Attachment D_2025 BVCP Final Survey Report

This is the text extracted from the file, without its layout, tables, or images. Use the original for anything that matters.

–

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Report of Results November 2025

1241 John Q. Hammons Dr, Suite #203 • Madison, WI 53717 • 608-709-8683 • info.polco.us

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 4 Summary of Survey Methods .......................................................................................................................................4 Key Findings.............................................................................................................................................................................4

Survey Background ............................................................................................................... 6 Survey Administration.......................................................................................................................................................6 How the Results are Reported .....................................................................................................................................6 Precision of Estimates .......................................................................................................................................................7 Comparison of Results by Subgroups .....................................................................................................................7

Survey Results ......................................................................................................................... 8 Familiarity with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan ..........................................................................8 Perceived Challenges and Community Concerns ............................................................................................9 Perceived Importance of Comprehensive Plan Objectives .................................................................... 10 Housing Preferences ........................................................................................................................................................ 12 Commercial Preferences ............................................................................................................................................... 17 Water Conservation and Support for All Generations ............................................................................... 19

Appendix A: Respondent Characteristics .................................................................. 22 Appendix B: Complete Set of Probability Survey Responses ........................... 27 Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey................................................................................................................ 43 Appendix D: Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics ... 50 Comparisons by Gender and Age ........................................................................................................................... 51 Comparisons by Race/ethnicity and Income................................................................................................... 65 Comparisons by Tenure and Housing Type ..................................................................................................... 81 Comparisons by Planning Area................................................................................................................................. 95

Appendix E: Complete Set of Open Participation Survey Responses .......... 106 Appendix F: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Open Participation Survey.......................................................................................................... 115 Appendix G: Survey Methodology ............................................................................... 129 About the Survey.............................................................................................................................................................129 Developing the Questionnaire .................................................................................................................................129 Selecting Survey Recipients .....................................................................................................................................129 Survey Administration and Response Rate ....................................................................................................130 Survey Processing (Data Entry) ............................................................................................................................131 Analyzing the Data .........................................................................................................................................................131 Open Participation Survey .........................................................................................................................................132 Weighting the Data ........................................................................................................................................................132

Appendix H: Survey Materials ...................................................................................... 134

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Table of Figures Figure 1: Familiarity with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan .........................................................8 Figure 2: Perceived Challenges and Community Concerns ...........................................................................9 Figure 3: Perceived Importance of Comprehensive Plan Objectives ................................................... 11 Figure 4: Levels of Support for Housing Initiatives in Boulder Valley ................................................ 12 Figure 5: Resident Preferences for Potential Housing Locations ............................................................ 13 Figure 6: Preferred Strategies for Accommodating New Housing and Businesses .................... 14 Figure 7: Levels of Support for Different Housing Types ............................................................................ 15 Figure 8: Resident Preferences on Building Heights ....................................................................................... 16 Figure 9: Preferences for Allowing Small Businesses in Residential Areas ..................................... 17 Figure 10: Approaches to Addressing Commercial Vacancies.................................................................. 18 Figure 11: Water Conservation Measures .............................................................................................................. 19 Figure 12: Support for Older Adults .......................................................................................................................... 20 Figure 13: Support for Younger Community members ................................................................................ 21 Figure 14: Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Areas .................................................................................. 95

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Executive Summary Background and Summary of Survey Methods The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (“the Plan”) outlines a shared long-term vision for how the Boulder Valley community should grow and change over the next 20 years. It guides decisions about land use, service delivery, and the protection of valued community assets. Jointly adopted by the City of Boulder and Boulder County, the Plan has been in place since the 1970s and is regularly updated to reflect evolving conditions, priorities, and community needs. This report summarizes the key findings from a community opinion survey mailed to a random address-based sample of community members. This community input is intended to help guide and inform the 2026 update of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, along with other community input being gathered via other means as part of the Plan update process. The survey addressed a variety of topic areas that are important focus areas for the Plan update, including community values, livability and growth management, design, neighborhoods, and related issues. Survey invitations followed by paper surveys were mailed to 5,000 randomly selected resident households in September 2025. A total of 668 surveys were completed, yielding a response rate of 13%. The margin of error is ±4% around any given percentage reported for all survey respondents. In addition to the survey sent to randomly selected addresses, open participation outreach was also conducted by the City of Boulder and Boulder County to give all community members an opportunity to participate. Respondents to this outreach completed the survey online. The questionnaire was identical to that received by the address-based sample. A total of 950 complete surveys were obtained through this effort. Responses to the open participation survey can be found in Appendix E: Complete

Set of Open Participation Survey Responses.

Survey results for both the random sample survey and the open-participation survey were weighted so that respondent gender, age, housing unit type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), race and planning area were represented in proportions reflective of the entire adult population of the Boulder Valley.

Key Findings Many Community Members Are Unfamiliar with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. •

Residents in the Boulder Valley generally have lower awareness of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. About four in ten respondents said they knew nothing about the Plan, three in ten knew very little, two in ten knew some aspects of the Plan, and only one in ten described themselves as somewhat or very familiar with it.

•

Two-thirds of respondents indicated that this survey was the first time they had heard about or participated in the Comprehensive Plan input process. Out of the one-third who had participated, 26% thought most or all their input was heard in the process, 41% were neutral and 32% felt at least some of their input was missed.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Affordability and the Natural Environment Emerge as Key Priorities and Concerns for Boulder Valley. •

Respondents were asked how concerned they were about fourteen current or potential issues facing Boulder Valley. The issues generating the greatest concern were the cost of living, the cost of housing, hazard preparation and resiliency, and the decline of the natural environment — each considered a concern by nine in ten community members.

•

Between eight and nine in ten community members also expressed concern about pedestrian and bicyclist safety, the economic health of local businesses, resource availability (e.g., water and energy), support for youth, and crime prevention.

•

When asked what goals were more important to be addressed by the Plan, about eight in ten respondents said it was essential or very important to protect and enhance the natural environment, making it the top-rated priority among all issues considered.

Community Members Prioritize Focusing Growth Within Existing City Limits and Show Openness to Diverse Housing Types. •

When asked about the future of housing in Boulder Valley, about three-fourths of respondents supported focusing on increasing housing that is more affordable, allowing moderate-density housing types in more areas, encouraging the use of underutilized sites within the city before developing areas outside the city boundary, and promoting mixed-use buildings (combining commercial and residential uses) in more areas.

•

Respondents were asked to identify which areas in Boulder Valley, if any, should be considered for additional housing. Overall, every area was chosen by at least 15% of community members, with the largest percentage of respondents selecting East Boulder, Gunbarrel, and Southeast Boulder. No one area was selected by a majority of community members.

•

Most of the respondents support accommodating new housing and businesses, but there were differences on how and where to accommodate growth. About four in ten community members preferred focusing growth within existing city limits and roughly two in ten supported extending city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on Boulder’s north side. Approximately three in ten favored a balanced approach that combines both strategies.

•

Asked whether they would support or oppose allowing different types of housing in Boulder Valley’s low-density neighborhoods, respondents indicated openness to a range of housing options. A majority of respondents at least somewhat supported adding duplexes, cottage clusters, multiplexes, and accessory dwelling units.

•

Community members were less open to changing building heights in the City of Boulder. A majority of respondents —six in ten—preferred keeping the current height limits unchanged. About two in ten supported allowing buildings of 6 or 7 stories in specific areas to enable more housing units, and 15% were open to fewer restrictions.

Community Members Support Allowing Small Businesses Throughout Residential Areas. •

A large majority indicated support for small businesses in residential areas. More than half of respondents supported allowing small businesses such as corner cafés, daycares, salons, or small shops, throughout all residential neighborhoods. About one-third also supported these types of businesses, but preferred limiting them to certain locations such as near transit stops, suggesting support for a more targeted approach in some parts of the community. Only one in ten respondents favored keeping residential areas exclusively for housing. 5

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Survey Background The Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (“the Plan”) provides a long-term vision for the next 20 years that guides how the Boulder Valley community should evolve, how best to provide services, and where to preserve what is valued. It is a jointly adopted plan between the City of Boulder and Boulder County and has been in place since the 1970s. The Plan is regularly updated to respond to changing circumstances and community needs and priorities. The 2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Statistically Valid Survey is intended to help guide and inform the 2026 update of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan, along with other community input being gathered via other means as part of the Plan update process. The survey addressed a variety of topic areas that are important focus areas for the BVCP update, including community values, livability and growth management, design, neighborhoods, and related issues. Please contact Kristofer Johnson (City of Boulder) at 303.441.4277 or Hannah Hippely (Boulder County) at 720.564.2298 if you have any questions about the survey.

Survey Administration A random sample of 5,000 households within the Boulder Valley was selected. Each household was contacted twice. The first contact included a mailed survey accompanied by a cover letter signed by Boulder City Manager Nuria Rivera-Vandermyde and Boulder County Manager Jana Petersen, inviting community members to participate. The packet also contained a postage-paid return envelope in which the survey recipients could return the complete questionnaire directly to Polco. Approximately one week after, each household was mailed a reminder postcard. All mailers included a web link and a QR code so that community members could take the survey online, if desired. There were 668 respondents to the mailed questionnaire, yielding a response rate of 13%. The margin of error is plus or minus four percentage points around any given percentage for all respondents. Survey results were weighted so that respondent gender, age, housing unit type (attached or detached), housing tenure (rent or own), race, and planning area were represented in proportions reflective of the entire adult population of the Boulder Valley. More information about the survey methodology can be found in Appendix G: Survey Methodology.

How the Results are Reported For the most part, the full set of frequencies or the “percent positive” are presented in the body and narrative of the report. The percent positive is the combination of the top two most positive response options (i.e., “excellent” and “good,” “very safe” and “somewhat safe,” “strongly support” and “somewhat support,” etc.). On many of the questions in the survey, respondents could give an answer of “don’t know.” The proportion of respondents giving this reply is shown in the full set of responses included in Appendix B: Complete Set of Probability Survey Responses is discussed in the body of this report if it is 30% or greater. However, these responses have been removed from the analyses presented in the body of the report, unless otherwise indicated. In other words, the majority of the tables and graphs in the body of the report display the responses from respondents who had an opinion about a specific item.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

For some questions, respondents were permitted to select multiple responses. When the total exceeds 100% in a table for a multiple-response question, it is because some respondents are counted in multiple categories. When a table for a question that only permitted, a single response does not total to exactly 100%, it is due to the customary practice rounding values to the nearest whole number.

Precision of Estimates It is customary to describe the precision of estimates made from surveys by a “level of confidence” and accompanying “confidence interval” (or margin of error). The margin of error for this survey is generally no greater than plus or minus four percentage points around any given percent reported for the entire sample (N=668).

