►
From YouTube: June 16, 2022 - Marshall Fire Community Meeting - Rebuilding in Unincorporated Boulder County
Description
Marshall Fire Community Meeting - Rebuilding in Unincorporated Boulder County, June 16, 2022. Overview and update on DC-22-0003: Land Use Code text amendments related to Accessory Dwellings.
00:00 Intro
00:05 Presentation
18:54 Questions and Answers
Learn more at https://www.boco.org/dc-22-0003
A
A
I
just
wanted
to
start
by
introducing
myself
again,
I'm
hannah
hipley,
I'm
the
long
range
planning,
division,
manner,
manager
at
boulder,
county
community
planning
and
permitting
also
on
the
call
staff
today
with
us
is
ethan
abner
and
andrea
vaughn.
Also,
members
of
the
planning
and
policy
team
here
at
community
planning.
In
permitting
and
dow
case,
the
director
and
denise
grimm
from
staff
are
also
here
with
us
today.
A
I
intend
to
go
through
the
draft
regulations
that
were
posted
to
the
website
today.
I
anticipate
that
might
take
about
an
hour
after
which
we'll
do
a
question
and
answer
session.
So
if
you
have
questions
go
ahead
and
put
them
in
the
q,
a
our
goal
here
really
today
is
to
talk
through
the
draft
and
hope
to
give
you
a
good
understanding
of
what's
in
there,
so
that
you
can
provide
comments
based
on
an
understanding
of
what's
being
proposed.
A
A
A
I'm
just
going
to
pause
here
and
let
you
know
that
these
slides
are
heavily
text
intensive
because
they
are
the
text.
That's
in
the
code,
so
you'll
you'll
see
that
alignment
between
what
we're
talking
about
here
in
the
slides
in
the
draft
regulations.
If
you
choose
to
download
those
from
the
website,
so
not
a
lot
of
exciting
pictures
in
this
presentation.
A
The
code
then
moves
on
to
talk
about
the
parameters,
so
the
requirements
for
these
it
does
propose
a
size
limit
of
up
to
700
square
feet.
This
ensures
that
the
dwelling
is
subordinate
to
the
primary
use.
It
reduces
the
potential
for
these
to
have
impacts
on
the
land,
the
landscape
and
perhaps
adjacent
neighbors,
and
reducing
this
potential
for
development
impacts
allows
us
to
reduce
the
need
for
an
intensive
land
use
review
process.
A
The
floor
area
of
these
dwellings
are
contemplated
to
be
considered
residential
floor
area
and
shall
fit
within
the
size
allowance
provided
in
f1.
A
again.
I
apologize
for
the
text
reference
to
a
previous
section
of
article
19,
but
what
this
means
in
essence,
is
that
the
decision
to
build
an
accessory
dwelling
is
not
proposed
to
grant
any
additional
allowance
for
new
development,
above
that
which
is
already
allowed
under
article
19..
A
Accessory
dwellings
in
the
comprehensive
plan
are
looked
at
as
a
strategy
to
help
address
the
local
housing
crisis.
We've
heard
this
from
the
community
as
well
that
there's
a
housing
need,
and
this
is
why
folks
are
interested
in
these.
It
does
help
assure
that
the
accessory
dwellings
and
the
properties
they're
constructed
on
remain
compatible
with
the
neighborhoods
and,
as
I
mentioned,
preserves
housing
for
residents.
A
The
accessory
dwelling
shall
use
the
same
access
point
in
driveway
as
the
principal
residence
again.
This
maintains
that
the
character
of
the
neighborhood
as
a
single
family
neighborhood,
in
addition
to
the
fact
that
new
driveways
create
new
impacts
on
the
land
on
the
landscape
and
on
the
roadway
networks
that
we
would
really
need
to
look
at
on
a
more
detailed
basis
than
what
we're
proposing
in
the
draft.
At
this
time.
A
The
accessory
dwelling
shall
remain
in
common
ownership,
with
the
property
and
accessory
dwelling
shall
not
result
in
the
creation
of
additional
building
lots,
nor
result
in
the
change
of
a
property
to
condominium
ownership.
Again,
the
intent
behind
these
accessory
dwellings
is
they
they
fit
in
and
become
part
of
the
neighborhood.
A
A
A
A
A
We
used
these
pictures
previously
in
our
presentation,
but
on
the
one
side
it
shares
a
floor
and
on
the
other
side
it
shares
a
wall,
so
it
might
be
above
or
beside
whatever.
The
accessory
structure
is.
This
example
here
is
a
detached
garage,
but
it's
not
limited
to
a
detached
garage.
It
could
be
your
workshop
or
your
garden
house
or
any
of
those
other
types
of
accessory
structures
that
you
had
and
are
rebuilding,
so
these
could
be
either
new
or
replacement
structures.
