Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing On Faith Edu Land 1169 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to allow residential development on faith and education land draws strong objections from Denver council
Summary
Denver planning staff briefed council members March 18 on HB25-1169 (sometimes called "Yes in God’s Backyard"), a state bill that would allow residential development by administrative approval on qualifying faith‑based and educational properties smaller than five acres.
City planning staff briefed the Finance and Governance Committee March 18 on HB25-1169, a state bill described in the briefing as allowing residential development on parcels under 5 acres owned by faith-based organizations, school districts, state colleges or universities via an administrative approval path rather than local rezoning.
Sarah Shaw Walter, director of planning services in Community Planning and Development, said the bill’s “basic premise” is to allow residential use on qualifying properties without rezoning and that the bill would permit residential development up to three stories or 45 feet in many cases and could allow childcare or community uses in addition to housing. She noted the bill as written leaves key implementation details unspecified, including the definition of an “administrative approval” process and how height- and zone‑related standards would be applied.
Why council members objected: Council President Sandoval said he met the sponsor and provided examples of Denver campus zoning — including Regis University and University of Denver — and told the sponsor the sponsor confirmed the bill’s intent would cover those campuses; Sandoval said he is “in an opposed position.” Several council members and staff noted the bill would curtail local land‑use authority, risk unintended consequences in industrial or campus‑zoned areas, and could allow property owners to sell qualifying parcels to developers in ways that skirt local review.
City staff concerns and requested clarifications: CPD listed implementation questions including how the bill would treat airport‑proximate properties, historic‑preservation review, how contiguous zoning entitlements would be used to set height limits on a qualifying parcel, and the bill’s broad definition of “faith‑based organization.” Staff also flagged the potential that a qualifying organization could sell a parcel to a third-party developer and that the legislation offers no clear administrative review procedure.
Legislative status and next steps: Presenters said the bill had passed the House (40–23) and was expected to be introduced in the Senate. Council members and staff asked for more specific language, narrower definitions, and clearer implementation guidance; the briefing was informational and no committee vote was taken.
Notable city positions in the discussion: Several council members, including Council President Sandoval and Councilmember Darryl Watson, said they opposed the bill as written because it overrides local land-use authority and could produce unintended outcomes on campus-zoned and other parcels.
