
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 18 of 78
(x) The project incorporates the natural environment into the design and avoids,
minimizes or mitigates impacts to natural systems;
The use of permeable pavers will help redirect run-off away from storm drains
and mitigating impacts to adjacent ecosystems. The inclusion of ornamental
trees and shrubs provides opportunities for habitat. The redevelopment will
maintain some of the existing vegetation, including the large Siberian Elm to
the northwest.
(xi) Buildings minimize or mitigate energy use; support on-site renewable energy
generation and/or energy management systems; construction wastes are
minimized; the project mitigates urban heat island effects; and the project
reasonably mitigates or minimizes water use and impacts on water quality;
The project will be required to meet the 2020 City of Boulder Energy
Conservation Code, which is a localized version of the 2018 International
Energy Conservation Code that is 20% more efficient than the national code.
The structure will be designed to be “solar ready” to support the additional
loads of a photo voltaic solar array. Space is provided on the rooftop for solar
photovoltaic systems and EV charging is provided in the garage.
(xii) Exteriors of buildings present a sense of permanence through the use of
authentic materials such as stone, brick, wood, metal or similar products and
building material detailing;
The design includes authentic materials like brick, sandstone, and metal
panels. See responses above. See Attachment A for the project’s material
palette.
(xiii)Cut and fill are minimized on the site, the design of buildings conforms to the
natural contours of the land, and the site design minimizes erosion, slope
instability, landslide, mudflow or subsidence, and minimizes the potential
threat to property caused by geological hazards;
The site is flat and already developed. Excavation will be required for the
underground garage and basement level units. The design of the building
conforms to the natural contours of the land.
N/A (xiv) In the urbanizing areas along the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
boundaries between Area II and Area III, the building and site design provide
for a well-defined urban edge; and
N/A (xv) In the urbanizing areas located on the major streets shown on the map in
Appendix A to this title near the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan
boundaries between Area II and Area III, the buildings and site design
establish a sense of entry and arrival to the City by creating a defined urban
edge and a transition between rural and urban areas.
(G) Solar Siting and Construction: For the purpose of ensuring the maximum
potential for utilization of solar energy in the City, all applicants for residential
site reviews shall place streets, lots, open spaces and buildings so as to
maximize the potential for the use of solar energy in accordance with the
following solar siting criteria:
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 19 of 78
(i) Placement of Open Space and Streets: Open space areas are located wherever
practical to protect buildings from shading by other buildings within the
development or from buildings on adjacent properties. Topography and other
natural features and constraints may justify deviations from this criterion.
As shown on the submitted solar analysis, the orientation of the buildings will
not cast shadows on the nearby buildings or impact solar access.
(ii) Lot Layout and Building Siting: Lots are oriented and buildings are sited in a
way which maximizes the solar potential of each principal building. Lots are
designed to facilitate siting a structure which is unshaded by other nearby
structures. Wherever practical, buildings are sited close to the north lot line to
increase yard space to the south for better owner control of shading.
The adjacent buildings to the north and east are two-stories and cannot shade
the roof. The three-story building to the east is across the street and therefore
will not impact solar system installation.
(iii) Building Form: The shapes of buildings are designed to maximize utilization of
solar energy. Buildings shall meet the solar access protection and solar siting
requirements of Section 9-9-17, "Solar Access," B.R.C. 1981.
The building is designed with flat roofs, which allows for solar photovoltaic
panels to utilize solar energy.
(iv) Landscaping: The shading effects of proposed landscaping on adjacent
buildings are minimized.
The proposed trees chosen to replace the evergreens to the east of the site are
smaller in height, thus minimizing shade on adjacent buildings. The existing
Siberian Elm may create shade on the adjacent property but will be maintained
to meet Site Review criteria related to Landscaping and Open Space.
_N/A__ (H) Additional Criteria for Poles Above the Permitted Height: No site review
application for a pole above the permitted height will be approved unless the
approving agency finds all of the following:
___ (i) The light pole is required for nighttime recreation activities which are
compatible with the surrounding neighborhood, light or traffic signal pole is
required for safety or the electrical utility pole is required to serve the needs of
the City; and
___ (ii) The pole is at the minimum height appropriate to accomplish the purposes for
which the pole was erected and is designed and constructed so as to minimize
light and electromagnetic pollution.
_N/A__ (I) Land Use Intensity Modifications:
_N/A_ (i) Potential Land Use Intensity Modifications:
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 20 of 78
___ a. The density of a project may be increased in the BR-1 district through a
reduction of the lot area requirement or in the Downtown (DT), BR-2 or
MU-3 districts through a reduction in the open space requirements.
___ b. The open space requirements in all Downtown (DT) districts may be
reduced by up to one hundred percent.
___ c. The open space per lot requirements for the total amount of open space
required on the lot in the BR-2 district may be reduced by up to fifty
percent.
___ d. Land use intensity may be increased up to twenty-five percent in the BR-1
district through a reduction of the lot area requirement.
___ (ii) Additional Criteria for Land Use Intensity Modifications: A land use intensity
increase will be permitted up to the maximum amount set forth below if the
approving agency finds that the criteria in paragraph (h)(1) through
Subparagraph (h)(2)(H) of this section and following criteria have been met:
___ a. Open Space Needs Met: The needs of the project's occupants and visitors
for high quality and functional useable open space can be met adequately;
___ b. Character of Project and Area: The open space reduction does not adversely
affect the character of the development or the character of the surrounding
area; and
___ c. Open Space and Lot Area Reductions: The specific percentage reduction in
open space or lot area requested by the applicant is justified by any one or
combination of the following site design features not to exceed the
maximum reduction set forth above:
___ 1. Close proximity to a public mall or park for which the development is
specially assessed or to which the project contributes funding of
capital improvements beyond that required by the parks and recreation
component of the development excise tax set forth in chapter 3-8,
"Development Excise Tax," B.R.C. 1981: maximum one hundred
percent reduction in all Downtown (DT) districts and ten percent in
the BR-1 district;
___ 2. Architectural treatment that results in reducing the apparent bulk and
mass of the structure or structures and site planning which increases
the openness of the site: maximum five percent reduction;
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 21 of 78
___ 3. A common park, recreation or playground area functionally useable
and accessible by the development's occupants for active recreational
purposes and sized for the number of inhabitants of the development,
maximum five percent reduction; or developed facilities within the
project designed to meet the active recreational needs of the
occupants: maximum five percent reduction;
___4. Permanent dedication of the development to use by a unique
residential population whose needs for conventional open space are
reduced: maximum five percent reduction;
___5. The reduction in open space is part of a development with a mix of
residential and nonresidential uses within a BR-2 zoning district that,
due to the ratio of residential to nonresidential uses and because of the
size, type and mix of dwelling units, the need for open space is
reduced: maximum fifteen percent reduction; and
___6. The reduction in open space is part of a development with a mix of
residential and nonresidential uses within a BR-2 zoning district that
provides high quality urban design elements that will meet the needs
of anticipated residents, occupants, tenants and visitors of the property
or will accommodate public gatherings, important activities or events
in the life of the community and its people, that may include, without
limitation, recreational or cultural amenities, intimate spaces that
foster social interaction, street furniture, landscaping and hard surface
treatments for the open space: maximum twenty-five percent
reduction.
_N/A_ (J) Additional Criteria for Floor Area Ratio Increase for Buildings in the
BR-1 District:
___ (i) Process: For buildings in the BR-1 district, the floor area ratio ("FAR")
permitted under Table 8-2, Section 9-8-2, "Floor Area Ratio Requirements,"
B.R.C. 1981, may be increased by the city manager under the criteria set forth
in this subparagraph.
___ (ii) Maximum FAR Increase: The maximum FAR increase allowed for buildings
thirty-five feet and over in height in the BR-1 district shall be from 2:1 to 4:1.
___ (iii) Criteria for the BR-1 District: The FAR may be increased in the BR-1 district
to the extent allowed in subparagraph (h)(2)(J)(ii) of this section if the
approving agency finds that the following criteria are met:
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 22 of 78
___a. Site and building design provide open space exceeding the required useable
open space by at least ten percent: an increase in FAR not to exceed 0.25:1.
___b. Site and building design provide private outdoor space for each office unit
equal to at least ten percent of the lot area for buildings twenty-five feet and
under and at least twenty percent of the lot area for buildings above twenty-
five feet: an increase in FAR not to exceed 0.25:1.
___c. Site and building design provide a street front facade and an alley facade at
a pedestrian scale, including, without limitation, features such as awnings
and windows, well-defined building entrances and other building details: an
increase in FAR not to exceed 0.25:1.
___d. For a building containing residential and nonresidential uses in which
neither use comprises less than twenty-five percent of the total square
footage: an increase in FAR not to exceed 1:1.
___e. The unused portion of the allowed FAR of historic buildings designated as
landmarks under chapter 9-11, "Historic Preservation," B.R.C. 1981, may
be transferred to other sites in the same zoning district. However, the
increase in FAR of a proposed building to which FAR is transferred under
this subparagraph may not exceed an increase of 0.5:1.
___f. For a building which provides one full level of parking below grade, an
increase in FAR not to exceed 0.5:1 may be granted.
_N/A_ (K) Additional Criteria for Parking Reductions: The off-street parking
requirements of Section 9-9-6, "Parking Standards," B.R.C. 1981, may be
modified as follows:
___ (i) Process: The city manager may grant a parking reduction not to exceed fifty
percent of the required parking. The planning board or city council may grant a
reduction exceeding fifty percent.
___ (ii) Criteria: Upon submission of documentation by the applicant of how the project
meets the following criteria, the approving agency may approve proposed
modifications to the parking requirements of Section 9-9-6, "Parking
Standards," B.R.C. 1981 (see tables 9-1, 9-2, 9-3 and 9-4), if it finds that:
___a. For residential uses, the probable number of motor vehicles to be owned by
occupants of and visitors to dwellings in the project will be adequately
accommodated;
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 23 of 78
___b. The parking needs of any nonresidential uses will be adequately
accommodated through on-street parking or off-street parking;
___c. A mix of residential with either office or retail uses is proposed, and the
parking needs of all uses will be accommodated through shared parking;
___d. If joint use of common parking areas is proposed, varying time periods of
use will accommodate proposed parking needs; and
___e. If the number of off-street parking spaces is reduced because of the nature
of the occupancy, the applicant provides assurances that the nature of the
occupancy will not change.
_N/A_ (L) Additional Criteria for Off-Site Parking: The parking required under
Section 9-9-6, "Parking Standards," B.R.C. 1981, may be located on a separate
lot if the following conditions are met:
___ (i) The lots are held in common ownership;
___ (ii) The separate lot is in the same zoning district and located within three hundred
feet of the lot that it serves; and
___ (iii) The property used for off-site parking under this subparagraph continues
under common ownership or control.
Attachment B - Analysis of Site Review Criteria
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 24 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 25 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 26 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 27 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 28 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 29 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 30 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 31 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 32 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 33 of 78
SS
SS
STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTST ST ST ST ST
W
W
WWWWWWS89°37'47"W 100.00' (C)
EAST 100' (TC2)NORTH 140' (TC2)S00°45'20"E 140.00' (C)ST ST ST ST ST ST ST STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTEEE
EEEEEEE E E E E
E EWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WGGGGGGGGGGGG
GG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEFO FO FO FO FO FO FOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO
FO FO FO FO FO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOEOHE OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
WEST 73.27' (TC1)
N89°37'47"E 73.31' (C)SOUTH 50' (TC2)N00°45'20"W 50.00' (C)WEST 50' (TC2)
N89°37'47"E 50.00' (C)SOUTHERLY 92
.95
' (TC1)N15°15'12
"W 93
.12
' (C)
BASIS OF BEARINGS
N89°37'47"E 282.61' (AM)
S89°37'47"W 86.27' (C)
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SSSSSSSS15TH STREET(70'
R
IGHT-OF-WAY)
ARAPAHOE AVENUE
(60' RIGHT-OF-WAY)
8' ALLEY 8'-0"'MARY WELCH TRACT
(BOOK 263, PAGE 42)
TRACT 517
(REC. NO. 813562)
WV
WVWV
WV
S S
WV
ST
S
EM
EM
EV
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
1 2
4
5 6 7
8
9
10
11
12
13
143
15
Sheet
Project No:
By:
File:
Draft
for Review
Sheet Name
sg
1509 landscape.dwg
L-100
EXISTING TREE
SURVEY
1509
Arapahoe
1509 Arapahoe
Boulder, CO 80303
1509 Arapahoe Avenue Site
Tree Inventory
4
Table 1. Tree Inventory Results
ID# Common Name Scientific Name DBH
(in)
Condition
Rating
Comments
1 Siberian elm Ulmus pumila 57.0 Good
2 Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima 27.5 Good
3 Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima 11.0 Good
4 Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima 20.0 Good
5 Honey locust Gleditsia triacanthos 17.0 Fair remove deadwood*
6 Honey locust Gleditsia triacanthos 14.0 Good
7 Honey locust Gleditsia triacanthos 22.5 Good
8 Siberian elm Ulmus pumila 21.5 Good
9 Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima 9.5 Good
10 Rocky Mountain juniper Juniperus scopulorum 7.0 Good
11 Rocky Mountain juniper Juniperus scopulorum 6.0 Good
12 Boxelder maple Acer negundo 7.0 Good
13 Siberian elm Ulmus pumila 31.0 Good
14 Siberian elm Ulmus pumila 25.5 Good
15 Tree of heaven Ailanthus altissima 8.5 Good
-ID# refers to Figure 1: ERC Tree Inventory Map
-DBH refers to diameter at breast height measured at 54 inches above ground
-* dead and rotting wood should be removed for safety in high traffic areas
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
REMOVE
LEGEND:
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
EXISTING TREES TO BE REMOVED
ERC TREE INFO14
0 10 20 FT
SCALE: 1" = 10'-0"
EXISTING TREE SURVEY
# Date Description
1 1/12/23Site Reveiw Submittal
2 4/28/23Site City Comments
3 6/23/23Site City Comments
4 8/01/23Site City Comments
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 34 of 78
SS
SS
STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTST ST ST ST ST
W
W
WWWWWWS89°37'47"W 100.00' (C)
EAST 100' (TC2)NORTH 140' (TC2)S00°45'20"E 140.00' (C)ST ST ST ST STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTEEE
EEEEEEE E E E E E
E EW
W
W
W
W
W
W
W
W WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WGGGGGGGGGGGG
GG G G G G G G G G G G G G G G GEEEEEEEEE
EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOFO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FO
FO FO FO FO FO FO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOEOHE OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
OHE
WEST 73.27' (TC1)
N89°37'47"E 73.31' (C)SOUTH 50' (TC2)N00°45'20"W 50.00' (C)WEST 50' (TC2)
N89°37'47"E 50.00' (C)SOUTHERLY 92.95
'
(TC1)N15°15'12
"W
93
.12
' (C)N15°15'12
"W
309
.97
' (AM)
BASIS OF BEARINGS
N89°37'47"E 282.61' (AM)
S89°37'47"W 86.27' (C)
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
SSSS15TH STREET(70'
R
IGHT-OF-WAY)
ARAPAHOE AVENUE
(60' RIGHT-OF-WAY)
8' ALLEY
MARY WELCH TRACT
(BOOK 263, PAGE 42)
TRACT 517
(REC. NO. 813562)
WV
Y DWV
WVWV
WV
S S
WV
ST
EM
EM
EV
SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS
5-SD
16-TS
9-H
16-SW
13-EI
4-SD
5-SD
7-HL
9-HL
6-SD
19-SW
8-SW
16-SW
4-SW
4-SW
4-SW
4-SW
4-SW
6-BC
6-BC
6-BC
6-BC
8-SW
6-BC
8-SW
3-BC
8-SW
3-BC
8-SW
148-TS
4-WRW
8-MSB
9-LDP
2-LDP
6-LDP
5-MSB
6-WRW
7-WRW
5-MSB
8-RGB
12-PM
5-RGB
4-PM
5-WRW
4-PGCR
3-PBB
4-MCR
9-PGCR
16-GLFS
6-MWP 6-MWP8-RS
4-SWW
4-SWW
6-SWW
5-DPBB
5-DPBB
6-SWW
3-SWW 3-SWW
4-DPBB 4-DPBB
4-PM
4-PM
6-MWP
6-MWP
28-VFRG
9-FRG
7-DFG 5-DFG
8-FRG
7-FRG
7-FRG
7-FRG
8-FRG
4-FRG
8-FRG
8-FRG
8-FRG
8-FRG 8-FRG
2-CMG 2-CMG
4-FRG 4-FRG
15-MLMG
5-CMG
4-DFG
4-DFG 2-EHB
1-AE
1-AE
1-JP
1-JP
1-JP
1-JP
1-JP
2-JP 2-JP
2-JP 2-JP
1-KC
1-KC
1-SSC
1 5 T H
S
T
R
E
E
T
A R A PA H O E A V E N U E
TRASH
ENCLOSURE
4 INVERTED-U
BIKE RACKS
SIGHT
TRIANGLES
SANDSTONE PAVERS
IN GROUNDCOVERS
PRIVACY
FENCE
STREET TREES
W/
CONTINUOUS
SHRUB BEDS
REMOVE WEEDS, AMEND SOIL, ADD
IRRIGATION AND RE-PLANT
6'-3"6'-5"
EXISTING HONEYLOCUSTS
(3) TO REMAIN AND
PROTECTED DURING
CONSTRUCTION
TREE PROTECTION
FENCING - TYP. (see detail
3.12 on sheet L2.0)
RAISED PLANTERS
ON UPPER DECKS -
TYP
6' PRIVACY
FENCE
WINDOW
WELL
WINDOW
WELL
WINDOW WELLWINDOW WELLCOMMUNITY
PATIO W/ TABLE &
CHAIRS & GRILL
Sheet
Project No:
By:
File:
Draft
for Review
Sheet Name
sg
1509 landscape.dwg
L-101
LANDSCAPE
PLAN
1509
Arapahoe
1509 Arapahoe
Boulder, CO 80303
0 10 20 FT
SCALE: 1" = 10'-0"
LANDSCAPE PLAN
LEGEND:
EXISTING TREES TO REMAIN
PROPOSED SHADE TREES
PROPOSED SHRUBS
PROPOSED ORNAMENTAL GRASSES
PROPOSED PERENNIALS
PAVER WALKS
DRY LAID STEPPING STONE &
COMMUNITY PATIO
6' PRIVACY FENCING
TREE PROTECTION FENCING
TOTAL LOT AREA
BUILDING AREA:6,056
TOTAL DRIVE & PARKING LOT:2,452
LANDSCAPE AREA / USABLE OPEN SPACE 6,750 (includes private decks)54 % usable open space
REQUIRED PROVIDED/COMMENTS
TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING STALLS 8 8
TOTAL NUMBER BIKE RACKS 20 bikes = 12 long term + 8 short term 12 long term (garage) + 8 short term
INTERIOR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPED AREA @ 10%:N/A N/A - only 2 parking spaces
FROM ADJACENT STREET 6' buffer 6' 2" minimum
Height & Opacity Landscape Material 42" ht.42" plant material screen
Width 6' Buffer 6'2"min provided
Trees alley trees: 1 tree/25 LF = 50' = 2 trees 2 trees provided
STREETSCAPE:REQUIRED PROVIDED/COMMENTS
15th Street 1 tree/40' @ 93 LF = 3 trees 3 provided
Arapahoe Avenue 1 tree/40' @ 100 LF = 3 trees 3 existing to remain
MIMINUM PLANT SIZES:
Deciduous Trees 2" cal. 4 new+ 4 existing
Evergreen Trees 6' ht.0
Ornamental Trees 1.5" cal.3 + 13 on roof in planters
Shrubs #5 container 206 shrubs + 170 orn grasses
LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS: 8/1/23
1 tree & 5 shrubs/1500 sf =4,053 sf = 3 trees + 14 shrubs
PARKING LOT SCREENING:
OVERALL SITE
12,561 sf
FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES
# Date Description
1 1/12/23Site Reveiw Submittal
2 4/28/23Site City Comments
3 6/23/23Site City Comments
4 8/01/23Site City Comments
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 35 of 78
Sheet
Project No:
By:
File:
1509
Arapahoe
1509 Arapahoe
Boulder, CO 80303
sg
1509 landscape.dwg
Draft
for Review
L-102
Sheet Name
LANDSCAPE
NOTES &
DETAILS
1. LANDSCAPING SCHEDULE: (A) NOTHING SHALL BE PLANTED BETWEEN OCTOBER 15 AND MARCH 1 WITHOUT
PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE CITY. STOCK, OTHER THAN CONTAINER-GROWN STOCK, SHALL NOT BE
PLANTED BETWEEN JUNE 1 AND SEPTEMBER 1 WITHOUT PRIOR WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE CITY. BARE ROOT STOCK
SHALL NOT BE PLANTED AFTER APRIL 30 OR IF PLANTS HAVE BEGUN TO LEAF OUT. (B) NOTHING SHALL BE
PLANTED DURING FREEZING OR EXCESSIVELY WINDY, HOT, OR WET WEATHER OR WHEN THE GROUND CONDITIONS
CANNOT BE PROPERLY WORKED FOR DIGGING, MIXING, RAKING, OR GRADING. (C) NOTHING SHALL BE PLANTED
UNTIL THE ADJACENT SITE IMPROVEMENTS, PAVEMENTS, IRRIGATION INSTALLATION AND FINISH GRADING IS
COMPLETED. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL TEST THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM IN THE PRESENCE OF THE DIRECTOR. THE
IRRIGATION SYSTEM SHALL BE IN APPROVED, OPERATING CONDITION PRIOR TO ANY PLANTING.
2. SITE PREPARATION AND ALL PLANTING SHALL BE COMPLETED, AT A MINIMUM, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CITY
OF BOULDER DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS. SITE PREPARATION SHALL INCLUDE TILLING THE SOIL TO A
MINIMUM DEPTH OF SIX INCHES BELOW THE FINISHED GRADE, TOGETHER WITH SOIL AMENDMENTS THAT ARE
APPROPRIATE TO ENSURE THE HEALTH AND SUSTAINABILITY OF THE LANDSCAPING TO BE PLANTED.
3. TURF GRASS SHALL BE LIMITED TO A MAXIMUM OF 25 PERCENT OF ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS ON THE SITE.
4. ALL PLANTING BEDS AND A 3-FOOT DIAMETER RING AT THE BASE OF EACH TREE WITHIN SOD OR SEEDED AREAS
SHALL BE MULCHED WITH ORGANIC MULCH AT LEAST 4” DEEP.
5. GRAVEL, ROCK MULCH, OR CRUSHER FINES SHALL NOT BE USED UNDER TREES OR ANY PLANTING AREAS. ROCK
OR GRAVEL MAY ONLY BE USED AS A SPECIFIC ORNAMENTAL FEATURE IN LIMITED AREAS (SUCH AS AT THE
BOTTOM OF A DRAINAGE SWALE OR DRY RIVER BED) OR AS A PEDESTRIAN PATH OR PATIO.
6. WEED BARRIER FABRIC SHALL NOT TO BE USED IN ANY PLANTING AREAS.
7. ALL PLANTS SHALL BE GROUPED BY WATER NEEDS. A MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF ALL LANDSCAPED AREAS
(INCLUDING ANY TURF GRASS) MUST USE LOW TO MODERATE WATER DEMAND PLANTS. THE LANDSCAPE SHALL
BE DESIGNED SO THAT, AT MATURITY, NOT MORE THAN 10 PERCENT OF THE LANDSCAPED AREA IS EXPOSED
MULCH.
8. ALL LANDSCAPE AREAS SHALL BE WATERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM. THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM
MUST BE ZONED TO DELIVER DIFFERENT APPROPRIATE AMOUNTS OF WATER TO DIFFERENT PLANT ZONES. THE SITE
SHOULD BE IRRIGATED WITH DRIP IRRIGATION, BUBBLER, OR MICRO-SPRAY SYSTEMS. ALL TREES WILL BE ZONED
SEPARATELY FROM TURF GRASS. ALL IRRIGATION ZONES SHALL USE A SMART SYSTEM THAT ADJUSTS FOR
RAINFALL, SOIL MOISTURE, AND OTHER WEATHER FACTORS.
9. PROTECTIVE MAINTENANCE: AN APPLICANT FOR CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL SHALL PROVIDE MAINTENANCE
AND CARE FOR ALL EXISTING TREES REQUIRED TO BE PROTECTED IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ADJACENT TO ANY
PROJECT OR CONSTRUCTION SITE DURING CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND THE PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT WARRANTY
PERIOD TO ENSURE THAT EXISTING TREES SURVIVE AND ARE NOT DAMAGED. REFER TO CHAPTER 3 OF THE DESIGN
AND CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS FOR ALL TREE PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS. (ONLY APPLICABLE TO EXISTING
PUBLIC STREET TREES OR EXISTING PRIVATE TREES THAT WILL MEET THE STREET TREE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION
9-9-13 BRC 1981)
10. ALL NEW TREES SHALL BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF 10’ FROM ANY EXISTING WATER OR SEWER UTILITY LINES
OR FROM LIGHT POLES OR OVERHEAD UTILITY POLES. ALL NEW UTILITY LINES SHALL BE LOCATED A MINIMUM OF
10’ FROM ANY EXISTING PUBLIC STREET TREE.
CITY OF BOULDER STANDARD LANDSCAPE NOTES
DECIDUOUS TREE
OPPOSITE SIDE SAMEOPPOSITE SIDE SAME
LC
LC
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO REVISED:
ISSUED:
DRAWING NO.
JULY 2, 1998
DECIDUOUS EVERGREEN
SHRUB SHRUB
SPECIFICATIONS
MULCHED,
SOD-FREE
BASE AROUND
BALL
BALL
EVERGREEN TREE
TRUNK PLUMB AND
8" GREEN STEEL
TEE POSTS WITH
BLADE ON TREE
SIDE
NOTES:
RUN DOUBLE STRAND 12 GAUGE
WIRE THROUGH GROMMETS IN 2''
NYLON STRAP. RUN WIRE TO
2. SEE SPECS FOR PLANTING OF
PLANT PIT
TWO TIMES
LARGER
THAN BALL
DIAMETER.
ROOT BALL
PLANT PIT
TWO TIMES
LARGER
THAN BALL
DIAMETER
BACKFILL
FINISH GRADE WITH
SOD OR MULCH,
BACKFILL
REMOVE ALL FOREIGN MATERIALS FROM TRUNK AND BALL
FOLD BACK TOP HALF OF UNTREATED BURLAP
UNDISTURBED SUBGRADE
SRW
TREES AND SHRUBS
PLANTING DETAIL 3.02DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
APPROVED BY:
STRAIGHT
TREES PER
POST AND TWIST FOR SLIGHT
VINES AND GROUND COVERS.
3. DETAIL IS TYPICAL IN INTENT ONLY.
TO BE 1''
SEE PLAN
JSH
ROOT BALL TO BE
2'' ABOVE
FINISHED
GRADE
ABOVE
FINISHED
GRADE
TENSION
1. WRAP TRUNK WITH 4'' TREE
WRAP PER SPECIFICATIONS.
NW NW 120
TREES UNDER
3'' CLP
TREES 3''
CLP AND UP
STAKING PLAN
PROTECTIVE CAP
SECURED TO STAKE
OCT. 17, 2000
CRITICAL ROOT ZONE
TREE WELL
BACKFILL
DRIP LINE
ROOT CUTTING WITHIN
DRIP LINE SHOULD BE
AVOIDED
TREE RETENTION
ROCK OR TIE WALL
CRITICAL ROOT ZONE
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY:
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
REVISED:
ISSUED:
DRAWING NO.
JULY 2, 1998JSH
RJH GRADE CHANGE
AROUND
EXISTING TREES 3.04
OCT. 17, 2000
SECTION
PLAN
CANOPY DRIP LINE
PROTECTIVE FENCING
DURING CONSTRUCTION
AERATION BEFORE,
DURING AND AFTER
CONSTRUCTION
FENCE LOCATION AT
DRIP LINE OR 15'
FROM TRUNK,
WHICHEVER IS GREATER
AND SHALL ENCLOSE
TREE
TREE FENCING SHALL
BE A MINIMUM OF
4' HIGH ORANGE
POLYETHYLENE
LAMINAR SAFETY
NETTING
POSTS SETTING TO
2' IN GROUND MADE
OF DURABLE METAL
"T" OR EQUIVALENT
SEE SECTION
PROTECTED ROOT ZONE WITHIN THE
CANOPY DRIP LINE-ACTUAL FEEDER ROOTS
EXTEND WELL BEYOND DRIP LINE
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
APPROVED BY:
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS
CITY OF BOULDER, COLORADO
REVISED:
ISSUED:
DRAWING NO.
JULY 2, 1998JSH
RJH PROTECTED ROOT
ZONE AND
DRIP LINE 3.12
OCT. 17, 2000
KEY QTY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME SIZE o.c.
SPACING
WATER
USAGE
AE 2 Ulmus 'Accolade'Accolade Elm 2" clp.as shown MED
KC 2 Gymnocladus dioicus Kentucky Coffeetree 2" clp.as shown LOW
TOTAL:4
EHB 2 Carpinus betulus 'Emerald Ave'Emerald Ave. European Hornbeam 1.5" clp.as shown MED
JP 13 Pyrus calleryana 'Jaczam'Jack Flowering Pear 1.5" clp.as shown MED
SSC 1 Malus x 'Spring Snow'Spring Snow Crabapple 1.5" clp.as shown MED
TOTAL:16
DPBB 18 Buddleia 'Blue Chip Jr.' USPP 26581 Dwarf Purple-Blue Butterfly Bush 5 gallon 3' o.c.MED
GLFS 16 Rhus aromatica 'Gro-Low'Grow Low Fragrant Sumac 5 gallon 5' o.c.LOW
LDP 17 Ligustrum vulgare 'Lodense'Lodense Privet 5 gallon 3' o.c.LOW
MCR 4 Rosa 'Morden Centennial'Morden Centennial Rose 5 gallon 3.5' o.c.LOW
MSB 18 Symphoricarpos x doorenbosii 'Marlene'Marlene Snowberry 5 gallon 3' o.c.LOW
MWP 24 Potentilla fruticosa 'McKay's White'Mckay's White Potentilla 5 gallon 3' o.c.LOW
PBB 3 Buddleja davidii nanhoensis `Petite Plum`Compact Purple Butterfly Bush 5 gallon 5' o.c.LOW
PGCR 13 Rosa x 'Noatraum' P.P.# 7282 Flower Carpet(R) Pink Ground Cover Rose 5 gallon 3.5' o.c.LOW
PM 24 Arctostaphylos x coloradoensis Panchito Panchito Manzanita 5 gallon 4' o.c.LOW
RGB 13 Berberis thunbergii 'Rose Glow'Rose Glow Japanese Barberry 5 gallon 4' o.c.LOW
RS 8 Perovskia atriplicifolia Russian Sage 5 gallon 4' o.c.LOW
SWW 26 Weigela florida 'Bokraspiwi' USPP 23781 Spilled Wine® Weigela 5 gallon 2' o.c.MED
WRW 22 Weigela florida Wine and Roses Wine and Roses Weigela 5 gallon 3' o.c.MED
TOTAL:206
CMG 9 Miscanthus sinensis 'Arabesque'Arabesque Maiden Grass 1 gallon 24" o.c.MED
DFG 20 Pennisetum alopecuroides 'Hameln'Dwarf Fountain Grass 1 gallon 1.5' o.c.LOW
FRG 98 Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Karl Foerster`Foerster Feather Reed Grass 1 gallon 1.5' o.c.LOW
MLMG 15 Miscanthus sinensis 'Morning Light'Morning Light Maiden Grass 1 gallon 1.5' o.c.MED
VFRG 28 Calamagrostis x acutiflora `Overdam`Overdam Feather Reed Grass 1 gallon 1.5' o.c.LOW
TOTAL:170
BC 36 Geranium x cantabrigiense 'Biokovo'Biokovo Cranesbill 1 gallon 18" o.c.MED
EI 13 Hedera helix English Ivy 1 gallon 24" o.c.MED
H 9 Hosta x 'Patriot'Patriot Plantain Lily 1 gallon 18" o.c.MED
HL 16 Lavandula angustifolia 'Hidcote'Deep Blue Lavender 1 gallon 18" o.c.MED
SD 20 Leucanthemum x 'Becky'Becky Shasta Daisy 1 gallon 24" o.c.LOW
SW 111 Galium odoratum Sweet Woodruff 4" pots 12" o.c.MED
TS 158 Veronica liaanensis Turkish Speedwell 4" pots 12" o.c.LOW
TOTAL:363
SHADE TREES:
PLANT LIST: 8/1/23
SHRUBS:
ORNAMENTAL TREES:
ORNAMENTAL GRASSES:
PERENNIALS:
TOURNESOL
WILSHIRE
PLANTER -
SIZES VARY
(3' x 3 x 3' tree
boxes, 2' x 2' x
4-10' L)
RAISED PLANTERS - ROOF DECKS
SCALE: NTS
LANDSCAPE FORMS Parc
Center Table & Chairs
COMMUNITY TABLE & CHAIRS
SCALE: NTS
SS
SS
STSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTSTST ST ST ST
W
W
WWWS89°37'47"W 100.00' (C)
EAST 100' (TC2)NORTH 140' (TC2)S00°45'20"E 140.00' (C)EEEEE E E EWWWWWWWW W W WW W W W W W W WGGGGGGEEEEEEEEEEEEEFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO
FO FO FO FOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFOFO EOHEOHE OHE
OHE
WEST 73.27' (TC1)
N89°37'47"E 73.31' (C)SOUTH 50' (TC2)N00°45'20"W 50.00' (C)WEST 50' (TC2)
N89°37'47"E 50.00' (C)SOUTHERLY 92
.95
' (TC1)N15°15'12
"W 93
.12
'
(C)
S89°37'47"W 86.27' (C)
ARAPAHOE AVENUE
(60' RIGHT-OF-WAY)
8' ALLEY
MARY WELCH TRACT
(BOOK 263, PAGE 42)
TRACT 517
(REC. NO. 813562)
WV
WV
EM
EM
EV
12,561 PERCENTAGE
BUILDING AREA:6,056 48%
TOTAL DRIVE & PARKING LOT:2,452 20%
6,750 54%
DECORATIVE WALKS AND PATIO (PAVERS)1,755 14%
LANDSCAPE SHRUB BEDS 2,875 23%
PRIVATE PATIOS 2120 31%
TOTAL LOT AREA
OPEN SPACE AREA:
OPEN SPACE SUMMARY TABLE: 6/23/23
OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM
SCALE: 1/16" =1'-0"
# Date Description
1 1/12/23Site Reveiw Submittal
2 4/28/23Site City Comments
3 6/23/23Site City Comments
GAS GRILL -
Home Depot or
equal
COMMUNITY GAS GRILL
SCALE: NTS
4 8/01/23Site City Comments
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 36 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 37 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 38 of 78
Burgundy Wire-cut Brick
Aluminum Black Metal Siding –
will match balcony railings,
trim and mechanical screening,
as shown in rendering.
Painted Cedar Color to Match Rendering
Materials Board
Sandstone veneer for planters
and window accents
Trex Composite Pergola
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 39 of 78
Stucco
Materials Board –Cont.
Black steel Powder coated
mechanical screening
Anderson 100 reinforced
fiberglass black windows
4”Hardiboard
Painted Cedar Color to Match Rendering
Sandbuff SandstoneItem 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 40 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 41 of 78
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call UpPage 42 of 78
1509 Arapahoe; LUR2023-00002
BUILDING DESIGN
1)Building appurtenances requirements: Per Section 9-7-7 BRC:
Six of our eight proposed mechanical screens comply with section 9-7-7, a) (1), in that they do not
exceed the maximum building height allowed by zoning regulations.
And the two other screens comply with section 9-7-7, a) (2): (A) There is a functional need; (B) The
functional need cannot be made with a screen of lesser height; & (C) Visible materials are
compatible with building materials.
All screening complies with a) (3) – There is no usable floor area, and a) (4) (A) screening is
consistent with building design; (B) They have been places to the rear of the street facades on the
interior of the lot; (C) The height of the screening is the minimum necessary; & (D) The screening
does not increase the apparent height of the walls.
Response to Downtown Urban Design Guidelines: Interface Area
A)Maintain the historic or predominant building setback line.
The majority of the buildings along 15th between Canyon and Arapahoe Ave. and those along Arapahoe
to the West have been built right next to the City sidewalk. 1509 Arapahoe continues this tradition.
B)Views: Projects should be designed to preserve access to mountain views from the public realm
and surrounding area. The south and west edges of downtown offer the most spectacular views.
75% of the units enjoy the views and solar access provided by the southern and western exposure.
Views from the public sidewalk surrounding the property will continue to enjoy the views and southern
exposure.
C)Sun & Shade: Provide natural light in buildings & create appealing pedestrian areas that are ice
free and sunny in the winter and shady in the summer.
With our building’s orientation to the south and west, the majority of the units will receive ample direct
sunlight. The adjacent city sidewalks and associated unit entrances will remain ice free during the
winter, while the courtyard and seating area on the north side of the building will provide shade and
respite from the summer sun.
D)Minimize the visibility of mechanical, structural and electrical appurtenances.
Low profile mechanical units have been placed to the rear of the building, towards the center of the
property to minimize their impact on the adjacent streets and neighboring properties. Electric & gas
meters will be placed in the rear of the building.
