Loading...
5A - 1946 Hardscrabble Dr - Site Review for Height Modification (LUR2010-00042) Return to Agenda C I T Y 0 F B 0 U L D E R PLANNING BOARD AGENDA ITEM MEETING DATE: October 7, 2010 AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of a Site Review for Height Modification #LUR2010- 00042 for a single-family home located at 1946 Hardscrabble Drive, to modify the height of a proposed addition (364 square feet) not to exceed 44' from the maximum permitted height of 35' within the Residential Low-2 (RL-2) zone district. The area of the site is 4,967 square feet. Applicant: Kyle Callahan Owner: Dale Gaar and Ra ma Skeen REQUESTING DEPARTMENT: Community Planning & Sustainability David Driskell, Executive Director Charles Ferro, Land Use Review Manager Jessica Vaughn, Planner I OBJECTIVE: Define the steps for Planning Board consideration of this request: 1. Hear Staff and Applicant presentations 2. Hold Public Hearing 3. Planning Board discussion 4. Planning Board action to recommend approval, approval with conditions or denial SUMMARY: Proposal: To construct a second story addition (364 square feet) not to exceed 44' in height. Project Name: Gaar and Skeen Residence Size of Parcel: 4,967 square feet Zoning: Residential Low-2 (RL-2) Comprehensive Plan: Low Density Residential Agenda Item 5A Page 1 of 14 Previous View Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page fi r~ - Laf ' f •Si 1 r r f Y- f fir; hl `S - t Su biec Area 9946 Ha abble Dr r----rr y' .rti lV i~ \ J 4 ~4 - Y T Vicinity Map KEY ISSUES: Staff has identified the following key issues regarding the proposed application request: 1. Is the proposed height modification consistent with the Site Review criteria set forth in Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981, specifically Section 9-2-14(h)(2)(F): Building Design, Livability and Relationship to the Existing or Proposed Surrounding Area? BACKGROUND Process Section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E), B.R.C. 1981 states that "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, 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." Agenda Item 5A Page 2 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page The applicant's proposal includes a second story addition that exceeds the maximum permitted height in the RL-2 zoned district, 35', at 44'. No other standards are being modified with this proposal. Section 9-2- 14(g)(3), B.R.C. 1981 requires Planning Board approval of any structure above the maximum permitted height specified in a zoning district. Although this property is within the Residential Low-2 (RL-2) zone district, which is a zone district subject to compatible development regulations, it is not subject to those regulations as the property is within a planned unit development. Section 9-8-2(e), B.R.C. 1981 provides an exception for properties that are within specific planned unit developments. Planned Unit Development (PUD) History The PUD process was the city's precursor to the Site Review process and sometimes provided detailed development standards that were unique to the structure in an individual subdivision. 1946 Hardscrabble is within the Shanahan Ridge 6 PUD which was approved August, 1975. The original PUD approval stipulated that the architectural intent of the PUD was to "design and build small one and two story energy- conservative houses in keeping with a mining theme utilizing the patio home concept." The original approval also set maximum limitations for building square footage at 1,400 square feet plus garage; maximum number of bedrooms at 4; maximum number of stories at 2'/z; and maximum (,l LOT 39 permitted height at 35'. Although the original PUD approval accounted for ' fWSTna,RES some maximum bulk standards, it did 10 i EXIST•G To R5" CONC. WALE not account for others, including building coverage and open space which has I3. j~J. 70-5727.1 GATE • ' created some confusion for residents NEN Gm- over the years. m x* : x a y LA DlL45 ` at xx ~r ~ x m -Exisrw TIRE TD To provide predictability clarity for property owners that seek to expand or * x ° alter their homes, a staff interpretation LFF dated July 3, 2003, (Attachment A) was created for the Shanahan Ridge 6 ' PUD that clarified maximum limitations ' t1 o for building coverage and open space, 6 rAt ^C g~z r _ 5718 and that set the stage for amendment policies. The policy stipulates that J 5716 building coverage is permitted