First off, I have to say that this opinion is mine alone and does not represent the position of the Green Mountain Falls Board of Trustees. I am the mayor of Green Mountain Falls and co-chair of the Legislative Committee for the Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments.
The PPACG registered a formal “oppose” to House Bill HB24-1152 and I testified in opposition to this bill on its behalf. Even though the bill does not directly affect the town of Green Mountain Falls, our town shares a lot of common attributes with Manitou Springs.
HB24-1152 is yet another bill that aims to take away control from local governments. One of the elements would mandate that accessory dwelling units (ADUs) be allowed on any single-unit detached dwelling parcel with no regards to parking.
This means that anyone who has a house can place and/or construct an ADU on their property, but the state would mandate that Manitou could not require any additional on-site parking to accommodate that ADU.
In Manitou, this could be catastrophic. Manitou’s roads are not necessarily designed for on-street parking and the terrain can prohibit road widening. If there are too many cars on the street, emergency vehicle access and emergency evacuations would become problematic at best.
The bill also states that this would be an administrative approval, meaning that it would not go in front of a Planning Commission or governing body. The bill states that a local municipality can enforce a “locally adopted life safety code …,” but it isn’t clear what this really means.
Remember, these bills are typically written by law firms, so words matter. If this bill passes, I’m hoping that this will include life safety codes that are “locally generated” so that aging infrastructure and local life safety issues can be taken into account when ADUs are added on a property.
This bill also creates a grant program for ADUs that will likely be used to develop new short-term rentals, not workforce or residential housing.
Again, words matter and the language in the bill states that grant monies can be used for “affordable accessory dwelling units”; “accessible or visitable accessory dwelling units”; or “accessory dwelling units used to support other demonstrated housing news in the community.”
I’m pretty sure I could make a short-term rental fit into at least one of those descriptions.
In my opinion, the state is deflecting away from one of the better answers to the housing crunch: condominiums. The Pikes Peak Regional Building Department (PPRBD) supplied us with graphs showing how many condo units have been built versus other dwellings, and the results are staggering.
This could be catastrophic.
In 2022 and 2023, for example, no condos were constructed under its purview because of the construction defect laws put into place several years ago. Builders must have insurance when they’re doing construction, and these laws make it incredibly difficult (if not impossible) for them to obtain insurance. So no insurance equals no condos.
This is actually an easy fix that would cost the state very little money. Just loosen up or limit the liabilities (this has been done successfully at the federal level with small airplanes). However, our lobbyists are telling us that the Trial Lawyers Association has great influence over the state lawmakers, so I’m not holding my breath on this one.
In the end, it is all of us who can influence change in our governing bodies. If you like the situation as it is, continue to vote for the same individuals. If you don’t, simply vote for someone who has different philosophies or puts their constituents over their party.
Information: leg.colorado.gov/bills/hb24-1152.
