4B - Call Up: 372 Hollyberry Ln Site Review (LUR2011-00011)
Subject Area
. 372 HoNyberry Lane
MEMORANDUM s Dartmouth AV
' orb
_ d
TO: Planning Board Kohler Or
II
FROM: Elaine McLaughlin, Case Manager
DATE: March 11, 2011
SUBJECT: Call Up Item: 372 Hollyberry Ln. ;
Approval of Site Review application for a
detached garage over the height limit of ~~bt~,~g$a~t
20-feet, due to existing topographic RL=2
. , 5ublecl ~ ~
constraints.
Proposed Project. The applicant is proposing a detached garage with a maximum height of 25 feet, over the permitted
height of 20-feet for an accessory structure located in the RL-1 (Residential - Low) zoning district. A request to modify a
building's height that is over the allowed height on a lot is subject to a Site Review application.
Project Analysis: The means for determining "height" is defined in the land use code (section 9-16) as, "the vertical distance
from the lowest point within twenty-five feet of the tallest side of the structure to the uppermost point of the roof "The relatively
narrow lot is constrained by significant topography with slopes of up to 40 percent in some places. There is no existing
garage, and the applicant is requesting the garage placement to be as close as feasible to the existing residence to avoid
placement of a significant number of stairs. The driveway approaching the residence is long, narrow and relatively steep with a
roughly 10 percent slope. The location of the garage is in a location on the site where the driveway flattens out, but the slope
on the north side of the driveway drops off. The result is a proposed finished floor of the garage equivalent to the driveway
elevation, and a lower level storage area below the garage, proposed to meet the grade below. Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the
existing condition and the proposed garage and Figures 3 and 4 present the site plan in context and photos that illustrate the
existing grade.
Staff finds that the proposed garage within the existing context and RL-1 zoning district is consistent with the BVCP policies
and the Site Review criteria of section 9-2-14(h), B.R.C. 1981.
Public Comment.
Required public notice was provided in the form of written notifications of the application for Site Review to property owners
within 600 feet of the subject property. In addition, a public notice sign was posted on the property and therefore, all public
notice requirements of section 9-4-3, "Public Notice Requirements," B.R.C. 1981 were met. Several neighbors commented on
this application with all of the commentors articulating support for the height modification of the garage. One neighbor
suggested flattening the 4:12 roof pitch further to avoid a height modification. However, staff notes that the low roof pitch
currently proposed is in keeping with the roof pitch of the residence and even lowering the roof pitch to a 2:12 would not
create a by-right solution and avoid a height modification primarily due to the grade transition on the site.
Conclusion.
Staff finds that the application for Site Review- Height meets the relevant criteria pursuant to section 9-2-14(h), "Site Review,"
B.R.C. 1981. The proposal was approved by staff on March 11, 2011 and the decision may be called up before Planning
Board on or before March 25, 2011. There is one Planning Board hearings scheduled during the required 14 day call-up
period on March 17, 2011. Questions about the project or decision should be directed to the Case Manager,
Elaine McLaughlin at (303) 441-4130 or at the following email address :mclaughIineObouIdercolorado.gov
Attachment:
A. Signed Disposition
5 Agenda Item 413 Page 1 of 6
} • ` S Y ail ~ P\
Ala.
tt bl~
47
Existing
:Y Home
f Proposed
Garage . a• , ,
IRA
I'M
Figure 1 a and 1 b (left)
Photos of proposed Garage
Location on slope
Y
Ar,
Figures 1c an 1 (below).
elevations of proposed
v'l )"A" R-.. garage
` J rx r w
A, tit,,
' ~W,k \ y} p w
_ F ! L. P ~ps,l f.I k'
r ~e.^+3ip ~.vk 5y '_~t,. fl M1
!'e tA7 - {I tom,. /r AL,
+x' rl ? c/Fk~~'Ip. w r to^, L~:.
r } r e'' ale:,
%
6 I~ S f4T}Y ~ . ~ Y
y! : ` A ,i y a {iii p d 11i• Y
0- ti fir + ~.3!~ "i~ ~e~l~ J: 'T
♦b r Y ~
~7 \ 1.Fy ~1 4 47 e w Alirri] 4i ~f7
HATC44 Ex 5T.
