SPR-16-0005 BOCC Buisness Meeting

Transcription

Land Use
Courthouse Annex • 2045 13th Street • Boulder, Colorado 80302 • Tel: 303.441.3930 • Fax: 303.441.4856
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 471 • Boulder, Colorado 80306 • www.bouldercounty.org
February 25, 2015 Business Meeting Item
To:
From:
RE:
Board of County Commissioners (BOCC)
John Holste, Planner I
SPR-16-0005 – MORAN Riding Arena & Barn: Request for BOCC to
make a call-up decision
Dear Commissioners:
The Land Use Department issued a Determination for SPR-16-0005: MORAN Riding Arena & Barn
at 396 N 76th St. on February 5, 2016. The application proposed a new 13,600 sq. ft. indoor riding
arena and a 2,160 sq. ft. horse barn, and staff approved both structures as proposed. These structures
required Site Plan Review (SPR) because the size of the non-residential structures exceeded 5,000 sq.
ft. According to the application materials both structures are proposed to house horses for personal
use. Staff supported the proposed structures because we did not find conflict with the Site Plan
Review standards. In particular, although the proposed arena is large no negative visual impacts were
found in regards to the location and size of the structures. The development pattern in the area is a
mix of suburban style residential subdivision development and the area’s former agricultural nature.
The Land Use Department has received responses from 24 property owners to the Land Use
Department’s determination (approval). All letters were passed on to the Board for your
consideration and are attached. 8 are in support of the proposal and 16 expressed various concerns for
the proposal. The concerns expressed are primarily in regards to height and size of the two structures,
the potential for the structures to be used for commercial purposes, the environmental impacts of
horse grazing, effects on the character of the neighborhood, impacts of lighting, and negative visual
impact.
The arena and barn can only be utilized for personal use as a riding arena and barn, as was proposed
in the materials and approved by staff. An Equestrian Center (as defined by Art. 4-502.A of the Land
Use Code) is not an allowed use in the Estate Residential zone district, which is the zoning
designation of this parcel. Utilizing this barn and riding arena for an Equestrian Center as defined by
Article 4-502(A) of the Land Use Code would be a violation of this Site Plan Review approval. The
Estate Residential zone district allows 2 animal units per acre by right, as well as allowing for
Accessory Agricultural structures. No lighting for the outdoor arena was proposed or approved with
this application, and any exterior lighting will be required to be downlit and limited to lights
associated with exterior exits on structures for the barn and indoor area.
Unlike the Presumptive Size Maximum for Residential Floor Area, the Land Use Code does not have
presumptive limits on agricultural structures. It does however state that Accessory Agricultural
Structures need to be of a size and scale appropriate to the agricultural use found on the property.
Land Use staff found this proposal to be appropriate in size and scale for the area; however, the Board
has discretion to find otherwise. Consequently, staff requests that the Commissioners determine
whether to call up the Director’s determination for SPR-16-0005: MORAN Riding Arena & Barn for
review at a public hearing before the Board.
Attachments: SPR-16-0005: MORAN Riding Arena & Barn dated February 5, 2016 (including
application materials and referral responses); public comments
Cindy Domenico County Commissioner
Deb Gardner County Commissioner
Page 1 of 93
Elise Jones County Commissioner
Land Use
Courthouse Annex - 2045 13th Street - Boulder, Colorado 80302 - (303) 441-3930 - Fax 303-441-4856
Mailing Address: Post Office Box 471 - Boulder, Colorado 80306 www.bouldercounty.org
2/5/2016
Kathryn A Moran
7705 Fairview Rd
Boulder, CO 80303
Dear Applicant(s):
This letter certifies that in accordance with section 4-800 of the Boulder County Land Use Code, the Boulder
County Land Use Director has Approved with Conditions the site plan for the following, effective February
5, 2016.
Docket: SPR-16-0005 MORAN Riding Arena & Barn
Request: Approved: Site Plan Review to construct a new 13,600 sq. ft. indoor riding arena and a
2,160 sq. ft. horse barn.
Location: 396 76TH STREET
Zoning: Estate Residential
Applicant: Kathryn A Moran
This is a Conditional Approval made by the Land Use Director, and is not final until a 14-day referral period
has transpired. During the next 14 days, the Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) may choose to call
this docket up for a public hearing. If no hearing is required, this letter will serve as the final determination.
Building, grading and access permits will be subject to any and all conditions of approval.
If the BOCC should decide to modify the Land Use Director's approval, or determines that further review is
necessary, a public hearing will be held. Upon completion of the public hearing and approval by the BOCC,
if a building, grading or access permit has been applied for, it will continue in the process and permits may
be issued subject to any and all conditions of approval.
In the event that you wish to appeal any conditions of the Land Use Director's determination, you are
entitled to appeal the determination to the BOCC. You must file an appeal for this purpose with the Land
Use Department in writing no later than 14 days after the date of this letter. If an appeal is requested, the
BOCC will review the Land Use Director's determination at a public meeting.
Please be aware that the attached Conditions of Approval become final if the docket is not called up by the
BOCC at the end of the 14-day review period. There are no other administrative means to appeal. If you
wish to resubmit information with regards to complying with any of the attached Conditions of Approval,
and have this information reviewed for approval by staff prior to the end of the 14-day review period, your
submissions must be received by the office no later than 10 days from the date of this letter.
Site Plan Review approval is valid for three years from the date of this letter although any changes in County
regulations could affect the proposal prior to application for a building permit. In order to be issued a
building permit, the project must comply with all policies and regulations in effect at the time of permit
application.
A Building Permit cannot be issued for this project until the applicable conditions above have been met.
Furthermore, a Certificate of Occupancy cannot be issued for this project until the applicable conditions
above have been met. A SPR inspection will need to be scheduled with this department prior to the issuance
of a Certificate of Occupancy. None of the conditions of approval will be waived or a Certificate of
Occupancy issued for this project based upon the applicant's need to meet financial obligations (i.e.,
construction cost overruns or loan closing dates). Any future additions to the approved structure, regardless
of size, will require SPR approval to amend this SPR.
Page 2 of 93
Page 1 of 2
The Public Notice sign must remain posted for 14 days after the date of this letter and then returned to the
Land Use Department in a timely manner after this date. Or, if your Site Plan Review application requires a
public hearing, please return the sign after the final public hearing. We will begin processing a refund for
the $25 sign deposit when your sign is returned, and a check will be mailed to you within approximately 2
weeks.
Please carefully review the attached conditions of approval. Compliance with these conditions will be
confirmed as is necessary throughout the process.
Sincerely,
John Holste
Planner I
Page 3 of 93
Page 2 of 2
SPR-16-0005: Moran riding arena & barn
396 N. 76th St.
Page 1 of 9
February 5, 2016
APPLICATION #:
APPLICANT:
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT SUMMARY:
SPR-16-0005
Kathy Moran
396 N. 76th St.
13,600 sq. ft. indoor riding arena and a 2,160 sq. ft.
horse barn
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Article 4-806 of the Land Use Code states that no Site Plan Review can be approved
without compliance with the following standards. All site plan review applications shall
be reviewed in accordance with the following standards which the Director has
determined to be applicable based on the nature and extent of the proposed development.
Only those standards applicable to this project are included in this list.
1.
To provide a greater measure of certainty as to the applicable neighborhood relevant
for comparison, the following definition of neighborhood shall be used to review
proposed Site Plan Review applications:
c. For applications outside of platted subdivisions with seven or more developed lots or
the townsites of Allenspark, Eldora, Eldorado Springs, Raymond and Riverside, the
defined neighborhood is the area within 1,500 feet from the applicable parcel. The
neighborhood shall not include any parcels inside municipal boundaries, platted
subdivisions with seven or more developed lots or the townsites of Allenspark, Eldora,
Eldorado Springs, Raymond and Riverside.
The applicable neighborhood for the subject parcel is the area within 1,500 feet from the
parcel, excluding parcels inside municipal boundaries, platted subdivisions with seven or
more developed lots, and any mapped townsites.
2.
The size of the resulting development (residential or nonresidential) must be
compatible with the general character of the defined neighborhood.
ii.
a. In determining size compatibility of residential structures within the
defined neighborhood, it is presumed that structures of a size within
the larger of a total residential floor area of either (1) 125% of the
median residential floor area for that defined neighborhood or (2) of a
total residential floor area of 1,500 square feet in the mapped townsites
of Allenspark, Eldora, Eldorado Springs, Raymond, and Riverside, or
2,500 square feet for all other areas of the County, are compatible with
that neighborhood, subject also to a determination that the resulting
size complies with the other Site Plan Review standards in this section
4-806.A.
A. SIZE PRESUMPTION
The presumed compatible size of residential structures within the defined neighborhood
(see Standard 1 above for the applicable neighborhood) is 4,675 sq. ft.
Page 4 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 2 of 9
February 5, 2016
Median (total residential floor area) in 3,740 sq. ft.
the defined neighborhood*
125% of the median residential floor 4,675 sq. ft.
area in the defined neighborhood
Total existing residential floor area on 1,092 sq. ft. residence, 390 sq. ft.
outbuilding, 153 sq. ft. shed
the subject parcel*
Approximately 1,635 sq. ft.
1,482 sq. ft. (153 sq. ft. shed to be
Total proposed residential floor area
deconstructed)
*Source: Boulder County Assessor’s records, as verified by Land Use staff for the subject
parcel.
B. APPROVED SIZE
RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA*
Total existing residential floor area on 1,482 sq. ft. (153 sq. ft. shed to be
deconstructed)
the subject parcel to remain
None
Approved NEW
residential
floor area
1,482 sq. ft. (153 sq. ft. shed to be
TOTAL approved resulting residential
deconstructed)
floor area
*Residential Floor Area includes all attached and detached floor area on a parcel
including principal and accessory structures used or customarily used for residential
purposes, such as garages, studios, pool houses, home offices, and workshops, excluding
covered deck. Floor area does not include the area of any covered porch. Gazebos,
carports, detached greenhouses and hoophouses up to a total combined size of 400
square feet are also exempt.
NON-RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA
Total existing non-residential floor area 0 sq. ft.
on the subject parcel to remain
13,600 sq. ft. indoor riding arena, 2,160
Approved NEW
nonsq. ft. barn
residential floor area
TOTAL resulting non-residential floor
area on the subject parcel
The arena is proposed to be used as an indoor horse riding arena, and the barn is proposed
to be used to house the horses and related equipment as shown in the application
materials. These structures will not be used for residential purposes. (See use affidavit
requirement in FYI section) and consequently they do not constitute residential floor area
that should be counted toward the compatible size presumption for the neighborhood.
Page 5 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 3 of 9
February 5, 2016
The development pattern in the area is a mix of suburban style residential subdivision
development and the remnants of the area’s former agricultural nature. The majority of
the parcels are the smaller suburban lots with single family residences but, there are also
a few agricultural properties located to the west of the subject property along and west of
N. 76th St. Staff supports the proposed arena and barn even though the type of
development is not typical of that that found in the nearby subdivisions. The proposal is
appropriate on this particular lot since this lot is one of the remnant agricultural properties
in the area and the agricultural development on this 5 acre parcel is not anticipated or
expected to be similar to what would occur within a residential subdivision. Staff found
that the size and scale of the proposal was not out of character with the development on
the other more similar remnant agricultural properties in the area.
3. The location of existing or proposed buildings, structures, equipment, grading, or uses
shall not impose an undue burden on public services and infrastructure.
A. ACCESS TO PROPERTY
Access to the property is via N. 76th Street, which is a paved, County-owned and
maintained roadway classified as a Minor Arterial. The existing access onto N. 76th
Street appears to be partially located on the adjacent parcel to the north. The applicant has
not provided proof of legal access to cross the neighboring parcel. The subject property
also has frontage, and therefore legal access, along Fairview Road, which is a paved,
County-owned and maintained roadway classified as Local.
Per Section 5.4.1 of the Boulder County Multimodal Transportation Standards, private
direct automobile access to Principal and Minor Arterials shall be permitted only when
the property in question has no other reasonable access to the general street system. Thus,
