Call-Up Agenda Memo

City of Boulder City Council Call-Up Agenda Item Meeting Date: March 5, 2026 Agenda Title Concept Plan Review and Comment Request for a proposed redevelopment of 3550 and 3850 Frontier Ave. as an urban neighborhood anchored by a 2,500-person capacity events venue and rehearsal space, a hotel, approximately 500 apartments, 30,000 square-feet of commercial uses such as restaurants, coffee shops, and retail, and structured parking. The proposal would involve a rezoning and height modification. Reviewed under case no. LUR2025-00086.

Staff Contact • •

Shannon Moeller, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services Brad Mueller, Director, Planning and Development Services

Executive Summary The purpose of this item is for the City Council to consider whether to call up the abovereferenced application for review and comment at a public hearing. On February 3, 2026, the Planning Board held a hybrid meeting and reviewed and commented on the proposal. The 30-day call up period concludes on March 5, 2026. City Council is scheduled to consider this application for call-up at its March 5, 2026 meeting. The staff memorandum to Planning Board, recorded video, and the applicant’s submittal materials along with other related background materials are available in the city archives for Planning Board. The recorded video from the hearing can be found here: February 3, 2026 Planning Board Meeting (item starts 15:30 minutes into the video). The applicant’s submittal package is provided in Attachment A. The draft minutes for the meeting are provided in Attachment B.

Council Action Options Option

Outcome

Call up the application

To call up the application, council must pass a motion. Suggested motion language: Motion to call up Concept Review application #LUR2025-00086. Called-up item will be scheduled for a public hearing at a future council meeting within 60 days of the date of call-up.

Do not call up the application No council action is needed. In addition to a public hearing at City Council, City Council has authority to refer Concept Plan Review proposals to the Design Advisory Board (DAB) and/or Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) for their respective opinions. The purpose of such a review by DAB is to encourage thoughtful, well-designed development projects that are sensitive to the existing character of an area, or the character established by adopted design guidelines or plans for the area. TAB’s opinion can be requested by council on transportation matters implicated in a Concept Plan Review proposal.

Planning Board History At the public hearing on February 3, 2026, the Planning Board heard presentations by staff and the applicant and asked questions following each presentation. Two community members spoke during the public comments portion of the hearing, one expressing support for the proposal and the other speaking in opposition. The Planning Board members discussed three key issues at the public hearing: 1. Is the proposed concept plan generally compatible with the goals, objectives, and recommendations of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) and Transit Village Area Plan (TVAP)? 2. Does the Board have general overall feedback on the conceptual site plan and building design’s consistency with the Site Review criteria in 9-2-14, B.R.C. 1981? 3. Does the Board have feedback on a preferred approach for rezoning the property from IS-1/IS-2 to a new zoning district? Regarding Key Issue One, board members agreed that the proposal is consistent with the BVCP Land Use Designation of MUTOD (Mixed Use Transit Oriented Development) and with the TVAP Phase 2 Amendment. However, some board members expressed concerns regarding the proposed phasing of the project placing residential uses in later

phases, where the MUTOD designation describes the land use as predominantly residential and intends to create a mixed-use neighborhood. Regarding Key Issue Two, the Planning Board discussed the site and building design and provided helpful feedback, including: • Board members were supportive of the overall walkable site design and the creative, detailed proposal documents. • Board members expressed concern that the proposed phasing plan and long vesting period doesn’t guarantee that any residential would be provided in the near term, and the current phasing plans could also result in decreased viability and activity along the planned central paseo. Board members recommended updating the proposal to provide residential more quickly. • Board members were generally supportive of a code amendment to allow a height modification to be approved through a site review process for a two-story performing arts venue, like proposed here, with a height of up to 55-feet, where a two-story building such as this is not currently eligible to make such a request. • Board members provided specific feedback on various aspects of the proposal, such as the proposed transportation and mobility improvements, open spaces, building design and placemaking, requests for modifications and exceptions to code standards, and other items. Regarding Key Issue Three, the board members’ feedback on a preferred approach for rezoning the property was mixed. The board was relatively evenly split with some members recommending the use of an existing zoning district such as MU-4 and other board members recommending a flexible approach that might include modifying an existing zoning district or creating a new district via ordinance. There was not specific interest in creating a Flex zone for the proposal.

Public Input Process Consistent with Section 9-4-3, Public Notice Requirements, B.R.C. 1981, staff provided notification to all property owners within 600 feet of the subject location of the application, and signs have been posted by the applicant indicating the review requested. Staff received some written public comments on the application included support for the proposal and feedback regarding pedestrian and transportation improvements in the area.

Analysis – Alignment with Relevant Portions of Boulder Revised Code The staff memorandum to Planning Board that includes staff analysis, along with the meeting audio, and the applicant’s submittal materials are available on the Records Archive for Planning Board.

Fiscal Note Review of this project is part of the P&DS team’s standard workplan and its impacts are incorporated into the annual revenue forecasting as part of the Budget office’s annual budget development. Therefore, review of the project will not have a meaningful fiscal impact past what has already been included in the approved budget. Current Year Estimated Fiscal Impact Fund(s): 2120FD Department(s): Planning & Development Services Program(s): All P&DS programs

FY 2026 Budget

FY 2026 Estimated Impact

FY 2026 Net Change

Beginning Fund Balance

$18,200,885

$0

$0

Total Forecasted Revenue

$15,179,491

$0

$0

Total Estimated Expenses

$17,735,173

$0

$0

Ending Fund Balance(s) After Reserves

$12,646,701

$0

$0

FTE

122.65

0

0

Item

Three-Year Estimated Fiscal Impact

Item

FY 2026

FY 2027

FY 2028

Total Forecasted Revenue

$0

$0

$0

Total Estimated Expenses

$0

$0

$0

Net Estimated Impact

$0

$0

$0

Next Steps for City Council The City Council may call up the application. If the application is called up, the City Council will review the application at a future public meeting.

Accessibility Statement 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 Attachment A: Applicant Concept Plans and Written Statement Attachment B: Draft February 3, 2026 Planning Board Meeting Minutes