Make Boulder attainable for more people and maintain its unique character by embracing affordable housing with an emphasis on sustainability, neighborhood character, and planning decisions at the local, not state, level. 

• Safe, stable, and affordable shelter is essential to the well-being of all people.  Boulder should continue to move forward, in collaboration with all relevant government agencies, to plan, finance, and build more permanently affordable housing for low-income populations and more attainable housing for middle-income households. Much of the current affordable housing stock is rentals and Boulder needs to expand permanently affordable homeownership to ensure Boulder maintains a diverse and balanced range of residents in all stages of life. Boulder must deliver a variety of housing types that meet the divergent needs of this population. 

• City expansion in Boulder has long been limited by our devotion to the beauty of our natural surroundings and a commitment to conservation. In 1959, Boulder voters created the Blueline to protect the mountain backdrop from development; in 1967, they voted for the first locally-funded greenbelt in the country; and in 1971, they voted to cap building height to protect the mountain views. As a consequence, growth in Boulder has focused on redevelopment, renovation, and limited annexation, all balanced by a strong commitment to historic preservation.  Infill, including the repurposing of industrial or commercial areas to include housing, has been hugely successful when planned with robust community input. Mixed-use infill, which creates purposely designed, walkable neighborhoods, is Boulder’s future. 

• In the United States, our strongest connections are to family, our country as a whole, and then to neighborhoods. Residents’ commitment to and intimate knowledge of their neighborhoods often produces constructive insights into the substantive issues of gentrification, displacement, local environment, and the impacts of development on current residents. From a historical perspective, our community has evolved over time and will continue to do so. For change to be accepted by most people, it should be discussed openly and the community benefit from the change should be emphasized. Sub-community plans, with strong community involvement, allow staff to introduce neighbors to models that increase housing affordability, community connectivity, and climate response.  

• Municipal zoning and planning must be considered within the context of ongoing regional planning because regional action is necessary to achieve Boulder’s climate, transportation, and housing affordability goals in an equitable manner.  However, while strongly supporting regional planning, Boulder should maintain substantial local control of land use as a home rule city. The leaders of Boulder bear a responsibility to the residents of Boulder to protect the interests of the city, which may differ from other cities in the region and the state. Colorado law has long been structured to provide a great deal of authority to local governments, particularly cities like Boulder that have adopted ‘home rule.’ Boulder has an exceptional record of well-managed development, and should retain its current full authority to regulate its own land use practices. If the balance of development decisions are not to the liking of some residents of the city, the solution is to alter the city laws and practices, not appeal to an outside authority for coercive legislation.