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
My initial involvement with City Council and local politics was the 4525 Palo Park development.
Source: Harold Hallstein: City Council threatens public lands – Boulder Daily Camera
I am a resident of Boulder who is working with TLAG on the Palo Parkway land dedication issue. I have read the demand letter sent by TLAG’s attorney, and note that the allegations raised in the letter appear to be well substantiated both factually and legally.
Source: Dean Wolf: Defending land dedication laws – Boulder Daily Camera
An attorney for the Twin Lakes Action Group has sent a formal cease-and-desist letter to Boulder Housing Partners, the Boulder Valley School District, Boulder and Boulder County demanding a stop to development at a proposed affordable housing development. The group contends two sales of the property where the proposed Palo Park is located were not legal or valid and argue that work on the development must stop until the title on the property is cleared, according to a demand letter.
Sara Toole lives in Northfield Commons, near the proposed development, said … “We should not have had to resort to a lawsuit for the city to follow its own laws regarding dedications,” she said. “The city could have simply listened to us and lowered the density for this development and increased the affordable ownership ratio.”
Full Story: Twin Lakes group issues cease and desist on Boulder’s Palo Park housing development – Boulder Daily Camera
The Jan. 19 Camera article (“Twin Lakes debate resumes“) accurately quoted my comments to the BoCo Planning Commission, describing efforts to annex Gunbarrel land parcels into the city of Boulder and upzone them to medium-density residential as “an outright theft from the Gunbarrel community.
Should dedicated lands be used for their intended purpose? Do property owners have adequate recourse when radical zoning changes are proposed on adjacent parcels? Does the intense pressure to build affordable housing justify trampling citizen rights, degrading existing neighborhoods and destroying valuable wildlife habitat? Isn’t it about time we had an honest debate about the merits and pitfalls of unbridled commercial development?
Source: Kimberly Gibbs: Trampling citizens’ rights – Boulder Daily Camera
Boulder’s Planning Board recently approved a 44-unit development at 4525 Palo Parkway over a multi-stakeholder solution seeking 35 units and additional preserved riparian zone. The public should understand the special treatment afforded to the developer on this particular project.
Also known as “Dedicated Outlot E,” 4525 Palo Parkway was sold in 1986 for $10 by Pinecrest Homes Inc. to Boulder Valley School District for school purposes to serve the local community. For 29 years, the land remained platted under this dedication for school use only. Despite clear county code (both current and 1984 applicable code) the land was passed ultimately to Boulder Housing Partners without public hearings or formal vacation proceedings required for dedicated school lands. Both Planning Commission and Parks and Open Space Advisory Board were required to review the sale. Colorado Open Records Act requests show these reviews were never held. Despite a formal objection filed by the community, the city and county have declined to provide any material analysis or code legitimizing this taking of public lands and its subsequent transfer to a residential real estate developer.
Full Story: Harold Hallstein: Palo and Planning Board: A neighbor’s perspective – Boulder Daily Camera