[{"_1":2,"_99":-5,"_100":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6211108,"mediaKeyId","3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd","parentId",3699627,"title","Planning Board recommends Boulder City Council adopt broad code cleanup with targeted amendments","audioSeconds",10074,"startMs",2305000,"endMs",12379000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd&start=2305&end=12379","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd/thumbnail_2305000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6211108/Boulder/Boulder-County/Colorado/Planning-Board-recommends-Boulder-City-Council-adopt-broad-code-cleanup-with-targeted-amendments","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6211108-b315de1701577fa066e0f1376146e657/orig.mp4?Expires=1770568868&Signature=cCtz~8o3PS2ZRiucznLl8G4pL-b7fhe7yL710JlnNxgRO2j2GcC0~ojlJTLFYxxsTN2SzhssGV3iTk76HOZIcmjXUlVIWN5H~V6X7ZfrMXfBioiocjtBVpIbnujcy5IW4yTgnUxZB8K9f4UKyges9z27fXel60D-R84Em4GfcfCgn~jo7S4PEZJNdP~6j1qMg79y-dL-OwksRXaVfb7ikUy~0j2yGiWoq1jTKgwN6FOp-PaGrZrmMo-w~YYQlBEjrPSqJiKpi4IoKWzxtL5-OZ8TRHO-G5o1CtqkOFsXGzudaxXWv712JQY~D2k90QwVZa80203~87o2F2-PJ05kAw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Boulder City, CO","date","2025-06-07T07:53:13Z","article","City planning staff on May 27 presented Ordinance 86 97, a wide‑ranging technical cleanup of Boulder’s land‑use code that corrects typographical errors, clarifies definitions, updates graphics, and makes targeted changes to align the code with state requirements and local practice. Jeff Salmonson, city planner, summarized the ordinance’s purpose as “a periodic technical review of the land use code” to fix errors and codify existing practices.

Staff highlighted several substantive changes under review: clarifying which dwelling types may be allowed in certain districts; harmonizing terminology for impervious, semipervious and permeable surfaces in the form‑based code; revising duplex and bedroom‑type language to accommodate larger units; and tightening minor subdivision rules so that proposals requiring public improvements follow full subdivision procedures. The package also proposes removing a 750‑foot separation requirement for congregate, custodial and residential care facilities and allowing additional flexibility for hospital and medical uses in public zoning districts to account for larger floor‑to‑ceiling heights.

Board members asked detailed questions across many provisions. Laura (Planning Board member) pressed staff on a proposed allowance intended to help Boulder Community Health add height for hospital uses without triggering community‑benefit requirements; Carl Geiler and Brad Mueller (Planning & Development Services) said the change responds to hospital floor‑height needs and to previously‑approved footprints, and that staff intended the change to be applicable more broadly than a single institution. Some board members expressed concern that the provision could create a narrow, use‑specific exemption; George (Planning Board member) moved to strike that addition and the board subsequently voted to remove it from the recommendation.

Members debated whether properties that do not meet current setback standards should be eligible to convert to duplexes; Kurt Nordback said the proposed setback restriction could block conversions of historic buildings. The board asked staff to revisit the duplex language and the related nonconforming‑lot rules. On minor subdivisions, engineers’ input led staff to propose that applications involving public improvements should proceed through the full subdivision process rather than the simplified minor subdivision pathway.

The board also discussed open‑space rules in denser urban zones, elevated courtyards above first‑floor spaces, and whether balconies and short‑term bicycle parking should count as “countable open space.” After debate, the board approved an amendment to the courtyard requirement changing the recommended language to require “an inviting outdoor garden or landscaped courtyard is provided at or close to grade level,” a wording intended to prevent broadly elevated courtyards from substituting for ground‑level open space where that would be inappropriate. The board kept language allowing certain elevated open‑space features to count in urban form‑based contexts.

Other focused items included: clarifying impervious/semi‑pervious/permeable surface definitions and harmonizing the form‑based code; retaining a SmartRegs exception for attached accessory dwelling units after discussion of construction burdens on retrofit ADUs; clarifying rules that restrict minor subdivisions that require public improvements; expanding the list of paved areas potentially counted as open space to include short‑term bicycle parking; and cleaning obsolete references to the Boulder Urban Renewal Plan.

