Making changes to Colorado’s land-use policies to increase residential density and promote transit was a chief focus for Gov. Jared Polis and Democrats in the legislature this year as they look to drive down the cost of housing.
They were able to pass many of their priorities in 2024 — albeit in bite-size pieces and after stripping out provisions in exchange for political support to get them across the finish line. That’s an improvement over last year, when the governor’s sweeping land-use measure failed in the final hours of the 2023 lawmaking term.
Some of the new bills focus on metropolitan planning organizations, or MPOs, of which there are five in Colorado. They are surrounding: Denver, Colorado Springs, Pueblo, Grand Junction and Loveland-Fort Collins-Greeley. (See them on a map here.)
The Colorado Sun pored through the measures to summarize how they would change the land-use and affordable housing landscape in the state. For context on the final vote counts, Democrats have a 23-12 majority in the Senate and a 46-19 supermajority in the House.
Increasing density around bus and train stops
An estimated 31 local governments — most of them along the Interstate 25 corridor — would be required to change their zoning laws to allow more housing units along major bus and rail corridors under House Bill 1313.
The measure would require those local governments to zone for at least 40 units per acre within a quarter mile of bus stops and a half mile of rail stations. For context, townhomes are typically designed at 12 to 18 units per acre, according to a metro housing diversity study, while apartment buildings can have 100 units or more on the same amount of land.
The measure, a key piece of Polis’ housing agenda, includes $35 million in financial incentives over four years for communities that comply, which comes out to a few hundred thousand dollars per affected community per year. The money could go toward things like affordable housing projects.
Originally, the measure would have withheld highway maintenance funding from cities that didn’t meet proposed state targets for housing density near transit stops. That provision was amended out of the measure after local governments complained.
It’s difficult to say how much housing the measure would actually produce. Cities don’t have to develop multifamily housing themselves — they would just have to change their zoning laws to allow higher density, letting developers build more units. And, local governments would still have some ability to block development through the permitting process if the area lacked the infrastructure needed to support it or if it was polluted.
Still, there’s some evidence that loosening zoning restrictions can have a big effect. A Pew Charitable Trusts study found that apartment construction boomed and rents grew more slowly in Minneapolis than in the rest of Minnesota after the city adopted a series of land use reforms, including increasing how much housing could be built along transit corridors.
Further complicating matters in Colorado, state and local officials disagree over what the bill actually requires. In Lafayette, for instance — a city of 31,000 people — city planners estimated they would have to zone for an additional 77,000 housing units under a previous version of the bill.
The governor hasn’t yet signed the bill, which was panned by Republicans and some Democrats as usurping local control. Opponents also said it would lead to overdevelopment in areas that can’t handle it.
It passed the House 40-24 and the Senate 19-15.
“Coloradans are begging for more housing,” said Sen. Faith Winter, a Broomfield Democrat and one of the main sponsors of the bill, “and there is no better place to build housing and increase density than near transit.”
Local governments weren’t thrilled about House Bill 1313, but they say they can live with the final version.
“We are pleased that the punitive measures in all of the bills were largely eliminated,” said Kevin Bommer, who leads the Colorado Municipal League, which represents cities and towns across the state. “As bills become enacted, signed into law, we’re going to look at it all in totality and work with our members to determine what they need to know.”
Read more about debate on the bill here and here.
Accessory dwelling units
People who live in parts of the state that are in metropolitan planning organizations would be allowed to build accessory dwelling units or “granny flats” on their properties under House Bill 1152, which is awaiting the governor’s signature.
The legislation would block many existing local regulations that prohibit ADUs.
The bill would also create state grant and loan programs to help finance the construction of ADUs built by low- to moderate- income homeowners and for local governments to incentivize their regulatory work on ADUs.
The bipartisan bill would take effect on June 30, 2025 if the governor signs it as expected. The bill passed the House 47-17 and the Senate 20-15.
Rep. Ron Weinberg, a Loveland Republican and the sole GOP main sponsor of the measure, said it wasn’t a silver bullet but “it will provide relief to the citizens of Colorado.”
