[sphinx]

I don't know enough about Boulder to react specifically, but in general, I like the idea of affordable housing in close proximity to job centers. Ideally, cities should be places where one can live, work, shop, and play without a car. Not everyone will choose to live that way, but it should be a logistically feasible option. This is often seen as an urban yuppie lifestyle frill (and it may be, although it is an attractive frill), but it is hugely important for the elderly, the poor, lower income working families for whom a second car is out of reach, the disabled, young people, etc.

Around DC, we have a plethora of suburban towns whose teachers and policemen, not to mention the mechanics and store clerks, can't afford to live there. That's crazy. Sounds like Boulder has the same problem.

[palmer]

I don't know enough about Boulder to react specifically, but in general, I like the idea of affordable housing in close proximity to job centers.

What I learned from the article is that Boulder has no affordable housing. Sure, they have some units that they call affordable housing but it is clearly just a scam. Affordable housing is created by developers making the best use of the land. Regulations about preservation, walkability, or other such niceties get in way of development. The bottom line is you can take your pick, either affordable housing or the parts of DC that you like.

The sole reason for the expensive DC suburbs is federal pork, and that will go away as federal bankruptcy is slowly acknowledged. Developers have done what they can, but the proximity to billions of dollars has overwhelmed their ability to build. OTOH Fairfax has some barrios with very affordable rents. Those will spread when the local economy inevitably contracts.