E)Design all sides of building including alley elevations.
All sides of the building have been incorporated into a cohesive design which includes building entries
with like awnings, consistent window configurations, balconies and planting areas. Materials used on
Attachment D - Applicant's Written Statement
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 43 of 78
the primary facades wrap around the sides of the buildings to a minimum of one structural bay.
Screening of parking and trash facilities are an integral part of the overall design.
F) Exterior building lighting should be designed to enhance the overall architecture of the building.
Security lighting should be designed for safety as well as nighttime appearance.
Building lighting will be primarily downlighting placed within ceiling cavities. All will be designed for
safety, minimize nighttime appearance and enhance the building.
G) Reduce the visual impact of structured and surface parking:
75% of parking is below grade and the two remaining spaces at the rear of the lot will be screened from
neighboring properties and the alley. 6 Units are accessible from the City sidewalk as well as a central
courtyard to the rear of the property. Two units are easily accessed from a sidewalk off of Arapahoe as
well as from the central courtyard.
H) The law requires that universal access be located with the principal public entrance.
Universal access is provided from the City sidewalk entrances.
I) Consider the quality of open space incorporated into the new building.
The project has a hardscaped central courtyard adjacent to a more casual seating area within the
landscape.
Building Design Intent:
The 1509 Arapahoe development introduces much needed multi-family housing into downtown
Boulder. The project will transform a large parking lot with small, one-story retail building into
traditional townhomes that provide generous, quality living space for residents while helping to enliven
and frame the 15th and Arapahoe corner in conjunction with the building to the west. The architecture
strives to be complementary to that building in form, mass and materials. Residents will enjoy direct
access to the city sidewalk from their living rooms as well as third floor outdoor living space with
unobstructed views of the flatirons to the southwest.
The design intent is to create a strong presence at the corner while articulating the façade into
traditional townhome modules with offsetting facades. This provides a vertical component to an
otherwise horizontal mass as well as referencing an historic urban archetype. This verticality is
reinforced with projecting bays and upright fenestration. The facades repetitive rhythm along the street
is complemented by alternating use of traditional materials. Additional interest has been added with
the use of metal detailing with awnings, balconies and inset panels. The stone wainscot, raised planters
and recessed front doors provide visual interest and establish a pedestrian scale that engages the city
sidewalk.
The first two floors are predominantly veneered in brick with stone detailing at windows and wainscot.
The masonry is softened by the adjacent stained, horizontal wood siding cladding the projecting bays.
These traditional materials are complimented by the introduction of modern glass railings and metal
paneling.
Attachment D - Applicant's Written Statement
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 44 of 78
Building fenestration is predicated on a traditional rectangular, 3’x5’ module with vertical orientation.
Windows are grouped in combinations of one, two & three units. Additional window configurations are
used to contrast the basic pattern and either highlight an architectural feature or reflect interior
functionality. We have strived to stack like combinations of windows in an orderly fashion. In some
instances, the functioning of the interior demanded a more casual window placement. This situation
only occurs once on the main facades, but, is more common on the building elevations opening onto the
interior of the lot itself.
The third floor has been stepped back to reduce the mass of the building as well as to provide a
generous outdoor living area. This floor introduces a new masonry material (stucco) and color to
differentiate itself from the levels below.
Attachment D - Applicant's Written Statement
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 45 of 78
Project Summary for Site Plan Review and Lot Consolidation:
The existing building lots are located at 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe. The proposal is to combine the
two building lots for eight (8) attached single family residences with an urban design to maximize
density while also retaining the pedestrian oriented design off of 15th St and Arapahoe. The
development meets sections 9-2-14 (h), B.R.C. 1981 because:
• it doesn’t exceed the allow density of the zone district.
• Is designed with from a pedestrian scale to enhance the right-of-way.
• Includes vegetative gardens and street landscaping to soften the development and create
a walkable streetscape.
• Has a single access off the alley to the property with underground parking for six (6) of
the eight (8) parking stalls proposed. Long term bike parking is also proposed
underground to increase resident safety.
• Private open space and onsite gardens are proposed with native species in addition to
tree preservation and street scape gardens to enhance aesthetics off of the public right-
of-way.
• The height and scale of the development fits within the neighborhood while also
promoting density within the urban.
(1)Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) criteria:
The proposed development is designed to allow for a non-vehicular lifestyle. While
parking is proposed, the location allows for easy alternative modes of transportation minimizing
greenhouse gas emissions. The development creates an urban design while keeping with the
design style unique to the City of Boulder’s downtown area.
The development will redevelop the site to a more vegetative space than what currently exists.
The development reintroduces vegetation and creates a space while allowing for intimate open
spaces dedicated to local group gatherings for the residents of the property.
Access to the property allows for a prominent pedestrian access hierarchy while minimizing the
vehicular access. The proposed alley vehicular access and underground parking minimizes, to the
greatest extent, the vehicular access.
Landscaping has been proposed to the greatest extent to promote diversity, native materials and
to create a urban yet natural realm.
The proposed building has been positioned to engage the pedestrian realm of the streetscape.
The design creates an urban feel while also maintaining the massing which is consistent with the
surrounding area.
Building materials have been chosen to fit within the character of the city with natural materials
of brick and stone and wood (which will meet building code fire resistance requirements).
Attachment D - Applicant's Written Statement
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 46 of 78
The proposed development meets the requirements of the Non-Historic and interface areas:
• The development has been designed to improve the streetscape from what is
currently there and pedestrian active space; while providing step back on the third
floor
• The development will not inhibit the spectacular views of the south corridor. The
building will not rise above the existing school south of the development.
• The proposed development has been designed with pedestrians in mind. The sun
access is prominent with sunny pedestrian access to the entrances of all units.
• Mechanical, electrical, structural appurtenances will be screen from the street.
• Solar panels will have low profiles and will be incorporated into shade structures
on the roof top decks
• Design has incorporated all areas including alley access with design features and
plantings.
• Exterior lightings has been intended to enhance the overall building with security
lighting being minimally invasive to the surrounding area.
• Parking has been proposed underground to minimize the visual impact of the
parking. Especially compared to what is currently there, parking will appear to be
minimal while providing all necessary parking for the proposed units.
• Proposed open space has been designed to create a welcoming gathering place for
all residences of the development with outdoor seating and a grilling area.
• Architectural character has been maintained to ensure that the design is appealing
and fits in with the unique architectural designs within the downtown area of
Boulder.
• The proposed development is intended to create a pedestrian oriented
environment along the streets for safe and comfortable access along the
development.
• Visual connections will be maintained as they currently exist, but will provide a
safer feeling with the residential environment adjacent to the school vs the
existing commercial development which provides a gathering of people in areas
which can make this corner less inviting to everyone.
• The proposed street scape is designed to be pedestrian oriented with wider
sidewalks at 14 feet in width provide a welcoming and comfortable pedestrian
thoroughfare.
• All sidewalks will have sufficient sun access.
•
Attachment D - Applicant's Written Statement
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 47 of 78
January 12, 2023
Stephen Brown
Brown Development Group
PO Box 6286
Denver, Colorado 80206
Reference: Travel Demand Management (TDM) Plan
1509 Arapahoe Avenue – Boulder, Colorado
SiteWorks Project No. 22239A
Dear Stephen:
This TDM Plan has been prepared for the proposed multi-family residential
development, located at 1509 Arapahoe Avenue, in Boulder, Colorado.
Project Information
The proposed project is located on the northeast corner of 15th Street and Arapahoe
Avenue in Boulder, Colorado. The 0.30 acre parcel is currently developed with an
existing commercial building. The proposed development consists of eight (8) multi-
family residential units with below grade parking. Vehicular access to the site is
proposed to be from the existing alley that runs East-West along the north property
line, with full movement access entering from 15th Street and southbound right turn
exiting onto 16th Street. There are numerous opportunities for alternative transit
services located adjacent to the site.
TDM Strategies
Strategies for trip reduction include:
•Package Elements: An “Alternative Transportation Subsidy Fund” will be
created by the developer. The developer will contribute to the Fund equal to
the cost of a 3-year participation in the Eco Pass program. This Fund will be
managed by the HOA, and can be used for expenses such as B-cycle and
car-share memberships, additional bicycle parking racks for the project,
transit (RTD) passes, and other HOA approved items. In addition, the HOA
will prepare and submit an annual report to Staff on the TDM related
expenditures per dwelling unit.
•Orientation Packets: An “Orientation Packet” will be provided to each new
resident that includes brochures, maps, and other resources to inform
residents of their transportation options. This packet will include RTD bus
information, the City of Boulder bicycle and pedestrian map (or similar), and
information on special events. This packet will be provided initially by the
developer at the time of sale.
•Evaluation: Through the sales agreement, the site’s residents will agree to
participate in annual on-line or paper surveys regarding their use and
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 48 of 78
Stephen Brown
Brown Development Group
January 12, 2023
Page 2 of 3
satisfaction with transportation demand management programs. The
evaluation will be administered by the City of Boulder using on-line tools.
• Pedestrian Enhancements: A 5’ detached sidewalk with 8’ landscape buffer is
proposed along Arapahoe Avenue. The existing attached sidewalk along 15th
Street is proposed to remain an 8’ detached walk with 4’ tree grates.
• Bike Enhancements: There are numerous bicycle enhancements located
adjacent to the site. The Boulder Creek Path is located directly south and
west of the site. Arapahoe Avenue has a muti-modal path. 15th Street is a
designated bike route. Grove Street is a contra flow bike lane which leads to
a designated bike route.
• Transit Enhancement: There are numerous RTD stops located adjacent to the
site. Stops for the BOLT include 14th and Arapahoe, 16th and Arapahoe and
15th and Canyon. The RTD Boulder Terminal is located two blocks north at 14th
and Canyon, with numerous transportation connections throughout the
region. Information about transit services will be provided in the Orientation
Packets.
• Meet Long-Term Bicycle Parking: 12 long-term bicycle parking spaces are
required by code. A wall-mounted bicycle rack will be provided in the
underground parking garage, providing a safe, secure, enclosed storage area
large enough to accommodate a total of 12 long-term bicycle parking spaces.
• Meet Short-Term Bicycle Parking: 4 short-term bicycle parking spaces are
required by code and 8 short- term bicycle parking spaces are proposed.
These standard City of Boulder U Racks are located on the north side of the
site, adjacent to the alley. Most of these proposed parking spaces will allow
for bicycles with attached trailers.
• Managed Off-Street Parking: The proposed project will have a total of 8
parking spaces. These spaces will be reserved for the residential units (one
per unit).
Should you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, kindly give us a
call.
Sincerely,
Donald P. Ash, P.E.
Principal – SiteWorks
Attachment: City of Boulder’s Draft Residential
Development Toolkit Packages
01/12/23
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 49 of 78
Stephen Brown
Brown Development Group
January 12, 2023
Page 3 of 3
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 50 of 78
April 28, 2023
Stephen Brown
Brown Development Group
PO Box 6286
Denver, Colorado 80206
Reference: Trip Generation Letter
1509 Arapahoe Avenue – Boulder, Colorado
SiteWorks Project No. 22239A
Dear Stephen:
This Trip Generation Letter has been prepared for the proposed multi-family
residential development located at 1509 Arapahoe Avenue, in Boulder, Colorado.
Project Information
The proposed project is located on the northeast corner of 15th Street and
Arapahoe Avenue in Boulder, Colorado. The 0.30 acre parcel is currently developed
with an existing commercial building. The proposed development consists of eight
(8) multi-family residential units with below grade parking. Vehicular access to the
site is proposed to be from the existing alley that runs east-west along the north
property line, with full movement access entering from 15th Street and southbound
right turn exiting onto 16th Street. There are numerous opportunities for alternative
transit services located adjacent to the site.
Trip Generation
The proposal land used for the trip generation analysis is multi-family residential.
Reference the Land Use Category #230 – Residential Condominium/Townhouse
from Trip Generation, 11th Edition, 2021, by the Institute of Transportation Engineers
(ITE).
The following Table No. 1 summarizes the proposed weekday, morning and afternoon
peak hour trip generation for the proposed land use.
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 51 of 78
Stephen Brown
Brown Development Group
April 28, 2023
Page 2 of 3
Table No. 1 – Trip Generation Rates
Use Fitted
Curve AM Peak Fitted
Curve PM Peak
17%
In
83%
Out
67%
In
33%
Out
8 Units 6.85 2 6 7.58 5 3
Use Fitted
Curve
Average Daily Trips
(ADT)
50%
In
50%
Out
8 Units 75 37.5 37.5
The project is estimated to generate eight (8) new AM peak hour trips and eight (8)
new PM peak hour trips.
Trip Distribution
Arapahoe Avenue is an east-west, two lane, minor arterial roadway, located directly
south of the site. The intersection with 15th Street is signalized.
15th Street is a north-south, two lane, residential roadway, located directly west of
the site. The intersection with Arapahoe Avenue is signalized.
The Public Alley is an east-west, one lane, residential alley, located directly north of
the site. The alley is one way to the east. The intersection at 16th Street is stop sign
controlled and right turn only.
16th Street is a north-south, one lane, residential roadway, located west of the site.
The street is one way to the south. The intersection with Arapahoe Avenue is full
movement and stop sign controlled.
Exhibit No. 2 shows the trip distribution anticipated for this project.
Trip Assignment
Exhibit No. 3 shows the trip assignment of the site generated traffic.
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 52 of 78
Stephen Brown
Brown Development Group
April 28, 2023
Page 3 of 3
Should you have any questions or comments concerning this letter, kindly give us a
call.
Sincerely,
Donald P. Ash, P.E.
Principal – SiteWorks
Attachment: Exhibit No. 1 – Location Map
Exhibit No. 2 – Trip Distribution
Exhibit No. 3 – Trip Assignment
04/28/23
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 53 of 78
Project:
File:
Date:
1509 Arapahoe
1509 Arapahoe Avenue
Boulder, CO 80302
22239B
22239B-1
05/01/23
PROJECT SITE
SCALE:
LOCATION MAP1
1" = 2000'
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 54 of 78
Project:
File:
Date:
1509 Arapahoe
1509 Arapahoe Avenue
Boulder, CO 80302
22239B
22239B-1
05/01/23
PROJECT
SITE
SCALE:
TRIP
DISTRIBUTION2
1" = 100'
ARAPAHOE AVENUE15TH STREET16TH STREETGROVE STREET
ALLEY
50%
50%
60%40%
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 55 of 78
Project:
File:
Date:
1509 Arapahoe
1509 Arapahoe Avenue
Boulder, CO 80302
22239B
22239B-1
05/01/23
PROJECT
SITE
SCALE:
TRIP
ASSIGNMENT3
1" = 100'
ARAPAHOE AVENUE15TH STREET16TH STREETGROVE STREET
ALLEY
1
2
1
3
2
1
4
2
19
19
15 22.5
37.5 37.5
37.5
3
2
AM PEAK HOUR
PM PEAK HOUR
XX.X AVERAGE DAILY
TRAFFIC (ADT)
Attachment E - TDM Plan and Trip Generation
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 56 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 57 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 58 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 59 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 60 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 61 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 62 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 63 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 64 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 65 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 66 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 67 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 68 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 69 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 70 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 71 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 72 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 73 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 74 of 78
Attachment F - Neighbor Comment
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 75 of 78
CITY OF BOULDER
DESIGN ADVISORY BOARD MINUTES
October 11, 2023
Virtual
A permanent set of these minutes and a tape recording (maintained for a period of seven years)
are retained in Central Records (telephone: 303-441-3043). Minutes and streaming audio are also
available on the web at: http://www.bouldercolorado.gov/
DAB MEMBERS PRESENT:
Brendan Ash
Rory Bilocerkowycz
Todd Bryan (Chair)
Stephen Eckert
Matthew Schexnyder
ml Robles, Planning Board Ex-Officio Representative
DAB MEMBERS ABSENT:
No members were absent.
STAFF PRESENT:
Kalani Pahoa, Urban Designer
Devin Saunders, Board Specialist
Charles Ferro, Development Review Planning Senior Manager
Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Alison Blaine, Senior Planner
Ali Pfenninger, Comprehensive Project Coordinator
Chandler Van Schaack, Principal Planner
1. CALL TO ORDER
Chair, T. Bryan, declared a quorum at 4:02p.m. and the following business was conducted.
2. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
No one spoke.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
A. On a motion by R. Bilocerkowycz and seconded by B. Ash, the board unanimously
approved the August 9, 2023 minutes as submitted.
4. DISCUSSION ITEMS
A. 1509 ARAPAHOE
Staff Introduction
A. Blaine introduced the item to the board.
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 76 of 78
Applicant Presentation:
M. McNamara with Brown Development Group, representing the applicant, presented the
item to the board.
Board Questions:
M. McNamara with Brown Development Group, representing the applicant, answered
questions from the board.
Board Comments:
1. Criteria 2.1.A
o 17 Walnut is a good example of setbacks that are more consistent on two sides of
the building.
o There is concern about articulating the Arapahoe façade more.
o There needs to be more variation or articulation on the Arapahoe façade, which
also includes the setback. The planted buffer on one side of the street could be
more consistent with what is on the other side of the street.
o There is an overall feeling that setbacks on the building were generally consistent
with new development and architecture.
2. Criteria 2.1.C
o The sun/shade issues were adequately addressed, considering the limitations.
3. Criteria 2.1.F
o The entries on the south façade should be addressed with further design study,
which will also help other comments about articulating and activating.
o The south elevation could benefit by considering treatments on the west side –
potentially flipping units.
o There is a lack of cohesion among all the elevations, with the west elevation
working the best. The other elevations could benefit from the proposed west side
stylistic choices.
o The 15th Street setbacks are consistent with the Mosaic building – suggesting that
the jogging in and out should be present on both 15th Street and Arapahoe Street.
4B: 5675 ARAPAHOE
Staff Introduction
C. Van Schaack introduced the item to the board.
Applicant Presentation:
J. Anastasi with OZ Architecture, representing the applicant, presented the item to the board.
Applicant Presentation:
J. Anastasi with OZ Architecture, representing the applicant, answered questions from the
board.
Board comments:
1. Criteria (h)(2)(A)(v)
o Regarding the circulation, look for ways to reduce the use of pavement in the
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 77 of 78
circulation pattern.
2. Criteria (h)(3)(A)(ii)
o Regarding parking, there is not a particular consensus on the parking but that it
could be put in another place that would still make it accessible.
o There were questions raised about flipping the plan in different ways, as there is
some concern about the pavilion and area C and how that interacts with the
service road (programmatic).
3. Criteria (h)(3)(A)(vi)
o consensus recommendation to find the outer edge to grab the architectural
tectonics of the buildings and connection with the sidewalk.
5. BOARD MATTERS
6. CALENDAR CHECK
7. ADJOURNMENT
The Design Advisory Board adjourned the meeting at 6:33 p.m.
APPROVED BY
_________________________________
Board Chair
_12/13/2023______________________
DATE
Item 3A - 1501 and 1509 Arapahoe Ave Call Up Page 78 of 78
MEMORANDUM
TO: Planning Board
FROM: Alison Blaine, Case Manager
DATE: January 29, 2024
SUBJECT: Call Up Item: Use review to allow residential uses on the ground floor facing a street
in an Industrial-Service 1 zone district. The proposal includes the redevelopment of
the existing site with two new residential buildings containing 21 three-story
townhouse units with private garages. The call-up period expires on Feb. 12,
2024.
ADDRESS: 4725 Broadway
PROJECT NAME: 4725 Broadway
CASE NO: LUR2022-00032
Attached is the Notice of Disposition of approval of a Use Review for residential on the ground floor facing a
street in the Industrial – Service 1 (IS-1) Zoning District per the “Use Standards” in Section 9-6-1, B.R.C 1981.
A Site Review application for the site is not required as it does not trip the minimum threshold for Site Review
in the IS-1 zone of 5 acres or 100,000 square feet of floor area. Refer to Attachment B for staff’s analysis of
the Use Review Criteria. Planning Board may call up the decision on or before Feb. 12, 2024. Please direct
any clarifying questions during the call up period to the case manager at blainea@bouldercolorado.gov.
Background. The subject property is located in North Boulder on the western side of Broadway and south of
Lee Hill Rd. The site is also about a half-mile east of Foothills Community Park. The surrounding context of the
area is made up of a variety of uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial. Single-family residential
is located west of the site with mixed-density residential to the east, as well as further north and south along
Broadway. Such residential developments include the Armory, the Bus Stop Apartments, 1175 Lee Hill, and
live-work units at 4645 Broadway. The area includes several commercial and office uses, including the
Comfort Inn and Suites, North Boulder library branch, various restaurants, and mixed-use developments.
Areas to the north and south include industrial uses, such as storage facilities and auto repair services. Refer
to Figure 1 for an aerial photo of the site.
Figure 1. Vicinity Map
Subject Site
Holiday
Neighborhood Industrial
Uses
The Armory
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 1 of 38
The project site is zoned Industrial-Service 1 (IS-1) which is described as: “Service industrial areas primarily
used to provide to the community a wide range of repair and service uses and small-scale manufacturing
uses.” (Section 9-5-2(c)(4), B.R.C. 1981). Surrounding zone districts in the area vary including RL-2, RM-1,
and RMX-2 as well BT-1, BT-2, IS-1, IS-2, and MU-1. Refer to Figure 2.
Figure 2. Zoning Districts
The site currently contains an industrial building constructed in 1978 that is approximately 19,000 square feet
with a 580 square-foot accessory structure. The existing uses include an auto repair shop and recreational
vehicle sales. The site is predominantly gravel surface parking areas.
North Boulder Subcommunity Plan: The site is subject to the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan. Per the
subcommunity plan, this area is considered a “Neighborhood in Transition” where diverse housing and
walkable development is encouraged. The plan supports short blocks that are comfortable for pedestrians,
bicyclists, and motorists and places emphasis on human-scale, neighborhood character. As indicated below,
the proposed project is consistent with the adopted plans for the area.
Project Proposal. The applicant is requesting approval of a Use Review to allow for two residential buildings
containing a total of 21 townhouse units that will be located on the ground floor and facing a street. Each unit
will have private, enclosed garages and individual rooftop decks. Refer to Figure 3 and 4 on the next page.
The applicant intends to meet Inclusionary Housing requirements with a cash-in-lieu contribution as provided
for in the city’s inclusionary housing regulations. As part of the proposal, the applicant is constructing half the
width of Zamia Ave. between 10th St. and Broadway, consistent with the Transit Master Plan (TMP) and North
Boulder Subcommunity Plan Connections Plan. Access to the site will be taken from Zamia Ave. with
additional pedestrian access to and from Broadway via an internal walkway connection. Refer to Attachment
C for the site and floor plans. Any expansions of the approved use require a new use review application.
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 2 of 38
Figure 3. Site Plan
Figure 4. Perspective of Proposal
Review Process. The application was received prior to use table code changes associated with Ordinance
8556 and is therefore subject to the code standards that were in place prior to Mar. 18, 2023. Per the use
standards found in Section 9-6-1, B.R.C. 1981 prior to Ordinance 8556, approval of a Use Review is required
for residential uses on the ground floor facing a street in the IS-1 zone district. Current standards prohibit
townhouses or attached dwelling units in the IS-1 zone district. Per Section 9-4-2, B.R.C. 1981, applications
for Use Review are subject to call up by the Planning Board. No modifications from the development code
have been requested. The proposal meets all other development standards for the zoning district and does not
trigger or require Site Review as indicated above. Refer to Attachment A for the conditions of approval.
Analysis. The proposal was found to be consistent with the Use Review criteria of Section 9-2-15(e), B.R.C.
1981. The proposed residential use is located in an area where other residential uses occur, as well as a
variety of commercial and industrial uses. The residential uses are situated on the site in a manner that
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 3 of 38
mitigates negative impacts from nearby properties and the proposed development provides a transition from
single-family houses immediately to the west to commercial uses immediately to the east. The construction of
the Zamia Ave. extension creates shorter, walkable blocks to better link residential uses to Broadway and
provides safe access for pedestrians, consistent with the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan. Staff conducted
a preliminary review of the proposal for conformance with form and bulk, intensity, and development standards
as part of the Use Review process. A more thorough analysis will be completed at time of Technical Document
Review and Building Permit. The purpose of the Use Review is to review the proposal for compliance with the
criteria of Section 9-2-15(e), B.R.C. 1981. The review criteria are intended to ensure that the proposed use is
appropriate in the proposed location. Please refer to Attachment B for staff’s complete analysis of the review
criteria and the conditions of approval can be found in Attachment A.
Public Comment. Consistent with Section 9-4-3, Public Notice Requirements, B.R.C. 1981, staff provided
notification to all property owners within 600 feet of the subject location of the application. Staff received
comments from three neighbors. One neighbor expressed opposition, one neighbor had questions about the
scope and process, and a third neighbor supported the development but had comments and questions about
access to Broadway. The comments are included in Attachment D.
Conclusion. Staff finds that the proposed project meets the criteria of section 9-2-15, “Use Review,” B.R.C.
1981 (refer to Attachment B). The proposal was approved by staff on Jan. 29, 2024 and the decision may
be appealed by the applicant or any interested person or called up by a member of the Planning Board on or
before Feb. 12, 2024. The applicant or an interested person may appeal the decision by delivering a written
notice of appeal to the city manager. A member of the planning board may call up the decision upon written
notification to staff or by making a verbal request, on the record, at a regularly scheduled board meeting.
There is a Planning Board meeting on Feb. 6, 2024, during the 14-day call-up period. Questions about the
project or decision or requests to call up the approval should be directed to the Case Manager, Alison Blaine
at blainea@bouldercolorado.gov.
Attachments:
A. Signed Disposition and Approved Management Plan
B. Analysis of Use Review Criteria
C. Applicant’s Site and Floor Plan
D. Neighbor Comment
E. Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 4 of 38
CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING DEPARTMENT
NOTICE OF DISPOSITION
You are hereby advised that the following action was taken by the Planning Department based on the standards and
criteria of the Land Use Regulations as set forth in Chapter 9-2, B.R.C. 1981, as applied to the proposed development.
DECISION: APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS
PROJECT NAME: 4725 BROADWAY
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
Use review to allow residential uses on the ground floor facing a street in an
Industrial-Service 1 zone district. The proposal includes the redevelopment
of the existing site with two new residential buildings containing 21 three-
story townhouse units with private garages.
4725 BROADWAY
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Exhibit A
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
APPLICATION:
ZONING:
CASE MANAGER:
PAUL ANDERSEN, INDEPENDENT ARCHITECTURE
ANDREW GHADIMI, EMERALD MANAGEMENT
Use Review, LUR2022-00032
Industrial - Service 1 (IS-1)
Alison Blaine
VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT: No; the owner has waived the opportunity to create such right under Section 9-
2-20, B.R.C. 1981.
APPROVED MODIFICATIONS FROM THE LAND USE REGULATIONS: None.
FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, SEE THE FOLLOWING PAGES OF THIS DISPOSITION.
On: January 29, 2024
Date
By:
Brad Mueller, Director of Planning & Development Services
This decision may be appealed to the Planning Board by filing an appeal letter with the Planning Department within two
weeks of the decision date. If no such appeal is filed, the decision shall be deemed final fourteen days after the date
above mentioned.
Appeal to Planning Board Expires: February 12, 2024
Final Approval Date: February 13, 2024
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 5 of 38
Address: 4725 BROADWAY 2
IN ORDER FOR A BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION TO BE PROCESSED FOR THIS PROJECT, A SIGNED
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL PLANS FOR CITY SIGNATURE MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE
PLANNING DEPARTMENT WITH DISPOSITION CONDITIONS AS APPROVED SHOWN ON THE FINAL PLANS. IF
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT SIGNED WITHIN NINETY (90) DAYS OF THE FINAL DECISION DATE,
THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT APPROVAL AUTOMATICALLY EXPIRES.
Pursuant to Section 9-2-12 of the Land Use Regulations (Boulder Revised Code, 1981), the Applicant must begin and
substantially complete the approved development within three years from the date of final approval, or in compliance
with the phasing plan if one was approved. Failure to "substantially complete" (as defined in Section 9-2-12) the
development within three years or in compliance with the phasing plan, if one was approved, shall cause this
development approval to expire.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The Applicant shall ensure that the development shall be in compliance with the plan set prepared by the
Applicant on December 14, 2023 and January 24, 2024, all on file in the City of Boulder Planning Department, except
to the extent that the development may be modified by the conditions of this approval.
2. The Applicant shall not expand or modify the approved use, except pursuant to Subsection 9-2-15(h),
B.R.C. 1981.
3. Prior to a building permit application, the property owner shall sign a declaration of use, including all of the
conditions for continued use, to be recorded in the office of the Boulder County Clerk and Recorder to serve as actual
and constructive notice to potential purchasers and tenants of the owner’s property status as a residential use within an
industrial zoning district classification.
4. Prior to Building Permit application, the Applicant shall submit, and obtain City Manager approval of, a
Technical Document Review application for the following items:
a. Final architectural plans, including material samples and colors, to ensure compliance with the intent
of this approval and compatibility with the adopted subcommunity plan for the area. The architectural
intent shown on the plans prepared by the Applicant on December 14, 2023 and January 24, 2024 is
acceptable. Planning staff will review plans to assure that the architectural intent is performed.
b. A final site plan and building elevations which includes detailed floor plans to confirm floor area
requirements and section drawings. The building elevations on the final site plans shall demonstrate
compliance with the maximum building height requirements of Section 9-7-5, “Building Height,” B.R.C.
1981. In addition, submittal of the final site plans shall include drawings and a written statement
demonstrating that any mechanical appurtenances meet the requirements of Section 9-7-7, “Building
Height, Appurtenances,” B.R.C. 1981.
c. A final utility plan meeting the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
d. A final storm water report and plan meeting the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
e. Final transportation plans meeting the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards and CDOT
Access Code Standards, for all transportation improvements. These plans must include, but are not
limited to: street plan and profile drawings, street cross-sectional drawings, signage and striping plans
in conformance with Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) standards, transportation
detail drawings, geotechnical soils report, and pavement analysis.
f. A detailed landscape plan, including size, quantity, and type of plants existing and proposed; type and
quality of non-living landscaping materials; any site grading proposed; and any irrigation system
proposed, to ensure compliance with this approval and the City's landscaping requirements. Removal
of trees must receive prior approval of the Planning Department. Removal of any tree in City right of
way must also receive prior approval of the City Forester.
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 6 of 38
Address: 4725 BROADWAY 3
g. A detailed outdoor lighting plan showing location, size, and intensity of illumination units, indicating
compliance with section 9-9-16, B.R.C.1981.
h. A detailed shadow analysis to ensure compliance with the City's solar access requirements of section
9-9-17, B.R.C. 1981.
i. An address plat following the city’s addressing policy to create a new address.
5. Prior to building permit application, the Applicant shall dedicate to the City, at no cost, the easements and
rights-of-way necessary to serve the development, including but not limited to the following easements and rights-of-
way as shown on the plans prepared by the Applicant on December 14, 2023 and January 24, 2024 meeting the City of
Boulder Design and Construction Standards, as part of Technical Document Review applications, the form and final
location of which shall be subject to the approval of the City Manager:
a. A 7-foot Public Access easement on the north side of the site, adjacent to Zamia Avenue.
b. A 30-foot right-of-way dedication, in fee, for Zamia Avenue.
6. Prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy, the Applicant shall construct and complete, subject to
acceptance by the City, Zamia Avenue between Broadway and 10th Street serving the site in conformance with the
approved engineering plans and with the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards.
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 7 of 38
Address: 4725 BROADWAY 4
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
THAT PART OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 12, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 71
WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT WHERE THE
SOUTH SIDE OF COUNTY ROAD NO. 201 INTERSECTS WITH THE CENTER OF HIGHWAY NO. 7; THENCE
SOUTHERLY 330 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE WESTERLY 660 FEET; THENCE
SOUTHERLY 165 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY 660 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY 165 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING, EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF BOULDER BY DEED
RECORDED FEBRUARY 19, 1991 AT RECEPTION NO. 1088253, COUNTY OF BOULDER, STATE OF COLORADO.
Attachment A - Notice of Disposition
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 8 of 38
CRITERIA CHECKLIST AND COMMENT FORM
USE REVIEW
SECTION 9-2-15
Criteria for Review: No use review application will be approved unless the approving
agency finds all of the following:
(1)Consistency with Zoning and Non-Conformity: The use is consistent with the
purpose of the zoning district as set forth in Section 9-5-2(c), "Zoning Districts
Purposes," B.R.C. 1981, except in the case of a non-conforming use;
At time of application, townhouses were an allowed use per Section 9-6-1, B.R.C. 1981.
The subject site is zoned Industrial – Service 1 (IS-1). Residential on the ground floor
facing a street is also allowable per Table 6-1 pursuant to a Use Review.
(2) Rationale: The use either:
(A) Provides direct service or convenience to or reduces adverse impacts
to the surrounding uses or neighborhood;
The proposed use reduces adverse impacts to the surrounding area by
replacing an existing auto repair with residential, which has fewer visual
and noise impacts.
(B) Provides a compatible transition between higher intensity and lower
intensity uses;
The proposal to develop 21 townhouse units provides a transition from
single-family houses immediately to the west in the North Briar
neighborhood to commercial uses immediately to the east along
Attachment B - Staff Analysis
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 9 of 38
Broadway. Areas to the east also include multi-family residential and
mixed-use development.
N/A (C) Is necessary to foster a specific city policy, as expressed in the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, including, without limitation,
historic preservation, moderate income housing, residential and non-
residential mixed uses in appropriate locations, and group living
arrangements for special populations; or
N/A (D) Is an existing legal non-conforming use or a change thereto that is
permitted under subsection (f) of this section;
3) Compatibility: The location, size, design, and operating characteristics of the
proposed development or change to an existing development are such that the use will be
reasonably compatible with and have minimal negative impact on the use of nearby
properties or for residential uses in industrial zoning districts, the proposed development
reasonably mitigates the potential negative impacts from nearby properties;
The proposal for townhouse units is compatible with adjacent residential uses, including
mixed-density residential to the east and south along Broadway. The residential uses are
situated on the site in a manner that mitigates negative impacts from nearby properties.
The buildings are located near the Zamia Ave. right-of-way and are separated from the
industrial uses to the south by an internal driveway and large setback. The townhouses
face north with access to the garage facing the rear. The buildings are also situated with
a large setback from Broadway on the eastern side. The setback is filled with the
landscaping and large tress to alleviate negative impacts, like noise, from the street.
(4) Infrastructure: As compared to development permitted under Section 9-6-1,
"Schedule of Permitted Uses of Land," B.R.C. 1981, in the zone, or as compared to the
existing level of impact of a non-conforming use, the proposed development will not
significantly adversely affect the infrastructure of the surrounding area, including,
without limitation, water, wastewater, and storm drainage utilities and streets;
The site is currently developed and contains the necessary infrastructure for water,
wastewater, and storm drainage utilities. As part of the approval, the site will be required
to provide Technical Documents to evaluate the proposal and confirm the new
development will not adversely affect the infrastructure of the surrounding area.
Infrastructure improvements included in this proposal is the construction of Zamia Ave.
to connect 10th St. with Broadway. The extension, including the detached sidewalks, can
better serve the pedestrian by creating a smaller block to improve circulation in the area.
The extension will also allow pedestrian, vehicle, and bicycle access to Broadway for
neighbors west of the site.
(5) Character of Area: The use will not change the predominant character of the
surrounding area or the character established by adopted design guidelines or plans for
the area; and
Attachment B - Staff Analysis
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 10 of 38
The surrounding uses include mixed-density residential immediately to the east and west
of the site, as well as further north and south along Broadway. Such developments
include the Armory, the Bus Stop Apartments, 1175 Lee Hill, and live-work units at 4645
Broadway. The proposed residential uses will not change the predominate character of
the area because this part of North Boulder already includes a variety of mixes, including
residential, commercial, and industrial. The industrial areas to the north and south will
remain.
The site is subject to the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan, which considers this
location a neighborhood in transition with the intent to create walkable neighborhoods
with short blocks that are comfortable for pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. The
proposal will add housing diversity in the form of townhouses and construct the Zamia
Ave. extension to create the neighborhood feel, as required per the plan. The building has
been designed to align with the plan’s guidelines for residential neighborhoods including
front doors facing the street, hidden garages, and front porch elements to introduce
human-scale design.
N/A (6) Conversion of Dwelling Units to Non-Residential Uses: There shall be a
presumption against approving the conversion of dwelling units in the residential zoning
districts set forth in Subsection 9-5-2(c)(1)(a), B.R.C. 1981, to non-residential uses that
are allowed pursuant to a use review, or through the change of one non-conforming use to
another non-conforming use. The presumption against such a conversion may be
overcome by a finding that the use to be approved serves another compelling social,
human services, governmental, or recreational need in the community including, without
limitation, a use for a day care center, park, religious assembly, social service use,
benevolent organization use, art or craft studio space, museum, or an educational use.
Attachment B - Staff Analysis
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 11 of 38
1
PL: 165'-0"PL: 619'-6"
PL: 619'-6"BroadwayBT-1 Zoning -
Business
Transitional 1
IS-1 Zoning -
Industrial
Service 1
RL-2 Zoning -
Residential
Low 2
IS-1 Zoning -
Industrial
Service 1 PL: 165'-0"10th St.Xcel
easement
12' interior side
setback boundary
60' Front Range
ROW reservation
30' Zamia ROW
dedication 60' Front Range
ROW reservation
14'-6"25'-0"20' rear setback
boundary
15' street side
setback boundary
from Zamia ROW
dedication
additional 7' public
access easement
1112
Zamia Ave.
