Thread by @shayshinecastle

First annexation is 1.04 acres at 66 South Cherryvale Road. An existing 5,792-square-foot home is on the property, belonging to Scott Mason Raney and Min Sheng.

The applicants wish to add an accessory dwelling unit to the yard, but they will add it to the front rather than the backyard, bc some neighbors were concerned, according to Shannon Moeller with the city. (I think is what she said)

Planning board unanimously recommended that council OK the annexation but not allow new structures in the 100-year floodplain on the property. City staff did not endorse that restriction, bc mitigation can take it out of the floodplain.

OK, ADU would be in the 500-yr floodplain, Moeller says.

Moeller: "Under the terms of annexation, property would be subject to same floodplain regulations as the rest of the city."

Q from Morzel about neighbors' concern over buildings in the meadow that the county preserved as riparian corridor. Nothing in the annexation guidelines about protecting the riparian corridor, Moeller says.

"We don't have requirements specific to riparian corridors."
Brockett: We have wetland regulations
"Delineated ones," says city staff member who I have seen and written his name one million times but have at this moment forgotten.
This is not a delineated wetland.

Morzel q: Can we impose condition that they not build in the riparian corridor? I mean this is an annexation.
Carr: As part of an agreement, you can impose any condition you like.

Applicant is speaking now: It's not a riparian corridor or meadow; it's farmland. Creek hasn't run through there in years; riparian corridor is on the other side; it is occasionally wet there but it doesn't pond.

Would not be willing to agree to that condition. "Most of our neighbors have sheds back there."

Two ppl signed up: both neighbors who wrote in opposition to this bc they say the applicant wants to move a shed there and block views, wildlife.

Michelle Sanders: "I'm here to talk about the meadow and my love for the meadow." She has a power point. And pictures.

"County has called (the meadow) a riparian corridor for the 18 yrs I've lived there. We're pretty sure the creek ran through there b4 it was relocated by Army corps of engineers."

Sanders showing pics/video/maps from 2013 floods. 11 homes in the area completely flooded; 11 partially so and 10-12 "built correctly or lucky" she says.

"What are the real goals for the flood plain? What is the generational needs or this riparian corridor? Are these goals being met by this annexation and possible permitting of a structure in this meadow?"

Q from Carlisle: Are there sheds there? Is this what we see?
Sanders: I don't see any sheds in this view; this is what you see when you look south. I have sheds in my yard.

Jones asks what her request is: To have any new buildings (an ADU) be built on the east side. References the size of the home (over 5K sq ft)
Weaver: You said any new building, but what about just dwelling units?
Sanders: Issue is going to be the floodplain, so dwelling.

Brockett: Does your property or any others have similar restrictions?
Sanders: No, but "from my understanding of annexation, you can put in" restrictions or requirements.

Out-of-context quote of the night: "I know that caboose" (Morzel)

Morzel asks about animals there. A flock of geese yesterday, Sanders said. "It renewed my interest in protecting the meadow."

Tons of mice and some hawks, too.

Shanda Farner: "I just want to preserve what my family built. I just want to keep the ambiance. That's all I have to say."
Jones: So are you supporting this proposal, or...?
Farner: I just want to keep the ambiance and character of that area and not over develop it or change it.

"It's kind of a country ambiance there."

She's not "with either party," she says, but she is sitting with Michelle Sanders.

They are neighbors, so that's fair. But presumably the applicant is, too, and she's not sitting with him.

Charles! Charles Ferro is the name of the staff member I forgot earlier. I'm sorry, Charles!

Morzel: I think we need a discussion at some point about building policies in the floodplain. Where on the schedule we put that I don't want to say. (Council laughs)
Jones agrees that this is not the time for it.

Also correction to earlier tweet: I think I had the wrong address: it's 1179 Cherryvale.

Brockett: I'm excited to see you take advantage of our new (ADU) regulations.

Carlisle: I was "dumbfounded" that floodplain regulations haven't been addressed. "We can't hang the applicant out to dry for the city's misdoings, but I'm shocked this hasn't been addressed."

Morzel: "The fact that so much of our city is in the 100-yr floodplain is a problem. We can’t do anything about that, but what we can do is not go forward with future developments that are in the 100-yr floodplain until we have this discussion."

Annexation passes unanimously; on to the next: 5469 S. Boulder Rd, 1.91-acre parcel that will be zoned RL-2.

Oh I realize my mistake from earlier on the Cherryvale annexation: I used the wrong address bc 66 Cherryvale Rd is part of this annexation: a 70-ft strip of city-owned open space that will be zoned Public.