up to ~5720', 1,540 square feet (not including garages - or covered porches) only by approval of _ an Administrative Minor Modification to EX's,IO QWK the approved PUD and that habitable f 5~~0 floor area above or in the garage is 7 RP n S 5 % included in the 1,540 square feet. The interpretation was based on a 10% maximum increase in floor area that is I OPEN t 1~= a"ff ~,mi oa Agenda Item 5A Page 3 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page permitted under the Minor Modification review process. Site Characteristics Shanahan Ridge is located in south west Boulder along the edge of the city's boundary and has very unique and varied topography. Shanahan Ridge was developed to capture prominent foothills views and the surrounding natural features of the land On the property, there is approximately 17' of grade change from the north side (EL. 5725') of lot to the south side (EL. 5708') which equates to almost 17% change in grade over the length of the lot (99.1'). The existing two-story, single-family residence at 1946 Hardscrabble is 2,451 square feet on a 4,967 square foot lot (.49 FAR). (Based on the PUD approval, the 474 square foot garage is not included in the overall square footage or lot coverage calculations as there is no habitable floor area above it). The existing lot coverage, (excluding the garage) is 1,071 square feet or 22% coverage. From the street looking south (the front of the homes along Hardscrabble), the property and its neighboring structures all appear as 35' two story homes. However, given the site's drastic topography, the view from the southern property line to the north (the rear of the homes) is much different with an exposed walkout basement level giving the appearance of a three-story residence. Since height is, under the city's development code, measured from a low point 25' away from the tallest side of the building, the existing residence measures approximately 44'. M h 1 ~ fill t Front Elevation; „'c____~: ,3~•, '~~tl ti,. ~L- to 5i - Rear Elevation Agenda Item 5A Page 4 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page PROPOSAL The development proposal is to construct a 364 square foot second story addition over the existing garage. The proposed addition will exceed the maximum permitted height within the RL-2 zone district (35') at 44', as measured from the low point 25' away from the tallest side of the building. It should be noted that the proposed addition will not exceed the existing roof ridge height as indicated by the illustrations below. ..18.61HWG- iema'f 3. - - lxieling ?Str.r l.cnpr F,lcvn tjonn I: ❑I II ~ k } Cxielinp .1'frcrfunPr fln tjnnn Agenda Item 5A Page 5 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page Also included in the development proposal, but not resulting in additional requests for modifications to the PUD standards or the form and bulk standards stipulated in Title 9 of the B.R.C. is the construction of a 51 square foot garage addition for storage; a 116 square foot first floor addition to provide a wheelchair lift access to the new rooms and a new covered front porch entry; and a 32 square foot basement addition (please refer to Attachment B, Proposed Plan Set for details on the complete development proposal). Since these additions meet the development standards stipulated in the original PUD approval and Title 9 of the Boulder Revised Code, they do not need to be considered as a part of this Site Review for a Height Modification request. All of the proposed additions, (excluding the garage addition), equate to a total addition of 512 square feet resulting in a 2,963 square foot residence with 525 square foot garage. Please refer to the table below for a summary of the change in floor area and lot coverage. Pursuant to the staff policy interpretation dated July 3, 2003 for building coverage in Shanahan Ridge 6, the only additions resulting in additional coverage are the proposed second story addition (364 square feet) that is located above the garage and the first floor addition (116 square feet) for the new covered front porch entry and lift resulting in a total building coverage of 1,531 square feet or 30%. 