HB1308 creates a statewide framework requiring certain Colorado municipalities, defined in the bill as “subject jurisdictions,” to administratively approve a lot split into two new residential lots when specified conditions are met. The bill applies beginning December 31, 2027, and sets minimum lot-size and configuration rules, including that the original lot must be at least 2,000 square feet, the smaller resulting lot must generally be at least 30% of the original lot if the lots are unequal, the property must allow residential use, and the lot must not already have been split or be located in certain exempt settings such as some utility-dependent lots, airport influence areas, historic properties outside historic districts, or common interest communities created on or before the cutoff date.
The bill also preserves local authority over many development-related standards. Subject jurisdictions may still enforce infrastructure, life-safety, health and safety, stormwater, impact fee, water/wastewater capacity, short-term rental, and historic district rules, and may apply limited setback standards in certain circumstances. At the same time, the bill limits some setback requirements between the two newly created lots, especially where no structure existed before the split. Private covenants, conditions, and restrictions are not displaced unless another law expressly provides otherwise.
A major additional requirement is lender consent. If the original lot or any structure on it is subject to a residential mortgage loan or other evidence of debt, the jurisdiction must verify that the lienholder received notice and gave written consent before approving the split. The consent must be recordable, notarized, identify the property and interested parties, and be recorded with the county; if consent is not obtained, the split cannot be approved and any approval issued without it is void.
The bill’s stated policy goal is to expand attainable homeownership and increase housing supply by making it easier to create starter homes and support multigenerational living, aging in place, and other household changes. In practical terms, it would amend Colorado land-use law by creating a new statewide lot-splitting mandate that constrains local zoning discretion for qualifying residential parcels while still allowing local review of infrastructure and safety issues.
The overall sentiment appears generally supportive in the House, where the bill advanced out of committee on a 7-4 vote and passed third reading 37-24, but it was later postponed indefinitely in the Senate Local Government & Housing Committee by a 6-0 vote. That pattern suggests the concept had meaningful support but also significant reservations. The main points of contention are likely the state preemption of local land-use control, the effect on neighborhood density and infrastructure, the interaction with private covenants and common interest communities, and the added mortgage-lender consent requirement, which may have been intended to address property-rights and financing concerns.
HB1308 would add Part 5 to article 35 of title 29 of the Colorado Revised Statutes, creating a new statewide administrative approval process for qualifying residential lot splits in municipalities meeting the bill’s population and MPO criteria. It would require local governments to approve eligible splits beginning December 31, 2027, while also limiting how local setback rules can be applied to the newly created lots. The bill preserves many local regulatory tools, but it narrows local discretion over whether a qualifying split may occur at all. It also creates a recorded lienholder-consent requirement for mortgaged properties and makes unauthorized approvals void.
The bill appears to have been viewed as a housing-supply and affordability measure, with its findings emphasizing starter homes, multigenerational housing, and aging in place. The House committee and floor votes show enough support to advance the measure, but the Senate committee’s unanimous postponement indicates stronger resistance in the upper chamber. Overall, the sentiment was mixed: supportive of increasing housing options, but cautious or opposed regarding local control, implementation, and property-rights implications.
The biggest contention points are likely the bill’s statewide mandate overriding local zoning decisions, the minimum lot-size and split standards, and the extent to which municipalities can still regulate infrastructure, safety, and design. Another likely concern is the treatment of common interest communities and private covenants, since the bill preserves private restrictions but still creates a new default approval pathway for qualifying lots. The lienholder-consent provision may also have been controversial because it gives mortgage holders a veto over lot splits, potentially complicating the bill’s housing-production goals while addressing lender and title concerns.