Comparison of Results by Subgroups Selected survey results were compared by gender, age, housing unit type, housing unit tenure (rent or own), race /ethnicity, household income and planning area. These crosstabulations are summarized and presented in tabular form in Appendix D: Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics. For each pair of subgroups that has a statistically significant difference, an upper-case letter denoting significance is shown in the category with the larger column proportion.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Survey Results Familiarity with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan The first question of the survey asked Boulder Valley community members how familiar they were with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (the Plan) prior to receiving the survey invitation. Results indicate relatively low awareness of the Plan among community members: about 4 in 10 respondents said they knew nothing about it, and another 3 in 10 said they didn’t know much. In contrast, 2 in 10 respondents reported knowing some things about the Plan, and just 1 in 10 described themselves as somewhat or very familiar with it. Figure 1: Familiarity with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan

Before receiving this survey, how familiar were you with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (The Plan)?

I’ve never heard of it/know nothing about it, 42%

I don’t know much about it, 31%

I’m very familiar with it (e.g., understand its purpose, scope, objectives, etc.), 2% I know some things about it, 20%

I know quite a bit about it, 5%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Perceived Challenges and Community Concerns Respondents were asked how concerned they were about fourteen current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. The issues that generated the greatest concern were the cost of living, the cost of housing, hazard preparation and resiliency, and the decline of the natural environment. All four issues were considered a concern by 9 in 10 community members. Between 8 and 9 in 10 community members reported being very or somewhat concerned about pedestrian and bicyclist safety, the economic health of local businesses, the availability of resources (e.g., water and energy), the support for the youth population and crime prevention and safety. Between two-thirds and three-fourths of respondents expressed concern about issues such as poor or aging infrastructure, excessive growth and development, the lack of diverse housing options, and support for the aging population. Additionally, about half of respondents said they were at least somewhat concerned about the impact of tourism in the Boulder Valley. Figure 2: Perceived Challenges and Community Concerns

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley? Cost of living

64%

30%

94%

Cost of housing

64%

28%

92%

Hazard preparation and resiliency

44%

Decline of natural environment

47%

55%

Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists

49%

Economic health of local businesses

44%

Availability of resources

39%

Support for youth population

Poor/ aging infrastructure

35%

90%

39%

88%

43%

87%

45%

33%

Crime prevention and safety

91%

84%

49%

41%

82%

40%

26%

81%

52%

78%

Excessive growth and development

40%

36%

76%

Lack of housing types/choices

37%

74%

Support for aging population Tourism impact

21%

47%

11%

39%

Very concerned

68%

50%

Somewhat concerned

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Perceived Importance of Comprehensive Plan Objectives The survey asked community members to rate how important it is for the Plan to address a series of objectives, with the goal of identifying which priorities community members believe the Plan should focus on. Shown on the following page, about 8 in 10 respondents said it was essential or very important for the Plan to protect and enhance the natural environment, making it the top-rated priority among all issues considered. Other goals viewed as essential or very important by more than two-thirds of community members included promoting a strong and diverse local economy (76%), preserving the existing quality of life (74%), enhancing adaptability to climate change (73%), enhancing parks, recreation, and open spaces (68%), increasing housing affordability (67%) and strengthening hazard resilience (67%). Between about one-half and two-thirds of community members thought it was essential or very important to increase the variety of housing options, enhance support for all ages and stages of life, foster a welcoming and inclusive community, improve public safety, support vibrant local arts and culture, ensure fairness and equal opportunity, provide easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices, and support Boulder’s role as a technology and science hub. The only issue considered essential or very important by a minority of respondents was positioning Boulder as a regional destination (29%).

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Figure 3: Perceived Importance of Comprehensive Plan Objectives

The Plan provides a framework for working toward objectives expressed by community member goals. How important to you, if at all, is it that each of the following objectives are addressed by the Plan? Protect and enhance the natural environment

48%

Promote a strong and diverse local economy

35%

28%

83%

48%

76%

Preserve existing quality of life

35%

39%

74%

Enhance adaptability to climate change

37%

36%

73%

Enhance parks, recreation and open spaces

29%

Increase the affordability of housing

39%

68%

28%

67%

Strengthen hazard resilience

31%

36%

67%

Support Boulder's role as a technology and science hub

30%

36%

66%

Enhance public safety

35%

28%

63%

Easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices

26%

37%

63%

Support vibrant local arts and culture

22%

40%

62%

Ensure fairness and equal opportunity

23%

38%

61%

Foster a welcoming and inclusive community

26%

33%

59%

Enhance support for all ages and stages of life

21%

Increase the variety of housing options

22%

Position Boulder as a regional destination

Essential

36% 26%

20%

29%

Very important

57% 48%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Housing Preferences When asked about the future of housing in the Boulder Valley, about three-fourths of respondents supported focusing on increasing housing that is more affordable, allowing moderate-density housing types in more areas, encouraging the use of underutilized sites within the city before developing areas outside the city boundary, and promoting mixed-use buildings (combining commercial and residential uses) in more areas. Initiatives that received comparatively less support included promoting low-density housing types such as detached homes and duplexes, supporting higher-density housing types such as apartments or condominiums in more areas, and expanding the city into the Planning Reserve to allow for new housing. These initiatives were supported by between 5 and 6 out of 10 community members. Figure 4: Levels of Support for Housing Initiatives in Boulder Valley

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

52%

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

26%

33%

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

45%

50%

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

33%

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

26%

33%

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

28%

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

17%

37%

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

78%

27%

41%

78%

77%

74%

59%

56%

54%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Respondents were asked to identify which areas in the Boulder Valley, if any, should be considered for additional housing. Overall, preferences were distributed across all areas, but East Boulder, Gunbarrel, and Southeast Boulder were each selected by the most people (about 30% of respondents). Other areas chosen by at least 20% of respondents included South Boulder, North Boulder, and the Planning Reserve. Each of the remaining areas were selected by 15% and 20% of respondents: Central Boulder, Palo Park, Crossroads, the unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods, University Hill, and the University of Colorado. Figure 5: Resident Preferences for Potential Housing Locations

Which areas in the Boulder Valley, if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply) East Boulder

31%

Gunbarrel

30%

Southeast Boulder

28%

South Boulder

24%

North Boulder

22%

Planning Reserve north of the City of Boulder

21%

Central Boulder

18%

Crossroads

18%

Palo Park

17%

Unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods

16%

University Hill

15%

University of Colorado

15%

All of the above

15%

None of the above

15%

No preference

17%

* Note: Respondents could select more than one option; percentages may exceed 100%.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Regarding strategies for accommodating new housing and businesses, about 4 in 10 community members preferred focusing on growth within existing city limits. Roughly 2 in 10 supported extending city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to allow for additional development, with about 3 in 10 favoring a combination of both approaches. Only about 1 in 10 preferred not adding any new housing or business uses. These results suggest that while a significant portion of community members support growth, there is a slight preference for managing it within existing boundaries while also considering expanding into the Planning Reserve. Figure 6: Preferred Strategies for Accommodating New Housing and Businesses

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer? Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses, 16%

Both of the above options should be pursued, 32%

Don’t add any new housing and business uses, 13%

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits, 39%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

The survey also asked community members whether they would support or oppose allowing different types of housing in Boulder Valley’s low-density neighborhoods. All four housing types included in the survey received majority support, indicating broad openness to a range of housing options. Approximately 8 in 10 respondents supported both duplexes and cottage courts in lowdensity neighborhoods, while about 7 in 10 supported multiplexes and townhouses, as well as housing types with two or more units dispersed throughout low-density neighborhoods. Housing types with two or more units but restricted to specific locations—such as near transit stops—received support from 6 in 10 community members. Finally, 6 in 10 community members supported single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only. Figure 7: Levels of Support for Different Housing Types

Low-density neighborhoods made up of single-unit detached houses currently cover a majority of developed land in the Boulder Valley, consistent with current regulations. Would you support or oppose allowing the following options related to different housing types in these low-density neighborhoods? Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

33%

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

49%

44%

82%

35%

79%

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

36%

34%

70%

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

35%

33%

68%

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in low-density neighborhoods, such as near transit stops Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

25%

32%

Strongly support

36%

26%

Somewhat support

61%

58%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

When asked about building heights in the City of Boulder, a majority of respondents —6 in 10— preferred keeping the current height limits unchanged. About 2 in 10 respondents supported allowing buildings of 6 or 7 stories, but only in specific areas, to enable more housing units. Fewer than 1 in 10 community members favored more extensive changes, such as allowing 55-foot buildings in additional areas without special conditions, permitting 6 or 7 story buildings citywide, or allowing taller buildings with varied rooflines and architectural features while maintaining the same number of housing units. Figure 8: Resident Preferences on Building Heights

Taller multi-unit buildings generally use land and resources more efficiently, but can also impact the skyline, scenic views, and the experience of a place on the ground. Building height in the City of Boulder is limited to 55 feet (about 4 or 5 stories) and is restricted to even lower in some areas unless new development meets special conditions. Regarding building heights in the city, which do you prefer? Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions, 8%

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units, 22%

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units, 7% Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of housing units the same, 5%

Keep building heights the same as they are today, 57%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Commercial Preferences Community members were also asked about their thoughts on the potential introduction of neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas. More than half of respondents supported allowing small businesses—such as corner cafés, daycares, salons, healthcare offices, or small shops—throughout all residential neighborhoods, indicating broad openness to integrating specific commercial uses into residential areas. About one-third preferred limiting these businesses to specific locations, such as near transit stops, suggesting support for a more targeted approach in some parts of the community. Only 1 in 10 respondents favored keeping residential areas exclusively for housing. These results suggest that community members generally see value in accessible neighborhood services. Figure 9: Preferences for Allowing Small Businesses in Residential Areas

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops, 34%

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of residential neighborhoods, 55%

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas, 11%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

When asked how to address commercial vacancies in the Boulder Valley, more than half of respondents supported converting office spaces into residential uses. Around four in ten favored making it more difficult for property owners to keep units vacant for extended periods, a similar share to those who suggested offering incentives for property owners to lease space at lower rates. About one-third supported allowing a broader range of uses to attract different types of businesses, such as storage facilities, event spaces, or service providers. Just 1 in 20 respondents suggested doing nothing regarding the commercial vacancies. Figure 10: Approaches to Addressing Commercial Vacancies

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two) Change office spaces into residential uses

56%

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

42%

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

39%

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services) Don't do anything

34%

* Note: Respondents could select more than one option; percentages may exceed 100%.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Water Conservation and Support for All Generations Community members were also asked to select up to two measures they would support as part of the Boulder Valley’s efforts to conserve water in response to climate change. The most preferred options were restricting outdoor water use to specific times and requiring lawn replacement with low-water landscaping, each selected by nearly half of respondents. Meanwhile, about 3 in 10 community members supported requiring low-flow indoor water fixtures and restricting outdoor water use only during times of drought. Figure 11: Water Conservation Measures

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two) Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

51%

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

48%

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

32%

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

31%

None of the above

10%

* Note: Respondents could select more than one option; percentages may exceed 100%.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

In the final section of the survey, respondents were asked which options the City and County should prioritize to support the community’s aging population. The top two priorities were enabling older adults to travel safely and independently throughout the city (52%) and increasing the availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes (48%). Secondary priorities included expanding housing choices attractive to older adults (28%) and ensuring an adequate workforce to provide healthcare services (23%). Fewer respondents emphasized increasing opportunities for social interaction (18%) or maintaining a sufficient workforce to support entertainment, dining, shopping, and other services (12%). Figure 12: Support for Older Adults

Overall, the Boulder Valley’s population is aging, and the fastest growing demographic is older adults (65 and over). Which of these options would you like to see the City and County prioritize regarding the community’s aging population? (Select your top two) Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

52%

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

48%

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

28%

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

23%

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other… None of the above

18% 12% 6%

* Note: Respondents could select more than one option; percentages may exceed 100%.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Respondents were also asked which options the City and County should prioritize to support the community’s younger population. The top two priorities were promoting safety in public spaces (55%) and increasing the availability of places for young people to gather and socialize (48%). Secondary priorities included supporting mental health and well-being (35%) and expanding opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs, and services (34%). Fewer respondents highlighted the importance of increasing access to volunteer and leadership opportunities (19%). Figure 13: Support for Younger Community Members

The younger generations in our community will live with the decisions we make in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan for many years. What we do now to create a healthy and thriving future for them is very important. Which of these options would you like to see the City and County prioritize regarding the community’s younger population? (Select your top two) Safety in public spaces

55%

Availability of places to gather and socialize

48%

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

35%

Opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs and services

34%

Access to volunteer and leadership opportunities

19%

None of the above 3% * Note: Respondents could select more than one option; percentages may exceed 100%.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Appendix A: Respondent Characteristics The following tables summarize the demographic characteristics of the 2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Statistically Valid Survey respondents. Table 1: Question D1

How many years have you lived in the Boulder Valley?

