Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7C - 2000 major update to BVCP Area 3 - Planning ReserveDO NOT REMOVE - PRAB File Matenal MEMORANDUM TO: Parks and Recreation Advisory Board FROM: Chns Dropinski, Director, Parks and Recreation Department Cate Bradiey, Planner SUBJECT: Possible Changes to Area III - Planning Reserve Designation DATE: October 6, 2000 As part of the Year 2000 Ma~or Update to the Boulder Valiey Comprehensive Plan, City CounGl has requested that the Planning Board consider the possibdity of elimmating the "Planning Reserve" designation and transfemng the land currenUy within that area to Area III - Rural Preserve. Attached is a memo from Planning Department staff which provides more infortnaUon about this proposal and the potential implicaUons for the Area III park site. At this time the PRAB is being requested to provide comments which can be considered by Planning Board as they discuss this proposal. Parks and RecreaUon staff have the following concems regarding this potent~al change m land use designation • The Rural Preserve designation suggests that uses Hnll not be "urban" and should be ~"` compaUble with the rural character of the surrounding land uses This could prove to ~ be an obstacle to the development of active recreational faalities on this site, by giving neighbors and catizens an expectat~on that the site would never be developed as an urban park This site was originally purchased with the intention of providing for future active recreational needs, with bond funds appraved for that purpose by Boulder cit~zens in 1995 This land was to be kept avadable for recreational needs that may develop over the next 50 years; it is important that we not foreclose the option of developing this property over the long term In addition, the provis~on of active recreational sites has been impoRant in taking off the pressure for inappropnate uses of the Open Space and Mountain Parks lands • If the park property is designated as Rural Preserve it may be more difficult to obtam approval for the annexation of the site or the e~ension of the "full range of urban services" necessary to support the development of recreational facdities Parks and Recreation staff recommends that. • no changes be made to the Planning Reserve designation at this Gme If Plannmg Board and Counal deade to transfer addiUonal properties mto the Rural Preserve, staff recommends that the park site and the ad~acent properties necessary to create a reasonable service area boundary be retained in the Planning Reserve • if a transfer of the park site into the Rural Preserve is to be considered, that an expanded public process be pursued which involves recreational user groups as well as the public at large and affected property owners. • if the PRAB is interested in exploring future uses of the Area III site, that this discussion take place in the context of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan update s"~ ~... MEMORANDUM October 11, 2000 ~ ~ TO: Pazks and Recreahon Advisory Boazd FROM: Peter Pollock, Director, Plamm~g Department Susan Richstone, Comprehensive Planner Bev Johnson, Environmental Planner SUBJECT: The Yeaz 2000 Ma~or Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan: Area III - Planmng Reserve OVERVIEW At the October 23 meetmg Plamm~g Department staff will provide the board w~th an update on the Yeaz 2000 Ma~or Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) and request the boazd's questions and comments on an issue related [o the Area III - Plannmg Reserve. Eazher tkus yeaz, staff completed a Leport which studied the suitability of future urban development m the planmng reserve (See Attachment ~. Tlus report recommended reducing the size of the Plannmg Reserve by movmg 182 acres of pnvate property mto Area III - Rural Preservauon. The proposal has gone through the four body adopuon process (Planning Boazd, Ciry Council, Boulder County Plannmg Comnussion, and Board of Counry Commissioners) and all four bodies agreed to move approximately 159 acres of private property to Area ,..~- III-Rural Preservahon Attachment B shows the new boundary of the Plannmg Reserve. ~ Smce the four body approval, City Council has requested that the Plannmg Boazd diswss the possibihry of eliminat~ng the Planning Reserve altogether. Tlus act~on would mean that all the land currently wrttun the Plan[ung Reserve, mcludmg approximately 243 acres of property purchased for a lazge pazk site, would be designated as Area III-Rural Preserve. Does the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board have comments on the issue of the potential elimination of the Planning Reserve that you would like to pass on to the Planning Board prior to the Planning Board discussion on November 16? BACKGROUND Work on the Yeaz 2000 Ma~or Update to the BVCP was mrtia[ed at the begmnmg of 1999. The BVCP guides land use and development m the city and ad~acent lands witlun [he Boulder Valley and has been one of the most important tools for managmg Boulder's growth A ma~or tenet of the BVCP is the service azea concept that divides the Boulder Valley planmng azea mto lluee ma~or azeas-- Area I, Area II, and Area III. The service azea concept is mtended to promote a compact r ~ development pattem, sepazaUon between commumt~es, preservatron of lands outside the service area, and efficient service provision and logical extension of city sernces Atea I is the azea wrtlun the ciry of Boulder wluch has adequate urban facihties and services and ~ is expected to accommodate urban development. Area II is the azea now under county~unsdichon, where annexations to ttte city can be considered, if cons~stent with the pohcies of the BVCP. Area III is the remammg azea m the Boulder V alley, generally under county ~unsd~ction. Area III is divided mto the Area III- Rural Preserve and the Area III- Plamm~g Reserve. The Area III-Rural Preserve is where the ciry and the county mtend to preserve existmg rural land uses and chazacter. The Area III- Planmng Reserve is where the crty and counry mtend to mamtam the ophon of expanded urban development m the ciry beyond the Ume frame of the 15 yeaz planmng penod The Planmng Reserve is in an azea outside of the current crty service azea, located duecdy north and east of Highway 36 (28[h Street Extended) and Jay Road The ongmal boundanes of the Planmng Reserve were estabhshed dunng the last ma~or update to the BVCP and aze based on the outcome of the Area III Planning Pro~ect (Febmary 14, 1991). This smdy identified the land m Area III (azeas located outside of the ciry's Service Area but wrtlun the Boulder Valley), that is surtable for possible service area expansion beyond the IS yeaz time frame of the BVCP. City Council and Plannmg Boazd directed staff on February 24, 2000 and Mazch 21, 20~0, to proceed with a study of the Plannmg Reserve for a potenhal boundary change to expand the Area III-Rural Preservat~on Area and reduce the size of the Plamm~g Reserve azea. Staff completed a land use suitabihry report of the ~ Plamm~g Reserve (Attachment Al wluch presented the mrtial staff recommendat~on to change the current ~. boundary and expand the Area III-Rural PreservaUon Area. Changes to the BVCP aze sub~ect to approval by the Plannmg Boazd, Ciry Council, Boulder County Planning Comnussion and the Boazd of Counry Commissioners. All four approval bodies have approved movmg approximately 159 acres from the Plannmg Reserve to the Rural Preserve (see Attachment Bl. At theu' meehng on September 19, the Ciry Council requested the Plamm~g Boazd to consider ehmmatmg the Plannmg Reserve altogether Staff will bnng tlvs ~tem to the Planmng Boazd as a pubhc heanng item on November 16 DISCUSSION The Parks and Recreadon Department owns 243 acres of land m the Plannmg Reserve. This land was purchased with the purpose of prov~dmg a site for the future development of an acuve regional park Development of the site will require the extension of city services to the area at the time of development ~ 2 The pazks s~te ~s located m the Plannmg Reserve (see Attachment B). At the time the srte was purchased, it was assumed that the site would be annexed pnor to development. The process to bnng property from ~... the Plannmg Reserve mto the city's service area and annexation to the city is outhned below ~... 1. The first step, wfuch may only be proposed dunng a 5 yeaz major update of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, is to move the land from Area III - Planmng Reserve mto the Sernce Area (Area In. Pnor to considenng an Area III to II change, a ~omt City-County Service Area Expans~on Plan must be completed tha[ addresses • the rypes of development needed to meet long term commumry needs and how the expansion proposal fits • compl~ance with commumty goals and policies • concepmal land use and mfrastructure plans • impact mingation and off-sets • development phasmg The City and County, m approvmg a Service Area Expansion Plan use the followmg cntena: • mmimum size of 40 acres • mimmum conUguiry of at least 1/6 the penmeter with the Service Area • expansion azea must make sense as a good neighborhood and ciry boundary, as a reasonable extension of urban serv~ces and as contnbuUng to a compact urban form • existmg neazby land use and the new use should be compauble 'I'he expansion should be compatible with the policies and mtent of the Comprehensive Plan. • must be demonsuated that there will be no ma~or impacts, includmg on ttansportahon, environment, sernces, facihnes and budget. ~ • expansion should not matenally affect growth pro~ecUOns. ~ • adequacy or avazlability of sernces to the immediate area or the Service Area are not matenally afFected by the expansion. • expansion should not matenally affect the City's capital budget. • change should not prematurely open development to land that logically should be part of a lazger Sernce Area expansion. 