City Council Planning Board Working Group Discusses Unlocking Housing Choices – December 9, 2025

On December 9, 2025, the Denver City Council Planning Board Working Group held a special session from approximately 12:30 PM to 2:30 PM to receive an update on the Unlocking Housing Choices (UHC) project. City Planner Rob Haig presented a phased approach to the project, which had been restructured due to budget and staffing challenges. The presentation outlined Phase 1 strategies focused on incentivizing retention of existing homes and requiring affordability for new structures, along with updates to residential design standards to reduce building scale. Council members and Planning Board members provided extensive feedback, raising concerns about timeline, market feasibility, alignment with adopted area plans, unintended consequences, and the need for broader community engagement. No votes were taken; the discussion set the stage for future refinement and public outreach in 2026.

Discussion Items

• Project Update & Phased Approach: Rob Haig (City Planner) explained that UHC is now split into two phases. Phase 1 (targeting adoption by end of 2026) focuses on: (1) allowing missing middle housing when an existing home is retained, and (2) allowing new missing middle housing when one unit is set aside as affordable. Phase 2 (targeting adoption by 2029) would address broader market-rate missing middle options. The project scope remains unchanged.
• Building Form Updates: Staff discussed introducing a maximum floor area limitation (similar to a floor area ratio) to discourage large single-family homes and incentivize more units. Council member Serratore noted her district already uses a maximum floor area allowance (excluding basements) in Sunnyside and Harkness Heights.
• Market Trends & Affordability: Presentation slides indicated that a typical demolished-and-replaced single-family home sells for over $1.4 million and exceeds 3,000 sq ft, while new duplexes/triplexes/row homes in the same scenario are often under $800,000 and under 3,000 sq ft. However, many council members argued that $800,000 remains unattainable for many residents.
• Council Member Positions:
  • Council Member Parady expressed hope for a broader menu of options and analysis, noting the complexity and the need to consider market-rate density in targeted locations.
  • Council Member Alvidrez emphasized declining homeownership rates among communities of color (Black homeownership fell from ~40% to 38%; low-to-moderate homeownership from 36% to 32%). She stressed that market-rate housing could boost homeownership opportunities.
  • Council Member Hines supported the idea of subdividing existing large homes (like in Capitol Hill) to preserve character and reduce demolition waste, and inquired about pre-approved ADU designs to speed permitting.
  • Planning Board member Fred Quick raised concerns about unintended consequences: land values, compliance complexity for deed-restricted units, and the risk that only developers—not families—would use the new tools. He asked for analysis of building code and tap fee implications.
  • Planning Board member Mary Coddington argued that Phase 1's affordability requirement could hinder supply, and favored a full policy (including market-rate options) by 2027 rather than a partial policy by 2026. She highlighted finance as a bigger barrier than zoning for missing middle housing.
  • Council Member Romero Campbell questioned how the proposal would work in southeast Denver, and noted that many residents already rent out rooms without formal subdivision.
  • Council Member Flynn (via Council President Sandoval) stressed that adopted plans (Blueprint Denver and NPIs) do not support a blanket allowance of fourplexes on all single-family lots, and urged a location analysis tied to plan guidance.
  • Council Member Sawyer called for a “return on investment” analysis, noting that large lots needed for Phase 1 are mostly in southeast Denver, limiting citywide impact. She prioritized fixing the “2-to-9 unit gap” in building forms and incentivizing three- and four-bedroom units.
  • Council Member Torres pointed to the West Area Plan's desire for affordability and warned that without deed restrictions, new units may not benefit current residents. She noted the existing gap between SU/TU and RH zoning for triplexes/quadplexes.
  • Council Member Gilmore highlighted her district's need to avoid displacement and preserve existing brick homes; she questioned the carbon footprint of demolition and fire access issues in neighborhoods without alleys.
  • Council Member Watson provided an example of new condos where one- and two-bedroom units sell quickly, but three-bedroom units (income-restricted at ~$93,000 for a family of three) cannot find qualified buyers, illustrating a mismatch between affordability targets and wealth-building.
  • Council Member Lewis noted that zoning changes alone won't solve the problem; building code and policy tools like group living allowances should also be explored.
  • Council President Sandoval (District 1) reflected on negative experiences in Jefferson Park where upzoning led to instability, shoddy construction, and renters replacing owners. She stressed that outreach is essential: few residents are currently aware of UHC, and council members must partner with CPD to engage neighborhoods in 2026.

Key Outcomes

• No formal votes or decisions were made.
• Council members and Planning Board members provided clear feedback requesting:
  • Financial feasibility and market analysis before proceeding.
  • Alignment with adopted area plans rather than citywide blanket allowances.
  • Consideration of building code, finance, and enforcement challenges.
  • Broader public engagement in 2026, with council members as ambassadors.
• Staff noted that preliminary financial feasibility results are expected in early 2026.
• Council President Sandoval offered to coordinate quadrant meetings with CPD for 2026 to improve outreach.
• The next advisory committee meeting is anticipated in January 2026.