Percent

Number

5 years or less

38%

N=247

6-10 years

13%

N=87

11-20 years

15%

N=99

More than 20 years

34%

N=223

Total

100%

N=656

Percent

Number

Working full time for pay

58%

N=378

Working part time for pay

14%

N=91

Unemployed, looking for paid work

N=36

Not retired, not looking for paid work

N=20

Fully retired

19%

N=123

Total

100%

N=648

Percent

Number

Yes, outside the home

58%

N=269

Yes, from home

38%

N=177

N=22

Total

100%

N=468

Table 2: Question D2

What is your employment status?

Table 3: Question D3

Do you work in the Boulder Valley area?

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 4: Question D4

Are you a student at CU Boulder or any other college or university?

Percent

Number

Yes, an undergraduate student

13%

N=69

Yes, a graduate student

12%

N=64

75%

N=390

Total

100%

N=523

Which best describes the building you live in?

Percent

Number

Single-unit house detached from any other houses

42%

N=272

Building with two or more homes (duplex, townhome, apartments or condominium)

57%

N=373

Manufactured home

N=2

Other

N=7

Total

100%

N=654

Percent

Number

Own

51%

N=336

Rent

47%

N=307

Other

N=9

I prefer not to say

N=5

Total

100%

N=657

Table 5: Question D5

Table 6: Question D6

Do you own or rent your home?

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 7: Question D7

Income

Percent

Number

Less than $50,000

25%

N=138

$50,000-$99,999

20%

N=113

$100,000-$149,999

18%

N=100

$150,000 or more

37%

N=211

Total

100%

N=562

Percent

Number

18-24

14%

N=88

25-34

29%

N=190

35-54

27%

N=179

55-56

N=45

65+

20%

N=131

I prefer not to say

N=18

Total

100%

N=652

Table 8: Question D8

What is your age range?

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 9: Question D9

Which race(s) and/or ethnic group(s) do you most identify with? Select all that apply.

Percent

Number

American Indian or Alaskan Native

N=5

Asian

N=25

Black or African American

N=7

Latine/Latinx/Hispanic

N=41

Middle Eastern or North African

N=2

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

N=1

White

83%

N=538

Other

N=4

I prefer not to say

11%

N=73

Percent

Number

Woman

45%

N=292

Man

46%

N=298

Non-binary/Genderqueer

N=10

I prefer not to say

N=44

I prefer to self-describe

N=2

Total

100%

N=646

Total may exceed 100% as respondents

Table 10: Question D10

What is your gender?

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 11: Question D11

Are you a member of the LGBTQ+ community?

Percent

Number

Yes

16%

N=105

75%

N=482

I prefer not to say

N=56

Total

100%

N=644

Total

Table 12: Question D12

Yes Do you have any of the following disabilities?

Are you deaf or do you have serious difficulty hearing?

N=17 97% N=619 100%

N=636

Are you blind or do you have serious difficulty seeing even when wearing glasses?

N=4

99% N=632 100%

N=636

Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, do you have serious difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions?

N=25 96% N=607 100%

N=632

Do you have serious difficulty walking or climbing stairs?

N=20 97% N=617 100%

N=637

Do you have difficulty dressing or bathing?

N=4

99% N=633 100%

N=637

Because of a physical, mental, or emotional condition, do you have difficulty doing errands alone such as visiting a doctor's office or shopping?

N=12 98% N=623 100%

N=635

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Appendix B: Complete Set of Probability Survey Responses The following pages contain a complete set of responses to each question on the survey. For questions that included a “don’t know” or “no opinion” response option, two tables for that question are provided: the first excludes the “don’t know” or “no opinion” responses and the second includes those response options. Table 13: Question #1

Before receiving this survey, how familiar were you with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (The Plan)?

Percent Number

I’ve never heard of it/know nothing about it

42%

N=282

I don’t know much about it

31%

N=203

I know some things about it

20%

N=130

I know quite a bit about it

N=36

I’m very familiar with it (e.g., understand its purpose, scope, objectives, etc.)

N=14

Total

100%

N=665

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 14: Question #2

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Very concerned

Somewhat concerned

Not at all concerned

Decline of natural environment

55%

N=358

35%

N=229

11%

N=69

100%

N=656

Support for aging population

21%

N=136

47%

N=313

32%

N=213

100%

N=661

Support for youth population

33%

N=215

49%

N=323

19%

N=123

100%

N=661

Cost of living

64%

N=419

30%

N=196

N=42

100%

N=657

Cost of housing

64%

N=425

28%

N=183

N=55

100%

N=663

Lack of housing types/choices

37%

N=244

37%

N=241

26%

N=175

100%

N=660

Poor/ aging infrastructure

26%

N=173

52%

N=341

21%

N=138

100%

N=652

Excessive growth and development

40%

N=263

36%

N=240

24%

N=161

100%

N=665

Tourism impact

11%

N=75

39%

N=255

50%

N=330

100%

N=660

Hazard preparation and resiliency (e.g., fire and flood mitigation)

44%

N=292

47%

N=309

N=61

100%

N=662

Economic health of local businesses

44%

N=291

43%

N=285

12%

N=80

100%

N=656

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

39%

N=257

45%

N=295

17%

N=110

100%

N=662

Crime prevention and safety

41%

N=271

40%

N=266

19%

N=127

100%

N=665

Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists

49%

N=321

39%

N=257

13%

N=84

100%

N=662

Other

42%

N=122

N=26

49%

N=142

100%

N=290

Total

Respondents were given an opportunity to write-in an "other" response. Please see Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey for the verbatim responses.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 15: Question #3

Essential

Very important

Somewhat important

Not important

Enhance parks, recreation and open spaces

29% N=188

39%

N=255

29%

N=188

N=27

100%

N=658

Ensure fairness and equal opportunity

23% N=154

38%

N=247

25%

N=166

14%

N=91

100%

N=657

Protect and enhance the natural environment

48% N=317

35%

N=234

15%

N=99

N=15

100%

N=665

Increase the variety of housing options

22% N=148

26%

N=172

31%

N=207

20%

N=133

100%

N=660

Increase the affordability of housing

39% N=261

28%

N=186

21%

N=139

12%

N=77

100%

N=664

Enhance adaptability to climate change

37% N=247

36%

N=235

17%

N=116

10%

N=63

100%

N=661

Foster a welcoming and inclusive community

26% N=172

33%

N=220

30%

N=199

11%

N=70

100%

N=662

Enhance support for all ages and stages of life

21% N=139

36%

N=241

35%

N=229

N=53

100%

N=662

Preserve existing quality of life

35% N=231

39%

N=259

20%

N=132

N=39

100%

N=661

Support vibrant local arts and culture

22% N=148

40%

N=263

29%

N=195

N=57

100%

N=663

Promote a strong and diverse local economy

28% N=184

48%

N=315

20%

N=128

N=30

100%

N=658

Support Boulder's role as a technology and science hub

30% N=199

36%

N=238

24%

N=161

10%

N=65

100%

N=663

Position Boulder as a regional destination

N=62

20%

N=130

38%

N=253

33%

N=219

100%

N=664

Easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices

26% N=172

37%

N=241

31%

N=203

N=40

100%

N=656

Enhance public safety

35% N=232

28%

N=186

28%

N=184

N=62

100%

N=664

Strengthen hazard resilience

31% N=204

36%

N=236

28%

N=182

N=32

100%

N=653

Other

24%

N=12

N=11

62%

N=110

100%

N=176

N=43

Total

Respondents were given an opportunity to write-in an "other" response. Please see Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey for the verbatim responses.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 16: Question #4

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

Percent Number

Central Boulder

18%

N=122

Crossroads

18%

N=115

East Boulder

31%

N=206

Gunbarrel

30%

N=195

North Boulder

22%

N=147

Palo Park

17%

N=112

Southeast Boulder

28%

N=185

South Boulder

24%

N=156

University of Colorado

15%

N=100

University Hill

15%

N=98

Planning Reserve north of the City of Boulder

21%

N=139

Unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods

16%

N=103

None of the above

15%

N=101

All of the above

15%

N=102

No preference

17%

N=114

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 17: Question #5 with don't know responses

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? The Plan should…

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

25%

N=167

32%

N=210

23%

N=153

16%

N=102

N=22 100%

N=654

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

32%

N=213

44%

N=287

11%

N=73

10%

N=64

N=19 100%

N=656

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

28%

N=181

27%

N=176

18%

N=118

25%

N=162

N=17 100%

N=654

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

39%

N=253

31%

N=201

13%

N=87

12%

N=76

N=34 100%

N=652

Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

51%

N=335

26%

N=169

10%

N=66

11%

N=74

N=7

100%

N=653

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

47%

N=309

25%

N=167

10%

N=64

12%

N=78

N=40 100%

N=658

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

15%

N=96

33%

N=212

14%

N=91

26%

N=172

12% N=82 100%

N=653

Don't know

Total

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 18: Question #5 without don't know responses

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? The Plan should…

Strongly agree

Somewhat agree

Somewhat disagree

Strongly disagree

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

26%

N=167

33%

N=210

24%

N=153

16%

N=102

100%

N=633

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

33%

N=213

45%

N=287

12%

N=73

10%

N=64

100%

N=637

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

28%

N=181

28%

N=176

18%

N=118

25%

N=162

100%

N=637

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

41%

N=253

33%

N=201

14%

N=87

12%

N=76

100%

N=618

Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

52%

N=335

26%

N=169

10%

N=66

11%

N=74

100%

N=645

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

50%

N=309

27%

N=167

10%

N=64

13%

N=78

100%

N=618

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

17%

N=96

37%

N=212

16%

N=91

30%

N=172

100%

N=571

Total

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 19: Question #6 with don't know responses