Broadway ROW 41' from
center of road
(about 6" from property line)
14' 10th St. ROW
reservaiton
20' front setback
boundary
Building 2
Residential Townhomes
3 Stories with Private Garages
Building 1
Residential Townhomes
3 Stories with Private Garages
106'-3"52'-3"24'-0"220'-8 1/2"34'-8 1/4"8'-0"52'-3"24'-0"34'-8 1/4"8'-0"46'-0"
244'-8 1/2"
20'-0"259'-10 1/8"
20'-0"92'-0"10'-0"
22'-8 1/2"20'-0"22'-8 1/2"54'-0"58'-3 3/8"
20'-0"
11
12
3
3
34
4
6
7
7
8
8
9
910
13
13
13
14
1413
14
13
13
13 13
11
11
11
11
5 9'-0"5
5
15
15
16
16
79.26
74.32
66.82
61.93
72.00 70.00
70.00
75.00 74.00 73.00 72.00
72.0073.0074.00
75.00
69.00
69.00
68.00
68.00
67.00
67.00 67.00
67.00
72.00
71.00 66.00
R
2
5
'
-
0
"
R2
5
'
-
0
"
1517
1517
2
A0.01
5
5
SITE PLAN KEY NOTES:
Zamia Ave. ROW dedicated and constructed to provide access
to the site and to comply with the intentions of the North Boulder
Subcommunity Plan. From north to south per the DCS Base Street
Standard Components: 24" curb and gutter, two 10' travel lanes,
24" curb and gutter, 8' planting strip, and 5' detached sidewalk.
Connect east end to Broadway and west end to 10th St. per DCS
Curb cut for new access drive per DCS
Two-way asphalt drive
Covered trash/recycling area on concrete pad with gate
Gravel path
10'x19' turnaround space with striping
Concrete walk/surface
Building outline
Unit division line
Private concrete courtyard with mesh fence
Planting strip
Sidewalk with trees, bicycle lane, mountable curb buffer, and
travel lane per North Broadway Reconstruction
Vegetation
Useable open space
Building above
Private concrete patio with entry steps and planter
Lowest point of natural grade within 25' of the tallest side of
each building
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
SITE PLAN LEGEND:
Property Line
Setback Line
ROW Reservation/Dedication Line
Easement Line
Building Outline
Building Footrpint
Vegetation
Useable Open Space
Gravel
Planter
New Trees and Shrubs
Spot Elevation 1234.56
VEHICULAR PARKING QUANTITIES
REQUIREMENT REQUIRED PROVIDED
Building 1
Residential 2 spaces for 3-bed DU 22 See total
below
Building 2
Residential 2 spaces for 3-bed DU 20 See total
below
Total Parking Spaces n/a 42 42
BICYCLE PARKING QUANTITIES
REQUIREMENT REQUIRED PROVIDED
Dwelling Units With A
Private Garage No requirement 0 0
LAND USE AREA CALCULATIONS
REQUIREMENT REQUIRED PROVIDED
Gross Lot Area n/a n/a 102,179 s.f.
Net Lot Area with ROW
Deductions n/a n/a 83,594 s.f.
Buildable Area F.A.R. max = 0.5 83,594 x 0.5 F.A.R. =
41,797 s.f. 41,797 s.f.
Building 1
Residential n/a n/a 22,429 s.f.
Building 2
Residential n/a n/a 19,199 s.f.
Total Building Area F.A.R. max = 0.5 41,797 s.f. max 41,628 s.f.
Private Open Space for
Residential Uses 60 s.f. per DU 1,260 s.f. min.12,025 s.f.
Useable Open Space 15% min.83,594 x 0.15 =
12,539 s.f.
14,975 s.f.
(not including private)
Parking Lot Area n/a n/a 15,041 s.f.
north property line
sidewalk
5'-0"8'-0"
2'-0"
10'-0"10'-0"
2'-0"
planting strip travel lane travel lane
curb and
gutter
curb and
gutter
additional 7' public
access easement
30' Zamia ROW
dedication
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:12.14.2023
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
A0.01
Site Plan
VARIES
DS
PA
1. Dimensions are to face of finished surface unless
otherwise noted.
2. Trees and shrubs represent design intent. Exact
locations TBD. Refer to Landscape Plan for more
information.
3. Spot elevations represent the design intent and
are based on a site survey and grading plans
from a previous site plan design. They are
intended to show the existing property corner
elevations, the approximate stepping in the
proposed buildings, and the lowest point of
natural grade within 25' of the tallest side of each
of the proposed buildings.
1 Site Plan
1"=30'-0"
2 Zamia Ave. Schematic Cross Section
1/4"=1'-0"
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 12 of 38
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Dining
Area
2-Car
Garage
Kitchen
Coat
Closet
Pantry
Powder
Room
Recessed
Entry
fridge
dw
up
down
down
down to
crawlspace
below
Patio
garage parking not
counted per Section
9-8-2, Table 8-2
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Terrace
Living
Area
up
down
open to
below
open to
below
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Bed 01 Bed 02
Shared
Bath
Bed 02
Closet
CorridorPrimary
Closet
Bed 01
Closet
Primary
Bath
Primary
Bedroom
down
Laundry
and Linen
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
stairway opening at the
uppermost floor not
counted per BRC
definition of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.01
Unit Type 1A
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1 Unit Type 1A - 1st Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
2 Unit Type 1A - 2nd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
3 Unit Type 1A - 3rd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
N
0' 1'5'10'20'0' 1'5'10'20'0' 1'5'10'20'
NN
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 13 of 38
unit 1b
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Dining
Area
2-Car
Garage
Kitchen
Coat
Closet
Pantry
Powder
Room
fridge
dw
up
Recessed
Entry
down
down to
crawlspace
below
down
Patio
garage parking not
counted per Section
9-8-2, Table 8-2
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Terrace
Living
Area
up
down
open to
below
open to
below
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Bed 01 Bed 02
Shared
Bath
Bed 02
Closet
CorridorPrimary
Closet
Bed 01
Closet
Primary
Bath
Primary
Bedroom
down
Laundry
and Linen
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
stairway opening at the
uppermost floor not
counted per BRC
definition of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.02
Unit Type 1B
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1 Unit Type 1B - 1st Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
2 Unit Type 1B - 2nd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
3 Unit Type 1B - 3rd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 14 of 38
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"####
Dining
Area
2-Car
Garage
Kitchen
Coat
Closet
Pantry
Powder
Room
fridge
dw
up
Recessed
Entry
down
down
down to
crawlspace
below
Patio
garage parking not
counted per Section
9-8-2, Table 8-2
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Living
Area
up
down
Primary
Bedroom
skylights
above
Primary
Bath
Primary
Closet
open to
below
open to
below
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Shared
Bath
Laundry
Bed 02
Closet
Bed 01
Closet
Linen
down
Bed 01
Bed 02
Terrace
Corridor
Terrace
Storage
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
stairway opening
at the uppermost
floor not counted
per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
Terrace Storage has a ceiling
height of less than 6'-0" and
therefore is not counted per
BRC definition of "Floor area"
and "Uninhabitable space"
the area of each
shared wall is split
between the two
units that share the
wall; area hatch
goes to centerline
of wall
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.03
Unit Type 2A
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1 Unit Type 2A - 1st Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
2 Unit Type 2A - 2nd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
3 Unit Type 2A - 3rd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 15 of 38
unit 2b
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Dining
Area
2-Car
Garage
Kitchen
Coat
Closet
Pantry
Powder
Room
fridge
dw
up
Recessed
Entry
down
down
down to
crawlspace
below
Patio
garage parking not
counted per Section
9-8-2, Table 8-2
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Living
Area
up
down
Primary
Bedroom
skylights
above
Primary
Bath
Primary
Closet
open to
below
open to
below
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
Shared
Bath
Laundry
Bed 02
Closet
Bed 01
Closet
Linen
down
Bed 01
Bed 02
Terrace
Corridor
Terrace
Storage
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
stairway opening
at the uppermost
floor not counted
per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
Terrace Storage has a ceiling
height of less than 6'-0" and
therefore is not counted per
BRC definition of "Floor area"
and "Uninhabitable space"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.04
Unit Type 2B
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1 Unit Type 2B - 1st Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
2 Unit Type 2B - 2nd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
3 Unit Type 2B - 3rd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 16 of 38
A
24'-0"105'-6 1/2"
#
#
C
2-Car
Garage
fridge
Living Area
Dining Area
Office
Mud Room
Courtyard
Kitchen
up
Powder
Room
Pantry
Elevator
Storage Crawlspace
Access
ceiling
above
down
down
EntryGallery
Corridor
up
dw
a-frame wall
at 6'-0" height
ceiling
above
2nd floor
above
3rd floor
above
strip skylight
above
ceiling
above
a-frame wall
at 6'-0" height
garage parking not
counted per Section
9-8-2, Table 8-2
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
a-frame space less than 6'-0"
in height and therefore is not
counted per BRC definition of
"Floor area" and
"Uninhabitable space"
a-frame space less than 6'-0"
in height and therefore is not
counted per BRC definition of
"Floor area" and
"Uninhabitable space"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.05
Unit Type 3
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
1 Unit Type 3 - 1st Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"N0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 17 of 38
A
24'-0"105'-6 1/2"
#
#
C
a-frame wall
at 6'-0" height
A-frame
Bath
A-frame
Office
a-frame wall
at 6'-0" height
Exterior
Walkway
Bed 01
Bed 02
Bath 01
updown
Corridor
Laundry
Bath 02
A-frame
Storage
A-frame
Terrace
Elevator
Corridor
Bed 01
Closet
Bed 02
Closet
open to
below
open to
below
open to
below
down
down
Elevator
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
a-frame space less than 6'-0"
in height and therefore is not
counted per BRC definition of
"Floor area" and
"Uninhabitable space"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
secondary egress included
in area calculations per BRC
definition of "Floor area"
stairway
opening at the
uppermost
floor not
counted per
BRC definition
of "Floor area"
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.06
Unit Type 3
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
1 Unit Type 3 - 2nd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"N0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 18 of 38
A
24'-0"105'-6 1/2"
#
#
C
Primary
Bath
Primary
Bed
Primary
Closet
Reading
Area
down
a-frame
wall at
6'-0" height
up
a-frame
wall at
6'-0" height
Primary
Terrace
Primary
Corridor
Elevator
double height
space not counted
per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
a-frame space less than 6'-0"
in height and therefore is not
counted per BRC definition of
"Floor area" and
"Uninhabitable space"
stairway opening at the
uppermost floor not
counted per BRC
definition of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.07
Unit Type 3
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
1 Unit Type 3 - 3rd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"N0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 19 of 38
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
2-Car
Garage
Kitchen
Coat
Closet
Pantry
Powder
Room
fridge
dw
up
Dining
Area
Recessed
Entry
down
down
down to
crawlspace
below
Patio
garage parking not
counted per Section
9-8-2, Table 8-2
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
open to
below
open to
below
Living
Area
Primary
Bedroom
Primary
Bath
Primary
Closet
Bed 01
Bath 01
down
up
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
floor area measured to the
outside surface of exterior
framing per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
the area of each shared
wall is split between the
two units that share the
wall; area hatch goes to
centerline of wall
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.08
Unit Type 4
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
1 Unit Type 4 - 1st Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
1 Unit Type 4 - 2nd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 20 of 38
B
A
22'-0"51'-6 1/2"##
open to
below
open to
below
down
Bath 02
Bed 02
Closet
Bed 02
Terrace
Corridor
17'-0
3
/
8
"51'
-4
1/2"
D
E
#
#
a-frame wall
at 6'-0" height
a-frame
wall at
6'-0" height
a-frame wall
at 6'-0" height
a-frame
wall at
6'-0" heightfloor area measured
to the outside surface
of exterior framing
per BRC definition of
"Floor area"
stairway opening
at the uppermost
floor not counted
per BRC definition
of "Floor area"
double height space
not counted per BRC
definition of "Floor
area"
a-frame space less than 6'-0"
in height and therefore is not
counted per BRC definition of
"Floor area" and
"Uninhabitable space"
AREA BY UNIT TYPE
Number of Units Unit Area per BRC Total Area per BRC
Unit Type 1A 9 1,928 s.f.17,352 s.f.
Unit Type 1B 1 1,947 s.f.1,947 s.f.
Unit Type 2A 8 1,884 s.f.15,072 s.f.
Unit Type 2B 1 1,908 s.f.1,908 s.f.
Unit Type 3 1 3,304 s.f.3,304 s.f.
Unit Type 4 1 2,004 s.f.2,004 s.f.
Total 21 Units n/a 41,578 s.f.
AREA DIAGRAM LEGEND:
Area Calculated Per BRC
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:01.24.2024
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
01.24.2024 Use Review Submission
A6.09
Unit Type 4
Area Diagram
1/4" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1 Unit Type 4 - 3rd Floor Plan
1/4"=1'-0"
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. Refer to Building Floor Plans for overall building
dimensions.
N
0' 1'5'10'20'
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 21 of 38
24'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"
Max Height
140'-0"
Adjacent Grade
104'-0"
T/ Parapet East
141'-0"
T/ Parapet West
138'-0"
Max Height
140'-0"
Low Point for Height
100'-0" (71.00)
123456789101112
1
1
4
3 22
9
15
1616
10
17
ELEVATION KEY NOTES:
Stucco exterior wall finish
Metal panel exterior wall/roof finish
Fiberglass windows
Fiberglass entry door
Wood sliding patio door with glazing
A-frame framing and glazing system; exact
design and window pattern TBD
Fiberglass door
Wood door with glazing
Aluminum overhead door
Concrete steps and flatwork
Metal mesh guardrail
Metal mesh fence with gate
Column
Downlight
Screen beyond will be the minimum height
required to adequately screen rooftop
mechanical equipment
Maximum height line dashed for reference;
parapet extends 12" beyond max height
for drainage purposes, less than the 18"
exception permitted per Section 9-7-7(5) of
the Boulder Revised Code.
Recessed entry with hidden lighting behind
triangular edges; lighting will be shielded
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
24'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"
Max Height
140'-0"
T/ Parapet East
141'-0"
Max Height
140'-0"
Low Point for Height
100'-0" (71.00)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1
3
9
11
7
8
5
12
6
11
1
Adjacent Grade
104'-0"
T/ Parapet West
138'-0"
14
116 15
51'-6 1/2"54'-0"
BA C
1
6
6
2
3
1
8 12
2
1
6
6
11
Max Height
140'-0"
Adjacent Grade
104'-0"
T/ Parapet East
141'-0"151716
51'-6 1/2"
B A
1
10
3
11
Max Height
140'-0"
Adjacent Grade
101'-0"
T/ Parapet West
138'-0"
15
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:12.14.2023
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
A2.01
Building 1
Elevations
3/32" = 1'-0
DS
PA
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. 100'-0" Low Point for Height elevation tags are
equal to spot elevations 71.00 for Building 1 and
66.00 for Building 2 on the site plan.
1 Building 1 - North Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
2 Building 1 - South Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
4 Building 1 - West Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
3 Building 1 - East Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 22 of 38
22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"
234567891011 1
1
4
9
3
2
6
11
121213
Max Height
140'-0"
Adjacent Grade
104'-0"
T/ Parapet East
141'-0"
T/ Parapet West
139'-0"
Max Height
140'-0"
Low Point for Height
100'-0" (66.00)
10
15
1616
1
17
ELEVATION KEY NOTES:
Stucco exterior wall finish
Metal panel exterior wall/roof finish
Fiberglass windows
Fiberglass entry door
Wood sliding patio door with glazing
A-frame framing and glazing system; exact
design and window pattern TBD
Fiberglass door
Wood door with glazing
Aluminum overhead door
Concrete steps and flatwork
Metal mesh guardrail
Metal mesh fence with gate
Column
Downlight
Screen beyond will be the minimum height
required to adequately screen rooftop
mechanical equipment
Maximum height line dashed for reference;
parapet extends 12" beyond max height
for drainage purposes, less than the 18"
exception permitted per Section 9-7-7(5) of
the Boulder Revised Code.
Recessed entry with hidden lighting behind
triangular edges; lighting will be shielded
#
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Max Height
140'-0"
Low Point for Height
100'-0" (66.00)
22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 111
1
3
9
7
4
2
6
12121311
T/ Parapet East
139'-0"
Max Height
140'-0"
T/ Parapet East
141'-0"
Adjacent Grade
104'-0"
5
14
15116
51'-6 1/2"
BA
10
11
3
15
1
Max Height
140'-0"
Adjacent Grade
104'-0"
T/ Parapet East
141'-0"
51'-6 1/2"
AB
1
10
3
11
2
6
13
Max Height
140'-0"
Adjacent Grade
101'-0"
T/ Parapet West
139'-0"
13131313
2
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:12.14.2023
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
A2.02
Building 2
Elevations
3/32" = 1'-0
DS
PA1 Building 2 - North Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
2 Building 2 - South Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
4 Building 2 - West Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
3 Building 2 - East Elevation
3/32"=1'-0"
1. All dimensions shall be verified in field prior to
construction.
2. 100'-0" Low Point for Height elevation tags are
equal to spot elevations 71.00 for Building 1 and
66.00 for Building 2 on the site plan.
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 23 of 38
21
A
B
C
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
outside framing24'-0"
244'-5 1/2"
outside framing
51'-6 1/2"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"54'-0"106'-0"51'-6 1/2"52'-0"outside framingapprox. area
for screened
rooftop mech.
(typ.)
approx. area
for pv panels
(typ.)
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:12.14.2023
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
A1.04
Building 1
Floor Plans
3/32" = 1'-0
DS
PA1 Building 1 - Roof Plan
3/32"=1'-0"
1. Exterior dimensions are to center of framing
unless otherwise noted.
2. Refer to Enlarged Floor Plans for typical unit plans.
3. Some site plan information included on First Floor
Plans for site context.
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 24 of 38
A
B
220'-5 1/2"
outside framing
22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"22'-0"51'-6 1/2"52'-0"outside framing2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 111
approx. area
for screened
rooftop mech.
(typ.)
approx. area
for pv panels
(typ.)
CHECKED:
DRAWN:
SCALE:
DATE:12.14.2023
SHEET NOTES:
4725 Broadway
OWNER:
4725 LLC
4949 Broadway Suite 105
Boulder, Colorado 80304
ARCHITECT:
Independent Architecture
2017 Larimer Street
Denver, Colorado 80205
TEL 303-433-5303
NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION
SUBMISSIONS AND REVISIONS:
Date Rev. # Description
KEY PLAN:
07.11.2022 Use Review Submission
12.14.2023 Use Review Submission
A1.08
Building 2
Floor Plans
3/32" = 1'-0
DS
PA1 Building 2 - Roof Plan
3/32"=1'-0"
1. Exterior dimensions are to center of framing
unless otherwise noted.
2. Refer to Enlarged Floor Plans for typical unit plans.
3. Some site plan information included on First Floor
Plans for site context.
Attachment C - Approved Plans
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 25 of 38
From:Rocky Mountain Joe
To:Blaine, Alison
Subject:Re: 4725 Broadway - access from 10th to Broadway
Date:Tuesday, March 28, 2023 4:17:59 PM
Hi Alison,
Thank you for getting back to me.
I am so glad we caught this in time.
There definitely needs to be some kind of pedestrian and bike access both ways: so the residents of 4725 Broadway have a safe and peaceful way to reach the Foothills Trail to the west, and the Multiuse path to
the south, and the residents of Northbriar and Trail Crossing safe and peaceful way to reach the Skip stop and the north Broadway shops.
In the 1995 Subcommunity Plan, the ‘Neighborhoods’ Section, calls for ‘no new cul de sacs’, as well as ‘an integrated network of streets, yielding more path options for motorists and users of alternate modes’
and ‘beautiful streets which are comfortable to pedestrians, bicyclists and motorists’. In the ‘Transportation’ section, one of the objectives is ‘Interconnect street network in new neighborhoods, both internal
and with existing streets, so that traffic load on residential streets is equitable, car trips distances are minimized and walking and biking are encouraged.’
For the future residents of 4725, sealing off a connection to 10th, leaves them in a dreary cul de sac and a long stretch on Broadway and/or Lee Hill Drive to reach the dog park, Foothills Trail (north and south)
and the future North Sky Trail as well as the multi-use trail network. (See my map attached.)
For Northbriar and Trail Crossing residents, access through the 4725 Project provides a delightful and short way to reach the SKIP stop and the North Broadway shops, coffee places and restaurants.
Please come up and walk these streets if you haven’t already. Imagine yourself as a 4725 Broadway resident wanting to take an evening walk, a short loop, with the puppy. Look at my map with the access to
the west. Then see what you’re left with, when the access is not there.
You will see what I mean.
How can we make this happen?
Regards,
Joe Glynn
Cell 303-257-6736
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 26 of 38
On Mar 20, 2023, at 11:49 AM, Blaine, Alison <blainea@bouldercolorado.gov> wrote:
Hi Joe,
Thank you for reaching out and I am happy to provide more information. As proposed in the plans dated 7/11/2022, the driveway would not connect to 10th and instead
dead-end at the western edge of the lot. Note that the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan indicates that Zamia will connect to 10th once constructed. As of now, there
are no plans to construct a temporary multi-use path prior to the construction of Zamia. The dedication of the Zamia ROW is only for future development. I hope that
helps and please let me know if you have any other questions.
Best,
Alison Blaine, AICP
City Planner
(pronouns: she/her/hers)
O: 303-441-4410
blainea@bouldercolorado.gov
From: Rocky Mountain Joe <joe@rockymountainjoe.com>
Sent: Friday, March 17, 2023 8:27 AM
To: Blaine, Alison <blainea@bouldercolorado.gov>
Subject: 4725 Broadway - access from 10th to Broadway
External Sender
Dear Ms. Blaine,
I live in North Briar just west of the 4725 Broadway project, and have questions about access to Broadway. My neighbors and I are interested in pedestrian and bike
access to Broadway, especially to access the Skip stop and the north Broadway shops.
We will have access though this project from 10th to Broadway per the current plan?
Can a multi-use path be built on the Zamia ROW (until the time Zamia may be built with sidewalks)?
Regards,
Joe Glynn
4787 6th Street
Cell 303 257 6737
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 27 of 38
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 28 of 38
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 29 of 38
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 30 of 38
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 31 of 38
From:Eric Scace
To:Blaine, Alison
Cc:Schilling KD0VXE Jessica
Subject:4725 Broadway
Date:Wednesday, October 12, 2022 8:29:13 PM
External Sender
Hi Alison —
Today I received a mail notice about a development review application for 4725 Broadway. I looked at the project
review docs available on-line but they are only site plan docs: drainage, utilities, etc.
Are there drawings available for the buildings that are intended to be constructed?
From the site plan, it appears the applicant intends to connect their driveway into 10th Street. At present there is a
fence line owned by the TrailCrossing at Lee Hill HOA. As the current board chairman of the HOA association, I
can state that we have never been contacted about an additional driveway entrance nor about changes to the fence.
The letter from Shabnam Bista for review TEC2021-00053 (dated 2021 Dec 22) includes in sections II (1) through
(30 a discussion about impacts to planned street connections; e.g., for Zamia Ave from 10th St to Broadway, for an
extension of Front Range Drive, and for “planned improvements to 10th St". Is there any information about how the
corrective actions in this letter were resolved? From the site plan, it appeared that none of the right of way
reservations have been incorporated into the plan.
Thanks for any assistance you can provide in clarifying these points.
Regards,
— Eric Scace
+1-617-712-1523
Attachment D - Neighbor Comments
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 32 of 38
Schematic Design
4725 Broadway
December 2023
The included images, which present the project’s preliminary design, are provided as a
supplement to the required materials for the current Use Review.
Attachment E - Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 33 of 38
Attachment E - Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 34 of 38
Attachment E - Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 35 of 38
Attachment E - Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 36 of 38
Attachment E - Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 37 of 38
Attachment E - Architectural Renderings
Item 3B - 4725 Broadway Call Up Page 38 of 38
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: Feb. 6, 2024
AGENDA TITLE
Public hearing and consideration of a Site Review Amendment including a Height
Modification request to allow for up to seven feet six inches of additional height with a
pitched roof or alternatively, up to four feet of additional height with or without a
pitched roof for each townhome building within the approved Shining Mountain
Waldorf School development at 0 Violet Ave. (LUR2023-00050).
Applicant: Erin Bagnall, Sopher Sparn Architects
Owner: Shining Mountain Waldorf School
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS
Brad Mueller, Director Planning & Development Services
Charles Ferro, Senior Planning Manager
Chandler Van Schaack, Principal Planner
OBJECTIVE
Define the steps for Planning Board consideration of this request:
1. Planning Board hears applicant and staff presentations.
2. Hold quasi-judicial public hearing.
3. Planning Board action to approve, approve with conditions, or deny.
SUMMARY
Project Name: Shining Mountain Waldorf School Site Review Amendment
Location: 0 Violet Ave. (Townhome Site)
Size of Property: Approximately 1.4 acres (Total site size: Approx. 11.6 acres)
Zoning: Residential – Low 2 (RL-2)
Comprehensive Plan: Residential Low
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 1 of 48
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is for the Planning Board to review and take action on the Site
Review Amendment application to amend the Shining Mountain Waldorf School
development to allow for up to seven feet six inches of additional height with a pitched
roof or alternatively, up to four feet of additional height with or without a pitched roof for
each townhome building. The applicant cites interior livability, neighborhood
compatibility and constraints to the buildings from the base flood elevation requirements
as justification for the request. Because this item includes a request for a height
modification, Planning Board approval of the Site Review Amendment application is
required at a public hearing.
The project scope is narrowly focused on the request for additional height for the
townhome buildings, and otherwise does not change the architecture, floor area, density,
or site layout from the previously approved plans (LUR2019-00068 & LUR2023-00021).
No changes to the approved single-family homes south of Locust Ave. are proposed.
Staff is recommending approval of the Site Review Amendment application finding the
proposal consistent with relevant Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) policies
and the Site Review criteria as outlined in within this memorandum, subject to conditions
of approval.
The applicant’s proposed plans can be found in Attachment A. The full list of staff
responses to the Site Review criteria for the approval recommendation by staff can be
found in Attachment B.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff has found that the proposed project meets criteria of Section 9-2-14, B.R.C. 1981
and is recommending that Planning Board approve the application in the form of the
following motion:
Suggested Motion Language:
Motion to approve Site Review application #LUR2023-00050, including a Height
Modification request to allow for up to seven feet six inches of additional height with
a pitched roof or alternatively, up to four feet of additional height with or without a
pitched roof for each townhome building within the approved Shining Mountain
Waldorf School development, adopting the staff memorandum as findings of fact,
including the attached analysis of review criteria, and subject to the recommended
conditions of approval.
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 2 of 48
KEY ISSUE
1.Is the proposed project consistent with the Site Review Criteria of the Land Use
Code section 9-2-14(h) including the Additional Criteria for Buildings Requiring
Height Modification?
PUBLIC FEEDBACK
Consistent with Section 9-4-3, “Public Notice Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981, staff
provided notification to all property owners within 600 feet of the subject location of the
application, and signs have been posted by the applicant. Staff received comments from
five neighbors expressing concerns over the proposed project. These comments are
included as Attachment C.
BACKGROUND
Shining Mountain Waldorf School has existed in the same location west of the 10th &
Violet intersection since 1983 (See Figure 1 below for a Vicinity Map). Since it was
founded, the school has expanded to provide a full Kindergarten through High School
curriculum in the Waldorf tradition for the Boulder community. Meanwhile, the land
holdings for the school have significantly increased over time, including 11+ acres
adjacent to its original parcel.
In August 2021, the school received approval of a site review for the phased
consolidation and redevelopment of the school facilities and redevelopment of a portion
of the property for future single family and townhome lots subject to design guidelines
(LUR2019-00068) and a use review to update the management plan for the private school
use within the Residential – Low 1 (RL-1) and Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) zoning
districts (LUR2020-00068). The full staff memorandum to the Planning Board for the
April 15, 2021 hearing item can be found HERE.
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 3 of 48
As a part of the
recent site review, a
phased development
was approved,
allowing
construction
of the high school
building first
and construction
of the townhome and
single-family homes lots as a part of a second phase. After site review approval, the
school immediately began Technical Document Review and building permitting for
Phase I. The new high school is currently under construction. It was determined that the
potential buyer and developer of the residential phase of the site desired the ability to
build the approved townhomes as fee simple residences on individual lots, rather than as
condominiums on a single, common lot for reasons related to bank financing,
maintenance, and marketing.
At that time, the applicant also expressed a desire to remove phasing requirements for the
single-family homes, which required construction of the homes “to be phased in blocks of
four residential lots at a time, starting with the 1101 Union Ave. subdivision and moving
east along Union before developing the Locust Ave. extension to Broadway, in
conjunction with the subdivision of building sites.” A site review amendment was
approved by staff in September 2023 to allow for subdivision of the approved
“townhome lot” into 17 individual townhome lots and to amend phasing requirements for
the single-family lots.
The school has been working diligently to progress with Phase II, as it is necessary for
funding the completion of the high school. Per the applicant’s written statement (included
as Attachment A), “upon further development and design of the townhome lots, it has
been determined that the height of the townhomes is unduly constrained by the 100-year
base flood elevation requirements. Further, the applicant is interested in providing a
sloped roof design that would provide more articulated roof lines that are more consistent
with the surrounding residential neighborhoods and school architecture adjacent to the
Shining Mountain Waldorf
School Campus/ PUD (yellow)
Townhomes Site
Single Family Homes Site
Figure 1: Vicinity Map
High
School
Site
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 4 of 48
townhome site.” Therefore, the applicant is requesting additional height as allowable by
BRC Section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E)(i):
The height modification is to allow a roof that has a pitch of 2:12 or greater in a building
with three or fewer stories and the proposed height does not exceed the maximum height
permitted in the zoning district by more than ten feet.
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use Designation: As shown in
Figure 2 on the following page, the subject property is designated as “Low Density
Residential” on the land use map of the BVCP. The description from the BVCP is shown
below.
Figure 2- BVCP land use designation on & around site.
Townhome
Site
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 5 of 48
Site Zoning: The site is zoned Residential – Low 2 (RL-2), which is defined as “Medium
density residential areas primarily used for small-lot residential development, including
without limitation, duplexes, triplexes, or townhouses, where each unit generally has
direct access at ground level.” (Section 9-5-2(c)(1)(B), B.R.C. 1981). See Figure 3.
Under the current site review approval, the townhomes are subject to the 35-foot height
limit for the RL-2 zone.
Figure 3: Zoning Map
Townhome
Site
Figure 4: Floodplain Map
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 6 of 48
Floodplain
As shown in Figure 4 above, the majority of the site is located within the 100-year and
500-year floodplains, with the townhome site (following dedication of the Locust Ave.
right-of-way) being completely within the 100-year floodplain. Pursuant to Section 9-3-
3(a)(17)(A), B.R.C. 1981, “Any person constructing a new residential structure shall
elevate the lowest floor, including the basement, to or above the flood protection
elevation.” In this case, the flood protection elevation is approximately five and a half
feet above the low point within 25 feet of the buildings from which height is measured.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
As described above, the purpose of the Site Review Amendment is to allow for up to seven
feet six inches of additional height with a pitched roof or alternatively, up to four feet of
additional height with or without a pitched roof for each townhome building within the
approved Shining Mountain Waldorf School development. No other changes to the
previously approved site or building plans are proposed. The applicant has not changed
any of the architecture or materials below the third floor of the buildings. As outlined in
the applicant’s written statement and proposed plans, they have provided two designs for
the Planning Board’s consideration.
The first alternative is considered the preferred design and adds pitched roofs to the
townhomes and increases the height by seven feet six inches. According to the applicant,
this option would reduce maintenance liability to homeowners, provide more useable floor
to floor heights within the structures, and “would provide a more articulated roof line and
respond more appropriately to the residential neighborhoods and school architecture
adjacent to the townhome site.” The second, alternative design is intended to comply with
Section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E)(iv), which allows for a height modification request “to allow up to
the greater of two stories or the maximum number of stories permitted but no more than
five feet above the maximum building height under Section 9-7-5(a) or 9-7-6, B.R.C. 1981,
in a building where the height modification is necessary because the building has to be
elevated to meet the required flood protection elevation.”
While the overall increase in height would be less in this scenario (four feet as opposed to
seven feet six inches), it would not allow for sloped roof forms and would therefore have
a more massive appearance from street level, as the entire four feet of extra height would
extend vertically as opposed to the sloped roofs, which would slope back commencing at
35 feet. Images of potential townhome designs at the approved 35 feet in height, at 42 feet
6 inches in height with the requested sloped roofs (preferred alternative) and at 39 feet in
height with flat roofs (secondary alternative) are shown below respectively to illustrate the
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 7 of 48
difference in building height and massing from both a plan section view and from the
pedestrian view.
The applicant is asking that the Planning Board consider one of the two alternatives, i.e.,
the intent is to have the entire development be developed consistent with one of the two
Alternative #2 - Flat roofs – 4’ Flood Height Increase
Requested Alternative - Sloped roofs – 7’6” Height Increase
Approved Building Height – 35’
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 8 of 48
proposed options. Both alternatives would be considered consistent with the adopted
design guidelines for the development.
In the event that the Planning Board denies both options for additional height, the
originally approved design, labeled “Approved Building Height” above will stand
PROCESS
A site review amendment is required because the proposal includes a request for a height
modification. Site review amendments are subject to the Site Review criteria in Section
9-2-14, B.R.C. 1981. Per Section 9-2-14(g), B.R.C 1981, an application for any principal
or accessory building above the permitted height for principal buildings set forth in
Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981 requires a staff
recommendation and final decision by the Planning Board at a public hearing, subject to
call-up by City Council.
ANALYSIS / KEY ISSUES
Approved Building Height Approved Building Height
Sloped Roofs –
42’6”
Flat roofs – 39’
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 9 of 48
1.Is the proposed project consistent with the Site Review Criteria of the Land
Use Code section 9-2-14(h) including the Additional Criteria for Buildings
Requiring Height Modification?
Staff finds that the requested height modification is, on balance, consistent with the
goals and policies of the BVCP and consistent with the Site Review criteria found in
Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981. While altering the original intent of the approval to
develop the residential portion of the site consistent with RL-2 height limitations, the
proposed sloped roof design is compatible with the character of the surrounding area,
avoids or minimizes blocking of prominent public views and contributes to a city
skyline that has a variety of roof forms and heights.
As shown in the images below, the proposed townhome designs maintain the existing
architectural compatibility achieved by the approved design guidelines in terms of
street-level form and materials along the Broadway corridor north of Violet (the first
three images are of the “Violet Crossing” and “Uptown Broadway” developments on
the east side of Broadway north of Violet), while the proposed addition of sloped
roofs achieves greater compatibility with the single family residential character of the
neighborhoods east of Broadway (images 4 & 5). Further, the proposed sloped roof
design is more compatible with the adjacent school buildings, which incorporate a
variety of roof forms including gabled roofs (shown below in images 6 & 7).
The approved density, use and configuration of the site are consistent with the intent
of the low- density residential land use designation in the BVCP as well as the
underlying RL-2 zoning standards, and will remain as such following the proposed
amendment. Refer to the full analysis of the Site Review criteria provided in
Attachment B.
Image 1: Violet Crossing (35’)
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 10 of 48
Image 4: Crestview West Residential
Image 5: Crestview West Residential
Image 3: Violet Crossing, Uptown Broadway (up to 48’)
Image 2: Violet Crossing
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 11 of 48
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The Applicant shall ensure that the development shall be in compliance with all plans prepared by the Applicant on December 1, 2023 and the Written Statement prepared by the Applicant on December 1, 2023, all on file in the City of Boulder Planning Department, except to the extent that the development may be modified by the conditions of this approval. 2. The Applicant shall comply with all previous conditions contained in any previous approvals, except to the extent that any previous conditions may be modified by this approval, including, but not limited to, the following:
Image 6: Approved SMWS Building
Elevations
Image 7: Approved SMWS Building
Elevations
Image 5: Crestview West Residential
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 12 of 48
• The Development Agreement recorded at Reception No. 03908433 and the approvals listed in the Notice of Disposition attached to that Development Agreement; and • The Development Agreement recorded at Reception No. 04026236 and the approvals listed in the Notice of Disposition attached to that Development Agreement.
3. Prior to a building permit application, the Applicant shall submit, and obtain City
Manager approval of, a Technical Document Review application for the following items:
a. Final architectural plans, including material samples and colors, to ensure
compliance with the intent of this approval, compatibility with the
surrounding area, and compliance with the previously approved Locust
Neighborhood Design Guidelines dated March 29, 2021 except to the extent
the Guidelines are amended by this approval as it relates to maximum
townhouse height and roof slopes. The architectural intent shown on the plans
prepared by the Applicant on December 1, 2023 is acceptable. Planning staff
will review plans to assure the architectural intent is performed. Townhouses
may be constructed to a height of up to 39 feet, consistent with the approved
Locust Neighborhood Design Guidelines, or may exceed a height of 39 feet to
allow a roof that has a pitch of 2:12 or greater, but not to exceed 42 feet and 6
inches.