Transportation Staff strongly recommends extinguishing the existing access onto N. 76th
Street after the new access onto Fairview Road is in place. Extinguishing the N. 76th
Street access would also rectify any potential issues with use of the adjacent property.
If the existing access onto N. 76th Street is extinguished, it shall be revegetated and any
ditch lines shall be restored.
The location of the proposed access onto Fairview Road is in conformance with the
Boulder County Multimodal Transportation Standards. The proposed access must meet
all specifications of the Standards, including a maximum width of 18 feet.
Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, submit two copies of an access and
driveway design for review and approval by the Boulder County Land Use and
Transportation Departments. The access and driveway design must also indicate the
method of revegetation for the 76th St. access if it will be extinguished. The access and
driveway design shall be included as part of the building plan set required at the time of
permit application.
At the final inspection, the Transportation Department must verify that the access and
driveway has been constructed to comply with the Parcel Access Design Standards in the
Boulder County Multimodal Transportation Standards.
Page 6 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 4 of 9
February 5, 2016
7.
The development shall avoid significant natural ecosystems or environmental features,
including but not necessarily limited to riparian corridors and wetland areas, plant
communities, and wildlife habitat and migration corridors, as identified in the
Comprehensive Plan or through the site plan review process. Development within or
affecting such areas may be approved, subject to acceptable mitigation measures and
in the discretion of the Director, only if no other sites on the subject property can be
reasonably developed, or only if reasonably necessary to avoid significant adverse
impacts based upon other applicable site plan review criteria.
Staff foresees no significant natural resource impacts from this proposal. No resources of
concern were identified on the site.
9.
The development shall avoid significant historic or archaeological resources as
identified in the Comprehensive Plan or the Historic Sites Survey of Boulder County,
or through the site plan review process. Development within or affecting such
resources may be approved, subject to acceptable mitigation measures and in the
discretion of the Director, only if no other sites on the subject property can be
reasonably developed, or only if reasonably necessary to avoid significant adverse
impacts based upon other applicable site plan review criteria.
A. HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE:
Land Use historic staff has determined that the existing residence does not appear to be of
historic significance, and has no conflicts with this proposal.
10.
The development shall not have a significant negative visual impact on the natural
features or neighborhood character of surrounding area. Development shall avoid
prominent, steeply sloped, or visually exposed portions of the property. Particular
consideration shall be given to protecting views from public lands and rights-of-way,
although impacts on views of or from private properties shall also be considered.
Development within or affecting features or areas of visual significance may be
approved, subject to acceptable mitigation measures and in the discretion of the
Director, only if no other sites on the subject property can be reasonably developed, or
only if reasonably necessary to avoid significant adverse impacts based upon other
applicable site plan review criteria.
For development anywhere in the unincorporated areas of the county, mitigation of
visual impact may include changing structure location, reducing or relocating windows
and glazing to minimize visibility, reducing structure height, changing structure
orientation, requiring exterior color and materials that blend into the natural
environment, and/or lighting requirements to reduce visibility at night.
Page 7 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 5 of 9
February 5, 2016
Location:
Elevations:
Height:
Exterior Materials:
Exterior Colors:
APPROVED
As shown on the site plan dated January 4, 2016 and staked
in the field
As shown in the application materials dated January 11,
2016
Riding arena: Approximately 22’ from existing grade
Barn: Maximum 32 feet from existing grade
Riding arena: Metal siding and metal roof
Barn: Wood siding and asphalt roof
Riding arena: Colors were not provided.
Barn: Brown siding and brown (“weathered wood”) roof
A. HEIGHT VERIFICATION
The Land Use Department requires height verification for any structure that is over 30
feet in height as measured from existing grade.
To verify that the barn does not exceed the approved height, a height survey is required.
Please note that the height verification is a two-part process that requires a licensed
surveyor to establish existing grade (the grade before any site work) prior to construction,
in addition to a follow-up survey once all roof framing is in place. The two-part form
must sufficiently establish existing grade in accordance with standard surveying practice.
Prior to issuance of building permit, the first part of the Height Survey Verification form
must be completed and submitted to the Land Use Department.
Prior to rough frame inspection, the second part of the form will be provided upon
building permit application and must be submitted to the Land Use Department.
B. EXTERIOR COLOR REQUIREMENT
The application does not specify colors for the siding and roofing materials of the arena.
Due to the structure’s visible position in the landscape, exterior colors shall be selected to
minimize visual impacts of the development and help the development blend in with the
natural environment and the neighborhood character of surrounding area. These colors
should be carefully selected from the dark to medium brown, gray, or green color range
to ensure that they are compatible with the policies and goals established by the
Comprehensive Plan and provisions of the Land Use Code and will not result in an
adverse impact on surrounding properties.
Prior to issuance of building permits, submit to the Land Use Department for review and
approval, three sets of samples (color chips, brochure, or catalog page) of all exterior
colors to be used including roof, siding and trim. Please note that all color samples need
to be small enough to fit into a file and will be kept for the record. Alternatively, exterior
colors may be included as part of the building plan set required at the time of permit
application.
At the final inspection, the Land Use Department must inspect and verify that the
approved color samples are used on the new structure.
Page 8 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 6 of 9
February 5, 2016
C. LIGHTING
The locations and types of exterior lighting fixtures were not provided in the application.
Due to the highly visible nature of the development and the potential for lighting to have
a negative impact on the area character, the placement of exterior lighting fixtures shall
be limited to:
 Only one (1) fixture is permitted for each exterior entrance.
 No landscape lighting is permitted
Prior to issuance of building permits, one copy of a proposed lighting plan must be
submitted to the Land Use Department for review and approval. Down lighting is
required, and all bulbs must be fully shielded to prevent light emissions above a
horizontal plane drawn from the bottom of the fixture. The lighting plan must indicate the
location of all exterior fixtures on the site and structure, and must include cut sheets
(manufacturer's specifications with picture or diagram) of all proposed fixtures. The
lighting plan shall be included as part of the building plan set required at the time of
permit application.
At the final inspection, the full installation of the approved lighting plan must be
inspected and approved by the Land Use Department.
11.
The location of the development shall be compatible with the natural topography and
existing vegetation and the development shall not cause unnecessary or excessive site
disturbance. Such disturbance may include but is not limited to long driveways, oversized parking areas, or severe alteration of a site's topography. Driveways or grading
shall have a demonstrated associated principal use.
A. LOCATION
The locations shown on the site plan dated January 4, 2016 and staked in the field are
approved as proposed.
B. UTILITIES
To minimize disturbances to the site, all utility service lines shall be routed underground
(see Article 7-1200 of the Land Use Code) and should be located in areas already
disturbed or proposed to be disturbed (e.g., along driveway).
Prior to issuance of building and grading permits, submit to the Land Use Department
for review and approval a plan depicting the routing of all utility services. The utility
routing plan shall be included as part of the building plan set required at the time of
permit application.
At the time of building inspections, full installation of the utilities per the approved plan
must be inspected and confirmed by the Land Use Department.
Page 9 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 7 of 9
February 5, 2016
12.
Runoff, erosion, and/or sedimentation from the development shall not have a
significant adverse impact on the surrounding area.
A. REVEGETATION/EROSION CONTROL REQUIREMENTS
Though no earthwork was proposed or approved through this application, some site
disturbance is expected during construction of the new structures and driveway.
Prior to issuance of building or grading permits, submit to the Land Use Department for
review and approval one copy of the proposed Revegetation Plan that conforms to the
enclosed handout titled “Revegetation.”
At the time of final inspection, the full installation of the approved revegetation plan
must be inspected and approved by the Land Use Department. If weather is not
conducive to seeding or if adequate revegetation efforts have not occurred and vegetation
is not adequately established at the time of final inspection request, an irrevocable letter
of credit or monies deposited into a County Treasurer account will be required to assure
the success of revegetation. You should consider the following well in advance of your
revegetation inspection:
 Whether you are applying for a certificate of occupancy, final inspection, or
the return of funds held in escrow for completion of revegetation, some level
of germination and growth of grass seed is required.
 Keep in mind that the steeper the slopes and dryer the soil, the greater the
attention needed to establish a level of germination adequate to obtain
revegetation approval.
 Areas of disturbance found at inspection not included on the revegetation
plan are still subject to reseeding and matting.
Incomplete revegetation is the leading cause for delays in obtaining a certificate of
occupancy.
15.
The proposal shall be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, any applicable
intergovernmental agreement affecting land use or development, and this Code.
A. LOCATION: SETBACK SURVEY REQUIREMENT
The site plan submitted with the application materials indicates that the footprints of the
proposed barn and proposed arena are within 20 percent of the minimum required 10-foot
side (north) yard setback for the ER Zoning District. Therefore, a Setback Survey
Verification Form is required. This form will be provided at the time a building permit is
processed.
Prior to the foundation form inspection, the Setback Survey Verification Form must be
completed by a licensed surveyor and submitted to the Land Use Department.
Page 10 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 8 of 9
February 5, 2016
B. ENCROACHING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE:
The existing accessory structure located to the north of the existing residence appears to
be partially located on the property to the north and County records do not indicate that a
building permit was issued for the structure. Several options exist for addressing the
encroachment issue including: relocating the structure so that is wholly located on the
subject property and meets the required setbacks (if the structure is within 20 percent of
the minimum required setback, a setback survey will be required), complete removal of
the structure, and a boundary line adjustment between the two properties. In addition, a
building permit must be issued for the existing structure if you choose to keep it on site
and if the structure is deconstructed and removed from the site. Please contact the
Boulder County Building Safety & Inspection Services Team at 303-441-3926 to obtain a
building or deconstruction permit.
Consequently, the accessory structure must be either removed from the property or
relocated a minimum of 10 feet away from the north property line of this property. Other
options, such as a boundary line adjustment may also rectify the encroachment issue. A
deconstruction permit can also be obtained if you choose to remove the structure.
Prior to issuance of any permit for the barn or arena, a building permit to either
maintain or remove the existing accessory structure must be issued.
At the final inspection for either the barn or arena (whichever occurs first), verification
of the relocation/demolition/permitting of accessory structure must be inspected and
approved by the Land Use Department and the permit requirements completed.
As conditioned this proposal will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,
intergovernmental agreements, and this Code.
FOR YOUR INFORMATION: Please read the attached referral responses
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
DECONSTRUCTION REQURIEMENTS:
To comply with Chapter 11 Sections N1105.2.1& N11105.2.2 of the Boulder County
Building Code, if the existing accessory structure is removed it must be deconstructed
and a Deconstruction Plan will be required at the time of deconstruction permit submittal.
Deconstruction consists of salvaging materials from an existing structure and the
recycling, resale, or reuse of the materials as an alternative to sending them to a landfill.
In addition to the deconstruction of existing residential structures, all construction jobsite
wood, scrap metal, cardboard, and concrete must be recycled. There are several means by
