Wednesday, March 05, 2008

Boulder TDR House Size Limitations

It appears that Boulder's County Commissioners are set on taking peoples private property rights through the TDR Program. I feel sorry for those people who have not added on to their homes yet or who have vacant land properties!

Boulder County's house-size battle nears an end
Opponents worry their voices will be ignored
By Laura Snider (Contact)Tuesday, March 4, 2008
If you go
What: County commissioners review the "expanded transfer of development rights," or TDR, program. The measures seek to offset the effects of large house sizes in unincorporated Boulder County.
When: At 4 p.m. today, the commissioners will have a study session to review the proposals. The meeting is open to the public, but no public testimony will be taken.
At 5:30 p.m. Thursday, the commissioners will listen to public testimony on the program.
At 5 p.m. Monday, the commissioners will have another study session when they will likely give direction to the staff on what the final program will look like.
Where: All meetings will be on the third floor of the Boulder County Courthouse, 1325 Pearl St.
For more information: Visit www.bouldercounty.org/lu or call Michelle Krezek at 720-564-2623.
Katrina Peterson doesn't think Boulder County should limit house sizes. She's said it at public meetings, she's written it in letters and she's called the land use department to express her concerns.
And even with a landslide of public opinion on her side -- or at least the vast majority of people who show up at public meetings on her side -- she's worried her voice isn't being heard.
Starting today, the county commissioners will hold three public meetings to discuss the county's controversial proposal to limit house sizes in unincorporated Boulder County. On Monday, it's likely the commissioners will decide on the final form of the regulations.
"I won't be surprised if they put it in place," said Peterson, who owns a house in the mountains and worries her property value will be damaged by the program. "It'll be pretty discouraging."
For many county residents doggedly following the house-size debate, the issue has laid bare a much more basic question than whether house sizes should be restricted. It has people pondering how elected officials should go about determining what their constituents really want.
"It's pretty hard to understand when (Commissioner Will Toor) says there's a lot of people out there who support it -- how do they know? How do they know when they don't show up?" Peterson said. "The staff and the county commissioners say there is a silent majority out there, and we're going to interpret that to mean they're OK with it."
More than 100 people wrote letters or e-mails to the land use department opposing at least some part of the program, compared with fewer than 40 supporting it.
And the county's Planning Commission, which is charged with advising the county commissioners on land-use issues, announced last month that it doesn't recommend house-size limits in the form of the "transfer of development rights" program, which would allow developers to build houses above set limits if they buy extra development rights.

Even so, there is evidence that county residents do support some form of house-size limits, and Toor says it's his responsibility to make a decision that's best for the entire community — now and in the future.
Toor points to a 2006 survey of Boulder County registered voters in which people were asked "whether respondents agree or disagree that if a house would be larger than, say, 4,000 or 5,000 square feet the county should require mitigation to the land such as buying open land and leaving it open ..." Seventy-three percent of people agreed.
"Having spent years in public office on the City Council and now on the county commission, I've learned the people who show up to testify on particular issues are not a representative sample of the population at large," Toor said. "We need to listen and understand those concerns, but I think there is a much broader public interest out there."
Contact Camera Staff Writer Laura Snider at 303-473-1327 or sniderl@dailycamera.com.
THE NUTS AND BOLTS OF HOUSE-SIZE LIMITS
The proposal that the county commissioners will review in the next week can be broken down into three pieces:
Expanded transfer of development rights
This is the part of the program that would set thresholds for house sizes. Most recently, the Planning Commission decided not to recommend such a program. However, the county commissioners still have the power to pass the program.
The last numbers used by the Planning Commission set a limit of 5,500 square feet for houses built in the plains and 3,500 square feet for houses built in the mountains. If a developer wants to build a larger house, he or she would need to buy extra development rights from owners of land that has not been developed or smaller houses that have not used all the square footage allowed.
Site-plan review
Now, anyone who wants to build a house in unincorporated Boulder County must go through a stringent site-plan review process to determine if the planned house would be in "harmony" with its neighborhood. The proposed amendments to the review would clarify what defines a neighborhood and create a clearer rule of thumb for what size house can expect to clear the review.
The Planning Commission recommended that the default "neighborhood" be set to 1,500 feet in all directions and the default house size be set to 125 percent of the median size of homes in that neighborhood. The definition of neighborhood or the size allowed could change with negotiation.
Special character areas
This designation would exempt unincorporated communities from the program, including Eldora, Eldorado Springs, Hygiene, Gold Hill, Allenspark, Raymond and Riverside. The program would also create a Peak-to-Peak scenic corridor. In all these designated areas, residents would work with the land use department to create codes that fit their individual communities and that would preserve the unique character of the area.

No comments: