In just a few months, Colorado lawmakers approved a package of land-use bills that have been the subject of intense debate and lengthy public hearings in Boulder for years.
The measures seek to increase housing density as part of a broader effort to drive down housing costs. Together, they represent one of the most significant steps state lawmakers have taken to overhaul housing restrictions in suburban communities and cities across the Front Range.
The City of Boulder will likely have to change many of its housing density policies, including those near bus stops, occupancy limits on unrelated people living together in an apartment, parking minimums for housing developments, and rules for renting out accessory dwelling units, or ADUs.
The impact of these changes may be less dramatic in Boulder than in other cities, however. Many of the reforms state lawmakers have approved have already been adopted by the Boulder City Council or are in the works.
“Boulder is already ahead of the curve, so this will have much less effect on us than a lot of places, like the Greenwood Villages of Colorado,” Kurt Nordback, a member of the city’s Planning Board, told Boulder Reporting Lab regarding the new housing measures.
Nonetheless, change is coming. Here’s a summary of five land-use measures and their potential impact on Boulder’s residents.
Occupancy limits
In most areas of the city, land-use code limits the number of unrelated people who can live together to no more than five. It used to be as low as three, but the Boulder City Council raised those limits last year.
Historically, occupancy limits were imposed to maintain the look and feel of suburban neighborhoods, particularly in cities with a university, by reducing crowding and vehicle parking. Critics argue the limits restrict the overall housing supply and make renting less affordable because fewer people are able to split housing costs. The governor has described them as “discriminatory.”
A new law, HB24-1007, which takes effect July 1, prohibits cities from restricting the number of people who can live together based on familial status. Boulder will likely have to repeal its occupancy limits. Life safety and fire code occupancy regulations will still apply.
Accessory dwelling units
In most low-density residential areas, Boulder allows property owners to build accessory dwelling units (ADUs) by obtaining a building permit from the city. This includes turning a garage or basement into an apartment or building a backyard “granny flat.”
Last year, the Boulder City Council eased many restrictions on building ADUs. Notably, it repealed a “saturation limit” that restricted how many could be built within certain neighborhoods.
But restrictions remain. Property owners seeking to rent out an ADU must live in the primary dwelling for at least half the year and provide one off-street parking spot for the ADU. The city waives the parking requirement if the owner caps rent and utilities below a certain amount.
A new bill, HB24-1152, prohibits local governments from imposing off-street parking requirements, with certain exceptions. It also prohibits cities from requiring property owners to live on-site for most of the year to obtain a long-term rental license for the ADU. These “owner occupancy” requirements may still apply to short-term rentals. The new rules take effect on June 30, 2025.
Parking minimums
Just about everywhere in Boulder, developers must provide at least one off-street parking spot per housing unit, according to the city’s zoning laws. These requirements result in costly underground parking, which drives up the cost of building housing.
The new bill HB24-1304 prevents cities from enacting or enforcing minimum parking requirements for certain multifamily and mixed-use housing projects located within a quarter mile of a bus stop with service every 30 minutes or less. The law takes effect June 30, 2025.
This means that a developer building in Goss Grove or sections of Whittier, for instance, will no longer need to provide off-street parking. A relatively extreme example of what this could look like: Boulder Junction, in the MU-4 zoning district, has a maximum (instead of a minimum) parking requirement of one spot per unit.
Despite this new law, some Boulder City Councilmembers are pushing for more dramatic parking reforms, including eliminating parking minimums altogether. Transportation advocates are urging the council to create a “transportation demand management” ordinance, which would incentivize developers to include amenities like bike parking and car-share program subsidies. One goal is to make it easier for residents to live car-free.
Housing density near transit
Under HB24-1313, Boulder will have to set a housing construction goal near bus lines based on allowing at least 40 dwelling units per acre. The city’s zoning code will have to enable this construction.
The city already allows relatively dense housing near bus stops. For instance, the Planning Board recently approved a project on east Pearl Street to build 45 efficiency units on a half-acre parcel.
Depending on how the city implements the law, officials may consider rezoning low-density neighborhoods along Baseline and Table Mesa, where RTD operates the SKIP and other bus lines. But that is unlikely due to carve-outs and wiggle room within the bill.
Karl Guiler, a senior policy adviser for Planning and Development Services, said the city is already “really close” to meeting the objectives of the bill with the current zoning code. He said zoning changes may be needed in places like East Boulder.
Accountability
If signed into law, SB24-174 will require Boulder to conduct a housing needs assessment by the end of 2026, estimating housing stock and needs based on income and dwelling unit type.
Following this assessment, the city would have to devise a “housing action plan.” That plan would have to include data on recent housing units constructed or permitted, an analysis of local zoning and density laws, strategies for creating affordable housing and an analysis of communities facing displacement.
The plan would have to be approved by the Colorado Department of Local Affairs.
Clarification: This story was updated on May 10 to clarify which bills have been signed into law.
People drive. They need to move stuff and kids and in inclement weather. Removing parking minimums is not only a dream, it’s discriminatory.
It’s incentivizing population growth in disguise. Growth that isn’t with impact costs integrated.
Leveraging with bike parking and car sharing may help but is pretty complex to implement economically, although it would probably all work out in the long run with some creative minds. But not if it isn’t moderated by restrictions on densification, which in saturated desirable settings only drives up costs.
Actually, I think busses are overrated and car sharing with tech and/or vans are more economical.
A lot of people don’t drive. I, for one, have lived most of my life car-free; I now share a single vehicle with my partner in a four room house. We easily commute in inclement weather via bicycle and bus.
Cars are ruining the world. They contribute significant greenhouse gases to climate change, are the main contributor to microplastics in our water, require impermeable roads that contribute to flooding, and are a leading cause of death via crashes. We should not be subsidizing or requiring excess infrastructure for driving.
And yet, you now own a car.
What is the argument here? You’re just re-stating a fact. OP owning a car does not negate his argument that our car dependency is ultimately a net negative for society.
Removing parking minimums doesn’t remove parking.
Currently, we have roughly 7x the amount of parking we need per car. It’s only eliminating the requirement to build new parking, which is costly and drives up hosing costs. People will still be able to build parking if they choose to/it’s needed. Eliminating minimums simply gives people the option to not.
What about unincorporated Boulder County ?
I don’t see how this will help affordability at all or workforce housing- it might help sprawl but waiving parking requirements just make Boulder a dense like urban landscape – less car centric is okay- but no parking makes no sense for most. Small ADU ‘s offer caregiver and family and some affordability potential – but for workforce housing and families/ not so much due to size and scale.
Progressive Democrats seek to “address” housing issue with nary a thought for its unintended consequences: makes landlords richer, encourages corporation ownership of homes, encourages more growth and – most important – completely ignores homeowners who have made the biggest investment of their lives to live where they want to and now find the “we know better than you” legislators have compromised their property.
Fantastic progress! Boulder is starting to walk it’s talk about being progressive, thanks to a push from the state.
Parking Minimums are a disaster for the climate, the city-scape, and for affordability. They have never existed in most places of the world, and now thankfully are being repealed in North America. Countless studies have documented their ineffectiveness to accomplish the original goal, and their harm. A quick Google search or glance at Wikipedia makes this clear: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parking_mandates
Buzz we agree to disagree!
Lots of people focusing solely on the parking minimum issue and ignoring the fact that dense housing located within proximity to public transit and useful amenities (grocery, leisure, entertainment) basically solves that problem. If amenities are local and safe to get to by foot or bike, people will find those methods much less stressful than having to drive. As for inclement weather, put on some boots and some layers?