January 13, 2026 — Board of Zoning Adjustment Regular Meeting

Transcript

Captions from City of Boulder YouTube recording.

[0:00] I need to wait for you. I just started our recording, so we are good to go. Great. You all are. So this is a meeting of the Board of Zoning Adjustments, and Thomas, I guess, do you want to read the rules of decorum now? And then I'll… Sure. Okay. Yeah, we can, go ahead and start with that. Just give me one moment to get those pulled up. Alright, thank you, everyone, for being with us. I'm just going to share some basic rules that cover our meeting conduct around public participation. First of all, we want you to know that the City has engaged with community members to co-create a vision for productive, meaningful, and inclusive civic conversations. This vision supports physical and emotional safety for community members, staff, and board and commission members, as well as democracy for people of all ages, identities, lived experiences, and political perspectives. And you can find more information about this vision and the community engagement process on our website.

[1:11] Following are some examples of rules of decorum found in the Boulder Revised Code and other guidelines that support this vision. These will be upheld during this meeting. All remarks and testimony shall be limited to matters related to city business. No participant shall make threats or use other forms of intimidation against any person. Obscenity, racial epithets, and other speech and behavior that disrupt or otherwise impede the ability to conduct the meeting are prohibited. And participants are required to identify themselves using the name they are commonly known by, and you must display your whole name before being allowed to speak online. When we get to the public participation portion, if you would like to speak, you could raise your hand by hovering your mouse. Over the bottom of the screen in Zoom and looking for the raise hand icon. And if you don't see that one, you might need to click this reactions button to expand it, and then click the raise hand icon there.

[2:03] And that's all from me. Back to you, Chair. Great. So tonight we have one item, and for… for that item, staff is going to present first, and then the applicants are going to have a chance to present, and then the public will be invited to comment, and then the board will discuss the matter. And in this case, because there's only 3 of us, we need all three of us to vote affirmatively in order for the, in order for the variants to be passed. If one of us doesn't approve of it, then we can, Look into something like a continuance, but, assuming that we all are in agreement, then the motion would pass. So, I think… Is that clear enough, in terms of… of what we need to do, Robbie?

[3:07] I believe so. Okay, so, the… the… the matter is BOZA202… I guess it's… is it 2026 now? It's 2025 since it was submitted last year. Okay, 022… 202500013. And I guess, Robbie, now it's up to you. Okay, thank you, Madam Chair. And let me just share my screen real quick. Okay, again, this is BOZ2025-00013. The address is 836 9th Street, and this is a setback variance.

[4:01] As part of an overall renovation project to the home, the applicant would like to recognize and establish an attached carport and elevated deck off the back of the home in order to meet setback requirements for a principal structure in the R01 zoning district. This carport and deck structure was originally permitted as detached, but at some point, many years ago. And by previous owners, it was attached to the home without permit, creating a non-standard setback situation. That needs to be resolved to allow for future permits at this property. The request includes a small… also includes a small expansion of an existing elevated landing connecting the carport and deck. structure to the home and providing direct access to the rear yard. The resulting rear east setback from the subject carport deck will be approximately 4.9 feet. Where 25 feet is required, and approximately 4.9 feet exists today. Section of the land use code to be modified, Section 971, Boulder Revised Code 1981.

[5:02] And up on the screen, I believe you see it, let me know if you're not seeing it. But up on the screen, you can see the location of the subject property. Within the application materials, there were 3 letters of support from surrounding property owners. And those three are, denoted as the green stars that you see on the property, so they are, the neighbor to the north, the neighbor to the south, and the neighbor behind the house, and to the southeast across the alley. And the addresses have been listed on the left side of the screen, and this is zoned RL1. And a little bit in the way of the history and some zoning information before we get into the variance request. Again, it is zoned R01. The lot size is around 3,825 square feet. That is considered a substandard-sized lot. And… because the minimum lot size for a typical R01 property is around 7,000 square feet. The history of the property, the home was built and permitted and built circa 1927.