2. Once m the Service Area, the site would then need to be annexed. Beyond meeAng state requirements in terms of nouce, heanngs and contrguity, the pnmary test for annexation is that the City is able to serve the annexation azea with a full range of urban sernces. Once in the Service Area, the hmmg of planned services to the azea is key If the park site is moved to the Rural Preservahon Area, ttte process for extendmg city services to the srte would change The city could annex srte as Area III- Annexed, similaz to the Boulder Reservou, or could extend out-of-city services to the site. If the property were to remam m Area III, then the city would be considenng extendmg less than the full range of urban services to the site Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan policy 1.20(fl states that "... publicly owned property m Area III may be annexed to the Ciry even if the property requues less than a full range of urban sernces or requires mclusion under City ~unsdicuon for health, welfaze and safety reasons." r ~- In addition, Pohcy 3 11(b) states that it is appropnate for the city to "extend hmited ut~hty service in Area III and Area II m circumstances that further the BVCP goals " ~ In general, public uses in Area III aze mtended to be those uses that aze not "urban", aze comparible with ~-- the rural chazacter of the Area III - Rural Preservataon Area and do not require the full range of urban services. Urban uses aze most appropnately located wIItun Area I. Staff would hke the Parks and Recreauon Advisory Boud's mput on this issue pnor to Plamm~g Boazd's d~scussion on November 16. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment A: Land Use Smtab~lity Report for the Planmng Reserve Attachment B: Map showmg the Planmng Reserve, as revised August, 2000 H ~PRAB\prab mem wpd ~'sR ~ ~ 4 Attachment A Year 2000 Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Planning Reserve Area Land Use Suitability Report ~ .,.,/ ,-•- .~ Planning Reserve Area Land Use Suitability Report Report Summary • an assessment of the surtabiliry of lands withm the Plannin~ Reserve for potential future expansion of the City of Boulder, Year 2000 Update to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Ttus report is a comprehensrve study of the Area III-Plannmg Reserve Area (Plarunng Reserve) for the purpose of City and County cons~detation of a boundary change to the Plannin~ Reserve. The report mcludes the followm~: • a recommendation for changes to the current boundary of the Plazuung Reserve that would result m a reducrion in the size of the Plamm~g Reserve and expansion of the Area III - Rural Preservarion Area ~"' ~... The onginal boundanes of the Planning Reserve were adopted m 1994 and based on the outcome of the Area III-Plamm~g Pro~ect (1991) (Figure 1) New information collected smce 1991 suggest that the Ciry and County may want to reconsider the onginal Planning Reserve boundaries. ~ r -BVCP Plauinq B~anbry _ PlanMg R~m~ ~ A~~~ l Aw~ 14 4~~ 11 Aen~aN 0 Ra~d imrn~lon Arn Figure 1. Locanon of the Plamm~g Resrne The results of this current study mdicate that it may be appropriate to decrease the size of the Plamm~g Reserve by movmg approximately 182 acres of land into the Area III-Rural Preservat~on Area. The proposed boundary change is based on new resource mformation about Natural Ecosystems, Envtronmental Conservatroa Areas, drainage basins, steep slopes, and cnhcal species habitat. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) polic~es concerning community design (cleaz urban boundaries and the design of entryways) also suggest an expansion of the Rura.l Preservarion Area at the northem edge of the ctty 1 Background ,~.,, ..~ The Boulder Va(ley P(annuig Area, which ~s the azea mcluded w~thm the BVCP is divided inio three areas (F~gure 1) Area I- the azea withm the City of Boulder which has adequate urban facihues and services and ~s expected to conrinue to accommodate urban development. Area II - the area now under County ~unsdiction, where annexat~on to the ciry can be considered consistent with BVCP pohcies. New urban development may only occur comctdent with the availability of adequate facilines and services and not otherwise. Departmental master plans project the provision of services to this area with~n the planning penod Area III - the remauung area in the Boulder Valley, generally under County~unsdichon. Area III ts drvided mro the Area III-Rural Preservation Area, where the City and the County mtend to preserve existmg rural land uses and character, and the Area III-Planning Reserve Area, where the City and the County intend to mamtam the ophon of expanded urban development m the City beyond the time frame of the 15-year planrung period. The Plamm~g Reserve is an approxunately 680 acre azea located duectly north and east of U.S.36 (28th Street Estended).(F ~wre 1) The Plazuung Reserve is bounded by U S 36 to the south and west, ~ Oran~e Orchard subdivision to the southeast, and City Open Space propemes to the nor[h. Sixty- ~, rune pazcels ran~n~ in size from one-half acre to 161 acres aze either completely or pamally located in the Planmng Reserve Nine pazceis or approximately 200 acres aze pubhcly owned by erther the City or the U S Forest Sernce. The chazacter of the Planning Reserve is nual with wide open vistas and sparse development, similaz to other Area III properties to the north and northeast. Land uses m the azea are predominantly single faznily residentsal and agnculturai, with a few small commercial businesses located along U.S 36. The Plannmg Reserve ~s in unincorporated Boulder County Approximately 3/4 of the properties in the Plamm~g Reserve aze Zoned Agnculhual. One quarter of the entire Plamm~g Reserve is zoned Rural Residential Less than five properues (approximately 5-10 total acres) located along U.S 36 have a Transitiona] zomng designahon. The Planiung Reserve is an interim BVCP designation until it is decided whether this land should be placed m the Area III-Rutal Preservation Area or in the City's Service Area. The followmg is the BVCP policy regazdmg the Planning Reserve. 2.09 (b) Area III-Planning Reserve Area. The Area I7I-Plamm~g Reserve Area u d~at pomon of Area III w~th naal land uses where the C~ty intrnds W mamtam the ophon of Lmited Servtce Area expans~on The Area III-Plammg Resme Area class~ficahon mamtau~s both rural praervanon and urban development ophons unul the Ciry and [he County dec~de the ~ 2 ultima[e des~red land use The locanon and charactensncs of this land make it potenually smta6le for new ,,.., urban development, based oa the apparent lack of seasmve envuonmental areas, hazard areas, and sigmficant agicultural lands, the feasibil~ry ofefficient urban senue extensioa and conawiry to the erisnng Semce Area `'~ wluch mamtauss a compact coaunumty In the long recc[~ City e+cpans~on mto the Plannmg Reserve may or may not be desuabfe dependwg on how well the co~nucuty meeu its long tecm goals and deprndwg on whether the brne6u to the commumry outweigh the cosu and neganve uapacu from new urban development The Plamm~g Reserve boundanes were estabhshed in 1994 as part of the last major update to the BVCP and aze based on the outcome of the Area III Plazuuag Pro~ect (February 14, 1991). The Area III Planmng Pro~ect idenrified lands m the Boulder Valley which may have development constraznts and should be designated for nual preservation. Planning Reserve boundaries were originally determmed by evaluahng natural resources and hazards and urban servtce capacity. T'his pro~ect estabhshed the onginal Service Area (Areas I and In, Plannmg Reserve, and Rural Preservation Area based on the resources and hazards throuehout the Boulder Valley.(Figure 1) Several stud~es have taken place smce the Area III Plazuung Project wtuch provide new mformaUon about resource values m the Plazuung Reserve The Natural Ecosystem map (adopted m the 199495 BVCP update) desi~ated a portion of the Planning Reserve as having natural resource importance. Sumlazly, Boulder County adopted an Envuonmental Conservarion Areas desi~ation in 1995 which ident~fies enhre landscapes throughout the county that aze important for natural ecosystem protection and for mamta~mng wildhfe habitat and comdors. `" Process for Planning Reserve Boundary Changes Area III-Rural Preservation Area boundary changes may be imhated by the City or the County and considered only during the BVCP five-year update. Changes to the Area III-Rural Preservation Area boundary require approval of the Ctty Plazuun~ Boazd, the Ctty Council, the County Planning Commisston, and the Board of County Commissione~ after a comprehensive study has been completed by the C~ry and the County demonstrahng that the followm~ cntena have been met. 1. A demonstrated need for either expansion or contrachon of the Area III-Rural Preservarion Area due to new information on land use swtability (e g., environtnental resource or hazazd constraints, feasibility of efficient extension of urban sernces, and compact and efficient urban form); or 2. A demonstrated need for either expansion or conhachon of the Area III-Rural Preservation Area due to changed circumstances or community needs. ~ ,,,,, 3 Land Use Suitability Analysis Tlus report provides the comprehensrve study of the Planning Reserve as requued by the BVCP and has been completed by City and County staff: The recommendarion presented in this document is based on a land use suitabihty analysis. A land use suitability analysis idenhfies land su-table or unsuitable to a particular