Decision on 63rd Street subdivision postponed until July

The Boulder County Commissioners voted to postpone a decision on the controversial 63rd Street Subdivision proposal until July 10, following a three-hour hearing on May 6. Commissioner Ashley Stolzmann was absent from the May 6 hearing.

Commissioners Claire Levy and Marta Loachamin heard extensive testimony about the proposal to create three additional lots at the southwest corner of 63rd Street and Niwot Road. Levy noted for the record her familiarity with the case and surrounding controversy.

County Planner Pete L'Orange presented the revised proposal, which had been scaled back from 10 lots to four total lots (the existing parcel plus three new ones). His analysis revealed that of 90 applicable criteria, 19 do not apply, 18 are not met, and 53 are or can be met by the proposal.

"A proposal must meet all criteria to be approved," L'Orange emphasized, noting the design "does not conform with Section 7-200" and conflicts with several Comprehensive Plan goals. He identified the property as being in an environmentally sensitive area with potential wildlife impacts requiring a full environmental impact study.

The application has generated substantial opposition, with 120 comments on the original referral and approximately 99 more since its re-referral to residents of the neighborhood. During public comment, speakers raised several concerns, with many identifying flooding risks.

L'Orange later responded to questions about transit accessibility, noting the location "does not support public transit or walkability" being two miles from the nearest Park-n-Ride. "In general, the proposal tipped more to the side of denying, inconsistent with the comprehensive plan goals rather than in support of them," he said.

When questioned about flood concerns, L'Orange explained that significant engineering would be required for the development area, which itself would create "adverse impacts on agricultural lands of importance."

The applicants defended their proposal, stating they have been working to rehabilitate the land to an agricultural state. "This application would make more green on the open space map," they argued, encouraging the board to advance the project to address engineering concerns at the next phase. The applicants warned that while they are pursuing agricultural use, "future owners may not. They may let it go to the condition it was in 2011."

Commissioner Levy expressed alignment with the staff recommendation for denial. "My concerns with the proposal are not things that additional engineering and design would clear up-it is more basic," she stated.

Levy elaborated that the request for additional density "is not allowed" under current regulations without meeting all criteria. She said, "It is not consistent with what we are trying to do in Boulder County. Any additional density should support our housing goals. This would not. These would be large single-family homes and would not meet a housing need we have in Boulder County."

Levy further argued the proposal "does not preserve agricultural land" and that "having four lots where only one is allowed consumes land that could be in productive agricultural use. This doesn't serve the heart of what we are trying to do in Boulder County,," she said.

Loachamin cited Comprehensive Plan language and noted that many questions would require the project to advance to be properly answered but was inclined to vote to approve the application.

With the hearing concluded, Levy moved to table the application to July 10 at 9:30 a.m., specifically so that Stolzmann could participate in the decision after reviewing the full recording. Public comment is now closed, with no additional testimony to be taken in July.

The proposal has drawn significant community attention, with more than 1,000 petition signatures gathered against the development prior to the hearing.