[6:05] The existing carport and deck was permitted and built circa 1993. Records do indicate detached carport and deck. Aerials appear to show the connection of the detached carport and deck as far back as 1999, so we are comfortable saying that it has been attached in some form for at least, 26 years now, but we could not find any permit record of said attachment. And the attached carport deck does create a non-standard and unpermitted situation that does require a remedy before future permits can be pulled. So, the overall project to the home, a renovation to the inside. Does require for this to be addressed prior to us being able to issue any sort of a permit. And the variance… granting of a variance would allow them to move forward with other, permits as needed. And the current owners and the applicant of the BOZ25-13, purchased the home in January of 2024. So the…

[7:11] Connecting conditions, of the subject carport and deck were done, decades prior to the current ownership of the home. In the existing and proposed floor area, there is no change. The only addition is for an extension of the landing and some stairs. That would not count as floor area, so the existing and proposed floor area for the home is around 1,764 square feet. The maximum for the property is around 2,403 square feet. And then the existing and proposed building coverage, there is a small expansion of building coverage because of that elevated landing and stairs. The existing, building coverage for the property is 1,000… around 1,293 square feet. And the proposed would be around 1,320 square feet, and the maximum allowed for this property is 1,589 square feet, so they are still somewhat under their

[8:09] maximum allowed for the property, even though it's a substandard-sized lot. And all of this will be verified at time of building permit. And then solar access, side yard wall articulation, side yard bulk plane, and height. Due to the location and size of any modifications to the existing home, there is no issue, and we will, of course, verify all of that at time of a building permit when that time comes. So here are some existing site conditions. This was all provided within the application. We do have an aerial. The lower right image you see is the subject carport and deck. It is a You can park under it with access to the alley, and above it is a deck. That's how it was permitted, but at some point, there was a small landing connection that essentially turned what was a detached carport and deck into an attached carport and deck. It is now a part of the house and has to meet

[9:03] principal structure setbacks. And you can see that a little clearer on the lower left image, which comes from the survey document. And then we have a photograph of the existing conditions, which is the central, upper central picture. So, what the board is considering this evening is a setback variance request, and that is a variance to the Rear East setback. And it's a variance for approximately… to allow approximately 4.9 feet, where 25 feet is required, and approximately 4.9 feet exists today. The left site plan shows the existing conditions, and the right site plan on the screen shows the proposed conditions. The existing and proposed 4.9 foot setback, which is the green dashed line you see on both images, will not be changing. And, the reason for a variance to the small landing stair extension is because it is located within the 25-foot rear yard setback, so…

[10:03] Any addition within the rear yard would require a variance. That's why the variance this evening is to recognize and establish that 4.9 feet, and then to also allow for that small landing extension to the south. And then we also have some existing floor plans. The top is… The lower left, the top left, is the lower level, and the bottom is the main level. And then the proposed floor plans, I just did the main level, which shows that extension of the landing and the stairs with direct access into the backyard. That's the image on the right. And then, within the application packet, there were some walls being moved around or replaced. Those are not impacted by the variance this evening. The variance this evening is primarily to Recognize the existing carport and deck, and then to allow for that, landing, extension, and stairs, which you see right here, shaded in the gray.

[11:02] And then this shows you… oh, I'm sorry. This shows you proposed elevations. We have the rear east, which is the top, and the side north, which is the bottom. The elevations were… the directions were not correct within the application, so I kind of redacted those. But the top image you see is the rear east. Which is looking from the alley to the back of the house. So, right here, you can see that new landing that is proposed, and they're also proposing to elevate the door with direct access to what I believe is the kitchen area into the house. There's some interior Work being done, and the applicant can touch on that if the board has any questions. And then all of this over here that you see is the existing carport and deck. And there is also a small shed located to the north that will be removed. And then down here is the side north. So, the subject carport is here on the left.

[12:01] And then the next image shows the front of the house, which visually. You won't really see any of this work. And then we have the, south side, so here on the right, you can see that deck, and then you can see the stairs and that landing right about here. And then we also have some… the images on the left are the existing and proposed drawings, 3D drawings, you can see the existing, and then right here on the lower left image, you can see that extended, landing with the stairs, providing direct access to… from the… Interior of the home to the backyard without having to go through the carport or deck. And then we have some interior photos showing the existing conditions of the property. So with that, the applicant kindly responded to criterion H1A through D. And as well as H5A through D, and that is also what staff used when evaluating and drafting our proposal for the application, the variance request.

[13:02] With that, staff does feel that it fully meets criterion H1, A, B, C, and D, as well as H5A, B, C, and D, and is recommending support and approval of the variance request as it has been presented tonight. We recognize that it is a significantly substandard-sized lot, which in itself pres… presents some hardships in terms of any development on the property, but on top of that, we do recognize that what is proposed is minimal. They are wishing to, not have to completely deconstruct the… Permitted, carport and deck, and while also maintaining access from the back of the house. to the backyard, and that is the, kind of, the connecting piece, including the new landing and the access to the backyard. We also received written support from surrounding property owners. We did not receive any written opposition from anybody.