which the existing accessory structure may be removed, reused, and/or the building
materials recycled. Please contact the Resource Yard at 303-419-5418 and the Building
Safety & Inspection Services Team at 303-441-3926 for more information on
deconstruction, local deconstruction contractors, and reuse/recycling of building
materials.
Page 11 of 93
396 N. 76th St.
Page 9 of 9
February 5, 2016
BOULDER COUNTY BUILDSMART REQUIREMENTS: You project may be
subject to the provisions of Sec N1105.2.5 of the Boulder County Amendments to the
Building Code, meaning certain energy efficiency requirements will need to be met at the
time of building permit. Compliance can be pursued typically by a prescriptive path (i.e.,
mandatory measures), or through a performance path (i.e., meeting a required HERS
rating). Please check http://www.bouldercounty.org/lu/buildsmart/ for more information
or contact Ron Flax in the Land Use Department Building Safety & Inspection Services
Team at 720-564-2643 or rflax@bouldercounty.org.
AFFIDAVIT FOR NONRESIDENTIAL ACCESSORY STRUCTURE:
As indicated in the use narrative, the proposed barn and riding arena are accessory
structures to an agricultural use and may not be converted to residential floor area as
defined by Article 18-189-D of the Land Use Code. In order to ensure compliance with
this limitation to an agricultural use, the Land Use Department will require the property
owner to sign an affidavit that acknowledges conformance with Articles 4-502(D) Open
Agricultural Uses, 4-516(B) Accessory Agricultural Structures, 4-516(L) Accessory
Structures, and 18-189(D) Residential Floor Area of the Boulder County Land Use Code.
A building permit will not be issued until the affidavit has been reviewed and approved.
SANITARY FACILITIES: Sanitary facilities must be provided during construction and
shall consist of a portable chemical toilet fabricated from steel, fiberglass or wood. Each
facility must be well ventilated, must conform to State law, and must have a vented
chemical tank and a separate urinal.
PUBLIC HEALTH
REQUIREMENTS:
ONSITE
WASTEWATER
TREATMENT
SYSTEM
On 9/9/15, the owner signed an agreement to repair the On-site wastewater treatment
system (OWTS) within 90 days. Those repairs have not been made to date. Also, if the
riding arena or barn generate wastewater, an upgrade to the OWTS will be necessary.
The owner or their agent (e.g., contractor) must apply for an OWTS permit, and the
OWTS permit must be issued prior to installation and before a building permit can be
obtained. The OWTS must be installed, inspected and approved before a Final Building
Inspection approval will be issued by Land Use.
Avoid Damage to OWTS:
Heavy equipment should be restricted from the surface of the absorption field during
construction of the proposed barn and riding arena to avoid soil compaction, which could
cause premature absorption field malfunction. Caution should be used in conducting
trenching and excavation activities so that sewer lines and other OWTS components are
not damaged.
Page 12 of 93
4
Boulder County Land Use Department
Itr
Shadeá Areas for Staff Only
Courthouse Annex Building
2045 1 3th Street . PO Box 471 . Boulder, Colorado 80302
Phone: 303-441 -3930 . Fax: 303-441 -4856
Boulder
County
lÕo,to
n'Îakes'Îamp
PAID
Email: plannerqbouldercounty.org
Web: www.bouldercounty.orgll u
Office Hours: Mon., Wed., Thurs., Fri. 8 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
Tuesday 10 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
JAN
Application Form
BOULDER
ProjectNumber
No
E
oPR- tb- oooS
Application Deadline
Lim¡ted lmpact Special Use
imited lmpact Special Use Waiver
ite Plan Review
ite Plan Review Waiver
Subdiuis¡on Exemption
Exemption Plat
lo¿l State lnterest Review
Location
Application Deadline:
First Wednesday of the Month
Application Deadline:
E
fl
É
Lot(s)
Area in
Acres
Ll,,
-
{
cZ
s
t)ûtl,^
E sketch Plan
E Preliminary Plan
E Final Plat
fl Resubdivision (Replat)
E Special Use/SSDP
nppeal
Co n*.,_*-t-r"
¿fe
Existing Zoning
'¿i-,|"-;i:L;Húe-tJr, iuct/<+k, ho L¿e
rH9
Applicants:
Applicant/Property Owner
Mailing Address
-77
D
9
t9o,t tÅ¿,,t
L
r"t',nsu;.;ff)ffi<d
+
Location and Extent
Road Name Change
Sat
l;>--
tç
faart c t) //L)<
Range(s)
7tt
Number of Proposed Lots
h c,
'^"itnaff¡*Lrvntþlofeth Ê Ìne-
Zip Code
Cu
Township(s)
Proposed 5ewage Disposal Method
Fq.Lrvi e.u R-'(
State
Rezoning
Road/Easement Vacation
Aj B K
Mav'
/\
Applicant/Property Owner/Agent/Consultant
kuzoz
tT\"
..96 o
*åDtç
Uv.
Fax
Email Address
n /,a
I
Mailing Address
City
Ag ent/Con su lta
i
Sect¡on(s)
Prooosed Water Suoolv
C¡ty
E
fl
E
E
o
Block(s)
g
l.ôr rrrr...,
Second Wednesday of the Month
Variance
l1,t
*"?
20t6
r.nn¡u USE
Project Name
E
E
fi
E other:
subdiv¡sion
II
Statê
nt
Phone
/.t/L
Mailing Address
City
Certification
Zip Code
State
Fax
EmailAddress
Zip Code
Phone
Fax
(Please refer to the Regulations and Application Submittal Package for complete application requirements.)
certify that I am signing this Application Form as an owner of record of the property included in the Application. I certify that the information and
exhibits I have submitted are true
. I understand that all materials required by Boulder County must be
submitted prior to having this ma
earings or meetings may be requiied. I understand that I óust sign an
Agreement of Payment for Applic
fees or materials may be required as a result of considerations which
may arise in the processing of this
ool, and park dedications may be required as a condition of approval.
I understand that I am consenting to allow the County Staff involved in this application or their designees to enter onto and inspect the subject
property at any reasonable time, without obtaining any prior consent.
All landowners are required to sign application. lf additionalspace is needed, attach additional sheet signed and dated.
I
''*mw'ff'à
Signäture of Property dwnhr
y'kLþr^rn
o'^'PW,
Printed
Name
bv*t A-
/1,4
ora
t"n
'
The Land Use Director may waive the landowner signature requirement for good cause, under the applicable provisions of the Land Use Code
Form: P/0.1 . Rev.07.29.15 . g:/publications/planning/P0lPlanningApplicationForm.pdf
Page 13 of 93
'ib -2tr-lç
Date
ST
de
ul
k
an
yo
n
h
SAN
TA
F
id s
D av
on
RD
ARAPAHOE
Shannon
Estates
White
Hawk
Ranch
itc
25
h
tc
C
d
Lafayette
ER
R
Lark
Meadows
RD
SITE
42
Davidson
Nicholas
Estates
Grace
Mar
D itch
Louisville Res.
Lake
Waneka
SOUTH BOULDE
29
ST
BU
FF
Superior
McCAS
Page 14 of 93
RD
ST
G oo
MAIN ST
dhu
e
62
42
EMPIRE RD
S 104TH ST
ON
CHERRY
HI
GH
W
AY
O
AL
DR
Heights
W
IR E
PARADISE LN
13
DYER RD
64 Sterling DIL
S 96TH ST
I KE
S 88TH ST
NP
EMP
DR
TA
BELLA VIS
PK
W
RT
UR
AL
NI
EN Y
T
N
CE
DE
170
DR
Cowdrey Res.
No. 2
UL
Louisville
S 76TH ST
h
66TH
CHERRYVALE
Bould
h
e
ut
hu
od
So
o
tc
-B O
ST
tc h
L
AL
SH
R
A
M
s
id
i
nD
ER
E
PIN
Di
51
170
39
v
Da
NV
L
Go
RD
Marshall
South
Vale
Mesa
Valley
VIA
PI A
RD
L
The user agrees to all Terms of Use set forth
by Boulder County. For Terms of Use, please
visit: www.bouldercounty.org/mapdisclaimer
t ch
DE
AP
DR
Bari-Don Knolls
N TY
C OU
MARS HAL
Di
Harper
Lake
29
Bo
S
RD
Date: 8/28/2015
Arroyo
Campo
i
RD
BOULDER
Ho
B
D
GTON
NORTH
ERN
N
SOUTH
ke
ur
Burke Lake
n
g so
r
1
Miles
w
Ne
D
76TH ST 25
h
60
Willow
Glen
BASELINE
56
k
tc
39
55TH
MESA DR
D ry
er
Area of Detail
LE
TA
B
0
ST
Di
Cr
ee
Creek
Baseline
Res.
SIOUX DR
36
N
re e
N
ST
55TH
Hoover Hill
RD
t t o n w oo d
Stonehenge
Teller Lake
7
BURLIN
PENNSYLVANIA AVE
BASELINE
Valtec
Legion Park
56
Park
Lake
Fox Run
Hillcrest
Lake
D ST
Boulder
95TH ST
LeggettRes.
Subdivisions
75TH
61ST ST
Valmont
Res.
Co
N
Municipality
Ley n er
52
D i t ch
B ut t e
63R Owen
COLORADO AVE
RD
Valmont Butte
County Boundary 157
396 76th
Dr
yC
r
m
de
NT
VALMO M i ll
Valmont
CRE
EK
Subject Property
ul
h
N
RD N
VALMONT
Bo
rs
r
Fa
e
R
Legend
T
tc
Di
N
AIRP O
BLVD
Land Use PreApplication Map: Vicinity
Rock Cr
Stearns
Lake
Land Use PreApplication Map: Public Lands
396 76th
itch
WEW
OK A D
R
Main Ditch
County Conservation
Easement
OSMP Properties and
CEs
itc h
le D
l
i
v
hal
ars
M
WATONGA WAY
THERESA DR
Municipality
non D
ulder Ca
South Bo
ORD DR
Parcels
to
h
COUNTRY LN
it a
Ag
Subject Property
it c
rD
CLOVER LN
Legend
STENGEL COUNTRY
ESTATES NUPUD
ch
Dit
e
u
h
od
Go
OCONNOR-HAGMAN
OCONNOR-HAGMAN CE
N
0
Area of Detail
800
Feet
N 76TH ST
SKYLARK
WAY
GOODHUE BLVD
FAIRVIEW RD
EGGLESTON DR
STEINBACH
OCONNOR
FAMILY
Date: 8/28/2015
Louisville
BROCKWAY DR
PL
EDDY
E
DG
RI
CRANNELL DR
OCONNOR RD
Page 15 of 93
RD
d
vi
Da
so
n
h
tc
Di
Land Use PreApplication Map: Location
396 76th
Legend
Subject Property
Parcels
Main Ditch
ut
So
h
itc
A
OK
W
WE
DR
N
0
Area of Detail
500
Feet
Date: 8/28/2015
FAIRVIEW RD
TON DR
EGGLES
rsh
Ma
ille
alv
ch
Di t
h
Ditc
e
u
odh
Go
Page 16 of 93
THER
ESA D
R
SKYLARK WAY
GOODHUE BLVD
N 76TH ST
ORD DR
Subdivisions
h
D
on
an
C
er
uld
o
B
Land Use PreApplication Map: Comprehensive Plan
396 76th
Legend
Subject Property
Parcels
Main Ditch
National Importance
ut
So
h
D
on
an
C
er
uld
o
B
h
itc
A
OK
W
WE
N
0
Area of Detail
500
Feet
Date: 8/28/2015
FAIRVIEW RD
TON DR
EGGLES
rsh
Ma
ille
alv
ch
Di t
h
Ditc
e
u
odh
Go
Page 17 of 93
THER
ESA D
R
SKYLARK WAY
GOODHUE BLVD
N 76TH ST
ORD DR
Riparian Areas
DR
Land Use PreApplication Map: Aerial
396 76th
Legend
Subject Property
Parcels
N 76TH ST
GOODHUE
BLVD
N
0
Area of Detail
120
Feet
Date: 8/28/2015
FAIRVIEW RD
h
Di
tc
M
Page 18 of 93
sh
ar
ille
a lv
'
=
'
Site Plan Review Fact Sheet
rfsJec ldentÍfication:
PrcþctName
Ytor.¡r'..t
Prooerw Address/l-ocatlon:
TypeofSuucture:
(e.9. residencg studio, bam, etc)
Total Þdsting Floor Areal
(Finished + Unfinished sguare feet including
.
qaraqe
ifattadredJ
fe$dsþ\h ;4 '¡ø\nt//44
!01*l
I DeconstructÍon:
I
sq,ft.
I
Floon
FÍrst
Second Floon
Garage:
E
-o
sq.ft.
Covered Declic
Total:
¡q.ft,
O ,o.¡,
0nn
o
s+ f¿
rq.ft.
so,ft,
sq.ft.
Structu
l01h
Height
ß! btt:
(aboveooïing
sq.ft
sr¿de)
WYT.
I(n^li
101+"
oetaore¿
D. ¡to.¡-l
o
**'ffåËü à¡ly.jlaú
WallColor
o
sa.ft.
Roofing
Mate¡ial
o
s+t
Rooftng
Color
qlilt
I
q.ft.
'1.ù.?4,-
À
TotalBedrooms
Residentialvs.
Non-Residential Floor Area
Typof SEucture:
rsidence sn¡dio, bam. etc)
Deconstudion:
Total Þristing Floor Area:
(Finished + Unfinished square feet induding
çrageifanachedJ
Are new floor afeas being proposed wheredemolition
--f f{o
)iJ
Yes tndude the new floor
D
osed Floor Âre¿ iirler.v Constr uction On t,;
fl
sq.ft-
occur?
thetabþ
Residential
Non-Residential
\
Básenenc
sq.ft
e.ft.
5q-fu
FirlFbor:
sq-ft.
5q.ft
:q.ft.
Second Floor:
Garage:
Heishr
\tuU-".niolqg
\
éâ.
V.r¡o.
.;i , i.
wafi dþtedat
sq-fr
WallCoù
tf fÞtached
so-ft-
s.ft.
sq.ft.
Roofing
Matedal
CoveredDeclc
sq.ft.
sq.ft.
so.ft.
Roofing
Color
\
s.ft.
sq.ft.
TotalBedrooms
Form:5PR/04- Rev.03.26.12-gilpublications/spr/5pR04siteplanReviewFact5heet-pdf
Page 19 of 93
is
required,then call 303-441-3930 and ask
t
sq.ft.
Note: lf an eÍisting raall(s) and/or roof(s)
are removed and a new wall(s)/roof(s) are
- ' ,!a Limited lmpact Special Review
-'i'i
Total:
lloorarea-
constructed, the associated fl oor area
due to the new wall(sVroof(s) are
considered new construction and must
be íncluded in the cakulation of floor
area for the Site Plan Review and shown
on this Fact sheet.
E.t\i",
sq.ft.
Residential floor area includes all
attached and detached floor area las
defined in Article 18-162') on a parcel,
includlng principal and accessory
structures used or customarily used for
residential purposes, such as gan¡ges,
studiet pool houses, home offices and
workshops. Gazebosand carports upto a
total combined size of ¿lO0 square fee-t
are o<empt. Bams used foragricultural
purposed'are not considered residential
qr¿e)
sq.fL
f¡
feet
&îx'it
lnformation
(e.g-
everyth¡ng within the exteriorface ofthe
exterior walls including garages and
b:sements. Covered porch area is not
Theshaded area on the
the area counted as
qtrv
Extetíor
sq.ft.
Aoes
Floor Area is measured in terms of square
fee¿ The total square fiootage is
NonResidential
sq.ft,
pf Prope¡tt¡ in
Determining FloorArea
tr
o
=T
r/l¿ft¡l
+4482
S¡ze
Are newfloorareas being proposed where demolition will occur?
No
Yec (indudethe new floorarea
tn thetable
P
osed Floor 4rea
Construciiorr Oni
Residemial
Basement
3qp N.rupnr
for a new Preapplication conference for
the Umited lmpact Special Review.
Site Plan Review Fact Sheet
The applicant(s) islare required to complete each section of this Site Plan Review (SPR)
Fact Sheet even if the information is duplicated elsewhere in the SPR application.
Completed Fact Sheets reduce the application review time which helps expediate the
Director's Determination. Please make duplicates of this SPR Fact Sheet if the project
involves more than two structures.
Project ldentification:
Structure #1 lnformat¡on
Prooertv Address/Locat¡on:
31b N.7þ7/
Type of Structure:
(e.q. residence, studio, barn, etc.)
Total Existing Floor Area:
(Finished + Unfinished square feet including
qaraqe if attached.)
'
=T
l¿ñHL1 r1)Ø^l
?uinA'Ef""r*
Current Owner:
Deconstruction:
ô
a
sq. ft.
sq.
ft.
Are newfloor areas being proposed where demolition will occur?
Yes (includå the new floor area square footage in the table below)
Floor Area
Construction
Residential
É ru" E
\z¡ur-
Unfinished
Finished
E
Ø
Total
Determining Floor Area
Non-Residential
Height
Basement:
sq.ft.
sq. ft.
First Floor:
sq.ft.
sq. ft.
Second Floor:
Garage:
sq. ft.
sq.ft.
2z'-d'
(above exist¡ng
qrade)
sq. ft.
t2b4.
Wall Material
ft.
Wall Color
NqAJ-
Exterior
Floor Area is measured ¡n terms of square
feet. The total square footage is
everything within the exterior face of the
exterior walls including garages and
basements. Covered porch area is not
included. The shaded area on the
diagram indicates the area counted as
square feet.
Exterior
E
sq.
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
Roofing
Material
Covered Deck:
sq. ft.
sq.ft.
sq. ft.
Roofing
Color
Total
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
Detached
D ¡tterherl
hÞrA{r-
ø
Total Bedrooms
Structure #2 Information
Type of Structure:
(e.q. residence, studio, barn, etc.)
Total Existing Floor Area:
(Finished + Unfinished square feet including
garaqe if attached.)
?Pv -
tj." Ks 6
Deconstruction:
o
Residentialvs.
Non-Residential Floor Area
Residential floor area includes all
o
sq ft.
sq. ft.
Are new floor areas being proposed where demolition will occur?
Yes(includethenewfloorareasq
footage in the table below)
Floor Area
Construction On
Residential
d No E
Unfinished
Finished
E
Ø Non-Residential
Total
Height
Basement:
sq.ft
sq. ft.
First Floor:
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
(above existing
qrade)
