Dear Planning Board Members:
I am writing to express my concern with Agenda Item #5A on the April 3, 2008 Public Meeting: "Public hearing and recommendation to City Council on approaches to interim regulations that may provide additional limitations in single family zoning districts aimed to protect neighborhood character."
I am opposed to any interim regulations for a number of reasons. As an initial matter, I am concerned that this proposal has been placed on a fast track for approval with little to no input from the citizens of the City of Boulder. The economic impact of any interim regulations on Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is not addressed in any of the materials submitted for this agenda item. It is very difficult to find a home in Boulder and most affordable homes are in need of serious repair and upgrades. It is hard for me to understand why the City would consider this proposal at a time when the economy is not good.
I have lived in downtown Boulder for over 20 years. I purchased my home several years ago in order to be able to live close to work. My wife and I plan on raising a family in our home, but we will need to remodel the current 2 bedrooms and 1 small bath in order to do so. The current zoning and permit process is very expensive and limits what can be done. My property is zoned RMX-1 and I have spent a lot of time and effort figuring out what we can and can't afford to do. I am concerned that the FAR proposal will add considerable time and expense to our plans. If this proposal is passed, my wife and I may have to join the exodus to Louisville, Lafayette or Longmont in order to find a sufficient home to raise a family. That is counter to the City's expressed goals of encouraging families to live and work downtown and having children attend neighborhood schools. If you pass this ill-conceived FAR proposal it will impact many people economically and cause property values to decline.
My big question is WHY is this such an emergency? The City spent a considerable amount of money on a Community Survey in 2007 and released the results in January, 2008. The Survey results are available on the City's website. The Boulder Community Survey included several questions about "Pops and Scrapes" (the alleged basis for the emergent nature of this FAR proposal). The Survey concluded that: "[T]he expansion or replacement of existing homes with larger homes ("pops and scrapes") is an issue about which Boulderites are ambiguous." Report of Results (2008-01-02), p. 35. Interestingly, a substantial majority found that "pops and scrapes" were good for the community because they: update the housing; beautify neighborhoods and the community by replacing or renovating run-down housing; benefit the neighborhoods by increasing property values; are necessary to match the quality of the housing to the cost of the land on which the house sits; and benefit neighborhoods by increasing the variety in housing design. Report of Results (2008-01-02), p. 35, Figure 23. These results are also interesting because 52% of respondents were property owners in the City. Report of Results (2008-01-02), p. 73, Table 51.
I am asking that you NOT recommend any interim regulations that may provide additional limitations in single family zoning districts to the City Council. Please stop this rush to find a solution to a problem that has not even been identified with any clarity. There are some very serious concerns that most property owners have that are not, and have not been, addressed. The .35 FAR number appears to have been snatched out of the air. I could find no basis for how this was determined or why it should be used. Is it really appropriate to use a "one size fits all" approach? Why are you now trying to include additional zoning classifications when the issue was supposedly aimed at RL-1? At a minimum, before this goes any further, an economic impact statement should be ordered to determine what effect the FAR proposal will have on property values, mortgages, property taxes, the local economy and the business community (builders, suppliers, realtors, etc.). I hope that you are hearing from a lot of property owners on this issue. Everyone I have talked to is extremely upset with the proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my input.
Sincerely,
Andrew and Kristin Macdonald
2003 Pine Street
Boulder, CO 80302
I am writing to express my concern with Agenda Item #5A on the April 3, 2008 Public Meeting: "Public hearing and recommendation to City Council on approaches to interim regulations that may provide additional limitations in single family zoning districts aimed to protect neighborhood character."
I am opposed to any interim regulations for a number of reasons. As an initial matter, I am concerned that this proposal has been placed on a fast track for approval with little to no input from the citizens of the City of Boulder. The economic impact of any interim regulations on Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is not addressed in any of the materials submitted for this agenda item. It is very difficult to find a home in Boulder and most affordable homes are in need of serious repair and upgrades. It is hard for me to understand why the City would consider this proposal at a time when the economy is not good.
I have lived in downtown Boulder for over 20 years. I purchased my home several years ago in order to be able to live close to work. My wife and I plan on raising a family in our home, but we will need to remodel the current 2 bedrooms and 1 small bath in order to do so. The current zoning and permit process is very expensive and limits what can be done. My property is zoned RMX-1 and I have spent a lot of time and effort figuring out what we can and can't afford to do. I am concerned that the FAR proposal will add considerable time and expense to our plans. If this proposal is passed, my wife and I may have to join the exodus to Louisville, Lafayette or Longmont in order to find a sufficient home to raise a family. That is counter to the City's expressed goals of encouraging families to live and work downtown and having children attend neighborhood schools. If you pass this ill-conceived FAR proposal it will impact many people economically and cause property values to decline.
My big question is WHY is this such an emergency? The City spent a considerable amount of money on a Community Survey in 2007 and released the results in January, 2008. The Survey results are available on the City's website. The Boulder Community Survey included several questions about "Pops and Scrapes" (the alleged basis for the emergent nature of this FAR proposal). The Survey concluded that: "[T]he expansion or replacement of existing homes with larger homes ("pops and scrapes") is an issue about which Boulderites are ambiguous." Report of Results (2008-01-02), p. 35. Interestingly, a substantial majority found that "pops and scrapes" were good for the community because they: update the housing; beautify neighborhoods and the community by replacing or renovating run-down housing; benefit the neighborhoods by increasing property values; are necessary to match the quality of the housing to the cost of the land on which the house sits; and benefit neighborhoods by increasing the variety in housing design. Report of Results (2008-01-02), p. 35, Figure 23. These results are also interesting because 52% of respondents were property owners in the City. Report of Results (2008-01-02), p. 73, Table 51.
I am asking that you NOT recommend any interim regulations that may provide additional limitations in single family zoning districts to the City Council. Please stop this rush to find a solution to a problem that has not even been identified with any clarity. There are some very serious concerns that most property owners have that are not, and have not been, addressed. The .35 FAR number appears to have been snatched out of the air. I could find no basis for how this was determined or why it should be used. Is it really appropriate to use a "one size fits all" approach? Why are you now trying to include additional zoning classifications when the issue was supposedly aimed at RL-1? At a minimum, before this goes any further, an economic impact statement should be ordered to determine what effect the FAR proposal will have on property values, mortgages, property taxes, the local economy and the business community (builders, suppliers, realtors, etc.). I hope that you are hearing from a lot of property owners on this issue. Everyone I have talked to is extremely upset with the proposal. Thank you for the opportunity to provide my input.
Sincerely,
Andrew and Kristin Macdonald
2003 Pine Street
Boulder, CO 80302
No comments:
Post a Comment