[14:05] And with that, staff does feel that it meets Criterion H1 and Criterion H5 in full, and again, is recommending support as it has been presented. I will leave it at that and hand it back over to you. Madam Chair. If you have any questions for me, I'd be more than happy to go over them, and I know we also have representatives, from the application here with us, so they can also provide more information. So with that, I'll hand it back over to you. Okay, Drew or Sean, do you guys have any questions? I have no questions for Robbie. Okay. Sean? I, too, have, no questions. Okay. I just had a quick question, Robbie. So, was this… since at some point in the 90s,

[15:02] The carport went from being detached to attached. And without a permit, Is… did this all come to light when they started, figuring out how they were going to apply for the building permit, or how did it come to light? Correct. The applicant, the property owner and applicant, they did their due diligence. Like, we… like people to do. They reached out to the city, and they might have a little more in the way of information. But it started out with somebody else on my team, and it was then directed to me when we realized that that connecting piece was not permitted and might require a variance. So, they did their research before kind of moving forward with permitting or anything like that. Okay. So, if… if there are no other questions from the board, We can go ahead and have the applicant do their presentation.

[16:12] Sure, I'm working on, getting them all in here to be promoted. Who from the applicant team will be actually sharing the presentation, if there is one? I guess I'll unmute. Patrick, do you wanna… do you wanna do it? Hi. Hi, everybody. Yeah, sure. Hi, everybody, thank you so much for… I don't know why my camera's not working, but, yeah, thank you so much for all your hard work, Robbie, and helping us out with this variance process and putting this whole packet together. Yeah, I, appreciate… I think you've, pretty much summed everything up that we wanted to discuss and, get approved here. Robbie and I have been working together on this project for a little bit of time now, because we were just doing the interior remodel, and…

[17:09] Realize that, you know, with the 25-foot setback, and the back of our house being at 25 feet, that this thing in the back is probably not… Excuse me. Yes. Terribly sorry to interrupt. Madam Chair, I believe that the speaker needs to identify themselves and provide an address before launching into the presentation. Yeah, I should have, I should have mentioned that. Yeah, so go ahead, just… Real quick, go back and just say your name and your address. Yeah, hi, my name is Patrick Gubitos, and I'm with Sobo Homes at 900 Arapaho, and my home address is 3458 Elliott Street, Denver. And you can just continue on with your presentation.

[18:03] Oh, okay, great, thank you. Yeah, so the main, Reason that we, you know, reached out was because we figured that this, attachment is encroaching into the rear setback. And, the biggest hardship that we… or the biggest thing that we had going on was that we have this staircase That led the basement access was against… it was… we think we had, like, a 16-inch landing going, down the stairs. So we wanted to remove that stairs, and coming out of the kitchen, that whole staircase and situation was, you know, very… kind of dangerous. So, in order to revamp that whole system, we want to, have direct access from the outside. And since we had that deck there, we figured, just put a small landing there, and that would be… Like, a proper way to access the yard from the back of the house.

[19:04] And, you know, with the hope of it not being seen, and with the hope of approval from other neighbors, yeah, we were just hoping that, this is, something that you guys would see and improve. Okay, Miles or Mike, do you guys want to weigh in at all, or… I'm Miles, I'm the owner of. Oh, hang on one second. 836 9th Street, which is the property under question, and yeah, I bought the house with the deck attached, kind of thought it was all on the up and up, and you know, doing this remodel, we realized that it would be a pretty big cost to bring that within code, so, would prefer to just kind of leave it as is. You know, fix the interior, do the nice exit, but otherwise not really touch it. So, yeah, thanks for your time and consideration, really appreciate it. Okay.

[20:02] Yeah, my name's Mike D'Onofrio. I work with Patrick at Sobo Homes, and yeah, like Miles said. are… Part of the design is, like, the path of least resistance was there's this thing in the back. We really don't want to touch it, we really don't want to mess with it, we're just trying to make the main level work, trying to get the main level up to code, so the variance is, Oh, gosh, Robbie and Patrick, what's our phrase? The, to… Acknowledge and establish. Is that what it was? Recognize and establish. Thank you. Recognize and establish this, this carport, And really, the goal is to not touch it, though. That's kind of… our meetings with the homeowners have been… it's all about the inside of the house. That's really what we're on board to do, is remodel the house, make a nice staircase.

[21:00] That's to code and unlock a couple of weird idiosyncrasies with the inside, and that rear door is, one of the linchpin things to having the main level make sense. Okay. Well, if that's all from the, applicant, Thomas, I don't know if you can tell, are there any members of the public who wanted to speak? Right, I suppose first, I should ask, Sean or Drew, do you guys have any questions for the applicant? I do not. Yeah, I also don't have any further questions. Okay, I don't either. So, Thomas, are there any members of the public who wish to weigh in?

