Colorado Democrats have introduced a wave of legislation to increase the state’s affordable housing stock to make good on what they said would be their main priority at the Capitol this year. But High Country communities from Aspen to Steamboat Springs, which have among the state’s highest housing costs, won’t be impacted by many of the measures.

Three of the biggest bills, which would boost housing density near transit, eliminate parking space minimums and lift prohibitions on accessory-dwelling unit construction, are almost exclusively focused on the Front Range. 

The only part of the Western Slope they would apply to is Grand Junction and its immediate surroundings.

---

---

The reasoning behind the High Country exemptions varies depending on whom you ask.

Some argue it’s because rural resort towns and counties are already addressing housing affordability. Others will say it’s because the mountain region faces geographic limitations, namely a shortage of available, buildable land. Still others will point to the lack of support for the bills among local leadership. 

---

---

But local governments across the state — including those that would be impacted by the bills — have all made the same arguments in opposition to the measures. They want local control, too, yet they aren’t excluded from the requirements. 

“I’m glad for them,” Kevin Bommer, executive director of the Colorado Municipal League, said of the mountain communities excluded from the measures.  

His organization, which represents cities and towns across the state, opposes most of the bills in the affordable housing package being pursued by the Democratic majority at the statehouse this year.

Bill details

House Bill 1304 would prevent local governments in the most populous parts of Colorado from setting minimum parking requirements. 

Rep. Stephanie Vigil, a Colorado Springs Democrat and one of the bill’s main sponsors, said parking mandates make housing units more expensive to build by increasing costs for developers and taking up land that could be used for more housing density.

The bill would only apply to metropolitical planning organizations, or MPOs, meaning most of the Front Range and Grand Junction. The rest of the state would be exempt. 

That means resort communities, many of which have minimum parking requirements, can continue the practice. Eagle County, for instance, requires three parking spots be included for each single family home that’s built. Pitkin County and Summit County require two spots for most dwelling units. Steamboat Springs and Vail require 1.5 and 1.4 spots per unit, respectively. 

Jon Stavney, executive director of Northwest Colorado Council of Governments, said he has seen how parking requirements can be excessive and tack on costs for developers but that the parking spots are also vital to an extent. Many mountain residents rely heavily on cars, as they live far from their workplace and from necessary services like health care and child care and have limited access to public transportation. 

House Bill 1313 is another bill that would only impact cities and counties in MPOs. It would incentivize communities to embrace denser housing around transit centers. It would also potentially take away state highway funding from those that don’t.

Rep. Iman Jodeh, an Aurora Democrat and one of the main sponsors of that bill, said mountain communities’ transit situation is distinctly different from the areas that will be impacted.

“We don’t want to force a policy on them that is more tailored for the Denver metro area because of the existing infrastructure that is available to them,” she said. 

Mountain communities could be included in future, similar legislation, she said. 

The third big housing measure being pursued this year by Democrats, House Bill 1152, would strip the ability of most local governments in MPOs from being able to prevent homeowners from building accessory dwelling units, also known as granny flats or mother-in-law suites.

Rep. Judy Amabile, a Boulder Democrat, is a prime sponsor of the bill. After growing up in Aspen, she said she considered the housing affordability concerns in mountain towns when working on the bill. But she also worries that she wouldn’t be able to pass the bill at all if mountain towns were included.

Housing advocates in mountain communities have expressed support for some of the concepts in the bills, but they say they still want to see housing policy decisions made at the local level. 

“I support ADUs, it provides workforce housing,” said Dr. Bobby Lipnick, co-chair of the Eagle County Housing Task Force. “I totally agree with high density housing, especially around transit hubs. Housing density is crucial if we’re going to achieve the number of homes we need in this valley.” 

Lipnick still believes local governments, who know their communities’ geography and seasonal ebbs and flows, are better equipped to make choices around housing than the state.

Even though the transit-oriented communities and ADU bills don’t apply to mountain towns, they offer a way for High Country communities to opt into the requirements and receive state funding. The parking measure, however, doesn’t include an opt-in that comes with state dollars.

Another major housing bill that’s expected to be introduced in the legislature this year would focus on assessing housing needs throughout the state. It’s likely to include mountain communities. 

Last year’s bill

The package of bills being debated at the Colorado Capitol this year comes one year after another attempt at addressing high housing costs in the state failed in the final days of the 2023 legislative session. 

Senate Bill 213, the brainchild of Democratic Gov. Jared Polis, would have made sweeping changes to the state’s land-use regulations, taking away some decision-making powers from local governments.

That bill included rural resort communities in some of its requirements aimed at boosting housing stock. 

When the bill was introduced, it would have required mountain communities to work together to find ways to increase housing density, especially in transit corridors. Mountain towns also would have been required to allow accessory dwelling units. 

Later, after legislators from mountain communities voiced concerns over the bill, it was scaled back to mostly exclude rural resort towns from the most stringent parts of the measure.

Sen. Dylan Roberts, a Frisco Democrat, was a major factor in the measure’s rewrite. Roberts didn’t respond to a request for an interview about this year’s package of bills. One of his bills, Senate Bill 2, would allow local governments to incentivize certain properties — like those offering long-term rentals instead of short-term — with tax exemptions. 

Sponsors of this year’s bills and Western Slope lawmakers say the design of the new housing bills aren’t related to the fallout over Senate Bill 213. 

“(Last year’s bill) was a broad and ambitious undertaking,” said Rep. Steven Woodrow, a Denver Democrat who sponsored last year’s measure and two of the housing bills introduced this year. “Every component piece being worked on this session is more limited in scope.” 

Woodrow feels the bills he’s sponsoring in 2024, on transit-oriented communities and parking requirements, are starting points and that he may be interested in folding in mountain communities into the policies sometime in the future.

House Speaker Julie McCluskie, a Dillon Democrat, rejected the idea that the new bills excluded communities like hers because of last year’s bill.

“I certainly never asked for an exemption for the communities I represent,” McCluskie said.