thankyou for your written updates that are so detailed, understandable, and comprehensive.
to regress somewhat. for myself I did not read anywhere what the take away was from the initial contact with the kairoi corp. was on feb. 27th ie: did kairoi feel lafayette residents were putting out
the welcome mat for them?
my 1st thought about this whole issue of annexing is. why are the commissioners even considering giving up even more land to this insidious foreign, out of state investment corp., just so they can further increase the return on their bottom line. I thought the commissioners expressed the desire to keep the eastern undeveloped land of lafayette an open space/ park.
this especially when the BHA is building 400 housing units at willowby, and erie township commissioners have permitted an avarice farmer, and greed driven developer to build 800-1,000
houses on a single piece of land on n 119th almost across from each other. not to mention the
construction taking place further east under the auspices of broomfield county whose motto is,
'there isn't a developer they don't like'.
the uncontrolled drive to push housing development between boulder, broomfield, and now weld county, and every type and kind of developer has 'now' become detrimental to the overall
well being, and quality of life to the residents of lafayette and 3 counties mentioned above. let alone the hidden political agenda of denver related to home rule, highway funding, and housing density to mass transit???
I will be writing the township commissioners before the may 20th meeting. my wife says (no comment necessary), that she doesn't want me attending these meetings, as it is bad for my health, and mental well-being. j.s.
To clarify a few things, when you say commissioners I am assuming you mean the county commissioners. They are not involved in this process other than the land is in Boulder County. But they are not "considering giving up more land". County rules say only one house per 35 acres can be built. If the landowner wants more than that they must be part of a municipality, in this case Lafayette.
The landowner has the right to petition the city of Lafayette for annexation but the city has no obligation to accept the annexation. The state has a process that is required if a landowner wants to develop the land, and that is the process the developer is following right now.
The developer must submit a petition to the city asking for annexation and have hearings before the city council. If their petition follows the state requirements (and I expect it will) they can begin the design process for the development. When that design is complete, the council will vote not only to accept or deny it but to also say yes or no to the annexation.
The body to write to about this is the Lafayette City Council. I will be writing a post soon with information about how to do that. Today (Thursday) the information packet for the May 20th council meeting will be released. That will have information about the next step in the petition process on May 20th. Stay tuned!
Hello Karen. Thank you once again for keeping the ongoing evolution of our community in our sights as it is being massively impacted by state legislation. It’s bad enough that we have to spend our time fighting to stop national leaders from crushing our democracy, but now we have to fight state leaders to stop them from crushing our community. Infuriating does not even begin to describe it. Here is a copy of the letter I sent to all city council members and to our city manager. I’d like to strongly encourage others to keep making their voices heard at the local and state level. Don’t forget our new state senator Katie Wallace. My first take is that she seems sympathetic to our concerns.
Dear Councilor,
I’m writing to contribute my thoughts on the executive session scheduled for the April 1 meeting regarding receiving legal advice on questions related to home rule authority and land use and zoning. I’m sure my input on this is just preaching to the choir here, but want to make sure my expectations are known about these questions and legal advice. I would expect council to ask any legal questions necessary to compare the costs and consequences of doing nothing to comply with HB24-1313 compared to the costs and consequences of allowing high density development that would exponentially increase our population and create huge permanent structures that could never be “unbuilt” and would create long term ongoing and unmanageable costs and burdens to the city. I would also expect that questions would be asked regarding a potential lawsuit to force the state to overturn this legislation, either on our own or in conjunction with the other targeted communities interested in joining forces. My goal as a resident is for one or the other of these two approaches (either ignoring the legislation or suing to overturn it), or a combination of both, would be the ultimate way this gets handled by local leadership, as opposed to working with the state to somehow meet them halfway and reach some compromise, which would not defend our home rule authority and still leave us with high density development in some form that we do not want. I look forward to hearing whatever outcomes of this meeting that council is able to share, or at least the leadership decisions that result from it. Thank you so much for supporting Lafayette residents in their outrage at this massive overreach by state legislators.
hello karen,
thankyou for your written updates that are so detailed, understandable, and comprehensive.