[22:02] Yeah, thank you. We do have one individual calling in, I'm not sure if they are with the applicant team or if they're a member from the public, but they're attending… Via phone, if… That is you, and you would like to speak, you can use… you can press star 9 on your phone to raise your hand. So we'll give you them a few moments to… do that. Again, this is the public hearing opportunity if you're joining us and would like to give a comment to the board. and you're joining by phone, please press star 9 on your phone, and that will raise your virtual hand so I can call on you. And I'm not seeing any… any action from them. So I believe we can move on. Okay, Patrick or Sean, or sorry, Drew or Sean, do you guys have any other comments or, before we ask for a motion?

[23:14] I guess we normally, you know, discuss it, right? Yeah, I guess from my perspective, I think it meets the criteria. I think that between, you know, the physical condition, the having this, covered carport, you know, 30 years ago. That's definitely unusual, and definitely the substandard lot, because the new addition is going into the setback, But I think, that it meets the… the criteria. I could run through it if, Deshauna, would you like that? Or. It would make an excellent record, Board Member Eisenberg, if you, would like to speak additionally, but if you are comfortable just doing blanket, approval, if you can just be cleared of, the specific criteria, that would be sufficient.

[24:17] the citations. Yep, I guess in… H1AI, right, the unusualness, small lot plus, existing carport. For B, definitely not everyone has that kind of carport, situation, so it's not existing throughout the neighborhood. And, yeah, I think given the small lot, cannot be reasonably developed. And this hardship has not been created by the applicant. in H5A, definitely would not alter the character of the neighborhood, it's a very minor change. And it would not affect the enjoyment of adjacent property, and, I definitely think this is the minimum variance,

[25:09] That would, meet. There are requirements, and there's obviously no solar access concerns. For D. Okay, great. I would be in favor. Okay. Sean, what about you? How are you… how are you leaning? Yeah, I also feel that it satisfies the requirements, specifically H1A. As we can see, that lot is extremely shallow. It's way under the normal minimum lot size for the rest of Boulder, and even looking to the left and right of that block. The other lot sizes are much bigger. For H1B, I do feel it meets that when I look at the rest of the neighborhood as a whole. But, something I'd like to clarify just, with the rest of this board, is because that specific block

[26:10] does seem to be full of similar lots that are very shallow. For whatever reason, that block seems to be smaller than the rest, I think, because of the street to the right of it. However, the lot sizes are… some are wider, some are narrower, and just in an general question. you know, does H1B refer to that it's the only unusual lot in the neighborhood, or that, it's one of a few unusual lots in a neighborhood? And I can speak to that. So, H1B states the unusual circumstances or conditions do not exist throughout the neighborhood. So the… If every single lot was that shape and size, then it would be a very common thing. But one thing worth noting in H1B is that it says, or zoning district.

[27:05] So the, this is not typical for R01. We would not permit a lot this size in this dimension in R01. So the board can choose between either the neighborhood part or the zoning district part, when, weighing in on H1B. Gotcha, yeah, thanks, Robbie. That definitely clarifies that, and in this case, I would say it definitely meets the criteria of H1B, because this lot size is much smaller than the zoning area. I think it also meets, H1C. Because of the small lot size, it's almost impossible to do anything to the property outside of, the four walls of the house, because it seems like it already meets the setback lines. And H1D, you know, this change is very minimal, I don't think it's…

[28:01] creating any hardship, on anyone else. And then, I do think it satisfies all of, H5, it's not significantly changing what's already there, so, you know, H5A, I think it definitely meets. H5b, it's only extending the staircase, to the edge of the… residents, I don't think there's anything that would affect any of the neighbors around them. For H5C, it does seem like they're doing the minimum way to, update the structure, without doing anything extravagant. And H5D, as we saw, does not conflict with any of the solar provisions. So with that, I would be inclined to vote yes on this. Okay, great. Well, I agree with what Drew and Sean said. It does seem like it meets the criteria of H1 and H5 in totality.

[29:08] So, with that, drew or Sean, you want… does one of you want to make a motion? We'll make a motion to approve BOZ2025-00013. Okay. And I second that motion. Great. Hearing that motion, Do we want to vote? Sean? I vote yes. Okay, true? Yes? Okay, and I vote yes as well. So with that, with 3 votes, Sounds like the motion is approved.

[30:03] Thank you. You're welcome. Thanks, you guys. Robbie, thank you, also. so much. You're welcome, and I will contact you, here soon with, kind of, next steps, as well as the approval document, so stay tuned for more on that. You guys are awesome, thanks a lot for your help. Yeah, thank you so much. This makes things a lot easier, so we really appreciate it. Right. Thanks for submitting a good application. You bet. Alright, take care. Great afternoon, thank you. Have a great one. Bye. Okay, since, we're through the motion, I guess we can move on to other matters. It's, This approval of the minutes from the last two meetings. Does someone want to make a motion to approve the minutes?

