Lafayette Growth Debates = More Meetings

The Lafayette City Council will discuss the annexation request of 82 acres on the northeast corner of Hwy 287 and Hwy 42, north of the Exempla Good Samaritan Medical Center tomorrow night, Tuesday, during their 7:30 PM meeting. (Scroll down to Public Hearing "N".)

This parcel is not to be confused with the Waneka land whose annexation will be subject to voter approval early next year.

On Thursday, Nov 30, the Lafayette Planning Commission will review the feasibility and "appropriateness" of development plans for the Countryside Village shopping center, better known as the old Albertson's/current WalMart site on the northwest corner of South Public and South Boulder Roads. Read the latest staff report on the redevelopment.

Following passage of Issue 2C in Lafayette, there will be some new parameters (or lack thereof) on the potential development; however 2C's exemptions may be far less of an issue than Boulder County's decisions regarding the land they own to the north.

Election Results - Most Taxes Fail in East Boulder County

People in Denver were still waiting to vote at 10:00 PM because of computer breakdowns, ballot shortages and other issues that likely should never have been a factor. When you can listen on the radio to the declared victor for governor or other issue races - while still waiting to cast your vote - it makes a mockery of the process. Talk about instilling a feeling of worthlessness to a person's vote. Denver Mayor Hickenlooper spent the night apologizing and scrambling to explain how the Denver Election Commission failed to prepare for the day.

Thankfully Boulder County did not grab headlines like in 2004 for delayed ballot counting or any major computer screw-ups. However, the County website set up to display results is decidedly ugly and less user-friendly than I prefer. Do we really need to see a breakdown of registered votes and their turnout percentages for various constituencies first? If we're bothering to use the County's website at all, we're looking for County ballot issue and candidate race info first.

To see results for eastern Boulder County issues and races, scroll down and look to the left side of the page. Of course, theses are not yet "official" results.

Three taxes failed that I had advocated for in the Yellow Scene this month: 2B in Longmont, 2A in Louisville and 2A in Superior. The anti-tax mentality won out over the rationale and pragmatic reasons for each. Longmont refused to tax overnight, out-of-town visitors; Louisville avoided the ability to tax out-of-town major purchases, and Superior, the worst of all, simply refused to step up and start to fund their own library services.

2C in Lafayette has passed as well as the Boulder Valley School District Bond; both overcoming deep skepticism that the authority/money granted will be handled appropriately by officials. More on 2C as we see how Lafayette City Council words the ordinance it will now create.

I must say Superior's vote surprises me most of all. What's up with that? Read Superior Trustee Jeff Chu's imploring letter to the editor of the Superior Observer asking for 2A's passage.

Did any results surprise you? Anger you? Anyone ready to demand a recount? I'm stuck on this Superior vote...

Two Days to Go, 2C Coming Down to the Wire

Thanks for the private and public comments on this - and the phone calls, I'm trying to reach you all. Closer reading of the Ballot Issue 2C's language shows that if passed, the number of units and the length of the exemption are yet to be set by Council: "...SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS TO BE ENACTED BY COUNCIL ORDINANCE REGARDING DURATION OF THE EXEMPTION AND LIMITS OF THE NUMBER OF DWELLING UNITS..."

So if 2C does pass, citizens can still let Council know the limits they would like to see on the exemption.

I've added in the comments section to this post some thoughts I picked up from Lafayette Mayor Pro-Tem David Strungis too. Councilor Kerry Bensman articulates "It Makes Sense to Reject 2C" in the Letters to the Editor of the Sunday Daily Camera, and Councilman Frank Phillips already added his comments to the posting below titled "Lafayette Ballot Item 2C - Does it Even Matter?"

Plus, read more of this discussion from the earlier post "Lafayette Councilor Misrepresented Big Time."


The following submission is from Lafayette City Councilor Jay Ruggeri:

2-C is "To See" the Future. Vote Yes for Lafayette.

In the past, Lafayette's city leaders neglected to include the Albertsons and Wal-Mart area into the exempted portion of the Urban Renewal District. They didn't consider the new trend in urban design that allows for a residence to be located above the retail and office space. Lafayette is now discovering, like many communities, that bringing a "mixed use" concept into the core of a town center is attractive, sustainable and environmentally friendly.

In Lafayette, we want to add that "mixed use" to new County buildings and a new three acre, pedestrian friendly, urban park to address to the void left by the big box stores that have moved to the higher traffic roadways. Correcting this omission will allow Lafayette to participate in the smart urban design planning that other communities currently enjoy. Designing an area without the necessary and supportive residential building permits doesn't make good sense for an interested developer. Without this exemption, we'll be left with big box blight.

One should keep in mind that these residences will be added to the business district, not some suburban sprawl that the growth limit was intended to address. This one time exemption would not change the city's 200 unit per year growth limit. That growth cap will continue. The citizens of Lafayette would prefer to rid that core area of the typical big box retail center.

