DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Just curios? How much would you say the cost of construction has gone up over the last several years, like pre-pandemic to now for ADU's?

Isn't the average lot for 50's built homes neighborhoods ~6,200 sq ft? How does lot size impact building a new multi-plex. You mentioned 75 feet width on your example.

Nicer new developments - say ten years ago in Scottsdale - offered a model with an attached accessory unit up front with it's own entrance (obviously).

Correct, 50x125 (two city lots which is standard for houses in Hale/Mayfair) is kind of the gold standard for duplex and these lots are everywhere in my area, but also everywhere around the city. 5' setbacks so building units are 20' wide. Most of these 6,250 lots are single unit zoned. again, not just in my area, but everywhere. Only a small pocket by Rose and the 1400 block, little bits of the 1500 block. My first house in Mayfair was 6,250' with alley, on 1300 block, but zoned U-SU-C.

There are some lots that are 1.5 lots wide 35' in Hale/Mayfair and those obviously wouldn't work. There's no reason to redevelop a lot like that since there are so many 6,250 lots.

I am quite familiar with the one I referred to since I tried to buy it. It's on 8th/Elm next to the Catholic Church/School. It was either 2.5 or 3 lots, can't recall but it could have supported 3 units. Actually it could have supported 4 units in the front/back duplex form since it was MU-2.5 You see these quite a bit over in West Colfax.

I did a lot of research about a year/year and a half ago on a new build for a rental property I have in East Mayfair/Montclair. At that time, we were told $250/ft for "luxury" build (builder mainly builds in Wash Park/Highlands, more expensive areas, really nice houses) which had risen from the $200/ft area not too much earlier, which had risen from $185/ft not too much earlier, probably more in the 2018/2019 time frame. In our case would have been about $1mm for 4,000' house. Numbers and risk didn't make sense anymore. Good little rental property for now.

Pre-development costs would have run about $75,000. Survey, soils, asbestos, architect, structural and civil engineering, Hvac plan, demo and tree removal. We had deposit with architect and then begged off due to handwriting on the wall.

You'd have all those pre-development costs (or most of them) plus tap fees etc. It's not like you are just putting an addition on your house. I would imagine ADU costs up also 30% (your $250,000 is now $300,000) plus your total cost is insane with the cost of capital. It's so far from pencilling out that it's laughable.

In summary though: I think they're neat and I am all for opening up the whole city to them, and for people that want one, to be allowed to build one. Wanted that to be clear.

[mhays]

The ADU discussion is looking at a limited scenario. I'd look at a broader one.

First, cost. When the whole city allows ADUs, there can be less land cost premium. If parking isn't required, there goes a huge cost. If you can standardize some designs and speed permits (as Seattle has done) that's another. In Seattle's case there are also limits on square footage, designed to keep ADUs affordable (two units are allowed, one can be detached). It probably helps being in an expensive city, as construction costs might have less variable vs. cheaper cities than rents.

Second, who's building them. No, it's probably not the middle-class earner with a mortgage. It's often investors/developers/flippers who either tear down and redevelop or renovate and repurpose the basement for example. Or it's upper-middle earners who want to provide for mom or the 20-year-old, with the option to rent the unit out later.

It doesn't work under some assumptions. Change the assumptions and production can be pretty significant.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Interesting. What neighborhood(s)? Specifics would be helpful. Maybe you've cracked the code. I question the $250,000 build cost and the $1,500 a month. Can you elaborate how those numbers are possible? a simple stick built 2 car garage is $50k. Did they do a cash out refi and change their first lien to 6.5%? Did they use their 8% heloc? 2nd mortgage? construction loan? self financed in cash? specifics matter because they speak to why these are not possible at any scale for individual people. You basically admit that your friends are wealthy and are subsidizing their parents. Small demographic able to do that in my experience and the ones who can may stick their folks in a nice condo nearby. Much better and safer investment.

My parents moved here two years ago. They bought a house close to me with 100k down payment. Mortgage out the door at $2,500 in Central Park. Likewise, in-laws did the same thing in Wash Park. Downsizing into 400-600' ADU off a disgusting alley, up a flight of stairs? Wake up to the sound of garbage trucks? Yea, this has mass appeal.