Strongly support

Somewhat support

Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

30%

N=196

25%

N=158

20%

N=131

20%

N=129

N=30

100%

N=644

Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

32%

N=206

47%

N=306

N=59

N=55

N=19

100%

N=644

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

34%

N=222

33%

N=213

14%

N=92

15%

N=99

N=21

100%

N=648

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

42%

N=277

33%

N=216

10%

N=63

10%

N=68

N=28

100%

N=652

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

33%

N=216

31%

N=203

15%

N=98

16%

N=104

N=33

100%

N=654

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in low-density neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

23%

N=147

33%

N=215

18%

N=119

18%

N=116

N=53

100%

N=651

Don't know

Total

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 20: Question #6 without don't know responses

Strongly support

Somewhat support

Somewhat oppose

Strongly oppose

Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

32%

N=196

26%

N=158

21%

N=131

21%

N=129

100%

N=614

Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

33%

N=206

49%

N=306

N=59

N=55

100%

N=625

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

36%

N=222

34%

N=213

15%

N=92

16%

N=99

100%

N=626

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

44%

N=277

35%

N=216

10%

N=63

11%

N=68

100%

N=624

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

35%

N=216

33%

N=203

16%

N=98

17%

N=104

100%

N=621

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in low-density neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

25%

N=147

36%

N=215

20%

N=119

19%

N=116

100%

N=598

Total

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 21: Question #7 without don't know responses

Percent Number

Keep building heights the same as they are today

57%

N=369

Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions

N=54

Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of

N=33

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units

22%

N=142

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units

N=45

Total

100%

N=643

Table 22: Question 7 with don't know responses

Percent Number

Keep building heights the same as they are today

56%

N=369

Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions

N=54

Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of

N=33

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units

21%

N=142

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units

N=45

I’m not sure / no opinion

N=19

Total

100%

N=662

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 23: Question #8 without don't know responses

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer?

Percent Number

Don’t add any new housing and business uses

13%

N=81

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits

39%

N=240

Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses

16%

N=96

Both of the above options should be pursued

32%

N=192

Total

100%

N=609

Table 24: Question #8 with don't know responses

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer?

Percent Number

Don’t add any new housing and business uses

12%

N=81

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits

36%

N=240

Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses

15%

N=96

Both of the above options should be pursued

29%

N=192

I’m not sure / no opinion

N=52

Total

100%

N=661

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 25: Question #9 without don't know responses

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

Percent Number

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of resid

55%

N=357

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

34%

N=221

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas

11%

N=72

Total

100%

N=649

Table 26: Question #9 with don't know responses

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

Percent Number

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of resid

54%

N=357

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

33%

N=221

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas

11%

N=72

I’m not sure / no opinion

N=15

Total

100%

N=664

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 27: Question #10 without don't know responses

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two)

Percent Number

Change office spaces into residential uses

56%

N=360

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services)

34%

N=217

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

39%

N=253

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

42%

N=270

Don't do anything

N=31

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

Table 28: Question #10 with don't know responses

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two)

Percent Number

Change office spaces into residential uses

54%

N=360

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services)

33%

N=217

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

38%

N=253

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

41%

N=270

Don't do anything

N=31

I'm not sure / no opinion

N=26

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 29: Question #11 without don't know responses

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two)

Percent Number

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

32%

N=201

Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

51%

N=323

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

31%

N=199

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

48%

N=304

None of the above

10%

N=62

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

Table 30: Question #11 with don't know responses

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two)

Percent Number

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

30%

N=201

Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

49%

N=323

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

30%

N=199

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

46%

N=304

None of the above

N=62

I'm not sure / no opinion

N=36

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 31: Question #12 without don't know responses

Percent Number

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

28%

N=170

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

48%

N=295

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

23%

N=139

Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other services

12%

N=72

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions

18%

N=109

Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

52%

N=314

Percent

Number

None of the above Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

Table 32: Question #12 with don't know responses

Percent Number

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

26%

N=170

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

44%

N=295

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

21%

N=139

Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other services

11%

N=72

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions

16%

N=109

Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

47%

N=314

None of the above

N=38

I'm not sure / no opinion

N=56

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 33: Question #13 without don't know responses

Percent Number

Availability of places to gather and socialize

48%

N=310

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

35%

N=229

Safety in public spaces

55%

N=357

Opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs and services

34%

N=222

Access to volunteer and leadership opportunities

19%

N=122

None of the above

N=17

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

Table 34: Question #13 with don't know responses

Percent Number

Availability of places to gather and socialize

47%

N=310

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

34%

N=229

Safety in public spaces

54%

N=357

Opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs and services

33%

N=222

Access to volunteer and leadership opportunities

18%

N=122

None of the above

N=17

I'm not sure / no opinion

N=16

Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one answer.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 35: Question #25

If you have participated in any engagement activities related to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update, do you feel heard in this process?

Percent Number

This is the first time I have heard about or participated in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan process

66%

N=421

Yes, I strongly agree that the city and county are hearing all of my input

N=14

Yes, I agree that the city and county are hearing most of my input

N=46

Neutral

14%

N=88

No, I disagree and think you are hearing only some of my input

N=38

No, I strongly disagree and don't feel heard at all

N=31

Total

100%

N=639

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Appendix C: Verbatim Responses to Open-ended Questions from Probability Survey Following are verbatim responses to the open-ended question on the survey. Because these responses were written by survey participants, they are presented here in verbatim form, including any typographical, grammar or other mistakes. The responses are presented in alphabetical order.

Question 2: The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley? (Other issues) •

•

• • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • •

•

1) BVSD ignorance to car dependent neighborhoods and full-time working parents. 2) Lack of affordable' amenities. I grew up in Boulder and I am watching our pools, affordable Hang out spaces and recreation become obsolete. 3) gunbarrel is a missed opportunity.. It's hard to live out here with multiple kids with the schools being so far and now BVSD moving us to schools that are even further out of the way. We are thrilled about the Libary, but there could be more thought put into the empty office buildings to build an area like North Boulder, where Bellota Spruce coffee and NOBO library are to attract more businesses and people wanting to live out here (not ugly office park cheap buildings, but nice brick buildings reminiscent of Pearl Street). Pipe dream, I know! We also don't need to smother the Earth with more concrete. There are lots of empty buildings that could be repurposed. Affordability of commercial real estate and the movement of businesses out of Boulder. There are a limited number of companies that monopolize the commercial real estate market in town and do not lower their rental prices, despite MANY units going unrented. Do they get some sort of tax benefit or write-off? There should be some sort of tracking of these units. Additionally, many industrial units were taken over by pot growing which drove up the prices of these units. On top of that, the city passed rules limiting the parking of trailers on city streets (some of which are used for landscaping and other legitimate, useful businesses) but provided no alternate parking. These businesses now need to pay for storage which is expensive or unavailable in town, contributing to higher prices and a higher carbon footprint, just so people don't have to "look" at trailers as an eye sore. It is unfortunate that the wealthy who are making these changes do not see the trickle down effect. AFFORDABLE SMALL BUSINESS RENT AIR PLANE NOISE AIR QUALITY Availability of public transit inside the city and to denver BIKE THEFT BLOCKING OFF ROADS TO CARS BOULDER BEING THE QUANTUM HUB GLOBALLY Boulder schools and BVSD failing us all on so many levels - all they've done is take away more and more services for the kids over the years, and parents have to pay for everything now. It's ridiculous and it's sad for Boulder. It used to be a great place to raise your kids. CHANGE OF THE CITY COUNCIL CITY COUNCIL FOCUSED ON CITY CITY OWNED FIBER INTERNET LIKE NEXT LIGHT IN LONG MOUNT City swimming pools- availability and quality. City's approach to preventing homelessness and managing its unhoused population Climate Change Community feel Concerned over the increased use of motorized vehicles by minors (ebikes, etc.); bike/road rules not followed properly; travel too fast putting themselves and others at risk; would like to see a permit process put in place. Congestion, Noise especially motorcycle racing late at night

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

COST OF HOME INSURANCE COUNCIL'S PROPENSITY FOR TAXATION CU ADDING STUDENTS/VERY LARGE BUILDINGS, ECONOMIC HEALTH OF SMALL, LOCAL BUSINESS, CREATE LIGHT RAIL FROM BOULDER TO DENVER/BOULDER, DIA CU's power needs to be curtailed -- see the CU South proposed development DENSITY DRUGS/UNHOUSED EMPLOYMENT EMTY OFFICE BUILDINGS EXCEEDING TOO RAPID DEVELOPMENT EXCESS GROWTH & DEVELOPMENT Excessive dwellings proposed without sufficient parking provided for!! Excessive growth without infrastructure and resources to support the levels of growth, and the growths impact to quality of life. And the lifting of parking requirements for new builds is naive, and aspirational, not realistic Excessive spending and road obstruction for bicycles EXORBITANT TAXES & OVER-REGULATION FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY Fix roads get bikes off side walks quit narrowing roads, enforce current laws like speeding, distracted driving etc. To make things safer for bikes and peds FLIGHT SCHOOL PROP PLANES FROM AMMA Fully Electric bikes on bike paths Governance GOVERNMENT TRYING TO DO TOO CIRCLE GROWTH OF CV INFLUENCE IT HAS ON CITY HEALTHCARE High sales tax and property tax hurting local businesses and elderly community members. Homeless and unhoused disturbing the peace and creating hostile areas that used to be gems of the city HOMELESS CRIME + SLIGHT HOMELESS GROWTH Homeless in our public areas HOMELESS NESS/POVERTY HOMELESS PEOPLE HOMELESS PEOPLE Homeless people living in communal areas; tons of people living in vans that they park on the streets Homeless populatio HOMELESS POPULATION HOMELESS POPULATION HOMELESSNESS Homelessness and vagrancy HOMELESSNESS MANAGEMENT HOMOGENIZATION AND LOSS OF IDENTITY HOUSING & MENTAL HEALTH, FENTANYL, DRUGS SUPPORT I am very concerned about the overall cost of living in Boulder. I am very concerned about water and its miss use and miss management by states other than Colorado. I walk to work and every single day at least 1 car blows throw the sidewalk as if I'm not there (Pearl and 21st) I'm concerned about the seeming lack of resources for our unhoused populations. I'm very concerned by the lack of parking in Boulder. Ignore illicit drugs being done openly in public spaces by the unhoused