zlbo*_
Wall Material
Exterior
Exterior
Second Floor:
ft
sq. ft
sq.
ft.
Wall Color
Âtt,.ho.t
sq ft.
sq. ft
sq.
ft.
Roofing
Material
Covered Deck:
sq. ft.
sq. ft.
sq.
ft
Roofing
Color
Total
sq ft.
sq ft.
sq.
Garage:
E
fì
Detached
2t@
sq.
ft.
Total Bedrooms
Form: SPR/04. Rev.03.26.12 . g:/publications/sprlSPR04SitePlanReviewFactSheet.pdf
Page 20 of 93
3i6"
NW
+41.ã
M*t
/Éfr{Ær
ø
attached and detached floor area (as
defined in Article 18-162) on a parcel,
including principal and accessory
structures used or customar¡ly used for
residential purposes, such as garages,
studies, pool houses, home offices and
workshops. Gazebos and carports up to a
total combined size of 400 square feet
are exempt. Barns used for agricultural
purposed are not considered residential
floor area.
Note: lf an existing wall(s)and/or roof(s)
are removed and a new wall(s)/roof(s) are
constructed, the associated floor area
due to the new wall(s)/roof(s) are
considered new construction and must
be included in the calculation of floor
area for the Site Plan Review and shown
on this Fact Sheet.
lf a Limited lmpact Special Review is
required, then call 303-441 -3930 and ask
for a new Preapplication conference for
the Limited lmpact Special Review.
\
Earth Work and Grading Worksheet:
Grading Calculation
Cut and fill calculations are necessary to
evaluate the disturbance ofa project and
Cut
Driveway
and Parking
to verify whether or not a Limited lmpact
Special Review (LISR) is required. A LISR is
lo
øla
n/a
h ln
ln/n
n
Areas
required when grading for a project
involves more than 500 cubic yards
(minus normal cut/fill and backfill
contained within the foundation
Berm(s)
Other Grading
footprint).
lf grading totals are close to tlreSQQyqrd
trigger, additional information may be
required, such as a grading plan stamped
by a Colorado Registered Professional
L
I
Subtotal
* lf the total in Box
1 is
n la-
I
f
Engineer.
subtotal
Fill
h/
t//a
(
I
a_
^/q
n/M,
greater than 500 cubic yards, then a Limited lmpact Special Réview is
required.
Earth Work and Grading
This worksheet is to help you accurately
determine the amount of grading for the
property in accordance with the Boulder
County Land Use Code. Please fill in all
applicable boxes.
Cut
Fiil
h
Foundation
t
lu
Material cut from foundation excavation
to be removed from the property
Note: Applicant(s) must fill in the shaded
boxes even though foundation work
does not contribute toward the 500
cubic yard trigger requiring Limited
lmpact Special Use Review. Also, all areas
of earthwork must be represented on the
site plan.
Total
h/L
A/o--
Excess Material wíll be Transported to the Following Location:
Excess MaterialsTransport Location:
I
Narrative
Use this space to describe any special circumstances that you feel the Land Use Office should be aware of when reviewing your
application, including discussion regarding any factors (listed in Article 4-806.2.b.i) used to demonstrate that the presumptive size
limitation does not adequately address the size compatibility of the proposed development with the defined neighborhood. lf more
room is needed, feel free to attach a separate sheet.
S
lrt,utu. lÜqz
6
()/ e
[otll
e
Drhq
t x /"a/
J
rt
ls
I
s
f
Your Property Gated and Locked?llfl
Note: lf county personnel cannot access the próþèlty then it could cause delays in reviewing your application.
Certification
I certify that the information submitted is complete and correct. I agree to clearly identify the property (if not already addressed) and
stake the location of the improvements on the site within four days of submitting this application. I understand that the intent of the
5ite Plan Review process is to address the impacts of location and type of structures, and that modifications may be required. Site
work will not be done prior to issuance of a Grading or Building Permit.
5ignatu re
)
t
Date
A
/l A-t tt lt'',
l-6-/Ç
Form: SPR/04. Rev 03 26.12. g:lpublications/spr/SPR04SitePlanReviewFactSheet
Page 21 of 93
pdf
ACCESSORY STRUCTURE
+r
N/
tl\/
TO REMAIN
\-,"ffi
LOT 8
INDIAN HILLS
FA¡RVIEW BIBLE CHAPEL
170'Jìr
L
5
wEsr
LOT
243',-T
t.
7
INDIAN H¡LLS
FENCE
660.
SIDEYARD
FENCED
Y
OUTDOOR RIDING
E\ISTING ONE STORY
70'x
FRAMED RESIDENCE
130'
¡$
q
EX. CONCRETE BLOCK
tr
LID
u.
À
v
weu-@
U'
l'ol
o,
ôt
(Ð
F
BUTLDTNG
DEMO FRAII,IED
/
m
-l
E
ROUND PEN
o
x
I
FENCE
LOT 56
FAIRVIEW ESTATES
t¡J
=
tU
É.
APPROXIMATE
s
tU)
PASTURE
AREAOF LEACH
o
210'X
FIELD
o
NEW24'
I
GATE
2',X
U'
F
(o
g
116'
RUNS
DRYLOT
9e
Oe
,
70'x72',
O04'
doo
Cq'
(o=
4j
l\
I
,
E¿t
lvP
t-
öt
z"o
É.
o
z
z
É.
vo
q
o
(Ð
(",
I
F
f,
o
Ø
Þl
ñ
oð
o
É.
f,
o
Ël
É.
F
l¡J
UJ
Ër
o
z
o
o
É.
sl
o
z
APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS
FORALL FENCES
PASTURE 3
PASruRE2
t_
210'X
-325',X112',
116'
I
24'GATE
10'SIDEYARD SETBACK
EAST 660.00'(R)
EDGE OFASPHALT
FAIRVIEW ROAD
NEW ENÏRY
-
LOT
1
-
LOT
LOT
3
FAIRVIEW ESTATES
FAIRVIEW ESTATES
3
FAIRVIEW ESTATES
uTrLrrY LEGEND (ALL EXTSTING)
SITE PI-AN
W
icnrE:1"=so{"
PHONE:
303.527.1100
\l-l
-
TROIECT
9224 MAIN STREET
L0utsvtLLE c0 80027
/î\
ovE
sA
ovE-
GA
-
ovEsAGA-
DR¡¡I'ING
OVERHEAD ELECTRICAL
WM
WATER METER
SEWER LINE
EM
ELECTRICAL METER
WATER LINE
GM
GAS METER
GAS LINE
TE
TELEPHONE BOX
WOOD FENCE
UC
OVERHEAD UTILITY CONNECTION LINES
ÍTTE
MORAN SITE PLAN REVIEW
SITE PI.AN
390 NORTH TOTH STREET
1' = 50'-0'
sc¡lr
BOULDER CO 80303
Page 22 of 93
REUStoilg
DÁIE
JANUARY
1,
2(}1O
ìÀuje- ruv\ntdd
\,t)osl Ç) .
NEW ASPHALT SHINGLES OVER NEW
WOOD TRUSS ROOF FRAMING
II
@
NEW FIBERGLASS WINDOWS WITH
CEMENT BOARD CASING
t
NEW 6" CEMENT BOARD I-AP SIDING
OVER NEW BUILDI'üG PAPER AND
1/2'O.S.B. SHEATHTNG
EXISTING GRADE
F
9na
EXISTTING CONCRETE FRONT PORCH & STEPS
EXISITING CONCRETE FOUNDATION
REMOVE BRICK AND SIDE WITH NEW BOARD &
BATTON CEMENT BOARD SIDING
I¡2A TIIX STREET
L0utSvtLLE c0 t002t
?HOIEI
s0! !¡t t100
I9I
TORTH
WEST EITVATON
¡TNEET
10
S0uLDEi C0'ITfl
!0¡0s
( ?-w\r:Åi,l
Wt,jhtn
lr
ñt
#&1 rY
Page 23 ofúÍ93
5(c^ e
Yq
ll
tl-
v\&.. \fur^- oàe)
*rÅ1^61
!4/OOD TRUSS ROOF FRAMING
NEW EIBERGI.ASS WINDOWS WITH
CEMENT BOARD CASING
NEW 6'CEMENT BOARD tAP SIÞING
OVER NEW BUILDING PAPER AND
1/2" O.S.B. SHEATHTNG
q Y"4
nXr'l
a
9
EXISMNG CONCRETE FOUNDATION
¡22^ rAtt gf iEET
t0utsvtlLE c0 ¡002t
PHOiE:
90¡ 52t-ti00
sotIfH Et"É]ú¡ÍloN
ta! l0RlH ?alff 6lREET
BOULDÊR CO
'!!03
1i
Page 24 of 93
o ¡Pd
l-iou5€
lr/o Y+t^
H'n"'u^***4
Çl
NEW FIBERGT.ASS WINDOWS WITH
CEMENT BOARD CASING
NEW 6" CEMENT BOARD LAP SIDING
Ll2" O.S.B.
EXISITING CONCRETE FOUNDATION
¡¡¡Â
t^t¡
3f BEEI
LOUìEVILLE CO IOO2'
PHOTE:
50!-527
ll00
r0ù ¡0RrH
r6lt
NORÏTI ELEVATION
sT¡EEl
0
80uLDEÃ C0 30S!3
Page 25 of 93
DECEXBEf,
I',2OI5
SHEATHTNG
-
(J<Jùu- (&
rnotuJ Çasl Çl
NEW ASPHALI SHINGLES OVER NEW
NEW FIBERGLASS WINDOWS WITH
CEMENT BOARD CASING
o
NEW 6'CEMENT BOARD LAP SIDING
V2'O.S.B. SHEATHING
t¡2^ x^ti
6TREEl
L0utSvtLLE c0 r002r
tf0tE:
t0! 621
1t00
EASTEI.EVATON
I9I ìOßfH ?!TH gTREEf
¡0uLDÊR C0 a030t
Page 26 of 93
lYtç4s
v't4t4
Page 27 of 93
m)*ns
o'\¡
N'\
,f
.-4uf
n5
\t
6<
/cfi
Åt
- ,oLl
Yt 03
-{ uf o1.'V'
'¿
ln,,(,
d
J
'ìl-?+S
dnf
^+l\ l/t"f/
Krhuç *re-nq
&
otv
Mark
sP-1
sP.2
'Ioo Bot Inl
44
44
0
0
Tmê
Diâ
A32s
0.760 3.00
A.625 225
4325
W¡dth Thlck
6',
5i8"
1t2"
Length
3r5 7lB',
3,-0 3/8'
RGA05rs7)
l0
."ì-
Át'
12
12
u--
_3L
.¡
I
Y
4
d-
RIGìDFRAMEELEVATION: FRAMELINE2 3
4567
8
RONBUILISfEÊL
KM€0170CO
THE CLEAR HEIGHTS SHOWN ABO\G ARE'ESTIMAIÊD" CLEAR
HEIGHTS ANO ARE gUBJEGTfO CHANGE BASED ON FINAL OESIGN
m3æ
Page 28 of 93
AUILD
rcS
,Å,;,¡..? rt+u'n^
j¡ll:
Fldd
Ì
FlêB
dr
D
__---__ro
gk
o
el3
D
e]¡
!.lj
D
D
6F
dr
D
D
B
I
tr
I
Ê
c
B
J
o
D
e.L!
el3
D
fiD
el3
E&
Fl€H
F¡okt
o
D
ffi
ei!
Er
u
Fi6ld
!
ANCHOR BOLT PLAN
NofE:
All
&se Pl6ts @ t0o!o'(U N.)
IRONEUILT Sf EEL BUILDINGS
KM6017oCO
Chtom
æ303
Page 29 of 93
NÂmè
K á,,^, Arpn"\
r"\12
-4r'
12
MAROI
MAROl
ERi2
ER.1
c
r
I
I
I
GIRÎ LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE
PRELIMINARYAND SUBJECT TO
CHANGE BASÊD ON FINAL DESIGN
I
i
I
I
rþld
ENDWALL
Ãr
12
I
E
I
I
ENDWALL SHEETING & TRIM: FRAME LINE
1
PANELS:26 Ga CW - Undefned color C
I
t'\
12
IRONBUILl SlEEL AUILDINGS
KM80170CO
40303
Page 30 of 93
K,A,
BOLT
^1
IABLE
FRÂMF f INF q
tsK-1/ÈK-Z
,
OF STEEL
t"\
Át12
12
DIAROI
MAROI
ER-2
E^i
c
I
r
I
I
t'
^^\
G-a
GIRT LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE
PRELIIVINARY AND SUBJECT fO
CHANGE BASED ON FINAL DESIGN
I
I
I
EC-1
/
\
EC-8
EC.7
ENDWALL
Ár
12
I
E
ril
Y
rò
Y
rî)
Y
.'ì\
12
ENDWALL SHEETING & TRIM: FRAME LINE
PANELST 26 Ga,
9
CW. Undeined 610rC
IRONBUILT SfEEL BUILDINGS
KM8017æO
00303
Page 31 of 93
Kü v7 ñrp*\
170r0"
TO-OUT OF
GIRT LæATIONS SKOWN ARÊ
PRELIM NARY AND SUBJECÍfO
CHANGË BASED ON FINAL DESIGN
1 12"
It
EC.6
ln"ro
16'{"
I
RF1.1
I
I
f.¡
GIRT
LAPS
3/4
1É
RFI.1
RF1-1
!4'
lt
3/.
I
{ 3/4
D
rÐâ
YY
.
3
1r3 7t4'
EC-'1
f-3 a/¡,
1
SIDEWALL F
I
RF1-1
¡ 3/4'
1ß
3/4'
LI
oÊ
99?
I
D
SIDEWALL SHEETING & TRIM: FRAME LINE A
PANELS: 26 Ga.
CW. Undefned ølor C
IRONBUILT SIEEL BU¡LDINGS
KM80l7æO
0ß03
Page 32 of 93
fi,)rø1 Êrun,t
I
I
(^
Y
rÐ
aà
16)
Y
Y
Y
\
.ll
1t2'
lln
4P+IF
Fleld
^..{þ+
RF1.1
: êld
II
'
{\
dL^.
t^aút
\
".^
RFl.l
RFl-1
F
eld
fr+
RF1.1
?
l
Y
./
r',-ß
"-ffiÐì
f-a::
1Iæ ¡
RF1.1
eld
GIRT LOCAIIONS SHOWN ARE
PRELIMINARY AND SUilECT TO
CHANGE BASED ON FINAL OESIGN
+
^^
F e¡d
EC.1
6-O'
6',-o"
GIRT
LAPS
ql+ Il
G-s
16)
,
-'1¡
-l.lgh'
¡r¡'
-ï¡ ¡¡'
1rx3|4'
-r-¡:/¡'
SIDEWALL
LI
ç
?9
999
SIDEWALL SHEETING & TRIM: FRAME LINE
16)
Y
o
F
PANELS:26 GE, CW - Undefined oolor C
IRdBUILT
KM00170CO
8æ03
Page 33 of 93
STEEL BUILD]NGS
I
I
\
ê
;
--]
s
J
.5
t^
t
j
I
I
It
I
I
\
J
+
rS^
-\)
'{"
{d
Þ-lþ
Page 34 of 93
*ù*
,r\\fl
Page 35 of 93
ì :1,|::
0o"a
-s-"
S#eæm'il
tWøø^
,tLc- æ_ _
+Wñffi
.å
*#"4¡æ-
^
rÀ¿- E_
4"Æ8^
-2,
-.|-wtub-
¿l
**Ë,Fr¿-.a-
_-j84tr9++
[^
Éær!44-ff8+
þpA
-4v4, y
¿
;,,irl.:ll::,:ì
s
__-_-rî_ørffiþ
-1q8'?t'ÊÊ+
,"qwbi
_iE eøæ+
..1
.
.... .!;
,.
..
.|
.
æL¡€ã_+
Page 36 of 93
**
úo*e
J
I
I
i
l
_L-
â¡
€
-t_
J---,r.
--1-
1
$
IL
À
f;
\\O{
Page 37 of 93
*CÊ
ì'v1O2
Page 38 of 93
I
o
ì
<\
"g
'v
q
ê
qE
I ¡
I I
I
I
tI
FIRgT FI.oOR
'i¡
4
oË
4
oE
rË
ó
I
ô
q
I
I
oE
.F
oF
,E
ò
I
L
,rH
o
I
_.1
I
I
-+
ï
-+
+
--t
r,@
Land Use
Courthouse Annex • 2045 13th Street • Boulder, Colorado 80302 • Tel: 303.441.3930 • Fax: 303.441.4856
Building Safety & Inspection Services Team
MEMO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
John Holste, Staff Planner
Gary Goodell, Chief Building Official
January 26, 2016
Referral Response, Docket SPR-16-0005, Moran Residential Remodel, Riding Arena and Barn Site Plan Review, 396 North 76th Street
Thank you for the referral. We have the following comments for the applicants:
1. Building Permits. Separate building permits and plan review and inspections approvals are required for the proposed remodel of the existing 1,092-sq.-ft. dwelling,
the proposed 13,600-sq.-ft. detached riding arena and the proposed 2,160-sq.-ft.
barn. Please refer to the county’s adopted 2015 editions of the International Codes
and code amendments, which can be found via the internet under the link:
2015 Building Code Adoption & Amendments, at the following URL:
http://www.bouldercounty.org/dept/landuse/pages/default.aspx
2. BuildSmart. Please refer to the county’s adoption and amendments to Chapter 11
of the International Residential Code (“IRC”), the county’s “BuildSmart” program, for
any applicable requirements for energy conservation and sustainability for alterations, remodels and repairs to existing dwellings. Figure N1101.13.3(1) is the starting
point for options for alterations, remodels and repairs to the existing dwelling. Please
refer to the link above for details.
3. Design Wind and Snow Loads. The design wind and snow loads for the property
are 120 mph and 30 psf, respectively.
4. Plan Review. The items listed above are a general summary of some of the county’s building code requirements. A much more detailed plan review will be performed
at the time of building permit application, when full details are available for review, to
assure that all applicable minimum building codes requirements are to be met. Our
Residential Plan Check List and other Building Safety publications can be found at:
http://www.bouldercounty.org/property/build/pages/bldingdf.aspx
If the applicants should have questions or need additional information, we’d be happy to
work with them toward solutions that meet minimum building code requirements. Please call
(720) 564-2640 or contact us via e-mail at building_official@bouldercounty.org
GRG:grg
Page 39 of 93
It t
Boulder
County
Land Use
CourthouseAnnex ' 2045 13th Street . Boulder, Colorado 80302 . Tel:303.441 .3930
Mailing Address: P.o. Box471 . Boulder, colorado 90306 . www.bouldercounty.org
MEMO TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
.
Fax: 303.441 .48s6
County Transportation, Health, and Parks Departments, FpD
John Holste, Planner I
January 12,2016
Site Plan Review application SPR-16-0005
SP
Request:
Site Plan Review to construct a new 13,600 sq.
a2,160 sq. ft. horse bam.
At396 N. 76d'Sfeet, in Section 01, TlS, R70W
Estate Residential (ER) Zoning District
Kathryn A. Moran
Location:
Zoning:
Applicant:
riding arena and
Site Plan Review by the Boulder County Land Use Director
is
required
for
new
building/grading/access or floodplain development permits in the plain and mountainous areas of
unincorporated Boulder County. The Review considers potential significant impact to the
ecosystem, surrounding land uses and infrastructure, and safety concerns due to natural hazards.
The Land Use staff values comments from individuals and referral agencies. Please check the
appropriate response below or send a letter. Late responses will be reviewed as the process
permits; all comments will be made part of the public record and given to the applicant. Only a
portion of the submitted documents may have been enclosed; you are welcome to review the entire
file at the Land Use Department, l3th and Spruce, Boulder.
Please retum responses to the above address by Januarv 29. 2016.
X
We have reviewed the proposal and have no conflicts.
Letter is enclosed.
PRINTED Name
Agency or Address
Cindy Domenico County
L-)
ú==-
Commissioner
\'\
-5;t
ì,:,1=.
.
,'<--
Deb Gardner County Comm¡ss¡oner
Page 40 of 93
5,'c---- Fo s ,L,-
d?=-' € t.]
Page 41 of 93
Parks and Open Space
5201 St. Vrain Road • Longmont, Colorado 80503
303.678.6200 • Fax: 303.678.6177 • www.bouldercounty.org
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
John Holste, Land Use Department
Ron West, Natural Resource Planner
January 29, 2016
Docket SPR-16-0005, Moran
I have reviewed the application materials, and foresee no significant natural resource impacts
from the proposal. Staff’s only comment is that the 31-foot height of the barn seems