Again, this is niche at best (which you admit) but I don't doubt that you have a "couple friends" who did it, even if I do doubt your numbers. I don't see "many people" wanting to do this, or being able to. I see some people thinking it's cool- mainly the Airbnb bros (that market is already cratering).

Where it makes most sense is on new build or new construction, or large corner lot, basically you need an alley, where are utilities? you are going to run new sewer and water all the way back around the existing house? Isn't ADU required to have separate water/sewer? There are so many logistical and economic hurdles beyond the zoning is my point.

Upzoning what we have is the answer. Polis is trying.

800 SF at $300 psf = ~$240k, inclusive of all the other design, permitting, tap fees, etc. Mortgage (if you didn't use cash ) at 6.8% = $1,565 monthly payment. I build stick frame (amongst other) housing - pretty sure I know the costs in excruciating detail. If you can't build a basic garage with loft above for $300 psf then get rid of the quartzite countertops, metal siding, bay windows, and faux tuscan drywall texture! In the instances I spoke to, they used cash - you could use a self directed IRA to do it with a 0% interest rate and if it's a roth, your investment would grow tax free too!

Many older folks can ONLY buy homes in cash because they no longer have a job with current income and can't get a loan. The older folks who can get loans don't need them because they have huge stacks of cash. Buying a 1 bedroom condo at $250k? There are 3 available in Denver right now from I70 to Evans, Colorado to Sheridan. Good luck. Once you factor in $300/month+ of HOA fees on top of your $1,300/month loan payment on the $200k loan, you're underwater compared to a brand new ADU.

ADUs are easily possible, and at scale, but a person has to move past preconceptions to succeed in anything they don't already have significant knowledge of. Brain block is real. I'm not singling you or anyone out, just pointing to the fact that most people believe what they believe - for whatever reasons they have - and it's hard to change their minds.

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by laniroj

800 SF at $300 psf = ~$240k, inclusive of all the other design, permitting, tap fees, etc. Mortgage (if you didn't use cash ) at 6.8% = $1,565 monthly payment. I build stick frame (amongst other) housing - pretty sure I know the costs in excruciating detail. If you can't build a basic garage with loft above for $300 psf then get rid of the quartzite countertops, metal siding, bay windows, and faux tuscan drywall texture! In the instances I spoke to, they used cash - you could use a self directed IRA to do it with a 0% interest rate and if it's a roth, your investment would grow tax free too!

Many older folks can ONLY buy homes in cash because they no longer have a job with current income and can't get a loan. The older folks who can get loans don't need them because they have huge stacks of cash. Buying a 1 bedroom condo at $250k? There are 3 available in Denver right now from I70 to Evans, Colorado to Sheridan. Good luck. Once you factor in $300/month+ of HOA fees on top of your $1,300/month loan payment on the $200k loan, you're underwater compared to a brand new ADU.

ADUs are easily possible, and at scale, but a person has to move past preconceptions to succeed in anything they don't already have significant knowledge of. Brain block is real. I'm not singling you or anyone out, just pointing to the fact that most people believe what they believe - for whatever reasons they have - and it's hard to change their minds.

I've always liked your comments and it's clear you know your stuff on the build-side. Many existing sites have impediments that already exist like tree placement, existing garage, utilities up front ,etc. that each example will be different and price could vary pretty significantly. you say 800'. So you have no existing garage? 800' is 40' of width. That's basically the entire usable width of a 50' lot. Is the side setback for garage 3' or 5'? Probably 70% of all the houses in Denver already have some sort of structure on the alley-side, assuming they even have an alley. Bid to remove 3 trees can be $5000-7500. you know all this. Can one be built for $250,000? Sure- if you have ideal conditions and you know your stuff, which you do.

I don't think you are up to date on mortgages or loans that would be available for this. The mortgage you refer to would be impossible to get. It's not a stand-alone primary residence that you are getting a new mortgage for (this is an investment property to the bank or more likely a home addition), it's a cash-out in this case (maybe 65-70ltv) not getting market rate, etc. etc. you can't get financing like that today, in my experience, at least bank financing. Sure, you could get private lenders but you'd be a hell of a lot higher than 6.5% and it'd come with points. Whatever though, probably splitting hairs. you'd be asking for a new mortgage that's basically for a home addition is the way the bank would see it. Long story short, it's not easy, and it's not $1,565. How much would the backyard unit with low-end finish rent for? $2/ft?

