.jpg){kind=avatar}
Colorado has created a new path for building homes on certain school, transit, and nonprofit properties—even where existing zoning has made housing difficult to develop.
But the law leaves one crucial decision untouched.
The institutions that own the land don't have to build anything.
That's the distinction behind Colorado's Housing Opportunities Made Easier (HOME) Act, signed by Governor Jared Polis on March 25, 2026.
Under House Bill 26-1001, covered local governments must provide an administrative approval process for qualifying housing developments on eligible institutional properties of five acres or less. The ordinary implementation deadline is December 31, 2027.
For Denver Metro and communities along Colorado's Front Range, the change could open development opportunities on land owned by school districts, transit agencies, housing authorities, universities, and certain nonprofits.
Instead of pursuing the usual discretionary zoning approval, a qualifying proposal would be evaluated by local staff against objective standards.
That could remove a significant obstacle. It doesn't mean a property is eligible, a project has been approved, or homes are about to go on sale.
The more interesting question is what institutions might actually do with the land they already control.
And Denver has a few examples worth watching.
RTD Is Studying Eight Properties for Possible Redevelopment
Think about the land surrounding an RTD Park-n-Ride.
It's valuable for transportation. People need somewhere to park, board transit, and connect to other destinations.
But could some of that land also support housing?
RTD is studying the possibility.
Its 2026 Park-n-Ride Economic Analysis identifies eight properties: 41st•Fox, Federal Center, Littleton•Mineral, Littleton•Downtown, County Line, Belleview, Colorado, and Aurora Metro Center.
The agency is examining parking and market trends, potential development uses, financial models, and implementation strategies. Its work includes evaluating multifamily housing alongside commercial possibilities.
That's a tangible example of an institution considering whether property it already uses could serve another purpose.
But it's a feasibility study, not eight announced housing developments.
RTD hasn't established through that study that the sites qualify under the HOME Act, that it intends to use the law, or that construction is moving forward.
The individual properties' acreage, eligibility, and eventual development plans would need to be verified separately.
The distinction matters because the HOME Act addresses only part of the challenge.
A transit agency considering housing still has to determine whether it can preserve necessary operations, accommodate parking needs, provide infrastructure, and make a development financially workable.
A more predictable zoning approval process might help with a qualifying proposal. It won't make those decisions for the agency.
And the law doesn't apply to every piece of institutional land in the first place.
The Five-Acre Rule Narrows Which Properties Qualify
It's easy to imagine an unused school building or a large parking lot becoming apartments.
The HOME Act is more specific.
A qualifying property generally must be five acres or less and owned by an eligible institution.
Those institutions include school districts, state colleges and universities, boards of cooperative services, specified housing authorities, qualifying transit districts or authorities, and certain nonprofits.
The nonprofit distinction is important.
An affordable-housing nonprofit generally must demonstrate qualifying affordable-housing experience within the previous five years. The law recognizes several forms of evidence, including specified housing tax credits, public financing, and other qualifying housing arrangements.
Other eligible nonprofits can participate through an agreement requiring an experienced affordable-housing nonprofit to develop the housing.
Simply owning land as a church or nonprofit doesn't automatically establish eligibility.
The law also limits attempts to create qualifying parcels by subdividing larger holdings. Certain adjoining small properties resulting from a subdivision within the previous five years are excluded.
Location adds another layer.
Denver, Aurora, Lakewood, Fort Collins, and Colorado Springs all exceed the law's population threshold of more than 2,000 residents.
But being in one of those cities doesn't make every institutional parcel eligible.
Unincorporated county properties face a narrower test. They must be in a qualifying census-designated place with at least 5,000 residents and within the statutory three-mile municipal area.
That means a school-owned parcel inside Aurora and one farther into unincorporated Arapahoe County could face different eligibility questions.
Other exclusions cover certain properties without qualifying domestic water or sewage service, including those relying on standalone wells or septic systems. The law also excludes specified agricultural, industrial, conservation, floodplain, airport-related, and other protected or restricted properties.
So a publicly owned parcel may appear suitable for housing without meeting the statute's requirements.
Even when land qualifies, the homes eventually built there could take very different forms.
A Denver church partnership offers an example of what that can look like.
A Denver Church Already Helped Turn Institutional Land Into Homes
Years before the HOME Act, Augustana Lutheran Church began exploring how its property could support housing.
The church partnered with Habitat for Humanity of Metro Denver in 2022 after looking for a development partner through the Congregation Land Campaign.
The result was eight affordable ownership homes in Denver's Washington Virginia Vale neighborhood.
According to Habitat's Augustana Homes project page, the church leased the land for the development.
That arrangement illustrates one way institutional property can contribute to housing without a conventional sale of the underlying land.