A
A
So
the
third
type
defined
is
when
they're
attached
to
the
principal
structure.
So
again
it's
designed
as
part
of
the
primary
residence
it
might
share
a
wall
or
a
floor
with
the
rest
of
the
structure.
There
are
two
a
couple
of
permutations
shown
here.
In
this
slide.
It
could
be
attached
to
an
exterior
wall.
This
could
be
your
basement
apartment
or
your
attic
apartment
in
an
iteration
where
the
principal
structure
also
had
an
attached
garage.
A
A
A
We
would
look
at
those
for
the
limited
purpose
of
looking
at
the
structure's
location
and
its
potential
impact
on
some
sites.
You
know
it's
not
realistic.
To
think
that
you
know
this
new
detached
structure
might
be
located
anywhere,
but
really
clustered
with
the
house,
but
on
larger
parcels.
That
is
possible.
A
So,
depending
on
where
someone
wanted
to
put
it,
we
would
look
at
it
through
site
plan
review
waiver
or,
if
it's
clustered
with
the
house
and
located
within
50
feet
of
the
footprint
of
the
single
family,
dwelling
that
was
destroyed
by
the
fire
site
plan.
Review
waiver
is
not
required,
so
site
plan
review
would
be
required
if
you're
building
a
new
detached
structure.
That's
further
than
50
feet
away
from
the
house
that
was
destroyed.
A
Above
and
again,
I
apologize
for
the
code
reference
that
doesn't
kind
of
make
a
lot
of
sense
and
if
we're
reading
it
like,
we
are
right
now,
but
section
f
is
the
location
requirements
that
apply
to
the
construction
of
of
your
house.
So
it's
the
the
need
to
reuse
a
certain
percentage
of
the
footprint.
A
but
you're,
adding
the
accessory
dwelling
to
that,
you
just
need
to
comply
with
those
location
requirements.
There's
no
additional
review
needed.
If
you're
building
a
new
structure.
Again,
you
didn't
have
an
accessory
building
before
and
you're
proposing
a
new
one,
and
you
want
it
to
have
an
accessory
dwelling
again.
We're
going
to
we're
proposing
the
site
plan
review
waiver
process
to
review
that
new
location.
A
A
Okay,
I
had
given
us
an
hour
to
review
all
that.
I
don't
clearly
my
walking
through
it
didn't
take
that
amount
of
time,
so
we'll
have
more
time
for
q
a,
but
I
did
want
to
stop
and
talk
about
next
steps
again.
Part
of
the
reason
that
we
really
wanted
to
do
this
with
you
today
is
because
our
referral
period
starts
today
a
little
bit.
A
I
have
a
typo
there
I
see
now
it
should
be
6
16
to
6
28,
so
we're
hoping
that
you
have
a
good
understanding
of
these
as
they're,
currently
written,
so
that
you
can,
in
your
comment,
provide
feedback
to
us
about
what
you
think
works.
You
know
what
doesn't
work,
how
would
you
change
it
and
that
comment
period
again
runs
until
tuesday
the
28th
planning
commission
is
anticipated
in
july.
A
We
tentatively
have
that
board
of
county
commissioners
hearing
set
for
august
4th
and
again
this
is
a
another
public
hearing
with
public
comment.
Opportunity
and
our
board
of
accounting.
Commissioners
is
our
decision-making
body.
So
really
none
of
these
regulations
are
completely
final
until
the
board
has
made
a
decision.
A
So
we
can
move
into
our
q
a
at
this
time.
I
just
do
want
to
ask
that
we
try
and
keep
the
questions
rel
about
related
to
kind
of
what
we've
looked
at
here
today,
really
focused
on
the
proposed
regulations.
If
you
don't
understand
something,
if
you
have
questions
about
how
something
might
work,
but
if
you
do
have
questions
about
your
property
in
your
particular
situation,
we're
not
really
able
to
answer
those
in
this
meeting,
but
we
can
address
them
as
staff
outside
the
meeting.
So
we'll
give
you
some
contact
information.
B
B
A
Question
the
draft,
in
addition
to
being
put
out
for
sort
of
general
public
comment,
has
been
sent
to
agencies
that
provide
services
in
the
area,
county
departments
that
provide
expertise
and
may
have
some
advice
for
us
as
we
drop
these
regulations.
So
the
water
district,
the
state
division
of
water
resources
to
see
if
they
have
comments
about
how
this
might
impact
well
permitting
the
service
providers
like
excel
energy,
adjacent
cities
and
towns.
A
A
A
Okay,
so
let's
tackle
the
first
one
first,
until
these
regulations
are
adopted,
we
can't
take
building
permit
applications
for
them.
So
we
do
need
to
wait
until
after
they're
after
they're
adopted
for
that
and
then,
if
you
have
a
temporary
dwelling
that
has
met
the
parameters
that
are
eventually
adopted,
it
could
be
converted
to
kind
of
a
permanent
accessory
dwelling.