By:
Brad Mueller, Secretary to the Planning Board
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Applicant’s Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Attachment B – Staff’s Review Criteria Analysis
Attachment C – Public Comments
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 13 of 48
BLDG 1 FFE
5520' -9"
BLDG 1 MAX HT
5551' -0"
FFE BLDG 2
5520' -0"
BLDG 2 MAX HEIGHT
5550' -0"
BLDG 2 LOW PT
5515' -0"
LOW PT BLDG 1
5516' -0"
AS-01 BR-01MP-01
CP-01
AS-01 MP-01
MP-01
BR-01
05
04
02
01
02
06
CP-01
06
MP-01
BLDG 2 2ND FLOOR
5530' -6"
BLDG 2 3RD FLOOR
5540' -6"
BLDG 1 2ND FLOOR
5531' -3"
BLDG 1 3RD FLOOR
5541' -3"35' - 0" MAX BLDG HT.9' - 9"10' - 0"10' - 6"4' - 9"35' - 0" MAX BLDG HT.9' - 6"10' - 0"10' - 6"5' - 0"02
02
04
05 AS-01 MP-01 CP-01 MP-01
BR-01CP-01 MP-01
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/29/2023 4:57:54 PMA2.00TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 803041/8" = 1'-0"1 EAST ELEVATION - BROADWAY
0'4'8'16'32'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
EXTERIOR MATERIAL SCHEDULE
MARK DESCRIPTION FINISH
AS-01 ASPHALT SHINGLES CHARCOAL
BR-01 BRICK BURGUNDY
CP-01 FIBER CEMENT PANELS CEDAR
MP-01 METAL PANEL CHARCOAL
MTL-01 PAINTED FASCIA BLACK
MTL-02 PAINTED METAL GARAGE DOORS CHARCOAL
WN-01 RESIDENTIAL WINDOWS & DOORS CHARCOAL
Keynote Legend
Key Value Keynote Text
01 FULL LITE DOOR, LOW-E GLAZING
02 FIXED AND CASEMENT WINDOW, LOW-E GLAZING
04 PREFINISHED ALUMINUM GUTTER
05 PREFINISHED METAL PARAPET CAP
06 STEEL RAILING, PAINTED
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 14 of 48
FFE BLDG 2
5520' -0"
BLDG 2 MAX HEIGHT
5550' -0"
BLDG 3 FFE
5521' -11"
BLDG 3 MAX HEIGHT
5552' -0"
BLDG 3 LOW PT
5517' -0"
BLDG 2 LOW PT
5515' -0"
MP-01MTL-01 AS-01BR-01 MP-01
CP-01
MP-01MTL-01BR-01CP-01AS-01
AS-01
02
03
05
02
01
07
04
03 01
04
03
06
BLDG 2 2ND FLOOR
5530' -6"
BLDG 2 3RD FLOOR
5540' -6"
BLDG 3 2ND FLOOR
5532' -5"
BLDG 3 3RD FLOOR
5542' -5"35' - 0" MAX BLDG HT.9' - 6"10' - 0"10' - 6"5' - 0"35' - 0" MAX BLDG HT.9' - 7"10' - 0"10' - 6"4' - 11"CP-01 MP-01 BR-01
MP-01 BR-01 MP-01
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/29/2023 4:56:56 PMA2.01TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 803040'4'8'16'32'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
1/8" = 1'-0"1 SOUTH ELEVATION - LOCUST
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 15 of 48
BLDG 1 FFE
5520' -9"
BLDG 1 MAX HT
5551' -0"
LOW PT BLDG 1
5516' -0"
BLDG 4 LOW PT
5518' -9 1/4"
BLDG 4 FFE
5524' -4"
BLDG 4 2ND FLOOR
5534' -10"
BLDG 4 3RD FLOOR
5544' -10"
BR-01MP-01 CP-01MTL-01MP-01
06
02
04
05
02
02
03
04
BLDG 1 2ND FLOOR
5531' -3"
BLDG 1 3RD FLOOR
5541' -3"
BLDG 4 MAX HT
5553' -9 1/4"35' - 0" MAX BLDG HT.5' - 6 3/4"10' - 6"10' - 0"8' - 11 1/4"35' - 0" MAX BLDG HT.4' - 9"10' - 6"10' - 0"9' - 9"MP-01 CP-01AS-01 AS-01BR-01
MP-01 BR-01 CP-01
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/29/2023 4:55:38 PMA2.02TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
EXTERIOR
ELEVATIONS4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 803040'4'8'16'32'
SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0"
NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
1/8" = 1'-0"1 NORTH ELEVATION - VIOLET
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 16 of 48
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/28/2023 5:09:29 PMA9.01TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
3D VIEWS 4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 80304NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
VIEW 1 - CORNER OF BROADWAY & LOCUST AVENUE LOOKING WESTVIEW 2 - CORNER OF BROADWAY & VIOLET AVENUE LOOKING WEST
VIEW 1 - CORNER OF BROADWAY & LOCUST AVENUE LOOKING WEST - SLOPEDVIEW 2 - CORNER OF BROADWAY & VIOLET AVENUE LOOKING SOUTHWEST SLOPED
VIEW 1 - CORNER OF BROADWAY & LOCUST AVENUE LOOKING WEST - FLOOD HTVIEW 2 - CORNER OF BROADWAY & VIOLET AVENUE LOOKING WEST - FLOOD HT
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 17 of 48
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/28/2023 5:08:11 PMA9.02TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
3D VIEWS 4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 80304NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
VIEW 3 - ALONG LOCUST AVENUE LOOKING NORTHEASTVIEW 4 - ALONG VIOLET AVENUE LOOKING SOUTH
VIEW 3 - ALONG LOCUST AVENUE LOOKING NORTHEAST - SLOPEDVIEW 4 - ALONG VIOLET AVENUE LOOKING SOUTH - SLOPED
VIEW 3 - ALONG LOCUST AVENUE LOOKING NORTHEAST - FLOOD HTVIEW 4 - ALONG VIOLET AVENUE LOOKING SOUTH - FLOOD HT
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 18 of 48
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 16 & 17) = 5515'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 13 -15) = 5516'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOTS 1 -6) = 5518.6'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 7 -12) = 5517'BROADWAYI
J
A
C
D
E
G
LOT 13
LOT 7
LOT 1 LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6
LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 LOT 12
LOT 14
LOT 15
LOT 16
LOT 17
B
F
H
VIOLET
LOCUST
5518.92
5519.00
5522.06
5519.88
5519.00
5517.06
5516.00
5515.00
5517.00
5519.02
5518.60
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/29/2023 2:40:12 PMG0.30TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
SOLAR SHADING PLAN4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 803041/16" = 1'-0"1 SOLAR ANALYSIS PLAN
0'8'16'32'64'
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
02 - 0.00 - SOLAR SHADING ANALYSIS TABLE
wttw
MAIN
FLOOR
ELEVATION
PROPERTY
ZONE
DISTRICT
SOLAR
FENCE
HEIGHT
HEIGHT
ABOVE
MAIN
FLOOR
ELEVATION
OF ROOF
ELEMENT
(y)
ELEVATION OF
GRADE AT PROPERTY
LINE (x)
RELATIVE HEIGHT OF
ROOF ELEMENT (h)
LENGTH OF SHADOW
(L)
10AM 2PM 10AM 2PM 10AM 2PM
A 5524.3 RL2 25 31.0 5555.3 5522.1 5522.4 33.3 32.9 21.9 20.9
B 5524.3 RL2 25 31.0 5555.3 5521.9 5521.3 33.4 34.0 22.2 23.8
C 5524.3 RL2 25 31.0 5555.3 5521.3 5520.6 34.0 34.7 23.9 25.7
D 5524.3 RL2 25 31.0 5555.3 5519.9 5519.0 35.4 36.3 27.6 30.0
E 5520.8 RL2 25 31.5 5552.3 5519.0 5518.9 33.3 33.4 22.0 22.2
F 5520.8 RL2 25 31.5 5552.3 5517.1 35.2 27.1
G 5520.0 RL2 25 31.5 5551.5 5516.0 35.5 27.9
H 5520.0 RL2 25 21.2 5541.2 5515.9 25.3 0.8
I 5521.9 RL2 25 13.0 5534.9 5518.6 16.3 -23.1
J 5521.9 RL2 25 31.6 5553.5 5519.1 34.4 24.9
NOTE: NEGATIVE SHADOW LENGTHS INDICATE ROOF ELEMENTS WHERE THE RELATIVE HEIGHT IS LESS THAN THE SOLAR FENCE HEIGHT.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 19 of 48
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 16 -17) = 5515'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 13 -15) = 5516'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOTS 1 -6) = 5518.6'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 7 -12) = 5517'BROADWAYLOT 13
LOT 7
LOT 1 LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6
LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 LOT 12
LOT 14
LOT 15
LOT 16
LOT 17
I
J
A
C
D
E
G
B
F
H
5522.06
5522.41 5521.95
5521.32
5520.63
5519.89
5519.03
5518.92
5519.00
5517.07
5516.00
5516.00
5518.64
5519.01
BROADWAYVIOLET
LOCUST
5517.00
5515.00
5516.00
5518.60
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/29/2023 3:44:22 PMG0.30TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
SOLAR SHADING PLAN4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 803041/16" = 1'-0"1 SOLAR ANALYSIS PLAN - FLOOD HEIGHT
0'8'16'32'64'
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
NO. ISSUE DATE
1 TEC DOC 09/22/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
02 - 0.00 - SOLAR SHADING ANALYSIS TABLE
ROOF
ELEMENT
MAIN
FLOOR
ELEVATION
PROPERTY
ZONE
DISTRICT
SOLAR
FENCE
HEIGHT
HEIGHT
ABOVE
MAIN
FLOOR
ELEVATION
OF ROOF
ELEMENT
(y)
ELEVATION OF
GRADE AT PROPERTY
LINE (x)
RELATIVE HEIGHT OF
ROOF ELEMENT (h)
LENGTH OF SHADOW
(L)
10AM 2PM 10AM 2PM 10AM 2PM
A 5524.3 RL2 25 33.5 5557.8 5522.1 5522.4 35.8 35.4 28.5 27.6
B 5524.3 RL2 25 33.5 5557.8 5522.0 5521.3 35.9 36.5 28.8 30.4
C 5524.3 RL2 25 33.5 5557.8 5521.0 5520.6 36.8 37.2 31.3 32.3
D 5524.3 RL2 25 33.5 5557.8 5519.9 5519.0 37.9 38.8 34.2 36.5
E 5520.8 RL2 25 34.0 5554.8 5519.0 5518.9 35.8 35.9 28.6 28.8
F 5520.8 RL2 25 34.0 5554.8 5517.1 37.7 33.7
G 5520.0 RL2 25 34.0 5554.0 5516.0 38.0 34.6
H 5520.0 RL2 25 34.0 5554.0 5516.0 38.0 34.5
I 5521.9 RL2 25 25.0 5546.9 5518.6 28.3 8.7
J 5521.9 RL2 25 34.1 5556.0 5519.0 37.0 31.7
NOTE: NEGATIVE SHADOW LENGTHS INDICATE ROOF ELEMENTS WHERE THE RELATIVE HEIGHT IS LESS THAN THE SOLAR FENCE HEIGHT.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 20 of 48
BROADWAYB
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
A
PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINER
2
5' - 0
"
5518.69'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 16 & 17) = 5515'R 25'
-
0"
R
2
5' - 0
"
R
2
5' - 0
"
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 13-15) = 5516'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 7-12) = 5517'
LOWPOINT ELEVATION
(LOT 1-6) = 5518.6'
VIOLET
LOCUST
LOT 1
LOT 2
LOT 3
LOT 4
LOT 5
LOT 6 LOT 13
LOT 14
LOT 15
LOT 17
LOT 16
LOT 7 LOT 8 LOT 9 LOT 10 LOT 11 LOT 12
5522.77'5522.24'
5522.06'
5521.17'
5520.00'
5519.00'
5519.00'
5518.00'
5517.50'
5519.31'
5518.60'
5516.00'
5515.00'
5517.00'
5516.00'
1/16" = 1'-0"1 SOLAR ANALYSIS PLAN - SLOPED ROOFS
02 - 0.00 - SOLAR SHADING ANALYSIS TABLE
wt
MAIN
FLOOR
ELEVATION
PROPERTY
ZONE
DISTRICT
SOLAR
FENCE
HEIGHT
HEIGHT
ABOVE
MAIN
FLOOR
ELEVATION
OF ROOF
ELEMENT
(y)
ELEVATION OF GRADE
AT PROPERTY LINE (x)
RELATIVE HEIGHT OF
ROOF ELEMENT (h)
LENGTH OF SHADOW
(L)
10AM 2PM 10AM 2PM 10AM 2PM
A 5524.3 RL2 25 35.7 5560.0 5522.8 5522.2 37.2 37.7 32.4 33.8
B 5524.3 RL2 25 36.4 5560.8 5522.1 5521.2 38.7 39.6 36.3 38.7
C 5524.3 RL2 25 35.7 5560.0 5520.0 5519.5 40.0 40.5 39.7 41.1
D 5520.8 RL2 25 36.9 5557.7 5519.0 5519.0 38.7 38.7 36.4 36.4
E 5520.8 RL2 25 36.9 5557.7 0.0 5518.0 5557.7 39.7 14665.2 39.0
F 5520.0 RL2 25 37.0 5557.0 0.0 5516.0 5557.0 41.0 14663.2 42.4
G 5520.0 RL2 25 37.0 5557.0 0.0 5517.5 5557.0 39.5 14663.2 38.4
H 5521.9 RL2 25 24.0 5545.9 5518.7 27.2 5.9
I 5521.9 RL2 25 35.4 5557.3 5519.3 38.0 34.4
NOTE: NEGATIVE SHADOW LENGTHS INDICATE ROOF ELEMENTS WHERE THE RELATIVE HEIGHT IS LESS THAN THE SOLAR FENCE HEIGHT.
SEAL
NOTICE: DUTY OF COOPERATION
RELEASE OF THESE DOCUMENTS
CONTEMPLATES FURTHER COOPERATION
AMONG THE OWNER, HIS CONTRACTOR, AND
THE ARCHITECT. DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION
ARE COMPLEX. ALTHOUGH THE ARCHITECT AND
HIS CONSULTANTS HAVE PERFORMED THEIR
SERVICES WITH DUE CARE AND DILIGENCE, THEY
CANNOT GUARANTEE PERFECTION.
COMMUNICATION IS IMPERFECT AND EVERY
CONTINGENCY CANNOT BE ANTICIPATED. ANY
ERRORS, OMISSIONS, OR DISCREPANCY
DISCOVERED BY THE USE OF THESE
DOCUMENTS SHALL BE REPORTED IMMEDIATELY
TO THE ARCHITECT. FAILURE TO NOTIFY THE
ARCHITECT COMPOUNDS MISUNDERSTANDING
AND INCREASES CONSTRUCTION COSTS. A
FAILURE TO COOPERATE BY SIMPLE NOTICE TO
THE ARCHITECT SHALL RELIEVE THE ARCHITECT
FROM RESPONSIBILITY FOR ALL CONSEQUENCES
ARRIVING OUT OF SUCH CHANGES.
THE DESIGNS AND PLANS ARE COPYRIGHT AND
ARE NOT TO BE USED OR REPRODUCED WHOLLY
OR IN PART WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION
OF SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS. THE DRAWINGS
AND SPECIFICATIONS ARE INSTRUMENTS OF
SERVICE AND SHALL REMAIN THE PROPERTY OF
THE ARCHITECT WHETHER THE PROJECT FOR
WHICH THEY ARE MADE IS EXECUTED OR NOT.
COPYRIGHT SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS.
DO NOT SCALE FROM DRAWING. VERIFY ALL
DIMENSIONS ON SITE.
JOB NO.11/29/2023 10:27:50 AMG 0.30TSMWS TOWNHOMES23030
SOLAR SHADING PLAN4395 BROADWAY ST. BOULDER, COLORADO 803040'8'16'32'64'
SCALE: 1/16" = 1'-0"
NO. ISSUE DATE
1 SITE REVIEW
AMENDMENT
10/13/23
2 SPR AMENDMENT R01 12/01/23
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 21 of 48
Sopher Sparn Architects LLC | 2505 Walnut Street, Suite 200 | Boulder, Colorado 80302 | 303.442.4422
MEMORANDUM
To: Charles Ferro, Land Use Review Manager - CITY OF BOULDER
Chandler Van Schaack, Case Manager - CITY OF BOULDER
From: Erin Bagnall - SOPHER SPARN ARCHITECTS LLC
Project: SHINING MOUNTAIN WALDORF SCHOOL – 999 Violet Avenue
Date: 13 October 2023 RV_01 December 2023
Re: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW AMENDMENT
WRITTEN STATEMENT
Pre-Existing Land Use Approvals
LUR2019-00068 – Site Review for the phased consolidation and redevelopment of the school facilities and
redevelopment of a portion of the property for future single family and townhome lots subject to design
guidelines. Approved August, 2021
LUR2023-00021 - Amendment to the Shining Mountain Waldorf School Phase II Site Plan and Locust Neighborhood
Design Guidelines to allow for subdivision of the approved “Townhome Lot” into 17 individual townhome lots and
to modify the phasing plan to remove phasing requirements for the single-family lots. Approved September, 2023
Proposed Site Review Amendment -- Project Intent
During the site review, the master plan was approved as a phased development, allowing the school to construct
the high school building first, decommission the existing church on Union being used for the current high school,
and then proceed into the residential Phase II (construction of the townhome and single-family homes lots). After
Site Review approval, the school immediately began technical documents and permitting for Phase I. After much
delay in the city process, the high school is currently under construction. (Estimated Completion February 2024)
The school has been working diligently to progress with Phase II, as it is necessary for funding the completion of
the high school construction. During initial conversations with city staff to kick off Phase II, it was determined that
there are discrepancies in the original approval language that are obstructing the schools desire to subdivide the
townhomes into individual lots (much like the single family) The recent site site review amendment (LUR2023-
00021) cleared up discrepancies to allow the school to proceed as necessary (and required) with their
construction of individual lots for the townhomes. Upon further development and design of the townhome lots, it
has been determined that the height of the townhomes is unduly constrained by the 100 year base flood elevation
requirements. Further, the applicant is interested in providing a sloped roof design that would provide more
articulated roof line and respond more appropriately to the residential neighborhoods and school architecture
adjacent to the townhome site. Therefore, the applicant would like to request additional height as allowable by
BRC Section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E)(i)
The height modification is to allow a roof that has a pitch of 2:12 or greater in a building with three
or fewer stories and the proposed height does not exceed the maximum height permitted in the
zoning district by more than ten feet.
We are requesting staff and Planning Board review and respond to our request for following:
1. Approve up to an additional 7’-6” of height for each townhome building, allowing for pitched roof design on the
third level, an architectural concept in keeping with the residential look of the surrounding neighborhood and
SMWS campus. The sloped roof design will provide a more creative and less boxy building design.
As measured, changing the height of the pitched roof scenario results in a 7’ to 7’-6” maximum additional height
request. This is a result of the topmost point of the ridgeline of the roof being the point of measurement when the
total increase in roof form height is much less to the human eye. For this reason, height exceptions for height with
sloped roofs are allowed with Planning Board Review and approval. As you can see below, the building design
within the required height limit is changed more dramatically when viewed two dimensionally on the page.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 22 of 48
12/01/2023
LUR2023-00050
Page 2 of 7
Building Design within the required Height Limit
Building Design with Additional Height for Sloped Roof
However, when taken at a pedestrian scale from a three-dimensional view, the requested changes to the roof line
become insubstantial to the view and provide a useful benefit to the homeowner. Providing a sloped roof will
maintain a connection to the neighborhood, allow for a more articulated building form, and give the owner an
easier maintenance liability in the future.
2. In the event the board feels an additional 7’-6” of height for each townhome is not supportable, we ask that
staff consider allowing for a consolation approval of up to 4’. This request is based on BRC Section 9-2-
14(b)(1)(E)(iv) - The height modification is to allow up to the greater of two stories or the maximum number of
stories permitted but no more than five feet above the maximum building height under Section 9-7-5(a) or 9-
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 23 of 48
12/01/2023
LUR2023-00050
Page 3 of 7
7-6, B.R.C. 1981, in a building where the height modification is necessary because the building has to be
elevated to meet the required flood protection elevation.
As mentioned, the underlying reason for this height request stems from the constraints to the buildings from the
base flood elevation requirements. Placing the building’s finish floor at flood protection elevation automatically
puts the structure at a 5’ deficit to allowable height. In a three-story townhome this can drastically affect the
functionality and ability to route structure and mechanical within a reasonable floor to floor ht. With the current
height limit we will be severely constrained in the floor-to-floor height, and providing this height exemption will
allow for a more realistic and standard sectional dimension, while providing minimal difference to the building
design by the naked eye.
As measured, changing the height to accommodate the desired floor to floor heights without changing the roof
slope will results in a 2’-6” to 4’ maximum additional height request. Once more, this request will result in minimal
change to the building design, and allow the applicant proper flexibility in the building design constrained by flood
elevations. Seen below, the change from the required height design and the requested becomes even more
insubstantial in two dimensions.
Building Design within the required Height Limit
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 24 of 48
12/01/2023
LUR2023-00050
Page 4 of 7
Building Design with Minimal Additional Height for flood protection elevation
In addition, when taken at a pedestrian scale from a three-dimensional view, the requested changes are not
discernable.
BRC 9-2-14 compliance
· Building Siting and Design Criteria –
The Shining Mountain Townhomes are designed to be consistent with the existing neighborhood, and
further, to act as a complementary transition between the MUB land use of the North Boulder Area
subcommunity area to the north, the low-density residential areas directly east, the future new low
density residential single-family construction to the south, and the new school construction to the west.
The site design relates directly to the public realm on all street facing frontages, with front porches
addressing the street, quality materials, and design that promotes a vibrant pedestrian experience. The
pedestrian and right of way improvements along Broadway will help to realize the long-term vision of the
North Boulder Subcommunity Action Plan and advance the community towards the future vision.
The applicant believes the height request for sloped roofs in this neighborhood better reflects the single
family home aesthetic in of the neighborhood, and believes that despite the seemingly large request (7’-
6”) the building benefits from a shaped roof line and allows for a more modern classic design with
minimal impact to the perceived height. The sloped roof design contributes to a city skyline with a variety
of roof forms and heights. Newly develped areas of the city have resulted in flat roof boxy forms because
of the strict height allowances. In 2019 the Planning Board and City Council amended the code to allow
for applicants to request height variances with sloped roof forms in the hopes it would provide variety
and interest. The applicant believes this request to be in keeping with this vision.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 25 of 48
12/01/2023
LUR2023-00050
Page 5 of 7
· Additional Criteria for Buildings Requiring Height Modifications –
As mentioned above, the building form and massing is appropriate for the existing and future vision for
the North Boulder Subcommunity area. The form and massing are of appropriate scale to the pedestrian
realm and will increase the quality of infrastructure and architecture along the public right of way. In
addition:
No building exceeds 200’ in length
No Building exceeds 120’ in length, but nonetheless provides façade recessions and
projections, front porches and entrances every 20’, and varied roof forms.
The requested amendment to the approved Shining Mountain Waldorf Master plan is determined necessary for
the viability of design for the townhomes. Constrained height as a result of determined base flood elevations limits
the townhome buildings. Further, the desire to provide sloped roof area on the buildings for design aesthetic are
the determining factors with this request. The original intent of the approval will remain, the school will continue
development a new and improved campus for their aging and flood affected property, and the City of Boulder will
gain 37 units of housing in a residential zone. We are hopeful this amendment will be understood as a further
design development for the approved townhome site, as we believe it to be.
Approved Access, Internal Circulation and Proposed Shared Connections
There are no changes to access, internal circulation and proposed shared connections with this amendment.
Approved Access, Internal Circulation and Proposed Shared Connections
There are no changes to parking with this amendment.
Approved School Design Character
There are no changes to the approved school design with this amendment.
Approved Schematic Residential Areas
There are no changes to the approved residential design with this amendment, beyond the height request for
sloped roof on the townhomes.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 26 of 48
12/01/2023
LUR2023-00050
Page 6 of 7
Approved Solar Siting and Construction
There are no changes to the approved site design with this amendment.
Approved Project Phasing –
There are no changes to the approved phasing with this amendment.
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Criteria Compliance
The project specifically meets the following criteria and complies generally with the requirements of the BVCP:
2.27 Preservation of Historic & Cultural Resources The city and county will identify, evaluate and protect buildings, structures,
objects, districts, sites and natural features of historic, architectural, archaeological or cultural significance with input from the
community. The city and county will seek protection of significant historic and cultural resources through local designation when
a proposal by the private sector is subject to discretionary development review.
Shining Mountain Waldorf School is a cultural resource in the City of Boulder, and clearly benefits the
community in countless ways. This is a case where the cultural resource itself is applying for discretionary
development review. ‘Protection’ in this case, would be in support of the overall intent of the school to
remain a vital part of the community through redevelopment.
2.33 Sensitive Infill & Redevelopment With little vacant land remaining in the city, most new development will occur through
redevelopment in mixed-use centers that tend to be the areas of greatest change. The city will gear subcommunity and area
planning and other efforts toward defining the acceptable amount of infill and redevelopment and standards and performance
measures for design quality to avoid or adequately mitigate negative impacts and enhance the benefits of infill and
redevelopment to the community and individual neighborhoods. The city will also develop tools, such as neighborhood design
guidelines, to promote sensitive infill and redevelopment.
The school is attempting to redevelop a portion of its land in a manner that mitigates any negative impact of
infill housing and is sensitively weaving in new residential development into the existing housing pattern in
support of the ongoing activities of the school itself.
5.05 Support for Local Business & Business Retention The city and county value the diverse mix of existing businesses, including
primary and secondary employers of different sizes, in the local economy. Nurturing, supporting and maintaining a positive
climate for the retention of existing businesses and jobs is a priority. The city recognizes the vital role of small, local and
independent businesses and non-profits that serve the community and will balance needs of redevelopment in certain areas with
strategies that minimize displacement of existing businesses and create opportunities for startups and growing businesses. The
city will continue to proactively analyze trends in market forces to shape its activities, plans and policies regarding local business
and business retention. The city and county will consider the projected needs of businesses and their respective employees, such
as commercial and office space, when planning for transportation infrastructure, programs and housing.
The school’s entire redevelopment proposal is in aid of staying in Boulder. The school recognizes that other
than the educational opportunity it provides, its largest physical asset is land. The value of that land in
support of redevelopment for residential use is substantial. The school values its place in the Boulder
community, but it recognizes the need to support its core function. If it cannot do so in Boulder, that need for
Waldorf Education would remain. It is Shining Mountain’s intent to remain in Boulder through the
improvement of the facilities proposed.
7.06 Mixture of Housing Types The city and county, through their land use regulations and housing policies, will encourage the
private sector to provide and maintain a mixture of housing types with varied prices, sizes and densities to meet the housing
needs of the low-, moderate- and middle-income households of the Boulder Valley population. The city will encourage property
owners to provide a mix of housing types, as appropriate. This may include support for ADUs/OAUs, alley houses, cottage courts
and building multiple small units rather than one large house on a lot.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 27 of 48
12/01/2023
LUR2023-00050
Page 7 of 7
The housing proposed as a part of this application creates opportunity for new single family residential
construction on lots that are smaller than the 7000sf standard size, thus limiting house size through FAR limits.
Likewise proposed are smaller townhouse units providing a more modest housing opportunity for home
ownership, in this neighborhood. These unit types provide for a transition to the denser housing types found
north of Violet and Uptown Broadway neighborhood.
8.13 Support for Community Facilities The city and county recognize the importance of educational, health, cultural and non-
profit community agencies that provide vital services to the residents of the Boulder Valley and will work collaboratively with
these agencies to reasonably accommodate their facility needs and consider location based on transportation accessibility or
other needs.
Shining Mountain Waldorf School provides a unique educational opportunity for children of all ages in
Boulder. No other Waldorf-based Pre-Kindergarten through High School exists in this community and offers
such a complete immersion in this vital educational and cultural opportunity. The need for change and
accommodation by the city is essential to its long-term health and sustainability.
8.20 Education Resources The city will seek to provide educational, cultural and literacy resources and opportunities for the
community. The city will develop and maintain resources to assist learners and students of all ages, including support for formal
education programs, and provide public workspaces and independent learning resources. The city will develop collaborative
relationships with community educational institutions and function as a research center for residents.
Shining Mountain looks to continue to enhance its place as an educational and cultural center for Boulder.
Through its improved facilities, greater opportunities for community cultural events will be even more
possible, once completed. The school looks forward to furthering such opportunities collaboratively with the
City and other local institutions.
Attachment A - Applicant's Proposed Plans and Written Statement
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 28 of 48
CRITERIA CHECKLIST AND COMMENT FORM
LUR2023-00050
SITE REVIEW
SECTION 9-2-14
(b)(1)(E) Height Modifications: A development which exceeds the permitted height
requirements of Section 9-7-5, "Building Height," or 9-7-6, "Building Height, Conditional,"
B.R.C. 1981, or of Paragraph 9-10-3(b)(2), "Maximum Height," B.R.C. 1981, to the extent
permitted by that paragraph for existing buildings on nonstandard lots, is required to complete
a site review and is not subject to the minimum threshold requirements. No standard other than
height may be modified under the site review unless the project is also eligible for site review.
A development that exceeds the permitted height requirements of Section 9-7-5 or 9-7-6,
B.R.C. 1981, must meet any one of the following circumstances in addition to the site review
criteria:
(i) The height modification is to allow a roof that has a pitch of 2:12 or greater in a
building with three or fewer stories and the proposed height does not exceed the
maximum height permitted in the zoning district by more than ten feet.
The current proposal requests a height modification to allow a roof that has a pitch of
2:12 or greater in a building with three or fewer stories and the proposed height
exceeds the maximum height permitted in the zoning district by seven feet six inches.
This is the preferred design proposed by the applicant. In addition, the applicant is
requesting approval of an alternative design consistent with the following:
(iv) The height modification is to allow up to the greater of two stories or the maximum
number of stories permitted but no more than five feet above the maximum building
height under Section 9-7-5(a) or 9-7-6, B.R.C. 1981, in a building where the height
modification is necessary because the building has to be elevated to meet the required
flood protection elevation
As detailed in the Applicant’s written statement, the required flood protection elevation
on this site requires elevating the first floor of the building by approximately five feet,
which constrains the townhome buildings in terms of functionality and ability to route
structure and mechanical within a reasonable floor to floor height. The applicant is
therefore proposing an alternative design as part of the height modification request to
allow for up to four feet of additional height for the townhomes in order to improve
interior livability and allow for each story within the townhomes to be constructed at a
standard floor to ceiling height.
(h)Criteria: No site review application shall be approved unless the approving agency finds
that the project is consistent with the following criteria:
(1)Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) criteria:
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 29 of 48
(A) BVCP Land Use Map and Policies: The proposed project is consistent with the
BVCP land use map and, on balance, with the goals and policies of the BVCP
particularly those that address the built environment. In applying this, the approving
authority shall consistently interpret and apply this criterion and consider whether a
particular goal or policy is intended to be applied to individual development projects
or is to guide city policy decisions, such as regulatory actions. The BVCP does not
prioritize goals and policies, and no project must satisfy one particular goal or policy
or all of them.
BVCP Land Use Map Consistency:
The BVCP land use map provides a sketch plan of the desired land use pattern in the
Boulder Valley. Land use designations are aspirational and indicative of the broad
goals of the city as compared to the regulatory aspects of zoning. “Whereas the
BVCP Map provides a generalized picture of desired future uses in the Boulder
Valley, the city zoning map assigns every parcel of land in the city a zoning district.
This regulates allowable uses, density, …. and more.” The BVCP Land Use
Designation for the site is “Low Density Residential” defined in the BVCP as
follows:
Characteristics and Locations: “LR is the most prevalent land use designation in the
city, covering the primarily single family home neighborhoods, including the historic
neighborhoods and Post-WWII neighborhoods.
Uses: Uses: Consists predominantly of single-family detached units.
BVCP Density/Intensity: 2 to 6 dwelling units per acre.
The site plan approved through LUR2019-00068 consists of single family lots,
attached single family townhomes and school facilities across 11.6 acres. With a
total of 38 dwelling units (20 proposed single-family lots; one existing single family
lot; and 17 townhomes) across the 11.6 acres the gross density equates to 3.28
dwelling units per acre, consistent with the anticipated density for LR. The proposed
site plan does not change the approved density but allows for the townhomes to be
constructed at a height of up to 42’6” with sloped roofs.
BVCP Policies. The proposed project, on balance, meets a number of BVCP policies as follows:
2.03 Compact Development Pattern
2.41 Enhanced Design for All Projects
2.25 Improve Mobility Grid & Connections
2.24 Commitment to a Walkable & Accessible City
2.37 Environmentally Sensitive Urban Design
2.38 Importance of Urban Canopy, Street Trees & Streetscapes
4.07 Energy-Efficient Land Use
4.08 Energy-Efficient Building Design
6.12 Transportation Impacts Mitigated
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 30 of 48
6.18 Neighborhood Streets & Alleys Connectivity
7.06 Mixture of Housing Types
8.12 Accessibility to Schools
8.13 Support for Community Facilities
(B) Subcommunity and Area Plans or Design Guidelines: If the project is subject to an
adopted subcommunity or area plan or adopted design guidelines, the project is
consistent with the applicable plan and guidelines.
While the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan identifies the area as the Union Utica
Neighborhood that is west of Broadway between Yarmouth Avenue on the north to
Utica Avenue on the south, there’s little in the way of defined or identifiable
character expressed for the area within the subcommunity plan. Instead, within the
approved Locust Neighborhood Design Guidelines, the applicant has provided an
area analysis that included observations to provide a foundation for the guidelines
including use of porches and garages that are set back; a mix of architectural styles
but with a consistent style on each home; variation in materials and sustainable
landscaping with native species. To that end, the guidelines provide a list of
acceptable primary and trim materials, roof styles, window door and entry details to
fit within the neighborhood but still retain elements of the time. No changes to the
building design elements within the guidelines are proposed other than those
elements related to the height of the townhome buildings and the allowable roof
forms. Overall, given the higher intensity uses and largely flat-roofed architectural
character of the existing 35 to 48-foot residential buildings along the east side of
Broadway north of Violet, the proposal to allow for 42’6” townhome buildings with
sloped roofs would provide both a transition in scale to the more traditional
residential areas to the south and southeast of the site as well as more variety in the
overall roof forms and architectural style of the area.
(C) Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Any new commercial building greater than
30,000 square feet in floor area and any 30,000 square feet or greater addition to a
commercial building shall either have a net site energy usage index (EUI) of zero or
is designed to achieve a net site EUI that is 10 percent lower than required under the
City of Boulder Energy Conservation Code. It shall be a condition of approval that
the applicant demonstrate compliance with this criterion at time of building permit.
For the purpose of this requirement, "commercial building" shall have the meaning
defined in the City of Boulder Energy Conservation Code.
Not applicable, as the proposed development is entirely residential.
(D) Urban Edge Design: If the project is located within the urbanizing areas along the
boundaries between Area I and Area II or III of the BVCP, the building and site
design provide for a well-defined urban edge, and, if, in addition, the project is
located on a major street shown in Appendix A of this title, the buildings and site
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 31 of 48
design establish a sense of entry and arrival to the city by creating a defined urban
edge through site and building design elements visible upon entry to the city.
Not applicable, as the project is not located within the urbanizing areas along the
boundaries between Area I and Area II or III of the BVCP
(E) Historic or Cultural Resources: If present, the project protects significant historic and
cultural resources. The approving authority may require application and good faith
pursuit of local landmark designation.
Not applicable, as there are no significant historic or cultural resources present on
the site.
(F) Housing Diversity and Bedroom Unit Types: Except in the RR, RE and RL-1 zoning
districts, projects that are more than 50 percent residential by measure of floor area,
not counting enclosed parking areas, meet the following housing and bedroom unit
type requirements in Subsections (i) through (vi). For the purposes of this
subparagraph, qualifying housing type shall mean duplexes, attached dwelling units,
townhouses, live-work units, or efficiency living units, and bedroom type shall mean
studios, one-bedroom units, two-bedroom units, or three-bedroom units.
(i) Projects five acres or less shall include at least one qualifying housing type. In
projects with efficiency living units, at least one additional qualifying housing type
shall be provided consistent with the requirements of this paragraph;
(ii) Projects greater than five acres shall include at least two qualifying housing types;
The proposed project is an amendment to a previously approved Site Review, which
includes, in addition to the Shining Mountain Waldorf School facilities, 17
townhome units and 20 detached single-family units to be developed as part of
Phase II. This request does not alter the previously approved unit number or type.
(G) Environmental Preservation:
(i) The project provides for the preservation of or mitigation of adverse impacts to
natural features, including, without limitation, healthy long-lived trees, significant
plant communities, ground and surface water, wetlands, riparian areas, drainage
areas, and species on the federal Endangered Species List and "Species of Special
Concern in Boulder County" designated by Boulder County and their habitat.
The site has been developed for several decades and as such, there is little in the way of
existing natural features wetlands, riparian, or special status species. The applicant
intends to preserve a number of long-lived mature trees on the site including and a
number of trees in poor condition and/or Ash species susceptible to Emerald Ash Borer
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 32 of 48
will be removed. There is a small ephemeral ditch that runs through the main campus
and feeds to a storm drain. The applicant intends to preserve this as a landscape feature.
