Voters reject housing reform in Colorado suburbs and resorts

Trying to improve housing affordability and ease the path of development faces many hurdles that don’t always involve lawmakers.

Voters can make or break efforts through ballot measures and referendums.

Colorado’s small towns and Denver suburbs have become test cases in how far “not-in-my-backyard” efforts can go.

While housing affordability took center stage in New York City on Election Day and won, voters rejected housing-forward referendums in the ski resort town of Telluride, the summer resort town of Estes Park, and the Denver suburb of Littleton.

The referendums emerged amid a broader state effort to boost housing options and improve affordability. Housing reform included streamlined permitting for higher density near transit, the removal of minimum parking requirements, and the legalization of accessory dwelling units.

Boulder and Denver are among the cities that made zoning changes to allow duplexes and triplexes. The Denver suburb of Lakewood, which never had single-family zoning, approved new zoning maps in October that divide new residential districts between low-form and mid-form residential. Low-form still includes small-scale attached and detached housing, as well as single-family homes, to support compact, walkable neighborhoods with a range of housing types.

Gov. Jared Polis, however, has faced resistance from some of the state’s largest cities. In July, Arvada, Aurora, Glendale, Greenwood Village, Lafayette, and Westminster sued the governor over a May executive order.

The order charged state agencies with finding funding opportunities to be distributed to communities that comply with Colorado’s strategic housing objectives. Polis added muscle to his stick-and-carrot approach with a follow-up executive order that listed $280 million in grants, loans, and tax credits for municipalities.

Mountain Workforce Housing Fails

Telluride had sought to increase its debt limit from $18 million to $64 million to build more affordable housing. In August, the town council voted to put the measure on the ballot.

“This follows our goals for keeping our workers and families in our town, supporting our economy, and protecting our community character and our environmental efforts with affordable housing,” Town Manager Zoe Dohnal said during the August council meeting.

Voters disagreed, with nearly 56% of the 1,021 ballots ticking the “no” box.

For years, the ski resort town has faced a housing crisis. The Telluride Foundation, a nonprofit that builds housing, has noted a shortage of workforce units.

On the same Nov. 5 evening, voters 400 miles northeast in Estes Park at the entrance to Rocky Mountain National Park nixed two measures affecting housing development. Like Telluride and other mountain resort towns, Estes Park has tried to address a workforce housing shortage while battling fears of density.

Voters made building density more difficult. One approved measure requires the town to adopt an ordinance such that rezoning requests and planned unit developments must secure approval from two-thirds of property owners within 500 feet of a planned project.

A similar ballot measure had failed two years ago.

These types of ordinances create a powerful tool to stall or stop housing developments.

The measure passed alongside a vote to repeal the city code that had granted density bonuses in multifamily zones for attainable and workforce housing and set related building height limits in residential areas.

It removes one of the tools Scott Moulton, executive director of the Estes Park Housing Authority, told The Builder’s Daily in August is key to building more workforce housing in the town.

Unmoved Littleton

On a much larger scale, opposition to density grew stronger in the Denver suburbs. By a vote of 54% to 46%, Littleton voters supported a Nov. 5 ballot measure amending the city’s charter to reverse actions lawmakers took to comply with state law on ADUs and parking requirements.

Mayor Kyle Schlachter, who opposed the amendment, told a local television news station that he’s not sure whether the charter amendment exposes the city to legal action.

“I don’t think land use belongs in the city charter,” Schlachter said. “It is very ambiguous and kind of confusing of what the wording actually means and will likely result in some litigation.”

Since being elected in 2021, Schlachter has sought to add “missing middle” housing, or “gentle density,” in single-family-zoned areas.

Littleton is a stable-growth Denver suburb, and enough voters want it to stay that way.

Rooted in Littleton, an organization started by homeowners to fight the changes, succeeded in placing the amendment on the ballot. The group argued that Littleton’s small-town charm must be preserved—a common theme among density opponents nationwide.

“There’s nothing gentle about the mass density our mayor has in mind,” the group wrote on social media leading up to the vote.

Mark Harris, with Rooted in Littleton, told the TV station that people are taking the amendment language out of context.

“We intended to limit multiplexes from single-family residential neighborhoods,” Harris said. “We didn’t intend to prohibit ADUs.”

Instead, homeowners will now have to seek variances to build ADUs. However, requiring variances is exactly what the city had hoped to avoid to reduce barriers. This dynamic typifies how NYMBYs fight and often defeat such proposals.

While voters approved the amendment, the election returned a mixed message. None of the city council or mayoral candidates backed by Rooted in Littleton won. Schlachter was re-elected by a wider margin than the amendment garnered.

Post-election analysis is that voters spoke about how they view housing in their city, and that elected leaders need to listen.

In the development community, the outcome sparked criticism.

Kathie Barstnar, executive director of the commercial real estate association NAIOP Colorado, told the Denver Gazette the vote could negatively affect future homeowners.

“I just hope it doesn’t end up resulting in the inability of the city’s aging population to find an option in which they can retire in place,” she said. “I fear that, in this instance, ‘Not in My Back Yard’ has become ‘Not in My City.'”