Using different strategies, officials in both Lawrence and Boulder, Colo., are trying to find the proper balance between residential and commercial development.

Lawrence isn’t nestled next to the majestic Rocky Mountains, like Boulder, Colo., but the two cities have enough other things in common that it makes it interesting to watch how that city develops and the various issues it encounters in the process.

Both cities are home to major state universities and have attractive downtown shopping/entertainment areas. Both are popular places to live and visit.

A recent news story indicates that Boulder, like Lawrence, is having trouble finding the right balance between housing and jobs. Only while Lawrence is seeking more industry to support its residential population, Boulder is considering limits on commercial growth.

For some time, Boulder has placed strict controls on residential growth. Those limits have driven the cost of housing in Boulder so high that many low- and moderate-income people have been priced out of the market. That means many people who hold jobs in Boulder can’t afford to live there, so they live in outlying cities and drive into Boulder to work.

That trend of workers being pushed out of the city has been rather dramatically illustrated by some new figures from Boulder city planners. Existing zoning, the planners say, would allow for 37 million square feet of new commercial building space, which would accommodate 75,000 to 150,000 new workers in Boulder. However, the land that is available for residential growth would only allow the city’s population to grow by about 12,000 people.

To try to bring those two numbers more in balance, Boulder city officials are considering some sort of cap on commercial development. That idea, of course, brings howls from developers and property owners who say such caps would infringe on property rights. Business leaders also worry that caps may be the wrong move in the current slumping economy.

Over the years, Boulder has undertaken a number of efforts, including creating a greenbelt around the city, to try to restrict its growth, but obviously, questions remain. Would Boulder have been better off not trying to manipulate its residential development? Will capping commercial development get things back in balance without hurting the economy?

These aren’t the same questions being asked in Lawrence, but some of the issues are similar. Lawrence’s tax base currently is skewed toward residential property, which has the effect of driving up residential housing prices and property taxes. That, in turn, makes it more difficult for moderate- and low-income people to afford housing.

Unlike Boulder, Lawrence is working to balance the situation by bringing more business development to the community. The goal is to shift more of the tax burden away from residential property as well as provide more well-paying jobs for local residents. Will the current efforts succeed in renewing the development balance in Lawrence and stall our trend toward becoming a bedroom community?

Most Lawrence residents hope so, but balancing jobs and housing has become an increasingly hot topic, according to one Denver official who noted, “A lot of people are watching what happens in Boulder over this.”

Lawrence is among those that will be watching and seeking to learn from Boulder’s experience. One lesson officials and residents in both cities should have learned is that it may not be wise to try to clamp down too tightly on a community’s growth.