Agenda Memo

City of Boulder City Council Agenda Item Meeting Date: June 18, 2026

Agenda Title Consideration of the following motions regarding the proposed annexation of an area generally located within the Spring Valley Estates Subdivision, including properties along Linden Drive, Cholla Court, Spring Valley Road, and Cactus Court and rights-of-way, with an initial zoning of Residential Estate (RE): 1. Motion to adopt Resolution 1381 setting forth findings of fact and conclusions regarding the proposed annexation of approximately 43.194 acres of land generally located within the Spring Valley Estates Subdivision, including properties along Linden Drive, Cholla Court, Spring Valley Road, and Cactus Court and rights-of-way, finding that the proposed annexation meets state law requirements, that additional terms and conditions should be imposed, and directing that an election be called. (LUR202300001) 2. Motion to authorize the city manager to execute an agreement with the Spring Valley Mutual Water Association regarding annexation and transition of municipal services.

Staff Contact  

Brad Mueller, Director, Planning and Development Services Chandler Van Schaack, Principal Planner, Planning and Development Services

Draft Motion Language Staff requests council consideration of this matter and action in the form of the following motions: 1. Motion to adopt Resolution 1381 setting forth findings of fact and conclusions regarding the proposed annexation of approximately 43.194 acres of land generally located within the Spring Valley Estates Subdivision, including properties along Linden Drive, Cholla Court, Spring Valley Road, and Cactus Court and rights-of-way, finding that the proposed annexation meets state law requirements, that additional terms and conditions should be imposed, and directing that an election be called. (LUR202300001) 2. Motion to authorize the city manager to execute an agreement with the Spring Valley Mutual Water Association regarding annexation and transition of municipal services.

Executive Summary The purpose of this item is related to a request to annex approximately 43.194 acres of land generally located within the Spring Valley Estates Subdivision, including properties along Linden Drive, Cholla Court, Spring Valley Road, and Cactus Court and rights-ofway into the City of Boulder with an initial zoning designation of Residential – Estate (RE), consistent with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP). Refer to Attachment B for Annexation Map Attachment C for the Annexation Petition. The area proposed for annexation is comprised of 36 lots developed with detached dwelling units and is located in North Boulder along the western City boundary adjacent to the Wonderland Hills neighborhood, below the Blue Line within Planning Area II of the BVCP. The applicant has requested annexation to connect the neighborhood’s dwelling units to the City’s municipal water system, and in the case of an emergency, have access to fire hydrants. Per Annexation Policy 1.17.b, the city will actively pursue annexation of substantially developed Area II properties along the western boundary below the Blue Line. At its meeting on May 7, 2026, City Council adopted Resolution 1380 (provided as Attachment H) as a procedural step required under state law to determine that the petition to annex the property complies with section 30(1)(c) of article II of the state constitution and section 31-12-107(1), C.R.S. and to set June 18, 2026 as the date for a public hearing and action related to the annexation petition. Note that City Council made similar findings in Resolution 1375, adopted on April 16; however, in order to meet publication requirements for a public hearing on the proposed annexation that were

initially inadvertently missed, City Council passed Resolution 1380 which superseded Resolution 1375. Planning Board reviewed the proposed annexation and initial zoning on April 21, 2026. The Board voted unanimously (4-0) (M. McIntyre, K. Nordback, M. Roberts absent) to recommend to City Council approval of the proposed annexation with an initial zoning designation of Residential – Estate (RE), subject to the recommended additional terms and conditions, and to adopt the staff memorandum as findings of fact. The Board also unanimously passed a second motion recommending that staff work with the applicants to include reasonable high-value, low-cost wildfire mitigation measures in the terms and conditions. A video of the April 21 Planning Board hearing, including the board’s discussion and recommendation on the annexation can be found HERE. The staff memorandum to Planning Board, meeting audio, and other related background materials are available on the Records Archive for Planning Board. Draft minutes from the hearing can be found in Attachment G. Per the State’s annexation statutes, City Council is asked to consider proposed Resolution 1381 (Attachment A). If adopted, proposed Resolution 1381 would do the following: setting forth findings of fact and conclusions regarding the proposed annexation of approximately 43.194 acres of land generally located within the Spring Valley Estates Subdivision, including properties along Linden Drive, Cholla Court, Spring Valley Road, and Cactus Court and rights-of-way, finding that the proposed annexation meets state law requirements, that additional terms and conditions should be imposed, and directing that an election be called. Council is also asked to consider a motion to authorize the city manager to execute an agreement with the Spring Valley Mutual Water Association (included as Attachment D) regarding annexation and transition of municipal services.