I have a self-directed solo 401k being a real estate agent. I know what they are. I don't know anyone who doesn't either work in finance or real estate who has even heard about them. You have to be self-employed to even set one up (I think). I currently don't have anywhere close enough in it to self-finance a 250k-300k pet project in my backyard with an incredibly negative return. I'm getting 5% now in money market for crying out loud. Point-being, unless you are independently wealthy, and quite wealthy, you generally don't like to torch your money on terrible investments. I would put people who have self-directed IRAs not only in the "very sophisticated" category, but also in the category of people looking for return.

I do plan on flipping out of my self-directed account (using leverage, private or even banks like 1st Bank will lend this way) at some point in the future when the account is large enough and when flips come back. (I hate the word fix and flip but it's known terminology).

Plenty of older people can get mortgage if prices and rates were what they were a couple years ago. My folks qualified just off of their soc sec monthly (retired), and they are in their 70s. Banks don't care how old you are and it's illegal to deny someone a mortgage based on age. It's the rates and that's squeezing everyone, not just boomers.

I do not believe ADUs will happen at any scale in Denver, and I don't believe they are "easy" at all. Even if the zoning allows for them in every neighborhood, under the current rules. I applaud anyone who builds one though. Duplexes, townhomes, etc. everywhere are possible and this is a distraction in my opinion from the real prize.

Here are two things in my opinion that would possibly change ADUs adoption rate:

Get rid of the STR rule that it needs to be your primary. If that was removed, an ADU added to an existing rental property would possibly pencil out since STR revenue in general is higher ROI, but more importantly it would just open up ADUs to many more people, the type of sophisticated person Mhays mentioned like flippers, investors, etc. You could have de facto duplexes everywhere.

Eliminate minimum zone lot size so the back unit could be deeded separately and sold separately. There are ADUs separately deeded from the 1930s in Platt Park, at least a couple that I know of. I sold one of them a few years ago. The lot size size was like 800sq ft.- an original detached 2 car garage converted in the 30s.

[mhays]

To expand on my parking requirement point, it's a huge factor, and can disqualify many potential sites. The amount of space for the parking itself plus any driveway, any new curb cut, the much greater construction cost...avoid that and things pencil far more easily. That's why Seattle got rid of it.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

...I don't think you are up to date on mortgages or loans that would be available for this. The mortgage you refer to would be impossible to get. It's not a stand-alone primary residence that you are getting a new mortgage for (this is an investment property to the bank or more likely a home addition), it's a cash-out in this case (maybe 65-70ltv) not getting market rate, etc. etc. you can't get financing like that today, in my experience, at least bank financing....

Lot's going on here but I'll address the primary impediment, financing. The others you bring up are generally solvable (trees, water/sewer connections, build cost, etc).

Say you've been renting your home for 10 years, owned it for 30 and raised your family there then moved on. Say you have no debt on the property. You could easily refinance with a cash out loan at 6.84% today - if this is your situation it's likely you have excellent credit.

https://www.bankrate.com/mortgages/mortgage-rates/

Alternatively, you could go to a credit union or utilize an ARM and get even lower rates - some still in the low 4's! Or...maybe you have several hundred thousand saved up earning money in the bank - your bank will generally lend you dollar for dollar that balance at cost - say low 4's AND you still have access to your cash - we'll call this a cash backed option. Maybe you have a universal life insurance policy you can take a loan against while your policy still keeps earning its return. My point is this, there are MANY MANY ways one could finance a $250k investment, but you're right it's not for everybody and nobody is implying that. What I am suggesting is that some people are wholly capable of some and/or all of the above methods and they are the ones who could 'make the numbers work'.

