Niwot Hills hearing

On June 15, the Boulder County Planning Commission considered a request to plat 11 additional lots in the Niwot Hills Subdivision, just south of Niwot High School. Micheal Markel, agent of Ridgeline Development Corporation and Niwot Hills LLC, and Cameron Knapp, of Drexell, Barrel, & Co., presented the application on behalf of the property owner.

The 11 lots would be located on the south portion of the property and each would be between 1.0 and 1.5 acres in size. An additional lot of 6.5 acres on the east side of the property was also included in the application, which would be available for later residential development and replatting.

Pete L’Orange, staff planner, noted that this is the third application for the Niwot Hills subdivision development, and that the first two phases had been completed. He presented a series of maps showing how the parcels intercept certain areas including eight environmental conservation areas and agricultural lands of local importance. The Geological Hazards map showed that the parcels are located in a moderate swelling soil potential area; the Oil & Gas Map has located a plugged and abandoned well in the middle of the parcels. L’Orange indicated that the plugged and abandoned well had been dealt with in the first phase of the subdivision.

According to the referral responses presented by L’Orange, “The Conservation Easement Program does not have conflict with this proposal, but recommends measures to protect the Foxhills Sandstone Natural Area on the adjacent conservation easement property during development of the subdivision. They strongly recommend the use of silk fencing in the construction area of the subdivision to protect the Foxhills Sandstone Natural area.”

Boulder County staff recommended that before construction is allowed to begin, all road improvements must be constructed within the platted right-of-way, and that the applicant will assume responsibility for construction and maintenance of the section of Niwot Hills Drive thought Tracts 1 & 2 until Certificates of Occupancy are issued for the adjacent lots.

“Development will ultimately disturb one acre or more of surface area, which will require a Boulder County Stormwater Quality Permit (SWQP) before construction,” L’Orange said. “A SWQP is required for the overlot grading and infrastructure associated with this new filing. The subdivision is also within the municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) urbanized area, which will require permanent stormwater management facilities as part of the development of the parcels created by this subdivision. A drainage letter will be required demonstrating that the existing extended detention basins (EDBs) have been designed for the development of this filing.”

Parks and Open Space staff were concerned about the Natural Area on adjoining Outlot B, noting the likely presence of rare lichen species and paleontological resources at Foxhills Sandstone outcropping. L’Orange said, “Staff notes that Outlot A, on the west side of the TDR PUD, has recreational trails developed on it. Although trails could be developed on Outlot B without directly impacting the sandstone area, off-trail use by mountain bikes and local children could impact the site and the lichens. Both a construction fence and a silt fence should be erected along the eastern new lots, before any earthmoving begins. No machinery should enter Outlot B east of these fences.”

L’Orange stated that he did not receive any comments or concerns regarding construction from BVLCD, Mile High Flood District, St. Vrain Valley Schools, OSMP, Public Health, Mountain View FPD, nor Colorado Parks & Wildlife.

In the final review, L’Orange discussed how the applicant’s request meets the criteria of Article 5-202: the proposal complies with sketch plan approval; the proposed water supply meets the criteria of Section 7-300 of this Code, including schematic design of water distribution system, and if applicable, well pump tests; if public sewage disposal is proposed, provision has been made for such system; the proposed drainage meets the criteria of Section 7-900 of the Code; and power, water, sewer, and fire protection infrastructure reviewed, approved, and installed as part of Filing 1.

The staff recommendation stated that under Article 5-302 of the Land Use Code, the proposal meets all planning, engineering, and surveying criteria of the County for maps, data, surveys, analyses, reports, plans, designs, documents, and other supporting materials. There was no testimony from the public at the hearing.

The Planning Commission voted to move this request to the Board County Commissioners recommending approval. Conditions of approval included that sending units for all Transferable Development Rights shall come from the Sending Site area designated on the Niwot TDR Area Map

for the Niwot Hills TDR/PUD, as required in Section 6-700(K) of the Land Use Code. All construction traffic must access the project area only via the eastern portion of Niwot Hills Drive and not the western portion adjacent to many existing residential structures.

Planning commissioner Dave Hsu noted that he would vote against the approval, saying, “I will be voting against this because I don’t read Article 5 - 301(c) the same way that the attorneys do. I disagree with that interpretation.”

The provision in question allows a preliminary plan and final plat application for seven or fewer lots to be combined into one proceeding. Article 5 - 301(c) states, “The final plat may be combined with the sketch plan and the preliminary plan if the proposed platted subdivision contains 7 subdivided lots or less and development of the lots does not require extensive engineering. The Director shall determine whether a particular application may combine sketch plan, preliminary plan, or final plat processes.”

L’Orange said that the director of the Community Planning and Permitting Department, Dale Case, determined that an application involving more than seven lots could be combined in his discretion since all of the infrastructure was already in place, which a majority of the planning commission accepted. Assistant County Attorney Erica Rogers spoke to the matter and explained that the section allowing a larger number of lots to be combined in the director’s discretion was in addition to the language specifically allowing a proposal for seven or fewer lots to be combined. Chairman Sam Libby moved for approval and Sam Fitch seconded the motion, which was approved on a 6-1 vote.