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey •

• •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

Impact of the continued significant increase in airplane traffic, largely from RMMA, but also how the Boulder, Longmont and other small airports in Boulder County relate to this traffic. The airplane noise is having a significant negative impact on a large subsection of Boulder communities. INCREASED TRANSIENT POPULATION IN PUBLIC PLACES CAUSING CRIME Infrastructure safety and convenience. Most road crossings in Boulder are not cyclist/pedestrian friendly, with long wait times at walk signs and drivers often not respecting traffic signals which can be unsafe. As someone who lives and works in Boulder, having walking bridges or underpasses makes for a faster and safer commute. This can also benefit drivers, who would have a lower risk of collisions with bikes or people walking. In terms of safety, managing the issue of aging or damaged infrastructure would also go a long way. Many roads in Boulder have significant damage and potholes, which can damage cars and cause injuries to cyclists and pedestrians. In addition, smoother sidewalks, especially in older neighborhoods, can make a huge difference. Finally, Boulder has an amazing network of multi use paths and for any commute that isn't in a car I am more likely to use them than painted bike lanes or sidewalks near busy roads. In the future I think the entire community would benefit from this network expanding and becoming more connected. Having this type of infrastructure is key to making Boulder into a more sustainable and less car dependent city. JEWISH PERSON SAFETY Just to touch again on the growth of Boulder. I've lived here for 40 years and I don't recognize Boulder anymore! Yes I was part of the migration to Boulder from the Midwest in the mid 80's but I did not buy a quaint and charming one story house, tear it down and build a three-story monster house. I do not drive or never have a loud muffled car and drag race with others late into the evening. I recycle and compost daily. I've, since the beginning, taking on low paying jobs one being helping parents raise their children in preschools settings, which is impossible to live on that salary in this town. The traffic is out of control starting at 3:00, the building of multistory level buildings is out of control which adds to the aforementioned traffic issues. I thought there was a four story maximum for height you can build, but that has since gone away. I feel like city council or Building committees have allowed way too much. K-12 EDUCATION KEEPING OFF LEASH SPACES lack of good traffic control - too much speeding LACK OF LIGHT RAIL BOULDER BUILD LIGHT FROM DENVER TO BOULDER TO LONGMONT LACK OF PLANNING FOR THE PRAIRIE DOG POPULATION LACK OF PLOWING SNOW LACK OF POLITICAL RESPONSE BUSINESS TO CITIZENS CONCERNS LACK OF RESIDENTIAL PARKING LESS TRAFFIC LIMIT THE CAR TRANSIT Limit the population. There are too many people here!!! LOANS ARE THE WORST LOOSING SENSE OF COMMUNITY MAINTENANCE OF LIKING TAXES mass transit MEGA MANSIONS Narrowing of traffic flow on main street NO DEVELOPMENT OF MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAILS CU SOUTH EXPANSION/DEVELOPMENT noise - from foothills pkw to tow planes and airport noise, it's an extremely noisy environment Noise from +300,000/year Prop plane flyovers from RMMA flight schools Open space preservation Our wildlife and the impact we have on our beautiful critters and keeping them safe as well. OVER BUILDING IN BOULDER OVER DEVELOPMENT/INFILL P DOGS DESTROYING ALL OUR GRASSLANDS PARKING

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey • •

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • •

•

PARKING CONCESSION ON LEHIGH AND CRAGMOOR STREETS DUE TO LACK OF DEDICATED PARKING LOT FOR TRAIL ACCESS Parking everywhere in Boulder is inadequate or free! We have repeatedly attempted to get the COB involved, to no avail.It clearly adversely affects our life and well being, but no one cares! The powers that be in this city, assume no one will have a vehicle in Boulder, which is a total joke. Even CU students have multiple vehicles per address. PRAIRIE DOGS & NOXIOUS WEEDS ARE RUINING OUR AGRICULTURE LANDS PRESERVING OPEN SPACE + PROTECTING Proliferation of homeless in public spaces and limited public rec opportunities relative to other communities (eg, limited year round pools etc) PROPERTY TAXES RESIDENT COMMISSION Public school system educating for a changing world Public Transportation Rabidly increasing taxes and minimal improvements. Too much money spent in the wrong places. REDUCE AMOUNT OF CONSTRUCTION WITH CODE EXCEPTIONS Rental properties ROAD REPAIR Road safety and speeding in residential areas ROAD TRAFFIC CONGESTION SAFETY + INFRASTRUCTURE DO TO OVER POPULATION SAFETY OF MIXED USE SIDEWALKS EBIKES WILL SOON WALKERS NOT SAFE TO WALK ON SIDE WALKS ANY MORE SHERIFF & POLICE BUT OFFENDERS IN TIMBER RIDGE APT KEEP GOOD PEOPLE SAFE FROM VIOLENT PEOPLE Short-term Rental Regulations and EnforcementThis includes the city's regulations and permitting process for short-term rentals, how residents can report complaints or issues, and the extent of city monitoring to ensure these rentals operate safely, follow parking Laws, and do not disrupt neighborhoods or the surrounding community. SOUND OF LIGHT ABETMENT Space and development areas being wasted on 'cookie cutter' complexes that make Boulder feel like any other city/town and are very poorly built. Streamflow conservation Taxes - especially for people with houses over $2million, and then those with very expensive houses that are unoccupied. They need to be placed on a higher tax bracket. As a small business owners needing a shop - commercial properties are very expensive with low residential taxes being one of the biggest factors casing this TERRIBLE ROADS The city's homeless policy is dangerous. It invites interlopers from outside of Boulder who are seeking assistance and handouts. I'm all for supporting Boulder's homeless population, but not outsiders. THE COUNTY REFUSES TO PAVE OUR ROAD (PRADO DRIVE) & EXPLICITLY TOLD US SO The growing homeless population. To be clear I do not dislike the homeless, rather I believe we need to up the resources available to these populations to get them off the street and into more suitable living conditions. The incremental scaling of costs across every household need, without any indication of an acknowledgement of such and a plan to limit this reality: Taxes, Insurances, Medical Visits. Vaccinations, Prescriptions, Food, Utilities, Material Goods, etc.. The unhoused takeover of the Boulder Creek. What should be Boulder's crown jewel has become "dirty nature". Dirty nature is, in my mind, worse than no nature. I'd literally rather go anywhere else. And the fact that this is happening next to Boulder High and the Library and its playground is an abomination. The area just feels unsafe. You have no idea what people who are on drugs and who are mentally unwell/schizophrenic are going to do at any given moment. I've been in boulder for 37 years and it wasn't close to this bad in the past. TONS OF HOMES STILL BEING BUILT, WHERE IS THE WATER GOING TO COME FROM?

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • • • • •

TOO DENSE TOO MANY HOMELESS TAKING OVER OUR PARKS & PUBLIC SPARES TOO MUCH DENSIFICATION TOO MUCH NEW HOUSING TOO MUCH OF CITY STREETS DOMINATED BY CONFUSING DANGEROUS BIKE LANES TOO WELCOMING TO BE HOMELESS Traffc traffic TRAFFIC/SPEEDING ASSHOLE DRIVERS Transparency in city and county decisions about changes to pedestrian and cycling infrastructure Transparency in government. working towards sustainabilty transportation (traffic) UN HOUSED ON CLERK PATH Unequal distribution of impacts from CU, loss of open space, and a decline in what makes Boulder special. We need to maintain that, even if it means housing is harder to find. Not everywhere needs to be Denver, or dense. It seems South Boulder is being sacrificed in many ways, having lived on both sides of town. Unhoused population- concerned for and by them. VOLUME OF VEHICLES ON ROAD LACK OF AFFORDABLE PUBLIC TRANSIT Wasteful City budgeting and spending. WASTEFUL SPENDING BY GOVT WILDLIFE MITIGATION IN NORTH BOULDER (BEARS) YOUTH ON E-BIKES IN TRAFFIC LANES.

Question 3: The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley? (Other issues) • • • • • • • • • • •

• •

ADD FAR MORE CHILDREN'S PLAY GROUND SO THAT KIDS CAN INTERACT WITH OTHERS RATHER THAN PLAY ALONE EACH IN HIS OWN BACKYARD AND-SHELTER IT FROM HOT SUN Address homeless issues Address mental health and homelessness Address Noise from +300,000/year Prop plane flyovers from RMMA flight schools ADDRESS ON HOUSED, MENTAL HEALTH ADDICTION SUPPORT ENHANCE LAW ENFORCEMENT Address the issues related to the impact of the increased airplane traffic. Utilization of the airspace over Boulder County needs to be in the hands of Boulder residents/citizens and not dictated by others. Addressing homeless population and people living out of vans in residential neighborhoods AFFORDABLE HEALTHCARE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR CITY EMPLOYEES Ban gasoline leaf blowers! Also, stop building condos everywhere! Boulder will remain expensive, there is only so much space. increasing density and trying to make it affordable will ruin our city. BEGIN CONTENTION OF LIGHT RAIL BOULDER-DIA-DENVER, SUPPORT THE WORKING PEOPLE OF THIS CITY SO THAT THEY CAN LIVE HERE AND BIKE TO WORK! MAKE RENTS FEASIBLE AND AFFORDABLE LE, TAX THE WEALTHY. THANK YOU! Boulder has grown beyond its "carrying capacity, " which was originally planned for and that meant growth would be managed. That is clearly not happening today. We have lost our identity and our purpose. Boulder schools and supporting our kids futuresWHY DOESN'T THIS SURVEY ASK HOW MANY KIDS YOU HAVE OR IF YOUR KIDS ARE IN BOULDER SCHOOLS ?!?!?! I am disappointed that is entirely left off of this survey especially when so much planning and decisions are going on right now with regard to school zones and boundary change considerations and attempts to re-zone schools by the school board which is breaking up entire communities. That affects housing and planning and affordability why is that not in this survey? Are we not planning for our children, only for the older population taking over our city??

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •

• • •

Build more housing so fewer people need to commute to town CONTINUE THE ALREADY COMMUNITY SOLAR GARDENS TO PROVIDE ENERGY TO EVERYONE AT A LOW COST DEMS SUCK DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE 100'S OF LOW FLYING PROPELLER PLANES THAT WAKE PEOPLE UP AT DAWN EVERY DAY. EASIER PARKING BOULDER HAS ALWAYS BEEN AN EXPENSIVE PLACE TO LIVE, RIGHT FROM ITS INCEPTION DONE CHECK OUT "NIWOTS CURSE" EFFECTIVE ADDRESS HOMELESSNESS, PRIMARILY IN PUBLIC SPACES Ensure the safety and protection in our boulder valley plan FIX THE ROADS Flood safety. Traffic remediation. Removing stupid bollards from our roads. Regional composting. Develop housing, not behemoths. GET RID OF HOMELESS Getting rid of homeless and the littering and junk they leave behind HOMELESSNESS HOMELESSNESS IMPROVE AIR QUALITY Improve infrastructure including roads and access IMPROVE SAFETY FOR WALKING + BICYCLING + SCOOTERING Increase ADU permits, including unincorporated Boulder County. This supports the aging population and supports young working families so they can have family members close by to help with children Increase parking accessibility KEEP FARM LAND OPENING KEEP OPEN SPACES. NEW BUILDS IN EXISTING URBAN AREAS KEEP THIS BASE THE FIELDS KEEPING OFF LEASH SPACES LESS TRAFFIC Limit new construction; the city has so much traffic and the new construction is unaffordable for the majority of people. Limit the number of 'cookie cutter' complexes that are hideous, unoriginal, and poorly built. Focus more on building nice, diverse neighborhoods or apartments. MAINTAIN SMALL COMMUNITY VIBE (NOT BE A CITYSCAPE) maintaining public paths and playgrounds so that they are safe, clean and usable for their intended purposes. MAKE ROADS SAFE FAR CYDISTS-PATHOLES & CRUMBLING WORKS EVERYWHERE MAKE THE BUS SERVICE IN BOULDER COUNTY FREE OF CHARGE MANAGE NOISE FROM PROP PLANES MORE COHOUSING & COOPS Not sure what is mean by be an inclusive environment' for a city. If it means that by saying yes to building housing for the homeless people suffering from drug addiction in mental illness, then no. if it means welcoming diversity, immigrants, and social mobility for all classes, yes. OVER BUILT OVER POPULATION/TRAFFIC PARKING CONGESTION ON LEHIGH + CRAGMOOR STREETS AND CITY'S FAILURE TO CONSTRUCT/PROVIDE DEDICATED PARKING LOT FOR TRAIL ACCESS (LIKE EVER OTHER TRAIL HEAD ALREADY 2 HRS) PLEASE LEAVE SEVERAL ROADS THAT GO E/W TO CARS WE NEED TO GET TO WORK, TO SCHOOL, TO APPTS ON TIME, BIKES HAVE LOTS ON OPTIONS PRESERVE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSING (FEWER\UNRELATED OCCUPANTS). WRITE A SURVEY THAT IS NOT SKEWED Preserve views. I don't know whose idea it was to let people build 3+ stories with under building parking everywhere, but you can't even see the foothills from many places in Boulder anymore. That and CU needs to be reined in. They seem to get whatever they want. They exist in Boulder, not the other way around. The

