Updated: Feb. 18, 3:54 p.m.
Leaders of a growing number of Colorado cities are indicating they don’t intend to comply with recently passed state laws that will pre-empt local governments’ control of parking, housing density and other land use issues.
Local governments in Colorado and across the U.S. have historically had domain over the rules that shape their growth. State legislators took a swipe at that last year, passing a suite of bills aimed at increasing the state’s housing supply and boosting transit use by requiring some cities to allow more accessory dwelling units, apartments, townhomes, duplexes, and other multi-family dwellings, and less parking in certain areas.
Now, as various compliance deadlines loom, cities including Boulder, Broomfield, Fort Collins, Longmont and Denver, are moving to reshape local rules and codes to conform to the new state laws.
But other local governments are pushing back. Officials in Westminster, Arvada, Colorado Springs, and Northglenn have at least suggested, and in some cases explicitly said, that they won’t follow some of the laws. They cite varied issues like inadequate infrastructure, unreliable transit service, and the loss of neighborhood character.
There’s one common objection, too: the loss of local control.
“Folks, this is insanity,” Westminster Mayor Nancy McNally said during a City Council meeting earlier this month in which she and other members directed city staff to not to comply with three of the new laws.
“I believe this is total overreach by our state government who should have a billion other things to be looking at, not how we run our cities,” she added.
In a statement, a spokesperson for Gov. Jared Polis said the state and local governments should work together to solve Colorado’s housing affordability crisis.
“We would expect local leaders to of course follow the law, help deliver more housing now, and save people money. Local governments must follow the laws of Colorado,” Eric Maruyama wrote in an email.
It’s unclear whether the conflicts will escalate to legal action, though some cities have already discussed the possibility of suing the state over the laws. How the disputes shake out could help determine where development powers rest in Colorado, and how its residents live and move through it in the future.
In Westminster, fears of Soviet-style apartment blocs.
One of the marquee bills passed last session forces some cities to allow greater housing density near certain transit lines. The law requires such cities to set “housing opportunity goals,” which are calculated by using a formula that considers the amount of land near existing or planned transit stations and lines.
A map produced by the state identifies a Regional Transportation District commuter rail station, two stations on its frequent Flatiron Flyer bus route along U.S. 36, and the Federal Boulevard corridor as areas eligible for denser housing. Under the law, Westminster could choose to concentrate its more dense housing zones in only some of those areas or petition the state to put it elsewhere in the city.
After subtracting acreage exempt allowed under the law, like open space and flood plains, Westminster staff estimate the city’s housing opportunity goal is 50,506 units — just more than the 50,323 existing housing units in the city.
One Westminster city councilor took that figure as an indication that Soviet-style apartment blocs could be in the offing.
“I want to know … who the state thinks is going to live in these 50,000 units,” said councilmember Kristine Ireland.
“Everyone's going to flee this state in droves because people want single family homes,” she added. “That's why people are leaving this state. They don't want to live in apartments from birth to death. I saw this stuff in Russia and it was built under Lenin.”
Having a goal of 50,506 units, however, does not necessarily mean that 50,506 new housing units will be built.
Rather, the law requires Westminster to change its zoning to allow that many units to exist in certain areas near transit. Some housing already exists in those zones, and the city’s current zoning allows for more.
City staff downplayed the impact its existing housing stock and zoning capacity would have on its goal, saying most land near transit corridors and stations do not have housing densities that meet the minimum of 15 units per acre and cumulative average of 40 units per acre required by the law. A neighborhood of four-story apartments would have roughly 40 units per acre.
The city, however, has already embraced high-density development in areas like its new downtown, built on the site of an old mall and near a Flatiron Flyer station. Those developments will help the city meet its goal and offer an example for what it will need to do elsewhere, said Matt Frommer, transportation and land use policy manager with the Southwest Energy Efficiency Project, an advocacy group that supported the housing bills.
“They're blessed with good transit,” Frommer said. “And that's where we want to build more housing to address our transportation and climate issues and provide more affordable housing.”