Council Action Options Option

Outcome

If Council finds that the annexation meets state law requirements and desires to annex subject to the proposed Terms and Conditions, adopt Resolution 1381 and approve execution

If the recommended motions are approved, Council would order through Resolution 1381 that an election will be called and would nominate an election commissioner. Then there will be an election where both registered electors and landowners of the area can vote on the annexation. A majority is needed for the election to pass. If the outcome is positive, the

of the agreement with SVMWA

area is considered eligible for annexation and finally, Council may annex the area by ordinance.

If Council finds that the annexation meets state law requirements but does not desire to annex or desires to annex with different Terms and Conditions or a different Agreement, define and adopt modified resolution and motion language

The Council would need to define any modifications or amendments to the proposed resolution, Terms and Conditions, agreement and draft motion language. This will likely require staff to bring back amended versions for future consideration.

If Council finds that the proposed annexation does not meet state law requirements, define and adopt a modified resolution and modified motion language. In this case, Council would not approve the proposed agreement with SVMWA.

Council would need to revise proposed Resolution 1381 to make findings of fact for its conclusion that the annexation does not meet state law requirements before adopting the revised resolution. This may require staff to bring back a revised resolution. The annexation proceedings would end and the area would not be annexed.

Key Issues Staff has identified the following key issues to help guide council’s discussion: 1. Does the annexation request comply with applicable state annexation statutes? 2. Is the proposal consistent with city’s annexation and other Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) policies? 3. Is the initial zoning of Residential – Estate (RE) appropriate for the subject property?

Background Property Description & Site Context The area proposed for annexation is comprised of 36 lots developed with detached dwelling units totaling approximately 43.194 acres of land generally located within the

Spring Valley Estates Subdivision, including properties along Linden Drive, Cholla Court, Spring Valley Road, and Cactus Court and rights-of-way. The lots range from approximately 0.43 acres to 2.5 acres in size. The subdivision is located in North Boulder along the western City boundary adjacent to the Wonderland Hills neighborhood, within Planning Area II of the BVCP (See Figures 1 and 2 below for vicinity map and BVCP Planning Area map). The area is located within the wildland Urban Interface (WUI) in “Ignition Risk Area 1” (for current WUI map, please visit the city website HERE). The area is currently served by city sanitary sewer. The city currently manages the water system and serves as the water provider for neighborhoods that border Spring Valley to the east. The primary purpose behind this petition for annexation is the petitioners’ request to have the Spring Valley neighborhood connected to the city’s municipal water system, and in the case of an emergency, have access to sufficient fire hydrants and reliable water sources.

As shown in Figure 2 below, the property is located in BVCP Planning Area II. Area II refers to land 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. Annexation is required before adequate facilities and services are furnished to properties in Area II. The Blue Line runs along the western boundary of the subdivision then through eight of the northernmost lots on the west side. The portions of property lying west of, and therefore

above the Blue Line, are not eligible for water or sewer services and are therefore undevelopable.

As shown in Figure 3 below, the property is designated Very Low Density Residential (VLR) on the land use map of the BVCP. This land use designation has an anticipated density of up to two dwelling units per acre or less. The description from the BVCP is below.

Application Description The properties in the annexation area are all developed with detached dwelling units. The properties are proposed to be annexed with an initial zoning classification of Residential Estate (RE) and without the ability to subdivide or add additional principal dwelling units. The properties of the petitioners are currently served with water by the Spring Valley Mutual Water Association (SVMWA); with annexation, petitioners are seeking connection to city water. The properties are already served by city wastewater services. Following a successful annexation and connection of each property to the city’s water utility, the SVMWA will dissolve and cease operations along with decommissioning the legacy water system. Process Different from most annexations processed by the city, in this case, not all landowners in the proposed annexation area have signed the petition and petitioners were not able to get all landowners to agree to terms of annexation in an annexation agreement. This means that if the city desires to annex and would like to impose additional terms and conditions upon the area proposed for annexation, such terms would have to be