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

• • • • • • • • •

•

• • • • • • • • • •

amount of noise they make at Prentup Field is just one example of the impunity they seem to have these days and the Police won't do a thing about it, instead referring it to the "CU Police" who of course won't do anything about it. PUT RESTRICTIONS ON SCRAPE OFFS OF NEW HOUSE SIZE REDUCE CRIME Reform governance RETURN GRASSLANDS TO GRASSLAND SAFETY OF PEDESTRIAN + CYCLIST. AFFORDABLE RENT FOR SMALL BUSINESS STOP BUILDING STOP BUILDING STOP BUILDING APARTMENT Stop building condos and apartment buildings. No more beehive communities! Boulder Valley is overpopulating at a nauseating rate! Businesses are failing right and left. Many commercial properties are vacant. Focus on homelessness and food insecurity for the people who already live here before continuing to over-build and ruining the land we are supposed to be stewards of! Stop building units without ample storage or parking. Stop building only multi-units for rent. People would like to own things and reduce turn-over. Additionally, please consider smaller units for singles and young people who would like to enter the market... we are pricing out younger populations and families STOP DENSIFYING Stop densifying, you cannot build your way to affordability stop destroying the quality of life in boulder by increasing housing density (and traffic). when will we "have enough" housing? we have enough now. STRENGTH HISTORIC PRESERVATION SUPPORT BUS & ALTERNATIVE TRANSPORTATION Support those unhoused due to economic constraints while cleaning up or bike paths and public spaces. The parks, recreation and open space are already great! not sure how to enhance TOO MUCH IMPORTANCE FOR BIKES OVER CARS MAKING TRAFFIC EVEN WORSE REDUCING IRIS TO Z LANES IS A DISASTER!! WATER COST WE ALREADY HAVE BEAUTIFUL PARKS & OPEN SPACES. USE THE MONEY FOR REC CENTERS + PUBLIC SAFETY (HELP PATROL OUR VIOLENT HOMELESS POPULATION).

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Appendix D: Selected Survey Questions by Respondent Characteristics The subgroup comparison tables contain the cross tabulations of selected survey questions by respondent characteristics. Chi-square or ANOVA tests of significance were applied to these breakdowns of survey questions. A “p-value” of 0.05 or less indicates that there is less than a 5% probability that differences observed between groups are due to chance; or in other words, a greater than 95% probability that the differences observed in the selected categories of the sample represent “real” differences among those populations. For each pair of subgroups that has a statistically significant difference, an upper-case letter denoting significance is shown in the category with the larger column proportion. The letter denotes the category with the smaller column proportion from which it is statistically different. Differences were marked as statistically significant if the probability that the differences were due to chance alone were less than 5%. Categories were not used in comparisons when a column proportion was equal to zero or one. Items that have no upper-case letter denotation in their column and that are also not referred to in any other column were not statistically different. For example, in Table 36, 65% of respondents aged 18–34 (Column A) reported that they had never heard of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan. This percentage was statistically higher than those of respondents aged 35–54 (Column B) and 55 and older (Column C), as indicated by the letters “B C” in Column A.

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Comparisons by Gender and Age Table 36: Question #1 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

I’ve never heard of it/know nothing about it

47%

40%

65% BC

36% C

17%

I don’t know much about it

30%

31%

20%

41% A

37% A

I know some things about it

17%

21%

22% A

33% A

I know quite a bit about it

10% B

I’m very familiar with it (e.g., understand its purpose, scope, objectives, etc.)

4% B

Total

100%

Before receiving this survey, how familiar were you with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (The Plan)?

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 37: Question #2 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Decline of natural environment

93% B

88%

93%

Support for aging population

75% B

57%

48%

72% A

91% AB

Support for youth population

86% B

79%

78%

85%

84%

Cost of living

96%

92%

97% BC

91%

90%

Cost of housing

94%

91%

98% BC

90%

85%

Lack of housing types/choices

81% B

69%

82% BC

70%

68%

Poor/ aging infrastructure

73%

83% A

71%

79%

90% AB

Excessive growth and development

79% B

72%

66%

73%

93% AB

Tourism impact

53%

46%

44%

48%

61% AB

Hazard preparation and resiliency (e.g., fire and flood mitigation)

93%

90%

93%

90%

89%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

89% B

77%

79%

86%

87%

Economic health of local businesses

86%

89%

84%

93% A

89%

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

89% B

77%

79%

86%

87%

Crime prevention and safety

80%

81%

76%

81%

88% A

Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists

90%

87%

88%

90%

85%

Other

64% B

40%

36%

57% A

78% AB

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

35-54 years

55 years or older

Table 38: Question #3 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Enhance parks, recreation and open spaces

65%

71%

63%

73%

69%

Ensure fairness and equal opportunity

70% B

54%

67% C

60%

53%

Protect and enhance the natural environment

87%

81%

86%

81%

Increase the variety of housing options

52%

50%

57% C

48%

39%

Increase the affordability of housing

75% B

65%

82% BC

63%

52%

Enhance adaptability to climate change

81% B

70%

80% C

71%

67%

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Foster a welcoming and inclusive community

66% B

55%

59%

70% C

52%

Enhance support for all ages and stages of life

64% B

52%

49%

61%

65% A

Preserve existing quality of life

73%

65%

74%

86% AB

Support vibrant local arts and culture

68% B

60%

62%

70% C

54%

Promote a strong and diverse local economy

78%

77%

81%

73%

Support Boulder's role as a technology and science hub

61%

74% A

66%

65%

69%

Position Boulder as a regional destination

23%

38% A

32%

30%

25%

Easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices

61%

66%

73% BC

58%

54%

Enhance public safety

64%

61%

59%

58%

73% AB

Strengthen hazard resilience

73% B

63%

70%

68%

63%

Other

48% B

19%

16%

43% A

54% A

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 39: Question #4 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Central Boulder

18%

20%

28% BC

14%

Crossroads

19%

18%

23% C

16%

12%

East Boulder

33%

32%

33%

32%

29%

Gunbarrel

32%

30%

31%

36% C

22%

North Boulder

24%

23%

28% C

21%

17%

Palo Park

19%

18%

21%

14%

Southeast Boulder

29%

34% C

26%

22%

South Boulder

26%

23%

32% BC

21%

15%

University of Colorado

13%

19% A

22% BC

12%

University Hill

11%

20% A

23% BC

12%

Planning Reserve north of the City of Boulder

26%

19%

25%

16%

22%

Unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods

20% B

14%

19%

13%

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

None of the above

12%

14% A

30% AB

All of the above

16%

17%

18% C

20% C

No preference

18%

23% C

17%

10%

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 40: Question #5 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Man

18-34 years

35-54 years

55 years or older

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

63%

56%

52%

63%

68% A

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

81%

84%

92% BC

80% C

60%

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

56%

63%

74% BC

54% C

33%

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

74%

79%

86% BC

72% C

58%

Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

84%

79%

91% BC

77% C

63%

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

80%

79%

88% BC

75%

65%

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

57%

54%

62% C

51%

46%

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? The Plan should…

Woman

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 41: Question #6 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

59%

53%

43%

66% A

71% A

Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

84%

90% C

82%

74%

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

71%

74%

87% BC

68% C

48%

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

84%

79%

86% C

82% C

69%

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

68%

73%

83% BC

70% C

46%

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in low-density neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

69% B

57%

64%

65%

55%

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 42: Question #7 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Keep building heights the same as they are today

65% B

46%

37%

62% A

78% AB

Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions

10% A

12% B

Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of

8% A

8% B

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units

21%

27%

29% C

27% C

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units

13% BC

Total

100%

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 43: Question #8 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Don’t add any new housing and business uses

12%

10% A

28% AB

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits

33%

46% A

46% C

38%

33%

Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses

18%

14%

21% A

22% A

Both of the above options should be pursued

37%

30%

44% BC

31% C

17%

Total

100%

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer?

35-54 years

55 years or older

Table 44: Question #9 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of resid

54%

61%

72% BC

60% C

27%

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

38%

32%

27%

33%

44% A

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas

7% A

29% AB

Total

100%

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 45: Question #10 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Change office spaces into residential uses

58%

52%

56%

49%

58%

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services)

31%

36%

28%

38%

34%

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

44% B

35%

37%

42%

37%

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

38%

44%

53% BC

40% C

25%

Don't do anything

10% AB

I'm not sure / no opinion

6% A

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two)

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 46: Question #11 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

35%

28%

31%

29%

Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

53%

47%

46%

52%

49%

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

26%

32%

29%

26%

35%

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

46%

49%

64% BC

37%

29%

None of the above

10% A

15% A

I'm not sure / no opinion

10% A

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two)

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 47: Question #12 by Gender and Age

Gender

Woman

Age

Man

18-34 years

35-54 years

55 years or older

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

29% B

21%

13%

27% A

43% AB

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

50% B

41%

46%

44%

43%

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

25%

19%

18%

23%

Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other services

17% A

15% C

10%

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions

15%

18%

13%

20%

18%

Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

48%

46%

48%

43%

48%

None of the above

8% B

I'm not sure / no opinion

12% A

14% BC

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 48: Question #13 by Gender and Age

Gender

Age

Woman

Man

18-34 years

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

Availability of places to gather and socialize

45%

50%

60% C

50% C

27%

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

45% B

25%

26%

36%

45% A

Safety in public spaces

54%

53%

55%

52%

54%

Opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs and services

33%

36%

28%

36%

39% A

Access to volunteer and leadership opportunities

20%

17%

13%

17%

27% A

None of the above

I'm not sure / no opinion

35-54 years

55 years or older

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Comparisons by Race/ethnicity and Income Table 49: Question #1 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

Before receiving this survey, how familiar were you with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (The Plan)?