use by overla}nng resource map uiformation to screen out inappropriate s~tes. The informanon used m the analysis is based on a set of critena denved from overall project or community goals. The cntena for ttus analysis are denved from several pol~cies m the BVCP (see Appendix A) Ttus section presents an assessment of the policies and cntena used to identify lands suitable or unsuitable for mclusion in the Planning Reserve. Resource mformarion for tkus analysis is derived from both the BVCP and the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan. The BVCP is a joint comprehensive plan adopted by both the Ciry and County to guide land use development m ihe Boulder Valley The Boulder County Comprehensrve Plan guides development throu~hout the entire county and mcludes some mformation from the BVCP. BVCP policy theme: Environmental resource preservation and avoidance of hazardous areas (BVCP policies 2.05, 4.01, 4.06, 4 07, 4 09, 4.13, 4.17, 4.26, 4 28, see Appendix A) ~ /"~ Boulder residents value the protection of environmental resources throu~hout the Boulder Valley "` Accordmg to the BVCP, "The fra~ le environment wtuch chazactenzes the Boulder Valley is a crincal asset that must be preserved and protected and is the framework wrtkun wluch ~owth and development may be permmed to take place." Pohcies in the BVCP emphasize the protechon ofwhole ecosystems and the processes which sustun them (e g., the movement of water, air, and nutnents through the landscape). Plannmg and policy decisions m the Boulder Valley are approached through an ecosystem framework, m wtuch natural regions like watersheds are incorporated mto plamm~g. The following critena are used to idenrify areas within the Plazuung Reserve which have environmental resources or constraints: Criteria: Wetlands, drainageways, drainage basins Figure 2 shows the location and extent of wetlands and drainageways within the Planning Reserve and m the surrounding azea. The wetland delmeadons were mapped m 1990 as part of a comprehensive wetland study of the Boulder Valley. These wetlands are also on the 1996 BVCP Inventoried Wetlands map. Wetlands located on private properry in the Planning Reserve aze not regulated by the City. ~ 4 ~~ ~~ ,........., , - _- f l~„ ~ _ ~ ~. J «~~...~~. ,~ f ~ •:::3:::' ~~ 1 !!(!tf!\I _ ~/^~/`~ ,~ F l 1H!lfH~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ..~,..... 1~. ~ ... .... r ......... ~,. ~ T~ ~ ~ `.«....... - ^, ~ ' ; .....«... ~ ~ ....«.... .~. ~ ) ,..~...... , ~~.....~... ........ ~ ~`,,, l~ ,...~...... \ ~" ~... ...... ~~ :......... .:~ ~'," '~ ....«.... ~ r ':::.,'.:.. ~~ \\l .......... ~:::.. :~::.. ~`<.~~,~,%Y' ~•'l..S`; ~ : _ .~ ~~I~ \ ~~ ~4 ~~` ~ ~1 ~ ~'~ ,s , . ~. Legend: << a Planning Reserve ~ """' Inventoried Wetlands ...;... -~ - - Creek/Ditch ~~ Drainage Basin ~ Contours (10 foot intervals) < ~ , o i ~ %` ~C C ee~ ~-~ --~~ _; ~~~~~n 7 ~-~'f \ / ~ J~~ ,~ o ~ ~ ` ---~ . ,~/ :- i / ~ ` 1 ~~ ~~~-' ° -= ~~/='" : ~-- ~ --- / - 1 1 ~-- / ~ `~ ~ ~ `~ J 1=::iiiiei~~iir'„» ~~ ~ ie~. •Fee e~~~~~~e~~ --". ~ ~ I ~ e T :FRf.. ~ii':~ - ~e~.~iiiiiie e~~~ { ~ t •~ 1 -n~v ~ ~)~-•`~ •_,~ ~~ --~- ~ .:..: : :~ v ~" ~ \ \ c~ ~ ~_ ~ ~ '~ ~ I~~~9. ~~~ _ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ °' ~ ~ ' ~' 1~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S ~ ~~ ~ , _ - ~- ~ ~ ~~~~~,;~ - .~ '""x -+, s ~ _~s~° ~__ ~ ~ ~ _ - - li Tn ~- J _ -~ _ _ 'r`. (•.::x ~ ~ ° ~ , ~ r ~ ) ; ~m""r"~' " - • ~ ~ ~ ~` _ - ; ly`~~ -` - ~~- -~ (~ ~~ ~~J \~ i ~ ~}~~r-~J~~~~~~I~~~I~~L ° ~ e ; t ~ _ ~ - ,~~_ ~ ~~~u~~ ~ - - - ~ _ - rl-r~ ~_ ~I I I ~ ~ ~ , ~_. 1 -_- 1_111 I ~l~ 1 lD '~1] .. `"' r`~ o., ~ ~~~~~~~~ 1Z~ l LT-[T i (I` ( l ~ {. ;. I .r~ i. " ,....mrm.._ ~ ~ ~~~i-F~/{i~7w-~ ~ ~l f~'~-=\ 1 II I ~IIfIIIIIIIIIIq \II , , I~~~11111 fil~l~Il~~~. ~i. Figure 2 also mdtcates the approximate drainage basm boundanes withui and azound the „~„4 Plannmg Reserve. The Planning Reserve is pnmanly withm the Six Mile Creek drainage ,r, basin T'he ma~onty of the area is charactenzed by predommantly flat terra~n wrth a gentle eastwazd slope The northwest portion of the Plazuun~ Reserve is characterized by more sharply defined ~ullies and drunageways w~th some steep slopes. Preservation of drainageways was not considered m the Area III - Plamm~g Project (1991). Policy changes to the BVCP since the 1991 study, however, emphasize the importance of planmng from a watershed level. Protection of ihe draznageways and steep slopes from mtensive urban development is important m protectin~ the wetlands and wildlife habitat in the Plazuung Reserve and the adjacent Open Space and ~s considered m dus current analysis. The wetlands and steep drainageways located m the northwest portion of the Planning Reserve (Figure 2) aze, therefore, inappropriate for expanded urban development. 2. Open Space property/BVCP Open Space designation City and County Open Space acquisitions in Area III have focused pnmanly on lands with environmental, scemc, agncultural and pass~ve recreational value Pubhc land surrounding the Plazuung Reserve (F o~ure 3) is prunarily owned by the City and managed as natiual and agnculYUral land. Connecting Open Space propemes with other lands m the Planning Reserve with similar environmental value is essential to the protecrion of whole ecosystems and, therefore, considered in tlus analysis. Similarly, it is important to protect ecological processes on pubhc lands by providmg adequate open space buffers between future I~-, development m the Planmng Reserve and sensitive natural areas. The need for open space `-° buffers, however, does not always preciude urban development. Open space buffers could be provided on properties witlun the Planning Reserve to separate new development from sensitrve azeas Open Space desigiations on the BVCP land use map includes land akeady acquired by the Ctty or other govemtnental entiues, as well as land planned for future acquisrtion. Open Space desi~ahons indicate that the long-term use of the land is p lanned to serve one or more open space funct~ons. Two azeas wittun the Planning Reserve have an Open Space desi~ation (Figure 3). The Oprn Space designation along the east port~on of the City pazk site covers the course of the Fazmer's Drtch through the Planning Reserve. Open Space designahons are given to all the ditches in the Boulder Valley to indicate their various open space and envuonmental values. Protecuon of the ditches and a buffer azea from urban development is ¢nportant in the protecrion the environmental and historic values of the ditch. This azea, therefore, would not be appropnate for urban development. ~ 6 ~ ~ Legend: ~ ~ / / ~ 0 Planrnng Reserve ~~ F~~;~ Inventoned Pravie Dogs , / , - ~ ~!~~ Natural Ecosystem Overlay Bell's Twinpod /4ea (wesl ol llne) 0 ~ i ~~~/~~~// ~///~/~ ,~,/'7; ~ Boulder Valley Ranchl8each Open Space Environmeotal Conservallon Area (above Ii~e) i ~ . ~ `~ ~ aFm u[n-nvo -- ~ _ --~~ ~ - ~~~~ ~ ~ --~~ -= ~-,~~~=-J~ °o y & County) ~\" 1 ~ , , . , ,, - ~~-r ~ ~ '- - ~fi- ~ ~1~~TiZ _ ~~ - . rTr~?~~l~l'(~ - - crn ~ n-r_t- - f~1~~=_~,~~~T ~- I~~~~ ~`~'~~~`~a_I ---- Fiqure 3 A second Open Space land use dest~arion covers the properhes in the far northwestern ,.,~ comer of the Plamm~g Reserve along U.S.36. This azea is a portion of a mesa and ,,,, charactenzed by very steep slopes. Ttus portion of the Plamm~g Reserve is also inappropriate for urban development. 3. Natural Ecosystems and Environmental Conservation Areas Figuce 3 illus~-ates the azea identified as a Boulder Valley Natural Ecosystem m the BVCP and an Envuonmental Conservation Area as idenhfied m the Boulder Counry Comprehensrve Plan Althou~ah both desi~ations represent sunilar environmental resource values, the desi~ahons were denved separately wrth slightly different C~ty and County policies Both desi~at~ons, however, ue important in identifying lands unsmtable for development due to environmental resource value. Natural Ecosystems aze defined in the BVCP as places that support natural ecosystems of natrve plants and azumals or possess unportant ecolo~ cal, biological, or geological values. Natural ecosystems mclude features that aze rare, iuuque, or sensiuve to human disturbance and aze essennal to maintaui the scienhfic and educahonal unportance of places represenling the nch natural lustory of the Boulder Valley Connechons and buffers that aze important for sustammg biolog~cal diversity and viable habitats for nahve species, for protecting the ecolog~cal health of certain natural systems, and to buffer potential impacts from ad~acent land uses aze also ~dentified as nahual ecosystems on the BVCP map. ~ A portion of the Plamm~; Reserve is identified as a"Group 2" Natural Ecosystem in the `'" BVCP Group 2 cntena aze used to des~~ate azeas that may be important m providmg ecosystem connechons and buffers, and protectmg large azeas from bemg split apart. Group 2 areas also may be human-altered landscapes that retaui si~uficant populations of species of concem, or funchon to meet biologcal requirements for species of concem. Generally, Group 2 azeas provide a buffer between more sensit~ve Group 1 naYUrai ecosystems and ad~acent urban land uses. BVCP policies regardmg Group 2 desi~anons aze consistent with overall polictes for the protecUOn of natural ecosystems. Ttus portion of the Plamung Reserve, therefore, is unsuitable for expanded urban development. "Ihe Boulder County Comprehensive Plan identifies Envtronmental Conservahon Areas on rts Envuonmental Conservahon Areas, Natural Landmazks, and Natural Areas map. These azeas aze similar to BVCP Natural Ecosystems m that they aze important nariual azeas and natural azea connechons defined at the landscape scale A portion of the Planning Reserve is idenhfied as part of the Boulder Valley Ranch/Beech Open Space Environmental Conservauon Area (Figure 3) Tlus conservahon area is significant because of a winter raptor concentranon area, significant prairie dog colomes, wetlands, hab~tat for Be1Ps Twinpod, and an tmportant large-mammal movement comdor. 