The site is within the 100 year flood zone due to the proximity of Fourmile Canyon Creek
and was impacted by the 2013 flood events in Colorado. As such, the redevelopment
provides the opportunity to mitigate for future flood events. The proposed Site Plan
places new structures above the levels required by Floodplain Regulations and allows for
the flow of water thru the open space areas on the site and around the new structures. As
per the requirements for Critical Facilities, the school currently has extensive Evacuation
Procedures in place, include routes for evacuation and defined safe zones for all areas of
the campus.
(ii) Where excavation occurs, the location and design of buildings conforms to the
natural contours of the land with tiered floor plates, and the site design avoids over-
engineered tabling of land. Slopes greater than 50 percent should be avoided and, to
the extent practicable, any such areas shall be stabilized with vegetation.
The existing site is already graded, and the proposed project conforms to the
contours of the land and does not create any significant slopes or tabling.
(2) Site Design Criteria: The project creates safe, convenient, and efficient connections
for all modes of travel, promotes safe pedestrian, bicycle, and other modes of
alternative travel with the goal of lowering motor vehicle miles traveled. Usable open
space is arranged to be accessible; designed to be functional, encourage use, and
enhance the attractiveness of the project; and meets the needs of the anticipated
residents, occupants, tenants, and visitors to the project. Landscaping aesthetically
enhances the project, minimum use of water, is sustainable, and improves the quality
of the environment. Operational elements are screened to mitigate negative visual
impacts. In determining whether this is met, the approving agency will consider the
following factors:
(A) Access, Transportation, and Mobility:
(i) The project enables or provides vehicular and pedestrian connectivity between sites
consistent with adopted connections plans relative to the transportation needs and
impacts of the project, including but not limited to construction of new streets, bike
lanes, on-street parking, sidewalks, multi-use paths, transit stops, streetscape planting
strips, and dedication of public right-of-way or public access easements, as
applicable considering the scope of the project. Where no adopted connections plan
applies, the applicant shall, in good faith, and in coordination with the city manager,
attempt to coordinate with adjacent property owners to establish, where practicable,
reasonable and useful pedestrian connections or vehicular circulation connections,
such as between parking lots on abutting properties, considering existing
connections, infrastructure, and topography.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 33 of 48
The previously approved phasing plan includes a number of public improvements and a
new street connection with the extension of Locust Avenue. As part of that extension, a
new multi-use path is planned along with a detached walkway. Violet Avenue and 10th
Street will also be improved with new detached walkways; with a new attached walkway
on the main campus side of 10th Street. No changes to the required public improvements
are proposed.
(ii) Alternatives to the automobile are promoted by incorporating site design techniques,
land use patterns, and infrastructure that support and encourage walking, biking, and
other alternatives to the single-occupant vehicle.
Inherent in a mixed use redevelopment is the integration of land uses that are compatible
and support walking and biking between the uses. In addition, by providing new detached
walkways on east side of 10th Street; south side of Violet Avenue; and a new street
connection with a multi-use path and a detached walkway, the ability to circulate to and
through the site as a pedestrian and bicyclist will be enhanced.
(iii) A transportation demand management (TDM) plan will be complied with including
methods that result in a significant shift away from single-occupant vehicle use to
alternate modes.
The existing Site Review approval includes an approved TDM and Parking
Management plan. Because this request only affects the height of the approved
townhome units and does not alter any of the previously approved project metrics,
staff finds that a new TDM Plan is not necessary.
(iv) Streets, bikeways, pedestrian ways, trails, open space, buildings, and parking areas
are designed and located to optimize safety of all modes and provide connectivity
and functional permeability through the site.
The previously approved plans require the applicant to close the existing access drives
into the existing high school site. In addition, the project plans illustrate a single access
point into both the high school and townhome access drive along the north side of the
Locust Avenue extension to ensure that the planned multi-use path will have limited
impacts from vehicle movement in that block. The applicant is extending Locust Avenue
as part of the project plans, with a detached multi-use path on the north side of the street
and a detached walkway on the south side. In addition, new detached walkways are
planned on the east side of 10th Street and the south side of Violet Avenue. No changes to
the approved street layout or site access are proposed.
(v) The design of vehicular circulation and parking areas make efficient use of the land
and minimize the amount of pavement necessary to meet the circulation and parking
needs of the project.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 34 of 48
Inherent in the previously approved plans is revitalization of the large school campus
and the redevelopment of land owned by the school as residential. The main school
campus limits the street and vehicular functions to the exterior of the large site. Then,
with a shared access drive between the High School and proposed Townhome lots, there
is restricted access from both Violet and Locust avenues that helps to minimize land
devoted to the street system. No changes to the street system are proposed.
(vi) Where practicable and needed in the area and subject to coordination with the city
manager, the project provides curbside parking or loading or both consistent with
city policies on curbside management.
The school has an approved pick-up and drop-off plan in place that will not be
affected by the current proposal.
(B) Open Space:
(i) Useable open space is arranged to be accessible and designed to encourage use by
incorporating quality landscaping, a mixture of sun and shade, hardscape areas and
green spaces for gathering.
For the 17 townhome style dwelling units within the RL-2 zoning, a minimum of 6,000
square feet of open space per dwelling unit or 102,000 square-feet is required. In this
case, the applicant is proposing a hierarchy of shared open spaces for the townhomes
including a small private backyard space at the rear of each townhome; a shared “pocket
park” space for the townhomes area; and shared open space with the school on the main
campus and within the high school space facing the townhomes. While the hours for
access for the entire open space are varied, with limits on hours during school days and
hours, the access would be communicated and enforced through signage. With the
approximately 210,453 square feet (or 4.83 acres) of open space total between the main
campus, the high school and the townhomes, the open space exceeds the requirement.
(ii) The open space will meet the needs of the anticipated residents, occupants, tenants,
and visitors of the property. In mixed-use projects, the open space provides for a
balance of private and common areas for the residential uses and includes common
open space that is available for use by residents of the residential uses and their
visitors and by tenants, occupants, customers, and visitors of the non-residential uses.
The open space within the master plan has shared and private areas for the townhome
residents. There is also common open space areas within both the high school site as well
as the main campus in the plan that are intended to be shared with the surrounding
residents. There are active and passive areas intended to be part of the shared open
space as identified within the open space plan per LUR2019-00068, and no changes to
this plan are proposed.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 35 of 48
(iii) If the project includes more than 50 dwelling units, including the addition of units
that causes a project to exceed this threshold, and is more than one mile walking
distance to a public park with any of the amenities described herein, at least 30
percent of the required outdoor open space is designed for active recreational
purposes.
Not applicable, as the project as approved includes 37 dwelling units.
(iv) On-site open space is linked to adjacent public spaces, multi-use paths, city parks, or
public open space if consistent with Department of Open Space and Mountain Parks
or Department of Parks and Recreation plans and planning for the area, as applicable.
The main school campus transitions to the 65-acre Foothills Community Park, which in
turn is connected to city Open Space and Mountain Parks land to the west.
(C) Landscaping and Screening:
(i) The project exceeds the minimum landscaping requirements of Section 9-9-12,
"Landscaping and Screening Standards," B.R.C. 1981, by at least fifteen percent in
terms of planting quantities, includes a commensurate area to accommodate the
additional plantings, and, where practical, preserves healthy long-lived trees.
On the previously approved Landscape Plan Plant Schedule, there are 263 shrubs and
209 trees proposed within the site plan; this includes street trees within all of the rights of
way planned for improvements along with new landscaping within the school and
townhome sites. This exceeds the amount of plant materials required. The overall number
of plants will remain the same in the current proposal.
(ii) The landscaping design includes a variety of plants providing a variety of colors and
contrasts in terms of texture and seasonality and high-quality hard surface materials,
such as stone, flagstone, porous pavers, and decorative concrete.
The plant materials are specified predominately as low and medium water adapted
plants, with one focal point willow proposed on the high school grounds in a low point
that would be adapted to receive drainage flows. The approved plan per LUR2019-00068
includes a number of different biomes throughout the site that exist today that are
intended to be enhanced including those identified as: xeric gardens; ornamental grass
gardens; permaculture; understory and swale and rock gardens along with perennial
gardens. Hardscape materials include scored decorative concrete roadways, a narrow
stone or rectangular paver border strip along the roads, and paver materials for
sidewalks and driveways. No changes to the approved landscape plan are proposed other
than a request to remove previously approved dwarf trees from the rear yards of the
townhomes and replace them with alternative plantings that can work with site drainage,
utilities, and building footprints.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 36 of 48
(iii) The landscaping design conserves water through use of native and adaptive plants,
reduction of exotic plant materials, and landscaping within stormwater detention
facilities to create bioswales or rain gardens, or other similar design strategies.
See response to (ii) above.
(iv) Operational elements, such as electrical transformers, trash storage and recycling
areas, parking, and vehicular circulation, are screened from the public realm through
design elements, such as landscaping, fencing, or placement of structures, to mitigate
negative visual impacts.
Operational elements are effectively screened, and no changes to the approved
locations are proposed.
(3) Building Siting and Design Criteria: Building siting and design are consistent with the
character established in any adopted plans or guidelines applicable to the site or, if none
apply, are compatible with the character of the area or improves upon that character,
consistent with the intent specified in this paragraph. Buildings are positioned and
oriented towards the public realm to promote a safe and vibrant pedestrian experience
including welcoming, well-defined entries and facades. Building exteriors are designed
with a long-lasting appearance and high-quality materials. Building design is simple and
to a human scale, it creates visual interest and a vibrant pedestrian experience. Building
roof design contributes to a city skyline that has a variety of roof forms and heights. In
determining whether this is met, the approving agency will consider the following
factors:
(A) Building Siting and Public Realm Interface:
(i) New buildings and, to the extent practicable, additions to existing buildings are positioned
towards the street, respecting the existing conditions or the context anticipated by adopted
plans or guidelines. In urban contexts, buildings are positioned close to the property line and
sidewalk along a street; whereas, in lower intensity contexts, a greater landscaped setback
may be provided to match the surrounding context.
The existing approval includes reduced setbacks along all rights-of-way to position buildings
closer to the street. No changes to the previously approved setbacks are proposed. In
addition, the previously approved residential guidelines provide direction on building
morphology to enhance the pedestrian experience by including the following design
strategies:
• A street-facing facade reinforces the entry and primary mass
• Wall articulation on all facades creates variety and secondary masses within the overall
form
• Covered porches help articulate the entry and create space for social integration with the
community
• Attention to detail in the connections between the masses of the overall building form
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 37 of 48
• Dormers, overhangs, and parapets add visual interest and detail to larger forms
• Variety in floor plan and building location within the allowable envelope prevents
commonality across adjacent development lots
• Front doors must be visible from the street and large porches are strongly encouraged
• Roof covers for the front door and porch must have a height that relates to the pedestrian
scale of the street and fit with the overall form of the building mass
• Garage doors must be set back from the entry façade
• Gable roofs are a common example in residential design and allow for a variety of
complimentary roof styles
• Shed roofs are suitable for the entry, secondary form or for the primary mass
• Wrapping porches combine social interaction with private outdoor space
No changes to these requirements are proposed.
(ii) Wherever practical considering the scope of the project, parking areas are located behind
buildings or set back further from the streetscape than the building façade.
Within the townhome site, parking areas are located behind the buildings and are
screened from view from adjacent rights-of-way.
(iii) Along the public realm, building entries are emphasized by windows and architectural
features that include one or more of the following: increased level of detail, protruding or
recessed elements, columns, pilasters, protruding bays, reveals, fins, ribs, balconies,
cornices, eaves, increased window glazing, or changes in building materials or color.
See response to (i) above.
(iv) Defined entries connect the building to the public realm. Unless inconsistent with the
context and building's use, along the public realm, one defined entry is provided every 50
feet. Buildings designed for residential or industrial uses may have fewer defined entries.
See response to (i) above.
(iv) If the project is adjacent to a zoning district of lower intensity in terms of allowable use,
density, massing, or scale, the project is designed with an appropriate transition to the
adjacent properties considering adopted subcommunity and area plans or design
guidelines applicable to the site, and, if none apply, the existing development pattern.
Appropriate transitions may be created through design elements such as building siting
and design or open space siting and design.
The proposed increase in height to allow for sloped roof forms on the townhome buildings
maintains the overall character of the development and provides an appropriate transition from
the higher intensity zoning to the north (RM-1 and MU-2 zoning lies across Violet to the north)
to the established RL-1 zoned residential neighborhoods with predominately traditional single
family building scale and style to the south and southeast of the site.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 38 of 48
(v) The building's siting and relationship to the public realm is consistent with the character
established in any adopted plans or guidelines applicable to the site or, if none apply, is
compatible with the character of the area or improves upon that character, consistent with
the intent of Paragraph (3), Building Design Criteria.
A key element of the previously approved Site Review is the Locust Neighborhood Design
Guidelines that govern mass, scale, orientation and configuration for development on the
residential portions of the site. The guidelines indicate intended character and design
expectations in both precedent images as well as massing diagrams. Specifically, the
guidelines specify roof and building form, height, scale, materials and transitions,
details, and other characteristics. While the townhomes align Broadway, which is
considered a state highway, there is no distinct character of the area. However, the
guidelines are compatible with the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan development
guidelines for the area. The current request would amend the approved design guidelines
to allow for additional height for the townhome buildings and different roof forms but
would maintain all of the other previously approved elements intended to ensure
compatibility with the character of the area.
(B) Building Design:
(i) Larger floor plate buildings and projects with multiple buildings have a variety of forms
and heights.
The current proposal to increase the allowable height to allow sloped roofs on the
townhomes, which were previously approved with a 35-foot height limit that would
preclude the provision of sloped roofs on 3-story buildings due to flood constraints,
would increase the overall variety in terms of building forms and heights across the
Shining Mountain Waldorf School PUD.
(ii) To the extent practical considering their function, mechanical appurtenances are located
within or concealed by the building. If they cannot be located within or concealed by the
building, their visibility from the public realm and adjacent properties is minimized.
The proposed height modification request does not alter the previously approved
locations for mechanical appurtenances, which are concealed by the buildings and
minimally visible from adjacent properties.
(iii) On each floor of the building, windows create visual interest, transparency, and a sense of
connection to the public realm. In urban, pedestrian main street-built environments, it is a
best practice to design at least 60 percent of each ground floor façade facing the street as
window area. Otherwise, it is a best practice to design at least 20 percent of the wall on
each floor of a building as window area. Blank walls along the most visible portions of
the building are avoided.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 39 of 48
The proposed height modification request does not alter the previously approved
fenestration on the townhome units, which incorporates large windows on all street-
facing frontages and creates a high degree of transparency at the pedestrian level.
(iv) Simple detailing is incorporated into the façades to create visual interest, without making
the façade overly complicated. This detailing may include cornices, belt courses, reveals,
alternating brick or stone patterns, expression line offsets, window lintels and sills, and
offsets in window glass from surrounding materials.
See response to (i) above.
(v) Balconies on buildings with attached dwelling units are integrated into the form of the
building in that exterior walls partially enclose the balcony. Balcony platform undersides
are finished.
Second floor balconies are integrated into the building forms and are partially enclosed
by exterior walls. These balconies were included in the previous approval and are not
being modified by the current request.
(vi) The building's design, including but not limited to use of materials, color, roof forms, and
style, is consistent with the character established in any adopted plans or guidelines
applicable to the site or, if none apply, is compatible with the character of the area or
improves upon that character, consistent with the intent of paragraph (3), Building Design
Criteria.
While the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan identifies the area as the Union Utica
Neighborhood that is west of Broadway between Yarmouth Avenue on the north to Utica
Avenue on the south, there’s little in the way of defined or identifiable character
expressed for the area within the subcommunity plan. Instead, within the Locust
Neighborhood Design Guidelines, the applicant has provided an area analysis that
included observations to provide a foundation for the guidelines including use of porches
and garages that are set back; a mix of architectural styles but with a consistent style on
each home; variation in materials and sustainable landscaping with native species. To
that end, the guidelines provide a list of acceptable primary and trim materials, roof
styles, window door and entry details to fit within the neighborhood but still retain
elements of the time. No changes to the building design elements within the guidelines
are proposed.
(C) Building Materials:
(i) Building facades are composed of high-quality, durable, human-scaled materials. High-
quality materials include brick, stone, polished concrete masonry units, wood,
architectural high pressure laminate panels, cementitious or composite siding,
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 40 of 48
architectural metal panels, or any combination of these materials. Split-faced concrete
masonry units, stucco, vinyl siding, EIFS, and unfinished or untreated wood are not
considered durable, high-quality materials, but may be used on a limited basis and not on
facades facing the public realm. High quality materials are focused on the ground floor
facades on all sides of a building and on all floors of facades facing the public realm, and,
overall, comprise the vast majority of all building facades.
The previously approved materials palette, which consists primarily of brick, metal
paneling and fiber cement paneling, meets the intent of this criteria and is not being
changed by this proposal.
(ii) Monolithic roofing membranes, like Thermoplastic Polyolefin, are not used on roof
surfaces that are visible from the street level.
The current proposal includes asphalt shingle roofs for the sloped roofs. The approved
flat roofs or alternative design (floor height) flat roofs would not be visible from the
street level.
(iii) The number of building material types is limited, and the building materials are applied
to complement the building form and function. The organization of the building materials
logically expresses primary building features, such as the spatial layout, building entries,
private and common spaces, anchor corners, stairwells, and elevators.
The previously approved plans include three primary building materials per building,
and this is not being changed by the current proposal.
(iv) Building cladding materials turn convex corners and continue to the inset wall. This
criterion does not apply to changes that occur at an interior corner nor to detailing
elements, such as cornices, belt courses, reveals, offsets in expression lines, lintels, and
windowsills. Building cladding materials do not change in-plane unless there is at least a
12-inch wall offset.
Criterion met.
(v) Any newly constructed building that includes residential units and is located within 200
feet of a railroad, freeway, or expressway is designed to achieve an interior day-night
average noise level of no more than forty-five decibels. Noise shall be measured in a
manner that is consistent with the federal Housing and Urban Development's standards in
Sections 24 CFR §§ 51.100 to 51.106 for the "measure of external noise environments,"
or similar standard adopted by the city manager in the event that such rule is repealed.
The applicant shall provide written certification prior to the issuance of a certificate of
occupancy that the sound abatement and attenuation measures were incorporated in the
construction and site design as recommended by a professional engineer.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 41 of 48
Not applicable, as the units are not located within 200 feet of a railroad, freeway, or
expressway.
(4) Additional Criteria for Buildings Requiring Height Modification or Exceeding the
Maximum Floor Area Ratio: Any building exceeding the by-right or conditional zoning
district height as permitted by Section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E), B.R.C. 1981, and any building
exceeding the by-right floor area limits as permitted by Section 9-2-14(h)(6)(B), B.R.C.
1981, shall meet the following requirements:
(A) Building Form and Massing: The building's form and massing are consistent with the
character established in any adopted plans or guidelines applicable to the site or, if none
apply, are compatible with the character of the area or improves upon that character,
consistent with the intent of paragraph (3), Building Design Criteria. The building's form,
massing and length are designed to a human scale and to create visual permeability into
and through sites. In determining whether this is met, the approving authority will
consider the following factors:
(i) The building does not exceed 200 feet in length along any public right-of-way.
None of the townhome buildings exceeds 200 feet in length.
(ii) All building facades exceeding 120 feet in length along a public street, excluding alleys,
are designed to appear as at least two distinct buildings. To achieve this, façade segments
vary in at least two of the following design elements:
a. Type of dominant material or color, scale, or orientation of that material;
b. Facade recessions and projections;
c. Location of entrance and window placements;
d. Roof forms; and
e. Building height.
No Building exceeds 120’ in length, but nonetheless provide façade recessions and
projections, front porches and entrances every 20’, and varied roof forms.
(B) Building and Site Design Requirements for Height Modifications:
(i) Buildings requiring a height modification shall meet the following requirements:
a. Height Modification Other than Height Bonus: For buildings no taller than three stories
and subject to a height modification pursuant to Subparagraph 9-2-14(b)(1)(E)(i) through
(vii), the building's height, mass, and scale is compatible with the character of the
surrounding area.
While the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan identifies the area as the Union Utica
Neighborhood that is west of Broadway between Yarmouth Avenue on the north to Utica
Avenue on the south, it is important to note that there’s little in the way of defined or
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 42 of 48
identifiable character expressed for the area within the subcommunity plan. Instead,
within the Locust Neighborhood Design Guidelines, the applicant has provided an area
analysis that included observations to provide a foundation for the guidelines including
use of porches and garages that are set back; a mix of architectural styles but with a
consistent style on each home; variation in materials and sustainable landscaping with
native species. To that end, the guidelines provide a list of acceptable primary and trim
materials, roof styles, window door and entry details to fit within the neighborhood but
still retain elements of the time. No changes to the building design elements within the
guidelines are proposed. The proposed increase in height to allow for sloped roof forms
on the townhome buildings maintains the overall character of the development and
provides an appropriate transition from the higher intensity zoning to the north (RM-1
and MU-2 zoning lies across Violet to the north) to the established residential
neighborhoods with predominately traditional single family building scale and style to
the south and southeast of the site.
b. Height Bonus: For buildings taller than three stories subject to a height modification
pursuant to Subparagraph 9-2-14(b)(1)(E)(viii), B.R.C. 1981:
Not applicable, as the proposed townhomes are 3-stories in height.
Attachment B - Criteria Analysis
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 43 of 48
From:Reed Summers
To:Van Schaack, Chandler
Subject:Notification requested
Date:Monday, October 30, 2023 11:26:57 AM
External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender.
Hello, I would like to be on the notification list regarding the hearing date for the Shining
mountain Waldorf school apartment block, rezoning of building height.
I do have some concerns about this as a resident a block away.
Thank you,
Reed
805 Union ave
Attachment C - Public Comments
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 44 of 48
From:Dan Marcus
To:Van Schaack, Chandler
Subject:Review #LUR2023-00050
Date:Wednesday, November 1, 2023 6:16:24 AM
External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender.
Dear Mr. Van Schaak:
I am writing in response to the City of Boulder Planning & Development Services notice dated
October 19, 2023 with regards to the City's consideration of new townhomes being developed
by Shining Mountain Waldorf School being allowed to reach more than 42 feet versus the 35
foot height limit. As a neighbor to the lot being developed for profit by the school, I am
writing to voice my opposition to the requested variance. The reason is that this is a single-
family neighborhood, hence the existing height limit. I do not believe this should be altered
for the financial benefit of the developer.
Additionally, I strongly believe that a condition of approval for any development here should
require the permit applicant to repave the surrounding streets (i.e., Locust, Union, etc.) given
their current poor condition and the impact that sewer and other utilities for the new housing
development will have on the streets and traffic in our neighborhood.
Please enter this letter in the record for consideration by staff and committee members.
Thank you,
Dan Marcus
849 Union Ave, Boulder, CO 80304
Attachment C - Public Comments
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 45 of 48
From:Alison R.
To:Van Schaack, Chandler
Subject:Shining Mountain Development
Date:Thursday, November 2, 2023 12:42:11 PM
External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender.
Hi there. I'm a neighbor on Union Avenue, and I received the notice about the Shining
Mountain request for a height variance. I'm of course speaking for myself here, though I know
from many conversations with neighbors that you will hear the same from them. I am firmly
opposed to a height variance for Shining Mountain.
We LOVE our little neighborhood here, and a big reason for that is the small, relatively simple
feel of the homes. I do understand that growth happens, and while I don't love that we'll have a
lot more cars crammed onto our street with the townhomes coming in, overall I'm more than
happy to welcome in more neighbors. So this isn't a NIMBY argument on my part. We live in
a desirable location, so I understand that more folks would want to live here.
Where I do have a problem is with Shining Mountain having a height variance that will surely
make it appear as though the school property is a cornerstone of our neighborhood. The reality
is they are terrible neighbors - exclusionary, unwelcoming, and thoughtless about those of us
who live here. They have a huge property with open fields and parks directly next to a public
park, yet they yell at any child who wanders onto their property (often unaware that they aren't
still at Foothills Community Park). They hold events which crowd our streets with parked
cars, and never in the dozen years I've lived here have they given neighbors a heads-up or -
god forbid - an invitation. (The Art House by comparison has frequently included neighbors in
their events and shows, which makes us happier to have it there despite its large size.)
At least twice a day, the Shining Mountain parents clog up Locust, OFTEN standing in the
middle of the street chatting away, while neighbors have to wait in their cars to get home to
their own kids. They park blocking neighbors' driveways or even IN neighbors' driveways,
with utter disregard to the people who live here. One of my neighbors even received a
complaint when her son parked his car in front of the house owned by S.M. This is a public
street, so parking is allowed by anyone. Meanwhile, that same neighbor says a teacher from
S.M. has parked in front of her house for the entire school year. (And no, that neighbor did not
complain because, again, it's a public street.)
Is this just an angry venting session that will make no difference? Possibly. But I say it
because this variance request would feel entirely different if we actually felt like the school
has ever been a part of our neighborhood. What it feels like in reality is a bastion of
entitlement, asking for even more entitlement, to dominate the space of our sweet
neighborhood. The rest of us have managed to live within the city rules and requirements, so
this property should do so as well.
Thank you for your time,
Alison Randall
Attachment C - Public Comments
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 46 of 48
From:Matt Cullen
To:Van Schaack, Chandler
Subject:Shining Mountain Waldorf Project
Date:Saturday, November 4, 2023 10:42:46 PM
External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender.
Hi Chandler,
I recently received a letter about a proposed change to the Dining Mountain Waldorf School
project. I am concerned about these changes and would like to be kept informed about
hearings and opportunities for comment.
Matt Cullen
Attachment C - Public Comments
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 47 of 48
From:Mike Strife
To:Samantha Strife; Van Schaack, Chandler
Subject:Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Date:Sunday, November 12, 2023 7:46:06 PM
External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender.
Hi Chandler,
My name is Mike Strife. I live at 712 Locust Ave, Boulder, CO 80304, just west of the
Shining Mountain Waldorf School.
I am writing as I am concerned about the increased traffic on Locust Avenue after the
completion of the construction project. Once complete, Locust Ave will go directly to
Broadway.
My main goal with this email is to inquire about adding measures to manage speed on Locust.
Locust is used by residents of this neighborhood and by citizens accessing Community
Foothills Park and the nearby trails. With the change to Locust Avenue now going directly to
Broadway I fear that more cars will access this road and therefore more cars will continue to
speed down the slope toward the school in order to get to Broadway.
Two streets to the South, Utica has a speed bump and I wonder how to get something
similar onto Locust. Thanks for your help.
Sincerely,
Mike Strife
Attachment C - Public Comments
Item 4A - Shining Mountain Waldorf School
Site Review Amendment
Page 48 of 48
1
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: February 6, 2024
AGENDA TITLE
Public hearing and recommendation to City Council regarding proposed Ordinance
8620, amending Title 9, “Land Use Code,” B.R.C. 1981, to clarify existing code
sections, update graphics, and improve the clarity of the code, and setting forth related
details.
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS
Planning & Development Services
Brad Mueller, Director of Planning & Development Services
Charles Ferro, Senior Planning Manager
Karl Guiler, Senior Policy Advisor
Lisa Houde, Senior City Planner
OBJECTIVE
Define the steps for Planning Board consideration of this request:
1.Hear staff presentation.
2. Hold public hearing.
3. Planning Board discussion.
4. Planning Board recommendation to City Council.
KEY ISSUES
Staff has identified the following key issues to help guide the board’s discussion:
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 1 of 31
2
1. Does Planning Board find that the proposed ordinance implements the
adopted policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan?
2. Does Planning Board recommend any modifications to the draft
ordinance?
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff has identified a list of proposed changes to clarify the Land Use Code, fix errors,
simplify language, and codify existing practices. The city periodically corrects technical
errors to avoid confusion and to ensure that the Land Use Code is administered and
enforced in a manner consistent with the intent and department practices. The last
ordinance addressing similar “clean-up” issues was adopted in 2020.
Staff is requesting that the Planning Board make a recommendation to City Council on
the proposed code changes as required by the Land Use Code. If passed, changes would
go into effect 30 days after adoption by City Council. The draft ordinance is found in
Attachment A.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff requests Planning Board consideration of this matter and action in the form of the
following motion:
Suggested Motion Language:
Planning Board recommends that City Council adopt Ordinance 8620, amending Title
9, “Land Use Code,” to clarify existing code sections, update graphics, and improve the
clarity of the code, and setting forth related details.
PUBLIC FEEDBACK
Staff is sending out an update in the Planning & Development Services newsletter
informing the community of the upcoming code changes. As the changes are primarily
focused on clarifying existing language, fixing errors, and aligning the code with existing
practices, this code change project is implementing an “inform” level of public
engagement.
BACKGROUND
The proposed changes were identified during previous land use review processes where
implementation of the code raised questions about interpretation and issues of clarity,
where code language resulted in unintended consequences, or where mistakes were
found. Staff accumulates a list of these issues and every few years compiles an ordinance
to update the code accordingly.
SUMMARY OF PROPOSED CHANGES IN ORDINANCE 8620
The ordinance can be found in Attachment A. Footnotes are provided in the ordinance to
describe the purpose of each change. The updates generally consist of:
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 2 of 31
3
• Corrections. Corrects inaccuracies, such as incorrect citations or typographical
errors.
• Clarifications. Updates that make the code language clearer.
• Graphics. Changes to graphics to address common misunderstandings.
• Consistency. Updates to ensure consistency with state or other requirements or
existing city practices.
ANALYSIS
Staff has identified the following key issues for Planning Board’s consideration:
1. Does Planning Board find that the proposed ordinance implements the
adopted policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan?
2. Does Planning Board recommend any modifications to the draft
ordinance?
Staff finds that the proposed ordinance implements the adopted policies of the
comprehensive plan. The following analysis is provided to demonstrate how the project
objective is met through the proposed ordinance. Attachment A includes the proposed
ordinance and also includes footnotes that describe the rationale of each proposed
change.
What is the reason for the ordinance and what public purpose will be served?
This ordinance fixes errors in the code, clarifies common issues of interpretation, and
updates graphics to improve communication of code requirements. The changes will
improve the accuracy of the code by correcting typographical errors and by providing
clarity where existing provisions have been misinterpreted.
How is the ordinance consistent with the purpose of the zoning districts or code
chapters being amended?
The ordinance would affect many different code sections. The changes will improve the
comprehension of the code overall, both for customers and code administrators and may
ease review of development applications.
Are there consequences in not passing this ordinance?
If this ordinance is not passed, clerical errors in the code would not be corrected and
improvements in code clarity would not be adopted. What adverse effects may result
with the adoption of this ordinance?
Adverse effects are not anticipated as a result of this amendment. Staff has intentionally
included only minor changes like fixing errors, clarifying existing language, or ensuring
consistency with state or other requirements or existing city practices.
What factors are influencing the timing of the proposed ordinance? Why?
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 3 of 31
4
While many of the proposed code corrections are relatively minor fixes, the ordinance
does include corrections that should be completed as soon as practical to avoid confusion
among code users. Some of the changes involve issues with recently adopted ordinances.
Staff aims to ensure these corrections are adopted prior to code change projects that may
be more comprehensive and substantive.
How does the ordinance compare to practices in other cities?
As the limited changes are primarily minor clarifications and corrections, comparisons to
other communities are not instructive in this circumstance. All communities have an
interest in keeping their code updated, clear, and accurate.
How will this ordinance implement the comprehensive plan?
The ordinance will implement the following applicable policy from the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan.
Local Governance & Community Engagement Policy 10.01: High-Performing
Government
The city and county strive for continuous improvement in stewardship and sustainability of
financial, human, information and physical assets. In all business, the city and county seek to
enhance and facilitate transparency, accuracy, efficiency, effectiveness and quality customer
service. The city and county support strategic decision-making with timely, reliable and
accurate data and analysis.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 4 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE 8620
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 9, “LAND USE CODE,”
B.R.C. 1981, TO FIX ERRORS, CLARIFY EXISTING CODE
SECTIONS, UPDATE GRAPHICS, AND IMPROVE THE
CLARITY OF THE CODE, AND SETTING FORTH RELATED
DETAILS.
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOULDER,
COLORADO:
Section 1. Section 2-3-12, “Board of Zoning Adjustment and Building Appeals,” B.R.C.
1981, is amended to read as follows:
2-3-12. Board of Zoning Adjustment and Building Appeals
…
(b)The board's functions are to:
(1)Review and decide at the request of any interested person any question of
interpretation by the city manager of Chapters 9-6, "Use Standards," 9-7,
"Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," and 9-8, "Intensity Standards," B.R.C.
1981;
(2)Hear and decide to grant or deny applications for variances from the setback
requirements of Section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C.
1981, and the size requirements for accessory dwelling units of Subparagraph 9-6-
3(n) B.R.C. 1981;
(3)Hear and decide applications for exceptions under the solar access ordinance,
Section 9-9-17, "Solar Access," B.R.C. 1981;
(4)Hear and decide to grant or deny applications for variances, and to hear and
decide appeals of orders from the city manager under the sign code, Section 9-9-
21, "Signs," B.R.C. 1981;1
(5)Sit as the Board of Building Appeals pursuant to Section 2-3-4, "Board of
Building Appeals," B.R.C. 1981; and
(6)Hear and decide such other matters as the city council may by ordinance provide.
1 The authority for BOZA to review sign variances is not described in Title 2, but is listed in Title 9. This change reconciles that difference.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 5 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Section 2. Section 6-14-2, “Definitions,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:
6-14-2. Definitions
The following words and phrases used in this chapter have the following meanings unless the
context clearly indicates otherwise:
…
Mixed -use development means a building, or a project, or a development, which may consist of
one or multiple lots or parcels, that contains one or more nonresidential use and one or more
dwelling units in any zone district.2
…
Produce or production means: (i) combining marijuana with any other substance for distribution,
including storage and packaging for resale; or (ii) preparing, compounding, processing,
encapsulating, packaging, or repackaging, labeling, or relabeling of marijuana or its derivatives,
whether alone or mixed with any amount of any other substance. Production shall not include
packaging or repackaging, labeling, or relabeling of a usable form of marijuana if no production
has occurred and such packaging and labeling qualify as cultivation.
Residential zone district means any district in the residential classification of Table 5-1 in
Section 9-5-2, B.R.C., 19813
Restricted area means the portion of a medical marijuana business location within which the
licensee defines on its application it intends to cultivate, distribute, possess, or produce medical
marijuana and which area is clearly identified as the restricted area on the floor plan submitted
with the medical marijuana business license application for the business.
…
Section 3. Section 6-14-7, “Locations of Medical Marijuana Businesses,” B.R.C. 1981,
is amended to read as follows:
6-14-7. Locations of Medical Marijuana Businesses
…
(c) No Medical Marijuana Business in Building with Residences or Residential Zone
Districts. It shall be unlawful to operate a medical marijuana business in a building which
contains a residence, or within a dwelling unit within any zone district, or within a
residential zone district, or within a mixed -use development that includes a residence.
2 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
3 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 6 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
This restriction shall not apply to a medical marijuana wellness center that had submitted
an application or held a license from the city on October 22, 2013. 4
…
Section 4. Section 6-16-2, “Definitions,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:
6-16-2. Definitions
The following words and phrases used in this chapter have the following meanings unless the
context clearly indicates otherwise:
…
Mixed use development means a building, or a project, or a development, which may consist of
one or multiple lots or parcels, that contains one or more nonresidential use and one or more
dwelling units in any zone district. 5
…
Recreational marijuana plant means a marijuana seed that is germinated and all parts of the
growth therefrom, including, without limitation, roots, stalks, and leaves, so long as the flowers,
roots, stalks, and leaves are all connected and in a growing medium. Recreational marijuana
plant shall include immature plants except where specifically excepted in this code. For purposes
of this chapter, any part of the plant removed is considered harvested and no longer part of a
recreational marijuana plant, but marijuana.
Residential zone district means any district in the residential classification of Table 5-1 in
Section 9-5-2, B.R.C., 19816
Restricted area means the portion of a recreational marijuana business premises within which the
licensee defines on its application it intends to cultivate, distribute, possess, or produce
recreational marijuana and which area is clearly identified as the restricted area on the floor plan
submitted with the recreational marijuana business license application for the business.
…
Section 5. Section 6-16-5, “Locations of Recreational Marijuana Businesses,” B.R.C.
1981, is amended to read as follows:
6-16-5. Application; Modification of Premises
4 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
5 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
6 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 7 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(a) Application Requirements. An application for a recreational marijuana business license
shall be made to the city on forms provided by the city manager for that purpose. The
applicant shall use the application to demonstrate its compliance with this chapter and
any other applicable law, rule, or regulation. In addition to the information required by
Chapter 4-1, "General Licensing Provisions," B.R.C. 1981, the application shall include
the following information:
…
(9) A zoning confirmation form from the city, to ascertain within a radius of one-
quarter mile from the boundaries of the property upon which the recreational
marijuana business is located, the proximity of the property to any school or other
facility identified in this chapter, or state licensed child care center, to any other
marijuana business or to any residential zone district or a mixed- use development
containing one or more residences.7
…
Section 6. Section 6-16-7, “Locations of Recreational Marijuana Businesses,” B.R.C.
