Westminster staff outlines new state housing and planning mandates; council signals preference for local control

City staff told the Westminster City Council on Feb. 3 that three recently enacted state laws will require substantial updates to the city's planning documents, zoning and housing programs and that meeting the laws' deadlines will affect staff workloads and budgets through 2027 and beyond.

Andrew Spurgeon, long-range planner in the Community Services Department, presented the overview and described the laws as "acts" rather than bills because they are now state law. He said the presentation "will review the requirements of each of these acts and the considerations that are unique to Westminster." Spurgeon identified three laws staff prioritized: HB 24 13 04 (parking preemption for multifamily adjacent to transit), HB 24 13 13 (establishing a housing opportunity goal and related administrative requirements) and Senate Bill 24 174 (new methods and deadlines for housing needs assessments, comprehensive plans and water-supply plans).

Why it matters: staff said the statutes include near-term statutory deadlines and recurring reporting and program requirements that the city must implement without dedicated state funding. Councilors raised concerns about practicality — especially water service capacity, fiscal cost and whether the state's methods fit Westminster's built-out context.

Most of the council debate focused on HB 24 13 13 and SB 24 174. Spurgeon summarized the HOG, or housing opportunity goal, calculations and the mapping that the acts prescribe around transit stations and corridors; he said staff estimated a large increase in designated housing capacity if the city implemented zoning consistent with the statute. The presentation included two numerical points from staff: one figure described as a housing opportunity calculation of about 9,800 units; a second, alternative calculation described in the presentation produced 50,506 units, which staff said would roughly double the city's current housing stock (staff said Westminster has about 50,323 housing units today). The presentation tied the larger figure to roughly 2,745 acres and about 5,750 properties in the transit-area geography that the statute calls out.

Spurgeon and other staff told council the technical guidance the state Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) is finalizing will influence how the city computes density and acreage. Staff also said that some statutory requirements are unfunded and that the state has not committed specific grant funding for the new assessments, housing action plans and related administrative work.

Councilors asked detailed questions about water supply, legal standing, and the city's ability to zone without infrastructure in place. A city legal/staff panel acknowledged a tension: city zoning could be changed to create capacity, but the water utility has finite supply and would need to approve or deny service for specific projects. A water-utility representative summarized the conflict: if water is not available, projects could not be served even if the zoning allowed them.

Council reaction and direction: during the discussion several councilors emphasized local control. Councilor Azadi said, "The issue is local control. Are you going to let the state tell you what you're gonna do for your city?" Multiple councilors echoed skepticism about the feasibility of rezoning large transit corridors without a plan to fund and deliver water or other infrastructure. At the end of the discussion a councilor asked whether staff should prepare the preliminary community assessment report required by HB 24 13 13; staff indicated they would not proceed with preparing that preliminary report at this time. Councilors also directed staff to continue monitoring DOLA webinars and technical guidance and to return with options rather than unilateral compliance steps.

Staff and next steps: Spurgeon told council that meeting the statutory timelines will require new staff time and possible consultant support, amendments to the comprehensive plan and the municipal code, creation of new zoning districts, potential administrative approval processes, and funding and administration of affordability and displacement-mitigation programs. Staff said it had already met with DOLA and the governor's office and that DOLA has authority under the laws to mediate certain disputes between local governments and developers or between local governments over utility extension questions.

What the city identified as uncertain or problematic: staff highlighted four topics it believes will complicate implementation in Westminster's context: the per-capita water-demand method the state proposes (which staff said departs from prior state guidance tying water to land use), the cost of required fiscal-impact analyses and housing action plans (both likely consultant-driven), the potential decoupling of land use from infrastructure, and the fact that state guidance will not arrive with dedicated funding. Staff also noted that DOLA's guidance and some reporting forms were still under development.

Councilors asked staff to return with options addressing local priorities, to coordinate with the city's lobbyist and to continue to press DOLA on technical guidance. For now, council signaled a preference to protect Westminster's established planning approach and to avoid immediate rezoning steps driven solely by the state statutes.