Study Session Memo

City of Boulder City Council Study Session Summary Meeting Date: February 5, 2026 Agenda Title Consideration of a motion to accept the December 11, 2025 Joint Study Session Summary regarding the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Preliminary Policy and Land Use Direction.

Staff Contact • •

Amelia Harvey, Project Coordinator, Planning and Development Services Brad Mueller, Director, Planning and Development Services

Draft Motion Language Staff requests council consideration of this matter and action in the form of the following motion: Motion to accept the December 11, 2025 Study Session Summary regarding the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Preliminary Policy and Land Use Direction.

Presentation Summary Staff began with an overview of engagement to date, followed by a summary of community input and the resulting policy directions for each of the Sustainability, Equity,

and Resilience (SER) framework goals. Staff then presented an update on the future land use strategy and an overview of the proposed land use classes. Full details on the key policy directions and future land use direction presented are available in the December 11 Special Joint Study Session Meeting Packet.

Questions for Council and Direction Received Key Policy Direction question: 1. Do Planning Board and Council have any questions about the community feedback and how it has informed the preliminary policy direction? Direction Received: • •

•

•

Members asked clarifying questions about plan organization, structure and how the plan is intended to be used in relation to plans that fall under it. Members asked how community input was synthesized across engagement methods and translated into preliminary policy direction, with questions focused on representation, gaps in outreach and equity considerations. Questions were raised about how plan goals and progress will be measured and tracked. Members repeatedly raised questions about the balance between specificity and flexibility. There was consensus that specificity is important for accountability, measuring outcomes and providing clear policy direction, while flexibility is necessary for adaptability given changing conditions. Members asked how competing priorities, values, and potential trade-offs would be addressed during implementation.

Key Policy Direction question: 2. Do Planning Board and Council have feedback on the preliminary policy direction? Direction Received: • •

Members expressed broad support for the preliminary policy direction and its alignment with the SER framework. Members encouraged clearer and more explicit references to climate change, wildfire, flood risk, watershed health, biodiversity, basic infrastructure and regional collaboration, as well as attention to climate benefits and environmental sustainability across policy areas.

•

•

•

•

•

•

There was support for improving walking, biking, and transit while acknowledging the continued importance of automobiles. Feedback emphasized investing in foundational infrastructure (such as sidewalks and road conditions), thoughtfulness about how we approach innovation, broadening public transit models and framing transportation around balance and access rather than moral judgment. Members asked for clearer articulation of desired housing types and population needs and encouragement (not just allowance) of housing diversity, including small-scale and middle housing. Members were supportive of the idea of home-based businesses and recommend considering safeguards to prevent displacement particularly for commercial activity in or near residential areas. Members encouraged elevating agriculture as a viable and economically strong industry and strengthening connections between food systems, local businesses, labor, land use and economic policy. Feedback highlighted the need for clearer racial equity outcomes, more efficient and transparent government processes, measurable accountability and inclusive emergency planning. There was a general interest in improving usability of the plan through tools such as indexing and clear navigation.

Future Land Use Strategy question: 3. Do Planning Board and Council have any questions about the community feedback and how it has informed the preliminary future land use strategy? Direction Received: •

•

•

Members asked whether the preliminary future land use map is largely a translation of existing conditions and how much change to expect in future drafts. Questions focused on timing, scale of anticipated changes, how community change requests may influence outcomes and how differences from the current map will be clearly communicated. Members sought clearer definitions and distinctions among land use categories. Members also supported clarifying definitions for terms such as “attached” versus “multi-unit” housing, “group living”, neighborhood types, “industrial” versus “facilities”, “greenways” versus “transportation corridors” and “land-based economic activities,” to avoid confusion or unintended interpretations. Questions focused on how the future land use map will relate to zoning, site review, form-based code and subcommunity or area plans. Members noted the

•

•

•

desire to maintain process consistency while recognizing the map as a future vision. Members asked for clarification on housing types within neighborhood designations, how character and scale will be addressed without blocking change and how zoning standards interact with the future land use framework. Members expressed interest in interactive mapping tools that allow comparisons to the existing map, layering of zoning and subarea plans, visibility into drivers of change (e.g., transit corridors and 15-Minute Neighborhoods) and clearer context for wildfire risk, wildland urban interface (WUI) considerations and infrastructure constraints. There was a desire for clarification around the approach to WUI-adjacent development, density and evacuation planning.

