2 - Draft Minutes - Planning Board - February 5, 2009
CITY OF BOULDER
PLANNING BOARD ACTION .MINUTES
February 5, 2009
1777 Broadway, Council Chambers
A permanent set of these MinLites 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.houidercolorado. ov/
PLANNING; BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT
KC Becker
Elise Jones
Willa Johnson, Chair
Bill Holicky
Adrian Sopher
PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT
Phil Shull
Andrew Shoemaker
STAFF PRESENT:
Jeff Arthur, Engineering Review Manager
David Gehr, Assistant City Attorney
Katie Knapp, Civil Engineer 11
Robert Ray, Land Use Review Manager
Uhr(s 1~~1c s~huk, Planner 1
Susan Honse, Administrative Specialist
Elaine McLaughlin, Senior Planner
I. CALL TO ORDER
Chair, W. Johnson, declared a quorum at 6:06 p.m. and the following business was
conducted.
2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
On a motion by A. Sopher, seconded by K. Becker, the Planning Board approved ( 3- 0, A.
Shoemaker, P. Shull, and E. Jones absent W. Johnson abstained) the Oct.] 6, 2008,
Plamung Board minutes as amended.
On a motion by A. Sopher, seconded by K. Becker. the Planning Board approved (4-0, A.
Shoemaker, P. Shull, anti I?. Jones absent) the Nov. 6, 2008, Planning Board minutes as
amended..
3. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
None.
4. DISCUSSION OF DISPOSITIONS, PLANNING BOARD CALL-UPS
None.
5. ACTION ITEMS
A. Public hearing and consideration Public hearing and consideration of a floodplain
development permit to construct a fence within the flood conveyance zone of Bluebell
Canyon Creek at 1235 Mariposa Ave.(case number LUR2008-00103), as set forth in
Section 9-3-4, "Regulations Governing the Conveyance Zone" and Section 9-3-6,
"Fooodplain Development Permits," Boulder Revised Code (B.R.C.) 1981.
Case Manager: Katie Knapp
Applicant/Owner: Beth Pommer/ Richard Geesaman
Staff Presentation
K. Knapp presented the item to the board.
Appellant
Joseph N. de Raismes, Atty. Reg. No. 2812, Caplan and Earnest LI.C, 1800 Broadway,
Boulder, CO 80302
Applicant
David J. Love, P.E., 800 Jefferson Ave Ste I3, Louisville, 80027 spoke on behalf of Beth
Pommer.
Beth Pommer, 750 Lincoln Place, Boulder 80302
Public Hearing
Tom Winter, 501 13"' St, Boulder, 80302
Board Discussion
A. Sopher asked if the two foot height, as the increase in the flood level for a 100 year
event corresponds to the width of that hatched area.
K. Knapp clarified that it was not a two foot increase in the flood height. She said the
depth of the water and the location of the fence are roughly about two feet.
L. Jones stated that an earlier comment was made that this is a precedent setting decision
and asked for staff's perspective on the comment if this was an unusual or rare decision.
K. Knapp stated this is standard decision on this type of project in order to obtain
approval for a floodplain development pen-nit. The applicant is asked to present findings
from a professional engineer, who renders a decision about the impacts in the floodplain.
If the decision is in favor, staff will review the data presented and may or may not draw
the same conclusion of compliance.
E. Jones asked if staff has made similar decisions on similar requests.
K. Knapp replied, yes.
W. Johnson asked if there is an issue with a moving a fence so the property owners do
not have access to their property.
D. Gehr stated that it is not a criterion that is addressed in the floodplain regulations and
further stated that property owners at times will use a fence to delineate property lines. In
this particular case the owners are requesting to delineate a property line.
K. Knapp said the applicants have met the requirements set forth in the code and further
stated that not enough evidence has been presented by the appellant to refute staff's
decision.
A. Sopher questioned the interpretation of B.R.C. 1981, Chapter 9-16.
K. Knapp explained the fence does not increase the flood hazard and therefore, is not an
"obstruction."
A. Sopher questioned whether or not the fence with debris was considered an
"obstruction". However, he could support the motion on the basis of the fence not
increasing a flood hazard. He further- stated that the floodplain regulations were
developed to protect property and property owners. He said if there was sufficient
evidence presented indicating this was in fact an obstruction he would have voted in
support of the appellant. I le stated the applicant has mct the burden of proof.
Motion
K. Becker moved and A. Sopher second the motion (o approve that Plannine Board
~D?J rave the floodI Iil_dcVelo pnient permit attached to the memorandum as Attachment
C and adopt the memorandum as the findings of fact, (5-0 A. Shoemaker and P. Shull
absent.
W. Johnson recused herself from this portion of the meeting due to a conflict based on
her participation on the Board of Historic Boulder, A. Sopher agreed to Chair this
portion of the meeting.
B. Public hearing and consideration of a recommendation to City Council on an
ordinance amending Title 9, "Land Use Code," B.R.C. 1981 to permit the City
Manager to modify the rear yard setback for a principal building from 25 feet to eight
feet along the alley of a property proposed for a subdivision into two lots at 800
Arapahoe, if the house commonly called the "Hannah Barker House" is designated as
an individual land mark, and setting forth related details within.
Case Manager: Elaine McLaughlin
Applicant/.Property Owner: West Arapahoe. LLC and Chris C. Maurer
Staff Presentation
E. McLaughlin presented the item to the board.
Public Hearing
None.
Disclosure to Board and Public
F,. Jones disclosed to the board and the public that although her residence is located at
716 Marine St., Boulder, which is within 600 ft. of the property that is being discussed,
that she would be objective in her deliberation.
W. Johnson was recused from this item.
Motion
B. Holieky moved that the Planning Board recommend that City Council approve the
special ordinance.
K. Becker seconded the motion.
A. Sopher offered a friendly amendment to the motion referring to Lot 2B of the staff
memo item 513, Page 18, Section 2, which shall read "The City Council authorized the
city manger to permit the modification to the rear yard setback requirement for Lot 213
for principal buildings to be decreased from 25 feet to eight feet.
B. Holicky and K. Becker accepted the friendly amendment.
Final (lluliun
On a motion by R. Ilolicky, seconded by K. Recker, the Planning) Board reconlmendcd
(4-0. A. Shoemaker and I'. Shull a)sent, W..lnhnst►n rccusc(l) that City ('ouncil
approve the special ordinance: amending Title 1). '.Land Usc Code.- I3.R.C. 199 1 te► permit
the City Manager to modify the rear yard setback Im- it principal building from 25 legit to
.sight Ice:t along the alley of a ortlxrtyproposed for a subdivision into two lots at 800
Arapahoe, if tile house conlnumly called the'Tiannah Barker I louse" is designated as an
individual landmark with- the tollowing condition ofappitov~ . modify Attachment 1 on
Pale 18, Section 2 of the staff mcnlorandtn i item 5B to refer to Lot 2B to read ""IThe City
Council authorized tile ccitv manger to tieI-mit the modification to the rear yard setback
NgUirenlent for Lot 213 for principal buildings to I)c decreased from 25 feet to ei )ht lba
6. MATTERS FROM T11E PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING DIRECTOR, AND CITY
ATTORNEY
R. Ray gave the board an update on the status of his position and said he will be working for
Housing and Human Services for the next six months.
7. DEBRIEF/AGENDA CHECK
None.
8. ADJOURNMENT
The Planning Board adjourned the meeting at 8:24 p.m.
APPROVED BY
Board Chair
DATE
4