Transcript

0:00:23All right. Commissioners, are you ready? Yes, we are. And we are recording. Good day. We'll call to order the meeting of the Boulder County Commissioners. Today is April 23rd, 2026 Commissioner Luchman Installsman. Our President Commissioner Levy is excused. We are here this morning for a public hearing on the Turner Family Care Unit Accessory Dwelling Unit ADU and accessory structure. We'll have a presentation from our team here in Boulder County, and then we'll hear from the applicant about what they'd like to say. Commissioners may ask questions at that time, then we'll take public comment, and then go back to our planning staff and then the applicant for their closing comments. We'll close the public hearing and deliberate amongst ourselves. Before we begin the hearing, I'll ask if there are any disclosures from commissioners. No disclosures, thank you. Thank you. I also have no disclosures this morning.

0:01:12And so with that, I'll turn it over to Sam from Community Planning and Permitting. Thank you. Good morning, Commissioners. This is Sam Walker with the Community Planning and Permitting Department. I was the reviewing planner for LU - 2510 and ESPR - 2573. The Turner family care unit ADU and accessory structures at 10189 Arapaho Road. So the Turner family owns the property, John and Juice specifically are the owners, their son Cain is the applicant, and then they have two people working on Architecture for them as agents. So that Shea Ramandy and Anchen Wang, Kane and John are here in the room with us today, and then I believe Shane Anchen have joined us virtually. The parcel is in the Agricultural Zoning District and is about five acres in size, and the existing permitted residents in existing permitted 2, 688 square foot barn, three large unpermitted structures.

0:02:07The proposal that we reviewed, I have both descriptions here because there was some square footage discrepancies that were fixed during the review process. But what we're looking at today is a limited impact special review to construct a 700 square foot accessory dwelling unit on the parcel, as well as an expedited site planer view to approve a 960 square foot detached garage 1020 square foot barn and 528 square foot barn, which were the unpermanted structures. So here is our vicinity mats on the north side of Arapaho Road in the eastern County, just north of the town of Lafayette, or city of Lafayette, or excuse me, west of 287. Here is our location map. So again, north side of Arrapaho Road. And an aerial photo of the parcel. So you can see all of the existing structures in this photo. Get my cursor over there. This is the existing residence right here. This structure is the permitted barn. And then this is an unpermitted barn unpermitted barn and the unpermitted detached garage. We have a regional aerial photo just as for the character of development in the surrounding area. This is our comprehensive plan map showing that the entire parcel has been identified with Agricultural Lands of statewide or national importance. And then we have a view protection score of 1. 6 along state highway seven or

0:03:33Rapajo Road. This is an elevation contour map. So the high point of the property is in the southeastern corner, and then it slopes pretty gently down to the northwest, but it looks pretty flat, a very gentle slope. We've identified moderate swelling soil potential across the entirety of the parcel. And there are some nearby County held conservation easements. And finally, we have a zoning map. So again, the parcel is located within the Agricultural Zoning District. And then there is also a 110 foot supplemental setback measured from the center line of Arapaho Road. I've included a few clips from the Applicant's narrative just in case we need to take a look. Uh, this slide specifically has some of the justification for the proposed family care ADU, as well as this slide. And then this slide discusses more of the accessory structures. This is the applicant site plan.

0:04:29So what I've circled here are the proposed structures as part of this application. So the three kind of along that North property line are the existing unpermitted structures. And then the circled area south of the residence is the proposed accessory dwelling unit location. Um, as noted in the staff recommendation, the elevations for the accessory dwelling unit were mislabeled. So the correct orientation is listed at the top of the slide and on the next three. So this is the west facing elevation of the accessory dwelling unit. This is the south elevation, which will face kind of toward a wrap - ho road. This is the east - facing elevation, which faces toward those neighboring properties further to the east. And then the North Elevation, which will face toward the residents. Um, I will note while we're looking at this elevation that there was some discussion of the covered porch area in the staff recommendation as well.

0:05:24And that's shown here, um, so this covered porch area faces west kind of into the property, but also generally toward the mountains. This is the floor plan for the accessory dwelling unit. So in this floor plan north is up and the covered porch area is on the left - hand side here. And then we do have a typical layout of a small accessory dwelling unit with one bedroom cooking and bathing facilities. We'll move pretty quickly through the site photos as usual aerial photo on the left of the property with a arrow overlaid on it showing the rough location and direction the photo was taken from. On the right. Um, so in this photo, we're looking at the proposed ADU location, which I've roughly marked out, uh, using the applicant stakes with red lines. In this photo, we're standing in the accessory dwelling unit location facing west. So most of what you see in this image is the subject property. You can see they have a large agricultural field. And then the permitted barn off on the right - hand side of the screen. In this photo, we're standing in the ADU facing directly south toward Rapajo Road, which is on the other side of the solid wood fence that you can see in the background.

0:09:48And left - hand water, the short version of that is that they didn't have any issues as long as the applicants go through the appropriate process to expand their existing residential tab. The conservationishment team had no concerns. We received no response from everyone you see listed in that paragraph. And then we received two public comments from one commenter about the application. They had some concerns about the proposal, and I tried to kind of explain what was happening and never received a response after that. So I've included, I think, two of the LU criteria, although all of the sub - criteria for ADU specifically, and then one of the site point review criteria, so that's what we'll talk about here. So the first criteria says that the ADU has two comply with all the minimum requirements.