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

I’ve never heard of it/know nothing about it

43%

57% A

54% D

44%

37%

I don’t know much about it

31% B

18%

24%

25%

22%

42% ABC

I know some things about it

20%

16%

11%

24% A

28% A

17%

I know quite a bit about it

I’m very familiar with it (e.g., understand its purpose, scope, objectives, etc.)

Total

100%

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

Table 50: Question #2 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

91%

87%

85%

94%

96% A

90%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Support for aging population

66%

69%

63%

70%

79% D

61%

Support for youth population

84% B

65%

80%

84%

87%

83%

Cost of living

93%

99% A

97% D

96%

89%

Cost of housing

93%

99%

99% D

96% D

97% D

87%

Lack of housing types/choices

78% B

65%

79%

89% CD

73%

69%

Poor/ aging infrastructure

77%

82%

77%

81%

84%

75%

Excessive growth and development

75%

71%

66%

80%

83% A

71%

Tourism impact

49%

51%

44%

59% D

57%

43%

Hazard preparation and resiliency (e.g., fire and flood mitigation)

93% B

79%

87%

91%

95%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

84%

76%

70%

90% A

83%

88% A

Economic health of local businesses

89%

83%

88%

92%

89%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

84%

76%

70%

90% A

83%

88% A

Crime prevention and safety

78%

88%

80%

77%

78%

82%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists

89%

90%

87%

80%

93% C

Other

46%

60%

32%

58% A

50%

Table 51: Question #3 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Enhance parks, recreation and open spaces

67%

83% A

67%

63%

69%

73%

Ensure fairness and equal opportunity

64%

63%

73% D

66%

57%

55%

Protect and enhance the natural environment

84%

93%

86%

83%

82%

Increase the variety of housing options

53% B

41%

56%

62% D

52%

45%

Increase the affordability of housing

72%

69%

82% D

70%

59%

Enhance adaptability to climate change

76%

83%

76%

65%

81% B

76%

Foster a welcoming and inclusive community

63%

66%

57%

60%

66%

62%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Enhance support for all ages and stages of life

55%

79% A

56%

48%

69% B

56%

Preserve existing quality of life

70%

89% A

70%

75%

74%

73%

Support vibrant local arts and culture

65%

66%

61%

66%

Promote a strong and diverse local economy

76%

89% A

79%

71%

77%

80%

Support Boulder's role as a technology and science hub

67%

61%

59%

55%

68%

79% AB

Position Boulder as a regional destination

30%

36%

29%

20%

27%

38% B

Easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices

63%

80% A

79% BD

56%

65%

63%

Enhance public safety

59%

78% A

63%

57%

63%

Strengthen hazard resilience

68%

63%

61%

70%

65%

72%

Other

28%

40%

34%

28%

37% A

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 52: Question #4 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Central Boulder

20% B

26%

19%

20%

17%

Crossroads

20% B

20%

19%

17%

20%

East Boulder

33%

31%

24%

40% A

33%

38% A

Gunbarrel

33% B

19%

20%

34%

33%

37% A

North Boulder

25% B

12%

18%

21%

24%

25%

Palo Park

20% B

13%

18%

20%

21%

Southeast Boulder

30%

32%

33%

24%

29%

South Boulder

26%

22%

27%

24%

27%

24%

University of Colorado

17% B

23% D

16%

14%

12%

University Hill

17% B

19%

17%

13%

14%

Planning Reserve north of the City of Boulder

24% B

13%

14%

36% AC

18%

23%

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods

16%

29% A

13%

30% ACD

10%

13%

None of the above

10%

18% A

11%

16%

12%

All of the above

17%

11%

15%

18%

13%

21%

No preference

18%

24%

26% D

20%

16%

12%

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 53: Question #5 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

58%

60%

47%

68% A

61%

62% A

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

85% B

75%

86%

89%

79%

82%

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

62%

57%

69%

57%

60%

57%

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

77%

82%

71%

80%

79%

76%

Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

83%

88%

94% D

89% D

82% D

69%

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

81%

75%

83%

76%

83%

77%

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

56%

59%

60%

53%

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? The Plan should…

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 54: Question #6 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Low-density neighborhoods made up of singleunit detached houses currently cover a majority of developed land in the Boulder Valley, consistent with current regulations. Would you support or oppose allowing the following options related to different housing types in these lowdensity neighborhoods?

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

57%

45%

41%

60% A

62% A

61% A

Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

87% B

69%

83%

89%

87%

82%

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

75%

67%

84% CD

79%

67%

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

82%

76%

85%

80%

86%

81%

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

72%

71%

79%

72%

69%

66%

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in low-density neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

63%

64%

67%

55%

65%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 55: Question #7 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Keep building heights the same as they are today

55%

45%

41%

55%

59%

59% A

Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions

11%

13%

14%

Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of

16% A

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units

25%

17%

24%

18%

28%

23%

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units

12%

15% CD

Total

100%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 56: Question #8 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer?

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Don’t add any new housing and business uses

13%

11%

12%

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits

41%

42%

38%

40%

41%

43%

Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses

15%

19%

10%

20%

14%

16%

Both of the above options should be pursued

35%

27%

42%

30%

33%

34%

Total

100%

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 57: Question #9 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of resid

59%

63%

61%

53%

59%

61%

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

34%

40%

34%

32%

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas

Total

100%

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 58: Question #10 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Change office spaces into residential uses

55%

54%

56%

48%

54%

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services)

32%

26%

30%

33%

41% A

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

42% B

27%

39%

45%

40%

34%

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

44% B

28%

44%

39%

44%

Don't do anything

I'm not sure / no opinion

17% A

8% D

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two)

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 59: Question #11 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

33%

31%

23%

33%

36%

34%

Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

50%

44%

51%

38%

56%

52%

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

29%

33%

26%

29%

21%

36% C

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

48%

57%

62% D

50%

51%

38%

None of the above

10%

I'm not sure / no opinion

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two)

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 60: Question #12 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

25%

18%

20%

25%

26%

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

47%

37%

61% D

48% D

59% D

30%

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

23%

13%

18%

17%

19%

24%

Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other services

10%

28% A

17% B

13%

12%

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions

16%

18%

14%

13%

15%

21%

Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

47%

40%

55%

54%

45%

None of the above

9% A

I'm not sure / no opinion

10%

11%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 61: Question #13 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

Availability of places to gather and socialize

50%

41%

53%

39%

49%

54%

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

36%

24%

31%

44%

30%

31%

Safety in public spaces

51%

63%

46%

52%

42%

63% AC

Opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs and services

35%

28%

38%

32%

46% D

29%

Access to volunteer and leadership opportunities

16%

25%

20%

22%

13%

None of the above

I'm not sure / no opinion

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 62: Question #25 by Race/ethnicity and Income Bracket

Race/ethnicity

Income Bracket

If you have participated in any engagement activities related to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update, do you feel heard in this process?

White alone, not Hispanic

Hispanic and/or other race

Less than $50,000

$50,000$99,999

$100,000$149,999

$150,000 or more

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

(C)

(D)

This is the first time I have heard about or participated in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan process

71% B

48%

69%

64%

69%

67%

Yes, I strongly agree that the city and county are hearing all of my input

Yes, I agree that the city and county are hearing most of my input

18% A

11%

Neutral

12%

18%

16%

14%

13%

No, I disagree and think you are hearing only some of my input

No, I strongly disagree and don't feel heard at all

9% A

8% D

Total

100%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Comparisons by Tenure and Housing Type Table 63: Question #1 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

Before receiving this survey, how familiar were you with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (The Plan)?

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

I’ve never heard of it/know nothing about it

24%

64% A

25%

55% A

I don’t know much about it

40% B

19%

36% B

27%

I know some things about it

28% B

11%

31% B

11%

I know quite a bit about it

I’m very familiar with it (e.g., understand its purpose, scope, objectives, etc.)

Total

100%

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 64: Question #2 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Decline of natural environment

89%

90%

89%

Support for aging population

79% B

55%

77% B

61%

Support for youth population

87% B

76%

84%

79%

Cost of living

90%

97% A

89%

97% A

Cost of housing

87%

98% A

84%

98% A

Lack of housing types/choices

67%

82% A

62%

83% A

Poor/ aging infrastructure

84% B

73%

84% B

74%

Excessive growth and development

84% B

66%

82% B

71%

Tourism impact

54%

46%

52%

49%

Hazard preparation and resiliency (e.g., fire and flood mitigation)

90%

92%

89%

93%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

87% B

80%

85%

82%

Economic health of local businesses

90%

86%

91% B

86%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

87% B

80%

85%

82%

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Own

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Tenure

Housing type Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Crime prevention and safety

84%

78%

87% B

77%

Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists

89%

86%

89%

87%

Other

60% B

42%

66% B

42%

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Own

Table 65: Question #3 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Own

Housing type Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Enhance parks, recreation and open spaces

68%

66%

73% B

62%

Ensure fairness and equal opportunity

52%

70% A

49%

69% A

Protect and enhance the natural environment

81%

84%

80%

85%

Increase the variety of housing options

40%

59% A

38%

57% A

Increase the affordability of housing

54%

82% A

50%

81% A

Enhance adaptability to climate change

67%

81% A

66%

78% A

Foster a welcoming and inclusive community

59%

60%

57%

62%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Tenure

Housing type

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Enhance support for all ages and stages of life

63% B

51%

61%

54%

Preserve existing quality of life

82% B

65%

83% B

67%

Support vibrant local arts and culture

62%

59%

64%

Promote a strong and diverse local economy

77%

75%

81% B

74%

Support Boulder's role as a technology and science hub

68%

65%

72% B

62%

Position Boulder as a regional destination

31%

28%

35% B

25%

Easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices

55%

73% A

57%

68% A

Enhance public safety

65%

60%

67%

60%

Strengthen hazard resilience

66%

68%

66%

68%

Other

47% B

16%

50% B

21%

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 66: Question #4 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Central Boulder

12%

25% A

12%

23% A

Crossroads

16%

19%

13%

21% A

East Boulder

35%

28%

30%

33%

Gunbarrel

34% B

26%

32%

29%

North Boulder

21%

25%

18%

26% A

Palo Park

21% B

14%

16%

18%

Southeast Boulder

28%

30%

25%

31%

South Boulder

20%

29% A

18%

29% A

University of Colorado

12%

19% A

10%

19% A

University Hill

12%

19% A

10%

18% A

Planning Reserve north of the City of Boulder

21%

20%

22%

Unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods

16%

14%

17%

None of the above

23% B

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Tenure

Housing type

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

All of the above

11%

20% A

12%

19% A

No preference

11%

24% A

13%

21% A

Other

Table 67: Question #5 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

63%

56%

71% B

52%

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

70%

89% A

69%

87% A

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

41%

74% A

43%

66% A

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

69%

80% A

68%

78% A

Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

68%

90% A

66%

88% A

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

69%

86% A

69%

83% A

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

45%

64% A

49%

58% A

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? The Plan should…

Own

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 68: Question #6 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

71% B

44%

73% B

46%

Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

78%

88% A

78%

87% A

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

55%

87% A

51%

84% A

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

71%

87% A

71%

85% A

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

55%

83% A

50%

82% A

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in lowdensity neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

58%

64%

55%

66% A

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 69: Question #7 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Keep building heights the same as they are today

70% B

42%

64% B

51%

Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions

12% A

Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of

8% B

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units

16%

30% A

18%

25% A

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units

12% A

11% A

Total

100%

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 70: Question #8 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer?