Some neighbors are concerned about this annexation, too, bc of potential for more development. From my story when the council heard this on first reading: 11 to 14 units could be put on the property.

No additional single-family homes will be allowed: only duplex, triplex or fourplex buildings. If more housing is added, half of it will have to be permanently affordable.

Any additional market-rate units will have to make cash-in-lieu payments of 25% of value toward the city’s affordable housing fund. None of the units can be bigger than 2,200-square-feet; affordable units must be equal in size to market rate ones or 1,800-square-feet.

Per Sloane Walbert: Annexation agreement anticipates development. Bc of the floodplain, no basements would be allowed. Applicant is dedicating an easement for flood control and drainage.

Annexation policies require that higher level of affordability outlined above.

Walbert: Two units priced to middle income (100% AMI)
Additional units priced to middle (120% AMI)

Limited new units to du- tri- and fourplexes "allows for diversity of housing types which supports community diversity and supports a spectrum of the community from singles to family members."

Planning board voted 4-3 to OK adding the parcel to the city. The major objection was that a portion of the land is located in the 100-year floodplain. One member also wanted SF homes.

Qs from council now. Jones: How do we decide when the units will be middle-income? How did we end up with that particular mix?
Kurt Firnhaber takes the podium: We met with applicant, we also look at size of development.

Typically, with 14 units, it's difficult to get too many low-income units. Our middle income units typically come from annexations. 25% cash-in-lieu can support low-income units on other sites.

Jones again: In 2013, looks like ditch overflowed. How will we prevent that?
Ferro: Idk that we can prevent it but we are getting a 50-ft flood easement
Weaver: Is 50 ft enough?

Edward Stafford: 50 ft is for mitigation but this area isn't a priority for much more work. But we would determine what needs done when development is proposed.

Q from Brockett: How much is the frontage?
275 ft, so 50-ft easement is 1/5 of the frontage

I wish I can could translate that into pedestrian for you, but I'm sorry I am not confident enough to do it right now.

Q from Morzel (but first some explanation: this parcel is in Area II of the BVCP, and the Area III boundary comes right up to it) Why is this not Area III? It's a weird boundary
Walbert: I think it has to do with city open space acquisition (open space is nearby)

Morzel: Do we do annexations without site review?
Walbert: Depends on size of property
Morzel: What is that threshold?
Walbert: Depends on zoning. 5 acres in this situation

I just broke off part of a particularly large carrot and this lady gave me *such* a look.

I'm here all night. Bish gotta eat.

One of the greatest parts of having @CassaMN here is that I now have someone to share food with! No one ever wanted to share food with me when I was in elem school cuz my mom packed me healthy food like carrots.

We're talking about floods and such for this annexation. Regulations say structures must be elevated 2ft bc of the 100yr flood plain. i.e. no basements

Totally don't know if that's the correct use of i.e.

Last-minute signup for the public comment period. But first... Something(?) Lopez is speaking now, on behalf of DKR Living Revocable Trust, property owner.

I can't really hear what he's saying; maybe you can on the video at home?

But maybe I should quit crunching my carrots and listen

Q from Morzel: How come 11-14 units are allowed on the 80K sq ft?
Ferro: Requirement for 6K sq ft of open space per dwelling

David Williams speaking now. First of two last-minute public commenters.

Williams: "We're still falling short on achieving those goals" for affordable housing. "Any opportunity to provide affordable housing should be embraced, especially for the missing middle."

This site is "quite well-suited" to homes for this demographic, Williams said. Table Mesa Park-N-Ride nearby, schools, bus routes.

Kristi Scott, who lives in Longmont, is here speaking about the family who owns the property, I believe.

Scott: This property is going to change, and a lot of us are not happy about it, but it can change for good. Affordable housing can help a lot of people.

Chatting now about the current home on the site, which needs repair. In the city, in order to get a permit for repairs 50% or more the value of the structure, the house would have to be raised 2 feet to meet the floodplain regulations.

Brockett: The community benefit package is the best I've ever seen on an annexation. It will make a real difference to a number of folks who otherwise could not afford housing in our city.

Morzel: While I have some concerns, I recognize that you could either do nothing or build a really cool community.

"We don't get these kinds of ppl coming in with so many community benefits, so that's pretty nice."

Weaver: If you can push housed toward South Boulder Road and leave open space toward the ditch, that would be ideal so flood waters will be farther from homes.

Unanimous vote.

Second to last one of the night: @threadreaderapp unroll this please and thank you :)