{"id":2362,"date":"2010-07-31T12:35:18","date_gmt":"2010-07-31T18:35:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.boulderblueline.org\/?p=2362"},"modified":"2010-07-31T12:35:18","modified_gmt":"2010-07-31T18:35:18","slug":"does-dense-make-sense-part-4-adequate-public-services","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.boulderblueline.org\/?p=2362","title":{"rendered":"Does Dense Make Sense? Part 4. Adequate Public Services"},"content":{"rendered":"

Editor’s note:\u00a0 PLAN-Boulder County<\/a> has issued a report entitled <\/em>Does Dense Make Sense? <\/strong> This is the fourth part in a six part series extracted from the report.<\/em><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Boulder Fire Department, 1913, Carnegie Branch, Boulder Public Library <\/p><\/div>\n

\n

The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan has a policy stating that all new development will \u201cpay its own way.\u201d\u00a0 This means that current levels of public services should be maintained as new development occurs.\u00a0 Policy 3.05 states, \u201cGrowth will be expected to pay its own way, with the requirement that new development pay the cost of providing needed facilities and an equitable share of services including affordable housing, and to mitigate negative impacts such as those to the transportation system.\u201d<\/p>\n

These goals are laudable and establish a legal justification for assessment of development fees on all new residential and commercial development.\u00a0 These fees should be set so that we maintain adequate public facilities and do not degrade levels of service. \u00a0Unfortunately, the current level of impact fees and development excise taxes are inadequate to achieve these policy goals in almost all areas of city-provided services.\u00a0 For example, recent empirical evidence shows that some public services such as libraries and fire stations are overburdened while nearby housing is built without any financial contribution to these services.\u00a0 The City\u2019s own studies<\/a> show that transportation funding is inadequate to prevent massive increases in congestion.\u00a0 The Blue Ribbon Commission I<\/a><\/em> identified building maintenance and replacement, and replacement of fire apparatus, as critical budget deficiencies.<\/p>\n

New development also has ongoing impacts beyond facilities construction.\u00a0 Witness the current debate over paving of subdivision roads in the county. \u00a0This year’s draft Capital Improvement Program (City of Boulder) states in the Introduction that, \u201cWhile dedication of certain funding streams by voters has provided funds for some capital needs, it has not provided ongoing new monies to pay for new operational costs. In some situations sufficient capital funds have been accumulated to build the project, but lack of operating dollars have put the project on hold . . .\u201d <\/strong><\/p>\n

Emergency Services<\/h1>\n

The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan sets service standards for response times for emergency services. Per the BVCP, when one fire response unit in a station exceeds 1,500 calls per year, additional fire engines and staff must be provided. \u00a0Three of Boulder’s seven fire stations currently exceed this service standard: \u00a0Station 1 is downtown, Station 2 is at Broadway and Baseline, and Station 3 is at 30th and Arapahoe. \u00a0In 2007, Station 1 received 2,402, Station 2 received 1,892 calls and Station 3 received 2,274 calls.<\/p>\n

Last year, Boulder\u2019s firefighters met their goals of arriving at the scene within 6 minutes only 65% of the time. \u00a0In 2007, they met the standards 80% of the time.\u00a0 This service gap has been widening steadily for the last few years according to an article in the Colorado Daily<\/em>, February 10, 2010. \u00a0Fire department staff have testified that more density creates more calls. \u00a0Routine delivery is more difficult in dense areas due to congestion and the configuration of Boulder\u2019s streets (lots of collector streets, few arterial streets).\u00a0 All of these factors combine to reduce response time.<\/p>\n

Station 3 will be directly impacted by the area formerly known as the Transit Village and, depending on the outcome of the Streets and Centers project, Station 2 could see some impact.\u00a0 Since these two fire stations have exceeded the service level spelled out in the BVCP, any additional growth in these areas will need to finance additional services.\u00a0 It is unclear if the City has identified any impact fees to these service areas to raise additional revenue for emergency services. \u00a0One-time development fees may not pay for the additional growth because the cost to operate the stations is an ongoing expense.<\/p>\n