1946 Hardscrabble Development Proposal Summary Existing Proposed Net Change Floor Area (sq. ft.) 2,451 2,963 512 Lot Coverage (sq. ft.) 1,071 1,531 460 *Please note that the 51 square foot addition to the garage is not included in this table as it does not create additional floor area by definition or additional lot coverage per the PUD interpretation. ANALYSIS Staff conducted a detailed compatibility analysis of the surrounding structures along Hardscrabble using data from the County Assessor and building permit records and found that surrounding properties all measured about 35' from grade along the street and about 44' to 45' in height in the rear of the properties where the topography changes and the height measurement is taken from. Similarly, staff's analysis found that surrounding homes range in floor area from about 2,400 to 3,000 square feet (excluding garages) therefore, the total proposed square footage of 2,963 is well within the surrounding context. Overall the applicant's development proposal is consistent with the intent of the original PUD and the surrounding residences in form, bulk and mass in that the addition does not exceed the height of the existing residence or floor area of the largest surrounding homes. The development proposal also takes existing exterior finish materials and roof pitches into consideration in order to maintain consistency and compatibility with the existing neighborhood character. Please refer to Attachment C, Criteria for Review for the complete staff analysis of the Site Review criteria for review. PUBLIC COMMENT AND PROCESS: Required public notice was given in the form of written notification mailed to all property owners within 600 feet of the proposed development, and a sign posted on the property for at least 10 days. All notice requirements of section 9-4-2, B.R.C. 1981 have been met. No public comment was received regarding the development proposal, however staff received some inquiries regarding an the ownership of an existing easement adjacent to the property. Agenda Item 5A Page 6 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION Planning staff finds that: 1. The application satisfies the Site Review criteria pursuant Section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981, specifically 9-2-14(h)(2)(F): Building Design, Livability and Relationship to the Existing or Proposed Surrounding Area if the conditions listed below are incorporated into the approval of this application. Therefore, staff recommends that Planning Board approve Site Review Height Modification Review #LUR2010-00042 incorporating this staff memorandum and the attached Site Review Criteria Checklist as findings of fact, subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval below: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development shall be in compliance with all approved plans, including exterior elevations and street elevations dated June 29, 2010, and site plan and solar shadow analysis dated September 2, 2010 and on file in the City of Boulder Planning Department, except 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 inconsistent with this approval, including, but not limited to, the following: Shanahan Ridge 6 PUD. 3. The Applicant shall ensure that the addition shall not exceed the height of 44 feet in accordance with the City's definition of height found in chapter 9-16, "Definitions," B.R.C. 1981. Approved B d Driskell, Ex U I irector Department of Community Planning and Sustainability ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Staff Interpretation dated July 3, 2003 Attachment B: Proposed Plan Set - Revised 10/412010 Attachment C: Criteria for Review Agenda Item 5A Page 7 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page Attachment A Shanahan Ridge f - PUP City of Boulder - Planning & Development Services Summary of Decision _ Staff has determined the following standing policy for Shanahan Ridge 6 only. Building Coverage/Open Space Requirements and Amendment Policies 1. Increases in building coverage are allowed up to 1,400 square feet (not including garages or covered porches) without any Administrative or Land Use Reviews. Habitable floor area above or in the garage is included in the 1,400 s.f, limit. 2. Increase in Building coverage are allowed up to 1,540 square feet (not including garages or covered porches) only by approval of an Administrative Review for a Minor Modification to the approved PUD. Habitable floor area above or in the garage is included in the 1,540 s.f limit. 3. Increases in building coverage are allowed up to 2,200 square feet (including garages and covered porches) only by approval of a Site Review PUD Amendment (Simple) that requires only the signature of the requesting property owner. 