1 ROOF' ,
F,7--r -a'
c-
vN Cr ~%i ~ - -
S--S 5 L•iV
ttaTCH J!K $T
5-LKE F,[7:1%&
-
:5,,-,:~JTH ELE ✓ • E :3T ELE TI N
6 a=:.-G ,'-r sc-Agwdadtem 4B Page 2 of 6
CQ Or r f1372 Ho99y~erry Plante retain trees. X15' tall White fir that provides shade from. W.
n1'-Y ) l ~ corn setting sun and buffer from common 70mph winter winds. Also, old
g•nvWth Blue spruce, Po,~de osa sD~-e a-d Pi-~inr, to ernain This area not suited
This area not suitable _
for building or
for building because of J~,= r ay i 4. attaching garage to
solar shading issue y" house because
% and 15' elevation rise f Ibecause of 15'
with iz flights of E „ r elevation drop from
stairs to house. Would ti)e house to the N. lot
also require and new = ~~F
:inc. It would require
4Fdriveway., t'
4. ~i anew driveway and
huge retainingwall
WM,
r and use up all my
All
seen space. It would
f
24x21 372 Hollyberry r also probably violate
solar shade.
} gar~~"i
.0 t7
hours
AMON,
01
Opp
~ ~~s `t - - ~ r ~,;iii
This area not suited for
building garage because of 17'
may..
;r elevation drop and possible
P # " caving in access road to 4
neighborhood houses.
Site plan - Severe slope on lot requires innovative building design. There is no flat ground on this lot. It has a severe slope. There is only 1
place on this lot that is buildable that will allow us to meet solar shading, conform to set backs, use our existing drive, preserve old growth trees,
provide room to turn car around rather than back out on Hollyberry Ln. into oncoming car bike and pedestrian traffic. In orderto build under
these challenging conditions and steep drop off we must request a variance in the height restriction.
Figure I Site Plan in Context illustrating constraints
7 Agenda Item 4B Page 3 of
6
b
Driveway to house - X
Picture looking South Picture looking West down driveway Li
Minimizing dangerous traffic condition. Winter views looking
At subject property at 372 Hollyberry Ln . Notice steep incline
i~ curved road and corner at top to the hill. It is extremely
hazardous to back out of driveway with limited sight to
oncoming pedestrians, bicycles, and cars zooming down the
steep hill.
0 OUR, A&
In winter, it is impassible to back out on the icy road and try to
" make it up the hill. We must back up with high speed to get
overthe snow plow hump. Then, we must back all the way
dawn Hollyberry Ln to get a start back up the hill.
The proposed garage built on the side of the driveway will
Picture looking up driveway allow car to make a "Y" turn around and allow a drive down
the hill for improved visibility to oncoming fast moving traffic
and improve safety.
Figure 4: Images from Applicant's Written Statement indicating steep roadway
constraints for backing onto Hollyberry that would be mitigated by garage
8 Agenda Item 4B Page 4 of6
CITY OF BOULDER
Planning and Development Services
V,
1739 Broadway, Third Floor - P.O. Box 791, Boulder, CO 80306-0791
phone 303-441-1880 - fax 303-441-3241 - web boulderplandevelop.net
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: 372 HOLLYBERRY LANE GARAGE
DESCRIPTION: SITE REVIEW WITH HEIGHT MODIFICATION - For construction of detached
2 story garage built into slope, with height to 25 feet due to topography.
LOCATION: 372 HOLLYBERRY LN
COOR: S02W06
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 3, HORIZON WAY, according to the plat thereof recorded August 17,
1973 as Reception No. 77196 in Plan file P-4, F-2, No. 50, County of Boulder,
State of Colorado
APPLICANT: Alvin and Kathleen Neumann
OWNER: Alvin and Kathleen Neumann
APPLICATION: Site Height Modification Only Review, LUR2011-00011
,ZONING: RL-1
CASE MANAGER: Elaine McLaughlin
VESTED PROPERTY RIGHT: NO; the owner has waived the opportunity to create such right
under Section 9-2-19, B.R.C. 1981.
FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, SEE THE FOLLOWING PAGES OF THIS DISPOSITION.
Approved on:
Date
By:
Da id Driskell, Exec five erector of Community Planning and Sustainability
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: Z5 I
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.
Address-.9372 HOLLYBERRY LN Agenda Item 4B Page 5 of 6
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. Failure to "substantially complete" (as defined in Section 9-2-12) the development within three
years shall cause this development approval to expire.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The Applicant shall be responsible for ensuring that the development shall be in compliance with
all approved plans dated February 16, 2011 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 inconsistent with this approval, including, but not limited to, the
following: Horizon Way Planned Residential Development (Exception approved by Board of Adjustment
Docket #67-49 on May 26, 1967).
Address: X372 HOLLYBERRY.LN
1 Agenda Item 413 Page 6 of 6