8 ~ Boulder County polictes encoura~e the conservation and preservatton of Environtnental ^ Conservat~on Areas through the removal of development nghts. The pomon of the Pluuung ~- Resec~e identtfied as an Environmental Conservation ?~rea. therefore, would be mappropriate for expanded urban development. Land uses adjacent to these azeas shouid be low intensity and ptovide a de~ee ofbuffenng between the conservation area and h~gh mtens~ty land uses. 4. Rare plants and critical wildlife habitat Cntical species habitat is defined as an azea wiuch currently provides food and shelter for species idennfied on the Boulder County List of Species of Concem or any species with spectal status on the c~ty, counry, state or federal level. Raze plant species habitat is idenUfied using the Boulder Counry Comprehensive Plan Nanual Commuruties, Rare Plants, Ripanan Corridors, and Cntical Wiidhfe Habitats map. Raze plant species habrtat found within the Plamm~g Reserve include Physana bell:r or Bell's Twmpod (F~gure 3) Habitat for tkus species is shown alon~ the edge of U S 36 No cnt~cal wildlife habitat ts identified in the Plannmg Reserve Praine dog habitat has been mcluded m tlus analysis as a cnhcal wildhfe species in Figure 3 Although the species is not on any local, counry, state or federal protection hst, the protection of praine do~s and their habitat has nsen m tmportance due to several go~emmentai acrions over the past two yeazs. City Council recently adopted an ordmance and resolution g~vmg prazne dogs and their habitat special consideration m Boulder In addiuon, the U S Fish and Wtldhfe Service recently decided to hst black-tailed praine dogs ~ as "warranted but precluded." Under ttus decision, praine dogs will not be hsted on the federal Endangered Spectes L~st but the U S. Fish and Wildhfe Service will annually review the status of the species and to ad~ust to any changes In addirion, Boulder County revised its land use code m 1998 wtuch effechvely hsts prazne dogs on the Counry's hst of Species of Special County Concem m cases where development is proposed wittun prairie dog habrtat. Two praine dog colomes aze idenrified in the Plazuung Reserve. (Figute 3) Althou,,ah relocahon of prazne dogs from their habitat is becommg more commonplace, protection of their ~rassland habrtat is essential to the long-term protection of the species throu~hout the regon The praine dog habrtat m the northwest pomon of [he Ptanrung Reserve is unsuitable for urban development and should be in the Area III-Rural Preservation Area. The prazne dog habttat m the south centrai portion of the Planning Reserve and located primanly on the C~ty park site, may also be unsuitable for development. The lack of contiguity of ttus habrtat to other sensrtive environmental ueas, however, makes it less feasible to move into the Rural Preservation Area. Protecrion of the prairie dog habitat on the City pazk site may be more appropnately aclueved through future pazk design and development. 9 5. Unique geological features The BVCP idenrifies 12 geologcal feahues wtvch aze si~uficant because they demonsRate the geological history of the Boulder Valley No umque geologcal features are identified m the Planning Reserve. 6. Hazardous areas The BVCP states that development m hazardous areas should be carefully controlled or protvbited. Hazardous azeas aze defined as azeas wluch present danger to life and property from flood, forest fire, steep slopes, erosion, unstable soil, subsidence, or s~m~laz geologic development cons~aznts. Czrtain hazards m geolog~c constrauit areas or flood zones may be m~tigated through restnctions to development and aze generally dependent on the effectiveness and cost of miti~ahon technolo~es and design factors. In many cases, cons~aznts or hazards such as soil sw-ell potenhal can be mirigated with appropnate prehrrunary engneezui; study and des~~, construcnon, and ma~ntenance ~ Vanous types of hazazdous areas have been mapped by both the City and County and identified in the BVCP and the Boulder Counry Comprehenstve Plan. The foilowtng is a discussion of these hazazdous azeas and the unpiicanons on land use suitability m the Plamm~~ Reserve. ~ a. Flood zones "' The Federal Emergency Management A~ency provides flood potential mformahon on their Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIItM). The 1995 FIItMs mdicate no flood hazard or floodway azeas m the Plamm~g Reserve. Sunilarly, the Boulder County Comprehensive Pian Geologic Hazazd and Constrami Areas Map assoctate no floodmg potential wrth ttus azea The lack of flood zone uiformation m ttus azea may be due to the lack of urban development. New flood zone mapping for this azea, however, wouid hkely tdenttfy very mmor floo~ing potenhal due to topograplvc and geologic conditioas. b. Steep slopes Figure 2 shows the topography of the Placuung Reserve. The south and southeast portions of the Planning Reserve aze lazgely flat and gently sloping to the east. The northwest portion of the area (north of the Ciry of Boulder General Fund property) is characterized by more tully terrain wrth some steep slopes along the edges of the drainageways and mesa tops. Few tssues would be associated with urban development in the flatter areas of the Planning Reserve. However, development ~ 10 ,,.,,, wtthm and at ihe edges of the draina~eways would potentially cause considerable ,,,,,, impact to the slopes and to the wetlands and sensitive habitat withm these gull~es. Steep siopes and dramageways, therefore, aze considered unsuttable for urban development. c. Geological development hazards and constraints Areas of ~eolo~c hazazd and consiraint have been idenhfied and mapped by both the City and the County m the BVCP and the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan Geolo~cal development construnts that have been identified m the Boulder Valley ~nclude mass movement hazard, soil swellmg potential, consohdated soil potential, mme-related subsidence, and combmed mass movement hazard and consohdated swell constramt. The BVCP identifies some nunor consh-auits to development m the northwest port~on of the Planrung Reserve due to soil swell potent~al and "combmed mass movement hazazd & consohdated/sweli consuaint" There is some discrepancy, however, between the City and County comprehensive plans The Boulder County Geologic Hazazd and Constraznt Areas map indicates mmor expansive soil and landslide potential over the ma~onty of the Plaiuung Reserve Swelluig soils aze soils or soft bedrock wtuch mcrease m volume as they get wet and """~` shnnk as they dry out. Subsurface Colorado swelhng soils tend to remaui at a `° constant moisture content m theu natural state and aze usually relatively dry at the outset of construcrion disturbance. Exposure to natural or man-caused water sources dwzng or after development results in swellmg In many instances, the sotls do not regam their on~ nal dryness after construcrion, but remam somewhat moist and expanded due to the changed ennronment. Potential swell of bedrock and surficial deposiu may damage structures and uhlities. Damage to sh~uctures may be prevented with ~eotechmcal mvesrigat~ons and appropnate structural engineenng desi~ In general, the presence of a smgie geologic hazazd, m and of itself may not be a siguficant deterrent to urban development. The minor geolo~ic development constraznts m the Plazuung Reserve, therefore, should not be a factor in the final boundary recommendation The restnchons to development m geologic constraint azeas are dependent on the effecriveness of mitiganon technologies and design factos. The use of sound engneering may be able to iruhgate most ~eologic hazards. 11 BVCP policy theme: Preservation of rural areas and amenities (BVCP policies 2 03, 2 08, 2.26, 4.12, see Appendix A) An important issue in evaluating the land use surtab~lity of the Planning Reserve is the de~ree to wtuch urban expansion mto the area would unpact Boulder's goal of preserving rural azeas. Both the BVCP and the Boulder Counry Comprehensive Plan outline policies and ~oals which address the pmtechon of rural chazacter and ameiuUes mcludmg a~culturally si~ificant lands and significant cultrual and histonc resources. T'he following are the critena used to idenhfy azeas m the Planmng Reserve which contnbute to the preservation of nuat character• Criteria: Cultural and historic resources ~ The uncque landscape of the Boulder Valley has attracted a diversity of peoples to the regon over tune, ran~ng from prehistonc settlers to farmers and mmers in the past few centuries The range o£ settlers who have come and gone has left a legacy of pretustoric and lustonc sites whcch preseni a nch pzcture of the past and help to create a sense of identity to the present mhabitants ~ Potenual cultural and htstoric resources in the Planning Reserve are denved from the Boulder "~ County Comprehensive Plan Archaeologicaily Sensit~ve A.reas Map. Tius map is based on a comprehensive tustonc sites survey and identifies the resources of tustor.c si~ificance wittun the counry. No historic sites are idenrified m ihe Planning Reserve accordmg to tivs map. A bnef fieid survey also was conducted by City staff to note structures wluch may be lustoncally si~ificant. No such structures were idenhfied dunng tlus survey 2. Ditches Ditches are valued for their hisYorical and environmental contnbutions. Although ditches aze not considered