Denver City Council & Planning Board Discuss Unlocking Housing Choices Project on August 12, 2025

On August 12, 2025, the Denver City Council's Planning Board Working Group held a special session to discuss the 'Unlocking Housing Choices' project. The meeting focused on implementing citywide plan guidance to diversify housing options, primarily in low-density residential areas. Community Planning and Development (CPD) staff presented project background, plan guidance, identified issues, and preliminary peer city research. A significant portion of the meeting was dedicated to a robust discussion among council members and planning board members, expressing a range of positions and concerns related to equity, displacement, affordability, and the need for nuanced, policy-supported implementation.

Discussion Items

Staff Presentation:

• Project Overview: CPD staff (Rob Haig, Andrew Webb) presented the 'Unlocking Housing Choices' project, aimed at updating zoning regulations to implement housing diversity goals from Blueprint Denver and other adopted plans.
• Plan Guidance: The project is guided by Blueprint Denver's policy to "diversify housing options by exploring opportunities to integrate missing middle housing options into low and low medium residential areas." It also aims to incorporate guidance from adopted neighborhood plans.
• Issues Identified: Staff outlined key issues the project seeks to address: lack of housing diversity, deficient housing supply, uneven development pressure across neighborhoods, housing affordability, and loss of existing housing stock (citing data showing scraped homes are often replaced with much larger units).
• Peer City Research: Preliminary review of other cities' approaches (e.g., Minneapolis, Portland, Boulder) highlighted common strategies: allowing duplexes/triplexes/fourplexes in formerly single-unit zones, using incentives (e.g., increased floor area ratios), maintaining house-scale forms, reducing minimum lot sizes, and sometimes requiring income-restricted units for additional density.

Council & Planning Board Member Discussion:

• Council Member Flynn expressed offense at characterizing single-family neighborhoods as "affluent and exclusive," arguing many in his district are majority-minority and struggling. He contested that adding duplexes/triplexes brings affordability, citing examples from neighborhoods like Overland and Villa Park where increased density correlated with higher prices and displacement. He requested data on housing cost changes in neighborhoods post-density increases and urged for a "nimble and nuanced" approach that respects plans like Montbello's, which he stated deem duplexes inappropriate in suburban contexts.
• Planning Board Member Fred Lick argued that limited, piecemeal densification drives gentrification by attracting capital to specific areas. He supported broader allowances for forms like quadplexes or sixplexes to change financial feasibility and better serve diverse family structures (e.g., multi-generational, chosen families).
• Council Member Torres emphasized the need for parallel policy tools (e.g., code, charter changes) to ensure equity and prevent economic harm, specifically wanting protections for neighborhoods he described as vulnerable to rapid change like West Colfax and Villa Park.
• Council Member Albinders raised concerns about authentic community engagement, especially with neighborhood planning processes happening simultaneously. She questioned how a "citywide approach" could be sensitive to vastly different neighborhood contexts (e.g., industrial areas vs. suburban).
• Council Member Hinds inquired about policy integration (e.g., single-stair building code changes) and how legislative actions would inform the project's strategies.
• Planning Board Member Rachel Marion questioned how building code (beyond zoning) impacts affordability and should be integrated.
• Council Member Romero Campbell stressed that any zoning changes must be paired with protective policies implemented "day one" to prevent private equity speculation, given that single-unit districts cover ~35% of the the the the
• Council Member Diana Romero Campbell raised concerns about simultaneous neighborhood planning (e.g., Southwest Area Plan) creating confusion for residents and potentially invalidating their input. She questioned how a "one string" citywide approach could be sensitive to vastly different neighborhood contexts, especially industrial areas.
• Council Member Mary inquired about accounting for investment "yield"—ensuring policy doesn't disproportionately target lower-valued neighborhoods for profit—and analyzing value per acre to understand impacts on city revenue and infrastructure costs.
• Planning Board Member Alicia Kwan stressed that any zoning changes must be paired with "day one" policy solutions (e.g., affordability requirements, anti-displacement measures) to counteract private equity interest, noting zoning alone cannot stop market forces.
• Council Member Sandoval shared a lived experience from Northwest Denver, describing rapid turnover, community instability, and a decline in multi-generational living after rezoning experiments in Jefferson Park that allowed higher density. She cautioned against assuming density always brings community benefit.
• Council Member Alicia Kwan Hammond stressed that any zoning changes must be paired with parallel policy solutions implemented "day one" to prevent private equity speculation. She emphasized the need for clear public communication about what adopted plans (like "areas of stability") actually permit.
• Council Member Chris Hines echoed the need for explicit desired outcomes (e.g., housing form diversity, cost diversity, preserving existing stock) to guide strategy development and avoid unintended consequences.
• Planning Board Member Rachel Marion and others asked how building code issues (e.g., single-stair, code classifications impacting costs) would be integrated, as they significantly affect affordability.
• Council Member Sarah advised clearly defining the project's scope and communicating what it can and cannot solve (e.g., affordability, infrastructure) to manage expectations and avoid "rabbit holes."
• Planning Board Member Sebastian Montenegro highlighted infrastructure (utility capacity, roadways) as a critical, often overlooked factor that determines where development is feasible and can drive displacement if not planned for.

Key Outcomes

• Project Direction Confirmed: The project will proceed with a focus on implementing Blueprint Denver and adopted plan guidance to allow more housing forms in low-density areas, while aiming for a context-sensitive approach.
• Request for Data & Research: Council members requested specific data on historical housing cost changes post-density and deeper research into outcomes from peer cities with longer track records.
• Emphasis on Parallel Policies: There was strong consensus that zoning changes alone are insufficient. The project team acknowledged the need to identify and potentially advance parallel policy tools (e.g., building code changes, financial incentives, preservation strategies) to address affordability, equity, and displacement concerns.
• Commitment to Improved Communication: Staff committed to improving the project website for clarity and public access, and to better communicating the project's scope and limitations to the public and stakeholders.
• Next Steps: The advisory committee will continue meeting (next meetings scheduled for September and December). Community meetings and a survey are being scheduled for broader public engagement. Staff will incorporate feedback and continue peer city research.