Survey on ‘vibrant’ neighborhoods
Why is Boulder sending out another biased survey?
No doubt many of you remember the surveys the city of Boulder sent out a couple of years ago that were so biased as to be essentially useless other than as propaganda pieces. Well, last Friday I and many others received another one of these sell-jobs enticingly titled “Family-Friendly Vibrant Neighborhoods.”
Translating, this means adding the maximum density to the still surviving lower density parts of Boulder that the council can do without violating the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. FYI, the BVCP cannot be changed without consent of the county commissioners, who have a lot more sense and are not advocates of unlimited growth at any cost. Fortunately, this limits the damage the “progressives” can cause, at least for the immediate future.
In addition to the cavalier attitude of some of our council members about unilaterally changing the character and livability of our neighborhoods, the survey offends by asserting that this is an attempt to address housing costs. But the council has made no effort to determine the size of the market, which is what determines whether such incremental increases in supply will have any measurable effect on costs. And given the data that I have shared about the Denver metro area being the number one target for people wanting to move, such changes will have no significant effect on prices.
After providing a lot of information on what changes are being proposed but none on the negative impacts, the survey asks the question, “Do you have any other thoughts or ideas to share related to expanding housing choices in Boulder?" The problem is that the question is, frankly, baloney. This is not about "expanding housing choices". It's about increasing density and increasing Boulder's population, covered over with this veneer of “choice”, as if it’s about abortion rights.
BTW, I ran the numbers on Boulder’s progress toward meeting its 15% affordable housing goal. Based on the data the city provides on the Housing & Human Services website, it will take us another 45 to 50 years to get there. But, no surprise, the “progressives” have not raised the current 25% permanently affordable housing requirement (which needs to be at 50% to prevent things from getting worse) nor raised the jobs-housing linkage fee from $30/sq.ft. for office space to what’s needed (which is a multiple of this.) This makes it crystal clear that the goal is more, not better or truly affordable.
The survey completely avoids everything related to impacts of growth. For example, there is zero discussion about:
the public resources necessary to support all these more people, like rec centers, parks, street capacity, parking, transit, etc.;
who will pay for these facilities given Boulder’s notable lack of development impact fees;
whether these resources can be added or are even available, like water, where Boulder could lose one-third of its supply (the CBT) depending on the Colo. River negotiations, or like reducing lanes on Iris (where, just east, a giant housing development is being built;)
if the folks that already live there would be better off with all this densification.
All this is carefully avoided, no doubt because in fact those of us who live in these targeted neighborhoods will be worse off.
What really exposes the dictatorial approach is the total absence of any discussion about giving the people already living in the neighborhoods a real say. The idea of us voting on what happens to our neighborhoods, that we bought into (and in many cases built in) years or decades ago, seems to be repellent to the progressives’ “we know what’s best for you” mentality.
It would be a radical change for the better if the City of Boulder planners and upper-level staff made a strong effort to persuade the council to seriously consider quality of life and costs, both financial and otherwise, and then to provide informed choices for those of us who are already here.
And likewise for our council members, maybe they might remember that they are supposed to represent the citizens who are here, not just pursue their own narrow goals which many have clearly never thought through.
One interesting technical flaw: I took the survey on Saturday and was able to respond multiple time. I filled it out and then hit “Submit.” (When I failed to click “Share Your Input” first, it went into an infinite loop.) Then I exited and re-started my web browser and filled out the survey again. No doubt many others also figured this out. So, any statistical conclusions are likely meaningless.