a natural feature, they provide habitat for many plant and azumal species because of the availability of water. Most of the ditches in the Boulder Valley were constructed in the late 1800's or eazly 1900's prior to extensive development of the city. As the city grew, the ditches were incorporated mto scte design or placed into culverts under ground. Although Yhe undergrounding of ditches ~s often favored by the ditch companies, the tustorical value and natural features of these resources are lost with ttus practice. Protecrion of open ditches, or ditches which rem`ain above ground, and the associated vegeYation is a commurury value and considered in ~ 12 u this analys~s ~ `r Two open ditches run through the Plarunng Reserve (see Figure 2) T'he S~Iver Lake Ditch runs along the west side of the city, crosses Broadway and U 5.36 in the north edge of town and runs north through the Planrun~ Reserve just east of U S.36 Protection of this dttch by movuig the majonty of it to the Rural Preservahon Area would be consistent wtth protection of the other resource values in ttus poruon of the Plaiuung Reserve. The Fazmer's Ditch on~nates m Boulder Canyon, passes throu~h the north central pornon of Boulder and enters the Planning Rzserve near Jay Rd and U S.36 Tlus ditch runs along the westem portion of the Orange Orchard subdivtsion and connnues along the eastem edge of the Ciry Parks and Recreahon property before leaving the Plazuung Reserve. The ditch separates the City property from a conservation easement along the eastem edge of the Plamm~~ Reserve. Protechon of this ditch may be accomphshed throu~h appropriate pazk desi~ 3. Significant agricuitural lands Sigmficant a~cultural land consists of the following subparts a~cultural land of national importance; a~cultural land of statewide importance, and a~icultural land of local unportance. These ciassificahons aze based on the Colorado Important Fannland Inventory conducted by the Soil Conservation Service. Generally, farmland of unportance is available ~ land that has the best combmarion of physical and chemical characterisncs for producin~ ~...- food, feed, forage, fiber, and oil seed. No si~ificant a~cultural lands are mdicated m the Planrung Reserve m either the BVCP or Boulder County Comprehensive Plan. 4. Conservation easements The County and the Ciry use various tools to set aside land for the preservahon of environmental resources, ag-icultural uses, and rural amemries Conservahon easement agreements aze commonly used by both ~unsdichons where fee acqtusirion of property is not feasible or practical. The subdivision and non-urban planned umt development regulahons of the Bouider County Land Use Code require that a minunum of 75% of the property be preserved through a conservarion easement agreement with the County. Since easements generally restnct the type and amount of development on a properry and usually in perpetuity, easement res~icrions are an important considerat~on in detemuning Planning Reserve boundanes One conservation easement in the Planning Reserve along the eastem.(Figure 4) A conservahon easement was granted to the Counry and the City by the landowner preserving 12 acres of the property m perpetuity for agricultural purposes. Development of ttus outlot ~ "~-~'' 13 Legend: ~ Planning Reserve BVCP Open Space Designaiion ;;;~ City and County Open Space Lands =;; ;~: Boulder City Parks ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Other Public Lands 4~ ~ City of I General ~i~ ~ - _ - _-~ ~ - ~C~~~ ~=~ ~'- ~f~' -,~',~- ~ r.;....... ~ ~r~ --,~ ; ~~3~~~~;~~~ ~~1!1'f~ ~~~m3~v ~ u_rl_ - j Inn imnrrin~ --- r~~4 ~ filllfl~Tl~~ ~-- i~l ~~~~~ ~ ~_~_l~_~~~,~~ ~. -~~ (~-~~1~ ~,,, .,~., ~ ~ ts restncted to actrvities which further a~cultural production of the land and limited to ~ structures wlvch are accessory to an open a~cuitural use However, the easement may be ~ termmated or transferred by the City and the Counry tf a set of cn[ena aze met. The cnteria for terminatmg the easement tnclude a development proposal whtch is consistent wtth the current Boulder County Comprehensive Plan, Boulder County Land L'se Regulations, and the Crty of Boulder Revised Code. Ttus clause in the easement a~eement makes future urban development on this property possibie Smce no addmonal envvonmental constramts are associated w~th this site, it ~s appropriate for the property to remam in the Planning Reserve. BVCP policy theme: Compact and efficient urban form/Feasibility of efficient extension of urban services (BVCP pohcies 1.12, 2 04, 3.01, 3 02, 3A4, see Appendix A) The BVCP emphas~zes an urban development pattem that is compact and efficient and permits the most cost efficient proviston of city facilrties and sernces The City and County prefer redevelopment and infill as compared to development in an expanded service azea ui order to prevent urban sprawl and create a strong community edge The Ctry's mtent as expressed through BVCP '"`' pohcies is to channel development to areas wrth adequate infrastructure and to locate new ~-- development and redevelopment m azeas where adequate pubhc sernces and facihues presently exist or aze planned to be provided under the Ctty's Caprtal Improvements Progam The Area I, II, III concept and the Sernce Area concept aze fundamental to the Comprehensrve Plan. The Service Area (Areas I and In estabhshes the geogap}vic extent of the City's commitment to annex and provide services wtttun the plannin~ period. The Service Area concept supports a process for phased ~owth of the City, with annexahon to occur only when the full ran~e of urban services is available. Urban service standards apply to pubhc water, public sewer, flood controVdrainage, urban transportahon, pazks and recreat~on, fire protecrion and emergency medical response and police protection. In addition, other services also need to be adequately planned for urban development, includin~ open space, housing, human sernces, and schools The Area III Plazuung Pro~ect (1991) provided an extensive review of urban sernces reserve capacity to analyze azeas where addirional urban gowth could be accommodated with mimmal new or expanded faciliues. In that study, reserve capaciry was defined as the capacity of present and planned City factIities or programs to accommodate addrtional service demands beyond present needs or those projected by 2010 Based on reserve capacities for required urban services, areas in Area III were identified where urban growth could best be accommodated from the standpomt of feasibility and effic~ency in providmg urban services. Both "excess" reserve capacities and "spillover coverage" were taken into constderahon m the study "Excess" reserve capacity is a quanhfiable ~„", ~""' 15 factiity capacity (e g treated water supply) calculated by companng pro~ect facility or service demand and pro~ect facility or service capaciues "Spillover coverage" was used to describe the ^~, City's abihty to provide senices beyond a service area (e g fue or park service areas) with the ~ exisung or planned services The pnmary conclusion of the 1991 study was that no azea m Area III could be served with the full range of urban services vnth existmg and planned facilines and prog~ams. The report stated that any Servtce Area expansion would require ma~or uifrastruchue mvestnents to provide a full range of urban sernces with existrng and planned facilines and programs Some parts of Area III, however, could be more easily provided wrth mdividual urban services than other parts Area III land azound ~.:~'~s*rel subcommumty would be the eas~est to serve gven the relahvely small possible gowth uea ad~acent w:ce .;_-*=nt Service Area boundary The North Central area (current Plazuung Reserve azea) and portions of the :.:archall area were reportedly the next easiest to serve. All other azeas m Area III would be considerabiy more difficult to scrve Master plans aze developed consistent wrth the pohcies, plans, population and employment pro~echons provtded by the BVCP They provide a common ciry framework for plamm~g [he dehvery and funding of services, facihnes and progams. Several departmental master plans have been updated since the 1991 Area III P(aniung Pro~ect. Consequently, the urban services reserve capaciry for vanous C~ty services, may have changed smce the 1991 study. Updated departmental master plans were reviewed for ttus current study. An outline of current and pro~ected urban sernce standazds and sernce capacities is m Appendix B. The follo.nn~ ~ summanzes the ma~or urban sernce capacity hmrtations m the Plazuung Reserve: ~ 1. Water and Wastewater Utilities Si~uficant unprovements m several City sernces have been made since the 1991 study of Urban Services Reserve Capaciries. Recent improvements to raw water intake, treated water distnbuhon facilihes, and raw water storage capacity have improved the City's abihty to provide water sernces to the Planiung Reserve. Recent annexarion in North Boulder from recent annexarions will also provide more efficiency m extending water to this area. Costs for n*e~•~'~~~ ~ a:er wnmouhon lines, wastewater collection lines, and storm sewers can be bome by the landowners or developers if urban services aze extended to tlus azea. There are several implicahons, however, in extendmg development into portions of the Plazuung Reserve. If development is extended mto the Six Mile Creek drainageway beyond the south ridgelme, wastewater would need to be pumped mto the Fourmile Canyon Creek basin to connect with existing wastewater collection lines. In this case, new sewer lift stations would need to be cons~ucted. Major drainageway improvements also may be necessary along Six Mile Creek to handle storm drainage Water qualiry implicadons of mcreasmg urban dra~nage into dnnkuig water supphes (Boulder Reservoir and Six Mile Reservoir) would also need to be assessed. 