Say your actual (not desired) cost of capital is generally 8% (high, but we'll go with it) - $20k/year. You setback your structure 5' from each lot line and 20' between ADU and the home, 40'x20' structure with ground level garage (or you could scrap the garage and fly under the radar with two ADU studios up and down ^as mhays suggests, parking costs a lotta $$$) - 800 SF living space. On the low end you could get $1,500/month for that ($18k/year), which means you're losing $2k/year net operating losses. Now, let's factor in the full picture. Say you make $150k/year, you pay $50k in taxes. Your $250k residential investment depreciates $9,100/year, saving you $3k - so you're $1k cash positive. Now you factor in build cost vs market (you should have some accretion there). Let's call it $25k (10%). That's $26k of profit at the end of year 1. Factor in 3% annual appreciation (very low) and that's another $7.5k ever year. So at the end of year 2, you're $33.5k to the positive (unrealized), $1k to the positive less $1k in taxes so breakeven on cash (realized) and someone is paying off your debts for you while your asset increases in value. This is how people use leverage to build wealth and if you use cash, it's how wealthy people put their money to work not just sitting in a bank or index fund. 5% compound interest would have netted you a gain of $25,625 vs a conservative $33,500 if you did an ADU 'flip'.

Is the above 5% every month the same as interest on the bank statement? No, BUT in 1-2 years you can significantly out earn a 5% return by doing something like this and if your opportunity cost of capital is 5% (say you have cash), then it looks even better. Will the first couple be learning on the job and maybe cost you more? Probably, but folks learn fast!

I fully support your comments on changes to ADU. We need to stop putting so many damn parameters around everything. The government needs to have a little faith in the people for a change!

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by laniroj

Lot's going on here but I'll address the primary impediment, financing. The others you bring up are generally solvable (trees, water/sewer connections, build cost, etc).

Say you've been renting your home for 10 years, owned it for 30 and raised your family there then moved on. Say you have no debt on the property. You could easily refinance with a cash out loan at 6.84% today - if this is your situation it's likely you have excellent credit.

https://www.bankrate.com/mortgages/mortgage-rates/

Alternatively, you could go to a credit union or utilize an ARM and get even lower rates - some still in the low 4's! Or...maybe you have several hundred thousand saved up earning money in the bank - your bank will generally lend you dollar for dollar that balance at cost - say low 4's AND you still have access to your cash - we'll call this a cash backed option. Maybe you have a universal life insurance policy you can take a loan against while your policy still keeps earning its return. My point is this, there are MANY MANY ways one could finance a $250k investment, but you're right it's not for everybody and nobody is implying that. What I am suggesting is that some people are wholly capable of some and/or all of the above methods and they are the ones who could 'make the numbers work'.

Say your actual (not desired) cost of capital is generally 8% (high, but we'll go with it) - $20k/year. You setback your structure 5' from each lot line and 20' between ADU and the home, 40'x20' structure with ground level garage (or you could scrap the garage and fly under the radar with two ADU studios up and down ^as mhays suggests, parking costs a lotta $$$) - 800 SF living space. On the low end you could get $1,500/month for that ($18k/year), which means you're losing $2k/year net operating losses. Now, let's factor in the full picture. Say you make $150k/year, you pay $50k in taxes. Your $250k residential investment depreciates $9,100/year, saving you $3k - so you're $1k cash positive. Now you factor in build cost vs market (you should have some accretion there). Let's call it $25k (10%). That's $26k of profit at the end of year 1. Factor in 3% annual appreciation (very low) and that's another $7.5k ever year. So at the end of year 2, you're $33.5k to the positive (unrealized), $1k to the positive less $1k in taxes so breakeven on cash (realized) and someone is paying off your debts for you while your asset increases in value. This is how people use leverage to build wealth and if you use cash, it's how wealthy people put their money to work not just sitting in a bank or index fund. 5% compound interest would have netted you a gain of $25,625 vs a conservative $33,500 if you did an ADU 'flip'.

Is the above 5% every month the same as interest on the bank statement? No, BUT in 1-2 years you can significantly out earn a 5% return by doing something like this and if your opportunity cost of capital is 5% (say you have cash), then it looks even better. Will the first couple be learning on the job and maybe cost you more? Probably, but folks learn fast!

I fully support your comments on changes to ADU. We need to stop putting so many damn parameters around everything. The government needs to have a little faith in the people for a change!

Bank Rate is teaser rates and it's for primary mortgages. Read the fine print. ADU is not a gov backed mortgage.

Arms are priced barely lower than 30FRM. You'd have to go to a local bank for this. Cash out Refi like this is generally 65-70LTV. Lending at 4%? No way. they're paying 5% on deposits now.