4. Increase in building coverage beyond 2,200 square feet (including garages and covered porches) requires a full analysis of the open space requirements for the entire Shanahan Ridge PUD and requires a Site Review PUD Amendment with the signature of all owners within Shanahan Ridge 6. 5. Amendments that affect open space outside of Shanahan Ridge 6 will require signatures of all affected property owners. This decision has been made by staff review of the open space requirements, and past policies and decisions on Shanahan Ridge 6. This staff decision on policy was from a staff meeting held on October 30, 2001. Approved on: j d Date By: b Cole, Director of Land Use Review i011102 Agenda Item 5A Page 8 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Planning Information ~ PROJECT ADDRESS SKEEN-GAAR RESIDENCE J~ 1946 HARDSCRABBLE DRIVE ~ i BOULDER, CD 80303 ~ ~ ''i P ~ LEGAL DESCRIPTI~N~ LET 39, G 0 ; ; SHANNAHAN RIDGE 6 ~ ~ ~i ` - P ~ CITY ~F BOULDER, BUULDER C(JUNTY, i - STATE OF CGLORADU i i c~ ei i i ~ ~ ~ / EXISTING GUEST ZONING CLASSIFICATIDN~ RL-P C a~ I a h a n ~ ~ / ~ ~ i Garage ii 10 -6 6 -2 PARKING ~ ~ l -4- ~ LOT AREAS 4967 SQ. FT. ~ S S O C I a t e 5 ~ 2 ~ ',I ~ ~ ~ DITION i FLGOR AREA ~ r C~ i t e c~ u r c _ neov~ ~ 1 ~ ~ 'J I~ ~~i EXISTING NEW TUTAL ziz~ ~othj~treet,~uike ioz r n - -IN ~J V I` J i~ 'rl C v e ~ f,,„~ UNFIN. FIN. UNFIN, FIN. r r U ~ d R~ V _ ~ BASEMENT 18 SF 874 SF 0 SF 32 SF 924 SF ~joulder, Colorado s030~ ~ £ L---- - _ _ FIRST FLG~R 0 SF 1,015 SF 0 SF 116 SF 1,131 SF TeleF6u~e- 303.545.2007 ' N SECUND FLUUR 0 SF 544 SF 0 SF 364 SF 908 SF 303~945.zoi4 y Laundr ~ t = " IV1C d' i y ~ . ~ GARAGE (ATTACHED) 474 SF 0 SF 51 SF 0 SF 5Z5 SF ~-~„~ll- ~~cyle~akglecallah~3n.~o~n DFGK 0 SF 387 5F 0 5F 63 SF 450 5F . i I ~ - ~ I i ~N7~~ TOTALS 492 SF 2,433 SF 51 SF 6P1 SF 3,488 SF ~ COVERAGE ~ I - _ 2 73 ~f q / I . F 0~ ' i ~ INCREASE OF . ~ ~ ~ ~ NBT INCLUDING DECKS •I 1.3 . ~ i r~ - IIb SF / z •i ~ CGVERAGE ~ K o I I d ~ ~ I B NoaA 'k ~ m I . ~ - EXISTING CUVERAGE 1071 SF NEW COVERAGE - EXISTING z ~ 6AR~ Kitchen ~ • ~ GARAGE STORAGE BASEMENT 0 SF .I 1 ~ - I ~ L01 39 I ADDI i ~ i ~ , I ~ ADDITION FIRST FL~DR 116 SF 460 SF ""'j'~ u~ EXISTING 1 SECUND FLOUR 344 SF ~ V~V _ - ~ I~~ - _ ~ _ I Z : ~ DRIVE ` X26 TOTAL 1,531 SF ~ y o ~ e ~ I ~ ~ £ 51 N ~ _ ~ I EX15 ~ EXISTING TREES MAXIMUM HEIGHT ~ ~ i R N nin m x g x -x ~ ~ I~ , ~ TOR ~ o Q TO REMAIN MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE EXISTING HGT 25' FROM PROPOSED PROPOSED I Y E 41 ~ I ~ .5' ~ ~ E ~I;; z • ~ 1 35'-O" ABOVE LOW PT. 43b' ABOVE LOW PT. 38.9' ABOVE LOW PT. NO CHANGE ~ ~ d hiving Ism ~ 10.3 17.5 r - d"~;~~I~.~~; xl _ - ~ 1 t, ~ o PEAK OF EXISTING RDOf 5150.31 L. rot ~ ~ ti I r f'~ - ~ ' ~ I~ PEAK OF NEW ROOF 5150.31 ~ u `J > 'x `1 ~ LOW POINT (EXISTING) 510b.b ~ v ~ 'U ~ XI TIN TR TOC=5727.1 ~ T T~ ~ L~ I ~ .I E 5 6 EE5 d - I m TO REMAIN ~ EX15T6 GARAGE ~ ~ _ _ ~ m Ig36 LDW POINT (FROM NEW ADDITION) 51115 ~ ~ ~ ~ r ~ Deck I ~ HARDSGRABBL -p .L a I NEW GONG. ~Ilclnlty Map ~ ~ ~ I ~ I~ LANDINGS ~ ~ I ~ EXISTING ~~1 ~ TREE TDB ~ E 'x r ADDITION OVER - r REMO~IED H / O y Pro osed P EXISTING 6ARR6E I First Floor Addition _ .~T ~ S TR eE ~ II8" = I'-0" GOVT, 'D ~ PORCH = FOYER AND ~°r ~ AGGE551BLE o~ ~ w K~ ~ LIFT ti's ~ ADDITION ~P 0 \ / LOT 35 ~ ~ ~w ~ ~ J ~ z_I 2 6 15•-On 2 6 q~_q~~ 156 . , ~~A~~ Q~ ~ ~ ` ~ - HARDSGRABBLE ~ Q' 0 QIN ~ ~ ~ ml° LOT 34 ~ N NEW HIP ROOF - ~ ~ _ _~~~`:3~ o ~ ~ t 0 ~ c OI ~ ~ OJ 0 r o - - - HV LOWER ' ' , - ~ _ - - ~ - V ~ L - SET N v ~ t v o z ~ c c ~ a m J'G ~I 1 J Q go ~ToQ c o:s HEIGHT X~~~ T~'~~TST~~'~ T~~ - 0 _ II% ~ ml / ~ LOT 33 ~~,~~od~~6~~ta~~o a _ NEW GARAGE STORAGE _ - - - ~ _ ~ - ~ ~ J t 0 N _ apLp~gtyta~~p~~LL m BELOW ~ ~ _ _ - - ~ - - - - Q L~6~~6a~~'LpLpmJ p~ p_ - ~ ~ l ~ ~ ~ - ~/`~J ~ Y LOT 32 Z mL~ao'J~Qm°d~o6 Tij v GOVERAGE INCREASE ~ , . ` \ ~0.1~ ) g ~ ~SU= ~~~~6~-~- r OF 322 SF i ~ ~ aipJJJ9,4~,~pNap9 Q~i a EX15T1N6 ~ ~ - ~ - ~ I M I • ~ W o_ L~~c ~ msom Jy o SCALE- 1 ~ 100 Q.. E~~~ma~aQQ`il~`o mcQ9 ~ ~ LANDSCAPE ~ • ~ _ - ~ ~ ~ ~c 9_J c. m E . a m 61 ~ i r ~~"IrC1 _ LOT 31 ~ °o~sm~o€~~~'~~~ ~6s STEPS ~ ~ .I _ ~ 10 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~J J~~t~ =~0 ~ N~Qaoo,~,~~JJ~QO Qma'" R~c c~ ~cc6;;~c~a' c c SO, ~ pcxEa;~~~~Os ~1mU y~0 01 >s ~ \ ~ I I - o I 0 - \ I \ ~ O Eo~~~cJOJLJmy~ m~ ~ ~~U4oN~Ns c.OC=~~ 690s = - -~~T2o` II =V v~ ~ I -IN - ; A ~ Z - z / ~ N61N>~Nai9 s~06m=L~~O~ - - •I o ~ I , _ _ ~ _ 'J1 c T ~66=m pc N ~ 0 6 a~ O`~ p N N „s ~ p t N c„ I , .I _ _ ~ A\~ A' ~ Site Review Notes a ~ ~ J= ~ / m ,,,Ja~om a c„m ~ f Q _ ~ / ~ a~'S~~LNs~~~o=` e o0 I. ALL EXISTING UTILITIES ARE TO REMAIN A5 IS UNLESS MINOR RELOCATION OF EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE ~ 61 ~ o o °'a~ o a ~ ~ ~ o= ~ ~ o Lift ~ ~ : ~ I ` yy~, \ :I ~ . - IMPROVEMENTS IS REQUIRED TD ALLOW FOR CONSTRUCTION TO PROCEED. z a J J B E o a~ a m t a a ~X o PORTION OF UPPER ~ z I ~ ~ ~ LEVEL ADDITION OVER ~ M-Bath EXISTING .I kOW F ~ SOW POINT ~ ~ ~ 2. THERE WILL BE NO GRANGES TO THE EXISTING STORMWATER DRAINAGE, THE SITE 15 SPLIT, WITH ROUGHLY ~ EXISTG DECK EXISTING COVERAGE I - - - - ~i 1 5-f I I.~ HALF OF THE STORMWATER CURRENTLY DIRECTED NORTH TO THE HARDSCRABBLE DRIVE ROW, AND Issue Oate Purpose •I I °J 5-f I I I 1 ~ 03 29 10 Owner Review 1 i ~ ROUGHLY HALF DIRECTED SOUTH TO A DRAINAGE CHANNEL THAT PASSES THROUGH THE OPEN SPACE EAST / / `tiIC N TO _ - ` 1 Exlstlna ~ - • ~ ~ j J ~ / cG~ I OF THE PROPERTY. 05/14/10 Site RevewlSubmlttal EL W O p Roof ~ - ~ Below ~ ~ m _ - - ~,i i - I ~!U - - ' ~ 06/21/201 Site Review Submittal ~ _ --I ~ RR _S c__- II~ i i . i I P_ ~ ~ I~ ~ ~ 06/29/201 Site Review Revised ~ ~ Site Plan Symbol Legend Submittal ~ G~ i ~ ~ 09/02/201 Site Review Revised _ Submittal 2 - ` i t iII i - PROPERTY LINE ~r-_ ~ - EXIST ~ ~ I c EXISTING S ~ - SETBACK E - - ~ ~ _ - / THE ~ ~ N ~ - I 7 ~ - M Bedroom 1 _ - ~ AIN ~ - ~ - ~ - ~ - EASEMENT / r~ % ➢w Dw DOMESTIC WATER SUPPLY ~ ~2 Op a- _ ~ 51,3' = - 51 EI'~ ' - ` ~ _ LOW F, S s~__ ~I LOW P.~f~T~ uE uE UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC SERVICE E _ . . _ I 5 _ Open TO ~ w \v ~ j~~~ ~ NG NG NATURAL GAS SUPPLY LINE / ~~°OW , ~ SURFACE DRAINAGE PATTERN - i ~ ~i ~ ~ ~f EXISTING CONTOUR Prepared by: d.R. / - - - s. ~ x / ~k NEW CONTOUR Checked by: kC Balcony - - ~ i n Landscape Symbol Legend NEW NON-OCCUPIABLE ADDITION {DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE Sheet Content TO COVERAGE LIMITS PER PUD) SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SITE UTILITY PLAN, STORMWATER EXISTING DECIDUOUS TREE TO REMAIN PLAN, AND FLOOR PLANS NEW OCCUPIABLE ADDITION (CONTRIBUTES TO COVERAGE LIMITS PER PUD) = EXISTING EVERGREEEN TREE TO REMAIN ~ ® ~ `  NEW GOVERA6E PER PUP Proposed Architectural s EXISTING SHRUBS TO REMAIN - Second Floor Addition Site Plan EXI5TIN6 GOVERA6E PER PUP Sheet 118" = I'-0" Il8" = 1'-0" EXISTING TREE TO BE REMOVED Number NEW DEGIDUOU5 TREE EXI5TIN6 GOVERAOE NOT OGGUPIABLE d I At NON-GONTRIBUTIN6 TO GOVERAH LIMITS PER PUP Gopyr gnu 2010 Kyle Gaiiahan, Architecture Inc. L ~ I❑❑' ~ Solar shading -Building -Trigonometric Analysis 1946 Hardscrabble Dr. (all grade and point elevations relative to FFE datum, all distances in feet) FFE = 5728.39 Ky(e Ca~~ahan ~ PO P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 P7 ,associates Point Point Point Grade elevation top of 25' point Distance Tangent Max point Shadow If P7 is less elevation Elevation at projected fence at height to of solar elevation elevation than 25 ~rchi~Eecturc above FFE shadow ray property line relative to property angle 8 above top of abo~ grade at shadow falls 21 Z i ~Ot~,jtreet,juite 102 ['joinder, Colorado 80301 intersection where top of line 25' fence property line below top of Te~ePhone- 303~545~~~J with property shadow line fence ~P6~opp.) _ (25'-P6+P4) fence~pass), 6 24. ~ax- 303.545.2014 line projects tan6*P5~adj.)) if greater Mail) 24,5 -mai~- ky~eCak~~eca~~aiian.coin A AM 21.4 5749.79 5724.5 5749.5 0.29 34.75 0.38 13.13 12.16 ass p B AM _ 22.0 5750.39 _ 5724.8 5749.8 0.59 33.33 0.38 12.59 _ 13.00 pass C AM 16.8 5745.19 5725.0 5750.0 -4.81 23.33 0.38 8.82 11.37 ass p ~kh D AM 16.8 5745.19 5725.1 5750.1 -4.91 20.33 0.38 7.68 12.41 pass ti E AM 11.0 5739.39 5725.5 5750.5 -11.11 0.10 0.38 0.04 13.85 pass 24.5 F AM 17.9 5746.29 5725.5 5750.5 -4.21 6.90 0.38 2.61 18.18 ass - - p G AM 17.9 5746.29 5720.0 5745.0 1.29 6.90 0.38 2.61 23.68 pass H AM 22.0 5750.39 5725.5 5750.5 -0.11 6.90 0.38 2.61 i 22.28 ass p \lrwn J 16.8 NIA ~v }I ~ V ~ > 0 ~ ~o° ~ L N ~ ~ ...Q 2 24.4 ' `~iS ~,n ~~j~ ~ ~ ~h' 247 ~ O / ~ l ~ Q ~ / / 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ c'~, d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ / ~ ~ ~ / *1 ~ / ~2 N 6 / ~ .A + ~ • + ~ ~ ~l '~A ~ ~ I ~ s s u l~fv}J ~ ~ \1 M 1 ~ ICI e ~ ~ X ~ % 6 6 crn ~6i 'F f;S ~ I \ / ~ I ~ I ~ I P~ m ry'~ t~ ~ E ~ I ~ h i ~ ~ ry ~ ~ F ` •.A 'd ~S~P~~2 i / v l ~~2 i i i / 61 1~ ~ ~ ( g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ 0 / ~ ~ ~ ~ , ~ ~ 2~ ~ ~ ~ t 0 ~ s ~ ~ ~ 1~ ~ L ~ ~ so \ ~ O 5 5 c~ ~ ~ c ~ p 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ GO i ~ / ~ ~6 ~~s+ ~"0~ ~ 0~ ~ S ~ N'mm~" sv6,,,,yII~ p ~ D ~ ~ p- rL0 ypN6V c0 N m r'~O ~9,g'---' ~ oq~6~~~s~yva~o`m oNi ~ ~ .u J L~6~Epa~~~oL~Op p` 9. ~ ~ ~ Z ypU'6~~L mpQ~~6 ~,p ~ CF O ~U~,L,~6~s~pyE~~ 6~ O ~rn H ~ ~ ~.