to regress somewhat. for myself I did not read anywhere what the take away was from the initial contact with the kairoi corp. was on feb. 27th ie: did kairoi feel lafayette residents were putting out
the welcome mat for them?
my 1st thought about this whole issue of annexing is. why are the commissioners even considering giving up even more land to this insidious foreign, out of state investment corp., just so they can further increase the return on their bottom line. I thought the commissioners expressed the desire to keep the eastern undeveloped land of lafayette an open space/ park.
this especially when the BHA is building 400 housing units at willowby, and erie township commissioners have permitted an avarice farmer, and greed driven developer to build 800-1,000
houses on a single piece of land on n 119th almost across from each other. not to mention the
construction taking place further east under the auspices of broomfield county whose motto is,
'there isn't a developer they don't like'.
the uncontrolled drive to push housing development between boulder, broomfield, and now weld county, and every type and kind of developer has 'now' become detrimental to the overall
well being, and quality of life to the residents of lafayette and 3 counties mentioned above. let alone the hidden political agenda of denver related to home rule, highway funding, and housing density to mass transit???
I will be writing the township commissioners before the may 20th meeting. my wife says (no comment necessary), that she doesn't want me attending these meetings, as it is bad for my health, and mental well-being. j.s.
Hi John,
I'm glad you find my reports useful. I wrote about the Kairoi neighborhood meeting here https://apoliticalhobbyistinlafayetteco.substack.com/p/potential-development-at-119th-and-c18 I don't think they got the feeling that residents were putting out the welcome mat. 😉
To clarify a few things, when you say commissioners I am assuming you mean the county commissioners. They are not involved in this process other than the land is in Boulder County. But they are not "considering giving up more land". County rules say only one house per 35 acres can be built. If the landowner wants more than that they must be part of a municipality, in this case Lafayette.
The landowner has the right to petition the city of Lafayette for annexation but the city has no obligation to accept the annexation. The state has a process that is required if a landowner wants to develop the land, and that is the process the developer is following right now.
The developer must submit a petition to the city asking for annexation and have hearings before the city council. If their petition follows the state requirements (and I expect it will) they can begin the design process for the development. When that design is complete, the council will vote not only to accept or deny it but to also say yes or no to the annexation.
The body to write to about this is the Lafayette City Council. I will be writing a post soon with information about how to do that. Today (Thursday) the information packet for the May 20th council meeting will be released. That will have information about the next step in the petition process on May 20th. Stay tuned!
Hello Karen. Thank you once again for keeping the ongoing evolution of our community in our sights as it is being massively impacted by state legislation. It’s bad enough that we have to spend our time fighting to stop national leaders from crushing our democracy, but now we have to fight state leaders to stop them from crushing our community. Infuriating does not even begin to describe it. Here is a copy of the letter I sent to all city council members and to our city manager. I’d like to strongly encourage others to keep making their voices heard at the local and state level. Don’t forget our new state senator Katie Wallace. My first take is that she seems sympathetic to our concerns.
Dear Councilor,
I’m writing to contribute my thoughts on the executive session scheduled for the April 1 meeting regarding receiving legal advice on questions related to home rule authority and land use and zoning. I’m sure my input on this is just preaching to the choir here, but want to make sure my expectations are known about these questions and legal advice. I would expect council to ask any legal questions necessary to compare the costs and consequences of doing nothing to comply with HB24-1313 compared to the costs and consequences of allowing high density development that would exponentially increase our population and create huge permanent structures that could never be “unbuilt” and would create long term ongoing and unmanageable costs and burdens to the city. I would also expect that questions would be asked regarding a potential lawsuit to force the state to overturn this legislation, either on our own or in conjunction with the other targeted communities interested in joining forces. My goal as a resident is for one or the other of these two approaches (either ignoring the legislation or suing to overturn it), or a combination of both, would be the ultimate way this gets handled by local leadership, as opposed to working with the state to somehow meet them halfway and reach some compromise, which would not defend our home rule authority and still leave us with high density development in some form that we do not want. I look forward to hearing whatever outcomes of this meeting that council is able to share, or at least the leadership decisions that result from it. Thank you so much for supporting Lafayette residents in their outrage at this massive overreach by state legislators.
Excellent! Thanks for staying engaged in this issue.