Planning Board reviews concept plan for 170-unit mixed-use development at 5450 Airport Blvd.

The Boulder Planning Board reviewed a revised concept plan on Jan. 7 for a mixed-use project at 5450 Airport Boulevard that would build 170 attached dwelling units, a community building and about 10,000 square feet of office and restaurant space.

The proposal, presented by Ripley Design land planner Sam Coutts and applicant Jason Markel of Markel Homes, would place four three‑story buildings on a 4.29-acre site south of Airport Boulevard and orient the development toward the open space and ditch corridor to the south. "We're orienting the entire development towards the south to front along this amazing green belt," Coutts told the board, describing planned trails, open‑space "rooms," and a rooftop amenity that overlooks the Flatirons.

City planner Shannon Miller told the board that the hearing was a concept review and that "no formal action is being taken on the project tonight in terms of an approval or a denial." Miller and staff highlighted key issues they expect at the later site‑review stage: compatibility with the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) and the East Boulder subcommunity plan, the proposed mix of residential versus nonresidential uses, and details of site design including accessibility, parking and transportation demand management (TDM).

The applicant said the revised plan responds to concerns raised at an October 2023 concept review by reducing surface parking, focusing building fronts toward the south open space, and adding shared parking arrangements with a neighboring lot. Coutts said the team has an MOU and ownership interests that they expect will allow construction of the “missing link” multiuse path across a triangular parcel to the southwest, connecting the site to Valmont Bike Park.

Board members praised improvements to architecture and orientation but pressed the team to provide stronger, verifiable commitments on transportation and connectivity. Several members said the “missing link” trail and links to Sterling Circle and the San Lazaro area are essential to making housing in this location compatible with BVCP guidance. Commissioner Kurt said the board needed assurances beyond conversations: who will construct the missing link and what mechanism will guarantee it at site review?

Members also called for a robust TDM plan — commitments that make alternate modes as convenient as driving. Commissioners emphasized best‑in‑class long‑term bike parking (horizontal, secured, and EV/ebike‑charging capable), on‑site micromobility options (scooter depots, ebike vouchers), unbundled/paid parking, and clearer management plans for the proposed shared parking arrangement with the lot to the north. Board member Laura stressed the need for horizontal long‑term bike parking to accommodate cargo and electric bikes.

Board members flagged specific site design items to resolve at site review: 1) the block of surface parking between Buildings 1 and 2, which several members said fragments the public realm and should be removed or reconfigured; 2) ADA access from Building 3 down to the new multiuse path (board members noted a proposed stair connection would not be accessible); and 3) how the project will provide resident‑serving amenities on site given limited nearby services.

The applicant reported roughly 87,000 square feet of residential gross floor area and about 13,000 square feet of nonresidential space (community building included). They said the neighboring lot currently has about 230 parking spaces and that they expect to use roughly 115 of those under a shared arrangement during workday hours.

Next steps: staff said the applicant may submit a site‑review amendment and a use review to allow residential uses in the industrial zone; those decisions are staff level and subject to call up by the board. The board gave detailed direction for the applicant and staff to develop a high‑quality TDM package, demonstrate actual commitments for the missing‑link trail and Sterling Circle connections where possible, refine ADA access, and revise parking and open‑space layouts before site review.

The board did not take a vote on the concept plan at the Jan. 7 meeting. The applicant will return with the technical site‑review materials and a more detailed TDM and connectivity plan for staff review and potential call up by the Planning Board.