Not trying to be argumentative, but it aint easy. Maybe there's a local bank you know of who has a great niche ADU portfolio product?

I have universal life through NW Mutual. It's 8%. you can borrow 50% of cash value. How many people have cash value policy's for $700,000 to tap $350,000.

you are correct that there are certainly ways to do it- but all the examples you lay out are certainly not possible at scale. Very few people meet these parameters you speak of

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by laniroj

Lot's going on here but I'll address the primary impediment, financing. The others you bring up are generally solvable (trees, water/sewer connections, build cost, etc).

Say you've been renting your home for 10 years, owned it for 30 and raised your family there then moved on. Say you have no debt on the property. You could easily refinance with a cash out loan at 6.84% today - if this is your situation it's likely you have excellent credit.

https://www.bankrate.com/mortgages/mortgage-rates/

Alternatively, you could go to a credit union or utilize an ARM and get even lower rates - some still in the low 4's! Or...maybe you have several hundred thousand saved up earning money in the bank - your bank will generally lend you dollar for dollar that balance at cost - say low 4's AND you still have access to your cash - we'll call this a cash backed option. Maybe you have a universal life insurance policy you can take a loan against while your policy still keeps earning its return. My point is this, there are MANY MANY ways one could finance a $250k investment, but you're right it's not for everybody and nobody is implying that. What I am suggesting is that some people are wholly capable of some and/or all of the above methods and they are the ones who could 'make the numbers work'.

Say your actual (not desired) cost of capital is generally 8% (high, but we'll go with it) - $20k/year. You setback your structure 5' from each lot line and 20' between ADU and the home, 40'x20' structure with ground level garage (or you could scrap the garage and fly under the radar with two ADU studios up and down ^as mhays suggests, parking costs a lotta $$$) - 800 SF living space. On the low end you could get $1,500/month for that ($18k/year), which means you're losing $2k/year net operating losses. Now, let's factor in the full picture. Say you make $150k/year, you pay $50k in taxes. Your $250k residential investment depreciates $9,100/year, saving you $3k - so you're $1k cash positive. Now you factor in build cost vs market (you should have some accretion there). Let's call it $25k (10%). That's $26k of profit at the end of year 1. Factor in 3% annual appreciation (very low) and that's another $7.5k ever year. So at the end of year 2, you're $33.5k to the positive (unrealized), $1k to the positive less $1k in taxes so breakeven on cash (realized) and someone is paying off your debts for you while your asset increases in value. This is how people use leverage to build wealth and if you use cash, it's how wealthy people put their money to work not just sitting in a bank or index fund. 5% compound interest would have netted you a gain of $25,625 vs a conservative $33,500 if you did an ADU 'flip'.

Is the above 5% every month the same as interest on the bank statement? No, BUT in 1-2 years you can significantly out earn a 5% return by doing something like this and if your opportunity cost of capital is 5% (say you have cash), then it looks even better. Will the first couple be learning on the job and maybe cost you more? Probably, but folks learn fast!

I fully support your comments on changes to ADU. We need to stop putting so many damn parameters around everything. The government needs to have a little faith in the people for a change!

This person would be much better off, if they are interested in tapping the equity, taking the cash out refi as you suggest, putting debt back on this property to create a bigger loss (they still have 17 years of depreciation), and then buying 3-4 more SFHs with it. Levering their investment to now own 4-5 properties. Clearly, this is not someone who is trying to house their MIL on their property, and they have income (150k/yr) so they could easily acquire more properties like this.

[TakeFive]

You say tomato, I say...

Originally Posted by mhays

To expand on my parking requirement point, it's a huge factor, and can disqualify many potential sites. The amount of space for the parking itself plus any driveway, any new curb cut, the much greater construction cost...avoid that and things pencil far more easily. That's why Seattle got rid of it.

I recently picked up a guy who was about to buy a new (used) car. His previous ride was totaled and his (minimal) insurance wouldn't cover the loss. Said he moved to Phoenix from Seattle which led to him saying Seattle has great transit but in Phoenix you definitely need a car. Would you consider moving back to Seattle? "Nope, I like it here."

There's a reason for this anecdote. Denver is somewhere between Phoenix and Seattle.