`~pSc p0yy m6""g~~ ~ ~ k^ w Q,tiL`~O~yc p~~669 4N~S ~ enera a ow na sis o es: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ E~sN~p-p6pQL~ O~pS 9 4 V ~ e ~ n O ~~~,ma~m°m~ .a~;~QVC r G ~ '~~T~~pNr N Qmm o ~ ~ o y m" m Lr I. THE 50LAR AGGE55 AREA FOR THIS RL-2 ZONED LOT 15 AGGE55 AREA 2, REQUIRING ~ N~Q ~pm~~~p~`p 2 0 \ ~ S,~ ,~0 c p ~ p p~~ y~ c~ ~Q L N C y A 25' FENCE, ~ ~ r,, ~ p~xEp+~~,LrDr~mU N€p p ~ "1 ^'V O jp~L O~~UpU UCaS+~ p~ N L l ~ ~ \O a ` O~~OpTQ~~`~pOU 9O~ ~ 2. THE ANALY515 BEING CONDUCTED 15 BASED UPON THE NEW 5Y5TEM CURRENTLY BEING ~ U ~ 6 c 6 ~ ADOPTED IN THE CITY OF BOULDER. E55ENTIALLY, THE DATA PRESENTED ABOVE 6~`~' a1 1 ~ ~ r ~6`-N"p m Q~ ~p~6,=,6p`~~u~i~yoj ~~N 4:c L15T5 THE ELEVATION OF A CAST SHADOW AT THE PROPERTY LINE IN THE SECOND ~ 1. FROM THE RIGHT HAND COLUMN. IF THE ELEVATION FIGURE PRESENTED IN TH15 ~ t. ~ ~ 9 ~ O~S~yt~~~cNO~~ N~~ Op ~ ~ COLUMN 15 LE55 THAN 25, THEN THE SHADOW 15 BELOW THE 50LAR FENCE. THE FAR ~ ~ ~ i ' 1' \ ~ + ~ ~EOO~a~oa~E~"yt ap~~ 1 ~ z ~pUO~EO~IL 6mL3m ~c3lYO a~ ~ RIGHT COLUMN INDICATES THAT ALL POINTS PA55. i \ k i ~ ' \ 5 ~ ~ Issue Date Purpose + 20~ \ ~g ~ • ~ s~ , / ~ 03/29/10 Owner Review 3. SHADOW ELEVATIONS ARE DETERMINED FOR DECEMBER 21. 20' ~ i ~ 05/14/10 Owner Review for ~ ~ T~;. ~ A~ ~~ST~.~, ~ h Site Review Submittal \ ~ 6 1 ~.a~ 06/21/201 Site Review Submittal a ~ 9~ 06/29/201 Site Review Revised . ~ 1 ~ 6?x Submittal ~ ,-r 09/02/201 Site Review Revised ~ h Submittal2 8- 5~x 135 9 ~ 6~x x 0 o I~ 5 4x 9 /~i ~ 61~ i i 1~ti ti Prepared by: J.R. Checked by: kc S~~ SOLAR SHADOW ANALYSIS I" = I+ i ° = io~ Sheet Content SOLAR SHADOW ANALY515 ® ~ n  Sheet Number A2 1 / Copyright 2010 Kyle Gollohon, Architecture Inc. L. DORMER ADDITION TO PROVIDE PROPER HEIGHT FOR LIFT AND NEW NEW SECOND LEVEL ADDTION WALKWAY TO SECOND LEVEL CRICKET ROOF BETWEEN NEW AND ~ ~ EXISTING ROOFS - ADDITION AE''OVE GARAGE EXISTING RIDGE = 5150.31 T.O. RIDGE T.O. RIDGE - - 121'-I 13/4" 121'-I 13/4" SE SECOND LEVEL ADDITION - BE BEYOND ABOVE GARAGE ~ ~ e DORMER ADDITION BEYOND U J ~a~~ahan ~ T.O. PLATE I11'-0° T.O. PLATE i ~S ~ Q ~ ~ ~ S I11'-0 8.0. HDR e.o. HDR ~ ~ I" C~ f t e C~ U r f - ~ 6'-8' AFF 6-8' AFF rn ~t - 212 ( i0th `J' treet, ~uike 102 3 ~ ~ [joulc~er, ~oorac~o 80301 ~STIP~i~F-FA - - _ EXISTING 2 4 3 iu T~ nc - - ROOF IV A3 - w A3 A3 A3 TeleFhu~e- 3o3.g4g.2oo7 ~ REPIOVE~ - - (-ax- 303.545.2014 A3 ~QQ ~-~n~d- ~~cyle~ak~~lecallah~3n.~o~n tK O ~ FFE _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 12 • - - - 108'-IL. FFE - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q6 108'-I I" u EXISTING EXISTING ~ V ~ V! ~ ~ t ~ 1V ~ FFE Q Q 'Z7 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - FFE - ~ 1100 -0 100'-0" - - - - - - - - ~ ~ y ~ ...Q 0 " 55 AGGESSIBILE RAMP ~ ~ 0 BLOOK~N FIRE-RA- GARAGE STORAGE - EXTERIOR WALL ADDITION NEW SIDING FIRE-RATED WALL AT ~ ~ ~ ~ PROPERTY LINE, ON NEW - ~ o FOUNDATION 0 517E LOW POINT 5106.6' ~ NEW FOUNDATION Q ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Q~ Pro osed Proposed P East Elevation South Elevation m ° H B ~ m° NEW SECOND LEVEL ADDTION I D ~90~ ~o~ A a~s~o~~~~0~~6~ ~o Q T.O. RIDGE T.O. RIDGE 121'-II 3/4' - 121'-II 3/4" = 5150. T.O. RIDGE C 0~~6cmys~mr~~60~N rU 121'-113/4"=5150.31' ~y~mEdo`~o~~~U EXISTING CHIMNEY ~ z m o J~ E ~ Q ° d~~ 6 T o m GUSTOMFIXED ~ s~~❑c~°~os~=~ o~ 6LA55 WINDOW - µ J~;, a m y y ~ o J7 LL S VERT.WOOD5IDING ~b ~ to ~ m°~mmm6T_9~,~, GLA55 BLOCK i J ~ s ` v 0 ~ ~ 6 ~ 6 6 9 4~ ~ ~ F G o o6o~~J;~~ya~~~ Q~s o - n ' m - - T.O. PLATE - T.O. PLATE T.O. PLATE ~ v m~C"~m°o°oJm~o a o - ~6 ~6~~m0c~6'¢++crc~ Ill'-0" I - - 111'-0" 111 0 DORMER ADDITION ~ _ - ~ ~ { x ~ ° ~ ~ ~ s m s ° m F ~ m ~ONij 6i0cQ~~~~"y 9umt B.O. HDR _ 6'-8" AFF BEYOND - - - o°a`o~Qm~yQoo~ mop N BOARC ~a~m mr~ c 69mr BOARD AND BATTEN5DN6 3 ~ ~~mm°~~9s°o°~m`mm"~ 2 A3 Q sct>T °c~ ~n-N OJ i - - A3 ❑°as6oNO~~i~~ ~m~ or z~ - 6~ i- - EXISTING ~ ~Loo~~om°~0m=~~cm~d 