Lemons PropertyDuring the 2005 BVCP review process the owners of the Lemons property petitioned to move that parcel back into Area II. The City Planning Staff, City Planning Board and the City Council turned down that request. During this process City planning staff wrote the following:
The conclusions in the study were that this area is unsuitable for extensive urban development. The general area has some of the most sensitive habitat among Area II. Of major concern for this area is the impact of residential uses on several species of concern and two species listed on the Federal Endangered Species List in this area. Domestic cats have been found to have one of the most significant impacts on native bird and mouse populations. Further residential land use in this area could impact protection of the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse as well as several grassland bird species using this area.In Winter 2006 the City Staff wrote the following as part of their response to the Lemons/Hempstead family's request to move the parcel to Area II:The wetlands to the east of the site are largely dependent on the high groundwater levels in the area. Further alteration of the local hydrology could impact the habitat on these properties as well as the adjacent Open Space.
In addition, the ground water level of the site is high and site drainage would be a problem. Underdraining residential units for basements would seriously impact the wetlands throughout the area.
Staff is not recommending approval of the request for the following reasons:In this same report staff goes on to say:The site is part of a larger area that was determined as unsuitable for extensive urban development during the 2000 major update to the BVCP.
Development of the site could have negative impacts on a large contiguous wetland system on the properties to the east.
Residential development at Low Density Residential densities would add to the cumulative impacts to the rare and sensitive wetland habitat on the Open Space in the area, which is a state-designated natural area and supports two species listed on the federal endangered species list.
Preliminary hydrology for the South Boulder Creek Flood Study suggests a possible increase in the size of the floodplain on the property. In addition, it is unknown whether or not this site will play a role in flood mitigation.
55 th St. is an existing and logical edge to the city.
The western edge of a large wet meadow system is located on a small portion of the south end of the property and on the adjacent property to the east. This wetland area is one of the last undeveloped significant floodplain habitats in the urban area. These wetlands are hydrologically connected to a highly sensitive wetland habitat on the Open Space property along the South Boulder Creek floodplain.We agree with the City's decision as to the Lemons/Suits property. Now, lets look at how this parcel compares to the Hogan/Pancost property.The Open Space and Mountain Parks properties north and south of Baseline in this area are designated as a Colorado State Natural Area due to a mosaic of high quality wetlands, wet meadows and mesic grasslands, including plains riparian forests and tallgrass prairie ecosystems present on the properties. In combination with riparian and grassland communities, wetlands found along South Boulder Creek are considered to be among the best preserved and most ecologically significant in the Boulder Valley.
Portions of the floodplain in the area east of the property include habitat for three species of concern: the Ute ladies'-tresses orchid (Spiranthes diluvialis); Preble's meadow jumping mouse (Zapus hudsonius preblei); and Bobolink (Dolichonix oryzivorous), a locally rare bird on the edge of its range. The orchid and the mouse are on the federal endangered species list.
...
Although the Lemon’s property had minimal sensitive environmental features on the site itself, it was determined that development of the property would likely have a large impact on the adjacent wetland complex to the east. The recommendation was to minimize potential development on the property in order to provide a buffer between the wetlands and urban development to the west.
The applicant has submitted new wetland maps (see ERO report in Appendix 2) for the Lemons’ property and the adjacent property (completed in May of 2005) indicating that much of the western edge of the wetland complex is farther away from the eastern edge of the Lemons property than was found in the previous wetland mapping.
Staff has concluded that the new mapping is likely to be accurate. Wet meadow wetland complexes such as the one in this area are highly sensitive to groundwater fluctuations and annual rainfall conditions. As annual precipitation conditions change, the wetland will easily recede or advance with changes to groundwater levels. The previous wetland delineation used in the 2000 Major Update was completed by the city’s wetlands ecologist in 1995, one of the wettest springs in the Boulder Valley over the latest couple of decades. It utilized the mapping procedures required under the city’s wetlands protection ordinance. The mapping showed that the wetland complex bordered the western edge of the property and, in some locations, extended into the Lemons’ property. The applicant’s new maps indicate that a portion of the wetlands are located on the north and south ends of the Lemons’ property but that most of the wetland is further to the east of their western property edge than shown in 1995 by up to 250 feet.
Staff does not find that the new wetland mapping alone supports moving the Lemons’ property from Area III to Area II. The potential impact that development of this property could have on the adjacent wetland complex is still high. The groundwater level of the site is high and any changes to either surface or groundwater hydrology of the Lemons property could seriously impact the wet meadow complex to the east of the site. Boulder has experienced similar problems in the past where large wet meadows were destroyed due to changes in groundwater hydrology from adjacent development. A study completed in 1992 on the Burke II Open Space property just north of Baseline Road showed that development of the County Meadows subdivision to the west resulted in impacts to the open space wetlands as far as 300 feet from the property line of the subdivision. Nearly 1/3 of the open space wetland habitat which supports rare plant communities and animals species was lost.