After a round of proposed amendments and votes, the Planning Board moved and seconded a recommendation that City Council adopt Ordinance 86 97 “as amended by Planning Board below.” The board instructed staff to prepare the ordinance with the adopted amendments for City Council review. Among the final edits the board directed: revised courtyard language to emphasize grade‑level access, a refined site‑plan/area‑plan consistency clause to distinguish site‑specific plan guidance from overarching plan goals, an aligned form‑based code exceptions clause, retention of the SmartRegs exception for attached ADUs, and removal of the proposed hospital‑height language under the site review criteria.

Ending: The Planning Board voted to recommend the code cleanup ordinance to city council with the board’s amendments and asked staff to bring the revised text forward for council consideration and to continue follow‑up on several requested clarifications.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","5-27-25 Planning Board Meeting","oneSentenceSummary","City planning staff presented Ordinance 86 97 on May 27, a technical cleanup of Boulder’s land‑use code; the Planning Board recommended council approval but adopted several targeted amendments.","taxTitle","Boulder, Boulder County, Colorado","taxId",3386,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6211113,"Boulder planning board presses staff on permanence and flexibility of proposed TDM ordinance",1610,621000,2231000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd&start=621&end=2231","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd/thumbnail_621000.jpg","/articles/6211113/Boulder/Boulder-County/Colorado/Boulder-planning-board-presses-staff-on-permanence-and-flexibility-of-proposed-TDM-ordinance","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6211113-9b6d36fca95af8eed7b3719c1a1e0e60/orig.mp4?Expires=1770568868&Signature=CEBsTnpnABM4VUYypcECuOwjbQGew7g5HANkVrvwpw~-ddFhbf09pAhd6~Y2dQGXg4gBEdbrBe5UkSNrp9RL7sLZmmbV3wo9WgErpy9HYJ7guhb8ia6R84~VcsACWmW2aI7zWE7iLZgyT8lTaDtch9-KhNM9K3-8~D54QF2GPiGuGbU2RjpvitbEzSzTSxj425XJm2LpM37hH88XtQsZ69pY1uc7NtSRUaIpX2mhGb74dBJfuAoEEPRC2HYXco7-4YEbrGMYDoeWXqb42oJWBXfGJRV9Qq6gaasbuob8t6YdftrTFLy76N1KueKTFfCfjQ5oUWUfOuixSLG0WtaumQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City of Boulder planning staff asked the Planning Board on May 27 for feedback on a Transportation Demand Management ordinance meant to complement recent parking-minimum eliminations and a residential access management program. Chris Haglund, principal project manager, laid out a tiered approach that would apply the ordinance to developments large and small and rely on financial guarantees provided by developers or property owners to fund tenant-level TDM programs.

Board members focused on three practical questions: whether the financial guarantees should be perpetual or reviewed periodically; whether the city should allow a cash-in-lieu option that would let payments be spent citywide; and how the ordinance should treat affordable housing projects. Planning Board member Kurt Nordback said he had “some concerns about a permanent, requirement,” arguing a mechanism to review or revisit long-term guarantees would be appropriate. He also urged making parking pricing a code requirement to change travel behavior.

Claudia (Planning Board member) told staff she supports longer-term commitments for TDM because tenants and uses change over time and exogenous events can disrupt travel patterns, but she also favored a periodic review or sunset so the program could be adjusted as conditions change. She asked that the ordinance include both programmatic and physical infrastructure elements — “best in class bike facilities, transit shelters and furniture, shared ride waiting areas,” she said — so alternatives to driving feel practical and safe.

Several members raised equity concerns. Claudia and others said exempting affordable housing from TDM requirements would reduce access to benefits for residents who may rely on alternatives; staff noted that the city currently subsidizes neighborhood EcoPasses for some Boulder Housing Partners projects and that market-rate projects receive a similar subsidy only after an initial developer period.