C
A
A
D
D
So
it
sounds
like
right
now,
there's
no
preference
to
decisions
that
if
the
adu
is
allowed
to
have
its
totally
separate
utilities,
like
you
know,
you
have
separate
electricity
yeah
most
of
us
here
as
well.
But
if
you
have
a
separate
electricity
meter,
it
surely
will
make
like
a
rental
unit
more
convenient.
D
B
G
A
So
we
have
not
contemplated
changing
the
building
code
in
any
way
to
accommodate
these.
I
do
think
it's
maybe
a
little
trickier
of
a
question
if
you're
attaching
the
accessory
dwelling
to
say
a
barn
rather
than
in
this
case,
the
garage,
but
at
this
point
in
time
we
have
not
proposed
any
changes
to
the
building
code
as
it
is
currently
applied.
A
A
A
A
B
A
C
I
E
Yeah
thanks
for
taking
our
question,
I
I
had
seen
this
question
a
few
times
in
the
q,
a
on
the
chat
and
wanted
to
surface
it
for
discussion,
there's
a
pretty
drastic
reduction
in
the
size
of
the
allowable
adu
in
terms
of
square
footage
down
to
700
square
feet.
A
couple
of
questions
around
that
is,
first
of
all,
why?
A
A
Yes,
the
scope
of
the
proposal
right
now
does
focus
on
those
whose
homes
were
destroyed
again
part
of
the
rationale
for
kind
of
this
hurried
code
update,
you
know
more
expedited
code.
Update
process
was
really
to
help
facilitate
those
folks
who
are
rebuilding
their
primary
home
to
incorporate
the
outcome
of
these
regulations
in
those
plans.
A
A
B
A
So
there
is
only
one
of
the
types
that
has
a
height
limits,
that's
specific
to
it,
and
that
is
the
detached
structure.
Has
a
height
limit
of
20
feet.
The
rest
of
the
types
which
are
the
attached
structure
to
the
principle
or
attached
to
the
accessory
structure
would
be
subject
to
the
height
limitations
in
the
zone.
District.
J
J
If,
if
the
general
regulations
says
700
square
feet
that
you
could
go
up
to
1200
if
you're
willing
to
do
an
spr
or
go
through
a
another
process,
because
I
it
just
feels
like
a
one-size-fits-all
regulation
here,
it
leaves
it
helpful
for
some
and
when
you,
when
they
talk
about
700
square
feet
as
the
family
care
unit.
That's
that's
not
meant
for
a
family,
that's
meant
for
aging
parents
or
a
brother
you're
caring
for
there's.
A
K
K
I
think
I
understand
the
difficulty
in
forging
these
things,
but
these
absolute
we're
already
bumping
into
presumptive
size,
max
problems
and
just
with
our
old
house,
and
then
we
had
a
880
square
foot
detached
shop
that
I
was
intending
to
try
and
convert
to
an
adu
if
this
turns
into
a
700
foot
limit
it.
This
really
renders
this
whole
exercise
pointless
for
us,
and
I
just
wanted
to
voice
that.
I'm
going
to
put
that
in
comments
as
well.
A
Yeah,
let's
go
back
just
for
a
quick
second,
I
do
you
know.
Part
of
the
reason
I
I
tried
to
keep
this
conversation
focused
on
questions
is
because
we
really
do
want
your
comments
and
writing
having
your
comments
in
writing
allows
us
to
share
them
with
others,
like
planning,
commission
and
the
board
of
county
commissioners.
A
A
C
A
A
A
You
know
additional
homes,
additional
larger
homes.
You
know,
have
the
impact
the
potential
impact
to
generate
additional
demands
on
those
kinds
of
services
as
well.
So
we
would
expect
to
get
those
sorts
of
comments
back
from
the
school
district
again.
If
the
accessory
dwelling
is
something
large
enough
to
house
a
family
of
four
and
then
we
have
a
second
principle
dwelling,
we
have
sort
of
doubled
the
transportation
impacts,
so
there
are
some
reasons
that
size
limits
help.
F
A
As
it's
drafted,
it's
the.
What
we're
talking
about
here
today
is
the
accessories
accessory
structure
with
an
accessory
dwelling.
If
you're,
you
know
not
contemplating
an
accessory
dwelling
at
all,
but
you
as
part
of
your
redevelopment
plans,
article
19
currently
requires
that
those
be
located
in
the
same
general
area
as
the
development
that
pre-existed
the
fire.
F
A
A
J
Most
of
us
attended
the
last
adu
meeting
and
put
a
lot
of
input
in
answered.
All
the
surveys
thought
that
we
were.
We
were
contributing
to
what
would
be
discussed
and
it
maybe
it
was.
