Loading...
11.18.25 PB Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation CITY OF BOULDER PLANNING BOARD MEETING DATE: November 18, 2025 AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing and consideration of the following related to an area of land at 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd.: 1. Action on a proposed Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) land use map designation change on the 19-acre portion of the property west of 55th Street from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) (LUR2025-00008); and 2. Recommendation on a petition to annex an approximately 24.04-acre area of land at 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd., including 55th Street right-of-way, with an initial zoning of Public (P) on 23.6 acres and an initial zoning of Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) on a 0.44-acre portion of right-of-way (LUR2025-00003). Applicant: City of Boulder Owner: City of Boulder PRESENTER(S) Brad Mueller, Director Planning & Development Services Charles Ferro, Senior Planning Manager Shannon Moeller, Planning Manager OBJECTIVE 1. Planning Board hears staff and applicant presentations 2. Planning Board holds Public Hearing 3. Planning Board discussion and action on the proposed BVCP land use map change and recommendation to City Council on the proposed Annexation and Initial Zoning SUMMARY Project Name: 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd. Location: 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd. Size of Annexation: 24.04-acres (1,047,221 square feet), including: 21.82 acres of property and 2.22 acres 55th Street right-of-way Zoning: Existing – Unincorporated Boulder County: Rural Residential – RR, Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 1 of 136 Suburban Residential – SR Proposed – City of Boulder: Public (P) on 23.6 acres Proposed – City of Boulder: Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) on 0.44 acres of right-of-way Comprehensive Plan: Existing – Low Density Residential (LR) and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) Proposed – Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) KEY ISSUES FOR DISCUSSION Staff has identified the following key issues to help guide the board’s discussion: 1. Is the proposed annexation consistent with State statutes and BVCP policies, including BVCP Policy 1.17, Annexation? 2. Does the proposed change to the BVCP land use map from Low Density Residential (LR) to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) meet the applicable criteria? 3. Is the proposed initial zoning of Public (P) and Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) consistent with the initial zoning standards in the Boulder Revised Code? EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this item is for Planning Board to consider an action on the proposed BVCP land use map change and to make a recommendation on the proposed Annexation and Initial Zoning. The Planning Board will consider the requests at a public hearing. STAFF RECOMMENDATION Staff Findings and Recommendation: 1. Staff finds the proposed annexation to be consistent with State statutes and BVCP policies. 2. Staff finds the proposed change to the BVCP land use map consistent with the applicable criteria. 3. Staff finds the proposed initial zoning of Public (P) and Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) is consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan goals and land use designations of Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) and Low Density Residential (LR) and appropriate for the subject property and right-of-way. Therefore, staff recommends that Planning Board adopt the following Motions: Suggested Motion Language: Motion to approve the proposed Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan land use map change for the 19-acre portion of the property west of 55th Street known as 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd. from Low Density Residential (LR) to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O), incorporating this staff memorandum as findings of fact, pertaining to case number LUR2025- 00008. Motion to recommend to City Council approval of the proposed annexation of the property located at 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd., including 55th Street right-of-way, with an initial zoning of Public (P) on 23.6 acres and an initial zoning of Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) on a 0.44-acre portion of right-of-way, under case number LUR2025-00003, incorporating the staff memorandum as findings of fact. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 2 of 136 PUBLIC FEEDBACK Consistent with Section 9-4-3, Public Notice Requirements, B.R.C. 1981, staff provided notification to all property owners within 600 feet of the subject location of the application, and signs have been posted by the applicant indicating the review requested. Written comments are included in Attachment G. Comments received primarily expressed concerns about flooding and future development on the property. BACKGROUND Prior Land Use Review History: The potential annexation of the site has been discussed for many years and several annexation, concept plan, and site review applications have been reviewed. Until 2018, the property was privately owned. The property has historically been known as the Hogan Pancost property. With the existing Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) designation of the site as Low Density Residential land use, development review applications and requests to annex were submitted to develop the property for residential uses. Environmental concerns in the area, mostly focused on wetlands, groundwater and flood, have been a focus in the review of the prior applications. The most recent requests to annex and develop the property included an Annexation and Initial Zoning (LUR2015-00093) with an initial zoning of Residential Low -2 (RL-2) and Concept Plan and Review (LUR2016-00076) application to construct 117 residential units. On Aug. 10, 2017, Planning Board recommended denial of the request to annex based on concerns about flood and groundwater impacts. On Oct. 10, 2017, City Council held a public hearing to consider the Annexation and Initial Zoning and the Concept Plan. In November 2017, the applicant withdrew the annexation application. From December 2017 through 2018, City Council held various study sessions and discussions regarding the property and next steps. • December 12, 2017 – Council held a study session to discuss the property and the next steps. • January 16, 2018 – A Matter from the City Manager was considered, and a public hearing was held. By a unanimous vote, staff was directed to proceed to purchase this property. • January 19 and 20, 2018 – Council discussed the purchase timing and uses for the Hogan Pancost Property at its annual retreat. • February 20, 2018 – Staff requested consideration of a motion to approve the acquisition of the Hogan Pancost Property. • April 20, 2018 – The property was purchased. • October 9, 2018 – Council held a study session to consider potential uses for the property. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 3 of 136 On July 16, 2019, Council directed staff to arrange for the purchase of the property. On October 15, 2019, Council finally adopted Ordinance 8349, in which Council appropriated funds for payment of the purchase price from the Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund, the Open Space Fund, and the Flood and Stormwater Utility Fund. Ordinance 8349 designates the Hogan Pancost Property partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation and partially for open space use. The map attached to the ordinance shows the locations of those uses, as shown in Figure 1, below. Court System Plan: In 2023 and 2024, the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department engaged in a planning process for the Boulder Tennis and Pickleball Court System Plan that utilized a blended approach that included policy direction, research, and community engagement. The purpose of the Court System Plan was to acknowledge and explore the growing demand for both pickleball and tennis in the community. The changing court supply in Boulder includes the closure of private tennis facilities (Rocky Mountain Tennis Center and pending redevelopment of CU Boulder South Campus Tennis Courts). Community representatives have shown a strong desire for additional dedicated courts and a higher level of service. The Court System Plan was finalized in July 2024. The three primary outcomes of the plan are to: • Develop short-term actions about how the department manages and invests in BPR’s current courts. • Inform long-range investment opportunities in BPR’s court system. • Define if and how BPR may play a role in a potential indoor facility. Among the Key Recommendations, the plan recommended: Figure 1 - Uses of Property per Ordinance 8349 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 4 of 136 • BPR should develop additional outdoor courts as funding and capacity allow. The recommended additions are: 22 additional dedicated tennis courts and 22 dedicated pickleball courts. • BPR should explore potential partnerships to better understand indoor facility opportunities. For example, BPR will continue to determine feasibility of temporary indoor facility with construction at East Boulder Community Park in 2025 and long-term opportunities as part of the Future of Recreation Centers project. East Boulder Community Park was identified in the Court System Plan (pages 36-37) as a priority site for the expansion of the tennis and pickleball court system. The plan noted: • Staff will be engaging in the process to make use of the Hogan Pancost property in parallel with planning for schematic design of courts at East Boulder Community Park. • The City purchased the Hogan Pancost property for utilities and parks usage. • The first step in understanding potential for recreation use is determining regulatory feasibility given flood impacts, groundwater requirements and water rights coordination before beginning an annexation process. • Including annexation, this process may take 9-24 months. East Boulder Community Park Racket Courts: From late 2024 through 2025, Boulder Parks & Recreation has commenced site analysis, conceptual planning, and community engagement towards the creation of additional tennis courts and conversion of some courts to pickleball at East Boulder Community Park, for a proposed total of 10 tennis courts and 6 pickleball courts. Additional information is available online at https://bouldercolorado.gov/projects/east-boulder- community-park-racket-courts. Future development of additional tennis courts on the subject site requires annexation to bring the site into the jurisdiction of the city for extension of utilities and land use review and permitting processes. No development plan is being reviewed or approved with this annexation. Existing Conditions: As shown in Figure 2, the site, historically known as the Hogan Pancost property, is located at 5399 Kewanee Drive and 5697 South Boulder Road in east Boulder near the East Boulder Recreation Center. The site can be accessed from 55th Street from South Proposed Annexation Manhattan Middle School East Boulder Community Center Keewayden Meadows Figure 2 - Vicinity Map Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 5 of 136 Boulder Road to the south of the site or from 55th Street from the north by way of the East Boulder Community Center. The property has been historically used for grazing and agricultural purposes within unincorporated Boulder County; however, as shown in Figure 3 below, almost the entirety of the site is surrounded by city annexed land, including the residential developments of Keewayden Meadows to the west, Greenbelt Meadows to the south, Peacock Place to the southeast, and the East Boulder Community Center to the northeast. Floodplain. The site also contains 100-year and 500-year floodplain areas, and small areas of conveyance and high hazard zone, as shown in Figure 4. East Boulder Community Center Keewayden Meadows Greenbelt Meadows Peacock Place Figure 3 - Site respective to city limits shown shaded Figure 4 - Floodplain Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 6 of 136 Wetlands. As shown in Figure 5, there are existing wetland areas on the site. A wetlands map is required as part of the annexation process to establish the mapped wetlands regulatory boundaries. Wetlands mapping and functional evaluations (Attachment C) and an Ecological Report (Attachment D) were prepared by the applicant. There are currently approximately 7.37 acres of mapped wetlands on the site, more than in previous years due to recent flood irrigation from the ditch lateral along the south edge of the site. Flood irrigation is no longer occurring and the cuts in the ditch lateral are being patched. Some ditch seepage will continue to occur and support the wetlands close to the ditches and ditch laterals. The mapped wetlands on the south side are high-functioning with a 50' wide buffer and the cattail wetlands on the north side of the site are low-functioning with a 25' wide buffer zone. An updated wetlands delineation is anticipated to be completed in 2026 following the changes to flood irrigation on the site. The higher-functioning wetlands near the south and west boundaries of the site will likely remain wetlands, consistent with previous mapping completed with prior annexation applications. For the purposes of annexation, the current mapped wetland boundaries are being adopted. Wildlife. As described in the Ecological Report (Attachment D), the site was evaluated for the presence and habitat for wildlife. Higher quality habitat is present east of 55th Street, with the land west of 55th having lower quality habitat with numerous noxious weeds. Wildlife values are low to moderate and include feeding, watering and cover. The site was examined for potential habitat for threatened and endangered species, as described in Attachment D. In particular: • Critical habitat for the Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse occurs on the eastern part of the property east of 55th Street, which will continue to be preserved and protected as open Figure 5 - Wetlands Boundaries Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 7 of 136 space. The land west of 55th Street does not provide critical habitat for the Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse. • The tricolored bat is proposed for listing by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as an Endangered Species. Buildings on the property were examined for signs of hibernating or roosting bats in the fall of 2024, and no evidence of bats such as guano or small scratches on the ceilings was observed. It is unlikely that bats would hibernate at the site. The buildings and trees should be examined for roosting bats, especially tricolored bats, and for any physical signs of bats before being removed. • No known occupied habitat or potential habitat occurs at the Hogan Pancost site for the Ute ladies’ tresses orchid or the prairie fringed orchid. The property was closely examined for the Ute ladies’ tresses orchid many times in previous years and the species was not found. Overall, the ecological report concluded that future development on the portion of the site west of 55th Street is not anticipated to adversely impact any listed Threatened & Endangered species that could occur in Boulder County. This is consistent with previous findings from studies completed during the prior annexation and concept plan proposals LUR2015-00096 and LUR2016-00076 in 2016, which found that no Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse had been observed on the site and were not likely to occupy the site based on the unsuitable habitat it would present; trapping studies completed that found no evidence of the mice on the site. Additional studies related to other species of concerns on the property, including plant species, were done and concluded that no special protected species were identified. The memos from prior cases are available in the city’s Planning Board archive. The land east of 55th Street will continue to be preserved and protected as open space. Prairie Dogs. A small area of abandoned prairie dog burrows is present in the north-central part of the site, as described in Attachment D. Prairie dogs were not observed at the site when it was examined eight different times over six months. The observations found that the old burrows were collapsing and there were no signs of prairie dog scat or vegetation grazing; no prairie dogs were found to be currently living on the site. BVCP Planning Areas: As shown in Figure 6, the property is located in Area II in the BVCP, which is the “area now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with Policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth Requirements and 1.17 Annexation. New urban development may only occur coincident with the availability of adequate facilities and services. Master plans project the provision of services to this area within the planning period.” Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 8 of 136 Existing BVCP Land Use Designation: As shown in Figure 7, the underlying Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) land use designation is Low Density Residential (LR) on the western portion of the property and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) on the eastern portion of the property (east of 55th Street). Figure 6 - BVCP Planning Areas Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 9 of 136 Existing Zoning: The property is located in unincorporated Boulder County with a county zoning of RR – Rural Residential and SR – Suburban Residential, which are defined as “Residential areas developed at a density and character compatible with agricultural uses” and “Low density suburban residential areas,” respectively (Articles 4-103 and 4-105, Boulder County Land Use Code). The site is largely surrounded by properties within Boulder city limits. Surrounding city zoning districts are shown in Figure 8. Annexation of the subject property provides an opportunity to consider the appropriate zoning and land use designation for the area proposed to be annexed. The applicant’s specific proposal for annexation, land use change, and initial zoning is discussed later in the memo. Figure 7 - BVCP Land Use Designations Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 10 of 136 PROCESS Annexation: The property is not currently within City limits. To allow for the property to be brought under city jurisdiction and for utilities to serve the site, the land must annexed. Land may be considered for annexation to the City if the annexation would comply with state annexation statutes and the policies of Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). The property borders the Boulder city limits with sufficient contiguity per state statute and is located within Area II of the BVCP, the area that may be considered for annexation. If a property is annexed, zoning is established consistent with to the goals and land use designations of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Most annexations involve two public hearings. The first is conducted by the Planning Board, who will make a recommendation to the City Council whether or not the annexation should be approved, and the terms and conditions of annexation, and initial zoning that should be applied. The City Council then holds a second public hearing before making a decision. Land Use Map Change: The BVCP land use designation on the property is Low Density Residential (LR) on the western portion of the property and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) on the eastern portion of the property (east of 55th Street). The applicant requests a land use designation change to portion of the site west of 55th Street to from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O). The change must be found to be consistent with criteria for land use map changes established in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Development Plan IGA attached to the BVCP as Appendix B. The amendment procedures can be found in Section A.1 of Exhibit B to the IGA. The process to change the land use map designation Figure 8 - Existing City Zoning Districts Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 11 of 136 for this property requires approval by the Planning Board and City Council. Changes greater than 5 acres in size are typically subject to Boulder County call-up; however, because the property is owned by the city, the change is exempt from County call-up. The land use map change request may be considered concurrently with the annexation application. PROJECT DESCRIPTION BVCP Land Use Map Change: The applicant is requesting a BVCP land use map change from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O). The land use map change is proposed to reflect the city’s acquisition and designation of this portion of the property for future flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes. Further information and analysis of the proposed land use designation is discussed later in the memo under Key Issue #2. Annexation and Initial Zoning: The applicant is requesting annexation by petition into the City of Boulder with an initial zoning of Public (P), reflective of the city’s ownership and the future uses of the property for flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes (west of 55th Street) and for open space purposes (east of 55th Street); and initial zoning in a small area of 55th Street right-of-way with an initial zoning of Residential – Low 2 where right-of-way south of the property is being annexed to allow for clarity of maintenance and permitting responsibilities of the right-of-way. Further information and analysis of the proposed initial zoning is discussed later in the memo under Key Issue #3. Refer to the Key Issues analysis for staff’s analysis of applicable state statutes, BVCP policies, land use designation change, and proposed initial zoning. Annexation Requirements Typically, an annexation agreement between the city and the applicant is required to establish the terms and conditions of the annexation. Because the property is city-owned, any necessary requirements have been completed during the review of the annexation or will be incorporated into the annexation ordinance. The annexation ordinance waives the requirement for an annexation agreement in this case as the city is the applicant. Annexation requirements include: • Payment of Plant Investment Fees (PIFs): Payment of PIFs is required prior annexation for any existing impervious surface area on the property. PIFs in the amount of $5,010.79 for the 1,849 square-feet of impervious surface area (existing agricultural structures) have been paid. • Submitting a petition for incorporating the property into the Northern Colorado Municipal Water District and Subdistrict: The applicant has submitted the required petition to incorporate the property into the NCMWD and subdistrict. • Establishing regulatory wetland boundaries per Section 9-3-9(k)(2), B.R.C. 1981: The city requires all stream, wetland, water bodies and buffer areas on the property to be annexed to be mapped and a functional evaluation of the stream, wetland or water body performed. The approved mapping and evaluation is adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. The regulatory wetland maps and functional evaluations (Exhibit C) were reviewed under case no. WET2025-00012 and would be adopted as part of the annexation ordinance. ANALYSIS OF KEY ISSUES 1. Is the proposed annexation consistent with State statutes and BVCP policies, including BVCP Policy 1.17, Annexation? Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 12 of 136 State Statutes: The applicant is requesting annexation by petition as provided by state law. Annexations must comply with Colorado Revised Statues (C.R.S.), Article 12 of Title 31. Staff has reviewed the annexation petition for compliance with Sections 31-12-104, 31-12-105, and 31-12-107, C.R.S. and finds that the application is consistent with the statutory requirements, as affirmed by the criteria below (refer to Attachment A for the Annexation Map and Attachment B for the Annexation Petition): • An annexation petition was filed meeting the requirements of Section 31-12-107, C.R.S. • Landowners of more than 50 percent of the area proposed for annexation, excluding streets, have petitioned to annex. • The annexation petition has been filed with the City Clerk of the City of Boulder. • There is a community interest between the property proposed for annexation and the city of Boulder. As more than one-sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous, a community of interest is presumed. • The subject property does not include any area included in another annexation proceeding involving a municipality other than the city of Boulder. • The annexation would not remove the property from one school district and add it to another. • The property has more than one-sixth (16.6%) contiguity with the City of Boulder. The annexation has approximately 77% contiguity. • The annexation would not have the effect of extending the City of Boulder’s boundaries any further than three miles from any point of the existing City boundaries in any one year. BVCP Policies: Additionally, annexations must comply with city policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth Requirements and 1.17 Annexation in the BVCP. The annexation is consistent with policies that support community benefit commensurate with potential impacts, where annexing the property is necessary to fulfill the purpose of the site as designated upon purchase of the property in 2019 partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation and partially for open space use. Following annexation, the area designated in Ordinance 8349 as open space will continue to have to be managed consistent with open space lands as described in the City Charter Sections 170 to 177, the land designated as parks and recreation consistent with park lands purchased with funds from the permanent parks and recreation fund as described in Charter Sections 154 to 164, and the land designated as stormwater and flood management consistent with the purposes described in Chapter 11-5, “Stormwater and Flood Management Utility,” B.R.C. 1981. Overall, staff finds that the annexation proposal is consistent with the following BVCP policies: • 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion • 1.10 Growth Requirements • 1.13 Definition of Comprehensive Planning Areas I, II & III • 1.17 Annexation • 2.03 Compact Development Pattern Refer to Attachment E for staff’s summary of the annexation proposal’s consistency with these policies. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 13 of 136 2. Does the proposed change to the BVCP land use map from Low Density Residential (LR) to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) meet the applicable criteria? As noted earlier in the memo, the applicant proposes a land use map change on the portion of the property west of 55th Street to reflect the city’s acquisition and designation of this portion of the property for future flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes. Refer to Figure 9 for a map of existing and proposed BVCP designations. A land use map change may be considered concurrent with a request for annexation. Land use map changes for properties located in Area II require approval of the Planning Board and City Council. Since the property is city-owned, the city’s decision is exempt from call-up by the Board of County Commissioners of Boulder County. Applications for land use designation changes that are made outside of a mid-term or five-year BVCP update must be found to be consistent with BVCP policies and satisfy several other factors listed in Appendix B of the BVCP. The proposed Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) designation is for public lands for recreational or flood control purposes. Refer to description in the BVCP: The criteria for a Land Use Map change are attached as Appendix B to the BVCP. To be eligible for a Land Use Map change, the city must find that that the proposed change:  a) on balance, is consistent with the policies and overall intent of the comprehensive plan; The applicant requests a land use designation change on the portion of the site west of 55th Street from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O). The land use map change is proposed to reflect the city’s acquisition and designation of this portion of the property for future flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes. Existing Proposed Figure 9 - Existing and Proposed BVCP Land Use Designations Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 14 of 136 Staff finds that the proposed Land Use Map change is, on balance, consistent with the overall intent of the comprehensive plan and with the comprehensive plan policies, including: • 1.25 Multi-Purpose Use of Public Lands: The property was acquired by the city and designated for flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes. The proposal to amend the BVCP land use designation to “Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O)” where the PK-U/O land use includes “public lands used for a variety of active and passive recreational purpose or flood control purposes” supports of the multi-purpose use of public lands and fulfills the original intent of the acquisition. • 2.15 Compatibility of Adjacent Land Uses: The proposal to amend the BVCP land use designation to “Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O)” limits and minimizes potential future land use on the site consistent with the purchase and designation of the property as partially for parks and recreation purposes and partially for future flood mitigation. The PK-U/O land use designation is consistent with the land use designation to the northeast (East Boulder Community Park). The proposed land uses for parks and recreation and flood mitigation are similar to or less intense than those on adjacent properties. • 2.22 Urban Open Lands: The proposal to amend the BVCP land use designation to “Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O)” supports the use of the property as part of the city’s urban open lands system, which is an important part of Boulder’s public realm and can provide functions such as flood management, recreation, environmental protection, and enhancement of community character and aesthetics. • 3.22 Floodplain Management: The proposal to amend the BVCP land use designation to “Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O)” limits and minimizes potential future land use on the site consistent with the purchase and designation of the property as partially for future flood mitigation, consistent with the city’s policy to manage the potential for flooding. • 8.14 City Parks & Recreation: The proposal to amend the BVCP land use designation to “Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O)” supports the intended uses for the property as partially for parks and recreation purposes, consistent with the city’s policy supporting parks and recreation facilities to meet the needs of the community.  b) would not have significant cross-jurisdictional impacts that may affect residents, properties or facilities outside the city; The proposed land use designation change from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) is consistent with the city’s acquisition and designation of this portion of the property for future flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes. The change will not have significant cross-jurisdictional impacts that would affect residents, properties or facilities outside the city.  c) would not materially affect the land use and growth projections that were the basis of the comprehensive plan; The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (adopted 2021), page 9, states: Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 15 of 136 “As of January 2015, the City of Boulder (Area I) had approximately 44,725 housing units, 104,800 residents and 98,500 jobs. The remainder of the Service Area (Area II) had approximately 5,700 housing units, 12,000 residents and 3,000 jobs. About 30,000 students attend the University of Colorado. “Over the next 25 years, Area I is projected to add about 6,500 housing units, 19,000 residents and 19,000 jobs. CU student enrollment could increase by a range of 5,000 to 15,000 additional students by 2030. Most of the growth that will occur in Area II will be preceded by annexation to the city; therefore, it is included in the projection numbers for Area I. Since there is little vacant land left in the city’s Service Area, most of this growth will occur through redevelopment.” The proposal involves a land use map change on a portion of property that was previously proposed to provide approximately 117 dwelling units, but where development of housing was ultimately not approved. The city purchased the property and designated this portion of the property for future flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes. The change from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) is intended to reflect the uses designated on the property, which do not include residential uses. The proposal to bring the land use map designation into consistency with the actual potential uses on the property will not materially affect the land use and growth projections.  d) does not materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area or to the overall service area of the City of Boulder; The proposal does not materially affect adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services. The proposed land use map change would allow the property to be annexed and zoned for public uses. Future use of the property for flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes would improve urban facilities and services. Future proposals on the site will be reviewed through additional land use review and permitting processes and will be required to construct any necessary improvements consistent with the Boulder Revised Code, and Design and Construction Standards.  e) would not materially affect the adopted Capital Improvements Program of the City of Boulder; and The proposal will not materially affect the adopted Capital Improvement Program. The property is already designated for flood mitigation and parks and recreation purposes and the land use map change is simply intended to reflect this designation.  f) would not affect the Area II/Area III boundaries in the comprehensive plan. The proposal is located in Area II, the area where annexation may be considered. The proposal would not alter the Area II/Area III boundaries. Based on the analysis above, city staff have determined that the BVCP land use map change is appropriate. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 16 of 136 Additionally, the proposal was referred to Boulder County staff and referral comments were provided in support of the proposal. Refer to Attachment F. 3. Is the proposed initial zoning of Public (P) and Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) consistent with the initial zoning standards in the Boulder Revised Code? Initial zoning is established pursuant to Section 9-2-18, “Zoning of Annexed Land,” B.R.C. 1981. If a property is annexed, zoning will be established consistent with the goals and Land Use Map of the BVCP. As described above, the application proposes a land use designation change for the western portion of the property to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O), and the eastern portion of the property is proposed to remain designated Open Space, Acquired (OS-A). These areas are public lands used for open space, recreation, or flood control purposes. As described above, staff finds that the proposed Land Use Map change meets the criteria for such change. The proposed zoning assumes approval of the Land Use Map change. Refer to Figure 10 for a map of existing and proposed zoning; the proposed initial zoning districts are further described below. Public Zoning District: The proposed Public zoning encompasses the city-owned properties east and west of 55th Street and the portion of 55th Street between the city- owned properties. The proposed Public zoning district is described as: “Public areas in which public and semi-public facilities and uses are located, including without limitation, governmental and educational uses.” (Section 9-5-2(c)(6)(A), B.R.C. 1981). Per Chapter 6, “Use Standards,” of the Boulder Revised Code, the Public zone district allows a limited number of uses by-right, primarily those in the Community, Cultural, and Educational use category, such as open space, park, and recreation uses. Various uses may also be permitted by use review. The property is directly adjacent to other areas zoned Public, including the East Boulder Community Park and Community Center. Existing Proposed Figure 10 - Existing and Proposed Zoning Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 17 of 136 Staff finds that the Public zoning district is appropriate for the site, allows for uses consistent with the underlying BVCP land use designations, and allows for consistency with the zoning of adjacent city-owned properties including the East Boulder Community Park and Community Center. Public zoning is consistent with the underlying BVCP land use designations of Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) and with the goals, policies, and objectives of the BVCP. Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) Zoning District: The proposed RL-2 zoning district encompasses a 0.44-acre portion of 55th Street right-of-way south of the city-owned properties, adjacent to RL-2 zoned property within city limits on the east side of the right- of-way, as shown in Figure 10. The RL-2 zoning district is described as: “Medium density residential areas primarily used for small-lot residential development, including without limitation, duplexes, triplexes, or townhouses, where each unit generally has direct access at ground level.” (Section 9-5- 2(c)(1)(B), B.R.C. 1981). This portion of 55th Street right-of-way is being annexed to “close the gap” between the area of 55th Street right-of-way to the north and south to allow for clarity of maintenance and permitting responsibilities in this area. The property and right-of-way to the east and south of this portion of 55th Street right-of-way are zoned RL-2 and are designated LR, Low Density Residential in the BVCP. Staff finds that the RL-2 zoning district is appropriate for this portion of the right-of-way and allows for consistency with adjacent properties and city standards for the designation of zoning to rights-of-ways. Refer to Attachment E for staff’s complete summary of proposal’s consistency with the zoning criteria. The initial zoning ordinance is anticipated to be included in the annexation ordinance for the area proposed to be annexed. Attachments: Attachment A – Annexation Map Attachment B – Annexation Petition Attachment C – Wetlands Map and Functional Evaluations Attachment D – Ecological Report Attachment E – Analysis of BVCP Policies, Boulder Revised Code, and State Statutes Attachment F – Staff Review and Referral Comments Attachment G – Public Comments Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 18 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: October 14, 2025 5:18 pm Browser: Chrome 141.0.0.0 / OS X IP Address: 73.203.31.139 Unique ID: 1389691725 Location: 39.9947, -105.2366 Name Jonah Seifer Email jseifer16@gmail.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) I'm interested in purchasing a property on Cimmaron Way, however I'm concerned about the potential changes in land use and management, as well as the implications of those changes on local groundwater and flood mitigation. I'd like to be updated when the city publishes new information about 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd, hosts public meetings, or conducts subsequent site analyses. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 19 of 136 Flatirons, Inc. Land Surveying Services www.FlatironsInc.com29038PROFESSIONAL LAND S U RVEYOR COL O R A DO LICENSEDJAM E S Z. GOWANItem 5A - 5399 Kewanee AnnexationPage 20 of 136 RECEIVED By Central Records/City Clerk's Office at 9:13 am, November 7, 2025 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 21 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 22 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 23 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 24 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 25 of 136 11/5/2025 Deputy City Manager Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 26 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 27 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 28 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 29 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 30 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 31 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 32 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 33 of 136 Flatirons, Inc. Land Surveying Services www.FlatironsInc.com29038PROFESSIONAL LAND S U RVEYOR COL O R A DO LICENSEDJAM E S Z. GOWANItem 5A - 5399 Kewanee AnnexationPage 34 of 136 Wetland Evaluation STR: S 3&4, T1S, R70W Investigator: David Steinmann Date of Visit: 11/20/2024 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: South of the East Boulder Recreation Center next to 55th Street. Referred to as the Hogan Pancost Property. Description: This evaluation covers the emergent cattail wetlands within a topographically low drainage swale on the north part of the site west of 55th Street. The property is an open field that was previously heavily grazed with cattle and horses on the land. The majority of the land site is vegetated with non-native noxious weeds. The dominant wetlands vegetation in the low-functioning wetlands is cattails. Plains cottonwood trees, willow trees, ash trees, Russian olive trees, and willows grow at the site. Wetland Origin: Irrigation Primary Water Source: Irrigation Ditch Flows and Seepage Hydro-period: Seasonal Max Water Depth: (ft): <1 Major Plant Communities Present: % of Wetland Area % Vegetated: 92 Cattails, Sedges, and Rushes 100 % % Bare ground: 8 % Water: 0.01 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater Recharge 2 b There is minor groundwater recharge after heavy rains and during snowmelt when water collects in the low spots and drainage swales where it can infiltrate into the ground. Groundwater Discharge 2 b There is no evidence of groundwater discharge because there are no seeps, springs, or streams on the site. Flood Storage/Alteration 2 c The site can store minor amounts of floodwater after heavy rains. Shoreline Anchoring 1 c No shorelines occur at the property. Sediment Trapping/ 2 c There is modest sediment trapping during heavy rains. Nutrient Retention 2 c Short term nutrient retention is expected in the drainage swales and within the (short-term) areas of dense wetlands vegetation. Nutrient Retention 2 c Long-term woody debris accumulation was observed, with emergent wetlands and lush vegetation being able to trap and retain nutrients. Food Chain Support (export) 1 b There are no streams to export food chain support from the site. Food Chain Support 3 c Vegetation, berries, rodents, and invertebrates provide food chain support. (within basin) Fish Habitat/Aquatic 1 c There is no fish habitat or aquatic diversity due to the lack of streams. Diversity Wildlife Habitat 3 c Trees, shrubs, grasses, and flowers provide food and habitat for birds and wildlife such as deer, rodents, canines, raptors, songbirds and prairie dogs. Active Recreation 1 c Recreational use is currently non-existent. The area is fenced. Passive Recreation/ 2 c The site may be used for photography and to passively observe wildlife. There Heritage Value no heritage value to the wetlands. Comments: The wetlands are isolated and are hydrologically supported by irrigation ditch seepage from the irrigation ditches that flow across the site. Wetland boundaries are defined by vegetation, soils, and topography. Noxious weeds are prevalent. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 35 of 136 Wetland Evaluation STR: S 3&4, T1S, R70W Investigator: David Steinmann Date of Visit: 11/20/2024 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: South of the East Boulder Recreation Center next to 55th Street. Referred to as the Hogan Pancost Property. Description: This evaluation covers the wet meadow wetlands on the south side of the property west of 55th Street, wetlands within several topographically low drainage swales on the west side, and wetlands adjacent to the active irrigation ditches associated with the property. The site is an open field that was previously heavily grazed with cattle and horses on the land. The majority of the site is vegetated with non-native noxious weeds. The dominant wetlands vegetation is sedges and cattails. Cottonwood trees, willow trees, ash trees, Russian olive trees, and shrubs are present. The Northern Leopard Frog may utilize these wetlands. Wetland Origin: Irrigation Primary Water Source: Irrigation Ditch Flows and Seepage Hydro-period: Seasonal Max Water Depth: (ft): <1 Major Plant Communities Present: % of Wetland Area % Vegetated: 92 Cattails, Sedges, and Rushes 100 % % Bare ground: 8 % Water: 0.01 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater Recharge 2 b There is minor groundwater recharge after heavy rains and during snowmelt when water collects in the low spots and drainage swales where it can infiltrate into the ground. Groundwater Discharge 2 b There is no evidence of groundwater discharge because there are no seeps, springs, or streams on the site. Flood Storage/Alteration 2 c The site can store minor amounts of floodwater after heavy rains. Shoreline Anchoring 1 c No shorelines occur at the property. Sediment Trapping/ 2 c There is modest sediment trapping during heavy rains. Nutrient Retention 2 c Short term nutrient retention is expected in the drainage swales and within the (short-term) areas of dense wetlands vegetation. Nutrient Retention 2 c Long-term woody debris accumulation was observed, with emergent wetlands and lush vegetation being able to trap and retain nutrients. Food Chain Support (export) 1 b There are no streams to export food chain support from the site. Food Chain Support 3 c Vegetation, berries, rodents, and invertebrates provide food chain support. (within basin) Fish Habitat/Aquatic 1 c There is no fish habitat or aquatic diversity due to the lack of streams. Diversity Wildlife Habitat 4 c Trees, shrubs, grasses, and flowers provide habitat for birds and wildlife such as deer, rodents, canines, raptors and songbirds. The Northern Leopard Frog may occur in the wet meadow wetlands and along the adjacent irrigation ditches. Active Recreation 1 c Recreational use is currently non-existent. The area is fenced. Passive Recreation/ 2 c The site may be used for photography and to passively observe wildlife. There Heritage Value no heritage value to the wetlands. Comments: The wetlands are isolated and are hydrologically supported by irrigation ditch seepage from the irrigation ditches that flow across the site. Wetland boundaries are defined by vegetation, soils, and topography. Noxious weeds are prevalent. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 36 of 136 Wetland Evaluation Wetland #: 40901 Former #: 15 (in part) T_R_S: T1SR70WS3 Investigator: A. Carpenter, C. Browne Date of Visit: 6/2/2004 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: Ponds immediately south of East Boulder Recreation Center Description: Two constructed ponds that encompass nearly 6 acres. Wetland Origin: Urban/ industrial Primary Water Source: Urban / industrial runoff Hydroperiod: Permanently flooded Max WaterDepth (ft): Major plant communities present % of wetland area % Vegetated: 1 plains cottonwood / mixed graminoid 2 % Bare ground: 0 cattail 1 % Water: 99 wooly sedge / mi ed graminoid 1 x mixed graminoid 1 open water 95 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater 2 b Recharge Groundwater 2 c Discharge Flood Storage / 2 c Floodflow Alteration Shoreline Anchor. / 2 b Stabilization Sediment Trapping / 3 b Retention Nutrient Retention 3 b (long-term) Nutrient Retention 3 b (short-term) Food Chain Support 2 b low opportunity due to controls (export) Food Chain Support 2 b mowed to edges (within basin) Fish Habitat / Aquatic 3 c Diversity Wildlife 2 b geese, but human activity and dogs probably reduce effectiveness of area for wildlife Habitat Active 5 c Frequent use of ponds in dog park area Recreation Passive Rec / 4 b Rec. center visitors Heritage Value Comments: margins partially manicured (with some unmaintained areas) resident Canada goose population Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 37 of 136 Wetland Evaluation STR: S04, T1S, R70W Investigator: Cat McIntyre Date of Visit: 8/28/25 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: South of East Boulder Recreation Center and East of 55th Street. Description: The Hogan Pancost property managed by Open Space Mountain Parks is located east of 55th Street. Wetland Origin: Irrigation/Natural Hydro-period: Semipermanently flooded Primary Water Source: Irrigation/GW Max Water Depth: (ft): 1 Major Plant Communities Present: % of Wetland Area % Vegetated: 94 Sedges and rushes 100 % % Bare ground: 1 % Water: 5 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater Recharge 2 b There is some groundwater recharge following precipitation events. Groundwater Discharge 3 b Groundwater discharge is likely attributing to the small pond located on site and hydrology may be influenced by flow in South Boulder Creek and ditch seepage Flood Storage/Alteration 3 c The site provides some flood storage. Shoreline Anchoring 1 c No shorelines are present at the site. Sediment Trapping/ Retention 2 c There is modest and temporary sediment trapping during rain events Nutrient Retention (short-term) 4 c Short term nutrient retention is expected in areas of standing water and where there is dense emergent wetland vegetation. Nutrient Retention (long-term) 4 c Emergent wetland vegetation, litter and soil throughout the site is expected to trap nutrients long term. Food Chain Support (export) 2 c The ditch that flows through the site acts as an export for food chain support Food Chain Support (within basin) 4 b Wetland vegetation, microorganisms, invertebrates, and rodents create food chain support. Fish Habitat/Aquatic Diversity 1 c No fish habitat is on site. Wildlife Habitat 4 b Riparian trees and emergent grasses, sedges and rushes provide food and habitat for birds and wildlife, and Howard Ditch serves as a wildlife corridor. Active Recreation 1 c Site is not used for recreation. Passive Recreation/ Heritage Value 2 c The site is adjacent to a pedestrian trail used for walking and biking so may be used for passive observation of nature and wildlife. The Wetland is High Functioning IF the total additive value is greater than or equal to 26 (excluding recreation) OR any value is 4 or 5 (except recreation) The Wetland is Low Functioning IF the total additive value is less than or equal to 25 (excluding recreation) Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 38 of 136 ECOLOGICAL REPORT for the HOGAN PANCOST PROPERTY in BOULDER COUNTY, COLORADO Prepared for: Tina Dalton City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department 3198 Broadway Boulder, CO 80304 Prepared by: Professional Wetlands Consulting, Inc. 20 Rim Road Boulder, CO 80302 303 444-1715 September 29, 2025 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 39 of 136 Introduction This Ecological Report documents the environmental characteristics of the Hogan Pancost property off 55th Street by the East Boulder Recreation Center. The land is proposed for annexation into the City of Boulder. The Hogan Pancost site development will conform to the guidelines established in the City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Department Plan approved by City Council in 2022. Methods Field review and analysis of the site was completed in November of 2024. Background and data review was conducted to gather existing information and assist in the evaluation of sensitive and natural biological resources within the project. The data review included an evaluation of online resources, review of agency publications, and coordination with agency staff to determine the presence or potential occurrence of sensitive natural and biological resources. Background review for the Hogan Pancost property included: · USFWS Federally Listed and Proposed Endangered, Threatened, and Candidate Species and Critical Habitat in Boulder County as identified by the USFWS Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC) Official Species List and Critical Habitat Mapper; · Colorado Parks and Wildlife Threatened and Endangered List including USFWS and Colorado State Threatened, Endangered, and species of Special Concern; · Review of Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) soils and ecological site data to identify soils and habitats in the vicinity capable of supporting sensitive or specially valued species; · Review of the USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Wetlands Mapper for the occurrence of known or suspected U.S. Army Corps of Engineers jurisdictional wetlands and waterbodies; · Review of soils surveys and U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service National List of Hydric Soils to aid in the determination for the presence of wetlands; · The Boulder County Comprehensive Plan and the associated maps for environmental areas, wildlife, migration corridors, biodiversity, rare plant habitats, and significant natural areas were reviewed. Current and historical aerial photography was also reviewed and analyzed; · Field review of the property was conducted by David Steinmann with Professional Wetlands Consulting (PWC). The field work included walking the project area to identify wetlands, look for Threatened & Endangered Species habitat, look for avian roosting and nesting sites, document general wildlife habitat, record vegetation, and document environmentally sensitive features. · Wetlands were delineated following the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (1987) and the Great Plains Regional Supplement. Wetlands were surveyed by a licensed surveyor. 1 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 40 of 136 Site Description The Hogan Pancost property is off 55th Street at an abandoned agricultural meadow that was historically plains grasslands and part of the South Boulder Creek floodplain. The site is bounded by roads, residential development, soccer fields, and undeveloped land. Irrigation ditches border the north, south, and west property boundaries. The primary use of the land has been agriculture and grazing. Habitat quality is higher on the portion of the site east of 55th and lower to the west of 55th. The Hogan Pancost property is located on both sides of 55th Street to the south of the East Boulder Recreation Center in Sections 3 and 4 in Township 1 South, Range 70 West in Boulder County, Colorado. A Site Inventory Map showing the wetlands on the land west of 55th Street is provided as Figure 1. Photographs of the property and of the wetlands are on Figures 5 - 11. The Land Survey Plat illustrating the surveyed wetlands boundaries on the entire property is also attached. Wetlands There are wet meadow wetlands, emergent wetlands, and willow shrub wetlands at the site. The wetlands are dominated by cattails, sedges, and rushes with a few small patches of sandbar willow shrubs. There were significantly more wetlands in the fall of 2024 than there were at any time in the past 32 years due to recent flood irrigation from the ditch lateral along the south edge of the site. Flood irrigation is no longer occurring and the cuts in the ditch lateral are being patched to prevent further flood irrigation. Some ditch seepage will continue to occur and support the wetlands close to the ditches such as the wetlands present in 2016 and shown on Figure 3. Data forms are attached. Dominant wetlands vegetation at the Hogan Pancost property includes cattails (Typha latifolia), baltic rushes (Juncus balticus), sedges (Carex species), three-square (Schoenoplectus americanus), and foxtail barley (Hordeum jubatum). The wetlands were historically impacted by heavy grazing; now there are large number of non-native weedy plants at the site. The wetlands were closely and systematically examined for rare and sensitive plant species numerous times prior the City of Boulder purchasing the property, as well as in the fall of 2024. Surveys for the Ute Ladies’ Tresses Orchid were completed in July and August many times from 1992-2016 following US Fish and Wildlife protocols. Plant species diversity is low within the delineated wetlands with no rare or sensitive plants. Hydric soils are present in the wetlands, with soil colors corresponding to 10yr 3/2, and 10yr 2/2 on the Munsell Soil Color Charts. Redoxymorphic features are present in the wetland soils, and soil texture is sandy loam with gravel and cobbles. The sources of wetlands hydrology are flood irrigation, irrigation ditch seepage, and groundwater with inputs from rain, snowmelt, and runoff. Wetlands on the Hogan Pancost property are classified as Palustrine, Emergent Wetlands. Functions and values of the wetlands include within basin food chain support, flood storage, wildlife habitat, passive recreation, long term nutrient retention, and short term nutrient retention. 