approved by a majority of the landowners and registered electors in the area in an election. Since the procedure for annexation involving an election somewhat differs from other annexation procedures, this memo also outlines the procedure for an annexation involving an election to help council anticipate the next steps in this process: Per state statutes, the first procedural step for an annexation involving an election is for council to determine whether the form of the petition (Attachment C) is substantially in compliance with Section 31-12-107(1) C.R.S., and if it is, to adopt a resolution to establish a public hearing date for consideration of whether the proposed annexation meets substantive state annexation requirements and whether additional terms and conditions are to be imposed. This step was completed on May 7, 2026, when City Council adopted Resolution 1380 (provided as Attachment H), determining that the petition to annex the property complies with section 30(1)(c) of article II of the state constitution and section 31-12107(1), C.R.S. and setting June 18, 2026 as the date for a public hearing and action related to the annexation petition. State statutes require that the public hearing be held not less than thirty days, nor more than sixty days, after the effective date of Resolution 1380 setting the hearing date. The second procedural step is required under the Boulder Revised Code and was completed on April 21, 2026, when Planning Board reviewed the proposed annexation and initial zoning. The held a public hearing and Board voted unanimously (4-0) (M. McIntyre, K. Nordback, M. Roberts absent) to recommend to City Council approval of the proposed annexation with an initial zoning designation of Residential – Estate (RE), subject to the recommended additional terms and conditions, and to adopt the staff memorandum as findings of fact. Based on concerns raised regarding the site’s location with the Wildland Urban Interface zone, the Board also unanimously passed a second motion recommending that staff work with the applicants to include reasonable high-value, low-cost fire mitigation measures in the terms and conditions. The staff memorandum to Planning Board, meeting audio, and other related background materials are available on the Records Archive for Planning Board. Draft minutes from the hearing can be found in Attachment G. The purpose of this agenda item is for council to hold a public hearing and determine whether the proposed annexation meet state statutory requirements and consider adoption of Resolution 1381 (Attachment A), as the third procedural step in the annexation process. If City Council finds at the public hearing on June 18, 2026, that state annexation requirements are met and desires to annex the area with the proposed additional terms and conditions to be imposed on the annexation area, then City Council

would direct that an election be called on the proposed annexation and terms and conditions. Evidence related to compliance with state annexation laws and recommended terms and conditions of annexation will be presented to council for its consideration at the June 18, 2026, public hearing. The terms and conditions proposed as part of the annexation resolution would be similar to the terms and conditions contained in an annexation agreement. The election would be held through a petition to the district court and the appointment of three election commissioners by the court to perform the election. Landowners and registered electors in the area proposed for annexation may vote in the annexation election. If a majority of votes cast in the election is in support of annexation, subject to the terms and conditions, the council may, by ordinance, annex the area and impose the terms and conditions. If the majority of votes cast are against annexation or the vote is tied, council may not proceed further with this annexation proceeding. After the election, council may not impose new terms and conditions on the property owners that were not voted upon in the election. Standard conditions of annexation typically include connection to city utilities, payment of the water plant investment fee (PIF), the stormwater and flood PIF, dedication of easements, wetland mapping, and, where additional development potential exists, special benefits, such as creation of permanently affordable housing within the annexation area. With the proposed RE zoning and terms and conditions, no additional development potential would exist on the properties within area proposed for annexation. A summary of the proposed Terms and Conditions is found below.

Annexation Terms and Conditions 1. Purpose of the Annexation 

A majority of Spring Valley landowners have petitioned to annex into the City of Boulder.



Properties currently receive water from Spring Valley Mutual Water Association (SVMWA) but already receive City sewer service.



Annexation is being pursued to connect all properties to City water service and constructing required public infrastructure.

2. Required Public Improvements

Connection to city water and meeting of City infrastructure requirements requires construction of the Spring Valley Public Improvements, which would include: •

Water mains, service lines, meters, hydrants, valves

•

An off-site booster pump station

•

Roadway upgrades to Cholla Court and Spring Valley Road to provide improved access for fire department vehicles and equipment

•

Easement dedications and acquisition of any necessary rights-of-way

These will be designed and built to City standards, subject to limited variances.

3. SVMWA Obligations •

A SVMWA Agreement must be executed prior to City Council’s hearing on the annexation petition. See Attachment D for draft agreement.