This vision of the future is not about big money, it's about a quality meeting place. Our citizens want a safe, comfortable, pedestrian friendly town center, not more of the same big box retail centers with a sea of asphalt. We could take a corrective lesson from that Joni Mitchell song, and sing..."Let's take parking lots and put up a paradise !"

Vote YES on 2C. The one time exemption for Lafayette's blight.
Jay Ruggeri, Councilor. City of Lafayette

Lafayette Ballot Issue 2C - Does it even Matter?

As the discussion of Lafayette Ballot Question 2C has evolved on this site and in conversations around town, I am losing the sense that a staunch pro or con stance even matters. Many sources tell me there's not likely to be a development proposal for the Countryside Village property that would request as many residential permits as 2C would allow. A city-wide cap of 200 building permits a year (plus 50 if they're affordable units) would be waived for this particular property if 2C passes.

Plus there are several other land use and expense factors that are weighing against the potential here. The infrastruture costs and a propoerty exchange involving County-owned land to the north of the parcel add to the complexity. In the latest Lafayette News, Councilor Kerry Bensman and resident Karen Norback have letters to the editor listing why 2C is a bad idea.

Councilor Chris Cameron and resident Wade Daniels have letters explaining their support.

I still like the idea of removing the cap on permits, and if it is almost a given that development wouldn't support close to 200 units, let alone more, then what difference does 2C make? I see 2C as unintentionally evolving into a philosophical debate over growth control in general. The outcome will either validate previous growth control votes from 2001 and 1995, or show a flexibility for specific parcels of land.

Given that proposals have to go through a public approval process and ultimately the Council, a site-specific removal of the unit cap removes the possiblity that permits could already be allocated elsewhere in the city in the same year a development comes forward for Countryside Village - and the development proposal, although worthwhile, is rejected because of the city-wide permit cap. To deny this possibility and/or deny the city the ability to avoid it is why 2C is now much more of a principled growth or anti-growth question.

I'm still leaning towards supporting the otherwise moot exemption 2C will offer. But there's still 4 days to go.

Lafayette Councilor Misrepresented Big-Time Online

In yesterday's Daily Camera, Lafayette was everywhere, with three of the ten articles in the entire paper (not counting sports) focused on Lafayette growth issues.

One article described the potential for re-routing Hwy 7, which is years away, unfunded and at this point just a nice idea.

Another article - from the front page - described the concerns some have over annexing Chuck Waneka's land for a Lowe's, and the February election that will allow or deny the annexation.

But the big shocker was the incorrect reference in the online version of the article on Ballot Question 2C, which we've been debating here (see earlier posts). Councilor Kerry Bensman was specifically named as a supporter of 2C - an outspoken one at that - and he is most certainly against 2C.

He sent me the following comment: "Today's Daily Camera article says I am a proponent of 2C. The reporter never contacted me before the article was published. Needless to say, the article is in error. Vote No on 2C. "

As more comments come in to the post below on 2C, it is important people know who is on which side.

The Comments Are Coming In...

Thanks to all of you sending in comments. As I add them to the entries below, I encourage you to check back on topics that grabbed your eye and look for new comments.

Thanks to Lafayette City Councilor Kerry Bensman for his comments re: Lafayette Ballot Question 2C. He disagrees with my position, and today the Daily Camera editorial also opposes the idea. I've added further comments and encourage the same from you.

2C or not 2C? Lafayette's big growth issue

I was contacted by a reader interested to know my position on Lafayette Ballot Question 2C. I have since added my email address into my profile description in case anyone else would like to send me a note outside of this forum. If you ever would like to post a topic for discussion, send it to me at budanddakota@yahoo.com.

Lafayette Ballot Question 2C:
Passage would exempt the Countryside Village Shopping Center from the city charter’s housing growth cap limitations. Opponents cry foul that potential mixed-use redevelopment of the land (following WalMart’s exit to its new home on Hwy 287) is asking to violate the citizen-approved cap on housing units allowed per year. The sentiment against 2C tends to filter down to a chorus regarding the virtues of “small town feel” and the intent of the growth cap, but the inflexibility it champions sounds more like ideological no growth. If inflexible housing unit growth limits are still in favor we'll find out November 7. Just asking the question posed in 2C is as valid as asking voters to chime in on the Waneka property annexation, a land-use vote that is being championed by those likely to oppose 2C.

Suggestions for the property at the northwest corner of South Boulder Rd. and South Public Rd. have included parks, retail and office space and several hundred housing units. In reality, the housing units are both a long term benefit to the town and a necessary component to attract development. As opposed to the otherwise equally likely but less attractive “small town feel” of abandoned buildings and a vast parking lot in the center of town, approval of 2C will give city officials and citizens the opportunity to consider smart proposals to add a new community center to town. Without the specific exemption 2C provides, creative and feasible ideas won't even come to the table. For these reasons I support 2C.

See the letter of endorsement for 2C from Mayor Chris Berry and Mayor Pro-Tem David Strungis in the Lafayette News. Read an opposing view from former City Councilor Jeff Monica in the comments link.