Market forces will also be a key factor in what eventually is built, Frommer said.
“You need the stars to align,” he said. “The landowner needs to want to build housing and it needs to make sense for them financially.”
The state Department of Local Affairs, which is overseeing implementation of the transit-oriented communities law and others, and Westminster, both issued statements to CPR News emphasizing collaboration — but also staking out their respective territories.
DOLA Executive Director Maria De Cambra said the department would ensure “all actions adhere to Colorado law” and a Westminster spokesperson said the city wants a solution that “respects home rule authority and the awareness of local control.”
The law requires affected cities to change their zoning rules by the end of 2027.
Arvada leaders, in the meantime, are stalled on the state's new parking law.
Another key law prevents some local governments from requiring parking be built with apartments and other multi-family projects close to some transit lines starting this summer.
Legislative backers and housing advocates say such local parking regulations drive up housing construction costs, rents, and contribute to sprawling neighborhoods difficult to navigate outside of a car.
In Arvada, the law would limit the city’s ability to require developers include parking for new housing near RTD commuter rail stations and five local bus lines. While the City Council has not yet taken a formal position on the new laws, a spokesperson said, several city leaders said in a recent meeting that they would undermine the city’s character and its ability to determine its own future.
“Our [parking] code definitely matches the character of our community,” said councilmember John Marriott, adding: “We have been flexible and are willing to have conversations with our community about what this should be and balancing these competing interests. But to have the state dictate to us that this is what's going to be, I think, is completely wrong.”
Other members said it was unfair to force the city to penalize driving when a key factor — transit service — is outside of its control.
“RTD is the most unreliable organization,” said councilmember Bob Fifer.
“Our land use as a community should not be based on an organization that can't get their act straight to even service our community,” he added.
The on-time performance for RTD’s local buses has suffered in recent years, and during the pandemic, the agency pared back how often the G Line runs. That line stops at three stations in Arvada.
RTD’s aspirational service plan calls for restoring the G Line to 15-minute service during peak times, but in a new statement, an agency spokeswoman said there are no current plans to do so.
“The agency closely monitors ridership trends and, when adjustments may be necessary, makes every effort to provide a level of service that supports demand,” spokeswoman Pauline Haberman wrote in an email.
Haberman also touted the agency’s current plans to restore service across the Denver metro this year. The state will also soon begin to contribute more funding for transit operations, including at RTD.
RTD plans to increase service on a dozen routes in May, though not on any that will affect Arvada’s parking regulations. The five lines that will affect Arvada’s parking regulations only run every half-an-hour at the most, RTD schedules show.
Arvada, Westminster and other rebellious cities have one thing in common: home rule
The state constitution allows cities and counties to become “home rule” governments, where local ordinances generally supersede state law.
Northglenn recently passed a declaration stating that as a home rule city, its local limit on how many unrelated people can live in one home supersedes the recent state law that largely bans such restrictions. Officials in Westminster and Arvada both referenced their home rule rights in recent discussions as well.
“This is the spot where us as home rule communities need to stand up to the state and say, ‘Look, you've got yours, we've got ours,’” said Marriott, the Arvada councilmember. “You're in our backyard here. We don't want you in our backyard. And maybe it's time for the Supreme Court to decide how this goes. But I don't see any reason whatsoever for us to roll over and just accept this out of the state legislature.”
Arvada’s city attorney told the council the city is preparing a legal analysis and speaking with other cities about the new housing laws. A city spokesperson said the council is expected to discuss them again in March.
State legislators sought to sidestep the home rule issue by declaring their bills address matters of “mixed statewide and local concern.”
University of Colorado Boulder law professor Michael Pappas said if a city were to challenge any of the state laws, the courts would likely have to decide whether local housing policies, in aggregate, amount to statewide policies.
“Is this something that is guaranteed to municipalities via home rule protections? Or is this something, that based on its effects on the statewide housing availability, is something that is properly considered at the state level?” he asked.
Editor's note: This story has been updated to reflect that Fort Collins and Longmont are also moving to reshape local rules and codes to conform to these new state laws.