•

SVMWA must: o Continue to provide water service until all properties connect to City water o Provide and/or assign design work for the Spring Valley Public Improvements o Provide necessary utility and flood control easements, in a timeframe acceptable to the city. o Convey the SVMWA parcel to an adjacent owner after removing structures o Work toward dissolving the association within two years of project completion

4. Local Improvement District (LID) •

After annexation, the City Manager will propose forming an LID to finance and construct the public improvements. Note that the proposed annexation terms and conditions set LID elements the city manager will propose for forming an LID; however, the LID process itself is a quasi-judicial process in which city council is the decision maker. The LID process would involve a public hearing and council’s decision would have to follow the procedures and standards established in

Chapter 8-1, “Local Improvements,” B.R.C. 1981. Key elements of the proposed LID structure include: o Property owners pay 100% of preliminary cost estimates plus up to 15% overrun (consistent with standards in Chapter 8-1, B.R.C. 1981). o Certain costs will be excluded (e.g., costs already paid by SVMWA, grant contributions) o A $1 million DOLA grant has been approved, but a contract with DOLA has not been executed at this time as Council approval of the annexation ordinance is required first. The grant functions as a reimbursement of approved costs, and the match requirements are far exceeded by the overall project costs. o Assessment methodology differs per improvement type and aims to equitably assess the costs among properties. •

•

Design and installation costs of the water distribution system would be assessed equally on a per property basis except that the costs of the pump station and of the water main installation is proposed to be assessed half based on property size and half based on home size. Road improvements to Cholla Court and Spring Valley Road are proposed to be split pro rata among properties on each street. Owners may pay assessments in full or in 30-year installments financed through the city.

5. Utility Connections & Fees •

Upon completion of the water system, properties must connect exclusively to City water.

•

Certain work on private property (service lines to the home, pressure reducing valves) is the landowner’s responsibility.

•

Property owners are required to pay Plant Investment Fees (PIFs): o Water PIF: payable at 2023 rates; includes a 10-year payment plan option with a 30% monthly surcharge financed through the city o Stormwater PIF: similar payment options o Wastewater PIF: not applicable as city sewer service already exists o Vacant lots will pay PIFs in effect at the time of future building permit issuance.

6. Water Rights •

Landowners must sell or offer a right of first refusal for any appurtenant water rights to the City when connecting to City water.

•

City does not intend to acquire SVMWA’s water rights but may monitor related water court activity.

7. Environmental & Regulatory Requirements •

Wetland and stream mapping will be completed and adopted with annexation.

•

Properties must be included in the Northern Colorado Water Conservancy District and Subdistrict before water connection.

•

Existing wells may be used for irrigation only (no domestic use) and must follow State regulations.

8. Land Use & Zoning Conditions •

Properties will be zoned Residential Estate (RE) upon annexation.

•

No subdivision is allowed due to topography and location.

•

Only one dwelling unit per lot (SVMWA parcel is not buildable) (Note that this limitation does not prevent establishment of an ADU on a lot).

•

Existing County building permit applications and permits may continue through the county process; new permits post-annexation must be through the City.

•

Rental properties must obtain City rental licenses within 90 days; initial energy efficiency upgrades are temporarily waived.

9. Enforcement •

Failure to pay assessments or comply with obligations allows the City to perform the work and recover costs, including certification of unpaid assessments to the County.

The BVCP provides a framework for annexation and urban service provision within the city. BVCP Policy 1.17c limits development on properties in Area II along the western foothills which became eligible for water service in 2016. The policy was added in the 2020 BVCP Mid-Term update to clarify the intent behind the Blue Line changes and related changes to the BVCP area map that were made to allow for water service of certain developments in the city, but were not intended to allow for additional development of those properties. The policy reads: “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 service shall be provided to development west of the Blue Line.” If a property is annexed, zoning will be established consistent with the goals and land use designations of the BVCP. 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. Consistency with BVCP policies has been identified as a key issue. Refer to Key Issue #2 below for a detailed analysis of compliance with city policies.

Public Comment Required public notice was given in the form of written notification mailed to all property owners within six hundred feet of the subject property and a sign posted on the property for at least 10 days prior to the public hearing. All notice requirements of Section 9-4-3, B.R.C. 1981, have been met. Staff has not received any inquiries or official public comments.

