Colorado 2023 Housing & Land Use Public Policy Survey

Magellan Strategies is pleased to present the topline results of an online survey of 779 registered voters from the state of Colorado. The interviews were conducted from September 5th to 17th, 2023.

Colorado registered voters expressed broad concern about housing availability and affordability across the state. While 61% said they were satisfied with their current housing situation, nearly eight in ten (78%) said the availability of rental and homeownership opportunities in their community was a big or somewhat big problem. A majority (55%) believed residential housing growth over the past five years had been too fast, though nearly one-third said it had been too slow, highlighting tension between growth pressures and unmet housing demand. Overall, voters signaled that personal housing stability did not negate concern about broader structural problems in the housing market.

Voters were overwhelmingly dissatisfied with existing affordable housing and land use policies. Nearly three-quarters (73%) said local affordable housing and land use policies were not effective or moving in the wrong direction. Despite this dissatisfaction, voters expressed a strong preference for local decision-making: 48% trusted local government more than the state to address affordable housing, and 54% trusted local government more to make land use decisions. Large majorities said both local (73%) and state government (67%) should be doing more to address affordable housing, but most preferred local control when tradeoffs arose.

State intervention in land use produced mixed reactions. Voters were evenly split on a state policy that would prohibit local governments from restricting multi-unit housing in single-family neighborhoods, with support (46%) and opposition (47%) essentially tied. Opposition arguments resonated strongly: roughly two-thirds agreed that such a policy could create parking and emergency access problems, remove the public’s voice from local decision-making, and undermine the tradition of local control. These concerns suggested that while voters recognized the need for more housing, they were wary of top-down mandates that override community input.

In contrast, other land use concepts received broad support. Nearly seven in ten voters (69%) supported increasing residential housing near transit corridors, and nearly three-quarters (74%) supported requiring local governments to include affordable housing and adequate water supply planning in their community master plans. These findings indicated that voters were more receptive to state policies that set planning standards or encourage strategic growth rather than those that directly override local zoning authority.

When asked about the causes of Colorado’s housing affordability challenges, voters most often pointed to population growth and inflation, with 83% saying each contributed a lot or somewhat to the problem. Large majorities also cited economic market forces (80%) and the growth of short-term rentals and housing investors (72%). Factors such as infrastructure limitations, community opposition to new housing, restrictive zoning, building codes, land availability, and water and sewer constraints were also seen as meaningful contributors, reflecting a belief that the housing crisis stems from multiple, interconnected pressures rather than a single policy failure.

Attitudes toward housing policy revealed both consensus and division. Most voters (81%) agreed that many communities have a “NIMBY” attitude toward multi-unit housing, yet voters were divided on whether restrictive zoning policies were the primary cause of the housing crisis. A majority (54%) agreed that some zoning and land use policies have been used to discriminate against lower-income individuals and minorities. Support for rent control was comparatively strong, with 60% favoring such a policy in their local community. Taken together, the results depicted an electorate that clearly recognized the severity of Colorado’s housing challenges, favored local control, supported certain state-level planning requirements, and remained conflicted about the appropriate balance between growth, affordability, and community autonomy.

Voters also weighed in on a specific law already enacted by the Governor and state legislature prohibiting local governments from limiting the number of new residential housing developments that could be built. Reaction to this measure closely mirrored the broader tension found throughout the survey: 44% expressed support while 47% opposed it. When asked whether “local control” or “state control” should be the higher priority in addressing affordable housing, nearly two-thirds (64%) said local control should take precedence, compared to just 26% who favored state control as the higher priority. Additionally, fewer than one in three voters (26%) believed state-determined affordable housing and land use policies were more effective than local policies at addressing the problem, while nearly half (49%) disagreed. These results reinforced a consistent pattern across the survey in which voters acknowledged the scale of Colorado’s housing crisis but remained skeptical of state authority as the preferred mechanism for solving it.