excessive and unnecessary. When compared to a single “story,” the structure’s mass appears
to be nearly doubled for no additional usable space. In the future, this structure would
negatively affect the views from the neighboring parcel to the east, as well as be more visible
from 76th St.
Page 42 of 93
Public Health
Environmental Health Division
January 26, 2016
TO:
Staff Planner, Land Use Department
FROM:
Jessica Epstein, Environmental Health Specialist
SUBJECT:
SPR-16-0005: MORAN Riding Arena & Barn project at 396 N. 76th Street
OWNER:
MORAN
PROPERTYADDRESS: 396 N. 76th Street
SEC-TOWN-RANGE: 1 1S 70
The Boulder County Public Health Department – Environmental Health division has reviewed the
submittals for the above referenced docket and has the following comments.
OWTS needs repair permit:
1. Boulder County Public Health issued a repair permit for the installation of an absorption bed
system on 11/6/81. The permit was issued for an onsite wastewater treatment system (OWTS)
adequate for a 3-bedroom house. Boulder County Public Health approved the installation of
the OWTS on 12/7/81. The permit number is ON0003824.
2. On 9/9/15, the owner signed an agreement to repair the OWTS within 90 days. Those repairs
have not been made to date. Also, if the riding arena or barn generate wastewater, an upgrade
to the OWTS will be necessary.
3. The owner or their agent (e.g., contractor) must apply for an OWTS permit, and the OWTS
permit must be issued prior to installation and before a building permit can be obtained. The
OWTS must be installed, inspected and approved before a Final Building Inspection approval
will be issued by Land Use.
Avoid Damage to OWTS:
4. Heavy equipment should be restricted from the surface of the absorption field during
construction of the proposed barn and riding arena to avoid soil compaction, which could
cause premature absorption field malfunction. Caution should be used in conducting
trenching and excavation activities so that sewer lines and other OWTS components are not
damaged.
This concludes comments from the Public Health Department – Environmental Health division at this
time. For additional information on the OWTS application process and regulations, refer to the
following website: www.SepticSmart.org. If you have additional questions about OWTS, please do
not hesitate to contact Jessica Epstein at (303) 441-1138.
Cc: OWTS file
Environmental Health • 3450 Broadway • Boulder, Colorado 80304 • Tel: 303.441.1564 Fax: 303.441.1468
www.BoulderCountyHealth.org • www.bouldercounty.org
Page 43 of 93
Transportation Department
2525 13th Street, Suite 203 • Boulder, Colorado 80304 • Tel: 303.441.3900 • Fax: 303.441.4594
February 5, 2016
TO:
John Holste, Planner I, Land Use Department
FROM:
Jennifer Valentine, Development Review Planner
SUBJECT: Docket # SPR-16-0005: Moran Riding Arena & Barn (revised)
The Transportation Department has reviewed the above referenced docket and has the following
comments:
1. The subject property is currently accessed via N. 76th Street, which is a paved, County-owned
and maintained roadway classified as a Minor Arterial.
2. The existing access onto N. 76th Street appears to be partially located on the adjacent parcel to
the north. The applicant has not provided proof of legal access (i.e. permission to cross the
neighboring parcel).
3. The subject property also has frontage, and therefore legal access, along Fairview Road,
which is a paved, County-owned and maintained roadway classified as Local.
4. Per Section 5.4.1 of the Boulder County Multimodal Transportation Standards (Standards),
private direct automobile access to Principal and Minor Arterials shall be permitted only
when the property in question has no other reasonable access to the general street system.
Thus, Transportation Staff strongly recommends extinguishing the existing access onto N.
76th Street after the new access onto Fairview Road is in place. Extinguishing the N. 76th
Street access would also rectify any potential issues with legal access, as identified in #2
above.
5. If the existing access onto N. 76th Street is extinguished, it shall be revegetated and any ditch
lines shall be restored.
6. The location of the proposed access onto Fairview Road is in conformance with 5.4.1.2 and
Standard Drawing 12 of the Standards, which outline requirements for intersection and
driveway spacing.
7. Per Standard Drawing 13 of the Standards, the proposed access onto Fairview Road shall be a
maximum of 18 feet in width.
8. At or before the time of building permit, the applicant shall submit a revised site plan with an
access conforming to the width requirements outlined in the Standards.
9. Because the residence can be accessed within 150 feet of N. 76th Street, a turnaround area is
not required for emergency access.
10. A culvert is required at the proposed point of access onto Fairview Drive, conforming to
Section 5.5 and Standard Drawing 14 of the Standards. An 18” or equivalent capacity RCP or
CMP is required.
This concludes our comments at this time.
Page 44 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Duke Altschuler
Holste, John; Boulder County Board of Commissioners; Weeks, Scott; Harding, Bryan;
matthew@fineberglaw.org
Melisse Perre; Norman Heumann
396 N. 76th Street Docket SPR-16-0005
Friday, 12 February, 2016 8:58:19 PM
To everyone overseeing this request for a Large barn site and Riding area:
This property is adjacent to our south side of our property. My wife and I are very
concerned about the sheer size of this project. The barn alone is imposing and the
whole project smacks of a commercial use. Situating the barn alone where it is
placed will really block our neighbors to the East and the height of the barn is 22
feet? From the ground to a horse’s head standing can’t be more than 8 feet for a
large horse. What’s the need for a barn height of almost three times that? And why
not situate the barn on the far East side of the property against the existing trees?
We would be interested to know what happens when the children move on. It a lot
of land to sit on and a large investment for one child to utilize.
I think a site visit might be in order for the commissioners. This project needs to be
reviewed for the true nature of how it may be used.
We live at 436 Wewoka Drive for reference. Thanks for looking further into this. Melisse Perre and Duke Altschuler
Duke Altschuler
Managing Partner
2585 Trailridge Dr E
Lafayette, CO 80026
duke@ctapllc.com
o. 303-661-9475
c. 303-517-7900
Page 45 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Webmaster
#LandUsePlanner
Ask a Planner - Web Inquiry
Tuesday, 09 February, 2016 2:52:42 PM
*******************************************************************************
Name: Monica A Bendele
Email_Address: bendelep@msn.com
Docket_Number: SPR-16-0005 MORAN riding arena and barn
Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_10_5) AppleWebKit/600.8.9 (KHTML, like
Gecko) Version/8.0.8 Safari/600.8.9
Comments_to_Planner:
Hello Neighbor!
Great! Happy for them. Let people improve and build!
Page 46 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
deb bennett
Holste, John
Deb Bennett
proposed development on the corner of 76th and Fairview Road
Thursday, 18 February, 2016 11:46:50 AM
To the County Planning Department:
As residents of this neighborhood for nearly 28 years, we are vehemently opposed
to the proposed development of the indoor riding arena on the corner of 76th and
Fairview Road. Please keep us informed of any future developments in this matter.
Thank you.
Gary and Debra Bennett
7495 Eggleston Drive
Boulder 80303
Page 47 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Perry Conway
Holste, John
Horse development at 76th and Fairview
Hello, …for 35 years, I have lived across the street from the proposed horse
development by Cathy Moran at the NE corner of 76 th and Fairview Road. I live at
7670 Fairview Road, directly south of the submitted plan for an indoor riding arena
and a horse barn. In its current form, I am totally opposed to what is proposed for
the following reasons:
1. A 13,600 sq. ft. metal indoor riding arena is not in alignment with the current
use and architecture of our neighborhood. In addition, this proposed development
“opens the barn door” to commercial activities like riding lessons, horse shows and
horse sales. I would be willing to consider a smaller facility, but this size building is
not acceptable as it is currently proposed. Commercial activities should not be
allowed…period!
2. Having seen what horses do to lots in terms of overgrazing, having up to 6
animals on what would be left after the development is complete, will generate a
field of largely barren ground….a major eyesore. I have seen this happen to the lot
directly west of me with just one to two animals.
3. A nicely constructed horse barn could be attractive; however, with a height of
31’8”….wow!…does the structure really need to be that high? Once again, this
would be out of alignment with the rest of Fairview Estates.
4. I assume a large night light would need to be installed for safety and security.
This will change the nighttime ambience of the neighborhood as well. Light
pollution….are there parameters for how large, how bright such a light can be?
SPR-16-0005 in its current form is not acceptable for the reasons I’ve stated. Please
consider my request for less obtrusive and out-of-alignment proposal. Thank you, William Perry Conway, homeowner at 7670 Fairview Road. Page 48 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
dmhobbs53@gmail.com on behalf of Donald Hobbs
Holste, John
Moran Property and Indoor Arena Comments
Wednesday, 17 February, 2016 7:44:38 AM
Mr. John Holste,
With respect to the planned Moran horse arena and barn, I am an adjacent neighbor
and I support the project because it seems an acceptable use of the land. For the
27 years that we have lived here, the 4.8 acres have mostly been a vacant field,
with decreasing levels of management and care, plus a quaint but increasingly
dilapidated farm home. Now it will be converted into a well-maintained pasture,
barn and arena setup, with a remodeled farm home to accent the rural historic
nature.
I do not believe that this project will negatively impact quality of life or property
values, nor can I envision any meaningful change in traffic given its intended use. And because the land is lower than adjacent homes as a result of the natural slope
coming off Davidson Mesa, it will not negatively impact the front range view
corridors that our neighborhood seeks to retain.
I have looked at the drawings, and as a former student of architectural engineering
at CU I am comfortable in my ability to assess their impact. A review of indoor
arenas reveals that the selected size is merely average for the purpose, not
excessive, and that building significantly smaller would limit its ability to serve its
intended purpose.
Could I interject my own personal interpretation of what the design should be from a
materials or scale perspective? I suppose so, but this isn't about personal opinions,
it is about what is acceptable from a legal and zoning perspective, and what is in
keeping with the general nature of our neighborhood where horses, pastures and
other farm animals have a long history.
Therefore, I offer no opposition to this project and I welcome the chance to drive by
and see the horses as I make my way in and out of the neighborhood.
Please feel free to contact me at any time with additional questions or concerns.
Best regards,
Donald Hobbs
7746 Fairview Road
Boulder, CO 80303
hobbs@email.com
720-939-1456
Page 49 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Lanning, Meredith
Holste, John
Case, Dale
FW: Docket SPR-16-0005: MORAN Riding Arena & Barn
Tuesday, 16 February, 2016 6:54:23 AM
John,
Please respond to Mr. Finberg.
Thanks,
Meredith
From: Matthew Finberg [mailto:matthew@finberglaw.com]
Sent: Sunday, February 14, 2016 7:24 PM
To: Boulder County Board of Commissioners; Lanning, Meredith; Case, Dale
Subject: Docket SPR-16-0005: MORAN Riding Arena & Barn
Dear Sirs and Madams,
I represent Norman and Judy Heumann who live at 428 Wewoka Drive, Boulder, Colorado
80303. Their home is located on a lot which is directly north of the proposed riding arena
and barn proposed by Kathryn A. Moran for property she owns at 396 N. 76th Street,
Boulder, Colorado 80303. It is my understanding that she does not now nor does she intend
to reside in the house located on the subject site, but lives within a short distance and out of
the line of sight of the proposed facility.
According to the Director’s Determination Letter, dated February 5, 2016, the equestrian
facility will contain an 80 foot parking area suggesting that it will be heavily used in a
commercial manner. My clients are concerned not only about the impact the barn and indoor
facility will have on their previously unimpeded views to the south in this estate residential
community but also the noise, dust, and traffic which will naturally occur at such a large
operation.
Although the applicant may have technically complied with the notice posting requirement
by placing the small yellow sign on 76th Street, the people most directly affected by the
project live on Wewoka Drive and Fairview Road and were unlikely to notice the sign when
leaving and returning to their homes. The entrance to the facility is to be from Fairview
Road. Neighbors driving from Fairview Road to South Boulder Road and from Wewoka
Road to Baseline Road would not even see the sign.
I therefore respectfully request on behalf of my clients that the Board of County
Commissioners intervene and call this matter up for public hearing before the nature of this
neighborhood is forever changed to the detriment of the people who reside about and within
the sight line of the proposed equestrian facility.
Sincerely,
Matthew S. Finberg, Esq.
2425 Canyon Blvd., Suite 110
Page 50 of 93
Boulder, CO 80302
303.717.3759
www.finberglaw.com
This transmission (and/or the documents attached) may contain confidential information
belonging to the sender, which is protected by the attorney-client privilege and the
Electronic Communication Privacy Act, U.S.C. Section 2510-2521. The information is
intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you are not the
intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, or distribution, or
the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this information, is strictly
prohibited. While precautions are taken against computer viruses, it is your responsibility