2 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 41 of 136 The Wetland Functional Evaluation forms for the Hogan Pancost site was based upon the Functional Assessment Evaluation - Ranking Rationale from the City’s 2004 wetlands remapping project, and upon the Advanced Identification of Wetlands in the City of Boulder Comprehensive Planning Area from May 1988. The wetlands on the south side are high-functioning with a 50' wide buffer and the cattail wetlands on the north side of the site low-functioning with a 25' wide buffer zone (Figure 1). The Super-Phostical Lateral wetland located along the north edge of the property is adjacent to a small regulated wetland area that is already mapped as a wetland by the City of Boulder (City Wetland # 40901), located on City land to the north of the subject property. The Wetland Functional Evaluation Form for this wetlands and the nearby ponds is also attached. Current Wetlands Boundaries: The site has 7.37 acres of wetland supported by flood irrigation and seepage from the surrounding irrigation ditches. The wetlands boundaries were delineated with sequentially numbered pink flags and surveyed by Flatirons Surveying as shown on Figure 1 and on the Land Survey Plat. City of Boulder wetlands mapping for the surrounding area is on Figure 13. There are currently more wetlands than in prior years due to flood irrigation from the south lateral. In 2016 there were approximately 2 acres of wetlands, while in 2024 there were 7.37 acres of wetlands. There was 5.4 acres more newly created wetland in 2024 than in 2016 because of flood irrigation that covered more of the site than in previous years. The wetlands are one hundred percent created by water from the irrigation ditches, with hydrological support for the wetlands from a combination of flood irrigation and sub-surface ditch seepage. The wetlands are topographically lower than the irrigation ditches. The ditches were not flowing at the time of the 2024 field survey. 1992-2016 Wetlands Boundaries: David Steinmann with Professional Wetlands Consulting, Inc. has been working at the Hogan Pancost property since 1992, and the extent of the wetlands at the site has been observed to be directly dependent upon the amount of irrigation water being applied to the land. The field visits over the past 32 years were conducted throughout the calendar year, with most of the site visits being conducted during the spring, summer, and fall. Historically, the land was flood irrigated with water from the lateral ditch to the south which has been the main source of hydrology for the wetlands the west of 55th Street. Flood irrigation water was not applied to the land most years between 2000 and 2016 by the previous owners, after which flood irrigation began to occur again once the City of Boulder purchased the property. Sub-surface water seepage also supports the wetlands with water seeping from the lateral ditch to the south, Dry Creek Ditch #2 to the west, and from the Super-Phosticle Ditch to the north. The wetlands map on Figure 3 from 2016 shows far less wetlands on the site in 2016 than there were in the fall of 2024. No flood irrigation was being applied to the land in 2016 when the wetlands were much smaller and being supported by sub-surface ditch seepage. An area must have hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and hydrology to qualify as a wetlands. Without flood irrigation the northern cattail wetlands mapped in 2024 should dry up due to a lack of hydrology because these wetlands are 100% supported by irrigation water. The wetlands near the south and west boundaries of the site will likely remain wetlands. 3 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 42 of 136 Anticipated 2026 Wetlands Boundaries: It is anticipated that the majority of the wetlands will dry up and revert back to uplands now that the flood irrigation has ceased. The wetlands should recede at least to the boundary shown in red on Figure 2, if not further south, similar to the 2016 wetlands on Figure 3. An updated wetlands delineation will be completed in 2026 now that flood irrigation has ceased so the wetlands boundaries can be re-mapped when the land is not being flood irrigated. US Army Corps of Engineers and Section 404 Wetlands Regulations: The wetlands on the Hogan Pancost site are isolated and are considered non-jurisdictional by the US Army Corps of Engineers. There is no surface wetlands/waters connection between the Hogan Pancost wetlands and navigable waters. A Section 404 Permit from the US Army Corps of Engineers will not be needed for the Hogan Pancost site development and tennis court project. State of Colorado Wetlands Regulations: The wetlands on the site are regulated by the State of Colorado and subject to the new State of Colorado wetlands regulations. City of Boulder Wetlands Regulations: A City of Boulder Wetlands Permit would be needed if there are proposed impacts to wetlands or the regulated wetlands buffer zones. Noxious Weeds The area west of 55th Street is very overgrown with non-native noxious weeds including teasel (Dipsacus sylvestris), Russian olive trees (Elaeagnus angustifolia), Canada thistle (Cirsium arvense) and trefoil (Lotus corniculatus). Noxious weed control following the City of Boulder’s Integrated Pest Management (IPM) guidelines and regulations is strongly recommended. The Common Teasel Identification and Management fact sheet is attached. Wildlife 55th Street divides the site with higher quality habitat east of 55th Street, with the land west of 55th having lower quality habitat with numerous noxious weeds. The wildlife habitat quality is moderate/medium at the property and on the land to the west of 55th Street. Wildlife such as deer, foxes, coyotes, rodents, bobcats, raccoons, raptors, songbirds, and small mammals utilize the property. The infestation of noxious weeds has diminished the wildlife habitat. A small area of abandoned prairie dog burrows is present in the north-central part of the site. Prairie dogs were not observed at the site when it was examined for prairie dogs 8 different times over the past 6 months. The old burrows are collapsing and there are no signs of prairie dog scat or vegetation grazing. The prairie dog burrow area is approximately ½ acre. Photos of the abandoned prairie dog burrows are on Figure 12. No prairie dogs are currently living on the Hogan Pancost site. Mammals such as the eastern cottontail rabbit (Sylvilagus floridanus), mice, voles, foxes, racoons, coyotes, and deer likely utilize the Hogan Pancost project area during all seasons. Common reptiles such as garter snakes (Thamnophis sirtalis), bull snakes, and lizards also utilize the site. 4 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 43 of 136 Wildlife values are low to moderate and include feeding, watering and cover. Bats utilize the area for nighttime feeding. The wildlife observed were whitetail deer, rabbits, a kestrel falcon, and a bobcat. Seasonal and/or year-round use can be expected by a number of birds including American robins (Turdus migratorius), mourning doves (Zenaidura macroura), magpies (Pica pica), swallows, crows (Corvus brachyrhynchos), chickadees, juncos, sparrows, and ravens (Corvus corax). No raptor nests were observed at the site. Raptors utilize the site for hunting rabbits, rodents, birds and small animals. No waterfowl were observed in the wetlands, though geese use the site for feeding. Some Wildlife Species of Special Concern listed by Boulder County likely use the property east 55th Street where there are less noxious weeds and connectivity to the South Boulder Creek corridor. The list of Boulder County Species of Special Concern from 2013 is attached. The northern leopard frog is known to occur in nearby wetlands east of 55t Street and is likely along the irrigation ditches on the edges of the Hogan Pancost property. The northern leopard frog may also utilize the wet meadow wetlands on the south side of the site. Threatened & Endangered Species The USFWS Information, Planning and Conservation System (IPAC) was accessed to determine T&E species that could be impacted by development at the site in Boulder County. Species include the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei), Ute lady’s tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis), prairie fringed orchid (Platanthera praeclara), piping plover (Charadrius melodus), whooping crane (Grus americana), and pallid sturgeon (Scaphirhynchus albus). The site was closely examined for potential habitat for the above listed species plus direct or indirect impacts. Critical habitat for the Preble’s Meadow Jumping Mouse occurs on the eastern part of the property east of 55th Street, as shown on the attached critical habitat map (Figure 4). The land west of 55th Street does not provide critical habitat for the mouse of any other sensitive species. The critical mouse habitat is not affected by the project. Typical habitat for PMJM is composed of well- developed willow/ riparian vegetation with undisturbed grassland communities and a water source. The tricolored bat is proposed for listing by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as an Endangered Species. Buildings on the property were examined for signs of hibernating or roosting bats in the fall of 2024, and no evidence of bats such as guano or small scratches on the ceilings was observed. It is unlikely that bats would hibernate at the site. The buildings and trees should be examined for roosting bats, especially tricolored bats, and for any physical signs of bats before being removed. No known occupied habitat or potential habitat occurs at the Hogan Pancost site for the Ute ladies’ tresses orchid or the prairie fringed orchid. The property was closely examined for the Ute ladies’ tresses orchid many times in previous years and the species was not found. The Hogan Pancost development is not anticipated to adversely impact any listed Threatened & Endangered species that could occur in Boulder County. All proposed site development is situated west of 55th Street. The land east of 55th Street with the critical mouse habitat will be preserved and protected as Open Space. 5 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 44 of 136 Physical Linkages to Natural Areas, Parks or Open Space The Hogan Pancost site is adjacent to City of Boulder Open Space on the east side, as well as City of Boulder Parks and Recreation Natural Lands that have the best habitat quality of any of their sites, and the most state and federal listed species. The property borders the East Boulder Recreation Center with existing soccer fields and tennis courts to the north of the site. The majority of the Hogan Pancost project site consists of abandoned agricultural fields dominated by non-native plants, with moderate wildlife habitat value often characteristic of agricultural land. The South Boulder Creek riparian corridor to the east of the site and east of 55th Street is a wildlife corridor that can be followed by mammals, birds, insects, butterflies, and pollinators. There is a physical link to the Open Space that currently borders the eastern property boundary of the site. Existing Drainage Patterns The site does not contain any streams, creeks or intermittent/perennial drainageways. The Hogan Pancost land is an agricultural meadow with several small historical drainage swales that are visible in the field and on aerial photography. Dry Creek Ditch #2 conveys water along the western property boundary. The site is situated within the South Boulder Creek watershed which flows into Boulder Creek. Figure 1 shows the 100 year floodplain and the 500 year floodplain limits. Aquifer Recharge and Discharge Areas There are no aquifer recharge or discharge areas on the property. There are no springs or seeps. Mitigation Opportunities If the proposed site development impacts City of Boulder regulated wetlands or the regulated wetlands buffer zone, then a City of Boulder Wetlands Permit and onsite mitigation would be required. It is anticipated that the northern wetland areas will dry up and revert to upland now that flood irrigation has stopped, such that the project should be able to avoid direct impacts to wetlands and most of the wetlands buffer zone. The proposed site plans will impact areas dominated by non- native vegetation with some impacts to native vegetation. If necessary, there are onsite wetlands and buffer zone mitigation opportunities. Due to the large area of land currently vegetated with non-native species and because much of the site will remain undisturbed, there are good mitigation opportunities on the property for establishing new native plant habitats and vegetation communities. 6 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 45 of 136 Potential mitigation and restoration opportunities at the Hogan Pancost site include: · Restoration of native grasslands by removing and controlling non-native plants. Native plant communities could be reestablished by seeding and planting species native to Boulder County. · A higher-quality wetlands buffer zone could be created by planting native trees and shrubs to provide shade, cover, and food sources to improve wildlife habitat. · Creating new wetlands, detention ponds, and grass-lined swales to filter stormwater runoff, sediment, and nutrients. · Visual screening by planting native trees between the new facilities and the undisturbed natural areas at the site, and to screen the existing residential development. 7 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 46 of 136 References Boulder County Comprehensive Plan. July 15, 2020 Environmental Resources Element Boulder County Comprehensive Plan Maps: Critical Wildlife Migration Corridors, Environmental Conservation Areas, High Biodiversity Areas, Habitat Conservation Areas for the Prebel’s Meadow Jumping Mouse, Rare Plants Areas and Significant Natural Areas. Boulder County Wildlife Species of Special Concern Colorado Parks and Wildlife. Colorado Threatened and Endangered List. Available at http://cpw.state.co.us/learn/Pages/SOC-ThreatenedEndangeredList.aspx. Colorado Natural Heritage Program (CNHP). CNHP Conservation Status Handbook (Tracking List), Statewide species and natural community tracking list for Boulder County, Colorado. Available online at: http://www.cnhp.colostate.edu/download/list.asp. United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS. USACE. 2010. Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Great Plain Region (Version 2.0). U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineer Research and Development Center. Vicksburg, MS.\ United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2014. National List of Hydric Soils, http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/wps/portal/nrcs/main/soils/use/hydric/. United States Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). 2015. Web Soil Survey. Available at http://websoilsurvey.sc.egov.usda.gov/App/HomePage.htm United States Department of the Interior, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2014. National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Map. Available at http://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper. USFWS. Critical Habitat Online Portal. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/crithab/. USFWS. Information, Planning, and Conservation System (IPaC) USFWS Listed Species occurring within vicinity of Project. Available online at http://ecos.fws.gov/ipac/. 8 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 47 of 136 Flatirons, Inc. Land Surveying Services www.FlatironsInc.com29038PROFESSIONAL LAND S U RVEYOR COL O R A DO LICENSEDJAM E S Z. GOWANItem 5A - 5399 Kewanee AnnexationPage 48 of 136 Figure 2. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 49 of 136 Irrigation pipe conveys flows over Dry Creek Ditch # 2 Dry Creek Ditch # 2 Wetl/an,.,,,d _ ___,, � 3sf (0.24 ac) Wetlan 809 (0.02 Wetla 1 27 0.04 ac Super-Phostical Lateral 0 O We'la�C 11,127 s (0.26 ac) RESIDENCE Wetland A 2,676 sf (0. Figure 3. 2016 Wetland Delineation Map Boulder Creek Commons Property [. •• Wetlands 1//H Pond Aquatic Habitat .Pit 1 Soil Pi ts Property Boundary -···-Ditch/Lateral Scale: 1 inch = 120 feet Contour Interval= 1 foot Date: September 2016 0 prepared by: Western Ecologlcal Resource, Inc. <;) 711 Walnut Street Boulder, CO 80302 (303) -4-49-9009 FAX (303) -4-49-9038 Super-Phostical Lateral Wetland Flagging Surveyed by Flatirons Surveying of Boulder, CO Wetland 4,114 sf (0.09 ac) t:::::::; Pond Aquatic 926 sf c) Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 50 of 136 Figure 4. Critical Habitat Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 51 of 136 Figure 5. Hogan Pancost property looking west from the northeast corner (top), and looking southeast from the northwest corner, showing the noxious weed infestation of teasel. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 52 of 136 Figure 6. Hogan Pancost looking west from 55th Street (top), and looking east from the southwest corner showing the sedge/rush wetlands. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 53 of 136 Figure 7. Cattail wetlands looking south from the north side of the property (top), and sedge/rush wetlands looking northwest from the southern property boundary. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 54 of 136 Figure 8. Hogan Pancost property looking southwest at the southwest corner (top), and looking northeast towards from the southwest corner. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 55 of 136 Figure 9. Hogan Pancost looking northwest along the north property line at the wetlands associated with the irrigation ditch, and the parcel east of 55th Street from the east property line. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 56 of 136 Figure 10. Looking south at two of the places where the irrigation lateral was cut to flood irrigate the Hogan Pancost property which then created large areas of wetlands and noxious weeds.Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 57 of 136 Figure 11. Irrigation ditch and associated wetlands at Hogan Pancost on the southeast side of 55th Street, and the shallow open water pond on the north edge of the site south of 55th Street. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 58 of 136 Figure 12. Prairie dog burrows at the Hogan Pancost property on the north/middle part of the site. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 59 of 136 Figure 13. City of Boulder Mapped Wetlands Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 60 of 136 Wetland Evaluation STR: S 3&4, T1S, R70W Investigator: David Steinmann Date of Visit: 11/20/2024 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: South of the East Boulder Recreation Center next to 55th Street. Referred to as the Hogan Pancost Property. Description: This evaluation covers the emergent cattail wetlands within a topographically low drainage swale on the north part of the site west of 55th Street. The property is an open field that was previously heavily grazed with cattle and horses on the land. The majority of the land site is vegetated with non-native noxious weeds. The dominant wetlands vegetation in the low-functioning wetlands is cattails. Plains cottonwood trees, willow trees, ash trees, Russian olive trees, and willows grow at the site. Wetland Origin: Irrigation Primary Water Source: Irrigation Ditch Flows and Seepage Hydro-period: Seasonal Max Water Depth: (ft): <1 Major Plant Communities Present: % of Wetland Area % Vegetated: 92 Cattails, Sedges, and Rushes 100 % % Bare ground: 8 % Water: 0.01 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater Recharge 2 b There is minor groundwater recharge after heavy rains and during snowmelt when water collects in the low spots and drainage swales where it can infiltrate into the ground. Groundwater Discharge 2 b There is no evidence of groundwater discharge because there are no seeps, springs, or streams on the site. Flood Storage/Alteration 2 c The site can store minor amounts of floodwater after heavy rains. Shoreline Anchoring 1 c No shorelines occur at the property. Sediment Trapping/ 2 c There is modest sediment trapping during heavy rains. Nutrient Retention 2 c Short term nutrient retention is expected in the drainage swales and within the (short-term) areas of dense wetlands vegetation. Nutrient Retention 2 c Long-term woody debris accumulation was observed, with emergent wetlands and lush vegetation being able to trap and retain nutrients. Food Chain Support (export) 1 b There are no streams to export food chain support from the site. Food Chain Support 3 c Vegetation, berries, rodents, and invertebrates provide food chain support. (within basin) Fish Habitat/Aquatic 1 c There is no fish habitat or aquatic diversity due to the lack of streams. Diversity Wildlife Habitat 3 c Trees, shrubs, grasses, and flowers provide food and habitat for birds and wildlife such as deer, rodents, canines, raptors, songbirds and prairie dogs. Active Recreation 1 c Recreational use is currently non-existent. The area is fenced. Passive Recreation/ 2 c The site may be used for photography and to passively observe wildlife. There Heritage Value no heritage value to the wetlands. Comments: The wetlands are isolated and are hydrologically supported by irrigation ditch seepage from the irrigation ditches that flow across the site. Wetland boundaries are defined by vegetation, soils, and topography. Noxious weeds are prevalent. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 61 of 136 Wetland Evaluation STR: S 3&4, T1S, R70W Investigator: David Steinmann Date of Visit: 11/20/2024 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: South of the East Boulder Recreation Center next to 55th Street. Referred to as the Hogan Pancost Property. Description: This evaluation covers the wet meadow wetlands on the south side of the property west of 55th Street, wetlands within several topographically low drainage swales on the west side, and wetlands adjacent to the active irrigation ditches associated with the property. The site is an open field that was previously heavily grazed with cattle and horses on the land. The majority of the site is vegetated with non-native noxious weeds. The dominant wetlands vegetation is sedges and cattails. Cottonwood trees, willow trees, ash trees, Russian olive trees, and shrubs are present. The Northern Leopard Frog may utilize these wetlands. Wetland Origin: Irrigation Primary Water Source: Irrigation Ditch Flows and Seepage Hydro-period: Seasonal Max Water Depth: (ft): <1 Major Plant Communities Present: % of Wetland Area % Vegetated: 92 Cattails, Sedges, and Rushes 100 % % Bare ground: 8 % Water: 0.01 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater Recharge 2 b There is minor groundwater recharge after heavy rains and during snowmelt when water collects in the low spots and drainage swales where it can infiltrate into the ground. Groundwater Discharge 2 b There is no evidence of groundwater discharge because there are no seeps, springs, or streams on the site. Flood Storage/Alteration 2 c The site can store minor amounts of floodwater after heavy rains. Shoreline Anchoring 1 c No shorelines occur at the property. Sediment Trapping/ 2 c There is modest sediment trapping during heavy rains. Nutrient Retention 2 c Short term nutrient retention is expected in the drainage swales and within the (short-term) areas of dense wetlands vegetation. Nutrient Retention 2 c Long-term woody debris accumulation was observed, with emergent wetlands and lush vegetation being able to trap and retain nutrients. Food Chain Support (export) 1 b There are no streams to export food chain support from the site. Food Chain Support 3 c Vegetation, berries, rodents, and invertebrates provide food chain support. (within basin) Fish Habitat/Aquatic 1 c There is no fish habitat or aquatic diversity due to the lack of streams. Diversity Wildlife Habitat 4 c Trees, shrubs, grasses, and flowers provide habitat for birds and wildlife such as deer, rodents, canines, raptors and songbirds. The Northern Leopard Frog may occur in the wet meadow wetlands and along the adjacent irrigation ditches. Active Recreation 1 c Recreational use is currently non-existent. The area is fenced. Passive Recreation/ 2 c The site may be used for photography and to passively observe wildlife. There Heritage Value no heritage value to the wetlands. Comments: The wetlands are isolated and are hydrologically supported by irrigation ditch seepage from the irrigation ditches that flow across the site. Wetland boundaries are defined by vegetation, soils, and topography. Noxious weeds are prevalent. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 62 of 136 Wetland Evaluation Wetland #: 40901 Former #: 15 (in part) T_R_S: T1SR70WS3 Investigator: A. Carpenter, C. Browne Date of Visit: 6/2/2004 Obs. Method: Onsite General Location: Ponds immediately south of East Boulder Recreation Center Description: Two constructed ponds that encompass nearly 6 acres. Wetland Origin: Urban/ industrial Primary Water Source: Urban / industrial runoff Hydroperiod: Permanently flooded Max WaterDepth (ft): Major plant communities present % of wetland area % Vegetated: 1 plains cottonwood / mixed graminoid 2 % Bare ground: 0 cattail 1 % Water: 99 wooly sedge / mi ed graminoid 1 x mixed graminoid 1 open water 95 FUNCTION AND VALUE ASSESSMENT Ratings: 5 = very high, 4 = high, 3 = medium, 2 = low, 1 = no Confidence in rating: c = high, b = medium, a = low Groundwater 2 b Recharge Groundwater 2 c Discharge Flood Storage / 2 c Floodflow Alteration Shoreline Anchor. / 2 b Stabilization Sediment Trapping / 3 b Retention Nutrient Retention 3 b (long-term) Nutrient Retention 3 b (short-term) Food Chain Support 2 b low opportunity due to controls (export) Food Chain Support 2 b mowed to edges (within basin) Fish Habitat / Aquatic 3 c Diversity Wildlife 2 b geese, but human activity and dogs probably reduce effectiveness of area for wildlife Habitat Active 5 c Frequent use of ponds in dog park area Recreation Passive Rec / 4 b Rec. center visitors Heritage Value Comments: margins partially manicured (with some unmaintained areas) resident Canada goose population Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 63 of 136 Criteria for Designating Wildlife Species of Special Concern Boulder County maintains a Species of Special Concern (SSC) List for the purpose of conserving and preserving wildlife species and their habitat in the county. A species must meet one of the following criteria to be incorporated into the List: 1. Species with Federal status (listed or proposed threatened or endangered, candidates for listing, or under review for listing) or State status (threatened or endangered); 2. Species considered to be sensitive that appear on the following lists: Colorado Parks & Wildlife − Species of Concern, U.S. Forest Service Region 2 − Sensitive Species, U.S. Bureau of Land Management − Sensitive Species, U.S Fish & Wildlife Service − Birds of Conservation Concern; 3. Species that have undergone a documented long-term noncyclical population decline, or whose abundance is critically low relative to their expected abundance in a given habitat type or quality; 4. Species occurring in Boulder County that are naturally rare 1; 5. Species that are dependent upon isolated or restricted2 habitat for at least a portion of their life cycle; 6. Species that have a disproportionately large effect on the structure and function of the ecosystem(s) they inhabit, and thus promote species diversity, ecosystem function and natural processes; 7. Extirpated species that historically occupied and are native to Boulder County; 8. Species of global or continental concern whose populations are stable in Boulder County (e.g. Colorado Natural Heritage Program - G1S4); 9. Species whose populations in the County may be currently secure, but are vulnerable to imminent threats affecting their populations either directly or indirectly3. 10. Species of undetermined status which require further research and/or monitoring. The Boulder County SSC list is a compilation of special status species identified by federal, state, and local governmental agencies, as well as non-governmental conservation organizations and conservation experts, as species that warrant protection in order to prevent the loss of habitat or populations. 1 Species which are “naturally rare” normally occur in low abundance throughout their range. While their populations may be stable, species that are rare on the landscape are more vulnerable to extirpation or extinction compared to species with large populations. 2 “Isolated or restricted” habitat is definied as a descrete area that is distinguished from surrounding habitat by its unique features (biotic or abiotic). Such habitat is typically rare and patchily distributed on the landscape. Species that rely on “isolated or restricted” habitat are more vulnerable to extirpation than those that are widely distributed or are habitat generalists. 3 Direct threats to populations include loss of individuals from overexploitation or other means of direct mortality. Indirect threats include habitat degradation, competition with invasive species, increased prevalence of disease and pollution, and climate change. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 64 of 136 Boulder County Wildlife Species of Special Concern 11/12/2013 Boulder County Species of Special Concern Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled 1 Frog, Chorus Amphibian 9 36 Kinglet, Golden-crowned Bird 5 Pseudacris triseriata Regulus satrapa 2 Frog, Northern Leopard Amphibian 2 *37 Lark, Horned Bird 3 Rana pipiens Eremophila alpestris 3 Salamander, Tiger Amphibian 9 38 Mockingbird, Northern Bird 4,5 Ambystoma tigrinum Mimus polyglottos 4 Toad, Boreal Amphibian 1,2 *39 Ovenbird Bird 4 Anaxyrus boreas Seiurus aurocapilla 5 Toad, Plains Spadefoot Amphibian 9 40 Owl, Boreal Bird 2,5,10 Spea bombifrons Aegolius funereus 6 Avocet, American Bird 5 41 Owl, Burrowing Bird 1,2,3,5 * Recurvirostra americana Athene cunicularia 7 Bittern, American Bird 2,5 42 Owl, Flammulated Bird 2,5 Botaurus lentiginosus Otus flammeolus 8 Bittern, Least Bird 4,5 43 Owl, Long-eared Bird 3 Ixobrychus exilis Asio otus 9 Blackbird, Yellow-headed Bird 3,5 44 Owl, Short-eared Bird 2,4,5 Xanthocephalus xanthocephalus Asio flammeus 10 Bobolink Bird 3,5 45 Pigeon, Band-tailed Bird 10 Dolichonyx oryzivorus Patagioenas fasciata 11 Bunting, Indigo Bird 3 46 Ptarmigan, White-tailed Bird 2,5,9 Passerina cyenea Lagopus leucura 12 Bunting, Lark Bird 2,3 47 Redstart, American Bird 4 Calamospiza melanocorys Setophaga ruticilla 13 Bunting, Lazuli Bird 3 48 Rosy-Finch, Brown-capped Bird 2,5 Passerina amoena Leucosticte austalis 14 Bushtit Bird 5 49 Scrub-Jay, Western Bird 5 Psatlriparus minimus Aphelocoma californica 15 Cormorant, Double-crested Bird 5 50 Shrike, Loggerhead Bird 2,3,5 * Phalacrocorax auritus Lanius ludovicianus 16 Crossbill, White-winged Bird 4,9 51 Siskin, Pine Bird 3 Loxia leucoptera Spinus pinus 17 Dipper, American Bird 5 52 Sparrow, Brewer's Bird 2,3,5 Cinclus mexicanus Spizella breweri 18 Duck, Ring-necked Bird 4,5 53 Sparrow, Cassin's Bird 2,3 Aythya collaris Peucaea cassinii 19 Duck, Wood Bird 5 54 Sparrow, Fox Bird 5 Aix sponsa Passerella iliaca 20 Eagle, Bald Bird 1,2,5 55 Sparrow, Grasshopper Bird 2,3,5 Haliaeetus leucocephalus Ammodramus savannarum 21 Eagle, Golden Bird 2,5 56 Swallow, Bank Bird 3 Aquila chrysaetos Riparia riparia 22 Egret, Great Bird 4,5 57 Swift, Black Bird 2,4,5 Ardea alba Cypseloides niger 23 Falcon, Peregrine Bird 2,4,5 58 Thrasher, Sage Bird 4,5 Falco peregrinus Oreoscoptes montanus 24 Falcon, Prairie Bird 2,5 59 Veery Bird 2,4,5 Falco mexicanus Catharus fuscescens 25 Flicker, Northern Bird 3 60 Vireo, Plumbeous Bird 3,5 Colaptes auratus Vireo plumbeus 26 Flycatcher, Olive-sided Bird 2,5 61 Warbler, Virginia's Bird 8 Contopus cooperi Oreothlypis virginiae 27 Flycatcher, Willow Bird 1,2,3,5 *62 Warbler, Wilson's Bird 3,5 Empidonax traillii Cardellina pusilla 28 Goshawk, Northern Bird 2,5 63 Waxwing, Cedar Bird 4,5 Accipter gentilis Bombycilla cedrorum 29 Grebe, Eared Bird 3,4 64 Woodpecker, American Three-toed Bird 2,5 Podiceps nigricollis Picoides dorsalis 30 Harrier, Northern Bird 2,3,4,5 *65 Woodpecker, Lewis's Bird 2,3,5 Circus cyaneus Melanerpes lewis 31 Hawk, Ferruginous Bird 2,3,5 66 Woodpecker, Red-headed Bird 3,5,10 Buteo regalis Melanerpes erythrocephalus 32 Hawk, Rough-legged Bird 5 67 Wren, Rock Bird 3 Buteo lagopus Salpinctes obsoletus 33 Heron, Black-crowned Night Bird 5 68 Chub, Lake Fish 1,5 * Nycticorax nycticorax Couesius plumbeus 34 Heron, Great Blue Bird 5 69 Darter, Iowa Fish 2,4,5 Ardea herodias Etheostoma exile 35 Kingfisher, Belted Bird 3 70 Darter, Johnny Fish 3,5 Megaceryle alycon Etheostoma nigrum 1 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 65 of 136 Boulder County Wildlife Species of Special Concern 11/12/2013 Boulder County Species of Special Concern (continued) Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled 71 Minnow, Brassy Fish 1,5 *106 Skipper, Two-spotted Insect 4 Hybognathus hankinsoni Euphyes bimacula 72 Shiner, Bigmouth Fish 3,5 107 Badger, American Mammal 3 Notropis dorsalis Taxidea taxus 73 Shiner, Common Fish 1,5 *108 Bat, Big Brown Mammal 9 Notropis cornutus Eptesicus fuscus 74 Stonecat Fish 2,4,5 *109 Bat, Brazilian Free-tailed Mammal 4,8,9 Noturus flavus Tadarida brasiliensis 75 Topminnow, Plains Fish 3 *110 Bat, Eastern Red Mammal 4,8 Fundulus sciadicus Lasiurus borealis 76 Trout, Greenback Cutthroat Fish 1,3,9 *111 Bat, Hoary Mammal 4,8 Oncorhynchus clarki Lasiurus cinereus 77 Capshell, Rocky Mountain Gastropod 2,3 *112 Bat, Silver-haired Mammal 5 Acroloxus coloradensis Lasionycteris noctivagans 78 Floater, Giant Gastropod 3 113 Bat, Townsend's Big-eared Mammal 2,3,4,9 Anodonta grandis Corynorhinus townsendii 79 Papershell, Cylindrical Gastropod 2,3 *114 Bat, Tricolored Mammal 9 Anodontoides ferussacianus Perimyotis subflavus 80 Physa, Banded Gastropod 3 *115 Beaver, North American Mammal 5,6 Physa utahensis Castor canadensis 81 Sprite, Umbilicate Gastropod 3 116 Fox, Gray Mammal 5,10 Promenetus umbilicatellus Urocyon cinereoargenteus 82 (A miner bee) Insect 5,10 117 Jackrabbit, White-tailed Mammal 3,10 * Macrotera opuntiae Lepus townsendii 83 Alpine, Theano Insect 4 118 Lynx, Canada Mammal 1,2,3 Erebia pawlowskii Lynx canadensis 84 Azure, Hops Feeding Insect 4,5,9 119 Marten, American Mammal 2,5 Celastrina humulus Martes americana 85 Bee, American Bumble Insect 3 120 Mouse, Northern Rock Mammal 5 Bombus pensylvanicus Peromyscus nasutus 86 Bee, Black and Gold Bumble Insect 4,5 169 Chipmunk, Uinta Mammal 10 Bombus auricomus Neotamias umbrinus 87 Bee, Variable Cuckoo Bumble Insect 4,10 170 Gopher, Northern Pocket Mammal 10 Bombus variabilis Thomomys talpoides 88 Bee, Western Bumble Insect 3,6 *171 Mink, American Mammal 10 Bombus occidentalis Neovison vison 89 Beetle, Prairie Tiger Insect 5,9,10 172 Mouse, Northern Grasshopper Mammal 10 Cicindela nebraskana Onychomys leucogaster 90 Blue, Colorado Insect 4,10 173 Mouse, Olive-back Pocket Mammal 5,10 Euphilotes rita coloradensis Perognathus fasciatus 91 Dancer, Blue-Ringed Insect 3,10 174 Mouse, Plains Harvest Mammal 4,10 Argia sedula Reithrodontomys montanus 92 Darner, Lake Insect 5,10 *175 Mouse, Plains Pocket Mammal 5,10 Aeshna eremita Perognathus flavescens 93 Dragonfly, Hudsonian Emerald Insect 2,5,10 176 Mouse, Silky Pocket Mammal 4,5,10 Somatochlora hudsonica Perognathus flavus 94 Duskywing, Mottled Insect 4,5 177 Shrew, Dwarf Mammal 10 Erynnis martialis Sorex nanus 95 Elfin, Moss's Insect 4,5 178 Shrew, Merriam's Mammal 5,10 Callophrys mossii Sorex merriami 96 Emerald, American Insect 5 179 Vole, Heather Mammal 5,10 Cordulia shurtleffi Phenacomys intermedius 97 Fritillary, Regal Insect 2,3,5 *180 Snake, Lined Reptile 9,10 * Speyeria idalia Tropidoclonion lineatum 98 Jutta, Rocky Mountain Arctic Insect 3,9 121 Mouse, Prebles Meadow Jumping Mammal 1,2,5 Oeneis jutta Zapus hudsonius 99 Skipper, Arogos Insect 4,5 122 Myotis, Fringed Mammal 2,4,5,8,9 Atrytone arogos Myotis thysanodes 100 Skipper, Cross-line Insect 4,5 123 Myotis, Little Brown Mammal 5,9 Polites origenes Myotis lucifugas 101 Skipper, Dusted Insect 4,5 124 Myotis, Long-eared Mammal 4 Atrytonopsis hianna Myotis evotis 102 Skipper, Ottoe Insect 2,4,5 125 Myotis, Long-legged Mammal 5,8 Hesperia ottoe Myotis volans 103 Skipper, Rhesus Insect 3,4 126 Myotis, Western Small-footed Mammal 5 Polites rhesus Myotis ciliolabrum 104 Skipper, Simius Roadside Insect 3,5 127 Otter, River Mammal 1,2,4 Amblyscirtes simius Lontra canadensis 105 Skipper, Snow's Insect 3,5 128 Pika Mammal 5,9 Paratrytone snowi Ochotona princeps 2 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 66 of 136 Boulder County Wildlife Species of Special Concern 11/12/2013 Boulder County Species of Special Concern (continued)Species of Undetermined Status Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled 129 Porcupine, North American Mammal 3 160 Owl, Mexican Spotted Bird 1,10 Erethizon dorsatum Strix occidentalis 130 Prairie Dog, Black-tailed Mammal 2,3,6,9 161 Owl, Northern Pygmy Bird 10 Cynomys ludovicianus Glaucidium gnoma 131 Rat, Ord's Kangaroo Mammal 5,10 162 Sprite, Sharp gastropod 2,3,10 * Dipodomys ordii Promenetus exacuous 132 Ringtail Mammal 4,10 163 (an Ant)Insect 10 Bassariscus astutus Aphaenogaster huachucana 133 Sheep, Rocky Mountain Bighorn Mammal 2,9 164 (an Ant)Insect 10 Ovis canadensis canadensis Formica laeviceps 134 Shrew, American Water Mammal 5 165 (an Ant)Insect 10 Sorex palustris Stigmatomma pallipes 135 Shrew, Least Mammal 5 166 (an Ant)Insect 10 * Cryptotis parva Pheidole elecebra 136 Squirrel, Spotted Ground Mammal 4,5,9,10 167 Skipper, Two-banded Checkered Insect 7 Xerospermophilus spilosoma Pyrgus ruralis 137 Squirrel, Thirteen-lined Ground Mammal 5 168 Chipmunk, Colorado Mammal 10 Ictidomys tridecemlineatus Neotamias quadrivittatus 138 Vole, Meadow Mammal 5 169 Chipmunk, Uinta Mammal 10 Microtus pennsylvanicus Neotamias umbrinus 139 Lizard, Short-Horned Reptile 4,5,10 *170 Gopher, Northern Pocket Mammal 10 Phrynosoma hernandesi Thomomys talpoides 140 Snake, Common Garter Reptile 2,3 171 Mink, American Mammal 10 Thamnophis sirtalis Neovison vison 141 Snake, Milk Reptile 4,9 172 Mouse, Northern Grasshopper Mammal 10 Lampropeltis triangulum Onychomys leucogaster 142 Turtle, Spiny Softshell Reptile 4,10 173 Mouse, Olive-back Pocket Mammal 5,10 Apalone spinifera Perognathus fasciatus 174 Mouse, Plains Harvest Mammal 4,10 Extirpated Species Reithrodontomys montanus Species Name Class Criteria Imperiled 175 Mouse, Plains Pocket Mammal 5,10 143 Toad, Great Plains Amphibian 7 Perognathus flavescens Bufo Cognatus 176 Mouse, Silky Pocket Mammal 4,5,10 144 Curlew, Long-billed Bird 2,7 Perognathus flavus Numenius americanus 177 Shrew, Dwarf Mammal 10 145 Goldeneye, Barrow's Bird 7 Sorex nanus Bucephala islandica 178 Shrew, Merriam's Mammal 5,10 146 Grouse, Plains Sharp-tailed Bird 7 Sorex merriami Tympanuchus phasianellus jamesi 179 Vole, Heather Mammal 5,10 147 Plover, Mountain Bird 2,7 Phenacomys intermedius Charadrius montanus 180 Snake, Lined Reptile 9,10 148 Chub, Hornyhead Fish 1,7 Tropidoclonion lineatum Nocomis biguttatus 149 Dace, Northern Redbelly Fish 1 Phoxinus eos 150 Shiner, Blacknose Fish 7 Notropis heterolepis 151 Jewelwing, River Insect 3 1994 2013 Calopteryx aequabilis Total Species 153 180 152 Moth, Lost Ethmiid Insect 7,10 New 64 Ethmia monachella Deleted 37 153 Bear, Grizzly Mammal 1,2,7 Ursus arctos 154 Bison Mammal 7 Bison bison 155 Ferret, Black-footed Mammal 7 Mustela nigripes 156 Fox, Swift Mammal 7 Vulpes velox 157 Pronghorn Mammal 7 Antilocarpa americana 158 Wolf, Gray Mammal 1,7 Canis lupus 159 Wolverine Mammal 1,2,7 Gulo gulo Year Summary of changes to the Boulder County Species of Special Concern List from 1999 to 2013. The Boulder County Species of Special Concern (SSC) list was updated from the current County list using the best and most current resources available. We compiled current and historical lists of special status species provided by various resource management agencies and conservation organizations. Many of these sources have been utilized in past Boulder County SSC lists and some are new resources for this update. 3 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 67 of 136 List B Key ID Points 1. Long slender floral bracts extend beyond the top of the flower head. 2. Leaves are crinkled and have prickles. 3. Stems are stiff and have rows of prickles. C ommon teasel, Dipsacus fullonum L., is a biennial or sometimes short- lived perennial forb. Mature plants can grow up to or over six feet tall and have a taproot. Common teasel has simple lan- ceolate to oblanceolate basal and stem leaves. Both leaves are conspicuously veined, wrinkled and have rough surface. Leaf margins are crenate. Stems leaves are lined with stiff prickles along the mid- rib. Stem leaves are opposite, net-veined, stalkless, and clasp the stem. The stem is rigid and also lined with several rows of downward turned prickles. F lowers are range from white to violet. The flower head is generally egg- shaped, with a square base. The long thin stiff floral bracts at the base of the inflorescence are generally longer than the flower head; these also have prickles. It flowers from April to September. This species reproduces by seed. In a Canadi- an study, common teasel resprouted 50% of the time after mechanically removing above ground vegetation. Common teasel can produce more than 2,000 seeds per plant. Plants die after production of seed has occurred. Seeds can stay viable for up to 14 years. Seeds germinate and estab- lish readily, however, seeds don’t gener- ally disperse far form the parent plant. The fruits are a four-angled achene, each containing a single seed. C ommon teasel is native to Europe where historically it had many uses. Common teasel is spreading rapidly in America. It is common along major travel corridors and previously disturbed areas. It is invasive in moist soils, such as wetlands, fens and riparian corridors. This includes roadsides, swales, irrigation ditches. Upland dry sites are also vulner- able. These include open, sunny habitats such as abandoned fields, pastures, meadows and woodlands. R estoration of infested and degraded sites is one of the keys to eradicating common teasel. Wetlands are impor- tant but very sensitive environments. Methods and techniques used in infested wetlands should follow best manag- ment practices, such as those available at https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/ag- conservation/noxious-weed-publications. Preventing seed production is necessary to curtail the spread of this forb. Eradi- cation efforts will need to continue for multiple consecutive seasons until the seed bank is depleted. Once eradication is complete, monitoring will be needed. C ommon teasel is desig- nated as a “List B” spe- cies in the Colorado Noxious Weed Act. It is required to be eradicated; some popula- tions may be contained or suppressed depending on state regulations. For state regulations described for each county, refer to the most recent Rule, or visit www.colorado.gov/ag/co- weedcontacts for details.Common teasel Dipsacus fullonum L.Common Teasel Identification and Management 2015 Quarter Quad Survey © Steve Dewey, UT State University, Bugwood © Chris Evans, IL Wildlife Action Plan © Wikimedia Commons © Steve Dewey, UT State University, Bugwood Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 68 of 136 Rev. 11/16 Colorado Department of Agriculture - Conservation Services 305 Interlocken Parkway Broomfield, CO 80021 (303) 869-9030 www.colorado.gov/ag/weeds List B Effective integrated management means using a variety of eradication methods along with restoration, prevention of seed production and dispersal, and monitoring. Maintain robust healthy native landscapes. Restore degraded sites. Avoid soil disturbance. Prevent seed production in the first and second year. Prevent seed from dispersing, e.g. contaminated equipment. Rest sites until restored. Change land use practices. Use methods appropriate for the site; disturbing wetlands, fens and riparian areas is generally not advised without proper training.Common teasel Dipsacus fullonum L.Integrated Weed Management Recommendations HERBICIDE RATE APPLICATION TIMING Metsulfuron (Escort XP) 1 oz. product/acre + 0.25% v/v non-ionic surfactant Apply when in rosette or bolting growth stage. (Spring or fall rosettes, or early summer bolting) Aminopyralid (Milestone)* 4-7 oz. product/acre (start with 7 oz.) + 0.25% v/v non-ionic surfactant Apply when in rosette or bolting growth stage. Best choice of herbicide to use in riparian areas. (Spring or fall rosettes, or early summer bolting) *Not permitted for use in the San Luis Valley. Imazapic (Plateau)8-12 oz. product/acre + 2 pints/ acre methylated seed oil Apply when in rosette or bolting growth stage. Good choice of herbicide to use in riparian areas. (Spring or fall rosettes, or early summer bolting) Aminocyclopyrachlor + chlorsulfuron (Perspective)* 4.75-8 oz. product/acre + 0.25% v/v non-ionic surfactant Apply from the seedling to the bolting stage. IMPORTANT: Applications greater than 5.5 oz. product/acre exceeds the threshold for selectivity. DO NOT treat in the root zone of desirable trees and shrubs. Not for use on grazed or feed forage. *Product not permitted for use in the San Luis Valley. CHEMICAL CONTROL METHODS NOTE: The following are recommendations for herbicides that can be applied to pastures and rangeland. Rates are approximate and based on equipment with an output of 30 gal/acre. Follow the label for exact rates. Always read, understand, and follow the label directions. The herbicide label is the LAW! MECHANICAL CONTROL METHODS Mechanical methods are best for infestations smaller than 0.5 acres; weigh this against other plants present, ecology and site condition. Sever roots below the soil surface during the first year before the plant stores energy, and in the second year before seed production. Mowing, chopping and deadheading stimulates more flower production; these methods require consecutive years of season-long treatments. Flower heads must be collected, bagged, and disposed of or destroyed; seeds will mature and germinate if left on the ground. Fire effects are unknown. Vegetation may not carry fire. Low severity prescribed fires may only kill the above ground vegetation, leaving roots and seeds unaffected. High severity prescribed fire may kill common teasel, but could damage native species and is not recommended. BIOLOGICAL CONTROL METHODS Common teasel is not palatable to domestic livestock in part because of the abundance of prickles. Properly managed grazing can improve vigor of desired species and indireclty reduce common teasel. There are no biological control agents for common teasel authorized in Colorado that would effectively control common teasel. For more information about biological control agents, visit the Colorado Department of Agriculture’s Palisade Insectary website at https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/agconservation/biocontrol CULTURAL CONTROL METHODS Maintain or restore a competitive assemblage of forbs, cool and warm season grasses. Implement whole site restoration of soils, plants and water regimes where stands of common teasel exist. Use locally adapted species that are ecologically appropriate for the site to improve competitiveness (e.g. wetland plants or upland plants). Include annual as well as perennial species. Incorporate soil amendments, soil microbes and mycorrhizal fungi in restoration efforts. Minimize soil compaction and disturbance, especially in wetlands and moist soil. Acquire permits for wetland restoration, if required. © City of Watsonville © Steve Dewey, UT State University, Bugwood © Lady Barbaras Garden, Pintrest Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 69 of 136 Attachment E Staff Analysis of BVCP Policies, Boulder Revised Code, and State Statutes BOULDER VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES Policy 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion As the community expands to its planned physical boundaries, the city and county will increasingly emphasize preservation and enhancement of the physical, social and economic assets of the community. Cooperative efforts and resources will be focused on maintaining and improving the quality of life within defined physical boundaries, with only limited expansion of the city. The proposal is a limited expansion of the city limits within Area II, the area which may be considered for annexation, and is largely surrounded by other properties within the city. The proposal will allow for the preservation and enhancement of physical and social assets by fulfilling the intended use of the city-owned property for partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation and partially for open space use. As identified in the city’s Court System Plan, a portion of the property is intended to address the need for additional tennis and pickleball courts in the city, improving the quality of life within city boundaries. Policy 1.10 Growth Requirements The overall effect of urban growth must add significant value to the community, improving quality of life. The city will require development and redevelopment to provide significant community benefits, achieve sustainability goals for urban form and maintain or improve environmental quality as a precondition for further housing and community growth. The proposal will not result in additional urban growth, as the site has been designated partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation and partially for open space use by Ordinance 8349. All development on the property will be limited to these purposes, which are all consistent with improving quality of life and thereby provide a significant community benefit. The proposal maintains and improves environmental quality through preservation of land for floodplain mitigation and open space uses and provides value to the community through parks and recreation uses. The Court System Plan anticipates use of the property to address the need for additional dedicated tennis and pickleball courts and a higher level of service as identified by the Boulder Tennis and Pickleball Court System Plan. Policy 1.13 Definition of Comprehensive Planning Areas I, II & III The Boulder Valley Planning Area is divided into three major areas: . . . Area II is the area now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with Policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth Requirements and 1.17 Annexation. New urban development may only occur coincident with the availability of adequate facilities and services. Master plans project the provision of services to this area within the planning period. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 70 of 136 The proposed annexation and land use map change is within Area II and can be considered for annexation consistent with these policies. Policy 1.17 Annexation The policies in regard to annexation to be pursued by the city are:  a. Annexation will be required before adequate facilities and services are furnished. City services will be available to the property following annexation. Payment of appropriate fees and installation of infrastructure is the responsibility of the applicant. n/a b. The city will actively pursue annexation of county enclaves, substantially developed properties along the western boundary below the Blue Line and other substantially developed Area II properties. County enclave means an unincorporated area of land entirely contained within the outer boundary of the city. Terms of annexation will be based on the amount of development potential as described in (c), (d) and (e) of this policy. Applications made to the county for development of enclaves and Area II lands in lieu of annexation will be referred to the city for review and comment. The county will attach great weight to the city’s response and may require that the landowner conform to one or more of the city’s development standards so that any future annexation into the city will be consistent and compatible with the city’s requirements. Not applicable; the property is not a county enclave, along the western boundary or a substantially developed Area II property. n/a c. In 2016, the city adopted Ordinance 8311 which changed the location of the Blue Line. This change to the Blue Line was intended to clarify the location of the Blue Line and permit water service to existing development in the area, while reinforcing the protection of the foothill’s open space and mountain backdrop. Both entire properties which and properties where the developed portions (1) are located in Area II and (2) were moved east of the Blue Line in 2016 shall be considered substantially developed and no additional dwelling units may be added. No water services shall be provided to development west of the Blue Line. Not applicable; the property was not moved east of the Blue Line in 2016. n/a d. Annexation of existing substantially developed areas will be offered in a manner and on terms and conditions that respect existing lifestyles and densities. The city will expect these areas to be brought to city standards only where necessary to protect the health and safety of the residents of the subject area or of the city. The city, in developing annexation plans of reasonable cost, may phase new facilities and services. The county, which now has jurisdiction over these areas, will be a supportive partner with the city in annexation efforts to the extent the county supports the terms and conditions being proposed. Not applicable; the site is not a substantially developed area. Refer to criterion “e” below. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 71 of 136  e. In order to reduce the negative impacts of new development in the Boulder Valley, the city will annex Area II land with significant development or redevelopment potential only if the annexation provides a special opportunity or benefit to the city. For annexation consideration, emphasis will be given to the benefits achieved from the creation of permanently affordable housing. Provision of the following may also be considered a special opportunity or benefit: receiving sites for transferable development rights (TDRs), reduction of future employment projections, land and/or facilities for public purposes over and above that required by the city’s land use regulations, environmental preservation or other amenities determined by the city to be a special opportunity or benefit. Parcels that are proposed for annexation that are already developed and which are seeking no greater density or building size would not be required to assume and provide that same level of community benefit as vacant parcels unless and until such time as an application for greater development is submitted. While the property is largely undeveloped, development of the property is very limited due to the use limitations established in Ordinance 8349. The site presents special opportunity and benefit to the city as it provides land for public purposes including flood mitigation, parks and recreation, and open space. Annexation of the property is necessary to allow for the extension of utilities, will allow the city to plan any recreation use as part of and in coordination with the East Boulder Community Center land use approvals, and will allow for the city to be the approving authority for use of the property consistent with its flood mitigation, parks and recreation, and open space purposes. n/a f. Annexation of substantially developed properties that allow for some additional residential units or commercial square footage will be required to demonstrate community benefit commensurate with their impacts. Further, annexations that resolve an issue of public health without creating additional development impacts should be encouraged. Not applicable; the site is not a substantially developed property. Refer to criterion “e” above.  g. There will be no annexation of areas outside the boundaries of the Boulder Valley Planning Area, with the possible exception of annexation of acquired open space. The subject property is within Area II of the Boulder Valley Planning Area. n/a h. Publicly owned property located in Area III, and intended to remain in Area III, may be annexed to the city if the property requires less than a full range of urban services or requires inclusion under city jurisdiction for health, welfare and safety reasons. Not applicable; the property is not within Area III. n/a i. The Gunbarrel Subcommunity is unique because the majority of residents live in the unincorporated area and because of the shared jurisdiction for planning and service provision among the county, city, Gunbarrel Public Improvement District and other Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 72 of 136 special districts. Although interest in voluntary annexation has been limited, the city and county continue to support the eventual annexation of Gunbarrel. If resident interest in annexation does occur in the future, the city and county will negotiate new terms of annexation with the residents. Not applicable, property not located within Gunbarrel Subcommunity. Policy 2.03 Compact Development Pattern The city and county will, by implementing the comprehensive plan (as guided by the Land Use Designation Map and Planning Areas I, II, III Map), ensure that development will take place in an orderly fashion, take advantage of existing urban services, and avoid, insofar as possible, patterns of leapfrog, noncontiguous, scattered development within the Boulder Valley. The city prefers redevelopment and infill as compared to development in an expanded Service Area to prevent urban sprawl and create a compact community. The proposal is largely surrounded by land within city limits. Annexation of the property allows for urban services to be provided in an orderly fashion and for the property to be used as intended for partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation and partially for open space use. A portion of 55th Street right-of-way south of the property is also being annexed to “close the gap” between the area of 55th Street right-of-way to the north and south to clarify maintenance and permitting responsibilities in this area of right-of-way and allow for city services to be provided in an orderly fashion. BOULDER REVISED CODE ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS SECTION 9-2-17  (a) Compliance with State Statutes and Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan: All annexations to the city shall meet the requirements of 31-12-101 et seq., C.R.S., and shall be consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and other ordinances of the city. See checklists above and below.  (b) Conditions: No annexation of land to the city shall create an unreasonable burden on the physical, social, economic, or environmental resources of the city. The city may condition the annexation of land upon such terms and conditions as are reasonably necessary to ensure that this requirement is met. Such terms and conditions may include, without limitation, installation of public facilities or improvements, dedication of land for public improvements, payment of fees incidental to annexation, or covenants governing Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 73 of 136 future land uses. In annexations of hillside areas, the city council may impose conditions designed to mitigate the effects of development on lands containing slopes of fifteen percent or greater. In annexations of more than ten acres, the applicant shall provide the information necessary to enable the city to prepare an annexation impact report when required by section 31-12-108.5, C.R.S. The proposed annexation will not create an unreasonable burden on the resources of the city. Annexation is necessary to fulfill the purpose of the property outlined in Ord. 8349 which designated the property as partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation and partially for open space use. Annexation of the property will allow the property to be brought into the city’s jurisdiction for review of any future development on the property consistent with city processes and standards. The property is not located on lands containing slopes of fifteen percent or greater. The applicant has prepared the annexation report required by section 31-12-108.5, C.R.S. n/a (c) Annexation Agreement: Owners of land petitioning the city for annexation of their property shall enter into an annexation agreement with the city stating any terms and conditions imposed on said property, prior to the first reading of the annexation ordinance. Upon annexation, such agreements shall be recorded to provide notice to future purchasers of said property. Where the annexation agreement provides that the city may install public improvements and that the owners of the annexed property will pay for such improvements, the costs of such improvements constitute an assessment against the annexed property as they accrue. If, after notice, any such assessment is not paid when due, the city manager shall certify the amount of the principal, interest, and penalties due and unpaid, together with ten percent of the delinquent amount for costs of collection to the county treasurer to be assessed and collected in the same manner as general taxes are assessed and collected as provided by section 2-2-12, "City Manager May Certify Taxes, Charges, and Assessments to County Treasurer for Collection," B.R.C. 1981. The property is city-owned and is limited in its use by the designations created by Ord. 8349. No additional specific terms or conditions of an annexation agreement are necessary for annexation of the property due to the limitations and community benefits of Ordinance 8349, as such staff recommends waiver of this requirement. ZONING OF ANNEXED LAND SECTION 9-2-18  (a) Generally: Zoning of annexed land or land in the process of annexation shall be considered an initial zoning and shall be consistent with the goals and land use designations of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Initial zoning is established pursuant to Section 9-2-18, “Zoning of Annexed Land,” B.R.C. 1981. If a property is annexed, zoning will be established consistent with the goals and Land Use Map of the BVCP. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 74 of 136 As described in the staff memo, the proposal includes a BVCP Land Use Map change for the western portion of the property to Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O). The eastern portion of the property is proposed to remain designated Open Space, Acquired (OS-A). These land use designations are described as public lands used for open space, recreation, or flood control purposes. The proposed zoning assumes approval of the Land Use Map change. Public Zoning District: The proposed Public zoning encompasses the city-owned properties east and west of 55th Street and the portion of 55th Street between the city- owned properties. The proposed Public zoning district is described as: “Public areas in which public and semi-public facilities and uses are located, including without limitation, governmental and educational uses.” (Section 9-5-2(c)(6)(A), B.R.C. 1981). Staff finds that the Public zoning district is appropriate for the site, allows for uses consistent with the underlying BVCP land use designation, and allows for consistency with the zoning of adjacent city-owned properties including the East Boulder Community Park and Community Center. Public zoning is consistent with the underlying BVCP land use designations of Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) and with the goals, policies, and objectives of the BVCP. The proposed Public zoning district is consistent with the goals of the comprehensive plan, including: • 2.15 Compatibility of Adjacent Land Uses: The proposed Public zoning allows for land uses consistent with or compatible with neighboring properties, including the Public-zoned East Boulder Community Park adjacent to the site. • 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion: The proposed Public zoning allows for uses consistent with the designated use of the land for flood mitigation, parks, and open space purposes, which will provide for preservation and enhancement of physical and social assets and improve quality of life within defined physical boundaries. • 2.22 Urban Open Lands: The proposed Public zoning allows for uses consistent with the intended use of the property as part of the city’s urban open lands system, which can provide functions such as flood management, recreation, environmental protection, and enhancement of community character and aesthetics. The proposed zoning is consistent with the BVCP goal to have open lands that provide opportunities for active and passive recreation and flood management within the fabric of the city. Residential – Low 2 (RL-2) Zoning District: The proposed RL-2 zoning district encompasses the right-of-way of 55th Street south of the city-owned properties, adjacent to RL-2 zoned property within city limits on the east side of the right-of-way. The RL-2 zoning district is described as: “Medium density residential areas primarily used for small-lot residential development, including without limitation, duplexes, triplexes, or townhouses, where each unit generally has direct access at ground level.” (Section 9-5-2(c)(1)(B), B.R.C. 1981). Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 75 of 136 This portion of 55th Street right-of-way is being annexed to “close the gap” between the area of 55th Street right-of-way to the north and south to allow for clarity of maintenance and permitting responsibilities in this area. The property and right-of-way to the east and south of this portion of 55th Street right-of-way are zoned RL-2 and are designated LR, Low Density Residential in the BVCP. Staff finds that the RL-2 zoning district is appropriate for this portion of the right-of-way and allows for consistency with adjacent properties and city standards for the designation of zoning to rights-of-ways. The proposed RL-2 zoning district is consistent with the goals of the comprehensive plan, including: • 2.15 Compatibility of Adjacent Land Uses: The proposed RL-2 zoning will allow for zoning consistent with neighboring properties along this small area of 55th Street right-of-way. All land within city limits, including rights-of-way, must be part of a zoning district. • 2.03 Compact Development Pattern: The proposed RL-2 zoning will ensure that zoning is applied consistently along 55th Street and supports an orderly, contiguous development pattern. The right-of-way is being annexed to ensure clarity of maintenance and permitting responsibilities along 55th Street and avoid gaps with city boundaries. All land within city limits, including rights-of-way, must be part of a zoning district.  (b) Public Notification: When zoning of land is proposed in the process of annexation, the city manager will provide notice pursuant to section 9-4-3, "Public Notice Requirements," B.R.C. 1981. Public notice has been provided consistent with 9-4-3, “Public Notice Requirements,” B.R.C. 1981. A public notice has been sent to property owners within 600 feet and notice posted on the property.  (c) Sequence of Events: An ordinance proposing zoning of land to be annexed shall not be finally adopted by the city council before the date of final adoption of the annexation ordinance, but the annexation ordinance may include the zoning ordinance for the annexed property. The city will follow the required sequence of events for adopting an ordinance proposing zoning of land.  (d) Placement on Zoning Map: Any land annexed shall be zoned and placed upon the zoning map within ninety days after the effective date of the annexation ordinance, notwithstanding any judicial appeal of the annexation. The city shall not issue any building or occupancy permit until the annexed property becomes a part of the zoning map. The city will follow the requirements for placing the zoning upon the zoning map. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 76 of 136 n/a (e) Nonconformance: A lot annexed and zoned that does not meet the minimum lot area or open space per dwelling unit requirements of section 9-7-1, "Schedule of Form and Bulk Standards," B.R.C. 1981, may be used notwithstanding such requirements in accordance with this code or any ordinance of the city, if such lot was a buildable lot under Boulder County jurisdiction prior to annexation. N/A; the property does not contain any dwelling units. n/a (f) Slopes: Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection (a) of this section, any land proposed for annexation that contains slopes at or exceeding fifteen percent shall not be zoned into a classification which would allow development inconsistent with policies of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. Not applicable; the slope of the site does not exceed fifteen percent slope. COLORADO REVISED STATUTES COLORADO STATE STATUTES TITLE 31, ARTICLE 12 Staff has reviewed the annexation petition for compliance with Sections 31-12-104, 31-12-105, and 31-12-107, C.R.S. and with section 30 of article II of the state constitution and finds that the application is consistent with the statutory and constitutional requirements, as affirmed by the findings below. ELIGIBILITY FOR ANNEXATION § 31-12-104 (1) No unincorporated area may be annexed to a municipality unless one of the conditions set forth in section 30 (1) of article II of the state constitution first has been met. An area is eligible for annexation if the provisions of section 30 of article II of the state constitution have been complied with and the governing body, at a hearing as provided in section 31- 12-109, finds and determines: The conditions of the state constitution have been met. The applicant has filed a petition for annexation that is signed by persons comprising more than fifty percent of landowners in the area and owning more than fifty percent of the area.  (a) That not less than one-sixth of the perimeter of the area proposed to be annexed is contiguous with the annexing municipality. Contiguity shall not be affected by the existence of a platted street or alley, a public or private right-of-way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, public lands, whether owned by the state, the United States, or an agency thereof, except county-owned open space, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway between the annexing municipality and the land proposed to be annexed. Subject to the requirements imposed by section 31-12-105 (1) (e), contiguity may be established by the annexation of one or more parcels in a Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 77 of 136 series, which annexations may be completed simultaneously and considered together for the purposes of the public hearing required by sections 31-12-108 and 31-12-109 and the annexation impact report required by section 31-12-108.5. The property has more than 1/6th contiguity to the city limits. The perimeter of the area being annexed is 5,540.60 feet. A minimum of 923.43 feet must be contiguous to city limits to meet the 1/6 requirement. 4,252.63 feet are contiguous.  (b) That a community of interest exists between the area proposed to be annexed and the annexing municipality; that said area is urban or will be urbanized in the near future; and that said area is integrated with or is capable of being integrated with the annexing municipality. The fact that the area proposed to be annexed has the contiguity with the annexing municipality required by paragraph (a) of this subsection (1) shall be a basis for a finding of compliance with these requirements unless the governing body, upon the basis of competent evidence presented at the hearing provided for in section 31-12-109, finds that at least two of the following are shown to exist: The contiguity required by paragraph (a) satisfies the finding that a community of interest exists. n/a (I) Less than fifty percent of the adult residents of the area proposed to be annexed make use of part or all of the following types of facilities of the annexing municipality: Recreational, civic, social, religious, industrial, or commercial; and less than twenty-five percent of said area's adult residents are employed in the annexing municipality. If there are no adult residents at the time of the hearing, this standard shall not apply. n/a (II) One-half or more of the land in the area proposed to be annexed (including streets) is agricultural, and the landowners of such agricultural land, under oath, express an intention to devote the land to such agricultural use for a period of not less than five years. n/a (III) It is not physically practicable to extend to the area proposed to be annexed those urban services which the annexing municipality provides in common to all of its citizens on the same terms and conditions as such services are made available to such citizens. This standard shall not apply to the extent that any portion of an area proposed to be annexed is provided or will within the reasonably near future be provided with any service by or through a quasi- municipal corporation.  (2) (a) The contiguity required by paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section may not be established by use of any boundary of an area which was previously annexed to the annexing municipality if the area, at the time of its annexation, was not contiguous at any point with the boundary of the annexing municipality, was not otherwise in compliance with paragraph (a) of subsection (1) of this section, and was located more than three miles from the nearest boundary of the annexing municipality, nor may such contiguity Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 78 of 136 be established by use of any boundary of territory which is subsequently annexed directly to, or which is indirectly connected through subsequent annexations to, such an area. Not applicable; the area previously annexed that establishes contiguity does not meet the description above.  (b) Because the creation or expansion of disconnected municipal satellites, which are sought to be prohibited by this subsection (2), violates both the purposes of this article as expressed in section 31-12-102 and the limitations of this article, any annexation which uses any boundary in violation of this subsection (2) may be declared by a court of competent jurisdiction to be void ab initio in addition to other remedies which may be provided. The provisions of section 31-12-116 (2) and (4) and section 31-12-117 shall not apply to such an annexation. Judicial review of such an annexation may be sought by any municipality having a plan in place pursuant to section 31-12-105 (1) (e) directly affected by such annexation, in addition to those described in section 31-12-116 (1). Such review may be, but need not be, instituted prior to the effective date of the annexing ordinance and may include injunctive relief. Such review shall be brought no later than sixty days after the effective date of the annexing ordinance or shall forever be barred. Proposal does not create or expand any disconnected municipal satellite.  (c) Contiguity is hereby declared to be a fundamental element in any annexation, and this subsection (2) shall not in any way be construed as having the effect of legitimizing in any way any noncontiguous annexation. Proposal meets all contiguity requirements. LIMITATIONS § 31-12-105 (1) Notwithstanding any provisions of this part 1 to the contrary, the following limitations shall apply to all annexations:  (a) In establishing the boundaries of any territory to be annexed, no land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate, shall be divided into separate parts or parcels without the written consent of the landowners thereof unless such tracts or parcels are separated by a dedicated street, road, or other public way. The entire property is proposed to be annexed.  (b) In establishing the boundaries of any area proposed to be annexed, no land held in identical ownership, whether consisting of one tract or parcel of real estate or two or more contiguous tracts or parcels of real estate, comprising twenty acres or more (which, together with the buildings and improvements situated thereon has a valuation for Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 79 of 136 assessment in excess of two hundred thousand dollars for ad valorem tax purposes for the year next preceding the annexation) shall be included under this part 1 without the written consent of the landowners unless such tract of land is situated entirely within the outer boundaries of the annexing municipality as they exist at the time of annexation. In the application of this paragraph (b), contiguity shall not be affected by a dedicated street, road, or other public way. The written consent of the landowner has been obtained for this annexation.  (c) No annexation pursuant to section 31-12-106 and no annexation petition or petition for an annexation election pursuant to section 31-12-107 shall be valid when annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation of part or all of such territory to another municipality, except in accordance with the provisions of section 31-12-114. For the purpose of this section, proceedings are commenced when the petition is filed with the clerk of the annexing municipality or when the resolution of intent is adopted by the governing body of the annexing municipality if action on the acceptance of such petition or on the resolution of intent by the setting of the hearing in accordance with section 31- 12-108 is taken within ninety days after the said filings if an annexation procedure initiated by petition for annexation is then completed within the one hundred fifty days next following the effective date of the resolution accepting the petition and setting the hearing date and if an annexation procedure initiated by resolution of intent or by petition for an annexation election is prosecuted without unreasonable delay after the effective date of the resolution setting the hearing date. No annexation proceedings have been commenced for the annexation of the property to another municipality.  (d) As to any annexation which will result in the detachment of area from any school district and the attachment of the same to another school district, no annexation pursuant to section 31-12- 106 or annexation petition or petition for an annexation election pursuant to section 31-12-107 is valid unless accompanied by a resolution of the board of directors of the school district to which such area will be attached approving such annexation. The annexation will not result in a change to the school district.  (e) (I) Except as otherwise provided in this paragraph (e), no annexation may take place that would have the effect of extending a municipal boundary more than three miles in any direction from any point of such municipal boundary in any one year. Within said three- mile area, the contiguity required by section 31-12-104 (1) (a) may be achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, a public or private right-of-way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway. Prior to completion of any annexation within the three-mile area, the municipality shall have in place a plan for that area that generally describes the proposed location, character, and extent of streets, subways, bridges, waterways, waterfronts, parkways, playgrounds, squares, parks, aviation fields, other public ways, grounds, open spaces, public utilities, and terminals for water, light, sanitation, transportation, and Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 80 of 136 power to be provided by the municipality and the proposed land uses for the area. Such plan shall be updated at least once annually. Such three-mile limit may be exceeded if such limit would have the effect of dividing a parcel of property held in identical ownership if at least fifty percent of the property is within the three-mile limit. In such event, the entire property held in identical ownership may be annexed in any one year without regard to such mileage limitation. Such three-mile limit may also be exceeded for the annexation of an enterprise zone. The annexation will not extend the municipal boundary by more than three miles. The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan and city departmental plans establish a plan for the area to be annexed. n/a (II) Prior to completion of an annexation in which the contiguity required by section 31-12- 104 (1) (a) is achieved pursuant to subparagraph (I) of this paragraph (e), the municipality shall annex any of the following parcels that abut a platted street or alley, a public or private right-of-way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway, where the parcel satisfies all of the eligibility requirements pursuant to section 31-12-104 and for which an annexation petition has been received by the municipality no later than forty-five days prior to the date of the hearing set pursuant to section 31-12-108 (1): Not applicable; the proposal does not achieve contiguity pursuant to subparagraph (I) of paragraph (e). n/a (A) Any parcel of property that has an individual schedule number for county tax filing purposes upon the petition of the owner of such parcel; n/a (B) Any subdivision that consists of only one subdivision filing upon the petition of the requisite number of property owners within the subdivision as determined pursuant to section 31-12- 107; and n/a (C) Any subdivision filing within a subdivision that consists of more than one subdivision filing upon the petition of the requisite number of property owners within the subdivision filing as determined pursuant to section 31-12-107. n/a (e.1) The parcels described in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (e) of this subsection (1) shall be annexed under the same or substantially similar terms and conditions and considered at the same hearing and in the same impact report as the initial annexation in which the contiguity required by section 31-12-104 (1) (a) is achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, a public or private right-of- way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway. Impacts of the annexation upon the parcels described in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (e) of this subsection (1) that abut such platted street or alley, public or private right-of-way, public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway shall be considered in the impact report required Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 81 of 136 by section 31-12- 108.5. As part of the same hearing, the municipality shall consider and decide upon any petition for annexation of any parcel of property having an individual schedule number for county tax filing purposes, which petition was received not later than forty-five days prior to the hearing date, where the parcel abuts any parcel described in subparagraph (II) of paragraph (e) of this subsection (1) and where the parcel otherwise satisfies all of the eligibility requirements of section 31-12-104. n/a (e.3) In connection with any annexation in which the contiguity required by section 31-12- 104 (1) (a) is achieved by annexing a platted street or alley, a public or private right-of-way, a public or private transportation right-of-way or area, or a lake, reservoir, stream, or other natural or artificial waterway, upon the latter of ninety days prior to the date of the hearing set pursuant to section 31-12- 108 or upon the filing of the annexation petition, the municipality shall provide, by regular mail to the owner of any abutting parcel as reflected in the records of the county assessor, written notice of the annexation and of the landowner's right to petition for annexation pursuant to section 31-12-107. Inadvertent failure to provide such notice shall neither create a cause of action in favor of any landowner nor invalidate any annexation proceeding.  (f) In establishing the boundaries of any area proposed to be annexed, if a portion of a platted street or alley is annexed, the entire width of said street or alley shall be included within the area annexed. 55th Street is not a platted street but is proposed to be annexed. The entire width of the street is included in the annexation.  (g) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (f) of this subsection (1), a municipality shall not deny reasonable access to landowners, owner of an easement, or the owner of a franchise adjoining a platted street or alley which has been annexed by the municipality but is not bounded on both sides by the municipality. The proposal does not involve denying reasonable access to any street or alley.  (h) The execution by any municipality of a power of attorney for real estate located within an unincorporated area shall not be construed to comply with the election provisions of this article for purposes of annexing such unincorporated area. Such annexation shall be valid only upon compliance with the procedures set forth in this article. The proposal does not involve power of attorney. PETITIONS FOR ANNEXATION AND FOR ANNEXATION ELECTIONS § 31-12-107 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 82 of 136 (1) Petition for annexation in accordance with section 30 (1) (b) of article II of the state constitution:  (a) Persons comprising more than fifty percent of the landowners in the area and owning more than fifty percent of the area, excluding public streets and alleys and any land owned by the annexing municipality, meeting the requirements of sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105 may petition the governing body of any municipality for the annexation of such territory. Landowners of more than 50 percent of the area who comprise more than 50 percent of the landowners in the area, excluding public streets and alleys, have petitioned to annex. (b) The petition shall be filed with the clerk. The annexation petition has been filed with the City Clerk of the City of Boulder. (c) The petition shall contain the following: The petition meets the following requirements. (I) An allegation that it is desirable and necessary that such area be annexed to the municipality; (II) An allegation that the requirements of sections 31-12-104 and 31-12-105 exist or have been met; (III) An allegation that the signers of the petition comprise more than fifty percent of the landowners in the area and own more than fifty percent of the area proposed to be annexed, excluding public streets and alleys and any land owned by the annexing municipality; (IV) A request that the annexing municipality approve the annexation of the area proposed to be annexed; (V) The signatures of such landowners; (VI) The mailing address of each such signer; (VII) The legal description of the land owned by such signer; (VIII) The date of signing of each signature; and (IX) The affidavit of each circulator of such petition, whether consisting of one or more sheets, that each signature therein is the signature of the person whose name it purports to be. (d) Accompanying the petition shall be four copies of an annexation map containing the following information: An annexation map has been received that contains this information. (I) A written legal description of the boundaries of the area proposed to be annexed; Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 83 of 136 (II) A map showing the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed; (III) Within the annexation boundary map, a showing of the location of each ownership tract in unplatted land and, if part or all of the area is platted, the boundaries and the plat numbers of plots or of lots and blocks; (IV) Next to the boundary of the area proposed to be annexed, a drawing of the contiguous boundary of the annexing municipality and the contiguous boundary of any other municipality abutting the area proposed to be annexed. (e) No signature on the petition is valid if it is dated more than one hundred eighty days prior to the date of filing the petition for annexation with the clerk. All petitions which substantially comply with the requirements set forth in paragraphs (b) to (d) of this subsection (1) shall be deemed sufficient. No person signing a petition for annexation shall be permitted to withdraw his signature from the petition after the petition has been filed with the clerk, except as such right of withdrawal is otherwise set forth in the petition. The petition meets this limitation. (f) The clerk shall refer the petition to the governing body as a communication. The governing body, without undue delay, shall then take appropriate steps to determine if the petition so filed is substantially in compliance with this subsection (1). The city manager has determined that the petition is in compliance with this section and the clerk and city council are taking these required steps. (g) If the petition is found to be in substantial compliance with this subsection (1), the procedure outlined in sections 31-12-108 to 31-12-110 shall then be followed. If it is not in substantial compliance, no further action shall be taken. This procedure is being followed by the City of Boulder. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 84 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS DATE OF COMMENTS: February 25, 2025 CASE MANAGER: Shannon Moeller LOCATION: 5399 KEWANEE DR, 5697 SOUTH BOULDER RD REVIEW TYPE: Annexation/Standard, BVCP Amendment REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008 APPLICANT: TINA BRIGGS, CITY OF BOULDER DESCRIPTION: Annexation and Initial Zoning of the city owned parcels at 5399 Kewanee Drive and 5697 South Boulder Road purchased in 2019 with an initial zoning of Public. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use Designation Change proposal to amend the land use designation on the 19 acre portion of the property west of 55th Street from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK U/O). I.REVIEW FINDINGS Additional information and revisions to the plan documents are required as indicated below. Refer to ‘Next Steps’ below. As noted below, the proposed BVCP amendment and annexation/initial zoning is supported by staff and revisions to plan documents are necessary to move the proposal forward to public hearings. Staff is happy to meet with the applicant team prior to a resubmittal. II.CITY REQUIREMENTS The section below addresses issues that must be resolved prior to project approval. Access/Circulation Kyle Clawson, (303) 441-4442 ANNEXATION MAP; Please revise the annexation map to include the portion of 55th Street that is located to the south of the subject parcel. Staff is happy to review a draft or sketch of the revised annexation map if additional clarity is required prior to resubmittal. Drainage Kyle Gillitzer, 303-441-4336 Drainage: As a condition of annexation, the applicant is required to convey drainage in an historic manner, which does not adversely affect neighboring properties. Legal Documents Julia Chase, 303-441-3052 1.Petition: Revise as shown on the marked-up version attached. 2.Map: Revise as shown on the marked-up version attached. 3.Survey: Upon resubmittal, provide an updated survey which has the delineation of wetland areas removed. (Note: The wetlands shown were not adopted.) Plan Documents Shannon Moeller, 303-441-3216 1.Please include all maps/attachments of the Impact Report in one PDF. The final report will be transmitted to the County consistent with 31-12-108.5, C.R.S. 2.Please include final copies of the reports related to environmental features noted in the written statement with the next resubmittal. Additionally, please refer to Wetland comments for instructions on submittal of a WET permit Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 85 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS application. 3. As part of the Written Statement, staff recommends including: 1) a written response to the BVCP Amendment criteria items a) through f) on page 161 of the BVCP; 2) an exhibit outlining the area where the BVCP land use designation is proposed to be changed . 4. Please refer to Transportation comments regarding annexation of 55th Street south of the subject property. The western portion of 55th Street south of the property along 5695 South Boulder Rd. is located within a right-of-way easement and thus remains on private property. Staff recommends that the applicant team make the current property owner aware of the intent to annex the full width of 55th Street into the city. Note that this would not change the ownership of the underlying property, simply the city/county jurisdiction of the roadway. Utilities Kyle Gillitzer, 303-441-4336 The subject property is not currently included in the Northern Colorado Water Conservation District (NCWCD) or Municipal Sub-district. Prior to 1st Reading at City Council, a petition to join the NCWCD District and Municipal Sub-district must be filed with the NCWCD for the subject property and a copy of the application submitted to the city. Please contact Kristen Thompson with the NCWCD at 970-622-2237 regarding NCWCD District and Sub-district applications and fees. Upon completion, the NCWCD will supply the applicant with a signed court order. A copy of this signed court order must be submitted to the city. Wetland Julie DeFoe, 303-441-4283 Wetland, Julie DeFoe, defoej@bouldercolorado.gov Prior to annexation, all stream, wetland, water bodies and buffer areas to be annexed shall be mapped and shall include a functional evaluation. The approved mapping and evaluation shall be adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. The applicant may EITHER: 1) Hire a wetlands ecologist to delineate the wetlands and complete a functional evaluation. After which, the applicant must apply for a Conditional Wetland Permit, and pay a $650 fee to the City of Boulder. OR 2) Apply for a Conditional Wetland Permit and pay a $3,500 fee to the City of Boulder which the city will hire a consultant to delineate the wetlands and complete a functional evaluation. The approved mapping and evaluation shall be adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. 9-3-9(k)(2) B.R.C 1981 III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS 1. Area Characteristics and Zoning History, Shannon Moeller, 303 441 3216, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov The property consists of roughly 22-acres located at 5399 Kewanee Drive and 5697 South Boulder Road in east Boulder near the East Boulder Recreation Center and has been known as the Hogan -Pancost property. 55th Street runs through the site. The property is located in Planning Area II in the BVCP, which is the “area now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with Policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth Requirements and 1.17 Annexation. New urban development may only occur coincident with the availability of adequate facilities and services. Master plans project the provision of services to this area within the planning period.” The existing underlying Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) land use designation is Low Density Residential (LR) on the western portion of the property and Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) on the eastern portion of the property (east of 55th Street). The property is located in unincorporated Boulder County with a county zoning of RR – Rural Residential and SR – Suburban Residential, which are defined as “Residential areas developed at a density and character compatible with Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 86 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS agricultural uses” and “Low density suburban residential areas,” respectively (Articles 4-103 and 4-105, Boulder County Land Use Code). Almost the entirety of the site is surrounded by city annexed land, including the single-family residential developments of Keewayden Meadows to the west, Greenbelt Meadows to the south, and the East Boulder Recreation Center to the northeast. Until 2018, the property was privately owned and development review applications and requests to annex were submitted to develop the property for residential uses. The most recent requests to annex and develop the property included an Annexation and Initial Zoning (LUR2015-00093) with an initial zoning of Residential Low -2 (RL-2) and Concept Plan and Review (LUR2016-00076) application to construct 117 residential units. Following public hearings before the Planning Board and City Council, in November 2017, the applicant withdrew the annexation application. From December 2017 through 2018, City Council held various study sessions and discussions regarding the property and next steps. Through these discussions, City Council directed staff to purchase the property and considered potential uses for the property. On July 16, 2019, Council directed staff to arrange for the sale of the property from the General Fund to the Permanent Parks and Recreation Fund, the Open Space Fund, and the Flood and Stormwater Utility Fund. The council passed a motion to designate the property partially for parks and recreation purposes and partially for future flood mitigation (west of 55th Street) and partially for open space use (east of 55th Street). The map attached to the ordinance shows these locations. On October 15, 2019, Council passed Ordinance 8349 to appropriate the funds as noted. 2. Historic Preservation/Landmarks- Clare Brandt - 303-441-994; historicpreservation@bouldercolorado.gov Per 9-11-23 B.R.C. 1981 historic preservation review is required for demolition of non -designated buildings older than 50 years. Submit a complete Historic Preservation Demolition application to PDSskipatrip <PDSskipatrip@bouldercolorado.gov> per instructions on application form: https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/1463/ 3. Land Use, Kristopher Johnson, Senior Comprehensive Planning Manager, 303-441-4277, johnsonk3@bouldercolorado.gov The purpose of this review is to provide the applicant with information regarding the proposed annexation and land use change for the properties located at 5399 Kewanee Drive & 5697 South Boulder Road. The subject property is located within the Planning Area for the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP), a plan jointly adopted by the city and county. The property lies outside Boulder city limits under the jurisdiction of Boulder County. The property is located within Area II and is therefore eligible for annexation so long as it meets state statutes and city policies regarding annexation. Annexation of a property requires consideration and a recommendation by Planning Board and final approval for annexation and zoning of the property by City Council. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Review 1.13 Definition of Comprehensive Planning Areas I, II, III The proposed application is consistent with this policy as the property is within BVCP Planning Area II. Area II is the area now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with Policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth Requirements and 1.17 Annexation. 1.17 Annexation The proposed application is consistent with this policy. Specifically, the proposed annexation supports the provisions related to special opportunities or benefits including land and/or facilities for public purposes, environmental preservation, or other amenities. Additionally, while the 3-acre portion on the east side of the site is within Area II, it may be considered for conversion to Area III-Annex which is intended for rural open space properties that are intended to retain that character after annexation as described in Policy 1.17(h). BVCP Land Use Designations The subject property primarily has an existing BVCP land use designation of Low Density Residential (LR) with the 3-acre portion east of 55th Street being designated as Open Space-Acquired (OS-A). The application proposes the LR portion be changed to a land use designation of Parks, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) which would be more consistent with the proposed park and stormwater management facilities envisioned for the property. The PK-U/O land use designation is described as including public lands used for a variety of active and passive recreational Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 87 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS purposes or flood control purposes. Staff recommend the area currently managed by Open Space and Mountain Parks east of 55th Street would remain OS-A as proposed in the application and should be considered for a change to Area III-Annex. Staff finds these proposed changes consistent with BVCP policies and proposed future uses of the property, particularly 3.23 Non-Structural Approach to Flood Management and 8.14 City Parks & Recreation. 4. Legal Documents, Julia Chase, 303-441-3052 Annexation Agreement: Prior to the 1st Reading of the Annexation Ordinance, the applicant must provide an updated title commitment current within 30 days.(Note: An annexation agreement will not be needed.) 5. Neighborhood Comments, Shannon Moeller, 303 441 3216, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov Neighborhood comments were received which are included as an attachment. 6. OSMP – Bethany Collins – collinsb@bouldercolorado.gov – (720) 415-1543 The Open Space and Mountain Parks department manages the eastern ~3 acres of the site proposed for annexation for open space purposes. This area has a land use designation of Open Space – Acquired in the BVCP and land owned by the City and managed as open space is typically annexed as Area III-Annex into the City. An Area III-Annex should be considered here and can be pursued during the current major or next minor update. Due to the OS-A designation and suggested Area III-Annex (rural preservation) contraction, and to best separate this 3-acre portion of the site from those identified or eligible for development or other uses, OSMP will collaborate with Parks and Recreation and Utilities to subdivide the OSMP-managed property from the remaining site during development review or another agreed upon approach. Additionally, OSMP acquired and will continue to hold and use the Dry Creek #2 ditch shares associated with acquisition of the larger property and those should not be considered for use, dedication, or other conveyance during annexation or future development planning. 7. Prairie Dog Information, Shannon Moeller, 303 441 3216, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov Prairie dog habit information is attached to the end of these comments. 8. Review Process, Shannon Moeller, 303 441 3216, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov The annexation process typically involves two public hearings. The first is conducted by the Planning Board, who will make a recommendation to the City Council whether or not the annexation should be approved, and the terms, conditions, and zoning that should be applied. The City Council then holds first and second readings of an annexation ordinance. First reading is typically on City Council consent agenda while second reading is typically done at a public hearing where council will render a decision. The BVCP land use map change may be considered concurrent with the request for annexation. Land use map changes for properties located in Area II require approval of the Planning Board and City Council. Applications for land use designation changes that are made outside of a mid-term or five-year BVCP update must be found to be consistent with BVCP policies and satisfy several other factors listed in Appendix B of the BVCP. If the Annexation is approved by the City Council, the initial zoning designation will also be established. Refer to ‘Zoning’ comments for information regarding initial zoning. 9. Transportation, Kyle Clawson, clawsonk@bouldercolorado.gov; It is Staff's recommendation that the 55th Street right-of-way to be further evaluated at time of future permit application and that portions may be vacated in order to provide a more consistent ROW through the subject parcel. 10. Zoning, Shannon Moeller, 303 441 3216, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov Staff finds that the proposed Public zoning district is appropriate for the site and is consistent with the proposed underlying BVCP land use designation of Park, Urban and Other (PK-U/O) and existing BVCP land use designation Open Space, Acquired (OS-A) and with the goals, policies, and objectives of the BVCP. 11. NEXT STEPS, Shannon Moeller, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov, 303 -441-3216 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 88 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS Revisions to the plan documents are required. Resubmittal materials that address the comments herein shall be uploaded through the “Attachments” tab in the CSS portal (https://energovcss.bouldercolorado.gov/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService/#/home) using the naming conventions in the Electronic Submittal Requirements for Development Review/ Plan case document available here: https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/1447/download?attachment. Resubmittals should have the following components: • A written response identifying all changes made, saved as a PDF file. (See requirements). • FULL set of electronic drawings and/or affected documentation addressing the review comments. (Named as specified in the requirements). • Revised plans must include the date of ALL revisions. These must be saved as PDFs. (See requirements). ***Please note that a separate WET application is required as a separate case number/submittal. Please be sure to upload the WET application documents as a separate submittal and not as part of the LUR applications. The application deadlines for the review track system can be found at https://bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop. Files shall be uploaded to the customer self service portal for resubmittals by 10 AM on the application deadline. IV. FEES Please note that the new 2024 application fee includes an initial and two subsequent reviews. If further substantive review is required following the third review, an additional fee will need to be paid for the fourth and each subsequent review. This additional fee does not apply for: Annexation/Initial Zoning, Concept Plan Review, BVCP land use designation change, Vacation Feasibility Study, Right-of-Way/Access Easement Vacation, or CDOT Access Permit. For 2023 or earlier cases, hourly billing still applies for reviewer time spent on any reviews following the initial review. V. APPROVAL CONDITIONS ON CASE 1. Fees 1. Based on the application data supplied and the 2025 Schedule of Fees, the following fees will be due prior to the first reading of the annexation ordinance: Plant Investment Fees (PIF’s) for New Multi-Family Residential Stormwater $2.71/square foot of impervious area Existing Impervious Area: 1849 square feet $5010.79 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 89 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS Prairie Dog Information The City of Boulder has guidelines for managing conflicts between prairie dogs and human land uses. The City’s Urban Wildlife Management Plan (UWMP) describes a “six-step” decision making process for managing prairie dogs when they are in conflict with human land uses. The “six-step” decision making process includes: Step 1. Minimize conflicts with the wildlife through non-removal methods. Step 2. Remove animals on a portion of the site where conflicts are occurring. Step 3. Evaluate potential for relocation. Step 4. Consider animal recovery programs (ferret or raptor). Step 5. Evaluate trapping and individual euthanasia. Step 6. If earlier steps not feasible and pesticides must be used: – Pay into city habitat mitigation fund – Notify the city – Post notice on property of pesticide application Evaluating the potential for relocation (Step 3) includes passive relocation (closing burrows where prairie dogs cannot remain) and active relocation (physically moving the prairie dogs to another site). Relocation activities are prohibited March 1- June 1 due to the prairie dog birthing season. Relocations occur between June 1 and October 15. Relocation efforts begun prior to Oct. 1, may be completed under appropriate conditions up to Nov. 1. Requests to relocate prairie dogs onto land managed by the City of Boulder must be made in writing by March 1, to the director of the Open Space and Mountain Parks Department. Passive relocation requires a Special Use Permit from the city, and active relocation that move prairie dogs off site requires a permit from the State of Colorado. To apply for a Special Use Permit for passive relocation, complete the General Data in addition to numbers 1, 2 & 18 of the Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permit Application referenced below. There are no costs associated with applying for a Special Use Permit, and processing time is approximately two weeks. If removal is required and there are no relocation sites available (Step 4), City ordinance requires landowners to obtain a permit from the city before using any form of lethal control on prairie dogs. In order to obtain a permit, the landowner must demonstrate the following: • A reasonable effort has been made to relocate the prairie dogs to another site; • The most humane method of lethal control possible will be used; • One of the following three conditions exist: 1. the land on which the prairie dogs are located will be developed within 15 months of the date of the application, 2. a principal use of the land will be adversely impacted in a significant manner by the presence of prairie dogs on the site, or 3. an established landscaping or open space feature will be adversely impacted by the prairie dogs; and Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 90 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS • the landowner has an adequate plan designed to prevent the reentry of prairie dogs onto the land after the prairie dogs are lawfully removed. Prairie Dog Lethal Control Permit Application Form can be found on the city website or by following this link: https://bouldercolorado.gov/sites/default/files/2021-02/312prairiedogpmtapp.pdf The waiting period after the submission of an application is a minimum of three to five months. If the city determines that relocation alternatives exist during or after the initial three-to-five month period, it may delay issuing the permit for an additional 12 months in order to allow relocation to occur. The basic administrative fee for a lethal control permit is $1,500. An applicant for a prairie dog lethal control permit must also pay a fee of $1,200 per acre of active prairie dogs habitat lost, pro-rated for any partial acres of lost habitat. For additional information contact: Valerie Matheson Principle Resource Advisor O: (303) 441-3004 mathesonv@bouldercolorado.gov Comprehensive Planning Division 1739 Broadway, 4th Floor Boulder, Colorado 80306 Bouldercolorado.gov Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 91 of 136 Long Range Team Referral TO: Shannon Moeller, Planning Manager FROM: Ethan Abner, Long Range Planner, Boulder County RE: Referral for LUR2025-00003 and LUR2025-00008 DATE: February 21, 2025 The Boulder County Long Range Team has reviewed the provided referral materials and has the following comments: 1. The application states that the purpose of this project is to annex a property near the East Boulder Community Park, known as the Hogan Pancost Property. The City purchased the property in 2019 after City Council passed a motion to designate the Hogan Pancost Property partially for parks and recreation purposes, partially for future flood mitigation, and partially for open space use. The Hogan Pancost Property includes 2 parcels at 5399 Kewanee Drive and 5697 South Boulder Road. The annexation also includes the section of 55th street that runs through the property, as well as a request for rezoning to the Public zoning district. 2. Historic resources may exist on the property. However, the project fact sheet does not indicate any proposed development or that any structures will be destroyed. We encourage you to examine these resources and seek ways to protect them and incorporate them into any future development proposals. 3. Boulder County supports this annexation because it is in Planning Area II of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, jointly adopted by the city and county through an intergovernmental agreement. Area II is described as “… are now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with Policies 1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion, 1.10 Growth Requirements, and 1.17 Annexation.” Sincerely, Ethan Abner Long Range Planner II Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 92 of 136 From: Hippely, Hannah <hhippely@bouldercounty.gov> Sent: Monday, February 24, 2025 12:43 PM To: !LongRange <longrange@bouldercounty.gov>; Moeller, Shannon <MoellerS@bouldercolorado.gov> Subject: RE: CITY OF BOULDER REFERRAL AND REQUEST FOR COMMENT - Annexation and BVCP Amendment at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 South Boulder Rd Hi Shannon, These properties are designated as Area II and annexation is supported by the BVCP. Since the City has purchased these properties and the future of them has been established as being for public uses (be that open space, floodplain mitigation, etc.) it seems appropriate to update the future land use map to show that as the intended future. Changes to the Land Use Map such as this that are concurrent with rezoning and annexation may be considered at any time. To be eligible for a Land Use Map change, the proposed change: a) on balance, is consistent with the policies and overall intent of the comprehensive plan; b) would not have significant cross-jurisdictional impacts that may affect residents, properties or facilities outside the city; c) would not materially affect the land use and growth projections that were the basis of the comprehensive plan; d) does not materially affect the adequacy or availability of urban facilities and services to the immediate area or to the overall service area of the City of Boulder; e) would not materially affect the adopted Capital Improvements Program of the City of Boulder; and f) would not affect the Area II/Area III boundaries in the comprehensive plan. I see no conflict with these criteria from the proposed change to the Land Use Map. Within Area II, the BVCP provides for a Call Up to the BOCC for map changes occurring at rezoning & annexations on properties over 5 acres in size. However, section C on page 169 of the BVCP states “the call up provisions do not apply to enclaves, city-owned land, and properties along the western edge of the service area below the blue line.” Since these are City owned properties, the call up provision is not applicable. I hope this additional explanation is helpful. Thanks, Hannah L. Hippely, AICP | Long Range Planning Division Manager Boulder County Community Planning & Permitting Phone: Direct 720-564-2298 | Main 303-441-3930 hhippely@bouldercounty.gov Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 93 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS DATE OF COMMENTS: June 27, 2025 CASE MANAGER: Shannon Moeller LOCATION: 5399 KEWANEE DR, 5697 SOUTH BOULDER RD REVIEW TYPE: Annexation/Standard, BVCP Amendment REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008 APPLICANT: TINA BRIGGS, CITY OF BOULDER DESCRIPTION: Annexation and Initial Zoning of the city owned parcels at 5399 Kewanee Drive and 5697 South Boulder Road purchased in 2019 with an initial zoning of Public. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use Designation Change proposal to amend the land use designation on the 19 acre portion of the property west of 55th Street from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK U/O). I. REVIEW FINDINGS Additional information and revisions to the plan documents are required as indicated below. Revised plans must be submitted by 8/26/2025 for this application to remain active. Please contact staff with any questions or concerns. Staff is happy to meet with the applicant team prior to a resubmittal. II. CITY REQUIREMENTS The section below addresses issues that must be resolved prior to project approval. Legal Documents Julia Chase, 303-441-3052 1. Petition: Revise as shown on the marked-up version attached. 2. Map: Revise as shown on the marked-up version attached. 3. Survey: Upon resubmittal, provide an updated survey which has the delineation of wetland areas removed. (Note: The wetlands shown were not adopted.) 4. Annexation Impact Report: Revise this report to include the final version of the annexation map once it has been approved. Plan Documents Shannon Moeller, 303-441-3216 1. Please update the Impact Report attachments with an updated copy of the annexation map (see other staff comments/redlines). 2. Please update the references in the Impact Report and Written Statement to clarify the existing and proposed BVCP land use designations. The area west of 55th is currently BVCP Planning Area II and has a BVCP land use designation of "LR" (Low Density Residential). The area east of 55th is currently BVCP Planning Area II and has a BVCP land use designation of "OS-A" (Open Space, Acquired). Both areas would automatically become part of BVCP Planning Area I upon annexation. The area west of 55th is proposed to have the BVCP land use designation change to PK-U/O; the area east of 55th was previously updated and does not require a BVCP land use designation change (will remain OS-A). Please note that the reference in the prior review comments to a future change from Area I to Area III for the area east of 55th Street was an informational comment only; it is not possible or necessary to make a change to Area III for this part of the property as part of the current process, but could be done in the future as part of a larger map update. 3. For the Annexation Map, as described in other comments, the prior informational comment regarding Planning Area I/II/III was informational only in nature and not intended to change the configuration of the annexation map. Please Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 94 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS refer to staff redlines for updates to the map. Wetland Julie DeFoe, 303-441-4283 Wetland, Julie DeFoe, defoej@bouldercolorado.gov Prior to annexation, all stream, wetland, water bodies and buffer areas to be annexed shall be mapped and shall include a functional evaluation. The approved mapping and evaluation shall be adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. The applicant may EITHER: 1) Hire a wetlands ecologist to delineate the wetlands and complete a functional evaluation. After which, the applicant must apply for a Conditional Wetland Permit, and pay a $650 fee to the City of Boulder. OR 2) Apply for a Conditional Wetland permit and pay a $3,500 fee to the City of Boulder which the city will hire a consultant to delineate the wetlands and complete a functional evaluation. The approved mapping and evaluation shall be adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. 9-3-9(k)(2) B.R.C 1981 ****Update June 2025: A wetland application has not yet been received. III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS 1. Prior Informational Comments, Shannon Moeller, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov, 303-441-3216 Please refer to earlier review comment letter for prior informational comments. 2. NEXT STEPS, Shannon Moeller, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov, 303-441-3216 Revisions to the plan documents are required. Resubmittal materials that address the comments herein shall be uploaded through the “Attachments” tab in the CSS portal (https://energovcss.bouldercolorado.gov/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService/#/home) using the naming conventions in the Electronic Submittal Requirements for Development Review/ Plan case document available here: https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/1447/download?attachment. Resubmittals should have the following components: • A written response identifying all changes made, saved as a PDF file. (See requirements). • FULL set of electronic drawings and/or affected documentation addressing the review comments. (Named as specified in the requirements). • Revised plans must include the date of ALL revisions. These must be saved as PDFs. (See requirements). ***Please note that a separate WET application is required as a separate case number/submittal. Please be sure to upload the WET application documents as a separate submittal and not as part of the LUR applications. The application deadlines for the review track system can be found at https://bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop. Files shall be uploaded to the customer self service portal for resubmittals by 10 AM on the application deadline. IV. FEES Please note that the new 2024 application fee includes an initial and two subsequent reviews. If further substantive review is required following the third review, an additional fee will need to be paid for the fourth and each subsequent review. This additional fee does not apply for: Annexation/Initial Zoning, Concept Plan Review, BVCP land use designation change, Vacation Feasibility Study, Right-of-Way/Access Easement Vacation, or CDOT Access Permit. For 2023 or earlier cases, hourly billing still applies for reviewer time spent on any reviews following the initial review. V. APPROVAL CONDITIONS ON CASE 1. The applicant has submitted a petition for inclusion to the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and Municipal Subdistrict with an anticipated hearing date in July of 2026. The applicant is advised that no development which includes the necessity for water may be submitted until a signed court order of inclusion has been received. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 95 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS 2. Fees 1. Based on the application data supplied and the 2025 Schedule of Fees, the following fees will be due prior to the first reading of the annexation ordinance: Plant Investment Fees (PIF’s) for New Multi-Family Residential Stormwater $2.71/square foot of impervious area Existing Impervious Area: 1849 square feet $5010.79 3. The applicant is required to convey drainage from this site in a manner which does not adversely affect neighboring properties and matches historic conditions. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 96 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS Physical Address 1101 Arapahoe Ave Boulder, CO 80302 Mailing Address PO Box 791 Boulder, CO 80306-0791 BoulderPlanDevelop.net P: 303-441-1880 F: 303-441-4241 DATE OF COMMENTS: August 22, 2025 CASE MANAGER: Shannon Moeller LOCATION: 5399 KEWANEE DR REVIEW TYPE: Annexation/Standard REVIEW NUMBER: LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008 APPLICANT: TINA BRIGGS, CITY OF BOULDER DESCRIPTION: Annexation and Initial Zoning of the city owned parcels at 5399 Kewanee Drive and 5697 South Boulder Road purchased in 2019 with an initial zoning of Public. Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) Land Use Designation Change proposal to amend the land use designation on the 19 acre portion of the property west of 55th Street from Low Density Residential to Park, Urban and Other (PK U/O). I. REVIEW FINDINGS Corrections to the plan documents are required as indicated below. We recommend final copies of the requested documents be provided on the review track due at 10 a.m. on September 10, 2025 so that the proposal can move forward to public hearings following a final review. Please contact staff with any questions or concerns. II. CITY REQUIREMENTS The section below addresses issues that must be resolved prior to project approval. Legal Documents Julia Chase, 303-441-3052 1. Petition: Revise as shown on the marked-up version attached. 2. Map: Revise as shown on the marked-up version attached. 3. Legal Description with Corresponding Map (8.5 x 11 size): Upon resubmittal, please provide a Exhibit A to attach to the Ordinance which matches the final version of the legal description shown on the Annexation map. Wetland Julie DeFoe, 303-441-4283 Wetland, Julie DeFoe, defoej@bouldercolorado.gov Prior to annexation, all stream, wetland, water bodies and buffer areas to be annexed shall be mapped and shall include a functional evaluation. The approved mapping and evaluation shall be adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. The applicant may EITHER: 1) Hire a wetlands ecologist to delineate the wetlands and complete a functional evaluation. After which, the applicant must apply for a Conditional Wetland Permit, and pay a $650 fee to the City of Boulder. OR 2) Apply for a Conditional Wetland permit and pay a $3,500 fee to the City of Boulder which the city will hire a consultant to delineate the wetlands and complete a functional evaluation. The approved mapping and evaluation shall be adopted as an update to the regulatory maps as a part of the annexation ordinance. 9-3-9(k)(2) B.R.C 1981 ****Update 06/23/2025 A wetland application has not yet been received. ****Update 08/21/2025 The wetland application has been received. Revisions to the submitted application materials is required. III. INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 97 of 136 CITY OF BOULDER LAND USE REVIEW RESULTS AND COMMENTS Physical Address 1101 Arapahoe Ave Boulder, CO 80302 Mailing Address PO Box 791 Boulder, CO 80306-0791 BoulderPlanDevelop.net P: 303-441-1880 F: 303-441-4241 1. Prior Informational Comments, Shannon Moeller, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov, 303 -441-3216 Please refer to earlier review comment letter for prior informational comments. 2. NEXT STEPS, Shannon Moeller, moellers@bouldercolorado.gov, 303 -441-3216 Revisions to the plan documents are required. Resubmittal materials that address the comments herein shall be uploaded through the “Attachments” tab in the CSS portal (https://energovcss.bouldercolorado.gov/EnerGov_Prod/SelfService/#/home) using the naming conventions in the Electronic Submittal Requirements for Development Review/ Plan case document available here: https://bouldercolorado.gov/media/1447/download?attachment. Resubmittals should have the following components: • A written response identifying all changes made, saved as a PDF file. (See requirements). • FULL set of electronic drawings and/or affected documentation addressing the review comments. (Named as specified in the requirements). • Revised plans must include the date of ALL revisions. These must be saved as PDFs. (See requirements). The application deadlines for the review track system can be found at https://bouldercolorado.gov/plan-develop. Files shall be uploaded to the customer self service portal for resubmittals by 10 AM on the application deadline. IV. FEES Please note that the new 2024 application fee includes an initial and two subsequent reviews. If further substantive review is required following the third review, an additional fee will need to be paid for the fourth and each subsequent review. This additional fee does not apply for: Annexation/Initial Zoning, Concept Plan Review, BVCP land use designation change, Vacation Feasibility Study, Right-of-Way/Access Easement Vacation, or CDOT Access Permit. For 2023 or earlier cases, hourly billing still applies for reviewer time spent on any reviews following the initial review. V. APPROVAL CONDITIONS ON CASE The section below provides conditions that will need to be met if your project is approved. 1. The applicant has submitted a petition for inclusion to the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and Municipal Subdistrict with an anticipated hearing date in July of 2026. The applicant is advised that no development which includes the necessity for water may be submitted until a signed court order of inclusion has been received. 2. Fees 1. Based on the application data supplied and the 2025 Schedule of Fees, the following fees will be due prior to the first reading of the annexation ordinance: Plant Investment Fees (PIF’s) for New Multi-Family Residential Stormwater $2.71/square foot of impervious area Existing Impervious Area: 1849 square feet $5010.79 3. The applicant is required to convey drainage from this site in a manner which does not adversely affect neighboring properties and matches historic conditions. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 98 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: October 14, 2025 5:18 pm Browser: Chrome 141.0.0.0 / OS X IP Address: 73.203.31.139 Unique ID: 1389691725 Location: 39.9947, -105.2366 Name Jonah Seifer Email jseifer16@gmail.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) I'm interested in purchasing a property on Cimmaron Way, however I'm concerned about the potential changes in land use and management, as well as the implications of those changes on local groundwater and flood mitigation. I'd like to be updated when the city publishes new information about 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd, hosts public meetings, or conducts subsequent site analyses. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 99 of 136 From:Debra Flora To:5399 Kewanee Subject:CU Tennis on Hogan Pancost Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 3:56:45 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. City of Boulder, I have lived at 5492 Pueblo Place for 36 years. The building of the East Boulder Rec Center and subsequent soccer fields changed the under ground water situation and many houses in the area began to have water problems in their basements. Many water studies and flooding events have proven that this site is not suitable for development. Our neighborhood has been fighting this battle for over 27 years. I thought the issue of development was resolved with the last go round. I threw my file away or else I could give you exact dates of when this has been turned down for development in the past. Please research why development has been turned down multiple times in the past due to the high water table and the negative effects on existing properties. We absolutely do not need indoor tennis for CU on this site. There needs to be land, not asphalt, cement, etc for flooding issues in the area. Flooding is acerbated when there is no where for the water to be absorbed. The property directly to the east of this site is going to be developed further reducing undeveloped land to soak up water and there is almost always standing water on this site. To develop the Hogan Panscost property, without seeing the consequences from the approved development on the Peacock property, would be poor planning. There are many reasons to not develop this site; please dig into the records in existence from prior council meetings through the years. Thank you, Debra Flora 5492 Pueblo Place Boulder, CO 80303 303-579-3628 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 100 of 136 From:Suzanne De Lucia To:5399 Kewanee Subject:Hogan Pancost Tennis Courts Date:Monday, February 10, 2025 8:01:06 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Dear Boulder City Officials, It is disgraceful that you are undoing all of the environmental protections put in place when the City acquired the Hogan Pancost properties. There were supposed to be no permanent structures there due to ground water concerns. It is an inappropriate use of the property, but consistent with your ignoring the wants of the people in so many ways. Sincerely, Suzanne Suzanne M. De Lucia, CBI Fellow Of The IBBA Past President Front Range Business, Inc. 303-579-8988 sdelucia@frontrangebusiness.com www.frontrangebusiness.com Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 101 of 136 From:Robert Prostko To:"Robert Prostko" via sebna Cc:5399 Kewanee; sebna-private; Kevin Catherine Carson; Steven Telleen; SEBNA Subject:Hogan Pancost indoor tennis courts development Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 5:26:15 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. I’m referring to the proposed Hogan Pancost development of parking lots, pickle ball courts and CU indoor tennis courts and the resulting flooding of our basements Best regards, Robert Prostko On Feb 7, 2025, at 10:38 PM, 'Robert Prostko' via sebna <sebna@googlegroups.com> wrote: Everyone who is opposed to this fill in /development should send their opinion to: 5399kewanee@BoulderColorado.gov ….AND…. Go online to: Bldr.fyi/3Cud8d6 and fill in the simple for with your opinion of this proposed development. Best regards, Robert Prostko Colorado Shades & Sunesta Awnings Motorized Shades Inc 303-919-5156 Robert@ColoradoShades.com www.ColoradoShades.com (awnings & exterior shades) www.MotorizedShadesInc.com (interior shades) “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” On Feb 7, 2025, at 10:23 PM, Robert Prostko <robertprostko@mac.com> wrote: Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 102 of 136 Hello City of Boulder, We fought for 20 years to NOT allow this land to be developed in order to keep our basements from being flooded. I do NOT want it to be filled in and paved over for parking lots, pickle ball courts and/or indoor tennis courts for the University of Colorado. The University of Colorado should build their indoor tennis courts next to their existing tennis courts on the parcel known as CU SOUTH. Best regards, Robert Prostko 5454 Omaha Place Boulder, CO 80303 303-919-5156 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 103 of 136 From:sylvanfireswan To:5399 Kewanee Subject:Hogan-Pancost Development Plans - Infrastructure Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 4:23:30 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. It is widely thought that the CU/City development is an excuse to access City infrastructure under the artificial turf soccar fields for the Kent development. Many people in the S. Boulder neighborhoods observed the City (in the middle of the night) installing development infrastructure under the artificial turf soccar fields. Of course, the development wasn’t approved so this was fraudulently done. This is the reason for “build baby build” at the Kent property and now the proposed CU tennis facility. Why don’t you just come clean about the illegal infrastructure? Come clean about paying your contractors $10 million dollars to upgrade the dog park to “bring the dogs water” and they still don’t have water? Of course everyone knows that that money wasn’t spent on new fences at the dog park. Rest assured that when further plans to develop so that you can utilize the under-soccar-field infrastructure, the evidence will come out. Midnight installations were videotaped by neighbors who purchased infrared equipment for the purpose. These videos were widely distributed. I personally don’t have a copy, but saw footage when neighbors were preparing for a development review before the City bought the property. Expect all to come out. Forensic accountants also have evidence to present, either in the public hearing or in lawsuits. Simply look for another piece of property that’s already paved over for your tennis facility development and let the infrastructure under the soccar fields go unused. The property is rare ecologically and important to the Arapaho and Cheyenne. They wintered along S.Boulder creek to the CU South area. With all of the investigations going on now at the Federal level trickling down to the local communities, it will come out should you decide to go ahead with these developments and creating and using the illegal soccar field infrastructure. Catherine Sundvall 5419 Illini Way Boulder, CO 80303 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 104 of 136 From:Lynn Segal To:5399 Kewanee Subject:Hogan-Pancost development plans. Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 9:45:24 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Do not infill/ develop/ build hardscape parking and recreational facilities - pickleball, tennis courts on to Hogan Pancost increasing flooding risk and destruction of the built environment and disturbing the permeable natural floodplain for critters, delicate wildlife and rare plant life in the ancient ecosystem. WE owe reparations to the native inhabitants that is entrusted to them. Also do not build more of the same at Peacock Pl. in the name of providing housing impacting the carrying capacity and population of the Boulder Valley while violating the principals and goals of the BVCP, now in process of being updated. Lynn Segal 303-434-8128 24/7 Dewey and 6th Boulder. Here in 1968 to '60 and '87 to present. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 105 of 136 From:Robert Prostko To:5399 Kewanee Cc:SEBNA; sebna-private; Kevin & Catherine Carson Subject:Negative vote Date:Friday, February 7, 2025 10:22:58 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Hello City of Boulder, We fought for 20 years to NOT allow this land to be developed in order to keep our basements from being flooded. I do NOT want it to be filled in and paved over for parking lots, pickle ball courts and/or indoor tennis courts for the University of Colorado. The University of Colorado should build their indoor tennis courts next to their existing tennis courts on the parcel known as CU SOUTH. Best regards, Robert Prostko 5454 Omaha Place Boulder, CO 80303 303-919-5156 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 106 of 136 From:Scott Ortman To:5399 Kewanee Subject:Opinion on the proposed development Date:Sunday, February 9, 2025 9:05:10 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Hello, I am writing as a homeowner to express concern regarding the proposed development of the Hogan Pancost property. My home is located immediately north of the proposed development area, on Omaha Place just north of the EBCC playing field. When the city raised those fields and installed turf, it changed the way groundwater flows through the area, such that I now have subsurface flows from spring through fall against the foundations of my house, which I must remove using a sump pump. The typical rate of pumping is 5 gallons per minute. My sump pump operates basically the entire time the legacy irrigation ditches are flowing. It is clear that the subsurface flow is beneath the playing fields. Essentially there are no plants to absorb the water so it flows downhill to the properties on Omaha Place. I am concerned about the proposed development making the situation worse by further removing water absorbing plants and creating hard surfaces that would reduce evaporation. I would urge you to make sure any such development includes remediating measures to improve the water drainage problems in the area. I think re-routing or closing the irrigation ditches as part of of the project would be a positive step. Another would be excavating a French drain along the current concrete path at the north end of the EBCC playing field so that the groundwater is shunted away from homes. In short, I am not inherently against development of the property, but am concerned that if it occurs in the absence of attention being given to groundwater issues it will make the situation worse, opening up the city to legal action from homeowners who won't have a choice. If you would like to discuss the groundwater issues we are experiencing further I would be happy to do that. I would suggest arranging a time to visit in the spring, once the irrigation ditches are flowing again. Sincerely, Scott Ortman Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 107 of 136 5478 Omaha Place Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 108 of 136 From:Robert Prostko To:lynnsegal7 Cc:5399 Kewanee Subject:Re: Hogan-Pancost development plans. Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 10:47:11 AM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Hear here! Best regards, Robert Prostko Colorado Shades & Sunesta Awnings Motorized Shades Inc 303-919-5156 Robert@ColoradoShades.com www.ColoradoShades.com (awnings & exterior shades) www.MotorizedShadesInc.com (interior shades) “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” On Feb 8, 2025, at 9:45 AM, Lynn Segal <lynnsegal7@hotmail.com> wrote:  Do not infill/ develop/ build hardscape parking and recreational facilities - pickleball, tennis courts on to Hogan Pancost increasing flooding risk and destruction of the built environment and disturbing the permeable natural floodplain for critters, delicate wildlife and rare plant life in the ancient ecosystem. WE owe reparations to the native inhabitants that is entrusted to them. Also do not build more of the same at Peacock Pl. in the name of providing housing impacting the carrying capacity and population of the Boulder Valley while violating the principals and goals of the BVCP, now in process of being updated. Lynn Segal 303-434-8128 24/7 Dewey and 6th Boulder. Here in 1968 to '60 and '87 to present. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sebna" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sebna+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sebna@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sebna/CY5PR11MB6319F99C14CAE5C5C0F9025591F02%40CY5PR11MB6319.namprd11.prod.outlook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 109 of 136 From:sylvanfireswan To:lynnsegal7 Cc:5399 Kewanee Subject:Re: Hogan-Pancost development plans. Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 1:32:54 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. 1000% Beautifully said Catherine On Sat, Feb 8, 2025 at 9:45 AM Lynn Segal <lynnsegal7@hotmail.com> wrote: Do not infill/ develop/ build hardscape parking and recreational facilities - pickleball, tennis courts on to Hogan Pancost increasing flooding risk and destruction of the built environment and disturbing the permeable natural floodplain for critters, delicate wildlife and rare plant life in the ancient ecosystem. WE owe reparations to the native inhabitants that is entrusted to them. Also do not build more of the same at Peacock Pl. in the name of providing housing impacting the carrying capacity and population of the Boulder Valley while violating the principals and goals of the BVCP, now in process of being updated. Lynn Segal 303-434-8128 24/7 Dewey and 6th Boulder. Here in 1968 to '60 and '87 to present. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sebna" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to sebna+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to sebna@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sebna/CY5PR11MB6319F99C14CAE5C5C0F9025591F02%40CY5PR11MB6319.namprd11.prod.outlook.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 110 of 136 From:sylvanfireswan To:5399 Kewanee Subject:Hogan-Pancost Development Plans Date:Saturday, February 8, 2025 1:56:00 PM External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. In 2010, we proposed a Botanic Gardens, unique in the world to highlight Native American food forest practices and to give the Arapaho and Cheyenne a place to share beautiful aspects of their traditions while creating a harmonious environment for the Federally Threatened Preble’s Jumping mice and leopard frog. Why are these animals so important to the plains Indians, especially the Cheyenne? https://youtu.be/-lhIedFeALs?si=-2ULTJHjLYlvqjb8 Both tribes long to be welcomed back in their homeland of Boulder. Obviously, the Ft. Chambers fort was built to prevent them from returning to their ancestral wintering grounds along S. Boulder Creek. The Hogan Pancost property is the only piece that wasn’t “spoken for”, tied up by CU South plans. We have been talking with the City for years about creating a Botanic Gardens, taking advantage of the inground water, perfect for a demonstration of an indigenous food forest. Should the City proceed with a violation of the social contract and promise that this property would NOT be developed, expect lawsuits to be filed, including those that expose how the property was stolen and why this particular piece is sacred to the Cheyenne and Arapaho. The tribes do NOT authorize this last piece of ancestral homeland to be paved over and developed for CU girls to play tennis in the Winter. There are other many other already paved places to build or just cover the existing tennis courts and repurpose for pickleball courts. BOULDER COUNTY LAND AND TITLES It is true that this happened a long time ago. However, there are undisputable facts that the title to the land was being issued in Boulder County well before any legal transfers could have taken place. Boulder city maps show the land being portioned off and sold in 1859. This was NOT legally possible. Today, as we look back on the unrelenting fraud and illegal land transactions, we must remember the honor of the American People today who learn about these injustices and have a moral duty to correct the Past. Failure to do so undermines the moral authority of every American living today. Catherine Sundvall 5419 Illini Way Boulder, CO 80303 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 111 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 8, 2025 12:33 am Browser: Mobile Safari 18.3 / iOS IP Address: 67.177.233.161 Unique ID: 1313067892 Location: 39.6667, -105.0854 Name Robert Prostko Email RobertProstko@mac.