Boulder advisory board praises 'hubs' and 15‑minute goals but urges clearer, measurable transportation policies in BVCP draft

City of Boulder planning staff presented the public draft of the Boulder Valley Comprehensive Plan (BVCP) on March 9 and asked the Transportation Advisory Board (TAB) for feedback before the plan’s public comment period closes April 6.

Sarah Horn, senior planner for the Comprehensive Planning Team, said the draft translates community engagement and earlier phases of the update into a 20‑year vision and a set of roughly 102 policies intended to be clear, straightforward and resilient. "We're here to share an update on where we are in the comp plan update process, and give you an overview of the draft plan," Horn said.

Planners emphasized two headline changes: a shorter policy set intended to be easier to read and a revised future‑land‑use map that reduces the previous 25 land‑use categories to 12 classes, each with a mobility description. Tess Schorn, city planner, highlighted that the land‑use descriptions include "what you can expect" language for uses, urban design and mobility, and that the draft links land use and transportation to support policies such as the 15‑minute neighborhood.

Board members praised the hubs and the 15‑minute neighborhood concept but pressed staff for more specificity on transportation priorities and safety. Vice Chair Darcy Kitching told staff a figure comparing only city residents’ travel choices "could be misleading" without regional commuter context and urged the draft to make the Boulder Valley’s regional role clearer. Kitching said that because most people who work in Boulder live outside the city, the plan should better acknowledge cross‑jurisdiction travel impacts.

Member Mike Mills recommended adding higher‑level language establishing a "functional street hierarchy" so streets’ roles (through movement vs. local access) are explicit in policy. "We could add a sentence saying streets within neighborhoods should prioritize access, safety, and local activity, rather than serving as high‑speed through‑routes," he said.

Member Michael Le Desma pushed for clearer, measurable "what" objectives rather than only aspirational language. He urged the plan to adopt a values statement that addresses what he called "mode equity," arguing the city should stop allowing road and infrastructure choices that privilege private automobiles over other modes. "Automobiles are no longer king," Le Desma said, arguing that the plan should make safety an unequivocal priority.

Staff said the BVCP is intended as a high‑level, values‑oriented framework and that more technical or prescriptive treatments (for example, a detailed street hierarchy or signal design standards) can be developed in implementation plans, department strategic plans, or the citywide strategic plan. "One of our policies prioritizes people‑first mobility — that lays a groundwork for a system of street hierarchy that pays attention to people first," Sarah Horn said.

TAB agreed to prepare consolidated feedback. Planners asked the board to identify top priorities (for example a top five list) and to submit comments promptly so staff can consider them during April refinement and before adoption processes begin in June. "If your next meeting or staff coordination can produce a concise list of key recommendations, that would be most helpful," Horn said.

Next steps: the BVCP draft is posted for public comment through April 6; TAB members and the public can comment via the project website and planners will incorporate feedback before the final adoption steps begin in June.