16 ~°'^ Gi~en these water and wastewater utility lim~tations, it may be meffic~ent to extend urban ~-- development beyond the ndgehne of the Six Mile Creek drama~e basm 2. Parks and Recreatio~ Development of the lar~e regonal pazk site m the Plannmg Reserve would fill the need for commumty and possibly netghborhood pazk facilities. There may be some need, however, for smaller, less active neighborhood park space. This need could be filled by requuuig pnvate nei~hborhood and pocket pazks in new development projects. 3. Police and Fire New urban development in the Plazuun~ Reserve would hkely raise operahng costs somewhat for both fire and pohce services. Although there is adequate spillover coverage from the exisring fire stanon m North Boulder, additional residenhal development may generate a tu~her number of service calls for both departments BVCP policy theme: Clear urban boundaries (BVCP policies 2.02, 2.03, 2.06, 2 07, see Appendix A) .--, ~ The BVCP states that a cleaz boundary between urban and rurai azeas at the penphery of the c~ty wil] be mauitamed where possible Distuict urban boundanes can be created by desig~mg the entryway to the city to create a clear sense of amval and departure. Although natural features aze the most effecrive edges, pubhc open land, ma~or roadways or heavy tree plannngs also can funchon as commumty edges. Conhnuity of open space and natural features is also an¢nportant aspect of a strong city edge The current Plaiuung Reserve boundanes were analyzed to assess the unpact of future city expansion on the mamtaimng clear urban boundanes Natural features, pubhc lands, and man-made features were also mcorporated to find the most logcal future edge to the city The follow~ng cntena were used m tlus analysis Criteria. 1. City limits and major roads U S 36 defines most of the northem boundary to Boulder's city limits.(Figure 4) This major roadway provides a strong community edge. Expansion of the city into the Planning Iteserve wouid require either a clear natural feature or a roadway to mazntain a similaz clear urban boundary. ~ ~ 17 2, Open Space property .•,, Open space purchases along the northem edge of the city define the city's edge by providmg ~ a permanent undeveloped boundary The Open Space property west of U S 36 provide a strong edge to the ciry (Figure ~3) A sutulaz edge to the City could be mirrored to the east of U S. 36 with appropriate open space preservahon techruques. 3. Entryway view analysis A preluninary anaIysis of Boulder's north enhyway at U.S 36 and Broadway was conducted for the purpose of ttus study Photographs were taken at several pomts along the lughway approactung the ciry from the north. A presentahon of these photos will be gven at Council, boazd, and public meetmgs concermng the Plazuung Reserve boundanes. In summary, the analysis shows that the ndgelme wtuch defines the city limits west of U S 36 and contmues east along the north edge of the City's General Fund property would create a natural and logical edge to the city (F ~~ure 4) The ed~e of the city west of U.S 36 is along the rid~e hne separatmg Open Space and the future Dakota Rid~e Village development. A strong entryway would be created by conhnumg the ed~e of development to the east along tkus same ndge hne. Development north of ttus rid~e line would not create a lo~cal city ed~e and give an appeazance of urban sprawi alon~ the ciry's northem entryway ~ Recommendation A proposed new boundary of the Planning Reserve is shown m Figure 5 The proposed boundary would move 12 properties (approximately 182 acres) out of the Plazuring Reserve and mto Area III- Rural Preservahon Area The foliowing constderahons were made in makm~ the recommendahon for the boundary change: 1 Preserving environmental or cultural resources: The propemes pmposed to be removed from the Plamm~g Reserve are unsuitable for urban development based on the presence of one or more of the following environmental or cultural resource constraints a. Wetlands and drainageways 'I'hree properties in the northwest portion of the Planning Reserve in the Six Mile Creek drainageway contain several acres of wetlands and aze inappropriate for expanded urban development. ~l... t8 ~ _ , ~ ~ ~ ° I Current Reserve Proposed Planning Reserve rmauan t.vo ~ ~~--)l'~~~ 1 \ _/ ~i-~JU , ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~~ `~ S~}~-~~~~~_`~=J~~: ~~~ T.--.,-. .-T.,_..-~ , ~._. . --,.-~,:.. ~ ~~1z~~~~~ ~~~~~I~`I --' ~ " ~ ,~villlllRnn n ~r I I I 1 ~ I i 1 ~ 1 ~~ Gi~+~~rn ~ ~~~~ ~} n~ ~ I'i-11'i~~~i~~~~iis --~====_i ~-~~-- J_I l l l~.,l~l- ~ ---- -- -I-I- -- - ~ - .~-~ rlf~- 1_..._' --I- ~ f'~ T` ~~~Cy_' ~~~ ~i` l``~~ ~~~ ~ ~~f ~ I~I in~it ~ nnnni~~ - ~~1~~~~~i ~~~1-~~~~~~~~ i BVCP Open Space designation Open Space desimahons on propert~es in the northwest portion of the Planning Reserve and over the Farmer's Ditch comdor m the eastem edge of the Planning Reserve are mappropnate areas for expanded urban development BVCP Natural Ecosystem and Boulder County Comprehensive Plan Environmental Conservatioa Area designatious The Natural Ecosystem and Environmental Conservahon Area desi~arions identify the northwest pomon of the Planmng Reserve as havmg vanous environmental resource values. City and Counry pohcies regardm~ these desi~ations make ttus azea mappropnate for future expansion of the ciry. d. Habitat for rare plants or crirical wildlife species (Bell's rivinpod, prairie dogs) Habrtat for cnncal species (praine dogs, Bell's twmpod) shouid be protected to the extent possible. Habrtat that is conhguous to other environmentally sensidve areas should be m the Area III-Rural Preser~arion Area. ~.-*, Steep slopes ~ The northwest portion of the Platuun~ Reserve ~s charactenzed by steep slopes and "` drama~eways. Tkus area is mappropnate for espanded urban development. f Ditches Two properties in the faz northeastem porhon of Plamm~g Reserve have considerable development consh~aints due to the Farmer's Ditch comdor Urban development on these propemes would compmmise the preservation of the tustoncal character of ttus resource This azea would also be inappropnate for future extension of the ciry 2. Providing a logical estension of city services: Expanded urban development beyond the south ridgehne of the Six Mile Czeek drainageway would not result m a logical or efficient extension of urban services. Urban development beyond the ndgeline would require considerable wastewater collection improvements. Stormwater and flood improvements would also be required along the creek and likely compromise the wetland and wildlife values throu,,ahout ttus draznageway. Urban development beyond the ridgeline may also have implicarions on dnnking water supplies in Boulder and Six Mile reservoirs. ~ 20 ,.rr•. 3 Maintaining a clear urban boundary: A clear boundary to the ciry is best achieved by ~,, matchmg the city's planned ed~e on both sides of U S. 36. The view analys~s indicates that future development m the Plazuung Reserve should follow the same rid~e line as that on the west s~de of the highway (Dakota Ridge Village) m order to create a strong ciry ed~e. The current Plamm~g Reserve boundary creates a northem ed~e to the city that is discontmuous from the west to the east side of U S 36. Urban development north of the ridgelme would not provide a distmcnve edge to the city or create a clear sense of amval and deparcure. The edge of the city should be desi~ed v~nth a similar buildmg height and density on both sides of the lughway to be visually effechve. List of Figures: Ftgure 1 Ftgure 2. Figure 3 ~ Figure 4 ~.. Figute 5 Aooendices~ Vicinity map Wetlands, drainageways, ditches, and drainage basins Open Space, Natural Ecosystems, Environmental Conservation Areas, and other natural features Public lands and conservation easements Current and proposed Planning Reserve boundaries Appendix A. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Policies Relevant to the Planning Reserve Appendix B Urban Services Reserve Capacities for Poteutiat Development in the Planning Reserve ~ ~.., 21 Appendis A: Boulder Vatley Comprehensive Plan Policies Relevant to the Planning Reserve POLICY 1.12 ADr1PTING TO LLryIITS OY PFI1'SICAL E%P~~ISION. As the co~muty expands to ~u planned phys~cal boundanes, the C~ty and the Counry w~ll mcreaswgly emphas~ze preservanon and enhancemen[ of the physical, social, and econoauc asseu of the commumty Cooperauve efforts and resources shall be focussed on mamtaunng and unprovmg the quahry of fife vntfun defined physual boundanes. mth only luru[ed expans~on of the ciry POLICY 1.16 DEFINIT'ION OF CONIPREHE`ISIVE PL~,i`i`1ING .~1RE.~,S I, II, AND III. Ihe Boulder Valley Plazuung Area u drv~ded mro three ma)or azeas Area I u that area vnthu~ che Crty of Boulder which has adequate urban facilmes and sernces and u expected to conunue to accommodate urban development ,.