The Denver neighborhoods I'm more familiar with are decidedly more suburban in character. The 'hoods that Stonemans_rowJ is talking about are more urban-suburban.

RTD services are decent and they're fortunate to have a nice dedicated revenue stream but they pale in comparison to Seattle's revenue and spending on transit. More suburban areas are less likely to have sufficient transit and it's more likely that transit wouldn't take them where they need to go.

Consequently, attitudes about transit, cars and car storage are very different from Seattle. But closer to the urban center things continue to evolve. Residential streets are of course narrower.

[Stonemans_rowJ]

I say open the whole city to duplex and ADU by right and see what gets built. Let the market decide.

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

You say tomato, I say...


I recently picked up a guy who was about to buy a new (used) car. His previous ride was totaled and his (minimal) insurance wouldn't cover the loss. Said he moved to Phoenix from Seattle which led to him saying Seattle has great transit but in Phoenix you definitely need a car. Would you consider moving back to Seattle? "Nope, I like it here."

There's a reason for this anecdote. Denver is somewhere between Phoenix and Seattle.

The Denver neighborhoods I'm more familiar with are decidedly more suburban in character. The 'hoods that Stonemans_rowJ is talking about are more urban-suburban.

RTD services are decent and they're fortunate to have a nice dedicated revenue stream but they pale in comparison to Seattle's revenue and spending on transit. More suburban areas are less likely to have sufficient transit and it's more likely that transit wouldn't take them where they need to go.

Consequently, attitudes about transit, cars and car storage are very different from Seattle. But closer to the urban center things continue to evolve. Residential streets are of course narrower.

The first, second, and third ring would benefit from duplex as a right. Even my neighborhood which feels suburban (by design) is a short walk to the Cherry Creek North District which my wife and I routinely make the walk down the hill. (Would be hard though in my neighborhood with the constituents).

The furthest rings in Denver where there are no alleys it's pointless and will only serve to piss people off. That's probably at least part of why the proposed legislation is DOA. It's whole hog. Needs a lot more nuance.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Bank Rate is teaser rates and it's for primary mortgages. Read the fine print. ADU is not a gov backed mortgage.

Arms are priced barely lower than 30FRM. You'd have to go to a local bank for this. Cash out Refi like this is generally 65-70LTV. Lending at 4%? No way. they're paying 5% on deposits now.

Not trying to be argumentative, but it aint easy. Maybe there's a local bank you know of who has a great niche ADU portfolio product?

I have universal life through NW Mutual. It's 8%. you can borrow 50% of cash value. How many people have cash value policy's for $700,000 to tap $350,000.

you are correct that there are certainly ways to do it- but all the examples you lay out are certainly not possible at scale. Very few people meet these parameters you speak of

^We'll agree to disagree!

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by stonemans_rowj

i say open the whole city to duplex and adu by right and see what gets built. Let the market decide.

amen!

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

The first, second, and third ring would benefit from duplex as a right. Even my neighborhood which feels suburban (by design) is a short walk to the Cherry Creek North District which my wife and I routinely make the walk down the hill. (Would be hard though in my neighborhood with the constituents).

The furthest rings in Denver where there are no alleys it's pointless and will only serve to piss people off. That's probably at least part of why the proposed legislation is DOA. It's whole hog. Needs a lot more nuance.

I suspect you are right about this. While many people were simply opposed to the idea of the state government overriding ANY local land use decisions, I think a lot of suburbs also felt it was unfair to be lumped in as "Tier 1" cities along with Denver, Boulder, FTC, and Co. Springs. It also seems to me that some kind of professional economic analysis of the likely outcome would be good to provide as a part of any proposal.

Do people in the furthest rings of the suburbs actually need to fear wholesale demolition of their neighborhoods to be replaced with townhomes? My guess is that the answer is no - and especially not if the same rules apply to more traditional urban neighborhoods where it makes more sense to add townhomes. And if market demand would prefer to put middle-housing units closer to the center anyway (as I suspect it would), then why not just build that into the structure of the proposal? Create a third "tier" for exurbs like Firestone and Dacono, and let the traditional suburbs occupy a second tier that is still allowed to zone for single-family. I bet a lot more people would go for it if it were seen as applying mostly to "the city," i.e.. the cities that are responsible for generating the majority of the economic growth.

