Posted on 03/31/2023 9:25:45 AM PDT by Right Wing Vegan
Gov. Jared Polis and Democratic state lawmakers unveiled the most significant land-use reform in decades last week. The sweeping new efforts to address Colorado’s housing crisis are focused on increasing residential density in the state’s cities and towns.
“This is how we will make more housing options for every Colorado budget in every community, drive down costs that are pricing Coloradans out of our homes and out of our neighborhoods,” Polis said.
The Common Sense Institute found Colorado had a housing shortage of 225,000 units in 2021, and the affordability of purchasing a home was the lowest in 33 years. According to the Bell Policy center, half of Colorado renters are cost-burdened, or spending more than a third of their income on housing.
The new proposal includes Senate Bill 213, which would mandate changes to zoning requirements across the state by preventing municipalities from limiting the construction of duplexes, triplexes, townhomes and housing add-ons in residential neighborhoods.
It does not, however, require construction of such housing.
The bill would also block limits on how many people who are not part of the same family can live in one unit, remove growth caps for cities and towns and cut state regulations on things like manufactured homes.
“When we invest in bringing housing costs within reach for people at all income levels, and across all housing types, we build healthier, more vibrant and flourishing communities,” s aid Rep . Iman Jodeh, one of the bill’s main sponsors .
Specific land use changes in the bill vary depending on a community’s population size and specific housing needs.
The state’s biggest cities — referred to in the bill as T ier 1 cities — include those in the Denver m etro a rea as well as Greeley, Fort Collins, Loveland, Windsor, Colorado Springs, Fountain, Grand Junction and Pueblo. Under the bill, T ier 1 cities c annon limit the buil ding of duplexes, triplexes, multiplexes up to six units and accessory-dwelling units in residential neighborhoods . Th ose cit ies would also be blocked from requiring parking for those units.
The bill would also require T ier 1 cities to allow for multi-unit or multi-family buildings near transportation hubs, and would require them to develop long-term plans for their housing needs.
Tier 2 cities are municipalities with a population between 5,000 and 25,000, which are in counties with more than 250,000 people. Those communities would not be required to allow duplexes, triplexes and multi-unit housing in residential areas, but would have to allow for accessory dwelling units. They would not be subject to land-use changes around transportation hubs, but would have to develop a housing needs assessment.
The bill classifies towns such as Aspen, Steamboat Springs and Vail as rural resort job centers. Those communities would be required to allow for accessory dwelling units, and develop regional housing plans that include zoning for duplexes, triplexes and multiplexes. They would also be required to work with surrounding communities to improve public transportation.
Non-urban municipalities in the bill are communities with more than 5,000 people that are not in the previous categories. The bill would prohibit limits on accessory dwelling units in non-urban municipalities, but they won’t need to develop a long-term housing plan.
Housing advocates, business representatives and environmental leaders support the proposal. Some local government officials also support it, but others say it still needs work.
“Neither myself nor the city is officially supporting the bill in its current form,” Boulder mayor Aaron Brockett said. “We're sitting down at the table with the bill sponsors and negotiating over some changes.”
Brockett s aid requirements for multi-unit housing larger a triplex is not appropriate for a city like Boulder. He would also like to address the restrictions on parking requirements in the bill, and would like to see additional funding for constructing new housing through Boulder’s housing authority.
Municipalities are concerned the bill amounts to a loss of local land-use control. The Colorado Municipal League officially opposes the measure.
“Although the bill is being sold as a ‘menu of options’ with ‘flexibility’ to create affordability, it mainly benefits developer interests to the detriment to the quality of life and access to local elected officials expected by Coloradans and with no guarantees that anything built will be ‘affordable’,” Kevin Bommer, CML’s executive director, said in a written statement.
Instead, Bommer said his organization wants to see state-level funding and support for local efforts and regional partnerships to develop affordable housing and workforce housing.
Welcome to Mexico City.
I have a much better housing proposal: Deport the illegals.
Saved me the time. That’s all this is: import more Mexicans to vote for pasty faced queers like Jared.
"Workforce housing" that's a new one to me.
Rename the joint, Coloazul.
“The bill classifies towns such as Aspen, Steamboat Springs and Vail as rural resort job centers. Those communities would be required to allow for accessory dwelling units, and develop regional housing plans that include zoning for duplexes, triplexes and multiplexes. They would also be required to work with surrounding communities to improve public transportation.”
The Aspen area already has good communter bus services all the way between from many miles north and west of Aspen along I-70 and free bus services all around the Aspen area.
WA is doing the same thing, HB 1110.
Intuitively you’d think that opening more land up for development would lower costs but that has been shown not to be the case if it is done by increasing density.
Your neighbor sells to a developer who plops a 6-plex on the lot, now your property taxes double because the “best use” of your land is now multi-family.
I am guessing the cost of getting permits for all this new construction is not going to be adjusted to make that process more affordable.
Will they only be allowed to use klacker at the company store?🙄
As a residential redeveloper here in Colorado, I’d love to build their fantasy low income housing, but the land buy needs to be 1/4 of the value or less of the projected after build value. With tight city/county legacy zoning restrictions (2 units on 1/8 acre), supply costs, and slow timeliness that cost holding interest payments, that won’t ever happen. However, easing up on ADU restrictions might make some ambitious home owners wealthy, over the long run, should they build a nice little tiny rental. Of course, after that’s done, the blue pigs will bring in tenant and rent rate restrictions.
I like your proposal.
In Portland and much of the surrounding area the vampires at the government require $50,000 to $100,000 before the first shovel of dirt is moved. Then the “houses” look like two-story manufactured chicken housing. I just drove through Colorado last week (I-70) and it seems to me that there is plenty of land available so that people don’t need to have living rooms that share windows with their neighbor’s bedrooms. I don’t think even the antelopes would be inconvenienced.
Just wait until those who have extra rooms are commanded to take in the homeless....AND pay to feed and clothe them.
Probably the model planned for the entire new ghettoized and mexicanized America. Soon enough India style hostel living will be introduced as well.
“The bill would also block limits on how many people who are not part of the same family can live in one unit, remove growth caps for cities and towns and cut state regulations on things like manufactured homes.”
Welcome to new slums. I can tell you one definite result of this more group housing for rehab centers or even parolees. It also means a major loss of green space such as parks.
I have my doubts about the current drumbeat of how increased urbanization improves the quality of life for residents. That I view as part of climate crisis propaganda.
in Mexico especially.
When the Democrats say “Workforce housing” what they mean is future slums.
Every time.
That is what has happened here in NH with the “work force housing bill”. Land that is available to build a subdivision on has gone up in price. This is because a piece of property that in the past you could put 20 single family houses on you can now put 60 or more duplexs on.
This is happening about a mile south of my house. They have approved a subdivision with 60 two and three bedroom duplexs. So, that will be another 120 autos on my road every day. Not to mention the amount of kids in the schools.
Question: Does this pre-empt HOA covenants?
Normally I think HOAs are evil but their sole saving grace could be keeping the government at bay with their schemes to carve up peoples backyards.
Here is what we have observed in Seattle suburbs.
The demographic consultant for the school district estimated 1 family with school age kids per 40 units of barracks-style housing they have built for Microsoft minions. The actual number turned out to be 1 in 120 and they are having to close a couple elementary schools.
Sounds like the housing plan that got Ceausescu eventually killed and the communists thrown out of Romania.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.