1981, is amended to read as follows:
6-16-7. Locations of Recreational Marijuana Businesses
…
(c) No Recreational Marijuana Business in Building With Residences or Residential Zone
Districts. It shall be unlawful to operate a recreational marijuana business in a building
which contains a residence, or within a dwelling unit within any zone district, or within a
residential zone district, or within a mixed -use development that includes a residence.8
…
Section 7. Section 9-2-1, “Types of Reviews,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as
follows:
9-2-1. Types of Reviews
…
(b) Summary Chart:
TABLE 2-1: REVIEW PROCESSES SUMMARY CHART
I. ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEWS II. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND BOARD
ACTION
7 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
8 Change to licensing part of municipal code - Clarifies applicability of multi-lot mixed use development location requirements for medical and
recreational marijuana.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 8 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Affordable housing design review pursuant to Section
9-13-4, B.R.C. 1981
Building permits
Change of address
Change of street name
Conditional uses, as noted in Table 6-1: Use Table
Demolition, moving, and removal of buildings with no
historic or architectural significance, per Section 9-11-
23, "Review of Permits for Demolition, On-Site
Relocation, and Off-Site Relocation of Buildings Not
Designated," B.R.C. 1981
Easement vacation
Extension of development approval/staff level
Landmark alteration certificates (staff review per
Section 9-11-14, "Staff Review of Application for
Landmark Alteration Certificate," B.R.C. 1981)
Landscape standards variance
Minor modification to approved site plan
Minor modification to approved form-based code
review
Noise barriers along major streets per Paragraph 9-9-
15(c)(7), B.R.C. 1981
Nonconforming use (extension, change of use (incl.
parking))
Parking deferral per Subsection 9-9-6(e), B.R.C. 1981
Parking reduction of up to fifty 25 percent per
Subsection 9-9-6(f), B.R.C. 19819
Parking reductions and modifications for bicycle
parking per Paragraph 9-9-6(g)(6), B.R.C. 1981
Parking stall variances
Public utility
Annexation/initial zoning
BOZA variances
Concept plans
Demolition, moving, and removal of buildings with
potential historic or architectural significance, per
Section 9-11-23, "Review of Permits for Demolition,
On-Site Relocation, and Off-Site Relocation of
Buildings Not Designated," B.R.C. 1981
Form-based code review
Geophysical exploration permit
Landmark alteration certificates other than those that
may be approved by staff per Section 9-11-14, "Staff
Review of Application for Landmark Alteration
Certificate," B.R.C. 1981
Lot line adjustments
Lot line elimination
Minor Subdivisions
Out of city utility permit
Rezoning
Site review
Subdivisions
Use review
Vacations of street, alley, or access easement
9 To align with Ordinance 8599 and the parking reduction regulations that have been implemented for years, this table clarifies that parking
reductions are only allowed up to 25% as Administrative Reviews.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 9 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Rescission of development approval
Revocable permit
Right-of-way lease
Setback variance
Site access variance
Solar exception
Zoning verification
Section 8. Section 9-2-3, “Variances and Interpretations,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to
read as follows:
9-2-3. Variances and Interpretations
…
(c) Administrative Variances: The city manager may grant a variance from:
…
(8) The city manager may also grant variances or refer variance requests to the
BOZA to allow development not in conformance with the provisions of this title
which otherwise would result in a violation of federal or state legislation,
including but not limited to the Federal Fair Housing Act or the Americans with
Disabilities Act. 10
Section 9. Section 9-2-14, “Site Review,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:
9-2-14. Site Review
…
(c) Modifications to Development Standards: The following development standards of
B.R.C. 1981 may be modified under the site review process set forth in this section:
(1) 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards" and standards referred to in that
section except that the standards referred to as "FAR Requirements" may not be
modified under this paragraph and are subject to Section 9-8-2, B.R.C. 1981, and
the maximum height or conditional height for principal buildings or uses may be
modified only as permitted in Paragraph 9-2-14(b)(1)(E), B.R.C. 1981.11
10 Change recommended by City Attorney’s Office to modify applicability to include violations of state legislation as well as federal legislation.
11 Clarifies that height modifications may also be requested for accessory buildings.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 10 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
…
(20) 9-9-17, "Solar Access."," provided the modification meets the exception criteria
in 9-9-17(f)(6).12
…
(d) Application Requirements: An application for approval of a site plan may be filed by any
person having a demonstrable property interest in land to be included in a site review on a
form provided by the city manager that includes, without limitation:13
(1) All materials and information required by Subsection 9-2-6(a), B.R.C. 1981;.
(2) A site plan with a north arrow showing the major details of the proposed
development, prepared on a scale of not less than one inch equals one hundred
feet providing sufficient detail to evaluate the features of the development
required by this section. The site plan shall contain, insofar as applicable, the
information set forth in this subsection;.
(3) The existing topographic character of the land, showing contours at two-foot
intervals;.
(4) The site and location of proposed uses with dimensions indicating the distance
from lot lines;.
(5) The location and size of all existing and proposed buildings, structures and
improvements, and the general location of adjacent streets, structures and
properties;.
(6) The maximum height of all buildings and building elevations showing exterior
colors and materials;.
(7) The density and type of uses;.
(8) The internal traffic and circulation systems, off-street parking areas, service areas,
loading areas and major points of access to public rights-of-way;.
(9) The location, height and size of proposed signs, lighting and advertising devices;.
(10) The areas that are to be conveyed, dedicated or reserved as parks, recreation areas,
playgrounds, outlots or open space and as sites for schools and other public
buildings;.
(11) The areas that are to be conveyed, dedicated or reserved for streets, alley and
utility easements;.
(12) The areas subject to the one hundred-year flood as defined in Chapter 9-16,
"Definitions," B.R.C. 1981, and any area of the site that is within a designated
space conveyance zone or high hazard zone;.
(13) A general landscaping plan at the time of initial submission to be followed by a
detailed landscaping plan prior to or as a condition of approval, showing the
12 Clarifies that modifications must still meet the existing exception criteria.
13 Makes punctuation in list consistent.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 11 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
spacing, sizes, specific types of landscaping materials, quantities of all plants and
whether the plant is coniferous or deciduous. All trees with a diameter of six
inches and over measured fifty-four inches above the ground on the property or in
the landscape setback of any property adjacent to the development shall be shown
on the landscaping plan.
(14) A shadow analysis depicting shadows on December 21, as described in the solar
analysis instructions provided by the city manager, and depicting shadows
calculated pursuant to Subsection 9-9-17(d), B.R.C. 1981, for those buildings that
affect adjacent properties;.
(15) A written statement containing the following information:
(A) A statement of the current ownership and a legal description of all of the
land included in the project;
(B) An explanation of the objectives to be achieved by the project, including,
without limitation, building descriptions, sketches or elevations that may
be required to describe the objectives;
(C) A development schedule indicating the approximate date when
construction of the project or phases of the project can be expected to
begin and be completed; and
(D) Copies of any special agreements, conveyances, restrictions or covenants
that will govern the use, maintenance and continued protection of the
goals of the project and any related parks, recreation areas, playgrounds,
outlots or open space;.
(16) Materials required by the City of Boulder Design and Construction Standards,
including, without limitation, a traffic study, master utility plan, utility report and
storm water report and plan for any application that proposes to construct or have
an impact on public improvements; and.
…
(h) Criteria: No site review application shall be approved unless the approving agency finds
that the project is consistent with the following criteria:
…
(2) Site Design Criteria: The project creates safe, convenient, and efficient
connections for all modes of travel, promotes safe pedestrian, bicycle, and other
modes of alternative travel with the goal of lowering motor vehicle miles traveled.
Usable open space is arranged to be accessible; designed to be functional,
encourage use, and enhance the attractiveness of the project; and meets the needs
of the anticipated residents, occupants, tenants, and visitors to the project.
Landscaping aesthetically enhances the project, minimizes use of water, is
sustainable, and improves the quality of the environment. Operational elements
are screened to mitigate negative visual impacts. In determining whether this is
met, the approving agency will consider the following factors:
…
(B) Open Space:
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 12 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
…
(iii) If the project includes more than 50 dwelling units, including the
addition of units that causes a project to exceed this threshold, and
is more than one mile walking distance to a public park with any of
the amenities described herein, at least 30 percent of the required
outdoor open space is designed for active recreational purposes.14
Section 10. Section 9-2-17, “Annexation Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to
read as follows:
9-2-17. Annexation Requirements
…
(c) Annexation Agreement: Owners of land petitioning the city for annexation of their
property shall enter into an annexation agreement with the city stating any terms and
conditions imposed on said property, prior to the first reading of the annexation
ordinance. Upon annexation, such agreements shall be recorded to provide notice to
future purchasers of said property. Where the annexation agreement provides that the city
may install public improvements and that the owners of the annexed property will pay for
such improvements, the costs of such improvements constitute an assessment against the
annexed property as they accrue. If, after notice, any such assessment is not paid when
due, the city manager shall certify the amount of the principal, interest, and penalties due
and unpaid, together with ten percent of the delinquent amount for costs of collection to
the county treasurer to be assessed and collected in the same manner as general taxes are
assessed and collected as provided by Section 2-2-12, "City Manager May Certify Taxes,
Charges and Assessments to County Treasurer for Collection," B.R.C. 1981.
(d) Hearing: The planning board shall hear a request for annexation at a public hearing and
make a recommendation for approval or denial to the city council. After considering the
planning board's recommendation, the city council shall make the final determination on
a request for annexation. 15
Section 11. Line 9 of Table 4-1: Summary of Decision Authority by Process Type in
Section 9-4-2, “Development Review Procedures,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:
9-4-2. Development Review Procedures
(a) Development Review Authority: Table 4-1 of this section summarizes the review and
decision-making responsibilities for the administration of the administrative and
development review procedures described in this chapter. The table is a summary tool
14 Drafting error.
15 In Table 4-1, Planning Board is identified as “Recommendation only” for annexations. However, the code requirements in 9-2 do not reference
the Planning Board’s role in annexations. This proposed language has been modeled to mirror language in 9-2-19 regarding rezoning
applications.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 13 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and does not describe all types of decisions made under this code. Refer to sections
referenced for specific requirements. Form and bulk standards may also be modified by
site review. Additional procedures that are required by this code but located in other
chapters are:
(1) "Historic Preservation," chapter 9-11;
(2) "Inclusionary Housing," chapter 9-13; and
(3) "Residential Growth Management System," chapter 9-14.
TABLE 4-1: SUMMARY OF DECISION AUTHORITY BY PROCESS TYPE
Standard or
Application Type Staff/City Manager BOZA Planning Board City Council
Parking Building
height, conditional
SECTION 9-7-616
D — — —
…
Section 12. Section 9-4-3, “Public Notice Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to
read as follows:
9-4-3. Public Notice Requirements
(a) Process and Options: When a process or procedure identified in this title requires public
notice, the city manager shall provide such notice according to Table 4-2 of this section.
If a code section does not reference a specific method, the city manager shall determine
the most appropriate notification method to be used.
TABLE 4-2: PUBLIC NOTICE OPTIONS
Public
Notice
Type
Type of Application,
Meeting or Hearing Mailed Notice Posted Notice
1 Administrative
Reviews (except those
identified below)
none none
2 Subdivisions
Preliminary Plats and
Minor Subdivisions17
To adjacent property owners and mineral rights
owners a minimum of 10 days before final
action and mineral rights owners a minimum of
30 days before initial hearing or decision
Post property a minimum of
10 days from receipt of
application and prior to
final action or any hearing
3 Good neighbor
meetings
To property owners within 600 feet of subject
property a minimum of 10 days before
meeting
none
4 Solar exceptions, solar
access permits
To adjacent property owners a minimum of 10
days before final action
Post property a minimum of
10 days from receipt of
16 Fixes a typo, which is intended to state “building height, conditional” and has been in the code for several years.
17 Public notice requirements for preliminary plats are somewhat unclear currently. In 9-12-7, “Staff Review and Approval of Preliminary Plat,”
(b) specifies that notice of surface estate and mineral state is required. However, Table 4-2 is relatively unclear as it does not specifically
reference preliminary plats. Additionally, the references to mineral rights owners have been updated to meet notification requirements under state
law.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 14 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
application and prior to
final action or any hearing
5 Applications requiring
BOZA action, wetland
permit and boundary
determination
To property owners within 300 feet of subject
property a minimum of 10 days before final
action
Post property a minimum of
10 days from receipt of
application and prior to
final action or any hearing
6 Development Review
Applications (site
review, use review,
annexation, rezoning,
concept plans)
To property owners within 600 feet of subject
property and any mineral rights owners a
minimum of 10 days before final action and
mineral rights owners a minimum of 30 days
before initial hearing or decision
Post property a minimum of
10 days from receipt of
application and prior to
final action or any hearing
7 Form-based code
review
To property owners and all addresses within
600 feet of the subject property and any mineral
rights owners a minimum of 10 days before
final action and mineral rights owners a
minimum of 30 days before initial hearing or
decision
Post property a minimum of
10 days from receipt of
application and prior to
final action or any hearing
8 Use review
applications for oil
and gas operations
To property owners, all addresses, and the local
government designee of any local government
within 5,280 feet (one mile) of the subject
property and any mineral rights owners upon
finding an application complete and a minimum
of 10 days before final action and any mineral
rights owners at that time and a minimum of 30
days before initial hearing
Post property a minimum of
10 days from receipt of
application and prior to
final action or any hearing
…
(e) Notice - Mineral Estate: The purpose of this notice provision is to comply with the
notification of surface development requirements in article 24-65.5, C.R.S. The city
manager will waive the notice requirements for mineral estate owners under this
subsection for use review applications that will not result in the construction of a new
building. The applicant shall:18
(1) At least thirty days before any initial hearing or, if none, before a final decision on
a development review application, send notice, by first classcertified mail, return
receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized overnight courier, to the mineral
estate owner.
(2) Provide in the notice a statement about how the decision will be made, rights of
appeal, the location of the property that is the subject of the application, and the
name of the applicant, the City of Boulder as the approving authority, and the
name and address of the mineral estate owner.
(3) Identify the mineral estate holder in a manner consistent with § 24-65.5-103,
C.R.S.
(4) Certify, in a form acceptable to the city manager, that such notice has been
provided to the mineral estate owner. The certification shall identify the name and
address of the mineral estate owners to whom notices were sent. This certification
is a condition of approval.
18 The references to mineral rights owners have been updated to meet notification requirements under state law.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 15 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Section 13. Section 9-5-2, “Zoning Districts,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as
follows:
9-5-2. Zoning Districts.
…
(c) Zoning District Purposes:
(2) Mixed Use Districts:
(A) Mixed Use - 1: Mixed use areas which are primarily intended to have a
mix of residential and nonresidential land uses within close proximity to
each other and where complementary business uses may be permitted.
(B) Mixed Use - 2: Mixed use residential areas adjacent to a redeveloping
main street area, which are intended to provide a transition between a
main street commercial area and established residential districts.
Residential areas are intended to develop in a pedestrian-oriented pattern,
with buildings built up to the street; with residential, office, and limited
retail uses; and where complementary uses may be allowed.
(C) Mixed Use - 3: Areas of the community that are changing to a mixture of
residential and complementary nonresidential uses, generally within the
same building.
(D) Mixed Use - 4: Mixed use residential areas generally intended for
residential uses with neighborhood-serving retail and office uses; and
where complementary uses may be allowed. It is anticipated that
development will occur in a pedestrian-oriented pattern, with buildings
built up to the street.
(3) Business Districts19
(EA) Business - Transitional 1 and Business - Transitional 2: Transitional
business areas which generally buffer a residential area from a major street
and are primarily used for commercial and complementary residential
uses, including without limitation, temporary lodging and office uses.
(FB) Business - Main Street: Business areas generally anchored around a main
street that are intended to serve the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
It is anticipated that development will occur in a pedestrian-oriented
pattern, with buildings built up to the street; retail uses on the first floor;
19 Correct erroneous listing of Business districts within the Mixed Use classification to align with table.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 16 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
residential and office uses above the first floor; and where complementary
uses may be allowed.
(GC) Business - Community 1 and Business - Community 2: Business areas
containing retail centers serving a number of neighborhoods, where retail-
type stores predominate.
(HD) Business - Commercial Services: Commercial areas primarily used to
provide to the community a wide range of retail and commercial uses
including repair, service, and small-scale manufacturing uses and where
complementary uses may be allowed.
(IE) Business - Regional 1 and Business - Regional 2: Business centers of the
Boulder Valley, containing a wide range of retail and commercial
operations, including the largest regional-scale businesses, which serve
outlying residential development; and where the goals of the Boulder
Urban Renewal Plan are implemented.
(34) Downtown Districts:
…
(45) Industrial Districts:
…
(56) Public Districts:
…
(67) Agricultural Districts:
…
(78) Flex Districts: A combination of use, form, and intensity standards not reflected in
any existing zoning district. Rezoning to a flex district may only be initiated by the
planning board or city council as part of an annexation, rezoning after concept review, or
area plan, and upon the determination that the flex zone would implement the goals of the
Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. When rezoning to a flex district, the rezoning
ordinance shall identify the specific use, form, and intensity modules which shall be
identified on the official zoning map. Nothing in this section shall be construed to prevent
city council from creating new zoning districts.
Section 14. Section 9-6-3, “Specific Use Standards - Residential Uses,” B.R.C. 1981, is
amended to read as follows:
9-6-3. Specific Use Standards – Residential Uses.
(a) Residential Uses:
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 17 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
…
(2) Residential Uses in the IG and IM Zoning Districts: The following standards
apply in the IG and IM zoning districts to residential uses that may be approved
pursuant to a use review:
(B) Floor Area Ratios (FAR): Residential floor area is limited to a 1.0 FAR on
a lot or parcel and non-residential floor area is limited to a 0.5 FAR in the
IG zone and 0.4 FAR in the IM zone. If at least 0.3 FAR of light industrial
manufacturing or research and development use is on the lot or parcel, the
residential FAR may be increased to 1.25 FAR in each zone. 20
Section 15. Section 9-6-5, “Specific Use Standards - Commercial Uses,” B.R.C. 1981, is
amended to read as follows:
9-6-5. Specific Use Standards - Commercial Uses.
…
(d) Mobile Food Vehicle:
(1) The following applies to any mobile food vehicle use:
(A) Standards: Mobile food vehicle sales on private property, public property,
or in the public right-of-way are allowed by right if the use meets the
following standards:
…
(v) No person shall operate a mobile food vehicle sales use without a
permit or in violation of the conditions of a permit. The permit will
be valid for twelve consecutive monthsup to two years, or such
other time as the city manager may by rule designate. Such
application shall meet the following requirements: 21
…
20 Correct error from Ordinance 8599 to make use type consistent with terminology in use table.
21 City licensing staff would like to update the licensing term to two years. This change had previously been passed in another ordinance, but was
inadvertently not included in a later update to the chapter. The original change was not reviewed by the Planning Board, which is required to
review all changes to the land use code. This change would modify the licensing term and provide required notice to Planning Board of this
change.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 18 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Section 16. The maximum cumulative coverage and wall length articulation lines of
Table 7-1: Form and Bulk Standards in Section 9-7-5, “Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards,”
B.R.C. 1981, are amended to read as follows:
9-7-1. Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards.
The purpose of this chapter is to indicate the requirements for lot dimensions and building form,
bulk, location and height for all types of development. All primary and accessory structures are
subject to the dimensional standards set forth in Table 7-1 of this section with the exception of
structures located in an area designated in Appendix L, "Form-Based Code Areas," subject to the
standards of Appendix M, "Form-Based Code." No person shall use any land within the City
authorized by Chapter 9-6, "Use Standards," B.R.C. 1981, except according to the following
form and bulk requirements unless modified through a use review under Section 9-2-15, "Use
Review," B.R.C. 1981, or a site review under Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981, or
granted a variance under Section 9-2-3, "Variances and Interpretations," B.R.C. 1981, or as
approved under the provisions of Section 9-2-16, "Form-based code review," B.R.C. 1981.
TABLE 7-1: FORM AND BULK STANDARDS
Zoning District A
RR-1
RR-2
RE
RH-2
RH-5
P
RL-1
RM-2
RMX-1
BT-2 BT-1
BC
BR
IS-1
IS-2
IG
IM
RL-2
RM-1
RH-4 MU-1 RM-3
RH-1
RH-6
RMX-2 RH-3
RH-7
BCS MU-3 BMS
MU-4
DT-1
DT-2
DT-3
DT-5
DT-4 MU-2
IMS
MH
Form module a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s
Maximum
cumulative
coverage of all
accessory
buildings
regardless of
location (m)
For residential uses - no greater than coverage of the principal building22
Wall length
articulation
standards for
side walls over
14' in height
within 20'
ofand less than
14' from the
side property
line23
See Section 9-7-
10 n/a
See
Section
9-7-10
n/a See Section 9-7-
10 n/a
…
Footnotes to Table 7-1, Form and Bulk Standards:
In addition to the foregoing, the following miscellaneous form and bulk requirements apply to all
development in the city:
…
22 The code already dictates building coverage limits, making this unnecessarily duplicative and punitive.
23 Drafting error from previous code change.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 19 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(e) For other setback standards regarding garages, open parking areas, and flagpoles, see
Paragraph 9-7-2(b)(8d), B.R.C. 1981.24
(f) Where a rear yard backs on a street, see Paragraph 9-7-2(b)(7c), B.R.C. 1981.25
…
Section 17. Section 9-7-2, “Setback Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as
follows:
9-7-2. Setback Standards.
…
(b) Side Yard Setback Standards:
(1) Setbacks for Upper Floors in Non-Residential Zoning Districts: A principal
building constructed with a side yard setback of zero for the first story above
grade in the BC-2, BR-1, DT-1, DT-2, DT-3, DT-4, DT-5, IS-1, IG or IM zoning
districts, where the side yard setback is noted as "0 or 12," will be allowed tomay
have upper stories set back stories either five feet or the distance required by
Chapter 10-5 "Building Code,” B.R.C. 1981, whichever is greater. above the first
story that is at or above the finished grade the greater of five feet or the distance
required by Chapter 10-5, "Building Code," B.R.C. 1981. 26
…
Section 18. Figure 7-3 in Section 9-7-5, “Building Height,” B.R.C. 1981, is replaced as
follows:
9-7-5. Building Height
…
24 Fixing inaccurate references.
25 Fixing inaccurate references.
26 This is clearer language about this requirement.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 20 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
27
…
(e) Height Calculations for Attached Buildings:
…
27 This graphic has been updated to provide more clarity about the steps to measure height.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 21 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(2) Separate buildings in compliance with Paragraph (de)(1) of this section, and
which exceed the maximum permitted height allowed by Section 9-7-1, "Schedule
of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981, may be considered by the planning
board pursuant to Section 9-2-14, "Site Review," B.R.C. 1981.28
…
Section 19. Section 9-7-6, “Building Height, Conditional,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to
read as follows:
9-7-6. Building Height, Conditional
(a) High Density Residential District Administrative Review Criteria: In the RH zones,
principal building height may be increased to forty feet if: 29
…
Section 20. Figure 7-14 in Section 9-7-10, “Side Yard Wall Articulation,” B.R.C. 1981,
is replaced as follows:
9-7-10. Side Yard Wall Articulation.
…
28 Fix inaccurate reference.
29 This is not an administrative review; this reference has been updated to reflect current practice.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 22 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
30
…
Section 21. Section 9-9-6, “Parking Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as
follows:
9-9-6. Parking Standards
…
(d) Motor Vehicle Parking Design Standards:
…
(5) Parking Design Details:
…
30 This graphic has been updated to provide more clarity on what counts towards side yard wall articulation.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 23 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(B) With the exception of parking areas for detached dwelling units, All all
parking areas are shall be paved with asphalt, concrete, or other similar
permanent, hard surface except for parking areas for detached dwelling
units. Parking areas for detached dwelling units shall be surfaced with
materials capable of sustaining the weight and impacts of the associated
vehicle usage. 31
...
(f) Motor Vehicle Parking Reductions:
…
(3) Alternative administrative parking reductions by land use: The parking
requirements in Section 9-9-6, “Parking Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, may be reduced
if the following standards are met. These standards shall not be permitted to be
combined with the parking reduction standards in Subparagraphs (f)(2) of this
section.
…
(B) Mixed Use Developments: The city manager may reduce the amount of
required parking in a mixed-use development by up to ten percent in the
BMS, IMS, MU-1, MU-2, MU-3 and RMX-2 zoning districts, or in all
other nonresidential zoning districts in Section 9-5-2, “Zoning Districts,”
B.R.C. 1981, by up to a twenty-five-percent parking reduction if the
following requirements are met:32
…
Section 22. Section 9-9-11, “Useable Open Space,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as
follows:
9-9-11. Useable Open Space
…
(f) Special Open Space Requirements Applicable to Residential Uses: Useable open space
for residential uses also includes:
(1) Individual bBalconies, decks, porches, and patio areas associated with an
individual dwelling unit or common open spaces on a roof or elevated above the
first story, that are not intended or designed to be enclosed, if the minimum size
of such individual balcony, deck or patiothe applicable open space is not less than
31 The Design & Construction Standards (DCS) specifies this surface treatment for parking areas but the land use code does not specify required
surfacing for detached dwelling units. This change specifies that the city manager has discretion over those areas to avoid maintenance challenges
in the future.
32 Correct typo from recent Ordinance 8599.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 24 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
thirty-six36 square feet and not less than forty-eight48 inches in any dimension or
porches that meet the requirements of section 9-7-4, "Setback Encroachments for
Front Porches," B.R.C. 1981. Such areas shall count for no more than twenty-
five25 percent of the required useable open space. 33
…
Section 23. Section 9-9-12, “Landscaping and Screening Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, is
amended to read as follows:
9-9-12. Landscaping and Screening Standards
…
(d) General Landscaping and Screening Requirements:
…
(2) Landscape and Screening Planting, Maintenance, and Replacement:
(i) Planting: Required landscaping and screening shall be planted between
March 1 and October 15. Bare root stock shall be planted between March
1 and April 30 or prior to plants leafing out. Stock, other than container-
grown stock, shall be planted between March 1 and June 1 or between
September 1 and October 15. The city manager may approve planting at
different times based on weather conditions that allow for successful
planting. 34
(ii) Maintenance and Replacement: The property owner shall maintain all
required landscaping and provide for replacement of plant materials that
have died or have otherwise been damaged or removed, and maintenance
of all non-live landscaping materials, including, but not limited to,
fencing, paving, irrigation systems, and retaining walls from the issuance
of a certificate of occupancy or certificate of completion.
…
Section 24. Section 9-10-2, “Continuation or Restoration of Nonconforming Uses and
Nonstandard Buildings, Structures, and Lots,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:
33 These changes clarifies language in this section to be more flexible for porches, rather than rigidly applying 9-7-4 standards.
34 This language is similar to text in the Design and Construction Standards to address successful times of year for planting. This reflects
landscaping inspection practice that has been underway for years.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 25 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
9-10-2. Continuation or Restoration of Nonconforming Uses and Nonstandard Buildings,
Structures, and Lots
…
(b) Damage by Fire, Flood, Wind, or Other Calamity or Act of God and Unsafe Buildings: A
nonstandard building or structure, a building or structure that contains a nonconforming
use, or a building or structure on a nonstandard lot, that has been damaged by fire, flood,
wind, or other calamity or act of God may be restored to its original condition, or any
building declared unsafe under the building code or any other applicable safety or health
code may be restored to a safe condition, provided that such work is consistent with the
requirements of Section 9-3-3, "Regulations Governing the One Hundred-Year
Floodplain," B.R.C. 1981, started within twelve monthstwo years of such event, and
completed within twenty-four monthsthree years of the date on which the restoration
commenced. 35
…
Section 25. Section 9-12-5, “Minor Subdivision,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as
follows:
9-12-5. Minor Subdivision
…
(b) Limitations: The provisions of this section shall not apply to a replat that:
(1) Requires any variations modifications to section 9-12-12, "Standards for Lots and
Public Improvements," B.R.C. 1981; 36
…
Section 26. Section 9-12-7, “Staff Review and Approval of Preliminary Plat,” B.R.C.
1981, is amended to read as follows:
9-12-7. Staff Review and Approval of Preliminary Plat
…
(b) Notice of Surface Estate: The city manager shall notify tenants of the property and
abutting property owners by first class mail that the subdivision is proposed and that any
35 In many recent cases of calamity events, beginning work within twelve months has been difficult. This change would provide more flexibility
for properties to begin and complete work after calamities occur.
36 The code was updated to consistently use the term “modifications” rather than variations several years ago; this remains due to a drafting error.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 26 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
questions or comments thereon may be directed to the planning department of planning
and community development. 37
(c) Notice of Mineral Estate: The purpose of this notice provision is to comply with the
notification of surface development requirements in article 24-65.5, C.R.S. The applicant
shall: 38
(1) At least thirty days before any initial hearing or, if none, beforea final decision on
an application for development, send notice, by first classcertified mail, return
receipt requested, or by a nationally recognized overnight courier to the mineral
estate owner;
(2) Provide in the notice a statement about how the decision will be made, rights of
appeal, the location of the property that is the subject of the application, and the
name of the applicant, the City of Boulder as the approving authority and the
name and address of the mineral estate owner;
(3) Identify the mineral estate holder in a manner consistent with § 24-65.5-103,
C.R.S.; and
(4) Certify, in a form acceptable to the city manager, that such notice has been
provided to the mineral estate owner. The certification shall identify the name and
address of the mineral estate owners to whom notices were sent. This certification
is a condition of approval.
…
Section 27. Section 9-12-8, “Final Plat,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:39
9-12-8. Final Plat
…
(b) In order to obtain city manager review of a final plat, the subdivider shall submit a final
plat that conforms to the approved preliminary plat, includes all changes required by the
manager or the planning board, and includes the following information:
…
(4) Accurate dimensions for all lines, angles and curves used to describe boundaries,
public improvements, easements, areas to be reserved for public use and other
important features. (All curves shall be circular arcs and shall be defined by the
37 This is an outdated reference to the department name. Throughout the land use code, “planning department” is the consistently used term.
38 The references to mineral rights owners have been updated to meet notification requirements under state law.
39 Surveyors sometimes use “more or less” calculations on plats and the City Attorney’s Office has interpreted this as acceptable. Surveyors have
indicated that it is standard practice to use “more or less” terminology for dimensions as monuments can slightly move or other surveyors may
have slightly different measurements in the future. This change aligns with standard surveying practice and the Ci ty Attorney’s Office
interpretation.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 27 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
radius, central angle, tangent, arc and chart distances. All dimensions, both linear
and angular, are to be determined by an accurate control survey in the field that
must balance and close within a limit of one in ten thousand. No final plat
showing plus or minus dimensions will be approved.);
…
Section 28. Section 9-12-9, “Lot Line and Boundary Verification,” B.R.C. 1981, is
amended to read as follows:
9-12-9. Lot Line and Boundary Verification
The subdivider shall provide to the City a computer check to assure ensure that the exterior lines
of the subdivision on the final plat close. In the absence of such verification, the City shall obtain
such computer check and the subdivider shall pay the fee therefor prescribed by Subsection 4-20-
43(a), B.R.C. 1981, before recording the plat. 40
…
Section 29. Section 9-12-12, “Standards for Lots and Public Improvements,” B.R.C.
1981, is amended to read as follows:
9-12-12. Standards for Lots and Public Improvements
…
(c) Private Utilities and Improvements: If the subdivider installs private utilities or
improvements, including, without limitation, streets or water, wastewater and storm drain
utilities, the subdivider shall provide mutual covenants in the deeds of all property
owners of the subdivision for the continued and perpetual maintenance of the utilities or
improvements. The city manager may require creation of a unit owners association
formed pursuant to the Colorado Common Interest Ownership Act to own and maintain
common private utilities and improvements. 41
Section 30. Section 9-13-10, “Options for Satisfaction of Inclusionary Housing
Requirement,” B.R.C. 1981, is amended to read as follows:
9-13-10. Options for Satisfaction of Inclusionary Housing Requirement
40 Removing the second sentence of this section because the subsection no longer references the City doing this work, this was l anguage that was
redacted in 2000 and has been incorrectly included since that time.
41 This has been added to clarify that subdividers must create a unit owners association that owns common facilities, as is already the city’s long-
term practice.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 28 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(a) Purpose: In order to create a significant amount of permanently affordable units, to the
extent permitted by this chapter, developers may satisfy the inclusionary housing
requirement through any combination of the following alternate means:
(1) Cash-in-Lieu Contribution: Developers may satisfy permanently affordable
housing requirements by making cash contributions to the city’s affordable
housing fund. The cash-in-lieu contribution will be based on the residential square
footage of the development creating the inclusionary housing requirement and the
applicable rate will be determined annually by the city manager. The city manager
may consider the number of units in the development, the size and type of units
which created the obligation, the amount that would incentivize on-site
construction of permanently affordable units, and the affordability gap between
market rate and permanently affordable unit prices when determining the cash-in-
lieu calculation.
(A) Annual Cash-in-lieu Escalator: The city manager is authorized to adjust
the cash-in-lieu contribution annually on July January 1 of each year.42
…
Section 31. This ordinance shall apply to any building permit, conditional use, use review,
and site review applied for on or after the effective date of this ordinance; however, any project
for which a complete building permit, site review, use review, or conditional use application has
been submitted to the city or which has received a site review, use review, or conditional use
approval prior to the effective date of this ordinance for a use inconsistent with the provisions of
this ordinance will be permitted to establish the proposed use under the use standards of Chapter
9-6, " Use Standards,” B.R.C. 1981, in effect at the time the building permit, site review, use
review, or conditional use application was submitted to the city. Such applicants shall be required
to pursue such development approvals and meet all requirements deadlines set by the city manager
and the Boulder Revised Code necessary to establish the proposed use. The applications for such
project shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable laws. An applicant may seek extensions
42 In Ordinance 8601 that was adopted in 2023, significant changes were made to the Inclusionary Housing program. Additionally, Housing &
Human Services staff updated the administrative regulations that accompany the code. The administrative regulations were updated to align the
timing to update Cash-in-Liew amounts in January, but the ordinance language was not updated accordingly. This change aligns with the intent
and the administrative regulations.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 29 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
of a development approval granted under the use standards in effect prior to the effective date of
this ordinance in accordance with the standards of Subsection 9-2-12(b), “Extensions,” B.R.C.
1981, and any initial review under Paragraph 9-2-12(b)(2), “Planning Board Level Extension,”
B.R.C. 1981, shall not impose as an additional condition compliance with the use standards
adopted in this ordinance provided that all other requirements of this Section 5 of this ordinance
have been met. Any failure to meet requirements of the city manager or this section of this
ordinance will result in a denial of such application. Any subsequent application shall meet the
requirements in place at the time of such subsequent application.
Section 32. If any section, paragraph, clause, or provision of this ordinance shall for any
reason be held to be invalid or unenforceable, such decision shall not affect any of the remaining
provisions of this ordinance.
Section 33. This ordinance is necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare
of the residents of the city and covers matters of local concern.
Section 34. The city council deems it appropriate that this ordinance be published by title
only and orders that copies of this ordinance be made available in the office of the city clerk for
public inspection and acquisition.
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 30 of 31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
INTRODUCED, READ ON FIRST READING, AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY
TITLE ONLY this 15th day of February 2024.
_____________________________
Aaron Brockett,
Mayor
Attest:
______________________________
Elesha Johnson,
City Clerk
READ ON SECOND READING, PASSED AND ADOPTED this 7th day of March 2023.
_____________________________
Aaron Brockett,
Mayor
Attest:
_____________________________
Elesha Johnson,
City Clerk
Attachment A - Ordinance 8620 – Annotated
Item 4B - Title 9 Code Section Improvements Page 31 of 31
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM
MEETING DATE: February 6, 2024
AGENDA TITLE
Public hearing and consideration of a standard wetland permit application for the
proposed renovation of the Chapman Drive Trailhead and construction of a pedestrian
bridge over Boulder Creek generally located at 38474 Boulder Canyon Drive in
Boulder County (WET2023-00020). The existing trailhead was an interim design that
was installed after the 2013 floods. The proposal is intended to improve visitor safety
and to provide additional amenities at the trailhead, such as trailer parking, and also
proposes restoration of habitat and increased natural resource protection.
Applicant: Adam Gaylord, City of Boulder OSMP
Owner: City of Boulder, Open Space and Mountain Parks
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS
Planning & Development Services
Brad Mueller, Director
Edward Stafford, P.E., PTOE, Senior Civil Engineering Manager
OBJECTIVE
Define the steps for Planning Board consideration of this request:
1. Planning Board hears applicant and staff presentations.
2. Public Hearing.
3. Planning Board action to approve, approve with conditions, or deny the
Standard Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permit.
SUMMARY
Project Name: Chapman Drive Trailhead and Pedestrian Bridge
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 1 of 37
Location: 38474 Boulder Canyon Drive (Boulder County)
Permit Type: Standard Stream, Wetland and Water Body
KEY ISSUES
Staff has identified the following key issues to help guide the board’s discussion:
1. Does the Stream, Wetland, and Water Body Application meet the Stream,
Wetland, and Water Body Permit criteria set forth in Section 9-3-9(e)(3)
and (4), B.R.C. 1981?
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks department (OSMP) plans to
renovate the interim Chapman Drive Trailhead, which was installed after the 2013 floods.