0 ~ _ 4 oQ _ - E ROOF 1- a~'S~~~m~~~a~o=~ m~~ om A3 qq ~ E ~ - - HORZ. WOOD 51DING ~ m ~ o o ~ a ~ 0 6 ~ ~ ar 6 m a~i ~ z ~L6UJ~~091Lam~3m ~~'Z ~0 Q - w0 z rn NEW HIP ROOF ~ OVFR EXISTING Issue Date Purpose ~ fFE fFE _ FFE i GARAGE 03/29/10 Owner Review - - 108'-II' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 108'-II" 108'-II" - - = _ = - - - - - 05/14/10 Owner Review for I~ - _ Site Review Submittal l i O6/21/2D1 Site Review Submittal Imo. i 06/29/201 Site Review Revised Submittal 1 NEWT HIP ROOF OVER I ~l i 09/02/201 Site Review Revised EXISTING PORTION OF ISTING A3 i Submittal 2 FIRE-RATED _ L~. - GARAGE FIRE-RATED - WALL WALL _ L~ EXISTING GARAGE - ~ N€W GARAGE ODOR ~ I - II ~ - - FFE fFE _ - - 100'-0" - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 100'-0' = 5128.38 - L I ~ PFE - - - - - - - - - - 100'-0" = 5128.38 - - GARAGE TOG GARAGETOG COVERED ENTRY WOOD POST Prepared by: J.R. PORCH GARAGE STORAGE ADDITION Checked by: kC AGGE551BLE RAMP TO ENTRY PORCH Sheet Content Pro osed A Proposed ~xT~~~o~ ~~~v~T~oNS West Elevation 4 North Elevation ~ ~  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Elevation Symbol Legend ' Sheet Number X 5OLAR AGGE55 POINT - 5EE A2 A3 Gopyright 2010 Kyle Gaiiahan, Architecture Inc. L io❑ ~e y ~a~~ahan ~ associates ~rc~itec~urc 12 ( i0tfi `J' treet, ~uike 102 j ~ou~c~er, ~o~orac~o 80301 i TeleFhu~e- 3o3.g4g.zoo7 1 ~ax- 303.549ZOi4 i~ ~ ~-mai~- ~~cy~eC3~t~~eca~~a~,an.com ~ I ~ ~1 ~~V ~ ~ ~ ~ _ d ~ / r r ~ i - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~r~ ~1. ~ ~ ~ ~4 ~ - M N - ~ ~ _ _ ~ u - ~ r ~ l' i ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ L - ❑ ❑ ~ ~~f.;-- u ~ ~ D D ~ l~.n. _ - rl ~ - T ~I ~ V! _ ~ r - ~ i Q ~ ...Q ~ L.~ J" e a p~ _ u ! ~ '1 , ~ i(u i(u iP t ' II ~ 1',~~ p p 7~/~JI 1~~~ ~~rd~scra~b~b~e c0 o ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ Existin g Q ~ Streetsca e Elevations I18•• : ~ N 0 0 y c~ ~ 6~0 6 U 00 6~ ~crr~,+ ~90~ ~ Oc ~ ~6~~004y '~g~"t~~a-6 d ~~sd0~~l~m~yE6m 00 ~ O fl~ J] 6 .u U~ ~r p O N ii Z NO„~E~OQ'O~NN=LLt x J9 0_~ '~Od~`0?~0 0 ?~~yV~ss~ps ~t~00 ~ pct c 670~O10y6T_9~, ~ W ~~s`~0~~~6~669 m~~ ~ E6~~a6N~9_~c~J~~OQ9 O 0 m O ~OOt~c O~J~a~s~ N6~ 0- I": m6Q~6~u~Ui ~6U~~~QO Q~p ~ ~c ~cc~NOc_6' crc ~OO~~cU00~~~5,0 41Fm 0 S UUO-~ti1O6mQ~~Q~~L90E N ~ UO.cQlc9yc~ac 09Q$ ~ - ~ ~ Q =O~~TO~~LLOpµ c~ Jim Ov ~n i y0~6S6oNOs~oo~~ONOr \V1 u.i Oy7~~y m00-N9 Vt~ OsXi1~ 1 _v ~~jdAUl~Omi,~O£y~ Dc~~d , ~4 I- h1~mu~i0`~~~c000c Q7~~ ~s 4~' ~ t , ; - ~ - - ~ mEOO~aEO6~E~y6 m~§ a~iw z ~LOUJ~~091Lamc.3m ~=Z ~0 ~ ~ j Issue Date Purpose T~ ~ _ ~ 03/29/10 Owner Review - 05/14/10 Owner Review for ~ ~'i ~ ~ ~ ~ Site Review Submittal i ~ ~ O6/21/2D1 Site Review Submittal i 06/29/201 Site Review Revised - ~ i I I - - - c- it ~ - - i Submittal b _ i.,.,, y''. ~ I 09/02/201 Site Review Revised Submittal 2 r L ~ ~ _ IV IV p h / _ d -a r~ ~9~~~ ~~r~sc~~~b~b~e Prepared by: J.R. Pro osed Checked by: kC P Streetsca e Elevations Sheet Content u8~~ = i~_o~, STRE~TSGP~P~ ELEVAT10N5 ~ ~  Sheet Number A4 Gopyright 2010 Kyle Gaiiahan, Architecture Inc. L Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page Attachment C CRITERIA FOR REVIEW No site review application shall be approved unless the approving agency finds that (1) Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan: Y (A) The proposed site plan is consistent with the purposes and policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation for 1946 Hardscrabble is Low Density Residential. The existing dwelling unit type, single-family residence, is not being altered with this development proposal. NIA(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 change to the existing density, which was approved under the Shanahan Ridge 6 PUD. NIA (i) The density permitted in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, or, NIA (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. (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, and its physical setting. Projects should utilize site design techniques which enhance the quality of the project. In determining whether this Subsection is met, the approving agency will consider the following factors: Y (F) Building Design, Livability, and Relationship to the Existing or Proposed Surrounding Area The applicant's development proposal consists of a second story addition (364 sq. ft.) to the existing residence that exceeds the maximum permitted height of the RL-2 zone district 