TAB recommends Boulder council adopt broad parking-code changes, asks staff to study bike parking details

The Transportation Advisory Board voted 3–0 on May 12 to recommend that City Council adopt two draft ordinances implementing the city’s Access Management and Parking Strategy (AMPS), including the elimination of minimum off‑street parking and new on‑street permit and bike‑parking standards.

The recommendation covers two draft ordinances described in staff materials as: an on‑street/neighborhood permit parking ordinance (referred to in TAB papers as ordinance 8700) and an off‑street parking ordinance updating Title 9 (referred to as ordinance 8696). TAB’s motion asked staff to “consider incorporation of comments from Community Cycles and TAB member Michael Ledesma” and to pursue follow‑up work on items raised by board members and the public.

Why it matters: staff told TAB the timing is tied to a recent Colorado law (referred to in the presentation as House Bill 241304) that prohibits local minimum parking requirements for some multifamily and adaptive‑reuse projects inside transit service areas beginning June 30. City staff said adopting city code updates now will give Boulder a regulatory framework as the state changes take effect.

What staff told TAB - Lisa Hood, principal planner in Planning & Development Services, told TAB the off‑street ordinance would remove minimum parking requirements citywide rather than only inside the state’s transit service area; the change is limited to new development and redevelopment and would not be applied retroactively. Hood said the code updates also include shared‑parking rules, revised EV‑charging references in the energy code so EV counts depend on spaces provided rather than required, and updated bike‑parking standards intended to improve security and usability. - Sam (Samantha) Bromberg, senior project manager for Community Vitality, outlined on‑street changes to the neighborhood permit parking (NPP) program: lowering the standard permit allowance from two permits per licensed driver to one, introducing year‑long “flex” permits for households with exceptional needs, offering 25 day‑passes per household per year, allowing the city manager to cap permits per zone, and a pilot in the Goss Grove neighborhood to test mobile pay parking for non‑permit holders with free “eco passes” for residents. - Chris Hagelin, principal project manager in Transportation & Mobility, summarized the transportation demand management (TDM) ordinance still in development: a tiered approach will require TDM plans and ongoing annual financial guarantees for larger projects, third‑party trip‑generation studies and remedial funds if projects do not meet vehicle‑trip targets.

Key details from the draft code - Off‑street parking: staff said the ordinance eliminates minimum off‑street parking requirements for all land uses citywide for new development and deletes numerous prior code references to minimums and reductions. - Bike parking: the draft raises emphasis on security and usability. Staff said: where over 20 long‑term bike spaces are required, 5% should provide larger footprints (10ft × 3ft) for cargo bikes; vertical/tiered racks would be limited to 50% of required spaces and must include mechanical assist; long‑term bike rooms must meet lighting, anchor and lock standards and should be direct to accessible paths (the draft disallows designs that require stairs to reach long‑term bike parking). - E‑bike charging: the draft calls for e‑bike charging in larger long‑term facilities (staff described a 5% target for charge‑capable spaces in those large installations, per the draft’s current figures). - On‑street/NPP changes: staff presented moves intended to reduce permit counts and better match supply, add day‑passes and flex permits, allow zone caps, formalize a park‑and‑walk block designation for school drop‑off/pick‑up, and test paid curbside parking with eco‑passes in the Goss Grove pilot. - Finance: Community Vitality’s analysis showed staff believe the NPP program could maintain cost recovery under the proposed changes when paid parking is in use; without paid parking, staff said permit fees would likely need to rise substantially to cover an eco‑pass program.

Public comment and stakeholder concerns Several speakers representing cycling advocacy groups urged stronger bike‑parking requirements and retroactive remedies for existing buildings. Gary Sprung of Community Cycles said, “Bicycles need parking space as much as do cars,” and pressed staff to exempt bike parking from floor‑area‑ratio (FAR) calculations so bike storage would not compete with living area. Alexi Davies of Community Cycles urged larger clearances for tiered racks, labeled cargo‑bike spaces and bigger locker dimensions. Trish Zir of Bike Boulder described recent bike thefts and said secure, well‑lit, accessible bike parking is essential to meet modal‑shift goals.

TAB discussion and direction Board members asked staff for data and legal detail on retroactivity and for stronger guidance on e‑bike infrastructure. TAB members also asked that staff confirm which parts of the draft are already addressed elsewhere in code or design standards and provided several suggestions for future work: a formal bike‑parking utilization study, re‑examining FAR treatment for bike parking, and a potential phased approach to retrofit existing buildings.

Formal action TAB’s formal recommendation (approved 3–0) asked City Council to adopt the two draft ordinances described above and included a directive that staff “consider incorporation of comments from Community Cycles and TAB member Michael Ledesma” and return with follow‑up analysis and any recommended code edits. (TAB members present and voting were recorded as an affirmative majority; staff told TAB an affirmative vote of all three members present was required to forward the recommendation.)

What’s next Staff will take the draft ordinances and TAB and Planning Board feedback to City Council in June; the TDM ordinance will return to TAB and Planning Board later in the year. Staff also agreed to prepare additional documentation tying TAB’s suggested changes to specific code language and to identify which items would require a separate work plan or additional legal analysis (for example, retroactive application to existing buildings).

Ending Staff emphasized the June state deadline for some aspects of the state law as the rationale for advancing the parking code changes now, while continuing to develop the TDM ordinance and the supplemental analyses TAB requested.