The review process for a proposed senior affordable housing project in south Boulder has been delayed, as developers consider a new arrangement with a slowed-down timeline.At 3485 Stanford Court, on the 5-acre site of Mt. Calvary Lutheran Church, Boulder Housing Partners and the local senior housing community Frasier have plans to build 45 one- and two-bedroom apartments — 100 percent of which would qualify as permanently affordable.
The project was set to go before the Boulder Planning Board for a public hearing and concept review on Thursday, but the applicants pulled out in order to reconsider a key aspect of the proposed deal.
What’s being rethought now is a detail in the plan that calls for Frasier to acquire the property from Mt. Calvary and have Boulder Housing Partners develop it. They would then lease space on-site back to the church for $1 per year for up to 15 years.
Source: Plan for south Boulder senior affordable housing delayed as developers rethink approach – Boulder Daily Camera
My husband and I share a 492-square-foot apartment in Cambridge, Mass. We inhabit a “micro apartment,” or what is sometimes called a tiny house. This label is usually proudly applied to dwellings under 500 square feet, according to Wikipedia. We are unwittingly on a very small bandwagon, part of a growing international movement. But deep inside the expensive custom closets and under the New Age Murphy beds, the pro-petite propaganda has hidden some unseemly truths about how the other half lives.
No one writes about the little white lies that help sell this new, very small American dream.
Here, on the inside, we have found small not so beautiful after all. Like the silent majority of other middling or poor urban dwellers in expensive cities, we are residents of tiny homes not by design, but because it is all our money can rent.
Read More: What No One Ever Tells You About Tiny Homes – NYTimes.com
People with comments and suggestions about proposals for major updates to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan can present their arguments during a joint Wednesday afternoon public hearing by the Boulder County Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners.
4 Body Review Changes
CU South – Flood Mitigation
Read More: Boulder County commissioners, Planning Commission to hold hearing on comp plan changes
The most important and time-tested component of American democracy is the concept of checks and balances. It ensures the interests of a few never override the values and interests of the larger community. It protects against corruption. It protects against tyranny.On June 13, Boulder City Council’s nine members met to contemplate eliminating Boulder County’s most important system of checks and balances: the BVCP’s four-body review process for land-use changes. Boulder’s four governing bodies are the county commissioners, county Planning Commission, City Council, and city Planning Board.
When the County Planning Commission (CPC) recently — and wisely — voted to maintain the existing density and reject Boulder County Housing Authority’s overreach at Twin Lakes, it sent shock waves through the halls of power in Boulder County — and the city. How dare this governing body listen to the people they serve? How dare they defy the back-door power plays of the county?
Read More: Susan Lambert: The stability of the four-body review process – Boulder Daily Camera
The implicit theory of growth behind Boulder’s current expansion is that it can become a fast-growing commercial center and retain its residential quality of life at the same time. That idea is proving to be a fantasy, along with many of the other visionary positions of our local government.Now the City Council has voted overwhelmingly to insert co-op housing in virtually any zoning district in the city and is pushing density through such bizarre ideas as “density transfer.” The inadvisability and destructive quality of this pro-density and anti-neighborhood position has been ably described in dozens of letters to the Daily Camera, as well as in editorials by Leonard May, Steve Pomerance, Spense Havlick and others.The indisputable fact is that the unaffordable housing problem is being driven by the push for commercial expansion. As one letter write wrote prior to the 2015 election, “You can’t build your way to affordable housing” — as has been demonstrated in San Francisco and Aspen. Boulder has fallen behind the wisdom of Palo Alto and other cities, which now understands this fallacy well. “Affordable” housing is really only more building, and not affordable at all. Indeed, much of the so-called affordable housing built in the city over the last two years opts out of the affordable housing requirement. Millions are being made, to a great extent by non-Boulder residents, by selling off beautiful downtown and neighborhood space.
Read More: Bill Karelis: When a city dashes forward – Boulder Daily Camera
The proposed development at 1440 Pine St. was given final approval on Tuesday night, as the Boulder City Council declined an opportunity to call up the project for further discussion.
That decline upholds a 6-1 vote of the city Planning Board last month to approve the project, which will see a three-story building built on a surface parking lot just northeast of the Pearl Street Mall.