2 Comments »

Don Deane said:
One of the Councilmembers in this clip, I think, cited some number (16 ?) of houses that have been built in Boulder that “everyone” agrees is an egregious McMansion.
a) Can you provide a list of those houses, with addresses, so that the rest of us can reach our own judgments about whether those houses are, in fact, so egregiously large and out of scale that they require this new law to forbid future ones like them?
Also useful would be information on:
b) whether any of the houses cited above could be built as it is now under the new proposed law.
c) how many other houses that have been (re)built over the last few (say, 3-5) years, and that are not generally regarded as egregious McMansions, would also have been precluded by the new law.
d) how many other houses that have not been (re) built over this period would be essentially frozen at the current size and dimensions by the new law. For set (d), it would be ideal to see some representative judgments of what proportion of these could be expanded by some % without becoming egregious McMansions themselves.
The numbers in sets c and d would represent over-control by the new Compatible Development law.
# 29 September 2009 at 4:02 pm
Macon Cowles said:
I appreciate this presentation of the discussion from the last City Council meeting. What I learned in watching this segment–because my argument is made at the end of it–is that I need to be more succinct in presenting my decision and the reasons on which it rests.
The presentation might be improved if you could click on the name of a Councilor and get their statement on the issue. Lisa’s comments are 8 minutes long–half of the segment. And Matt’s comments, to which the others were reacting, were absent.
# 26 August 2009 at 11:44 am

Add your comments...