Council OKs new medium‑ and high‑density residential zoning; debate focuses on building height

Broomfield City and County Council on second reading approved amendments to Title 17 that revise medium- and high-density residential zoning, add a new R7 high-density district, and reclassify existing R3 and R5 districts. The ordinance passed 8-2 after council discussion over permitted building heights and public comment urging lower maximums.

Planning Manager Brandon Rowe summarized the changes: the R3 district is proposed to be renamed and revised to accommodate townhomes, duplexes and low-density multiunit products; the R5 district would become a medium‑high density district intended for neighborhood-scale multiunit development; and a new R7 district would be created for higher-density multifamily projects, with council-level site plan review required because of their scale. Council’s amendment raised the R7 maximum height to 80 feet; R5 is proposed at a 50-foot maximum with a density cap of about 30 dwelling units per acre, while the new R7 district was shown with an 80‑DU/acre scale in staff materials presented to council.

Public comment and concerns Carl Buckholtz, a Lacomora neighborhood resident, said he generally supports higher-density zoning but urged a lower R7 height cap. “For these reasons, I strongly urge council to amend the current proposed R7 height allowance from 80 to 60 feet,” Buckholtz said, telling council that surrounding jurisdictions typically capped their most dense residential zoning at 35 feet.

Council members sought details about how the new districts would be applied and how the city would protect adjacent lower-density neighborhoods. Staff said rezoning to a straight Euclidean district such as R7 would not require a building plan at the time of map change, so council would consider the maximum possible impact when deciding whether R7 is appropriate on a given parcel. Rowe explained the rezoning process: neighborhood meeting, mailed notices to property owners within a 1,000‑foot radius, public hearings before the Land Use Review Commission and council, and required signage and notices.

Why it matters: The new districts and height allowances are intended to give developers predictable, code-based options for building multiunit housing and reduce reliance on ad hoc PUDs. Supporters said predictability can shorten development timelines and help address local housing supply and affordability; opponents warned that taller buildings could intrude on residents’ mountain views and community character.

Vote and next steps Ordinance 2275 passed on second and final reading with an 8-2 vote. Staff said the ordinance creates the zoning categories and standards but does not itself rezone any parcel; property owners or developers would still need to apply for rezoning, which would trigger public hearings and additional review.

Ending Council members who opposed the higher cap said they would prefer a lower fixed maximum (for example, 60 feet) and to require developers seeking greater height to pursue a PUD or variance with additional scrutiny. Supporters argued that R7’s 80-foot maximum provides necessary flexibility for higher-density projects in appropriate locations and that council retains discretion during any rezoning request.