[mhays]

A new state law is probably much easier in a state where there are existing state laws about cities accommodating growth. Once you get over that hump the debate is about the specifics, not the basic concept. Not that a major move like "start to allow missing middle in most place) is the same ol'.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by mr1138

...Do people in the furthest rings of the suburbs actually need to fear wholesale demolition of their neighborhoods to be replaced with townhomes? My guess is that the answer is no - and especially not if the same rules apply to more traditional urban neighborhoods where it makes more sense to add townhomes. And if market demand would prefer to put middle-housing units closer to the center anyway (as I suspect it would), then why not just build that into the structure of the proposal? Create a third "tier" for exurbs like Firestone and Dacono, and let the traditional suburbs occupy a second tier that is still allowed to zone for single-family. I bet a lot more people would go for it if it were seen as applying mostly to "the city," i.e.. the cities that are responsible for generating the majority of the economic growth.

Quite literally EVERY single suburb with beginnings before 1990 has a decent stock of duplexes, townhomes, cottages, and class C apartments. There are 0 exceptions. It's not like these places don't already have these land uses the State bill attempts to include by right and these places aren't exclusively SFH. The only thing that changed was zoning in the 90's began excluding literally everything except single family homes and big box retail...oh and giant plots of land for schools that will never get used, can't be rezoned (b/c...neighbors), and sit idle forevermore.

[TakeFive]

The State will get one more bite at the apple before the 2024 elections.

Gov. Polis claimed he sought the council of various experts. To me his appeal sounded like a bunch of talking points.

Where the Governor missed the boat is that he couldn't even get buy-in from the most urban-friendly part of the metro area: the City/County of Denver.

Chances are high that next year there will be a significant lack of enthusiasm for pursuing any statewide rezoning.

[TakeFive]

Different places, different faces of City Life

CBS4 Colorado has the awesome story of a migrant 'homeless' couple who are making a life in Denver.
MAY 13, 2023 BY Jasmine Arenas

A mother was raising her son in a city she loved. Then San Francisco changed and stole her boy
May 14, 2023 - Props to Sara Sidner for her well written piece for CNN.

While affordability is a significant issue it may be that residents are even more concerned with growing crime, homelessness and drug addition. This could make them hesitant to allow blanket up-zoning; not saying it's the most rational position but it would be understandable.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

[SIZE="3"]...Where the Governor missed the boat is that he couldn't even get buy-in from the most urban-friendly part of the metro area: the City/County of Denver.

Chances are high that next year there will be a significant lack of enthusiasm for pursuing any statewide rezoning.

It's almost like a Harvard Business School case study of NIMBYism. A bunch of cities/towns who complain about housing costs and displacement and then in the same breath they decry a solution to the problem (ie better zoning to replace their terrible decisions). I hope the dems and Polis steamroll all the cry-babies screaming local control and push through on partisan lines like they've gotten just abotu everything else passed in the past 7 years. THESE CITIES/TOWNS HAVE LOCAL CONTROL NOW AND FOREVER PRIOR - look what they've done!! If they had done something about housing that was positive, other than token feel good funding here and there at the margins, I'd tend to agree with them about local control, but these cities/towns have done nothing but exacerbate and accelerate the housing problem via zoning, regulation, and downright vindictiveness in some areas. Methinks you've been gone from Colorado too long. It's not the same place it used to be from a politics and business friendly standpoint. Yes some of the big stuff makes the news, especially what the legislature does, but the real story for real estate is at the extremely local level. The mandatory neighborhood meetings where you could pull a dozen restraining orders following each presentation, the Section 106 suits that instantly kill rezoning efforts, the CORA intimidation, historic preservation shenanigans, the prescriptive design requirements which drive incredible cost, the transportation requirements to build highways on residential streets, the high tech electrical metering that gets larger every year, the electric parking requirements for a grid that can't support the end users, the fire departments requiring ever greater areas of concrete and asphalt to fight increasingly rare fires, the subjective planning comments which delay the hell out of permitting, and finally, the cowardice of our local elected leaders to DO A DAMN THING ABOUT ALL OF IT!

We're barreling toward a tiny, less rich version of California.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by laniroj

We're barreling toward a tiny, less rich version of California.

I will be borrowing this, thanks in advance.