to scan for their presence and we accept no liability or responsibility therefor. Internal
Revenue Service regulations generally provide that, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax
penalties, a taxpayer may rely only on formal written advice meeting specific requirements.
Any tax advice in this message does not meet those requirements. Accordingly, any such
tax advice was not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, for the purposspee
of avoiding federal tax penalties that may be imposed on you or for the purpose of
promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matters. Page 51 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Michele Fishman
Holste, John
Proposed development corner of 76th and Fairview Rd
Thursday, 18 February, 2016 7:05:45 PM
Hello ,
I have some concerns about the proposed project at 76th and Fairview Road in
Boulder, 80303.
How is this not going to become a commercial entity? It seems like an unusually large facility for the amount of acreage and given that it
abuts a neighborhood.
What will be the impact of the lighting on those neighbors living nearby?
Thank you,
Michele
Page 52 of 93
Friday, February 19, 2016
For the attention of: John Holste (Planner, Boulder County Land Use)
To whom it may concern.
I live at 7662 Fairview Road, Boulder 80303, opposite the site under review through SPR-16-0005.
I am strongly opposed to the proposed development for a number of reasons that I will outline in
considerable detail.
1) My family (and my neighbors) will suffer meaningful reduction in quality of life if SPR-16-0005 is
allowed to proceed as is. I believe this will result in a corresponding loss of property value.
2) The scale of the proposed buildings is far too large and unattractive for the site and for the
overall character of the neighborhood.
3) The property will soon become barren, and my home will be subject to the dust, odors and
insects associated with a working farm.
4) There is a misrepresentation of over 2000 square feet in the declared size of the horse barn on
the SPR-16-0005 application.
5) The stated objective is to house six horses on the property. Just because a property may be
legally zoned for a certain number of animals, does not mean that this is appropriate.
6) The plans do not make any provisions for environmental impact, notably precipitation runoff,
and ground water contamination.
7) The overly large development presents a slippery-slope risk towards future commercial activity.
Any one of these reasons would be reason to reexamine the SPR-16-0005 development in its current
form. In combination, they present a very undesirable prospect for the immediate neighbors (including
myself), the general neighborhood, and indeed for the mindful management of the Moran’s own assets.
I am not intrinsically opposed to development on this site, provided it is done considerately and
sensitively. But SPR-16-0005 is not reasonable on numerous counts.
Marc Fouquet PhD
7662 Fairview Road
Boulder CO 80303
Fouquet 2016.02.19
1
Page 53 of 93
1. Introduction.
I am an engineer by education and profession, and have used this skillset to review this application
critically, as I would any project placed in front of me.
Engineering plans serve to communicate the context, content and intent of the project so that all
participants can unite in a common purpose and execute harmoniously. Given this, it is possible to infer
that insufficient thought has gone into the planning phase of SPR-16-0005 – there are just too many
inconsistencies and omissions, especially in light of the scale of the proposed development
Regardless of the eventual outcome of SPR-16-005, the application should be rejected in its current
form, because the planning and documentation is entirely inadequate. A much more comprehensive
set of plans is required to perform a thoughtful evaluation. Phrased another way, if I was bidding out
this job, I would not even consider this applicant for the implementation.
I have no particular interest or experience with horses, but I have made a fair effort to educate myself
on this topic in the last two weeks, by visiting commercial equine establishments, and interviewing
friends and acquaintances who own horses. Thus my observations are not entirely invalid.
2. The scale of the proposed buildings.
The desire of a single family to own six horses in a residential neighborhood needs to be taken at face
value. But as will be shown, the over-development presented in SPR-16-0005 shows too much
construction and insufficient open space for this number of animals.
Riding Arena
The proposed arena is a very large industrial building, wholly inconsistent with the neighborhood’s
character. Two examples of similar local buildings are provided below, with the arena’s dimensions
superimposed.
A representative structure is the Boulder Valley Ice (BVI) hockey rink in Superior. Both BVI and the
proposed arena have identical construction of steel trusses and sheet metal siding. As far as I can tell,
the arena is almost exactly the same height as the BVI ice rink, but with a somewhat smaller footprint
(170’x80’ versus 230’x120’ (estimated by counting siding panels)). Visually, the proposed riding arena
would be almost identical to this hockey rink.
Fouquet 2016.02.19
2
Page 54 of 93
A similarly sized structure is the “main field” of the Boulder Indoor Soccer (BIS) facility at 3203 Pearl St.
According to the architect (a personal acquaintance), the dimensions of the BIS main structure are 171’ x
82’-9” (so essentially identical to the Moran’s proposed arena) and “the height is approximately 23 to 24
feet at the perimeter and 27 to 28 feet in the center” (so about 4 ft taller than the proposed arena).
In the spirit of self-education, I visited the equestrian businesses near Highway 287 and Jasper / Isabelle
roads, to familiarize myself with the buildings and environments. Most of the buildings at these
commercial equine businesses were significantly smaller - on working farms with 50-100 acres. I did see
one building about this size (at Blue Roof Equestrian Center) - which was appropriate, albeit ugly, on a
large property. Such a structure is clearly not appropriate for a 4.8 acre plot in a residential area.
I cannot comment on whether an arena of these dimensions serves a legitimate equestrian purpose, or
whether it is simply a case of “bigger is better”
Barn
The barn represents a very substantial structure, significantly larger (especially taller) than any other
building in the neighborhood (other than the Boulder Valley Church of Christ on 76th). As such, it will
Fouquet 2016.02.19
3
Page 55 of 93
dominate all other surrounding buildings. While I am not opposed to an appropriately sized horse barn
on this property, the logic for such a massive and imposing structure is unclear, as explored in the
following paragraphs.
Since I could not find a local barn anywhere near as tall as the proposed construction, here is the barn
superimposed onto the Costco gas station (which conveniently labelled the ceiling height). The
proposed barn is slightly deeper than the Costco structure: 36' versus 32'
Or the same dimensions superimposed on the Ulta store (between Costco and TJ Max). These were the
only structures of comparable size that I found while going about my daily drive.
Factual Error on application for square footage of the Barn
Note that there is a significant factual error in the stated square footage of the barn, declared at 2160
sq.ft. SPR-16-005 sheet 26 identifies a second floor, so the new construction in fact doubles to 4320
sq.ft. The presence of expensive cathedral windows and shed dormers (SPR-16-005 sheet 23-25) above
the roofline is also indicative of a second floor.
Fouquet 2016.02.19
4
Page 56 of 93
It should be noted that the Barn plans do not present any details of the second floor, or even stairs.
Since all discussion of the Barn’s upper floor is omitted from the supplied documentation, it is
impossible to determine the intended use of this significant indoor space.
Layout of the Barn ground floor
Of the 2160 sq.ft on the lower floor, only 864 sq.ft (six 12’x12’ stalls) is identified for horse stalls. The
remainder effectively appears wasted, or as over-sized tack and utility rooms. Thus the building is far
bigger than it needs to be – and therefore will present a temptation for a future owner to increase the
number of stalls. It would only require minor modifications to reconfigure the barn lower floor to have
ten 12’x12’ stalls, or an even greater number of 12’x10’ or 12’x8’ stalls (these smaller stalls are
apparently more typical than the generous 12’x12’stalls). The figures below show the proposed stalls,
and one potential alternative configuration.
Proposed Stall configuration
Fouquet 2016.02.19
5
Page 57 of 93
Alternative stall configuration, for many more horses
SPR-16-005 sheet 27 identifies a shower and toilet on the Barn lower floor. No services have been
identified for water delivery, and more importantly sewage. It is conceivable that a composting or
incinerating toilet is envisaged, but this will not have sufficient capacity to dispose of the volume of
water for the (human or horse) showers. My understanding is that surface dumping of such greywater
is not permitted in Boulder County.
In summary, as proposed, the barn will be the dominant structure in the neighborhood. Yet the plans,
as presented, do not offer a complete or coherent definition of the building’s design, layout and usage.
Certainly it is far larger than necessary of the stated objective of housing six animals.
At a minimum, the County should insist that adequately detailed engineering drawings be submitted for
the barn prior to any further permitting consideration.
3. Surface cover and runoff
The overall site layout is poorly conceived, with too much construction and insufficient natural cover.
The following paragraphs explore these issues.
Site soil preparation and drainage
Fouquet 2016.02.19
6
Page 58 of 93
The subsoil on the western slope of Davidson Mesa is clay, beneath a few inches of poor quality top soil,
and therefore needs to be carefully managed to provide adequate runoff control. Yet the proposal
makes no provisions for the drainage of snowmelt and rain that is an essential consideration for this site,
especially given the proposed over-development.
Bare and impervious surface cover
Large areas exterior spaces are identified as dry / bare (outdoor riding area, dry lot, runs, round pen) or
impervious (roof of arena, barn and existing house). These areas cover approximately 2 acres
(estimated not calculated).
The dry /bare areas need thoughtful drainage strategies, since as mentioned earlier, the clay subsoil
offers limited water absorption. This will compounded by the runoff from the large roof areas
immediately adjacent to these areas.
The runoff from the large arena roof could result foundation problems for properties to the north, if not
actively managed.
The area between the arena and barn, the paths from 76th St and Fairview Road, and parking areas will
be gravel. This means that most of the topsoil will have been removed, eliminating most of the
absorption for these areas. These surfaces cover at least 0.5 acres (estimates not calculated).
Finally, the surface cover of the area to the east of the existing structure is not identified. It is currently
untended top soil, but the intended future cover is not defined in SPR-16-0005.
Remaining pasture
It should also be noted that only a small percentage of this plot remains as pasture. From SPR-16-005
sheet 11:
Pasture 1: 216’ x 116’
Pasture 2: 216’ x 116’
Pasture 3: 325’ x 112’
Total:
Total in acres
= 25056 sq.ft
= 25056 sq.ft
= 36400 sq.ft
= 86512 sq.ft
= 1.986 acres
Thus, only 2 acres of the 4.8 acre plot have been retained as notional green space for livestock.
I understand that having one horse per acre soon results in all grass being grazed and trampled to dust.
With the intended population of 6 horses, conditions will be extremely cramped, potentially even
dangerous. Given the dry Colorado climate, there will certainly be a lot of dust, flies and odors on the
adjacent properties – including mine.
The property on South Boulder Road (opposite the Boulder Valley Christian church) testifies that there
will be no vegetation left at the site of SPR-16-0005.
Fouquet 2016.02.19
7
Page 59 of 93
Given the density of livestock, attempts to irrigate these cramped pastures would probably result in
foul-smelling mud.
The leach field from the existing house is in one of these soon-to-be-bare pastures, and its ability to
evacuate effectively may be compromised, especially since it is at the lowest end of the property.
Remaining ground areas
Given the above inventory, most of the property will be (soon become) bare soil or impervious cover
within a short time. The only remaining vegetated areas will be the small spinney of Russian olive trees.
And perhaps the 10 foot setbacks around the perimeter of the property.
Overall, the development will soon resemble a Greeley feedlot, with oversized industrial buildings,
surrounded by dirt (and worse).
Watershed / riverine impacts
Wind erosion of this dusty lot needs to be considered, given the location that sees strong winds.
Water erosion of this dusty lot needs to be considered, given the location on a slope near the foot of
very large hill. These properties (including my own) are subject to seasonal flooding and a fluctuating
water table height.
The environmental impacts of the dirt and fecal load running off this property into the surrounding
watershed would need to be understood, since all surface runoff will enter the storm drain culverts
along 76th St, and conceivably into Marshallville ditch in the event of heavy rain.
The afore-mentioned absence of sewage services from the barn could also contribute to contamination
of surface water.
3. Site concept and layout
As mentioned above, and detailed below, the concept and layout presented in SPR-16-0005 bear more
resemblance to a commercial operation, than single-family “extended backyard”.
I do not want to speculate about specific intent in this, but at best, it documents insufficient thought,
research, consideration and planning while preparing SPR-16-0005.
Individually, the following points appear as quirky features. Together, they portray either incomplete
thinking towards the development, or a deliberate effort to maintain separation between this
development and the family home, as if this was intended for commercial exploitation.

