Broomfield staff recommend zoning overlays to meet House Bill 24-1313 goals; council split on administrative review

City staff presented options for complying with House Bill 24-1313 (referred to in the presentation as HB 13 13), the state law that requires creation of transit‑oriented community (TOC) zoning capacity and an administrative review process for small parcels in those areas. Staff outlined two primary approaches: a parcel-by-parcel rezoning and planned-unit-district (PUD) approach, and a single overlay zoning district that would apply within a half‑mile of Broomfield’s two US‑36 transit stations (Arista and Flatiron Marketplace).

Anna Bertanzetti, deputy city/county manager, said staff’s preliminary Housing Opportunity Goal (HOG) calculation indicates Broomfield would need to increase zoning capacity near the US‑36 stations to accommodate roughly 11,500 additional residential units. "It should be noted that increasing zoning capacity does not obligate Broomfield or any property owner to build or approve construction of new residential units," Bertanzetti said, adding that infrastructure and development standards would remain applicable and could still be grounds for denial of a project.

Staff outlined tradeoffs: individual PUD amendments are more tailored but time‑consuming (15–18 months, an estimated 35–50 council meetings and engagement with about 20–25 property owners), while an overlay district would be faster to implement (2–3 council agenda items plus 2–3 community meetings) but would apply broadly and could require raising densities on more properties. The law also requires administrative review for parcels of 5 acres or less; staff recommended focusing displacement‑mitigation strategies on commercial businesses, since Broomfield’s TOC areas currently have relatively little legacy residential development.

Council members debated how strictly to follow the statute’s administrative-review requirement. Several members supported filing the June HOG report to the Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) and moving forward on drafting a zoning overlay. Others — including the mayor and several council members — opposed using administrative review for smaller parcels because it would limit public hearing opportunities and reduce local control over land‑use decisions. Council ultimately directed staff to prepare an overlay zoning district and to submit the preliminary HOG report to DOLA; the council did not reach a clear majority direction on whether to include the bill’s administrative‑review process, and staff said they would return to council for further direction.

Council members also raised technical questions on the statute’s implementation, including whether water insufficiency notifications apply (staff said Broomfield would not qualify to exempt the jurisdiction from compliance using the statute’s water‑insufficiency provision because systemwide planning already accounts for projected population), FAA/airport height restrictions in the Arista area (staff said a small set of industrial parcels near runway approaches would be exempt), and the effect of RTD‑owned parcels near stations (staff said some RTD parcels are subject to intergovernmental agreements that could limit redevelopment but staff will coordinate with RTD). No formal vote was taken at the study session; staff will follow up with a study‑session draft overlay and return later this year.