0:10:35So it's allowed AD user allowed in the agricultural zoning district through the limited impact process that we are participating in today. The proposed structure will mean all of the required setbacks, and there are the additional provisions specific to family care unit ADUs in the land use code, and that's on the next few slides. So the first additional provision requires that the ADUB attached or closely clustered, and staff found that, in this case, the ADU is closely clustered to the existing principle residence. The next one is the size limitation for the accessory dwelling unit, which says that it can be no more than 700 square feet in size, although the board can approve additional covered porch area attached to the ADU if they feel that it's appropriate. In this case, the applicants have proposed to 700 square foot enclosed ADU, 250 square feet of covered porch attached to that ADU. Staff had no concerns about that, and so we're recommending approval as proposed by the applicants.

0:11:38The third one, the third additional provision requires that only one entry to either dwelling is visible from the front property line. Staff found that in this case neither entry would be visible from the front property line, which is the south parcel boundary along Rappho Road. We found that the fourth provision was met, the property owners currently live on the subject parcel, and we'll continue to do so if the ADU is approved. The fifth additional provision requires the submittal of an annual report to the community planning and permitting department indicating that the ADU is still being used as it was approved, and that's a standard condition of approval that we recommend. So that was all of the additional provisions. Then we have the, I've included criteria 6 for the limited impact review as well, which requires that the ADU use doesn't pose a level of community facilities and services greater than what's available. And so this was where the discussion was revolving around the water supply on the property in general, but also specifically to the accessory dwelling unit. And I just wanted to highlight that one of our recommended conditions of approval just kind of generically says they have to provide an adequate water supply at the time of building permit. I've also included one standard from the site pointer view standards regarding the unpermitted

0:12:59structures. Just to note that we didn't have any comprehensive plan concerns with the structures where they're located, and we're recommending approval of those structures as they currently exist in are constructed with revised floor area calculations that were laid out and recommended condition number 17. So community planning and permitting staff recommend that the board of county commissioners conditionally approve LU - 2510 and ESPR 2573, the Turner Family Care ADU and Accessory Structures, subject to the conditions that were in the staff recommendation. I have the full text of those conditions on the next couple slides if we need to take a look, and I'm available for questions if you have them. Thank you questions from Commissioners. Thanks. Yeah, thank you, thanks Sam, for the presentation information. I really, I think I just had two questions. And one was in regards to what looked like one of the diagrams that you showed at the beginning in your presentation was, if I could describe it, because I didn't write down the title of it, but it was a diagram that showed the, were circles around what were the three structures that are part of the expedited site plan review, also the placement of where the ADU was. I don't know if you could bring that one up really quickly.

0:14:20Thank you, exactly. Um, and so the one there, it says storage to remain. Is that the same structure as that what you discuss later as being the portal stall. Um, well, here I'll point with the cursor. So this structure right here, the furthest to the west, is the portestal. And then I think this was referred to as the large unpermitted barn or something along those lines, and the staff recommendation. This one is the detached garage. Thank you. Now I see that both of those two middle ones are, at the same title on the diagram. Thank you. So yes, I was talking about the furthest west one. And the question I had on that, and I was trying to look just through your analysis and the review, and I'm looking at the picture in the pack and on page 18, which is just one of the pictures that was in there. Typically when we're talking about land use, like from a structure, the height and all those different pieces, and I get the reasoning of wanting to just basically get these into the process because they were built prior to it, looked like the ownership of the applicants. But from my experience sitting here at the dais, typically we wouldn't approve the building of a structure that has a bright red coloring in Boulder County agricultural

0:15:37properties. And so it was just a curiosity if that is in your analysis if there was any discussion. And if this was a structure being presented to be added to this particular parcel, if there would be any different analysis. So I agree, it's pretty rare for us to approve. Bright red structures. Um, I think in this case, the structure itself is pretty low lying. Um, it's not, it's really below the elevation of a wrap - a - ho road, and the few similar structures in the surrounding neighborhood. Um, and so I think the height, the setback from the property lines and from the roads and things like that were not, made it not a concern from a visual impact at the staff level. Um, I think if the commissioners have concerns, you could always add a condition requiring the applicants to paint the structure at different color or something like that. Um, but frankly, it just didn't stand out to me when I was doing the site visit. And so we figured it was okay to approve as is. Okay, that's helpful to understand where you were looking at. I saw in the packet other in part of the other, maybe it's the EDU, and it had like different color palettes, at least described for the initial pieces. And so that's what it just, what