No access from the family home
Given the Moran family home is in the adjacent plot to the west, it is odd that no access is provided
between the two properties – such as a footbridge over Marshallville ditch. Instead, the family will
Fouquet 2016.02.19
8
Page 60 of 93
need to circumnavigate the property under development to the entrance on 76th and back to the barn /
arena, a detour of around a third of a mile.

Multiple access locations
Likewise it is puzzling that two access roads (the existing area off of 76th, and a new path exiting into
Fairview Rd) would be needed to reach the barn and arena. The traffic associated with single-family
usage does not seem high enough to warrant multiple entries, and suggests that higher volumes of
traffic are anticipated.
It makes little sense to incur the cost of the access road to Fairview. Furthermore, this road represents
meaningful lost area that could otherwise be devoted to sorely needed pasture.

Parking
A fairly large area has been set aside for parking spaces, suggesting higher traffic volumes than just a
single family. Again this area would be better served as pasture.
Of course, a couple small trucks and horse trailers would be needed. However, since the arena will be
unused most of the time, it would be logical to garage these vehicles in a corner of the arena, and move
them outside as required. Unless, of course, if the area in in near constant use by more than the
Moran’s immediate family and friends.

Use of existing house on 76th
The existing house off of 76th has been in very poor condition for years. Despite the considerable
expenditure needed to implement SPR-16-0005, the fate of this structure is puzzling. It is being
remodeled, but not expanded beyond its very small footprint.
It has been a rental property in the past, but its attractiveness as a rental would be compromised given
the proximity to these horse facilities. It is conceivable that this might be an interesting proposition for
a horse-loving tenant, or a facility caretaker.
As a piece of pure speculation, the location and size of this building would make it an ideal front office
for a commercial activity at this site.