~, Area II ~s the azea now under Counry ~unsdicho0. where annexanon ro the City can be coasidered cons~stent wrttt Pohcies 1 12 and 1 14 & 1 ZO New urban development may only occur cowcident wrth the ava~lab~Lry of adequate fac~liaes and smices and nM othenv~se Depamnental master plans pro~ect the provuion of ~ sernces to thu area vnttun the plamm~g pmod Area II?. is the azea of ¢nmediate focus vnt2un the first tluee years, and Area IIB ~s ava~lable to accommodate developmmt witlvn the balance of the plannin~ penod "' Area III u the remauung area m the Bouider Valley, generally under County ~unsdicnon Area III u divided mto the Area III-Rurai Preservanon Area, where the Cny and the Couaty mtend ro preserve e~usnng nual land uses and chazacter, and the Area III-Plamm~g Reserve Area, where the C~ry and t6e County intend to ma~ntam the opCOn of expanded arbaa devetopment m the City beyond tf~e nme frame of the 1~-yeaz plamm~g penod (See Areas I, II, III ~tap ) 2. COhIMUMTY DESIGN The Comprehensive Plan seeks aa urban developmrnt pattem that ~s compact and efficient and that pernuts the most effecnve and cost cfficient provuion of ciry facilines and sernces Such a development pattem enhances the hvabiLty of the co~umry for iu residenu by mcreasmg accessib~lrty to employment, recreauoq shoppmg and other amemues and by reducmg auto uavel and au pollunoa. From an urban design penpecrne, rt allows a shong, undentandable unage of Boulder as a separate commumty to emerge Redevelopmeat and mfill, whea sensmve to the character of ex~stng nughborhoods, aze encouraged as a means of mamtamwg a compact commumty POLICY 2.02 PHYSICAL SEYARATION OF COMMUNI'TIES. The City and the Counry shall smve to mamtam and enhance an oprn land buft'a tlut separaus development m the Boulder Valley from sucrouadwg cortunumhes and conGibutes ro a dtsnnc[ communtty tdennty for the City ~ 22 POLICY ?.03 ~,""~ ~" COM~IG^RTY/REGIOYai, DESIG~. The City and the County support ~mpro~ed des~2n oFmdiv~dual urban areas, nual areas, and the region through des~gn feanues such as clear urban boundanes, open land buffen sepazahng compact commumnes, viul acnnry centers, preservanon of rnncal nanual azeas and vistas, appropria[e comecnou of ~ad systems, effiarnt mulh-modal travei comdors, a balanced dismbueon of housm¢ and ~ob oppommmes, provuion of drverse ho~umg, and conser~anon of physical and soaal resources POLICY2A4 COMP~CT LA,~iD USE PATTERY. The Gty and the County wzll, by ~lemrnhng the Comprehensi~e Plan, ensure that developmcnt ~xnll rake place m an orderly fasluon which will take advantage of erisnng urban smices and shall avoid, uuofaz as possible, pattems of leapfrog, nonconhguous, scartezed development w~thui the Boulder Valley The City prefers redevelopment and mfill as compazed to development m an eacpanded Sernce Area, m order to prevent urban sprawl and create a compact commumty POLICY 2.05 OPEY SP~1CE PRESERVATIOY. The Qty and the CounN will preserve lands ~n[h umque nanuat features and charactensncs as permanent open space by purchase of development nehu, fee simple giti~ or purchases, and other measures as appropnate and Financ~ally feasible POLICY ?.06 DESIGN OF COM~IUNITY EDGES. Well-defined edges for the C~ry's boundanes aze u~ortant as they suppott an undeistandmg and apprec~ahon of the C~t}~s unage and create a cleaz sense of amval and depazrure ~ Natural feanues are most effecnve as edges, but public open land, ma~or roadways or heaw ~ee plannng also can funcuon as commumry edges As new azeas are developed, the defimnon of a commumry edge shall be a `"' destg~ pnonty POLICY 2.07 DESIGN OF ~LAJOR ENTRI'VVAYS. Ma~or entyways wto the Boulder Valley shall be idenafied, protected and enhanced m order to emphasize and preserve the natuial semng and appearance of the community Future smp commercial de~elopment shall be d~scouraged along ma~or artenals POLICY 2.08 PRESERVATIOIV OF RUR.~L AREaS APfD A1~IE;YIT'IES. The City and the Counry shall attempt to preserve e~snng nual land use and character m and ad~acent to the Boulder Valley where envuonmentally sensmve areas, Uazazd azeas, agnculturally sigmficant lands, nstas, sigcuficant histonc resources, and established cural residenaal areas exut A cleaz boundary between urban and mzal azeas at the penphery of the C~ry w~ll be mauitamed, where poss~bte E~ushng tools and programs for nual preservaeon will be sffengthened, and new tools and programs will be put m place POLICY 2.09 DELINEATION OF RUR.4L LANDS. Area III coasssu of the mmt lands m ihe Boulder Valley, oumde the Boulder Sernce Area. The Boulder Sernce Area mcludes urban lands m the Crty aad lands planned for funue annexahon and uct~an smnce prov~sioa Withw Area III, laad ~s placed mthia one of two class~f"icahons• the Area III-Rural Preservahon Area (RPA) or the Area III-Planwng Reserve Area (Planning Reserve) 'I'he boundanes of these two azeas aze shown on the Area III-Rural Preservanon Area and Area III-Plammg Rame 23 :4rea Classificanons Vlap Ttus map providcs an overlay to the Boulder Valley Co~rehensrve Plan ~Iap The more specific 4rea III land usc destg~anons on the BVCP ~Iap md~cate rhe rype of non-urban land ~e thac is desued, as well as recogmze those Counry developmencs that have or can snll develop a[ other chan rural '~'^ densmes and uses The Area III-Rural Preservanon Area ~s intended to show the desued long-[erm rural iand use, the Area IIl-Pla~ming Reserve Area is an mtenm class~ficanon unnl rt is dended whether or not th~s land should be placed m the Area III-Rural Preservanon Area or m the Service Area (a) Area III-Rural Preservat~on Area The Area III-Rural Preservahon Area is that porhon of Area III where nual land uses and character w~ll be preserved through exisnng and new nual land use preservauon tecluvques and no new urban development w~ll be allowed dunng the plamm~g penod Rural land uses to be preserved to the ~eatest possible estent mclude rural townsires (Eldorado Spruigs, Mazshall, and Valmont), e~ustme Caunry nual residenaal subdivvs~ons (pnmanly along Eldorado Spnngs Dnve, on Davidson ~[esa :;• -`T ^~neville, ad~acent to Gunbarrel, and m prox~miry to Boulder Resenmr), City and Counry acquued open space ann paz~.:_._', _~-~•^ _ c~ _~r^^~I ~reac and hazard areas ehat aze unswrable for urban development, s~gcuficant a~culnual^lands. and lands thac ~.~ ~~~saitable for urban development because of a tugh cost of extendmg urban servtces or scattered locaaons, which are not conducrve to mamtaming a compact commumty (b) Area III-Ptannmg Reserve Area The Area III-Plan:vng Reserve Area (Plannmg Reserve) ~s that pomon of?.rea III with nual land uses where the City intends to mazntatn the ophon of lu:uted Sernce Area expansion The Area III- Plannmg Reserve Area classificanon mamtams botk rurdl preservaaon and urban development opnoas unhl the C~ry and the Counry decide the ultunate desued land use The locanon and charactenshcs of this land make rt porennally swtable for new urban development, based on the apparent lack of sensmve envuonmenbl areas, hazard areas, and s»ficant agicultural lands, the feas~biliry of effic~ent urban servue extension, and conhgmry ro the exisnn~ Service .4rea which mamtams a "'~ compact commuruty w In the long tenn, Ciry e:cpansion mto the Plamm~g Reserve may or may not be des~rable dependme on how well the commumry meets its long term goals and dependu~g on whe[her the benefits to the commuwty outweigh the costs and negahve impacu from new urban development POLICY 2.26 PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL AND CULTUR~L RESOURCES. Buildmgs, d~smcts, and s~tes of histoncal, azc}utectural, azchaeological, or culnual stgmficance shall be ~dennfied and protected Preservanon and rehab~l~tanon of such bmldmgs, dismcu, aad sues by the pnvate sector shall be encouraged by the Crty and the County through the creahon of mcenhve programs, destgnahon of landmark buildmgs and duhzcu, des~gn rev~ew, pubhc u~rovements, and other rools 3. FACII.I1'IES AND SERVICES 1'he C~ty and t6e County agree tl~at urban develapment should not occur with~a the Boulder Valley unhl an adequate rangc of urban sernces ~s ava~lable to serve the developmenc The City and the County find t6at the deferment of or vanance fram the requvemeat(s) of adequate urban servtces for urban development ~s not m the best muresu of publtc health, safery, and welfaze and should not be conanued. POLICY 3.01 24 ~! PR04'ISIOY OF URB,~Y SERVICES IN THE BOLZDER VAI,LEY. The Ciry and the County mtend that ''~' new urban development not occur unhl adequate urban facilmes and servtces are available to serve the '°'~' development The Counry eepenence mdicates that prov~s~on of the full range of urban facilmes and sernces by a mumc~palrty is preferable to provu~on of urban facilmes and sernces by special d~smc[s and pnvate groups in part because mumc~palines have polmcally accountable leaders}up, general pohce power and the abiliry to coordmate prov~sion of adequate urban facilmes and sernces Therefore a ~s hereby pmsumed that adequate facihnes and servues can be prov~ded only by the Crty of Boulder POLICY 3.0? DEFL`IITION OF ADEQUATE URBA.`1 FACILTTIES :1i`(D SERVICES. (a) "adequare facilmes and services" for new urban residenaal development means the avatlabiliry of pubhc water, pubhc sewer, flood con~ol and drau~age, urban fue protecnon and emergrncy medicai caze, urban poi~ce protecnon, urban transporranon, developed urban parks, and schools based upon thc rntena set forth m subparagraph c below (b) "adequate facilmes and services" for new urban mdusmal and commerc~al development means the availabihty of public water, pubhc sewer, flood con~ol and dramage, urban fire protecnon and emergency medical caze, urban pohce protecnon, and urban ~ansporranon, based upon the rntena set forth m subparagcaph c below (c) The ava~labilrty and adequacy of urban facihnes aad sernces as set forth m subpazagraphs a and b above shall be detecmmed based upon the follovnng cntena and as further defined m the Urban Servue Cntena and Standazds secaon of tlus plan Deteimmaaons of facthnes and services adequacy shall be based upon the followmg cntena ~ I. Re `"" ii. iii. iv. v. POLICY 3.04 ~ponsiveness to public ob~echves, Suffiaency and dependabiliry of financmg, Operaaonaleffecnveness, Adequacy of equipment and facilmes, and Profic~ency of personnel CH.~.`1PIELLYG DEVELOP!