0:16:55I was trying to figure out where it all aligned. And so that helps to hear that. Um, the other question. Oh no, I guess that was it. I was just looking at my notes. That's my question for now. Thank you. Thank you. That question makes me have a question. So when I looked at the picture on page 18, it looked very terracotta palette to me. It doesn't look bright red or brick red, or it just looks like a very natural color. Like the iron oxides that are in the, um, fountain formation that you can see to the west of this area also have like red pigmentation. So I just, in my, and I know all the screens actually do show colors very differently. And like when you print it, it looks very different. So I just wonder if you could describe if it is in the, like fire engine red family, or if it is in the terracotta family, just because it present, it didn't present as bright red to me. Um, so I would say I would use the term barn red. Uh, I will say the camera that I used for this site visit tends to saturate colors quite a bit. And so it probably looks more saturated and bright in these photos than it doesn't real life. Okay, thank you. Um, any

0:18:02other questions. Uh, no. Thank you. Thank you. And so now we'll turn to the applicant for our presentation. Just a couple of reminders at housekeeping reminders when you speak, you want to speak. Like almost like you're eating the microphone very, very close to it so that the recording and people online and on TV can hear you. And then each person will just need to state their name for the record, even if we've just called you, which is sort of a strange thing. Um, so you'll have 20 minutes to tell us what you'd like to tell us. Good morning. I'm Kane Turner. I'm John Turner's son. Lynn Turner's son as well. Um, we weren't expecting to present anything. So we were here to help answer questions. But if you'd like, I can say a word about why we want to do this or whatever would be more appropriate. It's at your pleasure. If you feel like that was a very complete explanation and you're happy with the staff recommendation. That is just fine. You don't have to use all your time. If you dispute anything or you want to tell us something, you're welcome to. It is at your pleasure. You have 20 minutes. You could sing us a song. It is really at your pleasure.

0:19:08Tough you with it. But you don't have to use the time. No, I thought I thought the presentation was excellent. And I don't know how Sam keeps that all on his head. He wasn't even reading the screen very much. And it was a 15 minute download all in perfect order. So very impressive. Thank you, Sam. So, um, yeah, I thought, I thought that did a good job of clarifying what we're doing and why in the situation we're facing. Thank you very much. Any questions from commissioners? I don't have questions. Thank you. I also don't have any questions. And so with that, we'll turn to our public comment period this morning. If there are any members of the public that want to comment, we'll first go to folks who have signed up and we have one person signed up in person, which is Sasha Lewis. And you'll have three minutes if you'd like to tell us something. You can come up to the podium and tell us. And just like I was telling the applicant, you'll need to speak very close to the microphone and tell us your name. Thank you. Um, this is my fresh time being here. So I just want to clarify, I don't have any comments regarding to their presentation, but on a separate matter. And this time is okay to use

0:20:06for that. This time is really just for this matter at hand. Okay. Then I will step back. Thank you. Thank you. And I just ask maybe if someone from staff could check in with Sasha and just give her the opportunities for other public comment. Thank you. Thank you. Good suggestion. Any other photos? There are no other folks in the hearing room that are either staff or the applicant team. And so we'll see if there's just any other folks online and we're not seeing any. And so we will come back, um, into the room for staff for any closing remarks that you may have. Thank you, Commissioner Sam Walker, CPMP. I have nothing else unless you have follow - up questions for me. Any other questions. We don't have any other questions. Thank you, Sam. And then, um, you get the final word today. Again, you don't have to use your time, but you're welcome to say anything you'd like to conclude the public hearing. I think we're satisfied. So thank you. Thank you. And so with that, we'll close the public hearing and turn over to the commissioners for deliberation. Commissioner Lichman, would you like to kick us off? I'm happy to kick us off.

0:21:04Thank you. Thanks again, Sam for the presentation and for applicants for being here. It's helpful. Sometimes we do have questions. And so to have somebody here either in the room or online as well, it's important. So we appreciate that. I think just in general from looking at the analysis that was on in the packet and I don't want to dispute the type of camera or my, my, my visual read or take, I did not go to the property. It looked like there was a couple of different rods from the picture. So it was just a curiosity understanding what we typically see her at the dais. And sometimes it's a long conversation about the color palette, everything from what screens or reds or tans or browns, et cetera. So that's, that just to help you understand the curiosity. Um, regards the analysis of the accessory dwelling unit to me what you've brought forward, um, Sam and working with applicants is an appropriate use. It fits into the guidelines. I don't have questions in regards to how you, um, got to the recommendation with the criteria that we have in our land juice code. And certainly the expedited, um, review to address this type of a situation, I think is actually great for the standpoint of we have a lot of structures out there that maybe haven't

0:22:15gone through permitting process, et cetera. So to be able to address that and look at the water system and what is needed for the properties is an important process part of the Lambdus code. So I don't have any, um, concerns and it would be happy to move forward with recommendation as staff has presented it. Thank you. I agree with you completely. And I agree that it is great to be able to bring things into compliance. Um, so thank you for working on that as well. Um, we could take a motion at this time. I would move that we approve item 2a, the turn of family care unit accessory dwelling unit ADU and accessory structures, both with the docket LU 25 - 0010 and ESPR 25 - 0073 care unit ADU and accessory structures and improve as recommended with the conditions that staff has presented today.

0:23:08Thank you all second that all in favor. Aye. And no opposed. So the motion passes unanimously. Thank you. That concludes our business for this morning, I believe. I just want to make sure on my agenda that there was no light breaking news.