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) We fought for 20 years to keep this parcel from being filled in and developed in order to keep our basements from flooding. I do NOT want this parcel to be filled in and developed as a parking lot, pickle ball courts and/or indoor tennis courts for the University of Colorado. The University of Colorado should build their indoor tennis courts next to their existing tennis courts on the parcel known as CU South. Robert Prostko 5454 Omaha Place Boulder, CO 80303 303-919-5156 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 112 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 8, 2025 12:04 pm Browser: Safari 17.10 / OS X IP Address: 71.205.225.197 Unique ID: 1313133015 Location: 40.0373, -105.279 Name Dennis Dupuis Email eyeofbr@yahoo.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) Hello, I just finished reading about plans to put in pickleball courts that will be about 100 yards from my house, I live on Illini Way. When Hogan Pancost was sold I was under the impression that that area would be used for flood containment. Did everyone forget that we are in an area prone to flooding? Aside from the flood issues, am I also going to hear pickleball balls knocking the pavement all day? Not fair, please reconsider your usage of this property. Dennis Dupuis Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 113 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 8, 2025 12:08 pm Browser: Mobile Safari 18.1.1 / iOS IP Address: 73.217.92.162 Unique ID: 1313133702 Location: 39.9947, -105.2366 Name Tommy Feldman Email tommyfeld@mac.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) Please add me to the list to receive information. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 114 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 8, 2025 12:26 pm Browser: Safari 17.10 / OS X IP Address: 71.205.225.197 Unique ID: 1313136733 Location: 40.0373, -105.279 Name Dennis Dupuis Email eyeofbr@yahoo.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) Hello, I just finished reading about plans to put in pickleball courts that will be about 100 yards from my house, I live on Illini Way. When Hogan Pancost was sold I was under the impression that that area would be used for flood containment. Did everyone forget that we are in an area prone to flooding? Aside from the flood issues, am I also going to hear pickleball balls knocking the pavement all day? Not fair, please reconsider your usage of this property. Dennis Dupuis Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 115 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 8, 2025 2:22 pm Browser: Chrome 132.0.0.0 / Windows IP Address: 70.59.24.216 Unique ID: 1313154666 Location: 39.8401, -105.0027 Name Gordon McCurry Email gmccurry@mccurryhydro.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) I am a professional hydrologist and approximately 10 years ago studied the impacts of development on the former Hogan Pancost property. My evaluation showed that development would likely lead to increased flooding in the adjacent neighborhoods, from both surface water and groundwater. The City Council agreed with those findings and purchased the property so it could be used for flood control purposes. Paving over portions of this property for tennis courts, pickle ball courts and parking lots will significantly reduce the flood-dampening effect of this land and will lead to the increased flood risk that its purchase was intended to help mitigate. I urge you follow City Council's previous intention for this land and to not allow it to be developed as is currently proposed. I would be happy to meet with staff to discuss my findings in more detail. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 116 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 9, 2025 10:56 pm Browser: Chrome 132.0.0.0 / Windows IP Address: 75.71.246.79 Unique ID: 1313403695 Location: 40.0142, -105.2853 Name Wendy Meyer Email wendysmeyer@yahoo.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) I do not support the city annexing the land at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S. Boulder Rd so it can pave it over to make indoor tennis courts and pickleball courts that would be shared with the University of Colorado Boulder. CU Boulder has CU South where it may develop its own courts. Paving the land at 5399 Kewanee Dr. and 5697 South Boulder Rd would adversely affect the water table and add to flooding issues that nearby residents already experience. Moreover, paving this area would also endanger the Preble's Meadow Jumping Mouse. Please leave the land as it is so everyone in the city can enjoy its natural amenities. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 117 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 10, 2025 7:22 pm Browser: Firefox 134.0 / Windows IP Address: 174.29.126.108 Unique ID: 1313711350 Location: 39.6796, -104.9626 Name Eric Miller Email eric.miller@colorado.edu Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) I live right next to the property 5335 Kewanee Dr and would like to see the plan submitted for the property that shows proposed facilities, access and parking. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 118 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 11, 2025 10:11 am Browser: Firefox 134.0 / Windows IP Address: 208.131.130.100 Unique ID: 1313863255 Location: 37.751, -97.822 Name Vincent Wayland Email vince@thewaylands.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) As a nearby property owner/trustee who experienced the flooding in 2013, I strongly protest the development of this wetland and protected species area. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 119 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 16, 2025 3:22 pm Browser: Chrome 133.0.0.0 / Windows IP Address: 67.164.173.62 Unique ID: 1315465369 Location: 40.0373, -105.279 Name Karen Farrelly Email karenfarrelly@hotmail.com Share your thoughts on the annexation and BVCP land use designation for the property at 5399 Kewanee Dr and 5697 S Boulder Rd (LUR2025-00003, LUR2025-00008) I am glad that this land is under consideration to remove the residential status because it seems more suitable as a natural wetland than a building site. In the rainy season, water levels increase in the area and it becomes sort of a field of bog for frogs in the area. I also see it used often by grazing deer and birds of prey or bobcats who are hunting for food. I hope the prarie dogs return there too. I'd hate to see that land taken away from the wild animals, especially since there's already the Peacock Place subdivision going in across the street that's taking away fields and trees used by the wildlife -- including owls who I hear roosting in the trees around that land. Thank you for putting in a request for the 5399 Kewanee and 5697 South Boulder Rd parcels to change from residential to Public. I am hoping it remains as true, pure open space with this zone change, though. The description of the newly proposed zone of Public mentions that facilities could be located on the land and that concerns me if someone could target it for building something like a public tennis court or sports field. I hope that if the zoning changes to Public, the land remains free of physical public facilities like that -- keeping it open land would be preferred for the wildlife. And keeping the old farm buildings in place would help honor of the land's farming past. If it does get used more for public use, I hope it would only be for something like nature walks or field trips by local students studying the front range (animal/plant study) or used by grazing cows during seasons when the land is firm enough and dry enough for them to walk on. Thanks for the mailed notice of the planning and development application. I also saw the sign about it posted by the land when I walked my dog along the sidewalk by that area. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 120 of 136 Form Name: 5399 Kewanee DR and 5697 S Boulder Rd Feedback Submission Time: February 23, 2025 9:50 pm Browser: Firefox 135.0 / Windows IP Address: 128.117.68.226 Unique ID: 1317620096 Location: 39.9241, -105.0639 Name Holger Voemel Email Holger.Voemel@gmx.net Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 121 of 136 From: Scott Ortman <scott.ortman@colorado.edu> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 12:41 PM To: 'Robert Prostko' via sebna <sebna@googlegroups.com>; Jeff McWhirter <jeff.mcwhirter@gmail.com>; Robert Prostko <robertprostko@mac.com> Cc: sebna-private <sebna-private@googlegroups.com>; Steven Telleen <stelleen@comcast.net>; parks- rec <parks-rec@bouldercolorado.gov>; Meschuk, Chris <meschukc@bouldercolorado.gov>; Rivera- Vandermyde, Nuria <rivera-vandermyden@bouldercolorado.gov>; boulderplanningboard <BoulderPlanningBoard@bouldercolorado.gov>; Carper, Adrian <carpera@bouldercolorado.gov>; Johnson, Kristofer <JohnsonK3@bouldercolorado.gov>; Woulf, Mark <WoulfM@bouldercolorado.gov>; Contact Climate Intiatives <ContactClimateInitiatives@bouldercolorado.gov> Subject: Re: Flood mitigation by paving over for tennis courts???!! External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Thanks Robert for these photos! This is why I think it would be a good idea to push the city to dig a french drain down to the water table along the path between the west EBCC playing fleld and Omaha Place to divert the water that fiows down there away from homes and into the sewer system. The city needs to mitigate the groundwater consequences of past development as part of the new development. My sump pump removes about 5 gallons a minute from beneath my basement when we have big rains, and it runs spring through fall every year. Scott Ortman Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 122 of 136 From: 'Robert Prostko' via sebna <sebna@googlegroups.com> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 11:25 AM To: 'Robert Prostko' via sebna <sebna@googlegroups.com>; Jeff McWhirter <jeff.mcwhirter@gmail.com> Cc: sebna-private <sebna-private@googlegroups.com>; Steven Telleen <stelleen@comcast.net>; Boulder Parks Rec <parks-rec@bouldercolorado.gov>; meschukc@bouldercolorado.gov <meschukc@bouldercolorado.gov>; Boulder City Manager <rivera- vandermyden@bouldercolorado.gov>; BoulderPlanningBoard@bouldercolorado.gov <BoulderPlanningBoard@bouldercolorado.gov>; Boulder Ecosystem Management <carpera@bouldercolorado.gov>; Boulder Comprehensive Planning <JohnsonK3@bouldercolorado.gov>; WoulfM@bouldercolorado.gov <WoulfM@bouldercolorado.gov>; Boulder Climate Initiatives <ContactClimateInitiatives@bouldercolorado.gov>; Robert Prostko <sebna@googlegroups.com> Subject: Re: Flood mitigation by paving over for tennis courts???!! [External email - use caution] So the City of Boulder along with the University of Colorado value tennis courts over our fiooded basements???!!! Hope they have paid for great liability insurance!!!! If they flll in this designated FLOOD PLAIN with 4 feet of gravel topped with asphalt, concrete and an indoor tennis court (basically for the sole use of CU’s tennis teams…..NOT for a.. WHERE DO THEY THINK ALL OF THE WATER WILL GO???!!! Especially during extreme weather events happening more recently !!! Best regards, Robert Prostko Colorado Shades & Sunesta Awnings Motorized Shades Inc 303-919-5156 Robert@ColoradoShades.com www.ColoradoShades.com (awnings & exterior shades) www.MotorizedShadesInc.com (interior shades) “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 123 of 136 From: Robert Prostko <robertprostko@mac.com> Sent: Thursday, April 3, 2025 11:11 AM To: sebna-private <sebna-private@googlegroups.com>; Robert Prostko <sebna@googlegroups.com>; Steven Telleen <stelleen@comcast.net>; parks-rec <parks- rec@bouldercolorado.gov>; Meschuk, Chris <meschukc@bouldercolorado.gov>; Rivera- Vandermyde, Nuria <rivera-vandermyden@bouldercolorado.gov>; boulderplanningboard <BoulderPlanningBoard@bouldercolorado.gov>; Carper, Adrian <carpera@BoulderColorado.gov>; Johnson, Kristofer <JohnsonK3@BoulderColorado.gov>; Woulf, Mark <WoulfM@BoulderColorado.gov>; Contact Climate Intiatives <ContactClimateInitiatives@BoulderColorado.gov> Subject: Flood mitigation by paving over for tennis courts???!! External Sender Notice This email was sent by an external sender. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 124 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 125 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 126 of 136 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 127 of 136 Best regards, Robert Prostko Colorado Shades & Sunesta Awnings Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 128 of 136 Motorized Shades Inc 303-919-5156 Robert@ColoradoShades.com www.ColoradoShades.com (awnings & exterior shades) www.MotorizedShadesInc.com (interior shades) “The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of low price is forgotten” Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 129 of 136 From: No Reply <noreply@bouldercolorado.gov> Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2025 3:05 PM To: Council <Council@bouldercolorado.gov>; ContactCoB <ContactCoB@bouldercolorado.gov>; Mueller, Brad <MuellerB@bouldercolorado.gov>; Pannewig, Hella <Pannewigh@bouldercolorado.gov>; Ferro, Charles <FerroC@bouldercolorado.gov>; Johnson, Kristofer <JohnsonK3@bouldercolorado.gov>; Causa, Julie <CausaJ@bouldercolorado.gov>; Stanek, Cate <StanekC@bouldercolorado.gov> Subject: Karen Farrelly :- Planning and Development Services Preferred Form Language: English / Inglés Name: Karen Farrelly Organization (optional): Email: karenfarrelly@hotmail.com Phone (optional): (408) 529-8481 My question or feedback most closely relates to the following topic (please choose one): Planning and Development Services Comment, question or feedback: In the past, I wrote in about the planned tennis courts development on current open space near 55th in south boulder. I am writing again to express more concerns about the project and lack of informing residents directly about the tennis facility plans. I am concerned due to the lack of notification to residents in the area about the plan for the land. Shouldn't post cards or mailed letters be sent to those who live nearby due to significant change and quality of like impact this project will bring? Currently, there are small signs hidden stuck in the ground and partially in the grass on 55th street. Neither mentions the tennis court facility plans. Just the land rezoning and now a wetland conditional permit are mentioned. The first rezoning sign wasn't readable the past few months due to fading in the sun! I pass by current tennis courts at East Boulder rec center multiple times a week. There are never fully used; 2 to 3 courts are empty each time. Why are more courts needed in the open space along 55th? The court facility planned for the area on 55th (what is current wetland/old farmland) will only serve the university and other folks who play tennis or pickleball. I feel the need for courts has been overstated and will have negative impacts on nature and residents living in this area already. It seems like there are many commercial or industrial sites closer to the university or even existing university land where this build would be better suited. Would you want a commercial tennis/training facility to pop up across the street or down the block from your homes? I don't. I worry about the impact on water flow and drainage due to ground and water run off disruptions. I STRONGLY worry about the loss of habit loss for birds, frogs, toads, bobcats, deer, and wild turkey who use the land. I worry about the loss of vegetation and addition of hard artifical surfaces. We have already lost multiple trees and grassland in this area due to the Peacock Place subdivision Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 130 of 136 deolition and utility work -- many more trees are being chainsawed down today as I type this. It's disappointing and sad. I worry about the impact of new traffic and sounds from the facility. Will there be traffic pattern studies done on the impact of cars moving / turning from south boulder road off 55th and vice versa? I do not want to hear more traffic or people playing tennis so close to my home. Will the city or court builders address noise polution for affected home owners due to a commerical facility be added to what was previosly residential zoned land and what is currently open natural space? Yesterday, I saw a unique Thrasher bird sitting on a fencepost in the open space and feeding on bugs flying about the wetland. The tennis facility project takes away natural resources for creatures like that and replaces it with hard surfaces and noise. That bird and many other creatures will lose food and water sources. My neighbors, rec center/park users, and I will lose a source of tranquility that many of us walk by daily. I strongly wish the city and university would reconsider this project and choose a more suitable location. Karen Farrelly 113 Mineola Ct Boulder, CO 80303 Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 131 of 136 From: Jeff McWhirter <jeff.mcwhirter@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, August 2, 2025 2:21 PM To: Defoe, Julie <defoej@bouldercolorado.gov>; Moeller, Shannon <moellers@bouldercolorado.gov>; Dalton, Tina <BriggsT@bouldercolorado.gov>; Karen Farrelly <karenfarrelly@hotmail.com>; Steven <stelleen@comcast.net> Subject: Hogan Pancost wetland permitting process Hi Julie and Sharon, My neighbor Karen Farrelly gave me your email and said you are heading up the wetlands permitting process for the Hogan Pancost property. We are going to meet with Tina Dalton later this month to discuss the project but perhaps you could answer some questions. We have raised some issues about the wetlands study that was performed last year - https://ramadda.org/repository/a/hoganpancost_tennis_courts In particular the claim that the current mapped wetlands (7+ acres) that are noted in the report are somehow not long term wetlands and should not be considered for future wetlands designation. The site above provides ample documentation as to the long history of wetlands on the property. Furthermore, it appears that a decision was made on the part of the City to dry up those wetlands prior to the current wetlands designation and annexation process. Who actually made that decision and is that decision aligned with the overall City of Boulder policy regarding wetlands on City property? Perhaps one or both of you would like to be included in our meeting with Tina? We are available after August 12th Thanks Jeff Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 132 of 136 From: Karen Farrelly <karenfarrelly@hotmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2025 9:51 AM To: Dalton, Tina <daltont@bouldercolorado.gov>; Defoe, Julie <defoej@bouldercolorado.gov>; Moeller, Shannon <moellers@bouldercolorado.gov> Subject: Wetland Study for Permit Rezoning on Hogan land Hello, I have written to a number of city departments about a tennis court development plan near the East Boulder rec center and the land bought by the city for fiood zone management. I am writing to you because I saw your name on some wetland conditional permit paperwork linked to the related rezoning project. I have a few questions about the wetland studies. These questions are driven by one of the many concerns I have about the tennis courts project and I wondered if you know the answers: 1. Will the wetland studies be done across both hot and cooler days and during different times of day (morning, afternoon, evenings)? 2. Will the wetland studies be done across multiple seasons? Not just the summer and during peak times of daylight (I have only seen people walking the property in recent weeks on hotter days)? I have seen ponds with frogs or toads developing in parts of the land being studied in past years even after some irrigation water further upstream from it had been redirected. This season and in the winter, I see birds resembling Crissal Thrashers fiying around to catch bugs over the land. 3. Does the wetland study count species and vegetation across different seasons? Is there a way for residents to share pictures with the wetland study team of species they see using the land? I walk by the area weekly and see different animals/species using it depending on the season. 4. Will they conduct studies at times when water is AND isn't fiowing in the culvert that exists in front of the house to the south of the open land? IF the city recently redirected some water further upstream to reduce what fiows in front of the house I'm speaking of, where is that water fiowing to now? Usually there is a constant creek-like stream of water fiowing down the cement culvert in front of the house south of the land being studied. The water fiows toward the land being studied then turns west to run along the south edge of the open land between the house's property line and the open land. The water wasn't fiowing on the day I saw people walking the project land a couple weeks ago, but the week after there was some water fiowing into that culvert again in the section closest to the land being studied. 5. If the tennis project moves ahead, will the few protected acres to the East of 55th be protected from construction traffic and supply staging? Will that land have the damaged vegetation caused by construction parking and supply staging for 2024/25 trail developments restored to typical, healthier vegetation conditions that existed pre- Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 133 of 136 construction? That use left some fiattened dirt areas in the center and area near the farm gate that opens into the fleld. 6. How will the proposed project impact or disrupt fiood zone management in that area? Regards, Karen Farrelly 113 Mineola Ct, 408-529-8481 PS — here is some of my email sent to other city departments with one of my arguments against the rezoning and tennis courts, for context about my above questions: Building courts and a parking lot for it will have negative impacts on nature and residents living in this area already. I worry STRONGLY about the loss of habit for birds, frogs, toads, bobcats, deer, and wild turkey who use it now. I worry about the loss of vegetation and addition of hard artiflcial surfaces. Added lighting for the facility will negatively impact the quality of dark sky for people and nature at night. We have already lost multiple trees and grassland in this area due to the nearby Peacock Place subdivision's land demolition and utility prep work -- many more trees are being chain-sawed down this week as I type this email. It's disappointing and sad. Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 134 of 136 From: No Reply <noreply@bouldercolorado.gov> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2025 8:38 AM To: Council <Council@bouldercolorado.gov>; ContactCoB <ContactCoB@bouldercolorado.gov>; Mueller, Brad <MuellerB@bouldercolorado.gov>; Pannewig, Hella <Pannewigh@bouldercolorado.gov>; Ferro, Charles <FerroC@bouldercolorado.gov>; Johnson, Kristofer <JohnsonK3@bouldercolorado.gov>; Causa, Julie <CausaJ@bouldercolorado.gov>; Stanek, Cate <StanekC@bouldercolorado.gov> Subject: Karen Farrelly :- Planning and Development Services Preferred Form Language: English / Inglés Name: Karen Farrelly Organization (optional): Email: karenfarrelly@hotmail.com Phone (optional): (408) 529-8481 My question or feedback most closely relates to the following topic (please choose one): Planning and Development Services Comment, question or feedback: I have written previously about my concerns for rezoning current open space and fiood zone management land in southeast boulder (rezoning that would unfortunately allow it to be developed for new tennis court and pickleball facilities). I am writing with a few additional concerns and ask you to not proceed with rezoning. I am also writing with ideas for alternative locations to use if more courts are truly needed. I ask the city council, parks and rec department, and planning department to consider other locations for this project and to study the matter more before moving ahead with any court system expansion. Below are my concerns and a list of my ideas for other locations to use for new courts. New Concern 1: The tennis plan was developed WITHOUT advance input from the general public. I read the plan many times and it appears like the tennis community, pickleball community, and a company that maintains courts were the drivers of the plan and the people targeted for direct input. This is a biased approach and excludes the general public from input about land use and how to further enhance our treasured rec centers. It also excludes or does not comprehensively engage people who live near the selected court system sights while expecting those people to bear the burden of new sources of noise and traffic and to bear the burden of loss of a serene naural habitat currently home to many species of wild animals and birds. New Concern 2: I question the lack of current public courts sited in the tennis plan. I ask the city and parks department to do a current comprehensive observation of the current public courts to judge how many are currently in use and how many are typically available for use. I live near current courts at East Boulder Rec Center, where you plan to add over a dozen new courts. I pass by after work and on weekends during my walks. I usually see at least half or more courts open and not in use. This includes a recent weeknight at 5:30 where only one court was used. This past Saturday Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 135 of 136 midday, only 3 courts were used. I would ask the city to flrst consider a system to better advertise empty courts so members of the public can easily locate and utilize them rather than build more courts. Alternate Ideas: 1. Encourage private business to repurpose currently vacant lots and buildings in office parks or industrial parks. Or, have the city, university, and parks dept consider leasing and repurposing those spaces. Tax revenue and small businesses growth could beneflt from this. 2. A case study to model after might be the new Relish Food Hall / Pickleball on McCaslin that was created from a space formerly part of the Ascent church building in Louisville. 3. Use the unleased space in the new build across from Panera Bread at 29th street mall. Parking garages exist nearby. Would also drive business to other parts of the mall. 4. Use the vacant or underutilized office buildings east of Foothills/157 bordered on north by the rail lines and by the creek then Arapahoe to the south (the buildings north and slightly west of the hospital). 5. Use office buildings or lots within the business centers south of Valmont and east of 55th (complex where FedEx Center exists). 6. Use the university land where existing university courts are at in south Boulder near 36. 7. Use the university land on east campus that's currently used for solar panels. Build the indoor/outdoor courts there and put the solar panels on the roof). This is the land along Foothills/157 between Arapahoe and Colorado. 8. Build a second story or partial story on top of the east wing of the East Boulder Rec center. House the pickleball courts there. 9. Use the basketball courts at East Boulder rec for evening tennis/pickleball hours. 10. Move the sand volleyball courts at East Boulder rec to the grassy area east of the soccer flelds. Move the playground there too. Put the new court building on space once used by the courts and playground. 11. Use thevacant hardware store at Table Meas shopping center for pickleball courts or use the vacant building next to Chase bank in the same shopping center. 12. Use open land around the baseball flelds that exist near Western Disposal and other businesses in the area bordered by Butte Mill Rd, Stazio Dr, and 63rd St. 13. Use the land at the demolished 1st Bank Center. PLEASE do not rezone the land to allow tennis court and parking lot development ideas. Please leave the remaining open space on 55th in South Boulder in the former Hogan-Pancost land as open natural space. Please keep this as a tranquil nature space for the current species that live there and for humans like me who walk by it daily to decompress and appreciate nature. Or, if you can't leave the land as is.....consider softer use projects that don't demo the wild habitat — like use it for a nature study or grazing animal study area (study wildflre mitigation beneflts from them) or restore it to the native prairie state to help encourage understanding and respect for nature and its habitat by people of all ages. Thank you, Karen Item 5A - 5399 Kewanee Annexation Page 136 of 136