Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Design Advisory Board backs Fraser Meadows expansion concept but asks for refined massing, material and shadow studies
Summary
The City of Boulder Design Advisory Board reviewed a site‑review amendment combining the Fraser Meadows campus and Mountain View United Methodist Church, including a proposed 4‑story, 55‑foot, 98‑unit independent‑living building; the board generally supported the approach but requested further study of massing, glazing, material simplification and shadowing before planning board review.
Boulder — The City of Boulder Design Advisory Board on a virtual meeting reviewed a site‑review amendment for Fraser Meadows that would combine the senior living campus with the Mountain View United Methodist Church site and add a new 4‑story, 55‑foot independent‑living building containing 98 units. Chandler Van Schaack, principal planner with Planning and Development Services, said staff submitted comments identifying several criteria as only partially satisfied and asked DAB to give design guidance that staff will incorporate into the planning review.
The applicant’s lead architect, Mary Fiore of Boulder Associates Architects, presented massing and facade strategies intended to soften the building’s scale: tiered setbacks, fourth‑floor stepbacks, a varied material palette of red and blonde brick with limited stucco on upper floors, and glass 'links' between the building sections. "My name is Mary Fiore. I'm with Boulder Associates Architects, and I am the lead architect and designer on the project," she said and walked the board through elevation and perspective renderings.
Neighbors told the board the project still reads as a single, monolithic mass from Sioux Drive and urged larger recesses and setbacks. Anne, who identified her address as 4700 Sioux Drive, said the proposed glazed connections ‘‘will put so much light directly into our bedrooms’’ and called the overall massing "completely out of character" with modest single‑family homes across the street.
Board members generally agreed the proposal is an extension of the existing Fraser Meadows campus and noted several strengths, including generous western setbacks (about 50 feet in one portion) and active south‑side programming such as raised garden beds. At the same time they asked the applicant to refine several elements: confirm that the two glass links provide meaningful visual separation, run sun/shadow studies (board members said the current renderings understate shadow relief), consider additional upper‑floor recesses at the southeast corner above exposed parking (an element some described as effectively 5 stories), and simplify materials so stone veneer is not perceived as artificial.
On materials, the board discussed stucco and brick proportions. Fiore said stucco is limited to roughly 10% of the facade and will be detailed as carved plane work rather than a simple applied skin; several board members said stucco in recessed upper areas is acceptable if detailed and colored to reduce perceived bulk.
Chandler Van Schaack told the board that the applicant is requesting a height modification to reach 55 feet under the existing site‑review PUD and RH‑5 zoning; the planning board hearing date has not yet been scheduled. DAB members emphasized their recommendations are advisory and will be incorporated into staff comments to guide planning board review.
No formal DAB vote on the development outcome was recorded in the transcript. The board closed the Fraser Meadows discussion by asking staff and the applicant for additional study on shadowing, potential additional setback or upper‑floor modulation on the east side, refinement of the glass connectors for perceived transparency, and simplification of material transitions. The applicant said it would take the feedback into the next submittal.
The DAB review concluded with staff saying the comments would be provided to the applicant and used to guide the planning board packet when the hearing is scheduled.