Criteria for Review Applicable Boulder Revised Code Sections SECTION 9-2-17, “ANNEXATION REQUIREMENTS,” BOULDER REVISED CODE 1981 SECTION 9-2-18, “ZONING OF ANNEXED LAND,” BOULDER REVISED CODE 1981

Applicable Plans and Guidelines BOULDER VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES

• • •

1.08 Adapting to Limits on Physical Expansion; 1.10 Growth Requirements; and 1.17 Annexation.

COLORADO MUNICIPAL ANNEXATION ACT OF 1965: Colorado State Statutes Title 31, Article 12, including: § 31-12-104. Eligibility for annexation § 31-12-105. Limitations § 31-12-107. Petitions for annexation and for annexation elections § 31-12-109. Hearing § 31-12-110, Findings § 31-12-112, Election

Analysis 1. Does the annexation request comply with applicable state annexation statutes? Staff has reviewed the annexation request for compliance with Sections 31-12-104, 3113-105, 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. Refer to Attachment F for staff’s complete analysis of the state annexation statutes. Findings are also set forth in Resolution 1381. 2. Is the proposal consistent with city’s annexation and other Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) policies? The subject area may be considered for annexation due to its designation as Area II (Policy 1.14 Definition of Comprehensive Planning Areas I, II, and III). The Area II designation of this area refers to the planning area now under county jurisdiction where annexation to the city can be considered consistent with BVCP policies. Pursuant to BVCP Policy 1.17c, because the developed portions of the properties (1) are located in Area II and (2) were moved east of the Blue Line in 2016, the properties are considered substantially developed and no additional dwelling units may be added. The BVCP anticipates that the city will actively pursue annexation of substantially developed properties along the western edge of the city below the Blue Line. The terms and conditions of annexation generally consider whether and the extent to which a property

that is annexed has development potential. Refer to Attachment F for staff’s analysis of the annexation proposal with city policies. 3. Is the initial zoning of Residential – Estate (RE) appropriate for the subject property? 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 site is designated as Very Low Density Residential (VLR), which anticipates a density of two dwelling units per acre or less. VLR land use anticipates predominantly single-family detached units. The proposed zoning is Residential-Estate (RE), which has a density range consistent with the land use designation and would be compatible with the adjacent area to the southeast, which is zoned Residential – Estate (RE). See Figure 4. The RE district is described as: “Single-family detached residential dwelling units at low to very low residential densities.” (Section 9-5-2(c)(1), B.R.C. 1981). Considering that the nearest adjacent parcels with similar lot sizes and density are zoned RE, staff finds the proposed zoning is consistent with the underlying land use designation and the community’s desired future for the area.

Fiscal Note This item is limited to City Council’s determination of whether the annexation meets applicable state requirements. As such, there are no direct fiscal impacts associated at this stage. If the annexation proceeds, there may be additional workload and fiscal consideration related to utilities and right-of-way improvements, and management of property assessments. Staff review and preparation of the annexation petition are part of the department’s standard work program and are supported within existing budget appropriations. No additional staffing or budget adjustments are required for this annexation review. Future fiscal and operational impacts, if any, will be evaluated and presented at the time of consideration of an annexation ordinance.

Findings Staff Findings: 1. Staff finds the proposed annexation to be consistent with state statutes. 2. Staff finds the proposed annexation to be consistent with the Boulder Revised Code and BVCP. 3. Staff finds the initial zoning of Residential – Estate (RE) is consistent with the BVCP goals and land use designation of Very Low-Density Residential (VLR). The proposed initial zoning is also compatible with surrounding properties.

Accessibility Statement The City of Boulder is committed to digital accessibility. Some content may not be fully accessible due to technical limitations or issues. For alternate formats or accommodations, please visit Accessibility | City of Boulder or contact accessibility@bouldercolorado.gov.

Attachments A: Resolution 1381 B: Annexation Map C: Annexation Petition D: Proposed Terms and Conditions E: SVMWA Agreement (executed by SVMWA)

F: Staff Analysis of State Statutes and BVCP Policies G: April 21, 2026 Draft Planning Board Meeting Minutes H: Resolution 1380 I: Title Commitment for Annexation Area J: Annexation Impact Report