Undefined item
In the north-east corner of the property, the plans demark an approximately 15’x10’ area as “G.H” but
no additional detail of the intended use are provided.
Conclusion
The material presented in SPR-16-0005 does not present a coherent plan for developing this area
sensitively or sustainably. While thoughtful development of this property could be an asset to the
neighborhood, this proposal does not offer this promise. The buildings are much too large, the
remaining pasture is much too small. The details of the barn in particular are incomplete. The items I
Fouquet 2016.02.19
9
Page 61 of 93
have flagged in this discussion certainly do not represent a worst-case scenario – they are all extremely
realistic and likely.
Therefore, I defend my homeowner’s rights by opposing this development as vigorously as possible.
Summary list of main points.
-
Overall implausibility of 6 horses for stated family-only usage
Personal concerns:
o Risk of commercial development
o Unattractive visual appearance of the proposed buildings
 Arena is too large, and too ugly.
 Barn is too large
o Increase in visiting traffic opposite my property
 Diesel pickup truck idling while loading unloading horses
o Loss of property value and quality of life through the imposition of dust, flies and odors
-
Community concerns
o Inappropriate size of the arena and barn for a small(ish) plot in a residential area
o Inappropriate size of the arena compared to neighborhood buildings
o Inappropriate size of the barn compared to neighborhood buildings
o Incomplete detailing of barn:
 Inaccurate square footage of completed construction
 No details of second floor of finished space
 No details of water or sewage services
 Non-coherent size of barn ground floor for the sated application (housing 6
horses).
 Easy reconfiguration of the barn to include many more horse stalls
o Inadequate remaining pasture resulting all vegetation being stripped
o Imposition of dust, flies and odors on neighboring properties
o Effect of surface runoff (including barn toilet / shower) on local riverine quality
o Illogical access points
 No access from Moran family home
 Two access points on 76th and Fairview
o Use of existing house at 76th
o Excessive parking for stated family-only usage
Fouquet 2016.02.19
10
Page 62 of 93
February 18, 2016 Via e‐mail Mr. John Holste Boulder County Planning Department Re: Project # SPR‐16‐0005: Moran Riding Arena & Barn Dear Mr. Holste I am writing to express my excitement at the prospect of one of the first improvement projects in many years to come under consideration along North 76th street in east Boulder County. Let me first explain that I have lived at 7677 Brockway Drive for a number of years and prior to that, lived at 7496 Panorama Drive. Both of these properties reside in east Boulder County with the most recent within the affected area of this proposed property improvement. I tell you this as I have seen a continued and significant relative deterioration of the infrastructure and real estate in this area, especially since the financial crises of 2008 – 09. Though the point of this letter is not to lament on this issue, I would like to state that I have observed many properties see their primary owners sell or vacate their home with resultant renters moving to the premises. This has created a host of problems and the net result has been damaging to property values. In addition, I have witnessed the roads fall into disrepair, homes failing to be kept up, and more than one of the structures along 76th street become a home for abandoned cars and other recreational vehicles. Economists would refer to this state of affairs as a “broken window syndrome”. With that said, I received your notice of the site plan review and studied the proposal. I hope you consider what I believe to be are just some of the important items regarding this project:  Currently an abandon, asbestos riddled, structure sits on the land. And this is clearly visible to anyone driving down 76th street. This will be cleaned up and remodeled using the existing footprint.  As are most properties in this part of the county, this is a rural area and zoned for horses. I believe given the 4.8 acres that translates into eight horses. Many other properties have horses with their own structures.  The barn will be approximately ½ of the size permitted under current Boulder Country regulations. I would also like to point out that I am in possession of a flyer from an anonymous source claiming, among other items, that this pieces of residential property would turn into a commercial property, have a negative impact on property values, destroy native habitats and more. Aside from the point that these assertions don’t seem to have any basis in fact, I encourage Boulder County to verify the source, as I have seen such misinformation appear on other proposals. In other words, it seems individuals or an organization that does not live in this area may be behind such a campaign. In my opinion, the bottom line is this proposal will immensely help the immediate area east of 76th street from an economic and appearance standpoint. I welcome this project and hope Boulder County has the foresight to see the need for such property improvements as an important step to maintaining and improving our individual properties’ economic values and quality of life. Thank you. David Halseth Page 63 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Norman Heumann
Holste, John
"Matthew Finberg"; artrolander@comcast.net; dukeaztec@aol.com
396 N. 76th Street
spr160005ref application.pdf
Hello John,
Emailed and left a voicemail this morning, but have not heard back from you. Talked
to Bryan Harding who told me to email you my concerns about the 396 N. 76 th
proposal.
· Received the postcard Monday February 7 based on your letter that was
issued February 5. Not given the required two weeks for the public to respond to the
project. Not enough time to contact neighbors that are impacted.
· There is no way anyone can read the small yellow sign placed on 76 th Street.
Forty five mph speed limit and traffic on 76 th does not allow anyone to read the
sign.
· No sign on Fairview where the proposed new access is designated for the
neighbors on Fairview to see what is proposed.
· As an immediate neighbor, I am concerned having a 13,600 square foot metal
building 10’ from my property. It is situated in the direct path of my view to the
south.
· There is no landscaping proposed to hide this unsightly commercial looking
building.
· Will have a significant monetary devaluation of my property, not to mention
the compromised feel of the rural neighborhood with monstrous buildings more
suited for an industrial complex. Ms. Moran is unwilling to relocate the arena along
Fairview behind the stand of trees which would camouflage it from our view. This
location would be in the sight line of her residence on 7705 Fairview.
· Ms. Moran indicates she is doing this for her daughter who loves riding. I
sincerely question the intent that this is for her family. How can she justify a
$2,000,000 investment for the benefit of just her kids? There are existing riding
facilities just to the north of us on Arapahoe on agricultural land. This has all the
markings of a commercial use, not allowed by this zoning. Why does she need an
80’ long parking area if this is just for her family? What assurances can be placed on
this project to assure it will not be used as a business on property zoned estate
residential?
· Concerned about the dust, noise and traffic this project could turn into.
Page 64 of 93
· For all the above reason, I request a public hearing before the county
commissioners.
I would appreciate it if you can get back to me at your earliest convenience.
Thank you,
Norman Heumann
c. 303.499.9803
h. 303.499.9803
Page 65 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Holste, John
"Norman Heumann"
RE: SPR-16-0005
Tuesday, 16 February, 2016 10:02:00 AM
Norman,
I will wait until I receive your comments today to forward them on to the Board of County
Commissioners as well as Ms. Moran. Unfortunately, as your previous comments are part of
the public record, they will be included as well. I will include today’s comments, this email
and response, and your original comments together and in that order to help avoid
confusion about your concerns.
I have also received 3 other responses expressing concerns against this proposal as well as
one neighbor expressing support. These will be included with your comments so that the
Commissioners can receive all the comments so far in one package.
Sincerely,
John Holste
Planner I
Boulder County Land Use
720.564.2647
jholste@bouldercounty.org
From: Norman Heumann [mailto:nheumann@rmi.net]
Sent: Tuesday, 16 February, 2016 7:08 AM
To: Holste, John
Subject: SPR-16-0005
Hello John,
I was reading that you inform the applicant, Ms. Moran, of any feedback from neighbors. I
ask you not share the contents of the email I sent you, Scott and Bryan this past Friday. I was
under the impression that Wednesday was the response deadline and hastily put my concerns
into the email to make sure you aware of them before this project was approved. After some
investigation, many of the anxieties I expressed in the Friday email were either inaccurate or
not applicable.
Now that I realize the response date is this Friday rather than Wednesday, I had the time to
reevaluate and rewrote my concerns. I will hand deliver to Planning today and you can
certainly share with whomever you want.
Thanks so much for your time,
Page 66 of 93
Norman
h. 303.499.9803
c. 303.817.8505
Page 67 of 93
February 16,2016
RËCEIVED
Boulder County Land Use Department
FEB
Attn:John Holste
I
6
2016
BOUI-DER COUNTY
I-AND USE
RE: SPR-16-0005
Hello John,
After further review, I have major concerns about this approval for the 5PR-1b-005. As the plans are currently submitted,
the placement of the 13,600 square foot 22' high metal riding arena just L0' from my property is situated in the direct
path of my view to the south. This will have a huge visual and impact on my property. lt will look like the Superior lce
Rink at the end of my
L.
2.
3.
4.
Why is Ms. Moran placing the arena next to my property and not the line of sight from her residence? She is
leaving a stand of Russian Olives, which to my understanding the County is encouraging property owner to cut
these thorny "trees" down, to camouflage the unsightly additions from her home. There is 4.8 acres she has to
work with and can be redesigned to place the arena somewhere else. lt appears she is fine with impacting the
neighboring properties, but not hers.
How can this massive project be allowed on a 4.8 acre estate residential zoned property?
a. How are these massive buildings and proposed use harmonious with the character of the neighborhood?
b. There is no apparent landscaping or berms on the plan to reduce the visual impact of this project.
c. Our rural neighborhood is quite and dark at night. Surely they intend to have lights on th¡s facility? What
criteria is in place to keep itfrom looking like a commercial lit property at night?
According to the plan, there is only 1.97 acres designated for pastures. By code she is allowed up to t horses.
What environmental impact will this have on the native grasses and soil after a short time of grazing?
lt was always my understanding when we applied to the County to build a freestanding swimming pool building,
that accessory buildings had to be a smaller percentage of the primary residence. The home on this property is
total of 15,760 sq. ft. in accessory buildings are being allowed? Please explain.
a. How is this allowed when the owner is not going to live in the existing home, but rather rent it?
What assurances will there be that this facility will not morph into a commercial use? Ms. Moran says it is only
for her family now. Again, this is estate residential and not agricultural zoning.
1.,092 sq.
5.
yard. Below are my concerns and would like clarification before final approval.
ft. and
a
To me, this equestrian facility belongs on a much larger agricultural property and not in a residential neighborhood
Respectively,
Norman Heumann
428 Wewoka Drive
Boulder, CO 80303-4742
h.303.499.9803
c. 303.817.8505
Page 68 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Judy Heumann
Holste, John
Norman Heumann
STR-16-0005
1.png
3.png
5-1.png
Hello John,
Attached are before and after pictures taken from my home and my backyard. I will be bringing by the actual photos with descriptions on the back. The proposed riding arena
looks like a storage pod on steroids. It will have windows which will spill light onto our property.
The130’ x 70’ outdoor riding arena takes up the rest of my backyard view. Big concern about the amount of dust created by the horses jumping and galloping on dirt. I am sure
they will be instructions being yelled to the riders altering our normally quiet neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration.
Norman and Judy Heumann
Page 69 of 93
Page 70 of 93
Page 71 of 93
Page 72 of 93
Page 73 of 93
Page 74 of 93
Page 75 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Joan Hobbs
Holste, John
Moran improvements at 76th & Fairview Road
Dear John,
I am writing in support of Kathy Moran's plan to add a barn and indoor horse arena
to her property at 76th and Fairview Road. We have lived on Fairview Road for 27
years and deeply appreciate the rural roots of the neighborhood.
The plans for the barn are lovely. While an indoor horse arena is by definition large,
I don't have a problem with its size. I know Kathy will maintain the acreage with
the utmost integrity and it will be wonderful to see horses in the pasture as we enter
and exit the neighborhood. The improvements she has already done are
impressive. That property has definitely gone downhill in the past fifteen years. It is
so nice to see trees trimmed, new fencing, and that eccentric mish-mash of
buildings being upgraded and given a new life.
It takes accommodation from all to have a positive neighborhood. Some people
don't mow to other's standards. Some have an an excess of cars in their yard. Some build big houses, some drag down the real estate comps by not remodeling. Dogs bark. Kids yell. We can't always agree. But you can't get the rural feel of a
neighborhood back after it's gone. I urge to to approve Kathy Moran's plans. I will be a wonderful asset to our
neighborhood. Regards,
Joan Hobbs
7746 Fairview Road
Page 76 of 93
Page 77 of 93
Page 78 of 93
Hello Mr. Holste,
The two Google Earth photos below show the following well: 1) the size of a similar (slightly smaller) indoor arena
in an appropriate agricultural setting location, and extremely poor condition of the overgrazed pastures even
during a recent wet season; and 2) the inappropriate and ridiculous size of the arena's industrial-sized look and
shape in context to the surrounding neighborhood subdivision houses and other structures. In addition, less than
10% of all the houses in this area are 2 stories, making tall buildings stand out as odd and misplaced.
1) Local indoor arena size, and poor condition of the pastures even during wet season! Exposed soil everywhere.
Page 79 of 93
2) The inappropriate size of the proposed arena - in the photo the size of the red area is approx 183 x 85 feet.
Please include in your review.
Thank you,
Carla Johnson
7698 Fairview Rd
Page 80 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Webmaster
#LandUsePlanner
Wednesday, 17 February, 2016 6:02:12 PM
*******************************************************************************
Name: Chela Kunasz
Email_Address: chelak@comcast.net
Docket_Number: SPR-16-0005
Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10_7_5) AppleWebKit/537.78.2 (KHTML, like
Gecko) Version/6.1.6 Safari/537.78.2
Dear Boulder County Planner,
I have read the documents connected with the docket listed above. I am concerned about several
things about the project described. The buildings do seem very large when one compares, for example,
the buildings across Fairview from this site and seems like it would stand out like a sore thumb. Also,
I'm worried about the damage to to Fairview with all the construction that is planned. Is there anything
limiting those who wish to build the barn and horse riding area from opening it to others for
competitions, etc. so that parking and obstruction of local roads could become a problem? I don't see
any other buildings along Fairview that come close to what is envisioned here. Have the planners
visited the area and seen the neighborhood? I live in the area and have frequently used Fairview as a
wonderful, attractive, peaceful place to walk. The site I am referring to is 396 N. 76th Street. Thank
you for addressing my concerns.
Page 81 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
david
Holste, John
Marian
Horse arena on 76th st
Dear mr. holste,
My wife and I live at 324 76th st., just 2 doors down from the planned 13,000' ft
riding arena and 32' tall barn.
We are concerned that this process is moving along very rapidly compared to how
little good information we have on how much will change in our neighborhood.
So we hope this will not be given a final approval until a better chance to
communicate with other concerned parties is allowed to happen.
Thank you, David Lucas
Marian Bussey
Page 82 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Joy Meadows
Holste, John
SPR-16-0005/Moran Riding Arena
I’m writing to voice my support for the proposed redevelopment at the corner of 76th and Fairview
Road in Boulder. I’ve lived in the neighborhood for 14+ years, across the street and up two homes from
the lot.
I think the proposed plan fits in very nicely with the rural feel of the neighborhood. I absolutely love the
cows that pasture in the open space behind my home as well as the many homes in the neighborhood
that have farm animals, chickens, alpacas, etc. My elementary aged daughter is thrilled with the
prospect of having horses nearby. It will be lovely to see them from my yard and to drive by them
every day.
I understand the property is zoned for 8 horses but the owner is building a 6-stall barn. That seems
very reasonable to me and shows consideration that she is not trying to maximize the property’s use but
doing something special for her family.
I am very much in support of this and look forward to seeing horses in the pasture on Fairview Road.
Let me know if you have any questions.
- Joy Meadows
303-522-9045
7758 Fairview Road
Boulder, CO 80303
Page 83 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Webmaster
#LandUsePlanner
*******************************************************************************
Name: Susan Moore
Email_Address: smoore@brooksidept.com
Docket_Number: SPR-16-0005
Remote User: HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64) AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko)
Chrome/48.0.2564.109 Safari/537.36
RE: Moran Riding Arena and Barn
I have lived on Fairview Road for almost 25 years. In the past 20+ years I have tired of the skate board
park, beer parties and bonfires at that property. I am enthusiastically supporting the upgrade to the
property at the intersection of 76th and Fairview Road. Kathy Moran has lived on Fairview Road for 13
years. She is part of our community and understands the majority of our concerns. I think that a lot of
thought has gone into adhering to the neighborhood overlay in protecting view corridors and minimizing
the impact on the neighborhood. The barn and the riding arena are set on the north side of the
property, preserving the open grassland next to Fairview Road. I have no doubt that Kathy will maintain
the property consistently. Thank you for the great improvement to the neighborhood. Sue Moore Page 84 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Sue Peiker
Holste, John
"Sue Peiker"
Project #:SPR-16-0005 MORAN Riding
This e-mail is response to the site plan review for the corner of 76 & Fairview Road,
SPR-16-0005 MORAN Riding. We have a variety of concerns that we will express
here:
1. What is the current zoning and is it consistent with the proposed use?
2. The proposed plan does not fit in with the current residual use surrounding
this property.
3. The horse density appears to be quite high per acre compared to surrounding
properties.
4. I am concerned that it could easily be turned into a commercial operation:
horse boarding, riding stable.
5. I am concerned that there will be various incidental problems: manure, light,
flys, smell, dust, drainage, visual impact.
6. I am concerned there is not any building mitigation for such a large structure:
drainage plan, environmental plan, utility plan.
7. I am concerned about the traffic problems: parking, that many vehicles
coming in and out to maintain the facility.
Thank you,
Sue Peiker
550 Ord Dr.
Boulder, CO 80303
Page 85 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Debora Price
Holste, John
SPR-16-0005 concern
Friday, 19 February, 2016 11:39:03 AM
Hello,
I am an owner and resident on Fairview Rd in Boulder, and I have recently become
aware of the proposed development on the corner of 76th and Fairview Rd. I
reviewed the information that is public on the website:
http://www.bouldercounty.org/property/build/docketsdocs/spr160005ref.pdf
Although I typically do not interfere with a neighbor's desires for their use of their
property, I must voice my concern due to the nature of this development.
Based on the information that is public, it appears that the owner, would like a
substantially large indoor riding stable, a substantially large barn, and a very
minimalist home to live in - less than 1100 sqft.
Based on these plans, it appears that the owner is building for the opportunity to
commercialize the property. I am very concerned that any property in a residential
area be used for commercial use. Is there any guarantee by the county that this area cannot be used for
commercial purposes? Ever?
Also, based on the size of the arena and horse barn, I am concerned about the
agricultural impact it will have as well as the potential change in quality of life for
neighbors around. What kind of lighting would be necessary for such a large establishment?
Traffic/parking issues?
Finally, I am very concerned about the quality of life for horses on this property
based on the lot size. It does not appear that the amount of land not taken up by
buildings would allow ample grazing for horses.
How many horses will be allowed on the property at once? To live there
permanently? Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I would like to continue to be
informed about this development. You are welcome to email your responses or call
the number below.
Regards,
Debbie Price
303-956-3931
Page 86 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Art Rolander
Holste, John
artrolander@comcast.net
76th street proposal
Friday, 19 February, 2016 10:46:30 AM
Good morning John,
My wife and I lived at 417 Wewoka Drive and currently at 353 Skylark Way for 22
years and have greatly enjoyed our rural life style. During this time we have had 3
horses, enjoyed the riding, training and the stewardship to the land that goes with
it. We have continually prided ourselves with this responsibility and enjoy this life
style. This is now being threatened by the Moran proposal. A 13,000 square foot
indoor arena (similar in scope to the Superior Ice Arena) will forever change our
rural and country atmosphere. It will be one of a kind in our neighborhood that is
questionable “what and why there”? It raises questions that its size will be more
used as an equestrian center and not just for family use. Why would they need 8
parking spaces? In our horsemanship experiences with riding clinics, indoors and
outdoors, this seems to be a plan for a potential equestrian center and not just a
family riding arena.
We view this proposal is an inconsistent use and a change in character to our
neighborhood. We STRONGLY oppose this proposal as submitted and if it proceeds
we would encourage a smaller scale for the arena and barn that would be more
compatible to our neighborhood. We have all taken residence here because of its
character, architectural style(s) and serene location and views. One persons request
and/or need(s) should not interrupt and change the character of 100+/- home
owners that moved here for its quality and neighborhood lifestyle that has been in
existence for 4 decades or more!
Furthermore:
1. Whether or not zoning allows this use it needs to be noted that the
renovated house will not be owner occupied or the primary residence but a rental for
a care taker. That in itself could change the use by right.
2. The number of horses per acre on site without improvements is correct BUT
the amount of grazing land is greatly diminished. We have a “sacrifice” pasture of
approximately 1.4 acres for our 3 horses to graze. To keep a pasture strong with
grass you need I horse per acre in addition to annually seeding and fertilizing. Otherwise it will quickly become over grazed leaving room only for weeds that
horses will not eat.
3. As important it should be noted that there is a ingress/egress issue that
Page 87 of 93
needs to be resolved before there is any legal access!
4. Has there been any surveying done that would indicated the property lines
including access issues? This is very important.
5. Have there been any studies and/or statements about arena exterior lighting
and the impact to the neighborhood. We know that there will be a need for exterior
lighting for security and safety. You cannot just turn it off and walk away each
night. I do not think the neighbors are aware of this potential impact!!!
6. The County signage on 76 th Street is so small and cannot be read as you
drive. It is very misleading. It appears to be for a house renovation and not a
equestrian facility and separate barn and hay storage!
7. We think there should be restrictive guide lines in this application for present
and future use(s) to safe guard our neighborhoods character and future.
Respectfully,
Art and Robyn Rolander
353 Skylark Way
Boulder, CO 80303
303-499-4112
PS I will drop off a hard copy to your office in a few hours
Page 88 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Diana Rollings
#LandUsePlanner
Site Plan Review: Appication SPR-16-0005 Moran riding arena an barn
I have serious concerns and unanswered questions about the proposed construction
of a 13,600 sq.ft. steel indoor riding arena (80' x 170' x 22' in height) AND a 2160
sq.ft. horse barn (36' x 60' x 31'8" in height) PLUS the remodeling of the existing
1092 sq.ft. house all on only 4.8 acres at 396 76th Street. IF this property has
agricultural use status HOW can that agricultural status be maintained since there
will not be enough acreage left to raise a hay crop for profit as in previous years? Maintaining agricultural status requires at least 8 animals and the an attempt
must be made to show a profit. In addition to the above concerns, I feel very
strongly about the visual impact of a 31'8" high / 6 stall horse barn. Why so high??
The second floor of this "barn" appears to be for human use.
I have recently inherited the property at 7350 Goodhue Blvd. from my deceased
father, Robert Pherson. Being a fourth generation Boulderite I feel very strongly
that what little of the agricultural life style, land and water that remains should be
guarded from over development. This proposed project borders the Marshallville
Ditch, in which I am a shareholder. The integrity of this irrigation ditch, which
provides water to local agricultural lands, needs to be maintained. There can not
be any unauthorized pumping of said water from this ditch or dumping of any type
of debris or external water into the ditch. Water usage from this ditch
is strictly for use by Marshallville shareholders and there must be a unfenced
maintenance right-of-way on both sides of the Marshallville Ditch. This would allow
for cleaning and maintenance and/or the passage of any heavy equipment should it
become necessary. These concerns need to be thoroughly address before moving forward. As of this
morning, I see that workmen are already installing new fencing around this
property. Why if this project has yet to be approved???
Thank you for addressing these issues.
Diana Rollings
7350 Goodhue Blvd.
Boulder, CO 80303
303 588-1925
Page 89 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
leah@idbcorp.com
Holste, John
SPR-16-0005 Moran barn and stable
Wednesday, 17 February, 2016 8:10:24 AM
A neighbor of mine left a flyer in my mail box yesterday. It did not have “their”
name, it was anonymous. I actually dislike this type of subversive action. If
someone takes the time to put together this type of a flyer, then sign your name in
the action to “stop” this kind of development. Talk about being a chicken-shit (
sorry about that). BUT, after reading it and doing research both my husband Jay and I are thrilled with
what is going to be developed in our neighborhood. It looks like the building, the
barn and the sprucing up of the home on 75th will have a nice look to our eclectic
neighborhood.
Our neighborhood is built up with all sorts of housing styles, different type of outbuildings, barns, sidings on our homes, landscaping and garages.
Please allow this to happen Kathryn Moran to build on her property. The plans look
very clean and nice looking. IF you would like our comments either via email or phone contact us.
Leah (and Jay) Sherritt
443 Wewoka Drive
303-499-2968
Page 90 of 93
From:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Date:
Jenni S
Holste, John
dl231503 l
Concerns over proposed development: 76th & Fairview Rd
To Whom It May Concern, We live on 397 Ord Drive, Boulder 80303. We adjoin the property at 76th & Fairview
Rd, and we are writing to state our strong concerns regarding the development of a
large indoor Riding Arena. We are concerned about the environmental impact on
native grasses, soil, and water usage. We are also concerned about the potential
light pollution from such a large arena and eight car parking lot. This parking lot and
large arena also seem to lend themselves to being a commercial entity which we are
strongly against in our residential neighborhood. If the development can promise to be a smaller outdoor horse arena with a small
barn, as a adjunct to a home residence, we are comfortable with this. Thank you, Jenni Skyler and Daniel Lebowitz
720-331-3354
707-328-2782
Page 91 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
jeanettewagner14@comcast.net
Holste, John
Project #SPR-16-005
Dear Mr. Holste,
I received a notification card regarding a proposed horse barn and riding arena. The
current state of the lot is an eye-sore, with untended tumbleweeds, Russian Olive
trees, and three dilapidated shacks. The previous tenants have had loud parties and
bonfires, and many cars parked for all the guests/tenants This has been in stark
contrast to the adjacent lot on Fairview, which has the best landscaping in the
neighborhood; the Moran property.
76th St. borders this lot, and is already home to THREE large churches with parking
lots. A large animal barn, or arena would actually be more in line with the various
animal enclosures several homes already have, (including horse barns). I don't
understand why anyone living in this neighborhood would object to these structures
as, without a HOA, we have all been allowed to develop our properties as we see fit.
The lack of uniformity in our estates is what gives our neighborhood charm. I am
looking forward to the improvements.
Jeanette Wagner
7768 Fairview Rd.
720-301-3291
Page 92 of 93
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Courtney Wentworth
#LandUsePlanner
Project # SPR-16-0005 MORAN Riding Arena & Barn
I received the site plan review notification card about the property near our home. I
would like the Board of County Commissioners to consider reducing the size of the
Riding Arena. In our residential area, the open space and country living is what is
appealing to residents and the size of this arena seems very, very big for the lot. I
would ask for a smaller concept to be considered. I worry it will take away from the
view and country feel of our community AND I worry it would open the door for
others to build large structures, that in the past have been avoided. I ask for your reconsideration before approving a large structure such as this for
personal use in this area. Thank you for your consideration.
Courtney Wentworth
303.815.7164
Page 93 of 93

SPR-16-0005 BOCC Buisness Meeting

Transcription

Similar documents

SPR-16-0005 Application Materials

grand rapids, mi • van andel arena • sunday, october 16, 2016 • 6:00

3365 Fairview Street Burlington - Sublease Flyer

Eine neue Ehrenurkunde wurde geschaffen

Whitemud Equine Centre Arena Redevelopment

BEST FEATURE PAGE

Letter to Parents - Guilderland Central School District

Barleyfields Equestrian Centre