We
don't
know
we're
not
in
that
story
and
we
don't
have
the
opportunity
other
than
typing
in
some
comments
to
have
our
voices
heard
directly
to
the
people.
Writing
these
regulations.
A
Well,
I
mean
I
do
think
the
regulations
as
drafted
reflect
a
lot
of
what
was
heard.
You
know
the
proposal
removes
the
limited
impact
special
review
process.
It
allows
it
through
a
pretty
simple
building,
permit
review
for
a
lot
of
what
we
heard
people
wanted.
You
know.
I
am
pretty
sure
that
this
draft
does
not
provide
everybody
what
they,
what
what
they
specifically
voiced.
A
You
know
the
process
for
this
code.
Update
you
know
was
was
much
too
long
for
a
lot
of
people.
You
know
in
order
for
this
to
be
useful
to
most
people,
or
you
know,
to
a
lot
of
the
folks
that
we've
heard
from
they
they
want
it
done
already
pausing
to
to
do
what
you're
asking,
I
think
would
push
out
our
our
time
frame
a
lot
longer.
A
A
For
you
guys,
one
thing
I
do
want
to
point
out,
and
you
know
for
those
folks
who
are
wanting
to
build
a
home
first
before
the
principal
dwelling.
I
really
think
that
you
should
reach
out
to
your
rebuilding
coordinators,
so
we
should
talk
about
those
instances
specifically
because
there
is
a
temporary
housing
component
already
in
article
19.
A
J
L
L
I'm
just
kind
of
wondering
how
many
properties
in
unincorporated
boulder
county
have
been
affected,
and
would
it
be
that
hard
to
send
like
the
building
coordinator
out
and
discuss
each
property
with
a
unique
solution
rather
than
try
to
make
one
size
fits
all
for
I
I
just
don't
know
how
many
houses
you're
having
to
deal
with,
but
we're
not
talking
about
the
thousands
in
superior
lewisville.
It's
just
unincorporated
boulder
county
and,
as
I
think
molly
pointed
out,
every
property
is
so
different.
L
A
Well,
land
use
regulations:
you
know
they're
adopted
law,
they
need
to
apply
equitably
to
all
people.
We
really
can't
sort
of
just
make
things
up
as
we
go
along
for
each
property
owner.
What
you're
talking
about
you
know
having
a
planner
come
out
and
do
sort
of
a
site,
specific
detailed
review
results
in
you
know.
If
we
were
going
to
do
that,
and
we
would
take
that
approach,
you
know
we
still
need
some
parameters
about.
A
L
Okay,
I'm
kind
of
naive
about
it,
but
I
just
it
just
seems
to
me
you
know.
Just
in
the
few
neighbors
I've
talked
to
we've
had
some
neighborhood
meetings.
Everybody
has
different
different
issues
and
different
sizes
and
different
parameters,
and
it
just
seems
we
say
well
we'll
make
one
size
and
I
I
guess
it's
easier
for
you
guys
in
planning,
but
I
certainly
wouldn't
feel
you
know
upset
if
my
neighbor
got
something
more
than
I
did
just
because
they
had
a
bigger
lot
or
had
a
bigger
family.
L
L
C
And
hannah
this
is
rick
hackett
with
staff.
There
was
more
one
question
in
the
q
a
he
want
to
address.
Bonnie
smith
asked
about
kind
of
non-traditional
solutions
like
some
prefabs
or
there's
a
site
called
boxable.
Can
you
just
mention
how
structures
just
what
they
need
to
meet
as
far
as
building
code?
If
it's
a
kind
of
a
non-traditional
type
of
construction.
A
I
hope
you're
not
asking
me
to
quote
the
building
code,
but
the
land
use
code
that
we're
talking
about
right
now.
Is
you
know
the
zoning
basis,
it
kind
of
says
you
can
you
can
do
this
thing
here,
and
maybe
you
can
do
this
thing
and
here's
where
it
needs
to
go
and
how
big
it
needs
to
be.
It
does
not
tell
you
how
things
can
be
or
need
to
be
constructed.
That
is
the
role
of
our
building
code.
D
G
Additional
formal,
affordable
housing
in
boulder
and
if
that
affordable
housing
is
intended
to
be
for
like
single
people
or
if
it's
intended
to
allow
families
or
underprivileged
people
or
something
like
that.
What
is
the
intention
around
allowing
adus,
and
this
does
relate,
of
course,
to
the
square
footage.
A
A
A
Additional
dwelling
units
in
the
county
as
a
way
to
help
address
our
affordable
housing
issue.
You
know,
building
a
1500
or
1200
square
foot
house
doesn't
help
contribute
to
affordability
in
the
same
way
that
maybe
a
smaller
unit
would
be
who
they
may
be
rented
to
is
again
not
something
that's
regulated
by
the
land
use
code.
Someone
could
build
one
of
these
and
never
rent
it.