Libraries<\/h1>\n

Libraries are important public services that are needed in each community to \u201cenhance the personal and professional growth of Boulder residents<\/a> and contribute to the development and sustainability of an engaged community through free access to ideas, information, cultural experiences and educational opportunities.\u201d \u00a0Unfortunately, current library funding sources only include operational funds, not capital funds for new facilities. According to the Boulder Public Library (BPL) 2007 Master Plan<\/a>, BPL\u2019s service delivery model proposes the development of a branch library when the population in a geographic quadrant of Boulder reaches 10,000 – 15,000 residents, a service area size that provides the usage needed to justify the costs.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>

Figure 5. Public Library Locations<\/p><\/div>\n

Looking at a map of the City of Boulder, it is clear that the areas intended to accommodate most of the new growth have no library facilities near them.\u00a0 The Transit Village and the Holiday neighborhood on North Broadway are intended to be walkable, complete communities where much of the new growth would occur.\u00a0 In the case of the Holiday neighborhood, construction of a North Boulder branch was recommended as part of the 1995 Library Master Plan and the North Boulder Subcommunity Plan.\u00a0 The developer dedicated a parcel of land but there have never been sufficient funds to build or operate the new facility despite requests for one in BPL user surveys.<\/p>\n

Though the library size has not been determined, an 8,000 square foot branch would cost $350,000-400,000 per year to operate.\u00a0 This amounts to an 8% increase in the BPL operating budget. \u00a0Partial funding of $1.5 million has been allocated to construction of the facility through the Capital Development fund but it is not appropriated.\u00a0 It is now estimated that an additional $2.6 million will be needed to build the branch.<\/p>\n

Most of Colorado is served and funded by Library Districts. \u00a0In Boulder, raising money for additional operations requires a property tax increase, which begs the question, \u201cWhy would South Boulder residents vote to tax themselves to build a library branch in North Boulder?\u201d\u00a0 Today, the library\u2019s operating budget is heavily dependent on the City\u2019s general fund.\u00a0 Only 11% of BPL operations are supported by the Library Fund, which includes monies from the mill levy increment (9%), fines and fees, gifts, and miscellaneous revenue sources (2%).\u00a0 This heavy reliance on the general fund has resulted in significant program and service reductions during recent periods of budget cuts.\u00a0 To accomplish the vision of functional, walkable communities, and to avoid overburdening existing library facilities, the City should ensure that new developments are contributing their fair share to new capital facilities.\u00a0 It is critical that impact fees charged to new development are adequate to develop new library facilities.<\/p>\n

Parks and Recreation, Greenways, and Open Space<\/h1>\n

Surveys of Boulder residents have repeatedly found that recreational opportunities, open space, and the greenways and bike path systems are among the most important aspects of Boulder for its citizens.\u00a0 The departments providing these important services are stretched thin by the current budget crisis, and increasing housing density could be expected to exacerbate their difficulties.<\/p>\n

Greenways System<\/h2>\n

The Greenways system consists of a series of riparian corridors along Boulder Creek and six of its tributaries, jointly administered by the Parks and Recreation, Open Space and Mountain Parks, and the Transportation Departments, with input from various advisory boards. \u00a0Bike paths are the responsibility of the Transportation Department.<\/p>\n

Parks and Recreation Department<\/h2>\n

The Parks and Recreation department operates more than 60 city parks, 3 recreation centers, Boulder Reservoir, 22 ballfields, 48 tennis courts, 3 outdoor swimming pools, and a number of other facilities.\u00a0 These are all heavily used by Boulder\u2019s active population, and redevelopment projects that are denser than current housing will increase the demand for all these recreation and park facilities.<\/p>\n

Under the budgetary pressures of the recession, maintenance and operations have been cut back, and closing the South Boulder Recreation Center has been discussed. The Parks and Recreation Department is dependent on the general fund for most of its budget, with some contributions from user fees and from state lottery funds. It also receives some capital improvement funds from a dedicated sales tax.<\/p>\n

Open Space and Mountain Parks Department (OSMP)<\/h2>\n

Boulder was the first municipality in the United States to tax itself for the purchase of open space. The campaign to pass this measure followed passage of the Blue Line, which prohibited supplying city water above a certain elevation; the movement was citizen led and initiated, and it was closely tied to the founding of PLAN-Boulder.\u00a0 Open Space was made a part of the City Charter, which provides:<\/p>\n

Open Space land shall be acquired, maintained, preserved, retained, and used only for the following purposes:<\/p>\n