Up-zoning and densification will destroy Boulder
Two recent articles that appeared in The Daily Camera’s editorial section spurred me to write this guest opinion.
The first was a February 24 opinion piece by a frequent (and, by me, much admired) contributor, Steve Pomerance. I have been impressed by Pomerance’s increasingly shrill warnings about the pro-development and progrowth Juggernaut that is crushing the quality of life in Boulder. Pomerance and I are definitely on the same page. “Up-zoning” and “densification” will destroy this town!
The second was a March 1 guest opinion piece by Stan Oklobdzija, who appears to have revisited Boulder after a 24year slumber. But, unlike Rip
Van Winkle, he awoke to an unchanged world: in this case, a Boulder somehow frozen in time. He seems to think that this (if it were actually true) is horrible!
I first visited Boulder in 1974. Coincidentally, when I returned to live here exactly 24 years later, I was stunned by the growth during that interval: dirt roads had been paved, dozens of housing developments had sprung up on what was previously open prairie and farmland, new shopping centers appeared at almost every major intersection and sprawling industrial parks had been built. It has now been just over 24 years since I moved here, but even with the difficulty of perceiving growth when watching it daily for such a long interval, the change is undeniably obvious — take for example, the huge CU dorms on Baseline, the ultra-dense Boulder Depot and the hundreds of dwelling units at the north end of town — and, of course, the traffic jams, the noise and the air pollution.
Perhaps Oklobdzija should examine the U.S. Census statistics. Our city’s population (exclusive of CU students) has grown as follows: 67,000 in 1970; 86,000 in 1990; 98,000 in 2010; and 105,000 in 2020. And, perhaps more importantly, the county’s population has grown much faster: 132,000 in 1970; 225,000 in 1990; 295,000 in 2010; and 342,00 in 2023 — almost all of which has occurred east of the Flatirons. These numbers define an “exponential” and exponential defines an “explosion”!
Oklobdzija boasts of being a “California YIMBY.” Well, that’s great — if you want to live in places like LA or the Bay Area. I spent over 20 years in the latter and never plan to return — not even to visit if I can help it. He should consider Houston, the fourth largest city in the U.S. and the only major city with zero zoning — which boasts a demographic footprint about the size of Massachusetts. You buy a house in Houston, you’d better hope your neighbor doesn’t open a junkyard, a biker bar or a dog kennel!
I would suggest that Oklobdzija consider adding the acronym TINA to his credentials. That acronym embodies Margaret Thatcher’s answer to the environmentalist in the UK who questioned some of her more reckless pro-growth (aka Reaganite) policies. Her response: “There Is No Alternative!” Actually, there is. And one alternative is inviolable preexisting zoning — sometimes crudely denounced as NIMBYISM by developers, bankers and, alas, our City Council.
Bottom line, zoning is a “property right” — as much as is your own driveway or kitchen. As a progressive, I shudder to use that term, but it is what it is. As the chairman of the environmental law society in law school, I studied urban planning. The two concepts — environment and zoning — are inseparable. Sure, zoning may be a drag on over-development — but, it is and always has been a pro-growth concept at heart. Put the factories here and the shopping centers there — and the single-family homes here and apartments over there. The zoning concept didn’t build all of this stuff, it merely permitted it — and, encouraged it. And, so the developers came upon the land. They liked what they saw. And they built. And, then, they overbuilt. And, now they’re conniving with our City Council to subvert the zoning laws to the point that nothing about land use is sacred and everything is negotiable. Even the open space is on the table!
It was a job opportunity at Storagetek that brought me to Boulder. And, I was delighted to make the move. Back when I lived in Missoula in the early 1980s, we looked to Boulder for precedence on establishing city green belts, parks, recreation centers and even for smog control. I would shudder to think that Missoula would be looking to our current City Council for any such inspiration. And, of course, we all know what has happened to California — our City Council should take note of that!