The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) defines policies that govern potential annexation and development of adjacent lands.

One of the fundamental ideas of the BVCP is:

Encouragement of compact, contiguous development and a preference for infill land redevelopment as opposed to sprawl

Now, on the surface if one looks at the City limits it looks as though the annexation of the Hogan/Pancost property would serve to promote these goals. However, observation on the ground belies this view. The property to the east is Open Space and an Environmental Preservation area. To the south is a single home estate (6+ acres) in the county that is heavily treed. To the north are the open areas (soccer field, dog park) of the East Boulder Recreation Center park. It is only to the west where there is truly urban development.

Annexation under the BVCP

The section "Framework for Annexation and Urban Provision" of the BVCP states:

Area II is the area now under county jurisdiction, where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with Policies 1.16, 1.18, & 1.25. New urban development may only occur coincident with the availability of adequate facilities and services and not otherwise.

Lets take a look at each of these relevant sections.

1.16 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 shall be focused on maintaining and improving the quality of life within defined physical boundaries, with only limited expansion of the city.

One could view that this development enhances the economic and social assets of the city. 115 new homes will have an economic impact. However, what is the net economic and social benefit when considering long-term impacts on roads, services and utilities (especially water resources).

Does this proposal serve the clause: "maintaining and improving the quality of life within defined physical boundaries" Does it maintain or improve our quality of life?

1.18 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 as a whole to provide significant community benefits and to maintain or improve environmental quality as a precondition for further housing and community growth.

So we ask: how does this proposal maintain or improve environmental quality? It would take a far stretch of the imagination to come up with a rationalization for this. While the developer has stated that it is near transit lines (a small RTD sign on South Boulder Road 1/2 km away) and some would consider that to be an adequate reason why this would improve environmental quality (e.g., reduces car trips) the reality based community (i.e., the other 99% of us) realizes that what this development will bring is more car trips and more congestion. What this development inarguably does is to obliterate a 24 acre pasture that is right next to one of the most ecologically sensitive areas in the entire county.

So that leaves us with community benefits of 46 affordable rental duplexes for seniors and another 69 units ranging in price from 500000 to 800000 dollars. What are the net benefits to the community of this development? Does providing 46 senior units and more housing outweigh the many serious negative impacts of this development? Is placing seniors in a relatively isolated area that is at risk of flooding and mosquito borne illness even a benefit to them? While it is a laudable goal to increase housing opportunities for seniors those opportunities should be provided in more appropriate areas where there aren't these impacts on seniors and families that already live in the area.

1.25 Annexation.
The policies in regard to annexation to be pursued by the city are:
...
(d) In order to reduce the negative impacts of new development in the Boulder Valley, the city shall annex Area II land with significant development or redevelopment potential only on a very limited basis. Such annexations will be supported only if the annexation provides a special opportunity or benefit to the city. For annexation considerations, emphasis shall be given to the benefits achieved from the creation of permanently affordable housing.
...

So, what it comes down to is does this development represent "a special opportunity or benefit to the city."? We, the local residents, would say no! We believe that the city needs to view the net benefits of this proposal.

Groundwater

The BVCP calls for the consideration of the impacts on groundwater:

4.24 Groundwater. The city and county shall continue to evaluate aquifers, groundwater recharge and discharge areas, and sources of groundwater pollution within the Boulder Creek watersheds and formulate appropriate pollution and source protection programs. Impacts to groundwater shall be considered in land use planning, development review and public land management practices.