The redesigned trailhead will improve visitor safety, provide additional amenities such as
trailer parking, restore habitat, and increase protection of natural resources. OSMP is also
partnering with Boulder County to install a pedestrian bridge originally included in the
Boulder Canyon Trail Extension Project but never constructed. The pedestrian bridge will
span Boulder Creek and connect the Boulder Canyon Trail to Chapman Drive Trailhead
and Chapman Drive Trail. Construction of the trail head and bridge will require impacts
to Stream, Wetland and Water Body Protection areas regulated by Section 9-3-9, B.R.C.
1981.
A permit for this application was issued by the city manager and then called up by the
Planning Board on January 16, 2024.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Staff Findings and Recommendation:
1. Staff find that the proposed project meets the applicable Stream, Wetland, and
Water Body Permit criteria set forth in Section 9-3-9€(3) and (4), B.R.C. 1981.
Therefore, Staff recommends that the Planning Board adopt the following Motion:
Suggested Motion Language:
Motion to approve WET2023-00020, a Standard Stream, Wetland and Water Body
Protection permit to allow construction of a new bridge and trailhead improvements
for the Chapman Drive Trail Head, incorporating this staff memorandum and attached
criteria analysis as findings of fact and subject to the recommended conditions of
approval.
PUBLIC FEEDBACK
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 2 of 37
Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permits require that written notification is mailed to all
property owners within 300 feet of the subject property a minimum of 10 days before
final action and a sign is posted on the property for at least 10 days. All notice
requirements of Section 9-4-3, B.R.C. 1981 have been met. Public comments regarding
the Stream, Wetland, and Water Body Permit may also be received through public
hearing. No public comment has been received.
BACKGROUND
The Chapman Drive trailhead is located at 38474 Boulder Canyon Drive (see Attachment
A Vicinity Map) in unincorporated Boulder County; however, since the project is on city
owned property and is a city sponsored project it is subject to the Stream, Wetland and
Water Body protection regulations in Section 9-3-9, B.R.C. 1981. The project includes
impacts that require a Standard Wetland Permit, a permit application was reviewed and
approved by Staff on January 2, 2024. The Planning Board called up this decision on
January 16, 2024.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks department (OSMP) plans to
renovate the interim Chapman Drive Trailhead, which was installed after the 2013 floods.
The redesigned trailhead will improve visitor safety, provide additional amenities such as
trailer parking, restore habitat, and increase protection of natural resources. OSMP is also
partnering with Boulder County to install a pedestrian bridge originally included in the
Boulder Canyon Trail Extension Project but never constructed. The pedestrian bridge will
span Boulder Creek and connect the Boulder Canyon Trail to Chapman Drive Trailhead
and Chapman Drive Trail. Construction of the trail head and bridge will require impacts
to wetland areas regulated by the B.R.C. Additional information about the project can be
found in the Application (Attachment B), the Wetland Report (Attachment C), and the
Site Plans (Attachment D.
The proposed project will have the following impacts to city regulated wetlands and
buffer areas:
Permanent
(sq. ft.)
Temporary
(sq. ft.)
Wetland 0 1,344
Inner Buffer 435 936
Outer Buffer 2,644 2,004
PROCESS
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 3 of 37
Section 9-3-9, B.R.C. 1981 regulates activities that impact stream, wetland and water
bodies and associated buffers. Portions of this project require a standard permit for
temporary impacts to regulated wetland and inner buffer areas, while impacts to the outer
buffer by the trailed head improvements require a conditional permit. Since the impacts
are all part of one project they are included in a Standard permit application.
Standard Wetland permits are subject to review and approval by Staff and are subject to
call-up to the Planning Board. The Planning Board called up the staff decision on this
permit and will make a decision on it under this agenda item. The Planning Board
decision is subject to call-up by the City Council.
ANALYSIS OF KEY ISSUE(S)
Standard Stream, Wetland, and Water Body protection permits are evaluated using
criteria found in Section 9-3-9, B.R.C. (e) (3) including all of A, B, C and D along with
criteria of 9-3-9 (e) (4), B.R.C. 1981.
The criteria for the consideration of a Standard Stream, Wetland, and Water Body Permit
and the staff’s rationale and findings as to why those standards have been satisfied for 9-
3-9 (e) 4 are listed below:
Criteria for Standard Review: In addition to the standards in paragraph (e) (3) of
this section, the applicant shall demonstrate that the stream, wetland or water body
permit application meets the following criteria:
The criteria of Section 9-3-9 (e)(3), B.R.C. 1981 have been provided in Attachment E.
A. Minimization: Any direct or indirect adverse impact on a stream, wetland or
water body and its associated buffer area has been minimized to the
maximum extent feasible through a reduction in the size, scope or density of
the project or a change of project configuration or design;
The project considered design alternatives for the site and this design was selected
as the one that best meets the project goals, while minimizing the impacted area.
The trailhead improvements impact a small section of the outer buffer area and
has been placed as far from the regulated zone as the site will allow. The
replacement bridge includes temporary impacts to the wetland and inner buffer
areas, but no permanent impacts to the wetland area.
B. Minimal Impact: The activity will result in minimal impact or impairment to
any stream, wetland or water body function;
The project proposes construction access from the existing Chapman Drive bridge
north of the existing trailhead. Project staging is proposed to occur outside of the
regulated areas and within the footprint of the existing trailhead. There are no
proposed permanent impacts to the stream or wetland.
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 4 of 37
C. Protection of Species: The activity will not jeopardize the continued existence
of habitat for the following species:
(i) Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed as threatened or
endangered by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service;
(ii) Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed by the State of
Colorado as rare, threatened or endangered, species of special
concern;
(iii) Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed in the Boulder
County Comprehensive Plan as critical; and
(iv) Plant, animal or other wildlife species listed in the Boulder Valley
Comprehensive Plan as a Species of Local Concern.
OSMP staff have contacted the USFWS and confirmed that the project does
not raise concerns for any listed species or habitats.
D. Mitigation Demonstration: Unavoidable direct and indirect impacts can be
successfully mitigated based on the submission of a mitigation plan in
conformance with the standards outlined in subsection (f) of this section.
The project proposes that temporary impacts to Wetland, Inner Buffer and Outer
Buffer areas be restored in place with approved seed mixes. Permanent impacts to
the inner and outer buffer zones will be mitigated through the enhancement of the
buffer area south of the trailhead. There are no permanent impacts to the wetland
area, therefore no wetland mitigation is required. Five years of mitigation
monitoring has been required as a condition of this permit.
Staff’s conclusion is that the applicant has satisfied the requirements of Section
9-3-9(e)€, B.R.C. 1981, “Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permit Application
Review” and recommends that the Planning Board approve the Stream,
Wetland, and Water Body Permit, subject to the conditions of approval.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The improvements shall be constructed to minimize and mitigate impacts to the
existing wetlands in conformance with the conditions of the City of Boulder
Wetland Permit issued for this project.
2. The restored buffer areas shall be maintained and irrigated as required to ensure
seed germination, tree and shrub survival and an overall successful restoration.
3. The applicant shall obtain a site inspection and approval from the City of Boulder
Floodplain and Wetlands Administrator upon completion of the project.
4. Best management practices shall be applied to all phases of the project and shall
conform to the requirements of the "City of Boulder Wetlands Protection
Program: Best Management Practices" adopted July, 1995; and "City of Boulder
Wetlands Protection Program: Best Management Practices - Revegetation Rules"
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 5 of 37
adopted July, 1998.
5. The wetland mitigation site shall be monitored annually for five years. Monitoring
reports shall be submitted to the City of Boulder Planning and Development
Services prior to September 1st of each year. If it is determined that the mitigation
is not successful, then corrective measures will need to be established and
implemented to ensure a successful wetland mitigation project.
6. The following success criteria shall be used for the wetland mitigation:
• At least 80% native vegetative cover or comparable to the surrounding
area.
• Invasive species on the Colorado Noxious Weed Inventory list-A shall be
100% eradicated.
• Invasive species on the Colorado Noxious Weed Inventory list-B shall
encompass no more than 10% of the total cover of the restoration area.
Approved By:
________________________
Brad Mueller, Secretary to the Planning Board
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Vicinity Map
Attachment B: Wetland Permit Application
Attachment C: Wetland Report
Attachment D: Civil Site Plans
Attachment E: Section 9-3-9 (e) (3) “Criteria for Review”
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 6 of 37
Boul
derCanyonDrChapmanDrCity of Boulder Vicinity Map
Subject Area:38474 Boulder Canyon Dr
Location: 38474 Boulder Canyon Dr
Project Name: Chapman Drive Trailhead and Bridge
Review Type: Wetland Permit Public Process
Review Number: WET2023-00020
Applicant: Adam Gaylord, City of Boulder Mountain Parks
Subject Area
Zoning District
The City of Boulder has provided the data as a public service and offers no
guarantees or warranties, expressed or implied, as to the accuracy and/or
completeness of the information contained herein. The City of Boulder makes no
warranties about the datasets and disclaims liability for all uses of the datasets, to the
fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
0 620 1,240310 Feet
´
View Case Online
Attachment A
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 7 of 37
City of Boulder
Planning & Development Services WET2020-
Wetland Permit Application
Wetland permits are required for development that impacts regulatory wetland and buffer zone areas and is
required by Section 9-3-9 (see Table 3-1 for required permit type and exemptions) of the Boulder Revised Code.
Incomplete applications will not be accepted. Please fill out every section of this form.
REQUIRED MATERIALS FOR ALL PERMITS
0 Site Plan (please show the wetland and buffer zone boundaries)
0 At least two photographs of current conditions
0 Construction drawings(as applicable)
TO SUBMIT YOUR WETLAND PERMIT APPLICATION
0 Save your application and supplemental files as PDFs
0 Name your materials according to the File Naming Convention in the Electronic Submittal Guide
0 Submit application and files to PDSskipatrip@bouldercolorado.gov
It, CONTACT INFORMATION
Applicant Contact Information
Name Phone# Email Address
City of Boulder OSMP c/o Adam Gaylord 303-495-8982 gaylorda@bouldercolorado.gov
Address City State Zip
2520 55th St Boulder CO 80301
Property Owner Contact Information
ZSame as Applicant
Name Phone# Email Address
Address City State Zip
VTheownerofthepropertyisawareof and consentingtothe improvements beingmadei nth is perm ittingprocess.
Signature of Owner: 1 Date: 10/ 13/2023
This application will not be accepted without the owner's signature.
Approved as to form:
t7C1re 10/11/2023
Updated June 2020 Planning&Development Services 1 1739 Broadway,3rd Floor Page 1 of 4
P.O. Box 791 Boulder,CO 80306 303-441-1880 boulderplandevelop.net
Attachment B
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 8 of 37
PROJECT INFORMATION
Standard Conditional
Permit Type(please check one)
Boundary Determination Functional Evaluation
Project address: 38474 Boulder Canyon Drive
Project Description:please include the who, what, where, when and why in your project description (please also
describe if this project is part of a larger project)
The City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks department(OSMP) plans to renovate the interim
Chapman Drive Trailhead installed after the 2013 floods. The redesigned trailhead will improve visitor
safety, provide additional amenities such as trailer parking, restore habitat, and increase protection of
natural resources. OSMP is also partnering with Boulder County to install a pedestrian bridge originally
included in the Boulder Canyon Trail Extension Project but never constructed. The pedestrian bridge will
span Boulder Creek and connect the Boulder Canyon Trail to Chapman Drive Trailhead and Chapman
Drive Trail. Construction of the trailhead and bridge will require impacts to regulated areas. As such,
OSMP is submitting this application for a Standard Wetland Permit.
PROJECT IMPACTS
Impact Area Total Impacted Area Required Restoration Ratio
permanent& temporary) square feet) area restored to area disturbed)
Wetland 1,344 2:1
Inner&Outer Buffer Zone 6,019 1:1
BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICES
Describe how you will keep sediment or erosion from entering the creek.
The city s contractor is responsible for drafting the plan and installing and maintaining erosion control practices during construction
until final stabilization of the site occurs.The following general erosion control measures will be implemented:
Silt fences shall be placed around the site during construction.
Certified weed-free coconut fiber logs/waddles shall be installed in key locations around the site to limit runoff.
Erosion control mats,filter logs, rock checks,durable mulch or a combination thereof shall be used in areas where concentrated
water flow is likely to occur to prevent soil movement.
Soils tracked from the site by vehicles shall be cleaned daily(or more frequently,as necessary)from paved roadway surfaces
throughout the duration of construction.
Other erosion control BMPs will be utilized as necessary.
HYDROLOGY
Check all that apply:
Current Water Source Groundwater Stream water Rainwater Other:
Future Water Source Groundwater Stream water Rainwater Other:
Will your project negatively impact site hydrology? Z Yes No
If yes,please describe:
Updated June 2020 Planning&Development Services 1 1739 Broadway,3rd Floor Page 2 of 4
P.O. Box 791 Boulder,CO 80306 303-441-1880 boulderplandevelop.net
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 9 of 37
110 MINIMIZATION
Describe the steps taken to ensure that your project is causing the least amount of wetland disturbance.
Please see the narrative for details.
RESTORATION OF TEMPORARY IMPACTS
I will be utilizing native wetland seed mix for restoration. Yes No
If no,please explain:
Will you be restoring at the project location? Yes No
If no,please describe where your restoration will occur.
t OTHER ITEMS TO CONSIDER
Does your project include any of the following?Check all that apply:
Bank Stabilization Native plants/landscaping are preferred over rip rap or hardened structures(as feasible).
Vegetation Removal For noxious weed infestation or native habitat restoration only(applies to inner buffer).
New Steps/Pathway Only allowed in buffer zones,one per property,and 4-feet wide maximum.
Sediment Removal Shall not alter flood capacity.Vegetated channel bottoms shall be restored.
Fill Identify the source of any fill,and the location where any fill will be placed
If you checked any of the above,please describe:
Please see the attache narrative and plans for details.
None of these apply to my project
Updated June 2020 Planning&Development Services 1 1739 Broadway,3rd Floor Page 3 of 4
P.O. Box 791 Boulder,CO 80306 303-441-1880 boulderplandevelop.net
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 10 of 37
For Standard Review Applications Only
PROTECTION OF SPECIES
Check one and attach to application:
Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit
Army Corps of Engineers 404 Permit AND US Fish and Wildlife Threatened & Endangered Species Permit
MITIGATION PLAN
Please provide a mitigation plan that addresses the following items in the order listed below.
1. Statement that mitigation plan was prepared by qualified wetland biologist
2. Existing site evaluation
a. Type and value of existing wetlands
b. Total area impacted (use table above)
c. Total area to be mitigated (use ratios in table above)
d. Construction start/end date
3. Mitigation Site
a. Location
b. Who owns the mitigation site (do you have their approval?)
c. Description of mitigation (i.e. is the site suitable for wetlands?)
d. Hydrology description
i. where will the water come from to establish the wetland?
ii. Who owns the water? Do you have their consent?
e. Mitigation start/end date
f. Probability of success of mitigation measures
4. Mitigation Site Maintenance
a. Description of maintenance activities:weed control, litter removal, irrigation, water control structures,
vegetation maintenance (replanting), culvert clearing
b. When will maintenance start?
c. Who will perform maintenance?
d. How often will maintenance be performed?
e. When will maintenance end?
5. Mitigation Site Monitoring
a. Monitoring criteria: how will you know the site is successful?80%revegetated, no noxious weeds
b. When will monitoring start?
c. Who will perform the monitoring?
d. When will monitoring end?
Updated June 2020 Planning&Development Services 1 1739 Broadway,3rd Floor Page 4 of 4
P.O. Box 791 Boulder,CO 80306 303-441-1880 boulderplandevelop.net
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 11 of 37
Chapman Drive Trailhead and Pedestrian Bridge
City of Boulder Wetland Permit Application
October 9,2023
1.0 Introduction
The City of Boulder Open Space and Mountain Parks department(OSMP)plans to renovate the interim Chapman
Drive Trailhead installed after the 2013 floods. The redesigned trailhead will improve visitor safety,provide
additional amenities such as trailer parking,restore habitat, and increase protection of natural resources. OSMP is
also partnering with Boulder County to install a pedestrian bridge originally included in the Boulder Canyon Trail
Extension Project but never constructed. The pedestrian bridge will span Boulder Creek and connect the Boulder
Canyon Trail to Chapman Drive Trailhead and Chapman Drive Trail. Construction of the trailhead and bridge will
require impacts to regulated areas. As such, OSMP is submitting this application for a Standard Wetland Permit.
2.0 Project Area
The project site is located west of the city of Boulder, southeast of the intersection of Boulder Canyon Drive and
Chapman Drive, and west of Boulder Creek(Plan Set Cover Sheet). The project site is located on what was
formerly a single family homesite(Photo 1).After the home was damaged by the 2013 floods,the City acquired
the property,removed the home, and constructed an interim trailhead to provide access to Chapman Drive Trail
Photo 2). The area south of the interim trailhead(Photos 2 and 3) is currently dominated by non-native
groundcover,mostly smooth brome(Bromus inermis). Ponderosa pine (Pinus ponderosa) line Boulder Creek
along with scattered cottonwood(Populus deltoids),Russian olive(Elaeagnus angustifolia),juniper(Juniperus
scopulorum), and chokecherry(Prunus virgiana). South of the project area, an unnamed drainage flows into
Boulder Creek. The south bank of this drainage is dominated by ponderosa pine trees while the north bank is
mostly smooth brome with scattered chokecherry and cottonwood seedlings.
a .
i
t
h
Photo 1. 2007 aerial photo of homesite damaged during 2013 floods.
1
Attachment C
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 12 of 37
r
Photo 2. Interim Chapman Drive Trailhead(facing south)with Boulder Creek to the right/west and the unnamed
drainage in the background(2022).
Photo 3. Area south of interim Chapman Drive Trailhead(facing north)with Boulder Creek to the left(west)
2022).
2
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 13 of 37
3.0 Regulated Areas
An OSMP ecologist surveyed the site in 2022 to map the ordinary high water mark along Boulder Creek and an
ephemeral drainage south of the proposed trailhead. Both of these features are regulated under the City of
Boulder's Stream,Wetland, and Water Body Protection Program, as is the 50-foot buffer surrounding them(Plan
Set Sheet C-100).
4.0 Project Description
OSMP is planning to reconfigure the existing trailhead to support trailer parking, improve sustainability, and
provide a safer connection from the trailhead to Chapman Trail, and to install a pedestrian bridge to connect these
features to Boulder Canyon Trail west of Boulder Creek.
4.1 Chapman Drive Trailhead Redesign
OMSP is planning to reorient the main parking area to accommodate a trailer turn-around and designated
accessible parking. Please see the attached plan set for details. The parking lot will include 14 standard parking
spots, one accessible parking spot, and up to two trailer parking spaces. The parking areas and turn around will be
gravel road base over compacted subgrade. To prevent direct discharge of water into Boulder Creek,the parking
area will be surrounded by curb and gutter that will direct water to a bioretention area on the north end of the
trailhead. From there,water will flow west through an underground pipe. Riprap will be installed at each end of
the pipe to prevent erosion.
OSMP will install a pedestrian path east and south of the parking area to connect Boulder Canyon Trail,the
trailhead, and Chapman Drive Trail. The trail will be surfaced with crusher fines except for the north end which
will be concrete. The trail will be six feet wide, and the southern section will include three sets of timber stairs
leading up to Chapman Drive. To minimize impacts to the floodplain, OSMP will install a boulder retaining wall
west of the path. A second boulder retaining wall be installed on the east side of the parking area to contain the
steep slope up to Chapman Drive. To protect natural resources and improve visitor safety by discouraging access
to the creek and ephemeral drainage, OSMP will install a fence on the west and south sides of the parking area
and trail.
4.2 Chapman Drive Pedestrian Bridge
At the northwest corner of the trailhead, OSMP will install a 70-foot-long prefabricated steel bridge. Please see
the attached plan set for details. The bridge will be 10-feet wide and will connect the existing Boulder Canyon
Trail to the redesigned trailhead and Chapman Drive Trail. The bridge deck will be sealed concrete and the
abutments will be poured concrete wing walls anchored with driven steel pilings. Pedestrian railing will be
installed on either side of the concrete path on both sides of the bridge. At the base of each abutment, OSMP will
remove the existing riprap and replace with 24-inch angular rock mixed with soil(aka buried riprap)to stabilize
the slope while allowing for plant growth,which isn't possible now with the existing riprap. The new riprap will
tie into existing riprap under the vehicle bridge.
4.3 Access and Staging
The project area will be accessed by the existing Chapman Drive bridge that crosses Boulder Creek north of the
existing trailhead. Staging will occur outside of the 100-year floodplain within the footprint of the existing
trailhead.A temporary concrete washout area and a temporary vehicle tracking control pad will also be installed
within the footprint of the existing trailhead during construction.
4.4 Project Timeline
Pending on-going regulatory review and permit issuance,project construction is planned to start in the
Fall/Winter of 2024 and extend into early 2025, if necessary.
3
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 14 of 37
4.5 Best Management Practices
During construction, OSMP will follow all applicable Best Management Practices outlined in Wetland
Protections Program Best Management Practices(City of Boulder 1995)and OSMP's Ecological Best
Management Practices(City of Boulder 2013).No dewatering will be necessary. Grading limits will be clearly
marked.
No equipment is expected to access the water. Should equipment need to access the water,biodegradable
hydraulic fluids will be used in all equipment and machinery used in the water per the county's 2016 Storm
Drainage Criteria Manual. Prior to transporting equipment to the site, all machinery will be cleaned to remove
aquatic nuisance species(ANS)and weed seeds in accordance with State of Colorado ANS regulations. Cleaning
will include either steam(heat) or chemical cleaning,not just power washing.A"spill kit"for emergency
pollutant isolation, and written clean-up procedures,will be onsite at all times during construction activity.
The city's contractor is responsible for drafting the plan and installing and maintaining erosion control practices
during construction until final stabilization of the site occurs. The following general erosion control measures will
be implemented:
Silt fences shall be placed around the site during construction.
Certified weed-free coconut fiber logs/waddles shall be installed in key locations around the site to limit
runoff.
Erosion control mats, filter logs,rock checks, durable mulch or a combination thereof shall be used in
areas where concentrated water flow is likely to occur to prevent soil movement.
Soils tracked from the site by vehicles shall be cleaned daily(or more frequently, as necessary) from
paved roadway surfaces throughout the duration of construction.
Other erosion control BMPs will be utilized as necessary.
5.0 Impacts to Regulated Areas
The proposed project requires 3,079 square feet of permanent impacts and 4,284 square feet of temporary impacts
to regulated areas (Table 1). The project will also increase the amount of impervious surface in the regulated
buffers by 1,178 square feet(concrete abutments,paths, and curb/gutter).
4
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 15 of 37
Table 1.Proposed wetland and buffer impacts by activity e.
Proposed
Impacted Area(ft)
Activity
Wetland Inner Buffer Outer Buffer
Temporary Permanent Tem ora Permanent Temporary Permanent
Buildings and
Additions
Other Structures:
Retaining Walls 0 276
New Fences 2 66
Pavement,
Surface, &
Trails:
Cement Paths
0 288 0 459
Crusher Fine
0 0 0 1,180
Trail
Trailhead
0 0 315 0
Planting Areas
Curb and Gutter
0 0 0 153
Parking Area
0 0 0 500
Associated
539 0 1,689 0
Grading
Landscaping&
Landscape
Maintenance:
Stream Channel
Flood
Improvements:
Bridge 0 0 131 0
Abutments
Culvert Outlet 0 0 14 10
Abutment Riprap 1,344 397 0 0
Total 1,344 0 936 435 2,004 2,644
Note: Blank cells equate to zero square feet.
6.0 Mitigation
The proposed project requires 3,079 square feet of permanent impacts and 4,284 square feet of temporary impacts
to regulated areas. Temporary impacts will be restored in place. Permanent impacts will be mitigated by
enhancing approximately 3,200 square feet of mostly inner buffer south of the trailhead,path, and fence(Plan Set
Sheet C-103). OSMP will remove existing vegetation(a monoculture of smooth brome)and the top six inches of
soil to dispose of offsite. The area will then be ripped to decompact soil, seeded with native grass and forb
5
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 16 of 37
species,blanketed with 100%biodegradable erosion blanket, and planted with native shrubs.Plant material will
be obtained from commercial nurseries and seed suppliers or supplied by OSMP. Only local genotypes will be
used. Commercial seed lots will be tested for viability and purity and seed lots contaminated with weed seed will
be rejected.Native seed collected through OSMP's volunteer native seed collection program may also be used.
Any willow cuttings used for the project will be harvested from OSMP land.
7.0 Monitoring
OSMP will monitor the mitigation area annually for five years. OSMP proposes the following success criteria:
At least 80%native vegetative cover or comparable to the surrounding area.
Invasive species on the Colorado Noxious Weed Inventory list-A shall be 100%eradicated.
Invasive species on the Colorado Noxious Weed Inventory list-B shall encompass no more than 10%of
the total cover of the restoration area.
8.0 Alternatives Analysis
OSMP examined numerous design alternatives to avoid and/or minimize impacts while still achieving the
project's objectives. The following is a summary of the alternatives explored and their potential outcomes.
1. No action.
This option would eliminate the impacts described above. However,without constructing the bridge,the multiuse
path west of the creek would lack a connection to Chapman Drive Trail. Without redesigning the trailhead,horse
and handcycle use of the area is limited because of lack of trailer parking. For these reasons,the no action
alternative was rejected.
2. Creek Access
OSMP considered adding infrastructure to allow access to Boulder Creek but determined that 1) conditions along
this stretch of creek are not conducive to safe visitor use and 2)impacts to regulated areas were too great.
3. Larger Trailhead
OSMP considered enlarging the trailhead further with more parking spots and visitor amenities. However,this
option would have required additional impacts to the regulated buffer around the ephemeral drainage south of the
trailhead.
9.0 Regional and Federal Clearances
The proposed project requires clearances from Boulder County.
9.1 Boulder County
Portions of the project are located within the Boulder County and FEMA 100-year floodplain. OSMP has been in
contact with Kelly Watson,Floodplain Specialist with Boulder County Community Planning and Permitting,who
confirmed that the project will require an individual Floodplain Development Permit(FDP). OSMP will submit
an application for a floodplain development permit and a grading permit.
9.2 Federal Clearances
Boulder Creek is jurisdictional under the Clean Water Act. The project falls under Nationwide Permit 14—Linear
Transportation Project. The project will result in less than 0.1 acres of impact to Boulder Creek so no
Preconstruction Notification(PCN)is required.
6
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 17 of 37
The project is not located within Colorado Parks and Wildlife mapped occupied range or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service(USFWS) designated critical habitat for Preble's meadow jumping mouse. Habitat impacts from the
project are expected to be minimal and confined to the former homesite with no impacts to riparian trees or
shrubs. OSMP contacted the USFWS and staff confirmed the proposed project does not raise any concerns for
listed species or habitats.
7
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 18 of 37
W o
M
W O0°O W
V o°R o
C
r
W x oG
rc oo wp
J Z CO
W Q 2 w
u
Npz+VE m oY4 9Sg
pER
P"
p p— i
Cm w
a w w a mw$oE
o -
V ooN
LLoLLZ
I
m . m mggggIT. 8 $ J J d J d J J J 6 R R R A da
fiR
Y
nos
LL y
LLo oULL oS wmm 3 LL
w
m°$zrcwO mo xw w= 4pw
A wsaa_
E€ 1
jA oo
F;
a mpammmsH mNmh.mh
Z
1 s§E}
8
W Q
Z N
u rcwo W N 0
DwJaapoo9€ww=
o '-,; ._ o
Fw 3 awl€g w c=i w N W)
CO o<<MI. '. m ...3 soss wwwwa-.12M uLL 69 sf=izzR Q V F g w
QC a s z s <ms ms°—oemoowsa wwwwLLw wLLcc m x =k cap
Q
w
o0azo iz
z w
i 3 -
w om
0 3
G/'
mz ° oil oo
a '
a> iz J(.5 MOd 3OU
w ma img o 0 9dFrcW _ w z 3 a FzQ
rO o;0- o o
O3¢ r _
a3 o u3 _ U
W U o apz.z Eo o zoo mw I.:
z.- = EU = ° -m3
U '^r' o w.>rc'.g. rymo r3z 2.
z¢ __ a i; '
oozzzo- rc 'u5mi :E rc
m= -m biz ¢
w u
o m z rra an ¢E2gympwO2m° =w mFE w y€ rcp ,_rc
wq
a am grcww xoo° U
wu
Wy
S-
LL
2.iJrcQto i
tW€w $ag x
w
E
m
s W =o N = ewo 000wJ
3 pm
ui ro
UO
gyp
ao FE
U U3soZwzOoU
FmZWM°0 wWao_R Nogmzc Wmos
y
o
w
W W =W U
ZO
arch _ orc U d O
Q wrc m goaLL =oaw -°w_go .
o° ° z.
F
M. °
h =5 h
o
111 zzagezwziyvampO2,0x src ao a> rc a> zm >
3 '
o o' -
mrc S Ywrc ~
zwV=oW
z= _ - Q o w rca ' <
rc
Zrcorcw $wry m'a ozz zc 16
a
3£ a
marwww
w sowrcmo ozyww.20oO o3 au 3 ma
a.
os °w
S. .0
Q mw uw-t.'-,
wru mopw e.=01
w
Ei - rc E2 O
s
zo
s-
z'
Z.
u __
wnwz N
2. -
ya3smu ow—w Fo ¢ " o F° pz6wNz.l Iz diz.an
zgQOw _ °ggOWzo-w
m
2wj
e _ --
Ga -
u3lx -'.z.w °
z. rcaw 03
w °u"
q
a a6
Z
ao 0 2 Um3 W --gzg
wmm~
Oo ; _ 3m =J
W w Y w--
wI oS _ z o t wz wozoww€ _Vz oo rci 3 x 0 joo rc i
o y a,$-H °a mowz rc3rcaz V' Ko oo p w -
O o6 W_ 5 Wh F - '°'m o'a sorry -zd
x Sw o Q ¢3 i viF rc €w V O 0 ow w O xwOm
3y
z wi' o p - -=p o -U oN o o o E o 'g a3p boo ty v
amw _amm rc_rcm: .a<,mLLa f rcmrcmrcrcm3 I spa area m mm 8 rcrca F aH mom y am ww
U mawla 08§ ?off eo - iwz is - u. _
rcrc w3 gz
w$ uwwc a - ''
w -00> E
o orc
z za n°a
m¢ _.
o-zo wp oaLL
Hh, E <
y
w
wrc =€ rpm ozoo off
Ft= zFo
o
3J
z °
3x
a¢
N awl a owoo orcao _ €arcrc¢Qoarc Iz
gg<,o oNN <opo w-u<g
m3 P O
w>
pN _
u.
z'I0 50=p 'z' 'm€ - -¢
z
E wpm pd>>O
wRo wCSa$ - mQ _ Wz J =
how
mzz maF iyw - 5a w,3zE3wnaa
u
R o '_ __ O o w °wEIp.
g
m m= s z_>
w 2_o°a im wq
o < o W su is ww o so
rc -,
o
wa aw wwom,y
J po °W _p'
J go°k' Nn of ° z -wwza's3w o Ho
O NOEa boa -rc rc _ 3o rw " 0 wg axarc
11, zaoomo¢¢ 3zHzY _ rc wzo€ 10
wa NOR
o.
o
of mw
W3w zCLL yowm 4'rcLLia Buz rc$iLLo _ o¢a rca w =
3LLo2°a
0
o2g2 °Pm8w -= O oa¢w3 Z z°
s 2a v wg o
wwMow €wp _ - :w''
3p: - -w8 h o
o1
w a Rz' 5 FF p€rc H. _ -' '.rcrcw oo F za
rco>
O
o tLL aw i O - y "w mN ° _wos m o O3 ozw 'ww°a'w`.-'a -
zw ° O_wa O rc m am. a rc src=m 0Ou ° mo_ .hLLmrc rcmo.m ° ¢wm rco wmoLLwm °zm HM Qow8- WHW LL
o ¢ a3
w m mrc~ w w wm x
w H
O¢W
xKµwa woizx ku mailsaNs asnos aao slsaNawsoamnswvaou oonxwwnmla ueuma oonnuonc'+eyd45'.wimwi.piAttachment DItem 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 19 of 37
Y el a+Lel LY6uFdo0
bZbl1E 00'3D0'—Na—w x
SNOUVIAMI88H ONV q 06eL31s'adoa„IHIN66EL
J ON3EJ31'63iON1HN3N3E)
H731 tld131 O SNad N3d°
R 1
dtl3HllVdi 3AR10 NtlWdtlH n
PPO OfN SW3WIl000 NOIlONtlLSNOO ItlNId EZ2ZI60 3 vzi 3 s \
d NI—ino9dOAll0 d5
pU g ww Gmw w o
ws oB °off
W J=
w, _ V w 5 -Z. oi - : <
E ° o3wo3 w LLo oy s3 "LLB m
W h k'ak - zorc - Uw° o0o s03- " -
o°
wOa
LL
qqF
a m m mmm °°°°°°°° ° ww w ww wwm w¢ w 'x°xx ___x E zzz a as xa_ rcm
f1
a m m m m o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o w w w w w w w w w m w x x x _-_ E z z z o 0 o a o a a 6 E m m m
z5
w
p
pRd o0 o 3s
m
U wHEo9 ;=o33H jO az0wm°
wJ
I I I
I I I
I
I oo$ i i ®d Mi i• 88
I I LJ
w
m °
fir a ww _
o
a m Fxm: °° a 3 ""w=w =°o o t ' w
map 8„ HH iw°'o .o`
n-'
So<2 N w o wmooa - wJ
xFW=_ 0o _ yw o oH ga Npi w`=" a w=' <o pwg3m _z
g x'
a =%o maNao aw'ZO
h waO„ °o ° Qa a,=gw =o yc aa°w < saay axo!- w
N a oo'~`x
3= = 3w a N„m
mnsz"t--O<W a 3NN _ gip
o LL FAN u<aao«N F =m 'ws= wF w
aSw
A « LL m ohm° w 3 2. = F a 2za=aE m 3 0 06 00 ' a
3w< 00
w3 a_zo 2 '€ m-tea w
w=who a o '°w=. a >< c
Z
W. w oo m _o °€=a°o`-'3<amo m=°a a 1 o
o J;a_ Nw_ p 3z o
J ° - wg awa a'wo t5x __ z_a=-_ g yo" N`-U_R=m mrc - -pm g£
a< o€arc ai-mks>--oq - asom
m€
xax ztxV Z°YssFo5_ § - =1 wF - we oa $6a gym w o€
w _mow io $$ - o€aZwL`ia yf-m pF0 w w i
n ry zi
m
u $ °m
ca m
i= FD rc —"—u° O-Fm°>O a Y= ism
m =
an wy - - o
wo o wR<wow°go zz9 oo a ozw,z j
U °
3 „ o Q `zaw _ mow= NJFo€op 3wa xw -pwwwo - - U m --
Zo w
w _
w
m
o"=O
o3'a o-'wo«o3p8 w °
o 90 co
o; a O z s° _03sx
aaK o rFrc opamw m°
o pro ¢ £ o =1O ° £ m
oo°$ <` "
moo`=w ° - 09NN -offa wo w boa - - 0 3 y o i zoHoi° 3`= w <w - ' `m Eta°opo - N w - ja m° - -21 3E°ww xo _ a3wpo"
LLg p w< W8 ` _ 3w aW" wpo: Eoioo w "LLpa m
p _ p_ « o w w - °
o -
os iowF 'o£ -_ow2"- Uwa ow°tio °z -w SILL
Z ~ pw y3
WHO o rc
m =fir _a iro axw=:opo Nwrc -moo m
8Li-to€ o8m ww E - aka o smzw :aQa yawm€ono= °'3'
J"°"
g'w
j
o = — - _ €p ._ aF - -_'
63 o=s 3a ao 3 =W _m N 1. 0o o zd° w
w a°a am =°w 11w xm `_ " . m °
0. nx mam ` <
3 x aw °w
mF
z a
w o
w o o v
3Wpb az
a
5 rz € oaua g ry s 300
y O >_ _ —mp >i v°iw
LL _ °u F~att w
Fz R Oaa i — Ng1
x _ - _ ow - g °off w9 y19 8 -
S w °,0 o _ z g'z W o u "lz, o o
Qp6 3o 3 g 836° ° 2W wb o m saz
0 0-1Z.p= ego S °
m -p m3 0 3Nm= s
m
o w- x 3 0
o$ - w
Z how - _
H -s o xo m wo oz s oFwE Ty wp _ _ _w p 3 t w 0
a
z - <z oF$ `LLi K m 6 9oa Sw 0- - z ao oQ _ m ORzw
mix as w3 FJO ?' o 2H s Z
m y€ °m mm
zw
mp5 "9 i ao - who o ;°m w m J66
a wF - _ z z 0
O " - o€wu - - ms 3s rc >-
z
z U i
P.