~IENT TO ?aRE~.S WITH A.DEQUAIE L~1FR~STRUCTIIRE. m order to protect and use past mvestrnenrs m capiral u~rovemeats, aew development and redevelopment shall be located m azeas where adequate public services and facilihes presendy eCVSt or aze planned to be provided under the Ciry's Capital Iiaprovements Program. 4. Ei`1VIRONMENT The fragile envuonment wtuch charactenzes the Boulder Valley ~s a rnacal asset that must be preserved and protected. It is the framework cvithm which growth and developmeat may be permitted to take place. The C~ty and County recogivze the mex~cable lmlcs between the long-te:m health of our natural environment, the economy and communrty hveabihry, and shall promote pohcies and prograzas that cnsure a sushmable envuonmene POLICY 4.01 INCORPORIT'ING ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS INTO PLANrIING. Plamm~g and policy decuions m the Boulder Valley shall be approached tfuough an ecosystem hamework, m wh~ch nanual regions lke a~rsheds and watessheds are mcocporated mto plamm~g, and an appropnate rclahoaslvp bctwern the bmlt eavuonmrnt 25 and au, wa[er and land qual~ry is considered POLICY ~.06 NATL~L ECOSYST'E~IS. The Gty and the County shall prorect and resrore sigmficant ecosystems and hab~rats for nanve plant and azumal spectes on pubhc and pnvate lands through acquu~non, land use plamm~g, devdopment renew, and publ~c land vunagement pracnces Promonon of bwfogual dtvenny and prorection of endangered species and theu associated habitat will be cmphas~zed. Degraded habita[ may be restored and selected extupa[ed species may be remaoduced as a meaas of en6ancmg naavc flora and fauna m the Baulder Valley Narural areas (as desigiated m the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan) that are within the Boulder Val]ey, shall be maziaged m a manna tl~at u cons~stent wtth [he Nanual Areas Goals and Pohcies of rhe Boulda Counry Comprehensrve Plan POLICY ~i.07 ECOSYSTEVi COtYNECTIONS ?~,YD BLT~'FERS. The C~ty and the Counn recognize the biological importance of preservmg lazge azeas of unfragmented habitat. T'he City and Counry w~ll work together to preserve, enhance, and restore undeveloped lands cnncal for providmg ecosyscem connecnons and buf2'ers for ~o¢ung s~~uficant ecosystemc 'Ihese azeas aze vnportant for susuuung biolog~cal diversity and v~able habiwts for nahve species and for mm,m,~,ng ~pacts from developed lands POLICY ~.09 ~, WE7'I,.~u~iD PROTEC'I'IOIV. Nanual and human-made wedands aze valuable for theu ecological and Where appropnate, theu recrcanoval funchons mcluding theu abilicy to enhaace wauz and au quahry Wetlands also funcnon as unportanc wildlife hab~ta~ especially for rare, tlueatened ~d endaneered plants and wildhfe 'Ihe ~ City and the County will connnue to develop progrems to pro[ect and enhance wetlands in the Boulder Valley ~ The C~ty shall ducouraee the desaucnon of wedands, but m the care cases when development is perautted and the fillmg of wedands cant~ot be avoided, they shall be restored or replaced POLICY 412 AGRICULTUR.aI. L.a.`ID. The C~ty and the County shall encourage the preservanon of a¢nwlhual lands as a current and funue source ofboth food and fuel and for theu conmbuaon to culnual, envuonmenml, and econonuc drvers~ry Agnculnual lands wuh uanonal, state and local siyuficance have been idennfied. Ihe Crty and the County will encourage the protecuon of siguficant agncultural azeas and related water supphes and facilines, mciudmg the histonc and exisnng d~tch systems, through a vanety of ineans, wfuch may mclude publ~c acquismon, land use plantung, and sale or lease of water for ag~cultural use POLICY 4.13 [TMQUE GEOLOGICAI, FE~1T[JRES. Due ro ~u locanon at the foot of the Rocky Mountains, the Boulder Valley has a number of siguficant or umque geological features, wluch have bem idennfied The C~ry and the County shall attaapt to protect these feattues from alteranon or destrucnon duough a vanety of ineans, such as pubhc acquts~hon, land use planwng and regulauon, and densry hansfer within a pamculaz site. POLICY 4.16 H.~ZARDOUS AREAS. Hazazdous azeas which present danger to hfe and properry ~om flood, forat fire, steep slopes, erosion, unstable so~l, subs~dence, or s~laz geologual development coasuaines shall be ~ 26 r,. delmeaced and development m such azeas cazefully conuolled or prolubited ~ ~ POLICY 4.17 FIII.LSIDE PROTECTION. Hillside and ndge-line development sLall be camed out m a manner wtuch, to the eYtent poss~ble, avoidt both neganve envuonmental consequences to the unmed~ate and sunoundmg area, as well as the de~adu~g of views aad vuras from and of pubhc azeaz POLICY 4.26 FLOOD bl.~u`1AGE~IEYT. The funcnonal and aestheec qualmes of dramage courses and waterways shall be preserved and enhanced A noncontaimnrnt approach to flood management shall be used on Boulder Creek A genernlly non-scucaual approach to IIood control that emphas~zes a natural appearance shall be used on all ma~or water courses and dramageways. In some cases a shuctural salunon may be used, consutent with adopted master plans POLICY 4:?8 PROTECI'ION OF HIGH HAZ4RD AF2EAS. The Ciry shal] prevent redevelopment of s~gmficandy flood- dama~ed propemes m lugti hazazd areas The Crty shall prepaze a plan for property acquismon of flood- damaged and undeveloped land m flood lugh hazard azeas lindeveloped IIood lugh hazazd azeas will be retamed in their nahual sute whenever possible Companble uses of npanan comdon, such as natura! ecosystems, w~ldlife habitat, and wetlands shall be encouraged wherever appropnate TraIls or other open recreanonal facihnes may be feas~ble m certam areas e~~+ , 27 Appendis B: Urban Services Reserve Capacities for Potentiai Development in the Planning Reserve Water • Raw Water Signif-cant escess capacity in raw water supply exists to sezve the Boulder Vailey at build-out (mcludtng build-out of the Planning Reserve). • Treatment Sufficient escess capacity Recent unprovements to raw water mtake and treated water distnbut~on facihnes (Betasso W P and Boulder Reservoir W.P ) have somewhat reduced the concem. Lakewood Pipehne improvements will further tncrease capaciry • Storage Sufficient escess capacity. The North Boulder Termmal Water Reservou was built smce ihe 1991 assessment and provides sufficient addit~onal stora?e capacity for new growth m the Plamm~g Reserve. ,,,, • Distnbuhon Limited escess capacity. New water ~ansmission and distnbuhon pipes would need to be constructed and connected to the existmg '"~'' water transmission svstem m North Boulder "" Wastewater • Treatment Sufficient escess capacity. The wastewater treatment system is expected to meet buiid-out needs with modifications outlmed m the W astewater Treated Facihhes Plan. • Collecrion Limited excess capacity. If development is extended mto the S~x Mile Canyon Creek draznageway, new sewer lift stations would be needed to pump wastewater. New interceptor and collector sewers aiso would need to be constructed and connected to the existmg water transmission system m North Boulder. Cost of the tmprovements would be the respons~bility of developers. Drainage/Storm Sewers Limited excess capacity. Adequate size drainage facilines inludmg storm sewers would need to be constructed and extended to Fourmile Canyon Creek. Cost of tt;e improvements would be the responsibilrty of developers 28 ,p... Transportatlon-Roads Significant reserve capacity m the arterial road system w~ll be r,,,r available to accommodate tra~c from new development m the Planning Reserve. A full transpoRation impact analysis, however, was not conducted for ttus study. A complete analysis of the amount of addiaonal ~rowth m the Planmng Reserve that could be handied by the existmg arterial road system would be needed. Parks • Re~onal Adequate coverage. Land was purchased m the Plarunng Reserve by the Pazks and Recreation Department for a future Rej onal Pazk. Future urban development m the Plazuung Reserve would be adequately served by ttus park facility • Commuruty Some spillover coverage. The new North Boulder Commumty Pazk would provide some spillover coverage for pomons of the Plamm~g Reserve. • Neighborhood No spillover coverase. Existm~ neighborhood parks m the North Boulder area would not be adequate to meet the neighborhood park service standards in the Planning Reserve. Although the new re2ional park would provide sigruficant pazk services to the ennre azea, some ~' neighborhood pazk space would be needed to meet the needs of new ~ residenual azeas FirelEmergency Medical Response Significant spillover coverage A service standazd of the Fue Department is to have a response hme to the locauon of an emergency that is normally less than six minutes from the hme the call is received by the dispatch center. The Fire Stahon at 19th St. and Violet would serve a si~ificant pomon of the current Planning Reserve. PoliCe Limited excess capacity. Although a complete analysis of police service capacity was not conducted, demand for police services aze likely to increase with increased development in the Planning Reserve. Smce no police sernces are currently provided in the Plazuung Reserve, it is assumed that new urban development would increase annual operatmg costs or the need for new officers to serve addiuonal residenu. Capital expenditures for police services may be also be needed to provide addirional stations and opentional resources in the azea. '~ 29 ~~ Library Significant spillover coverage. With existing and planned new '""^ library branches, all of the Boulder Vailey could be served. A new North Boulder Branch library would serve new urban development in the Planning Reserve. ~ 30 Attachment B Legend: Q New Planning Reserve ~ City and County O.S. Land n ~ Boulder Ciry Parks ~N~ ~ Other Public Lands City of E General ~ I~ ~ ~T