On enforcement and monitoring, staff described a compliance approach that could reduce annual monitoring after three years of compliance for large developments and build periodic checks — suggested at five years — into ongoing monitoring. Haglund said staff will examine options including a cash-in-lieu program and alternative methods to calculate annual financial guarantee levels (per unit, per bedroom, or square footage) and expects to return to the board with a draft ordinance in August.

The board did not vote on the proposal; members treated the meeting as a feedback session. Staff recorded the requests and will refine tiers, monitoring, affordability treatment, and financial-guarantee approaches in the next draft.

Ending: Staff will return in August with a draft ordinance that incorporates the board’s feedback on guarantee length, monitoring, tier thresholds, possible cash‑in‑lieu options, and how to measure payments (per unit/bedroom/square foot).","At a May 27 Planning Board session, staff sought feedback on a draft Transportation Demand Management (TDM) ordinance. Board members urged clearer rules on the duration of financial guarantees, options for cash-in-lieu programs, and protections for affordable housing, and asked staff to return with a draft ordinance in August.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6211105,"Residents urge more community input on Boulder SIP and raise concerns about demolition at Broadway/Baseline",280,235000,515000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd&start=235&end=515","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3699627-5887df7d5d6fa31951758bd8d031bbcd/thumbnail_235000.jpg","/articles/6211105/Boulder/Boulder-County/Colorado/Residents-urge-more-community-input-on-Boulder-SIP-and-raise-concerns-about-demolition-at-BroadwayBaseline","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6211105-9b5c5e2def56a13794afb3fcb0db0ced/orig.mp4?Expires=1770568868&Signature=Mv2xCutu5jq--8MUp1iSSIvLLwO2BonNdKAIK4W4wgUcjA3JlVQwcsIId~PeZgxkjS7yTwXAKnAkWFkwt9c4nN4~aRbETSJLhx9qDxSCGiMazVACqSze310eTvxvU2c5bjY6IGAkqGO5zwDmp6wN0cJmdE~1JklwRJoExRTEgrXuximrQxCpfvPGUfW1cf8BhC45sKl7kpqHg-fposLjxaUDpaypTztowZ3YrD9L6PtIQ6wq5zo-CE617OhbTeiNOuy85PSSZl4aOWSNe1VcYlWF5a7WWD8GR-o0ts8rl4oryKOlyNBhp8Gvm2GFY0EAmF2KZ3HZpVGqBhg6EkTubw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Two members of the public urged the Planning Board to slow and expand outreach on separate issues during the May 27 public participation period. Jan Burton, who identified herself as a Boulder resident, told the board she “believe[s] strongly there needs to be more community involvement and input on the city of Boulder budget,” and specifically asked staff to outline the Planning Board’s process and timing for reviewing the SIP so the board could schedule sufficient meetings and allow for “education, research, proper discussion” before votes.

Lynn Siegel addressed redevelopment and demolition at Broadway and Baseline and referred to a site she described as tied to Western Resource Advocates. Siegel said she was concerned the site and its stormwater detention demonstration design had not received a Landmarks Board review and that the property was demolished; she also criticized recent redevelopment at other sites and raised parking and affordability concerns, saying the outcome had reduced potential affordable housing on some lots. Siegel said developers and projects had argued insufficient parking as a justification for changes and added that those choices drove up housing costs.

Staff acknowledged the comments in the meeting record; the Planning Board did not act on the public comments during the session. The board continued to the scheduled agenda items following the public participation segment.

Ending: The comments were entered into the record. Board members and staff acknowledged they would consider public feedback as they continue work on the SIP review schedule and related land‑use items.","During public participation at the May 27 Planning Board meeting residents asked for more community involvement and time for reviewing the city’s SIP and raised concerns about demolition of a site associated with Western Resource Advocates and parking-driven redevelopment priorities at Broadway and Baseline.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Board recommends Boulder City Council adopt broad code cleanup with targeted amendments

Boulder planning board presses staff on permanence and flexibility of proposed TDM ordinance

Residents urge more community input on Boulder SIP and raise concerns about demolition at Broadway/Baseline