3 - ou rc mm "-
Z -iM
LL _ -
w e
1N z m m xo =
o<
Ha & o oU 4 - z '`w= zaLL p °oLL w z <
y .r
wz,
q °
00 0 °om o
o z oLL Z o€ x x <Qz o o Wy'O° 3 rcOz F5 =z LLt ° o P zwz
ow LL ¢tea o yw w =rcw
5 m
W ww o 30
ov
ofi wa rc =E
w
5 4. oww € 3LLw°m -
w
a
W oo p
Z io ° w.9 .a aa= ° < m i ° 'a5 8 m°p < <aa <m a
m S ° = r
m P pa m m a
NVH13'OONON-OMO'S310N lYtl3N30 OOI J\531Id133HSWtl0\100ZZ-S68ESL-pOZ1S680SL13001tlN3NJ3LS\S1 3fONd\O-Wd 906SE EZOZILZI6
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 20 of 37
Voel Nlel 1V61+Rdo0
bZ608 00'3aaINN3NO3aB 8 w
NV-ld O
66 316'adoa„1H1a6a6
oW
SNOUIGNOO ONUSIX3
o ft R
r
H331 VU131 O °4: dtl3HllVdi 3AIUCI NtlWdtlHo4"'
OfN S nO0a N0110naLSN00 VNIH SMMO
dM-NnOwaNtl 30tld5 N3d0 a y 3 s v
a3alno—io
5,3y
3
og o36 ? s!
C wp Egon1N m 01 V
J
Il i l €I
II II
l i l i L1
I
I
I
I
3w
i_' ---__ _-
i ce
N
y z
r g
K
I v / v I vv 11 it
y
m 1
oooo
OV//—,
m wg
00
Nb 'OONON-0Ma'SNOIDUNO00NUS1X3001=31Hd 3HS\atl0\100ZZ56NG61 Z1568051\30a18N3NO3NU\S 3rO d\O-Nd Z1:65:EEZOVLM
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 21 of 37
Y el a+Lel TY6uFdo0
bw Zoa ya0a0',
3 0OM0tl^1HIIIHN
IN0S HOE 4
O
NHId dWM S WtlINWd3tlHI N I
ONV 1HI11NI'NOIlIlOW3 O
H731 VMJL31 GV3HllVdi 3AR0 N
arm Wr—NOOOHOOIVNM
mR
w s
fr,
d NItl1NOOWONtl 30tld5 N3d0 a y 3 s v _
H30lLIOSd0All0
ZO
J 6o8
qq
w
o '0 3o
0.
OR
z
J
of
I I
yl I
V
3
I.
o= 1.
F s
OE -
n-w
Z._ 1.
3 - -
o w
j w
Z.
W
Q
zn
O H0l\
o
16
ho
o
Z
3-VbOMO^L Hs 00 p -
10
NbHL3'OONON-OMO'dWMS T/I11NI ONtl Ntlld NOILlOW30 ZOL-\S31Id133HS\OVO\LOOZZ-S66ESLUOZ1S680SL13001tlN3NO3LS\S103fOLd\O-Wd Sl6SE EZOZILZM
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 22 of 37
Y el a+le11Y6uW
bZ40E 00'3001E1N3NO3aB 8 w M6431s'atloa„IHINs6Elo
NHId dWMS ldNld 1
o ft R
r
H331 VM131 R10Odtl3HTVdi3A NtlWdVHZ)
OHi'
OfN SW3Wn000 NOIlOnaLSN00ltlNld EZ2ZI60
SNatld NItl1N00W ONtl 30tld5 N3d0
a301n09 o-o
w I'
o M pig,
wJ
IIof
I I I
I I
yl I
3
s= \`• \\ \\ —
C
i/—r=r,'' \ ' cHnrmnN oiuv[ \\ ,>_f,. a e ecea/
I as
will
w
w u tl
Z
t
WHY EH9 MENT
1
I
i \
6MIN
L--o
VON
lit
og N33aod aaolnoa
1jIg
N1111J
Whzop ¢
NtlH13'OONON-0M0'-8ltMld W6-O 11d133HS\Qtl LWZZ-96NSLO=968SL\3001aN3NO3gS 103rOd\:0-Wd SL69:E EZ6ZIM
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 23 of 37
Y el wlel lY6uFdoO
OO
w,I '
3OOIElN3NO3bB x
oa yaa alOmbmlinllH f
Ste ! NHId 311S IINO
o ft R
r
H731 VM131 @10 NO °4: JV3HlIVdi 3AtlWdtlHPROSOfN —3-O0GNOIlOObLS lVNId EZ2ZI60
SNbtld NItl1NO0W ONtl 3JtldG
b3OlfIORdO m
Ftt
O
O o
OR
rp u
U' wuwEHg,-g -Z'oa3ym It° gEE°o py
o N
w
I I u
I
sail ®0i.ri i
III I
I w
3w
w
I ua
I
c' y
a
y
p>
wsw pso 0
H=o e
LL
o yg m o w s zSxo
w a
GNMMOR / OFFER
I /
N
ERE69OU
a Ow
lw
w
30 RRIGIR
WAY EASEMENT
I
u
Z.
a Z O rz N N33bJ b3O1OO5
Ua w
o o a
zw
o
0
0
mop °
w y z a 'a m mgo
R y LLWWw a
iw
w 3p
NVH13'OONON-OMON d3DSIIAI3M0-O\531Id133HS\OVO\100ZZ966ESIU=96N9L13OOItlN3NO3bS\S 3rOd\:0-Wd ZG6S:EEZOZI
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 24 of 37
Y el a+lel,Y6uFdo0
bZ40E O0'300—NO— a w
NH-ld O
6e 31s'atlGb„IHIN66E
S
W
30VNIVW1 4NV EJNl(]"E)
o ft R
r
H731 VMJL31 O GV3HllI 3AR1O NtlWdtlH
OHi'
arm SlN3W0000N0IlOn—OOItlNId EZ2ZI60
SNYtld NItl1N00WONtl 30tld5
d301NO9d ij
8pp°
a ym E
a°'
Z.
E E
W
Y a
J
Ilo n
w
I
w p"_ _
gTg
wu,
m
p1.zw
o1.
60, —
g Mgtylla_ e06o-• ) e _ . = a ,
i
a
W.
8
w
30 RIGHT OF
WAY
Z;
8,0
u
Ow
o N33b0 a3G,l10A
I`
Z.
Z.
womo
bF£p MdO1H0/b Ozopww
H.
oLL—imrcF
wzl
o= oo
zo dm v'izm
NtlH13'OON.OMO'—d 30tlNNd0ONtl ONl—SOL-O.11d133HS\Otl0\100ZZ-566ESLU0 96EE911300ltlN3NO3LS\S 3rO d%:O-Hd 1469:E EZOZM1ZM
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 25 of 37
Yael a+lel lY6uFd°O
bZbl1E OO'3001NN3NO— 8 w
6e 31s'atloa„IHIN66E
o
SllV130llnlO LOH331tlM131OR
dtl3Hlltli113 11O NtlWdtlH fOHi'
OfN SW3WIlO00 NOIlONtlLSNOO ItlNId EZ2ZI60
SNYtld NItl1Nf10W ONtl 30tld5 N3dO a y 3 s v _
tl30lfIOSd is
sa
30 J K
y Z
l
oG ° Z wg Co
Z.Vim° pS" '3npw eyG
wo'aw Nga
i
wao ono
30$ Z. o w
rco
Nag&' -z'
a a
no
LL s a awe
o
oag-
BIZ°emu,yzy v 3 .. p
ap
19
mNe
r
n -
gg
g Hai O
z e\ a XLLw
o O o w a'y
g 8a a z oaf N"p
Z.
F z
nz
s
o pip a°\V n
11m
U
Z.
I
W-
S
n
o\
am' Q11 w
o
mo 3w wa
yw
iar
w0 Z
a \\
Z
Qa FU OW
a°o
SRO
6 y`rc z
a
Z'a z.
oo
a °
z
NVH13'OONON-OMO S,Itl130 IIA13 W0O\S31Id133HSWtlO\100ZZ-S68gLlOM68E9113O01tlN3NO3LS\103rOd\:O-Wd5 9:S EZOZIM
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 26 of 37
Yael a+lel lY6uFEOO
bZ40E OO'3001E1ND-9
woa 4aala+lal rw++
64 31s'atl°a„IHIN66E
O OfN
SNYtlSd
llV13 0ll0tlntlWdl5dO
tlN
LO
3Hd O
R
H331tlM131 dtl3H N
WlONOONtl ItlNId 20
M-N....N
tllfO m
a y 3 s fv _
g'
so Iw,
m =
mmE
w LLmwwosH .pLLp ooF _
m 0 O Fr a mauomO rcp —
N
O
ED rcs a w Wz iW2 at a a x¢Og''m
swQQ o dam€Qo ws =ss° _o3E.o3LL SEE
M
m
w
g _
0.
Z s<
LL
3° d6 OHS w
a
w s
zz
N
1
Z.I
a
R.S.0 uw
h
6U
m
2 Iz
Izmrc
g
1- z
IIIIII 1.Z,LL°w
it
III
I
s Ww
o
Z,m
w
Z.
m =
L.
z
III—
u
a
z
I
3n0,0
NVH13'OONON-OMO S,Itl130 IIA13 W0 O\S31Id133HSW LOEZZ-S68gLl OM68E9113O01tlN3NO3LS\ 33—dVO WdL 9:S EZOZIM
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 27 of 37
Voel aNel W&iAdoO
OZ00000'3001UN3NO3aS w
os 31s'anoanlH ws oe SlIH1341021N00 a0NNOISOU3ONV3EVNIV24
H331 VM131 Qtl3HlItl13N20 NtlWdtlH
Nn000N011—SNO01-H L 0
SNand N-NNOW ONV 3 9 N3dO
gw
Ha
w
W
W uU
a W
w O u
w w
W w m
a
ww7
3a01 z 1. _
m
a
z
w m ° ww°
m s H Z. 3 do,
Ca w on p Zwn
twow U so w w° a F
sm w o
cz
s W goO
sa w o
J z
V3o01ao
a a U
W II I 3
d 5
O \ \ w ioQ ULL
LL
i
o_ Q w.
10
w
mz
yes F
m
m _
a
o gm U
j
a O h
xx Sa i
o
m H
3 P sgzNe $
Z.
8 ; jp
O 5I Ej SwS x o'
v
m
3
w
d
3 0
w
3dOlS UZ
w oy 3 $ ao fig
U
gI
XX
p
a ns
6
w $
III =
m
oIIIw st 3 m e
sa II ww Sabxe
a F
3dOlS
m C3mV z
NVH13'0ONON-O $11n13010a1N003xOLOS=311d133HS\O LOOZZ-96NGLl OZ156Ne L130018N3NO3N8\ 3—d%0-Wd[S-SSZOZNZI6
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 28 of 37
Voel aNel W&iAdoO
OZOOB OO'3001UN3NO3HS w M
004315'OtlOtl 1lIH INS OfI SlIH1341021N00
a
cD.
NOISOU3 ONV 3EVNIV24
H331 VM131 Qtl3HlItl13N20 NtlWdtlH
Nn000N011—SNO01-H f 0
SNtltld N-NNOW ONV 3 9 N3dO
g s
o°ay a w =w
3 x w= p
p$
UsZ-
s _ QW o
6 w - w Jm aoxE
o= m oxWs=¢
ZW_= myaow
o` € who a":Wgwomo<
o wwoowp
MM H-MvdLLtz my N
U
W
g ygy
S gp
U
z
U
4T E x 4 w
a
a
Ie
d .
E
iai
NVH13'OONON-O $11tl1301OH N0038OLOS=311d133HS\O LOOZZ-S6NGLl OZ 6Ne L130OI8N3NO3N8\S 3rO d\0-Wd BS:65:ffZOZNZl6
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 29 of 37
F 00'ap nog S s 1 E z(L
w a S>I2]Vd NIViNnovi a.
W w aNV DOVdS N3dO 2i3ainos O Am li$$ ¢
LL Wmos =Wo A s 'g oW J
o _°:fr w -_ db 3HI1b 211 '2ia N dWd dH3 - $5o
1.
maPa.
Qo o ff wm LL
z
m mLLLL "off 5= =g o30 w sa oo
8 Yy PH °'aom H j z a o< < o w H,
sssoIZSSS oss2sssaoo2
Nyy »yH yyHy y I a a SF ow, w w=a° _ ff<
E81-
y -
mse
p = a° § a_ 3 os oho ow M,
c —
o 000 0000 000
I e M52 62 o =8 w= oasue= W= x _ - eNm aswwHU"
w s zo4 w zo zme° o
a i ° o
3N s s yQ -F w¢ m i w Eta st °m„
g c BwNoy 55 0
3,"° z z4w ow o oo i 3 9 m°m
eo=2 - o?g Z w NodW
s
o m No¢ w ow N' z9o g o Boa axe <w wg g g= g Ns
m
T 8S j
Y
gww8ss =€ o ¢ os NNo ° w =3 -, 12 o
5 "' F. << E w o sw °
h s $ --°5 <58 ° _ °°: o ° z O =3 «3 oo ig 3°'a Sa y W eo s o amo 3m c oyo ono Qy w= w =93w" g s o
s
o
E- swo mew =4 o _LLo„ E ao _> ova ohs¢ so8.ssoo oF39 oo bw
y
5 <°' tiEa
r' - a o
Szlzo
o °mmBNg a = s = ° y No eo >_ ¢sN aw a two w oN _ wmSamud--3 3 W ° ° rya 'm ao 3°az 3mya ow rca¢ a a f` tz w
8go Fww axzw= m °m °
g so s w wow 8 ` w5m °8 w
o = o w O O O O O
w aa o a 5oo g= LL o a 2os Ng e mam o °a
Y i Y i A i • _,_-_; ;_ -?_%__-_-_- -_ o ELeo
N
1 \ ymeb \19/
vI I
I ,
4 1 1 i / N i
1
OVO
mow!_wl7awa a,Gp
i
1
O
1
1
1
1
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 30 of 37
F
a° 00'ap nog
W a SNNVd NIViNnon a
N
u1mv 3OVdS N3dO 2jgm oa O Am z O
zoos e w a
z
Jc _ fr db 3H11b 211 'Ia N dWd dH3 - $5og w
k[k W
02„oAc _uVQUmn Uf mn
cannot
ffi
r—o
a Ism aoo 0
S g 3o N - yw sit H a
a wl lot to
wH
9
x e E o o w
I Iasi p
to 'a 8=°° s 1 s9
F '
awza k oim zw howwm gn ow ws o in ull 4
o w ¢ " ow$w 1 s <
2 mw °'a o" z J°°y'a J`s' $ ¢wO
u/i w w yo 3 w — 4¢i olun° o "s°[ r
z
w Fo oFa°
m
hHo dhi g
p w
a s 9"
LL w w a£ JF o s
rs=
ag" y
Hiss"wV wO iw z yH r u H No goS .
S&im aSww oSwo ° w E4 w H 9
wh oH Eg °o H 2 5m
HH
s L w
w
w°
s x=
s«
o ova
I
Qam3 gs w ooEEF
i
111....
11 ....WOMEN o
P
OOFCFA
1 111 10
f'a
FE P/ /
HNf
HORSE TRAILER PARKING
s , /
in
3 APPROXIMATE STREAM EDGE d
a
i
i
i
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 31 of 37
W w; U s
00'jepinog a w
w S>I2]Vd NIViNnovi o
ox INV DOVdS N3dO 2jgm os O Am N a M
LL zog moo S BFwy3 ¢ Jfr = 11db3H1VN-L 'NCI NVWdVH3 - $5 o
g
U azoO
n UH ma
n laml J
ap 3 4
mk'
z
3<
I
L
1i Q 8a
o
Yll
IQI L
111 11 11I
IIII 111II I!',1i.
Q - L
I fi IIIII
1=IKIIII=1I FI-F11=III=111 1111-
p
s IIII a
g 11111111E II=III IIIIIII w
v 111=III-IIFIII-II'
a
FIIHII=ILFIIF x m wwa wa v
1 11=III-IIII' U a
w wTKIII=III=IIKIIF 8
1
1 11=III-III= z 3
e11111=III
yPH—
ONI
IIFi W i
12aII=II=Q m az
s KITH ILII z w w
o v 111 111 T1=1
s 1- 11111 s LL
II
IIII- Sm
1.H1s 1ze o
I I ova
es
I I S o3w I
w
m3 8
IllFIL a
g w
O 1 Fw
w 1-11 f x III= a
o.s IIII Y III=1oll
ry z 0'
oo
1=1 1=1
z III-I 1 III1 f xH4I I I-III-I
Y
a III-III-I m
I-III=III= m F
III-III-I
I-III=III-
e ': 111=III=1
oLLyS
o M coFI3IIIoeoJ
ullllo so
i°3 III
m z III=III -III LL
II I J I 1=1 I 1=1 11=1 11= mIIIIImySsaLLIII=TIz III -IIIitIIIII ¢ z pJII
M II I w
j
III— LL o w m wIII-IIIIIIIF 4'
III-Ill w Q._, w III= w w
HIS I1=1I x 11_r_ cr
u-11= Y II—III s. I C)
o III-11 i II-1il- o
r .IIIIIIIIII l-IiI- " ii i 1Tu
a wwm
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 32 of 37
w w; U s
C Oo'jepinog w
w a SNi ]Vd NIViNnovi Oil N
Wpm w g INV DOVdS N3d0 2i3ainos O Am a O
J azGos -
8 S 88wg3 ¢LL
zw
db 3H- 1b 211 '2ia N dWd dH3 °
O oZlw s gyk@_
0
Fo _
gym gpp"a 3 ZVQOnUfmn
n
3E`ml J
h
co z.
11zo
LLww o of b > m sr wi
w ` oY m
N
wo 0og g w
o u ?wwo uzo£s x ¢ Z s
Zffi
o128
y goo o= 3 H s w
8 s wgs ea o II'
ogga `
a g9gw gaa III
o -LL
E
h
II111 11 1
11111-E W
3
F
x
0
boa
9 li s
I
so' oNib J
N
wPs F
III I'
m mew 11=III. ¢ III—II
Z
1 k1'S.
maeS
x
111
Qeyotiogmi
a
o a eoyao ¢¢ s
Sod
oa'e IF
m III W 3=0 a¢e.a3 " o w 'H
III=x m<w ° =MEas8zssezyo ¢_m ° II m boo 3 aim y 'z o °
sa €o ow Nx3 a601 90
w. 'o-wLL°oox
e
8IToogs¢MagoE€ wo =¢ g sw
O
x
w:
ah 3w, may
uE"sso '= Ey Z,
N, oo O
o w
ma3
m a m
o NmsnNz y HHHH.H.H .s- tHllmhi Hsax
i o a-a g of°po 6G soioo
II G
II i.
II1L a
1III-
j111-
E lllllllk =¢w
w o
g` m -w--------------o aso
7 Imll w
a fm Ill O
s g6 mah e m m III III
oL As
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 33 of 37
w w; U s
U g Q
C oo'japinog S s,e` 1 E g® w
w S>I2]Vd NIViNnovi Oil C
Wpm w g INV DOVdS N3dO 2i3ainos O Am a O
J <Z os N°x
LL
zWpw
db 3H- 1b 211 '2ia N dWd dH3
Fo _
gym gpgp"a 3 ZVQOnUfmn
n
3E`ml g
3S
III—III— III=1 I r
I I=1 11=111=1 11=1 I I m
1=1 1=1I-1 1=1
sho¢w
zIII—OIIIIIIIwe
III q 22 zo
11=III=III=1I1= 1I1=
1I1=1I1=1' z
a
F
8 pm z
LU
o OU
III=III=11—i O
w
I' w w
11=11= 11=
of
I111111111111—' w z
1=1I1='m 0
III—II
IIIIIIIIRIP
III—II
IIIIIIIII
IIIIIIIII
1=1 1=III—II
IIIIIII
IIIIIII w
H
III—I
sir-
o°
III=1
IIIIIII u
IIIIIII w yam
s
Jw
IIIIIIII 9F¢ O
1=III: ow m
II1= m w
Illlllf w' 11- U
U)
Ilillllil s<s ss IIIII_
IIIIIIIII
III—I I I
I—III=1
IIIIIIIIIII,-LU
III=III= III II O
z
III III=1ii
III;
N
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 34 of 37
Atachment E
BRC Section 9-3-9 (e) (3) “Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permit Application Review”
Criteria:
Criteria for Review: For an activity requiring conditional use or standard review, the
applicant shall demonstrate that the stream, wetland or water body permit application
meets the following criteria:
A. Criteria for all zones: In all zones, the following criteria apply:
(i) Any activity requiring conditional use or standard review shall not
result in a significant change to the hydrology affecting the stream,
wetland or water body. Percolation of storm runoff on-site through
vegetated swales, permeable paving materials or other similar methods
to slow and clean runoff being discharged directly into the wetland,
stream or water body may be required as part of the permit.
The proposed project has no impacts to site hydrology.
(ii) Minimization: The applicant shall demonstrate that the activity is
designed and located to minimize direct or indirect impacts to the
adjacent wetland, stream or water body.
The project considered design alternatives for the site and this design was
selected as the one that best meets the project goals, while minimizing the
impacted area. The trailhead improvements impact a small section of the
outer buffer area and have been placed as far from the regulated zone as the
site will allow. The replacement bridge includes temporary impacts to the
wetland and inner buffer areas, but no permanent impacts to the wetland
area.
(iii) Mitigation: If required, the applicant shall demonstrate that
unavoidable direct and indirect impacts to vegetation, pervious surface
or hydrology affecting the adjacent stream, wetland or water body can
be successfully mitigated through design of the activity or by
compensating for the impact.
The project has proposed mitigation for impacts to the buffer areas through
enhancement of approximately 3,200 square feet of mostly inner buffer area
south of the trailhead, path and proposed fence that can successfully mitigate
the impacts of the activity.
(iv) Restoration of Temporary Impacts: The applicant shall demonstrate
that direct, temporary impacts to a wetland, stream water body, or
buffer area will be successfully restored according to the requirements
in subsection (f) of this section.
The project proposes that temporary impacts to Wetland, Inner Buffer and
Outer Buffer areas be restored in place with approved seed mixes.
(v) Application of Best Management Practices: The applicant shall
demonstrate compliance, at a minimum, with all applicable city rules
concerning best management practices as described in chapter 9-16,
"Definitions," B.R.C. 1981.
Section 9-16“Definitions” B.R.C. defines best management practices as
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 35 of 37
Atachment E
economically feasible conservation practices, and land and water
management measures that avoid or minimize adverse impacts to the
chemical, physical, or biological characteristics of wetlands. These practices
may be further described in rules promulgated by the city manager, which
may be amended from time to time, pursuant to Chapter 1-4, "Rulemaking,"
B.R.C. 1981. Such practices include, without limitation, avoiding wetlands
whenever practicable; controlling soil loss; reducing water quality
degradation; appropriate use of native wetland plant material; and
minimizing the impacts on hydrologically connected surface and ground
water and on the plants and animals that it supports. The rules presently used
are "City of Boulder Wetlands Protection Program: Best Management
Practices" adopted July, 1995; and "City of Boulder Wetlands Protection
Program: Best Management Practices -Revegetation Rules" adopted July,
1998. (Wetlands).
The proposed project will conform with the city rules concerning best
management practices. Compliance with the Wetland Protection Program:
Best Management Practices has been required as a condition of the Stream,
Wetland and Water Body Permit
B. Criteria for the Outer Buffer Zone: In the outer buffer zone, the following criteria
shall apply:
(i) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(3)(A) of this section.
The criteria analysis for Section (e)(3)(A) is provided above.
(ii) Impervious surface coverage: Any new building or attached structure,
expansion of an existing building or attached structure, new surfacing or
expansion of an existing surface that would result in a cumulative total
of twenty percent or more impervious surface in the outer zone on the
property shall provide mitigation according to the requirements in
subsection (f) of this section for the loss of pervious surface.
The project does not propose an expansion of more than 20% of the
impervious surface area in the outer buffer.
C. Criteria for the Inner Buffer Zone: In the inner buffer zone, the following criteria
shall apply:
(i) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(3)(A) of this section.
The criteria analysis for Section (e)(3)(A) is provided above.
(ii) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(3)(B) of this section.
The criteria analysis for Section (e)(3)(B) is provided above.
(iii) Channel bank protection or stabilization shall utilize, to the extent
feasible, techniques that involve landscaping with appropriate native
plants rather than rock or artificially hardened structures.
The project does not include bank protection or stabilization.
(iv) All new plant material adjacent to wetlands or water bodies or along the
banks of a stream shall be consistent with all applicable city rules
concerning best management practices as described in chapter 9-16,
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 36 of 37
Atachment E
"Definitions," B.R.C. 1981. Mitigation monitoring for restoration
projects may be required by the city manager.
The proposed restoration plan includes native seed mixes in accordance with
the City of Boulder Wetland Protection Program Best Management Practices
Revegetation Rules. Five years of mitigation monitoring has been required as
a condition of the Stream, Wetland and Water Body Permit.
(v) "Vegetation removal - major" shall only be allowed to prevent noxious
weed infestation, provide for native habitat restoration or for other
permitted projects. Major removal of vegetation shall be mitigated
within the inner buffer according to the requirements in subsection (f) of
this section.
The project does not include “Vegetation removal – major”.
(vi) New steps, paths or other minor access to or over a stream on private
property will be permitted if there is no more than one access on an
individual property, the path or steps are designed to have minimal
impact to the wetland, stream or water body, and the path and the area
of impact does not exceed four feet in width.
The project does not include new access on private property.
D. Criteria for the Wetland, Stream or Water Body: In the wetland, stream, or water
body, the following criteria shall apply:
(i) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(3)(A) of this section.
The criteria analysis for Section (e)(3)(A) is provided above.
(ii) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(3)(B) of this section.
The criteria analysis for Section (e)(3)(B) is provided above.
(iii) The provisions of Subparagraph (e)(3)(C) of this section.
The criteria for Section (e)(3)(C) are provided above.
(iv) Replacement or repair of an existing fence shall be generally in the same
location and not result in additional impacts to the wetland, stream, or
water body.
The project does not replace existing fences.
(v) Utility line or drop structure maintenance or repair shall not impact the
existing functions of the wetland, stream, or water body.
The project does not include repairs to utility lines or drop structures.
(vi) Activities conducted solely for the purpose of removing stream sediment
shall not alter the flood capacity as shown on the adopted floodplain
maps. Vegetated channel bottoms shall be restored and stabilized.
Removal of sediment is not proposed in the project.
Item 4C - 38474 Wetland Permit Application Page 37 of 37
C I T Y O F B O U L D E R
PLANNING BOARD INFORMATION ITEM
TO: Planning Board
FROM: Brad Mueller, Director Planning & Development Services
Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Senior Manager
DATE: February 6, 2024
SUBJECT: South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Project and Annexation
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this item is to update the Planning Board on the South Boulder Creek Flood
Mitigation Project (the “project”) being developed by the city’s Stormwater and Flood
Management Utility department (the “flood utility”), and associated proposed annexation to
facilitate its construction, operations, and maintenance. This item is for informational
purposes only and does not require Planning Board action at this time.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Project
The South Boulder Creek (SBC) Flood Mitigation Project is intended to protect life and safety
by addressing flooding in the area known as the West Valley. There are an estimated 600
structures and 3,500 people in the South Boulder Creek floodplain within city limits. Over the
last 80 years, South Boulder Creek has had six significant flood events, with overtopping of
US 36 happening in 1969 and 2013.
The South Boulder Creek Major Drainageway Plan was approved by City Council in 2015.
The plan includes three phases with the first phase being a regional detention facility upstream
of US 36 on and near the property commonly referred to as “CU South.”
The South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Project will protect approximately 2,300 residents
and 260 structures from a 100-year flood (1% annual chance of occurring) on South Boulder
Item 5A - SBC Flood Mitigation Project and Annexation Page 1 of 5
Creek. Staff have been working collaboratively with the property owners, including the
University of Colorado–Boulder, city Open Space and Mountain Parks (OSMP), and the
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT). The project has completed a conceptual
alternatives analysis, preliminary 30% design, and is nearing completion of a 60% design. The
design includes a dam and flood storage that requires use of city-owned land adjacent to US
36 for the construction of a floodwall and spillway. It is scheduled to begin construction
starting in late 2024. See Attachment A for an overview of the project. More information on
the proposed design can be found on the project website. A design update was also presented
to the Open Space Board of Trustees (OSBT) at their October 11, 2023, meeting.
The project requires formal transfer of 2.2 acres of city open space to utilities for flood
mitigation purposes. The land will need to be transferred using the OSMP disposal process,
which requires approval from OSBT and City Council.
Proposed Annexation
Additionally, and in parallel with the disposal, the city is pursuing annexation of 4.1 acres of
OSMP property that is currently outside the city limit to be utilized for the flood project
features adjacent to US 36 (application LUR2024-00001 for 5600 Table Mesa Rd). The total
area of the proposed annexation is approximately 27.4 acres and will include the permanent
location of the floodwall and spillway, a temporary construction access area, and adjacent US
36 right-of-way (see Figure 1). Annexing this area into the city will facilitate more efficient
construction and on-going operations and maintenance of the project features.
Land may be considered for annexation to the city if the annexation would comply with state
annexation statutes and the policies of Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). The
Figure 1: Proposed Annexation Site Context
Table Mesa Dr
Foothills Pkwy
S Boulder Rd
Item 5A - SBC Flood Mitigation Project and Annexation Page 2 of 5
proposal must be reviewed for compliance with the Colorado state statutes of 31-12-101, et
seq. C.R.S., BVCP policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth
Requirements, and 1.17 Annexation, and other applicable ordinances of the city. If a property
is annexed, zoning will be established consistent with the goals and land use designations of
the BVCP.
The BVCP provides a framework for annexation and urban service provision within the city.
Specifically, Policy 1.17(h). states that publicly owned properties in Area III are allowed to be
annexed if they are intended to remain in Area III and will require less than less than a full
range of urban services, or are being included in city jurisdiction for health, welfare and safety
reasons.
If a property is annexed, zoning will be established according to the land use designation in
the Land Use Map of the BVCP. Per Section 9-2-18 of the land use code, zoning of annexed
land or land in the process of annexation shall be considered an initial zoning and shall be
consistent with the goals and land use designations of the BVCP. The annexation ordinance
may include the zoning ordinance for the annexed property.
The city-owned land is currently designated as Open Space – Acquired (OS-A), and portions
of the US 36 right-of-way near the Foothills Parkway interchange are designated as Parks,
Urban and Other (PK-U/O), and Public/Semi-public (PUB), which anticipates continued use
for open space, park, flood control, or other public infrastructure purposes. The proposed
zoning will be Public (P) for its exclusive use as public infrastructure for the flood mitigation
project. The proposed P zoning district is described in the B.R.C. as “Public areas in which
public and semi-public facilities and uses are located, including without limitation,
governmental and educational uses.” Upon Annexation, the property will be designated as
Area III-Annex.
PROCESS AND TIMELINE
An information item regarding the project and open space disposal request occurred at
OSBT’s January 17 meeting. A link to the staff memo for this meeting can be found here, and
a video recording of the meeting is available here. Additionally, an overview of the flood
utility and key project updates were provided during the January 25 City Council Study
Session (memo link, video link).
A joint public hearing with OSBT and City Council regarding the disposal is scheduled for
February 22. OSBT deliberation and action on the disposal will occur at its March 13
meeting. City Council deliberation and action is scheduled for the March 21 meeting.
Annexations also involve two public hearings. The first is conducted by the Planning Board,
who will make a recommendation to the City Council whether or not the annexation should be
approved, and the terms, conditions, and zoning that should be applied. City Council then
holds a second public hearing before making their determination.
This information item regarding the project and annexation request is being presented to you,
Planning Board members, on February 6. A public hearing, deliberation, and action on the
Item 5A - SBC Flood Mitigation Project and Annexation Page 3 of 5
annexation is scheduled for the March 5 Planning Board meeting. A public hearing and
council consideration and action on the annexation will take place during the same March 21
meeting as the open space disposal.
NEXT STEPS
As noted above, city staff are currently reviewing the annexation application for compliance
with state statutes, BVCP policies, and other local codes. At the February 15 City Council
meeting, council will consider 1st Reading of the annexation ordinance and associated
resolution establishing a final public hearing date of March 21. Planning Board will hold a
public hearing and consider the annexation proposal on March 5.
If you have any questions on the proposed annexation, please contact:
Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Senior Manager
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – South Boulder Creek Flood Mitigation Project Overview
Item 5A - SBC Flood Mitigation Project and Annexation Page 4 of 5
U.S.
3
6
S. Boulder Rd
South Boulder CreekViele ChannelDry Creek Ditch No. 2Outlet Works
Spillway
Dam Embankment
DetentionExcavation
ExistingCU Levee
PUB
OS-O
PK-U/O
S Loop Drive Modifications
Upper BearCreek DitchS. Boulder andBear Creek DitchTable Mesa Dr.
H
w
y
9
3
Ecological Restoration Area
P:\16134 - South Boulder Creek\Engineering\GIS\Land Disposal\OSMP Oct 2023 Memo\Figure 1 - Project Components.mxd±
0 800 1,600400
Feet
PLAN OF PROJECT
COMPONENTS
October 2023
SOUTH BOULDER CREEK
REGIONAL DETENTION
PROJECT
PROJECT NO. 16134 Figure 1
CU Boulder South
Boundary
OSMP Land
Restoration Area
Item 5A - SBC Flood Mitigation Project and Annexation Page 5 of 5
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD INFORMATION ITEM
MEETING DATE: February 6, 2024
AGENDA TITLE
Information Item: Boulder Municipal Airport Community Conversation Update
REQUESTING DEPARTMENT / PRESENTERS
Transportation & Mobility
Natalie Stiffler, Director
John Kinney, Boulder Airport Senior Manager
Allison Moore-Farrell, Senior Transportation Planner
Planning
Brad Mueller, Director
Kristofer Johnson, Comprehensive Planning Manager
Kathleen King, Principal City Planner
OBJECTIVE
Share an update on the Boulder Municipal Airport Community Conversation project.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This Information Item provides an update to City Council regarding the Boulder
Municipal Airport Community Conversation. The report summarizing the Airport
Community Conversation is provided in Attachment A.
The City of Boulder (city) engaged in a community focused process to understand
aspirational goals and desired outcomes for the future operation and/or development of
the Boulder Municipal Airport (BDU). This process stems from recommendations in
Item 5B - Update on Boulder Airport Community Conversation Page 1 of 4
policy 6.23 in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, increased tensions between the
airport user community and the broader Boulder community, the need to improve airport
facilities, and preparation for a potential future Airport Master Plan Update. The City of
Boulder, along with a consultant team, conducted community conversations with
stakeholders and developed a range of potential long-term scenarios for the future of the
airport site. This engagement process and resulting high-level scenario analysis is
intended to provide a better understanding of the desired future for BDU for city
leadership and City Council.
FISCAL IMPACT
When the project team presented to City Council in August 2023, City Council requested
additional legal and financial analysis to better understand potential future scenarios for
the Boulder Municipal Airport. The project team is in the process of performing this
analysis and expects to share with City Council in Q3 2024.
BACKGROUND
The city owns and operates BDU, which is a general aviation airport that offers business,
private, and recreational aviation services to the city and surrounding communities and
supports emergency aviation services as needed.
From December 2022 – September 2023, the project team held a variety of community
engagement activities to better understand the aspirations of impacted stakeholders,
residents, and traditionally underserved communities. The community engagement
activities and events conducted by the project team are outlined in Table 1: Schedule of
Engagement Events, and summaries of community input from these activities are
provided in the attached report.
Table 1: Schedule of Engagement Activities
Engagement Activity Date/Date Range
In-Depth Interviews December 2022 – March
2023
City Council Presentation January 12, 2023
Community Working Group (CWG) 1 March 14, 2023
CWG BDU Airport Tour March 15, 2023
Questionnaire 1 April 6 – May 4, 2023
Public Open House 1 April 11, 2023
CWG Lunch Gathering at Airport April 12, 2023
CWG 2 April 13, 2023
Vista Village Bilingual Community
Meeting
April 19, 2023
San Lazaro Bilingual Community
Meeting
April 24, 2023
CWG Virtual Gathering May 31, 2023
CWG 3 June 7, 2023
Item 5B - Update on Boulder Airport Community Conversation Page 2 of 4
Engagement Activity Date/Date Range
Public Open House 2 July 18, 2023
CWG 4 July 20, 2023
Questionnaire 2 July 12 – August 2, 2023
Vista Village Bilingual Community
Meeting
August 22, 2023
City Council Presentation August 24, 2023
San Lazaro Bilingual Community
Meeting
August 29, 2023
CWG 5 September 12, 2023
Throughout the engagement process, community members expressed a desire for near-
term action items to have a likely time frame of 0-5 years and could be implemented
independently from actions considered in the long-term scenarios. Figure 1: Community
Input and Feedback Process details how community input was synthesized at each step
of the project process to craft both near-term actions and long-term scenarios.
Figure 1: Community Input and Feedback Process
The project team then evaluated these scenarios based on how they align with city goals,
as outlined in the Sustainability, Equity, and Resilience Framework. The report details
the potential economic, environmental, and social impacts of each long-term scenario.
Item 5B - Update on Boulder Airport Community Conversation Page 3 of 4
NEXT STEPS
The project team will clarify any questions City Council has regarding the process, the
final report and the requested legal and financial analysis. Later in 2024, staff will request
direction from City Council on next steps for the future of Boulder Municipal Airport.
ATTACHMENTS
A.Boulder Airport Community Conversation Final Report (link)
Item 5B - Update on Boulder Airport Community Conversation Page 4 of 4