[31:10] Drew? Sean? I was not at the August 12th meeting, so… Okay, I guess I… can I make a motion, or… I can make the motion. I guess, question for Deshauna, does, do I need to include any other details in the motion for the record? Thank you. Ideally, there would be two motions, one for each set of minutes, and given that we are, with our quorum, I'm wondering if folks would prefer to defer approving the minutes until a later date, or would like to proceed tonight. I'm just picking up on what Board Member Eisenberg said about his absence, and I'm thinking ahead that perhaps we might have some issues with, a unanimous approval.

[32:01] But I'm speculating, I could be mistaken. I mean… I, you know, I looked at the minutes, there's really nothing of contention, I guess… I would trust, my other board members. I don't know how this works. You can advise me, lawyer, if it's okay to do that or not. So, I see Robbie's hand, and, to answer your legal question, you can still vote to approve minutes, even if you were absent. A lot of folks do decline to vote, due to perhaps discomfort, but that you're… if you feel like they are accurate representation, Then you can vote accordingly. And it's also worth noting… it's also worth noting that Jill was also not here for the August meeting, so we'd kind of be in the same situation until we got, I guess, a fifth member who was also not in the meeting. So I think it really does come down to, your comfort level, Drew, and whether or not we can approve these minutes, but I don't believe delaying another month is actually going to change anything with

[33:14] Jill not having been here. Right, theoretically, I could watch the recording, but, I think I'll follow the vote of Katie and Sean. If you think that the minutes seem good, then I will approve. Yeah, I think I would be willing to approve. Minutes from both months. Yeah, I thought they looked fine. So, Sean, you want to make a motion? And I guess I could second it. Gotcha. And is this, one motion for both, or are we doing two separate motions? Whatever you prefer, it is my opinion that it's cleaner to do two separate motions. Okay, we'll do two separate. I'll start with, I bring forward the motion to approve the August minutes.

[34:04] I second that. Alright, is there a vote? gone. I go, yes. And I also vote yes. So, that sounds like they're approved. And then, do we have a motion to approve the December minutes? I bring forward the motion to approve the December minutes. Okay. I second. Right? So, you guys vote yes to… Yes. Okay. I vote yes. I vote yes as well. So, bills are approved, too. Okay, as far as, additional matters, from the board or the city attorney,

[35:06] or stop. Deshauna, do you have any additional… I have nothing to share from the City Attorney's Office, thank you. Okay. Robbie? And from staff, I just want to say thank you, Katie, for representing BOSE at last week's Board and Commission Open House. It was a great turnout and good conversations, and also thank you to the other board members who offered To, represent and be in attendance. We appreciate it. I think it was a good turnout, and we'll probably be doing that every year for recruitment. And then… Outside of that, yesterday was the deadline for the February 10th BOSA meeting. I have yet to kind of go through to see what, if anything, came through, and to do completeness checks. So, as soon as I have an update on the February meeting, I will send something out so all of you know

[36:04] what's going on, but if you do have any anticipated absences, for the February 10th meeting, just send me an email as soon as you can and just let me know. But I will send something out just with an update on the meeting as soon as I can. And that's it from Steph. Okay. Sean or Drew, any… anything from you guys? I do have a question on recruitment. I'm not sure if we're able to see, but have we gotten any applicants yet? For Boza, I don't know, but I do know that, just in general, I don't think they… the city clerk's office gives us that information until it's closed. But I am a part of the interview process. As you know, Sean, and I think Drew, I don't know if I sat in on yours, but they are involving staff in those, so I should know sometime after January 25th, which is when the recruitment, the application period ends. And again, if you know of anybody

[37:03] that would be a good board member. We are looking for one this year, or this upcoming year, for, what was Nikki's term. So, board people to that information, have them apply, we'd appreciate it. So, might as well use the board members, To kind of get us some, hopefully, new board members, so… yeah, and always feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions, or want me to weigh in on something, but Yeah, it closes January 25th. Okay. Well, if there isn't anything else, I'll just add, I know I'm going to be gone, for the February meeting, So I will see you guys all in March. Okay. Thank you, Katie, and I'll see all of you here soon. Okay? And with that, the meeting of the Board of Zoning Adjustments is adjourned.

[38:05] Thanks, everyone. Thanks, bye. Bye-bye. Good afternoon. Have a good night.