Other Republicans expressed concerns, as with House Bill 1313, about usurping local control. A group of local governments, including the cities of Brighton and Fountain and El Paso County, opposed the legislation.
Eliminating parking minimums (in some places)
Cities and towns would be prohibited from establishing or enforcing minimum parking requirements for residential buildings in specific areas under House Bill 1304, which is awaiting the governor’s signature.
The measure would take effect June 30, 2025, and apply to areas of the state that are part of a metropolitan planning organization and near certain bus or train stops or routes.
Additionally, the legislation would only apply to multifamily residential developments, buildings redeveloped for residential purposes and buildings redeveloped for mixed use in which at least 50% of the new use is residential.
The measure was originally much more sweeping. It would have applied to all areas within metropolitan planning organizations, but it was watered down to pick up enough votes to pass.
The Daily Sun-Up podcast | More episodes
The bill passed the House 40-22 and the Senate 19-15.
“Parking mandates drive up housing costs, increase traffic congestion and make it harder for Colorado to hit its climate goals,” said Sen. Kevin Priola, a Henderson Democrat and one of the main sponsors of the bill. “Developers can always choose to include parking, but eliminating minimum requirements will increase the availability of housing, drive down prices, and help ensure more Coloradans have a place to call home.”
Opponents of the measure said it could lead to parking problems in congested areas and that local governments are best suited to determine how much parking they need.
Right of first refusal
House Bill 1175 would give local governments a new “right of first refusal” to buy publicly subsidized affordable housing properties when their rental restrictions expire.
The measure would also require landlords to notify the government if they plan to sell older apartment complexes that aren’t subject to rental restrictions. The local government would then have the right to make a first offer on the property in order to turn it into affordable low-income housing.
Polis vetoed a more expansive version of the bill last year, which would have created a stronger right of first refusal that would have applied broadly to apartments that are at least 30 years old, even those that hadn’t been built with the help of public dollars. The governor hasn’t committed to signing this year’s version, which the legislature would have to renew after five years.
House Bill 1175 passed the House 41-19 and the Senate 19-14.
Those who voted against the bill argued it would give the government too much power to interfere with private transactions. The Colorado Real Estate Alliance and Colorado Apartment Association opposed the measure.
Read more about the proposal here.
Preventing local restrictions on how many unrelated people can live together
For decades, Colorado college towns such as Boulder and Fort Collins limited the number of unrelated people who could live together. Other cities did so, too.
But starting July 1, local governments will no longer be able to impose those rules under House Bill 1007, which was signed into law in April by the governor. The only exceptions are for health and safety concerns, or if the limits are tied to affordable housing guidelines.
“We’re in the midst of an affordability crisis right now, and housing is a top concern for folks,” said state Rep. Manny Rutinel, a Commerce City Democrat and one of the main sponsors of the bill. “The hope is that by allowing folks to fill empty bedrooms, we’ll be able to bring prices down, allow folks to live more sustainably by living closer to their workplace or to their friends and family, and also share energy and water resources.”
The bill passed the House 42-16 and the Senate 20-14. Opposition to the measure was more limited than it was for the other land-use bills debated at the Capitol this year, though the lawmakers who were opposed said it was another example of the state trying to impose its will on local communities.
The Adams County Regional Economic Partnership, Colorado Springs Chamber of Commerce and EDC and Mesa County were among the groups opposed to the bill.
Housing needs assessment
Most local governments with a population of at least 1,000 people would be required to assess their communities’ housing needs, with assistance from the Department of Local Affairs, under Senate Bill 174, which had broad bipartisan support and is awaiting the governor’s signature.
DOLA would be charged with developing guidelines and tools by the end of this year for communities to conduct and publish assessments by the end of 2026 and every six years thereafter, with three-year progress reports due to DOLA.
Ultimately, DOLA would assemble a statewide report on existing and future housing needs, as well as population growth projections. DOLA would also have to produce an analysis of land-use scenarios and their impacts. The measure includes $15 million over the next two years for DOLA, most of which will go toward grants.
The measure passed the House 58-6 and the Senate 33-2.