Our next question is from Richard Hockett
What is your opinion of the proposed CU South campus plan? Do you support building on this site. If the city can acquire the land would you (a) want to see the area remain openspace or (b) would you want affordable high density housing built?
Philip Hernandez
First, we need to recognize that this is CU property and the university will do want it wants. Given that, my preference is that part of the land be used for wind and/or solar energy. The remaining land would be utilized for recreational ball fields, soccor fields, bike trails and remaining in its natural state.
Nabil Karkamaz
Did not participate.
Kathryn Kramer
It is really unfair me to even answer this one because my back yard borders the CU open space. I am opposed to any building there because it is wetlands (and was once a gravel pit) and it is also in the floodplain (or was until it was said that the magical "berm" would keep it dry). It is also the gateway to Boulder. It was only because of a mistake on past city council's part that the land was not acquired as Boulder open space. Why not swap CU for other land and keep it as it is with hiking trails and wild life.
Would I want affordable high density housing built - ablsolutely NOT. That would ruin the first view that visitors have of Boulder.
Adam Massey
Did not participate.
Lisa Morzel
Did not participate.
Alan O'Hashi
this was a conversation that a bunch of us had at the bmoca event that many of us attended. i fought tooth and toe nail against the tennis court project. the best way to avoid flood plain issues at cu south is to keep it as open space. we need people on city council who understand sovereignty issues. i worked for tribal government and have hand on understanding about sovereignty. i know about the 'diplomacy' which is necessary in dealing with state and national governments.
Susan Osborne
Did not participate.
Eugene Pearson
I have the distinction of having voted three times against proposals to build on the CU-South campus. It is not good for students and it is not good for the community. I would like to see the area remain open space. I share this opinion with CU Regent Cindy Carlisle and CU Regent Candidate Joseph Neguse who also opposed any development on the property. If the city could engage in a land swap with the university I would propose it being a swap for space perhaps in the transit village area. We need to do what is congruent with that neighborhood and consider what is in the best interest of the collective community – students and permanent residents.
Susan Peterson
I am not a fan of more population growth in Boulder, either at the University or in the town. Thus, if the City could acquire the land, I would want to see the area remain OpenSpace, and I would seek other ways to add affordable housing inventory from existing housing stock.
Larry Quilling
I believe Boulder and Boulder County made a mistake by not purchasing the site when the opportunity was available. The South Campus property is in the flood plain the existing earthen dam that surrounds the property will simply push flood waters onto to open space and other private properties. We should work with CU to find alternative "trade" sites for their growth and limit South Campus development.
Tom Riley
It is a horrible idea. No longer should we allow CU to impose upon our infrastructure. In no way will I ever support building on this site. I feel strongly that given that riparian plants are indigenous to this area and that cannot be replaced, that in no way will I ever support building on this site. I propose that we withhold any connection to sewer or water connections to CU at this site. In exchange for water connections and sewer connections I would support that this space be committed to open space and that CU be permitted to build any perceived structures on its already large enough main campus including family housing.
Eric Rutherford
The South Campus is an Area Two, meaning it can be used for residential development, and I would not dismiss out of hand the idea of building there. Our need for affordable housing is so great that this could provide an excellent solution. There are only three Area Twos that can be developed – we need an emphasis on quality not quantity to help ease the burden on our communityy members needing housing support.
Rob Smoke
Did not participate.
Ken Wilson
Did not participate.
Matt Appelbaum
Did not participate.
Philip Bradley
Again the 3 part question. 1 No I do not support building on this land. It doesn't make sense for transportation(buses) the surrounding communities (the new Hill) or the city. I would want to see the area remain open space. affordable housing poses the same problems as building with the university does if not worse.
Seth Brigham
Did not participate.
Shawn Coleman
Of course high density housing would not be the best and highest use of CU south. IF any development happens there it must be remembered the serious flood plain issues there. This issue will require working with CU, and the County. Co-operation, rather than antagonism is the best way to ensure a positive outcome for all parties. Perhaps a land exchange is possible, but there are few people in the city who don't want to preserve our gateway as open space, and working with the university I suspect they would generally feel the same, co-operation with this state entity is the best way to find a positive outcome.
Macon Cowles
Did not participate.
Angelique Espinoza
I am not aware of an plan for south campus that is intended to start any time soon. It certainly fits the bill for an open space area, defining the boundary of town. Affordable housing, is a priority for me, though, so I would have to consider carefully the merits of a specific proposal. It would have to offer a very great deal of "community benefit" to be worth sacrificing the open space buffer at the entrance to town on 36.
Crystal Gray
Arrived late
Andrew Harrison
Did not participate.
