In advancing a framework for the future of the CU South parcel, the Boulder City Council stressed a desire to study flood risk and mitigation on the site before solidifying annexation and development plans there.
On Tuesday night, after a long-awaited deliberation on the controversial property — 308 acres of University of Colorado-owned land in the southeast Boulder floodplain — the council voted 8-1 to approve a new land-use designation for CU South that allows for potential new development.
Over decades to come, the university hopes to build 1,125 housing units for students and employees, athletic fields and academic buildings on that acreage, and, for CU, the council’s vote represents the clearing of a significant hurdle to fulfillment of those ambitions.
Boulder Planning Board produces the result they were expected to produce: they approved housing for young homeless adults at 1440 Pine St.
After 18 months of community debate — often unusually heated, even by Boulder’s standards — the city Planning Board on Tuesday night approved a proposal to build housing for homeless young adults in a new downtown facility.
The board voted 6-1, with member Crystal Gray representing the lone voice of dissent.
Read the Full Story at the Daily Camera: http://www.dailycamera.com/news/boulder/ci_31025612/boulder-board-approves-housing-homeless-at-1440-pine
The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) is an agreement that guides land use in the Boulder County area that surrounds the city of Boulder (about 12,000 residents and 44,000 acres of land) and within the city (about 104,000 residents and 16,000 acres). Recent comments from several Boulder City Council members indicate some frustration with implementation of the BVCP using a process called “four-body review.” Under these time-honored and effective procedures, some BVCP changes of policy and land-use designation must be approved by majority votes of the four bodies with expertise in land-use decisions: City Council, Planning Board, county commissioners, and county Planning Commission.As former members and chairs of the county Planning Commission (both of us) and the city Planning Board (one of us), we believe we have a thorough understanding of BVCP processes. The four-body approval process ensures both responsiveness to the electoral process (all those formally involved in the approval process are either elected or appointed by elected officials) and long-term stability necessary for BVCP implementation, providing residents and local government a clear indication of how their neighborhoods and lands are to be managed in the coming years. Because of the BVCP’s important role in coordinating city and county actions and decisions, representing the interests of both city and county residents, and its generally acknowledged success over the past four decades, changes to the process by which the BVCP is adopted should be considered only with great care.
Respected environmentalist Tim Hogan’s letter to the newspaper, outlining the issues. For many longtime residents of Boulder, the current proposal from the university requesting annexation, engineered flood mitigation, and additions to their housing and academic building portfolio stirs up a host of reservations. The more one delves into the details, the greater those reservations become.
Source: CU-South | PBC
CU Boulder Welcomes another record setting freshman class
This is NOT good news for Boulder! We’re already suffering from a staggering affordable housing crisis with 60,000+ daily in-commuters, more jobs than residents, and exponentially-increasing housing costs. The median cost of a single-family residence in Boulder is now around $1 million and continually rising. How many CU faculty and staff can afford to live in Boulder with this kind of housing costs do you suppose? Very few. If the CU Boulder campus enrollment continues to increase annually at 2.9 percent as it reportedly did from 2015 to 2016, the number of students will increase from 32,220 to 64,440 in just 24 years! And that’s assuming that the rate of increase stays the same and doesn’t increase over that time period. Read more on Facebook:
This article has been submitted to the Daily Camera as a Guest Opinion, but the Daily Camera has so far refused to publish it.
A Boulder pro-growth advocate regularly tweets, “If you love your City, you should build more of it.”
That’s like saying, “If you love your 15 children, have 15 more. If you love candy bars, eat hundreds.”
Analogies aside, the tweeter’s perspective seems at odds with the reality of our finite world and ecosystem. My field was science. Science everywhere confirms finite limits of: resources, amount of carbon our atmosphere can handle, and the population a bioregion can sustain.
The tweeter’s attitude reminds me of the anti-science fringe wing of Congress, which doesn’t accept science or facts. More disturbingly, Boulder government demonstrates a similar disregard for facts and limits. Our City government refuses to say how many more people they plan to draw to Boulder. The “silence from the top,” is deafening.
No wonder citizens are uneasy. We look to our civic leaders, but hear only the policy equivalent of “More, more, more!” Continue reading “Stacey Goldfarb: Boulder Government, Wake Up!”
A recent article in the Denver Post, Hickenlooper backs $380 million Denver Water project to divert Colorado River water, reminds us that the communities of the Front Range depend on water captured and delivered from elsewhere – water that is seriously over-promised to places as far away as Phoenix and Los Angeles.
Over 30 years ago, Marc Reisner wrote the definitive book on land development and water policy in the western United States: Cadillac Desert: The American West and Its Disappearing Water. Starting in the early twentieth century, when the city of Los Angeles began importing water from hundreds of miles away, it chronicles how urban and agricultural development in the arid Western United States was built upon dubious assumptions about the availability of water. Continue reading “Recommended Reading: Cadillac Desert”