Boulder’s Planning Board voted 4-3 this week to continue studying a possible expansion of the city into the Area III planning reserve, a 493-acre parcel northeast of the city that remains largely undeveloped.
The site has capacity for up to 8,700 housing units, making it one of the city’s largest potential opportunities to address its housing shortage and create a new neighborhood. Skeptics of expanding into the area have cited the need to prioritize infill development within city limits, the significant cost of extending city services and the workload it would impose on staff.
In January, the Planning Board voted 4-3 that there was not sufficient community need to warrant further consideration of expanding into the planning reserve, nearly closing the door on the idea until the next Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan update, roughly five to 10 years away. The Boulder City Council later disagreed, finding there was sufficient need and allowing the Planning Board to revisit its decision. This week’s narrow vote to reverse course now allows that planning work to proceed.
Planning Board Vice Chair Laura Kaplan changed her position to support further study. She said examining the economics of building new neighborhoods with affordable housing “will be beneficial to Boulder regardless of whether we end up expanding the city service area into all or part of the planning reserve.”
Even if all approvals are secured, significant development would not occur until at least the 2030s.
This site lends itself to single-family homes – smaller, starter homes would be a perfect edition to Boulder’s housing. Schools are losing enrollment because young families can not afford housing in Boulder. We need to return to raising kids in neighborhoods that have small houses with lawns and back yards so kids can play and thrive. This kind of devlopment would also provide opportunities for people born/raised in Boulder to continue to live here and raise their own families – becoming more of a legacy city rather than a transient city. We need generational diversity to be a healthy community
If Boulder stopped building all these new housing communities we’d be better off. The prices are high, the inventory isn’t getting absorbed, vacancy rates are up, rents are down to 2022 levels on existing inventory and it’s still not renting, concessions are the highest they’ve been in 40 years, and in conjunction all the laws are changing you can barely recoup deposit expenses, everything and anything can be a “safety” concern to vacate the lease, it’s all so tenant friendly, and actual human landlords are being pushed out and the industrial companies are taking over. I’ve been in property management for 10 plus years in Boulder and this new market they’ve created because of this supposed housing crisis is insane. There’s no shortage of housing. There was a shortage of well priced housing. That has now changed. I’ve had a 2 bed on baseline and 30th posted for $1350 since last August. Not renting. The market isn’t what they seem to believe and consistently state it is.
Where exactly is the parcel northeast of the city? Can you please name the street parameters of the proposed expansion area? Thanks
BRL, please include a map for any article that references a location, including this one.
Added, and appreciate the feedback.
If you look out on 500 acres of land that has been in rural protection since the 1970s and think we should develop 8,700 homes, town houses and condos, I question why you want to live in Boulder. The City of Boulder is the place it is largely due to land conservation.
Yes, it would be lovely to own a newly constructed single-family home, adjacent to open space, with a lush green yard, at 40% below market. When that dream requires water we don’t have, many 100’s of millions in infrastructure and the degradation of Boulder’s character that’s a problem.
There is no shortage of development within Boulder’s current city limits with countless major projects proposed. If those options don’t suit you then look elsewhere. There is no shortage of development along Colorado’s front range.
It would be great to see further reporting into what led to City Council pressuring the Planning Board to change their vote. Why was one member of the Planning Board swayed? Who is behind those LLCs that have major land holdings in Planning Area 3? Who stands to profit from all this?
Overall, this vote pulls funding and attention away from issues the city should be focused on. Let’s fix our current problems before creating new ones.
It’s not hard to see why the Democratic Party is struggling. Recent polling shows Democrats with a higher unfavorability rating than Republicans—something that should prompt real reflection at a time when MAGA-driven extremism dominates the GOP. In many ways, the only thing Democrats have going for them is that the alternative often feels unhinged—and that’s not a sustainable political strategy.
Voters, regardless of ideology, don’t like being told how to live their lives, especially by the government. Yet too often, that’s exactly the message coming from within the party—particularly from progressives, who more than anyone tend to embrace policies and rhetoric that feel prescriptive and condemning of how people in their own party live their lives. When states dictate how cities and towns should develop, or signal that the neighborhoods people chose must fundamentally change, it reinforces a perception of overreach and drives voters away.
This approach is politically self-defeating. Telling people that wanting space, stability, or a yard is somehow out of step doesn’t feel forward-thinking—it feels dismissive.
I say this as a lifelong Democrat who wants the party to succeed. It’s frustrating to watch it repeatedly shoot itself in the foot. If Democrats want to rebuild trust, they need to move away from telling people how to live, start listening, and focus on finding solutions people can embrace.
So what has happened to the Danish Plan? As a long-time Boulder County resident who once lived in the city, I am very much disturbed by the trend toward greater density and demands for additional housing we don’t need. The desirable character of Boulder was established and maintained by open space buffers and low-density neighborhoods. Why does the city now wish to destroy the very attributes that make Boulder…Boulder. I find it bad enough to see high rises along 30th street blocking the sun and views of the mountains while I navigate traffic that mimics a parking lot. Now there’s a desire to eliminate single-family homes in favor of human beehives and anthills. I am a Democrat who finds herself increasingly at odds with her own party whose leadership ignores issues such as skyrocketing property taxes and homeowners insurance in favor of accommodating developers’ dreams. I suggest that the city and county listen to their longtime residents’ concerns before making these decisions that affect all of us.