35' at 44'. The existing residence is approximately 2,451 square feet, not including the 474 square foot attached garage, and 44' in height. Also part of the development but not requesting any additional modifications for the original PUD approval (Shanahan Ridge 6) or the form and bulk standards stipulated in section 9-7, B.R.C. 1981 are a 51 square foot addition to the garage for storage; a 116 square foot addition to the first floor to accommodate for the proposed lift and covered front porch, and 32 square foot basement addition. Since all of these additions meet the standards stipulated under the original PUD and Agenda Item 5A Page 9 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page Title 9 of the B.R.C. they are not under the purview of this Site Review for Height Modification request pursuant section 9-2-14(b)(1)(E), B.R.C. 1981. Y (i) The building height, mass, scale, orientation, and configuration are compatible with the existing character of the area or the character established by an adopted plan for the area; The proposed addition to the existing single-family residence is compatible with the existing neighborhood character and scale of the other residences. The proposed development takes into consideration the existing neighborhood character exterior finish materials will be consistent with the other homes in the neighborhood and the street-facing fenestration creates a street interest. The scale of the proposed second story addition is compatible with the surrounding residences in that it honors the existing roof pitches, ties into the existing roof form seamlessly, and existing building heights. The proposed addition is not in excess of the existing building height of 1946 Hardscrabble and is compatible with the properties surrounding 1946 Hardscrabble. Y (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 for the immediate area, The building heights of the two residences directly adjacent to 1946 Hardscrabble are 1936 Hardscrabble to the north and 1956 Hardscrabble to the south, they are reportedly 42.4' and 40.4' respectively. Although the existing roof ridge height at 1946 Hardscrabble is in excess of that of the two directly adjacent properties, the proposed addition does not exceed what is already existing in height. Essentially, the existing residence will not get any taller as a result of the proposed addition. Y (iii) The orientation of buildings minimizes shadows on and blocking of views from adjacent properties; The proposed addition is purposefully positioned as far to the south on the existing residence as possible, so that the potential to cast shadows onto the adjacent properly is minimized. Y (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; Exterior materials are proposed to be compatible with the existing materials. Y (v) Buildings present an attractive streetscape, incorporate architectural and site design elements appropriate to a pedestrian scale, and provide for the safety and convenience of pedestrians, The proposed addition more successfully addresses the street than the existing residence in terms of the increase in the number of windows and their proposed fenestration which will increase the street interest for both pedestrians and home owner. Y (vii) For residential projects, the project assists the community in producing a variety of housing types, such as multi-family, townhouses, and detached single-family units as well as mixed lot sizes, number of bedrooms, and sizes of units; Agenda Item 5A Page 10 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Item 5A Cover Page The existing single-family residence unit type is not being altered with this development proposal. The residence is however, being modified to accommodate for life changes so the property owner can remain in the house as they age. Agenda Item 5A Page 11 of 14 Previous View Item 5A Cover Page Return to Agenda Joint City Council/Planning Board STUDY SESSION Oct. 12, 2010 6 p.m. SustainableBoulder Creating our Future Check-in on the 2010 Major Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan 1777 Broadway Municipal Building City Council Chambers Submit Written Comments to City Council ATTN: Alisa Lewis, City Clerk 1777 Broadway, 2ud Floor P.O. Box 791 Boulder, CO 80306 or Fax to 303-441-4478 or E-mail: council(a~bouldercolorado. ov Agenda Item 6A Page 1 of 174 Previous View Return to Agenda I Agenda item 6A Page 2 of 174 Previous View