Wetlands
The following map, from the City, shows the extensive wetlands on the Lemons/Suits property and the adjacent South Boulder Creek Open Space.
Lemons/Suits Wetlands
As noted this mapping was done:
The previous wetland delineation used in the 2000 Major Update was completed by the city’s wetlands ecologist in 1995, one of the wettest springs in the Boulder Valley over the latest couple of decades.Unfortunately, the wetlands on the Hogan/Pancost property were not mapped during this same time. However, current conditions, testimony from the neighbors and the city's own assessment indicate that Hogan/Pancost has a long history of extensive wetlands on site. We feel that if the Hogan/Pancost was analyzed during such a wet spring as the one in 1995 it would be shown that the entire site would have been covered with wetlands, not just on adjacent lands like the Lemons property.
A Quiz
Now, lets have a little quiz. The following pictures were taken from the Lemons/Suits property and the Hogan/Pancost property. Based on the City's attitudes and decisions about land use in the area can you guess which is which? Remember, the city characterized the Lemons/Suits property as containing extensive wetlands, enough to prevent development, yet, they seem to be giving the nod to development on Hogan/Pancost.Property 1 | Property 2 | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
|
||
|
| |||
|
|
||
|
|
||
One would think that property 1, the one shown with the extensive amounts of standing water, cattails, sedges, wet meadows, etc., would be the Lemons/Suits property. However, it turns out that property 1 is the Hogan/Pancost property. Property 2 is the Lemons/Suits property. These pictures were taken during the same time of year.
In their recommendation on the Lemons property City Planning staff discussed the impacts on ground water, wetlands and Open Space to the east. We ask why isn't the same criteria being used for Hogan/Pancost? As the following image shows it is clear that the Hogan/Pancost property has the same and most likely worse ground water and environmental issues. It is upstream, completely surrounded and bisected by irrigation ditches, and contains a regulatory wetland. There are numerous wetland areas in close proximity to the parcel. As we have shown with extensive photographic evidence this parcel literally oozes water. The Hogan/Pancost is far wetter then the Lemons/Suits property.
Nearby Wetlands and Open Space
Proximity to Open Space
The city staff stated:Residential development at Low Density Residential densities would add to the cumulative impacts to the rare and sensitive wetland habitat on the Open Space in the area.That sounds like a reasonable thing to be concerned about. Just how far is the Lemons property to the Open Space to the east?
1400 feet.
For far is the Hogan/Pancost property?
0 feet.
Hogan/Pancost abuts Open Space land. To be fair the development proposal on Hogan/Pancost is to build houses west of 55th street. How far is that to Open Space lands?
450 feet.
Species of Concern
Furthermore, in the BVCP 2000 update city staff noted that there would be no impacts on species of concern in the area from development of Hogan/Pancost. Strangely, in the Lemons proposal they state that there will be impacts. They state:Further residential land use in this area could impact protection of the Preble’s meadow jumping mouse as well as several grassland bird species using this area.Now, as we describe here the Hogan/Pancost property is immediately adjacent to one of the major habitation sites of the Preble's.
As explained at the December 2, 2004 Planning Board meeting the rationale why the Lemons property was not considered by city staff to be appropriate for Area II inclusion and the Hogan/Pancost was, was that the Lemons parcel did not have 55th street between it and the lands to the east while Hogan/Pancost had 55th as a divider.
Does development impact on species of concern stop at a simple 2 lane road? We seriously doubt that a single road can act as an effective buffer. We do not agree with this viewpoint that a small road can significantly reduce environmental impacts. Furthermore, as the City studies point out:
The Preble's makes intensive use of the irrigation ditches in the area.Hogan/Pancost is surrounded and bisected by irrigation ditches that are immediately adjacent to "ground zero" for Preble's habitat. This property abuts critical wetland areas and open space to the east, is a short distance across soccer fields and parklands to the Lemons parcel and is much closer to South Boulder creek with its dense populations of threatened and endangered species.
Flood Impacts
City staff state:Preliminary hydrology for the South Boulder Creek Flood Study suggests a possible increase in the size of the floodplain on the property. In addition, it is unknown whether or not this site will play a role in flood mitigation.
 Hogan/Pancost Flooding
|
 Lemons Flooding
|
Conclusion
It is clear that City staff are not using the same set of objective criteria in judging the environmental impacts that the development of the Hogan/Pancost property will bring. When we have raised our concerns with them these concerns are either dismissed or ignored.The following quote, from a Planning Staffer who is responsible for some of these opinions and decisions, is indicative of their attitudes:
What's all of the fuss about? This (ed: Hogan/Pancost development) has been a done deal for years.We contend that the development of the Hogan/Pancost property has as many, if not more, of the environmental issues and potential impacts that the development of the Lemons property would bring.