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Don’t add any new housing and business uses

18% B

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits

41%

39%

38%

41%

Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses

20% B

11%

22% B

11%

Both of the above options should be pursued

21%

44% A

23%

39% A

Total

100%

Other

Table 71: Question #9 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of resid

45%

68% A

44%

64% A

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

38% B

30%

38%

31%

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas

17% B

18% B

Total

100%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 72: Question #10 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two)

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Change office spaces into residential uses

54%

55%

49%

58% A

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services)

34%

31%

36%

30%

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

40%

36%

40%

37%

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

34%

49% A

33%

47% A

Don't do anything

7% B

I'm not sure / no opinion

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 73: Question #11 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

32%

28%

31%

29%

Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

48%

50%

46%

51%

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

30%

31%

33%

28%

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

35%

58% A

29%

59% A

None of the above

12% B

14% B

I'm not sure / no opinion

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two)

Own

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 74: Question #12 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Own

Housing type

Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

35% B

15%

38% B

16%

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

36%

53% A

35%

52% A

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

22%

20%

23%

19%

Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other services

13%

10%

12%

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions

20% B

13%

20% B

13%

Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

46%

47%

42%

51% A

None of the above

I'm not sure / no opinion

11% A

10%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 75: Question #13 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure Own

Housing type

Rent

Single family, detached

Other

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

Availability of places to gather and socialize

40%

56% A

42%

51% A

Supporting mental health and wellbeing

38% B

28%

35%

34%

Safety in public spaces

56%

51%

59% B

49%

Opportunities for youth-focused activities, programs and services

37%

30%

35%

32%

Access to volunteer and leadership opportunities

21%

15%

19%

18%

None of the above

I'm not sure / no opinion

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 76: Question #25 by Tenure and Housing Unit Type

Tenure

Housing type

If you have participated in any engagement activities related to the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update, do you feel heard in this process?

Own

Rent

Single family, detached

(A)

(B)

(A)

(B)

This is the first time I have heard about or participated in the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan process

55%

78% A

53%

75% A

Yes, I strongly agree that the city and county are hearing all of my input

4% B

Yes, I agree that the city and county are hearing most of my input

Neutral

18% B

10%

16%

12%

No, I disagree and think you are hearing only some of my input

9% B

12% B

No, I strongly disagree and don't feel heard at all

7% B

Total

100%

Other

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Comparisons by Planning Area Figure 14: Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Areas

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 77: Question #1 by Planning Area

Before receiving this survey, how familiar were you with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (The Plan)?

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

I’ve never heard of it/know nothing about it

45% C

36%

20%

42%

I don’t know much about it

30%

35%

38%

31%

I know some things about it

19%

23%

20%

I know quite a bit about it

15%

I’m very familiar with it (e.g., understand its purpose, scope, objectives, etc.)

Total

100%

Table 78: Question #2 by Planning Area

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Decline of natural environment

90%

91%

80%

89%

Support for aging population

66%

72%

76%

68%

Support for youth population

81%

87%

73%

81%

Cost of living

94% C

97% C

70%

94%

Cost of housing

93% C

95% C

60%

92%

Lack of housing types/choices

75% C

71%

49%

74%

Poor/ aging infrastructure

79%

76%

81%

79%

Excessive growth and development

74%

83%

80%

76%

Tourism impact

49%

61%

44%

50%

Hazard preparation and resiliency (e.g., fire and flood mitigation)

93% B

81%

91%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

83%

86%

83%

Economic health of local businesses

88%

86%

92%

88%

Availability of resources (e.g., water and energy)

83%

86%

83%

Crime prevention and safety

81%

78%

93%

81%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

The Plan provides a framework for addressing potential issues facing the Boulder Valley. How concerned, if at all, are you about the following current or potential issues facing the Boulder Valley?

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Safety of pedestrians and bicyclists

89% C

81%

68%

87%

Other

49%

60%

57%

51%

Table 79: Question #3 by Planning Area

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Enhance parks, recreation and open spaces

67%

74%

56%

67%

Ensure fairness and equal opportunity

62% C

64%

38%

61%

Protect and enhance the natural environment

83% C

88% C

63%

83%

Increase the variety of housing options

49%

52% C

21%

49%

Increase the affordability of housing

69% C

72% C

22%

67%

Enhance adaptability to climate change

75% C

31%

73%

Foster a welcoming and inclusive community

59%

70% C

37%

59%

Enhance support for all ages and stages of life

57%

64%

53%

57%

Preserve existing quality of life

73%

80%

66%

74%

Support vibrant local arts and culture

62%

70%

45%

62%

Promote a strong and diverse local economy

76%

86% C

58%

76%

Support Boulder's role as a technology and science hub

67%

65%

56%

66%

Position Boulder as a regional destination

30%

26%

25%

29%

Easy and safe access to a range of mobility choices

64% C

37%

63%

Enhance public safety

64%

62%

59%

63%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Strengthen hazard resilience

68%

66%

50%

67%

Other

29%

42%

53%

31%

Table 80: Question #4 by Planning Area

Which areas in the Boulder Valley (see map), if any, do you think should be considered for more housing? (Select all that apply)

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Central Boulder

19%

17%

14%

18%

Crossroads

19%

15%

18%

East Boulder

33%

22%

31%

Gunbarrel

31%

27%

23%

30%

North Boulder

22%

20%

29%

22%

Palo Park

17%

13%

17%

Southeast Boulder

29%

23%

28%

South Boulder

25%

18%

19%

24%

University of Colorado

16%

11%

15%

University Hill

16%

12%

15%

Planning Reserve north of the City of Boulder

20%

24%

21%

Unincorporated Boulder County neighborhoods

16%

None of the above

14%

19%

40% A

15%

All of the above

17%

15%

No preference

19%

12%

17%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 81: Question #5 by Planning Area

How strongly do you agree or disagree with each of the following related to the future of housing in the Boulder Valley? The Plan should…

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Support low-density housing types like detached homes and duplexes

58%

68%

69%

60%

Support moderate-density housing types, like 3- to 6-unit buildings, in more areas

81% C

74% C

39%

78%

Support higher-density housing types, like apartments or condominiums, in more areas

60% BC

41%

25%

56%

Encourage mixed-use buildings (often commercial and housing in one building) in more areas

75%

63%

57%

74%

Focus on increasing housing that is more affordable

80% C

79% C

37%

78%

Encourage use of less utilized areas in the city before developing areas outside the city boundary

78%

79%

66%

77%

Expand the city into the Planning Reserve (see map) to allow for new housing

55%

54%

34%

54%

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 82: Question #6 by Planning Area

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Single unit detached homes and accessory dwelling units only

55%

62%

85% A

58%

Duplexes (a building with two dwellings)

83%

81%

72%

82%

Multiplexes and Townhouses (a building with 3 to 6 units)

72% C

68% C

31%

70%

Cottage court (a cluster of 3 to 8 small, detached homes arranged around a shared courtyard space)

79%

87% C

63%

79%

Housing types with two or more units allowed throughout low-density neighborhoods

69% C

64%

44%

67%

Housing types with two or more units only allowed in specific locations in low-density neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

62%

58%

47%

61%

100

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 83: Question #7 by Planning Area

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Keep building heights the same as they are today

55%

61%

80% A

57%

Allow buildings in more areas of the city to be up to 55 feet tall without meeting special conditions

13%

Allow buildings to be taller than 55 feet but only for varied rooflines and architectural features keeping the number of

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories only in specific areas to allow more housing units

23%

19%

14%

22%

Allow buildings to be up to 6 or 7 stories everywhere to allow more housing units

8% B

Total

100%

101

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 84: Question #8 by Planning Area

If the City or County decides to support new housing and business uses, which do you prefer?

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Don’t add any new housing and business uses

12%

18%

20%

13%

Focus new housing and businesses within existing city limits

40%

36%

50%

39%

Expand city boundaries into the Planning Reserve on the north side of Boulder to accommodate new housing and businesses

14%

20%

25%

16%

Both of the above options should be pursued

34% C

26%

32%

Total

100%

Table 85: Question #9 by Planning Area

If the City or County decides to support new neighborhood-serving businesses in residential areas, which do you prefer?

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Allow small businesses (such as corner cafes, daycares, salons, healthcare offices or small shops) in all areas of resid

57%

47%

49%

55%

Allow small businesses only in very specific locations within residential neighborhoods, such as near transit stops

34%

35%

28%

34%

Don’t allow small businesses in traditionally residential-only areas

10%

18% A

24%

11%

Total

100%

102

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 86: Question #10 by Planning Area

Which of the following would you be most interested in exploring to address commercial vacancies? (Select your top two)

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Change office spaces into residential uses

53%

65%

42%

54%

Allow more uses to encourage other types of businesses (e.g., storage, event spaces, services)

33%

24%

42%

33%

Create incentives for commercial property owners to lease space at lower rates

38%

44%

23%

38%

Make it harder for property owners to leave units vacant for extended periods of time

42%

39%

25%

41%

Don't do anything

14% A

I'm not sure / no opinion

Table 87: Question #11 by Planning Area

As part of the Boulder Valley’s response to conserve water in relation to climate change, which of the following would you support? (Select your top two)

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Require low-flow indoor water fixtures

31%

30%

18%

30%

Restrict outdoor water use to specific times

49%

46%

38%

49%

Restrict outdoor water use only during times of drought

30%

28%

33%

30%

Require lawn replacement with landscaping that needs minimal water

48% C

39%

18%

46%

None of the above

11%

32% AB

I'm not sure / no opinion

103

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 88: Question #12 by Planning Area

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Availability of housing choices attractive to older adults (e.g., single-level living, smaller units, etc.)

24%

31%

36%

26%

Availability of housing that is affordable to people on fixed incomes

44%

47%

46%

44%

Size of workforce population to provide healthcare services

20%

24%

20%

21%

Size of workforce population to provide entertainment, dining, shopping and other services

12%

11%

Number of activities and opportunities for social interactions

16%

17%

29%

16%

Ability to travel around the city safely and independently

48% C

50% C

23%

47%

None of the above

14%

I'm not sure / no opinion

104

2025 Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan Update Statistically Valid Survey Table 89: Question #13 by Planning Area

Planning Area 1

Planning Area 2

Planning Area 3

Overall

(A)

(B)

(C)

(A)

Availability of places to gather and socialize