Future Land Use Strategy question: 4. Do Planning Board and Council have feedback on the preliminary future land use strategy? Direction Received: •

•

•

•

•

Members expressed overall support for the direction of the future land use framework and appreciation for fewer, more intuitive categories focused on function and feel rather than single uses. Members strongly supported designating greenways, recognizing them as central to Boulder’s identity, ecological health and mobility. Members encouraged better management of greenways and stronger acknowledgment of their role as mobility corridors that connect neighborhoods, parks, trails and transportation networks. Members supported expanding housing options within neighborhoods, including small-scale multi-unit housing and ADUs, encouraging more explicit policy direction to affirmatively enable these forms. Alignment of walkable neighborhood designations with 15-Minute Neighborhood goals, shared green spaces and family-friendly design was emphasized. Members encouraged stronger integration of mobility into land use designations, including clearer direction on sidewalks, multimodal connections and safety on arterial streets. Members expressed interest in improved map illustration of key corridors and connections. Feedback emphasized clearer guidance on coexistence of uses such as industrial and residential, flexible transitions between land use designations (especially along arterials and near activity centers), guidance on how to balance

•

•

market forces with desired outcomes for neighborhoods and avoiding overly rigid categories that could limit future adaptability. Members raised questions about how institutional uses, new planning areas and WUI locations are designated and managed. Members emphasized the need for clearer processes for future area planning, stronger integration with surrounding areas and better consideration of environmental systems, public safety and regional coordination. Members raised focused concerns about how the University of Colorado is categorized in the future land use framework, questioning whether a separate designation is appropriate given issues of sovereignty, long-term flexibility and neighborhood integration. Members suggested clearer alignment with broader civic or community hub concepts and guidance for managing university parcels over time.

Next Steps for City Council The below items will advance discussion and decision-making related to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update. •

January 2026 Public Hearing – Screening of Community Change Requests: On January 22, City Council reviewed the list of Community Change Requests submitted during the update process and determined which requests warrant further analysis as staff continue drafting the Comprehensive Plan.

•

February 2026 Public Hearing – Area III–Planning Reserve Community Needs Assessment: City Council will hold a public hearing on February 12, to review community needs identified through the Comprehensive Plan process and determine whether those needs are of sufficient priority to warrant further consideration of a Service Area Expansion Plan for the Area III-Planning Reserve.

•

March 2026 Joint Study Session – Draft Comprehensive Plan and Future Land Use Map: City Council and Planning Board will reconvene on March 26, 2026, for a joint study session to review the draft Comprehensive Plan and future land use map. This will be Council’s final opportunity to provide substantive feedback before the plan is finalized and moves into the adoption phase. The draft plan is anticipated to be available for public review from early March through early April.

•

April 2026 – 4-Body Informational Meeting: This gathering of all four approving bodies of the Comprehensive Plan will be the

last opportunity to provide substantive feedback on draft policies and future land use plan elements that apply to both the city and county. •

Summer 2026 Adoption Cycle: Council will participate in a joint public hearing with Planning Board in early June 2026 and is scheduled to deliberate and vote on adoption of the final Comprehensive Plan and future land use map in mid to late June.

Digital Accessibility The City of Boulder is committed to digital accessibility. Some content may not be fully accessible due to technical limitations or issues. For alternate formats or accommodations, please visit Accessibility | City of Boulder or contact accessibility@bouldercolorado.gov.

Attachments