But Augustana Homes wasn't created under HB26-1001. The partnership predates the law, and Habitat now identifies the development as a past project. The homes are no longer for sale.
It's an example of what's possible through a partnership, not a currently available HOME Act development.
It also highlights a question that tends to disappear when housing legislation is discussed in broad terms.
What kind of housing will the institution actually create?
Augustana produced ownership homes. Another institution might pursue rental apartments, housing subject to income restrictions, or a different residential arrangement.
The HOME Act itself doesn't impose one statewide maximum sale price or rent, a universal buyer-income limit, or a requirement that all resulting homes be available for purchase.
Nor does it reserve every development for teachers or other institutional employees.
Actual restrictions may come from local rules, project financing, affordability agreements, or recorded covenants.
The statute requires qualifying residential development to consist of permanent dwelling units, with residential use as the primary purpose. Temporary housing and shelter space don't qualify under that definition.
For a Denver buyer, those distinctions matter far more than the fact that a project sits on school or nonprofit land.
An announced apartment development isn't necessarily a future collection of homes for sale. And an institution's interest in housing doesn't establish who would be eligible to live there.
Those answers emerge from an actual project proposal.
Cities Still Have a Say in How Housing Is Built
The HOME Act changes the approval process. It doesn't eliminate local development standards.
For a qualifying project, administrative approval means local staff evaluate compliance with objective requirements rather than making the kind of discretionary zoning decision that might otherwise be necessary.
The law limits certain restrictions local governments can impose.
For example, qualifying developments generally receive height protection up to three stories or 38 feet, subject to statutory fire-apparatus and historic-district limitations. Greater height may be allowed where applicable local zoning or a contiguous residential property permits it.
Jurisdictions also generally cannot deny a qualifying proposal solely because of its number of dwelling units. Comparable site-design standards remain relevant, including rules addressing setbacks, parking, landscaping, and lot coverage.
But an administrative approval path isn't permission to ignore infrastructure or safety.
Local governments retain authority over applicable building and fire requirements, wildfire protections, utilities, stormwater, transportation, environmental safeguards, and water and wastewater capacity.
Subdivision procedures, impact fees, short-term-rental rules, and existing affordability or deed-restriction requirements can also continue to apply.
And public participation doesn't simply disappear. Jurisdictions may provide notice and collect feedback. Certain historic-district reviews and funding-related hearings can also remain part of the process.
Imagine living near a former school property where the district proposes a residential development.
Under the HOME Act, the city may have less discretion to reject an otherwise qualifying project because of the proposed residential use or unit count.
But residents would still need the actual development plans to understand its building height, access points, parking arrangement, and infrastructure requirements.
The law doesn't establish those details in advance. Nor does it establish how a nearby home's market value would respond.
That depends on what is proposed and ultimately approved—not simply on the passage of HB26-1001.
Why December 2027 Matters More Than the March Signing
Colorado's HOME Act was signed in March, but the main local implementation deadline is still ahead.
Under the current statute, covered jurisdictions generally must comply beginning December 31, 2027.
A jurisdiction actively updating its zoning or development code to comply on that date may have until June 30, 2028 to finish the work.
That extension is conditional. It isn't an automatic postponement for every Front Range city.
Boulder provides an example of how implementation is developing.
On its Planning and Development Code Changes page, the city identifies the HOME Act among state measures that staff is analyzing but that haven't yet been addressed in its Land Use Code.
That's evidence of preparation, not an adopted HOME Act ordinance or approved housing project.
Boulder is separately considering an affordable-housing expedited-review measure associated with Proposition 123. Although both involve housing approvals, that process is distinct from HB26-1001.
For institutions contemplating development, the approaching deadline creates a clearer point on the calendar for understanding the applicable approval process.
For homebuyers, however, it doesn't provide an occupancy date.
A property owner must still choose to pursue housing. A qualifying development must be proposed and reviewed, financing must be arranged, and construction must take place.
None of those steps is completed merely because the jurisdiction has brought its code into compliance.
What Denver Homebuyers Should Watch Next
The HOME Act could eventually create additional housing opportunities on smaller institutional properties that were previously difficult to develop.
But the meaningful next development won't necessarily be another statewide announcement.
It will be a specific institution identifying property for housing and moving forward with a proposal.
That's when consumers can begin answering questions the law cannot settle: What will be built? Will the homes be rented or sold? Are there income restrictions? How far along is the approval process?
Until those details exist, there isn't a HOME Act housing inventory to shop from.
The law is also separate from Colorado's Schools-to-Home down-payment assistance program. That program concerns financing for eligible homebuyers, not development permission for school-owned land.
For someone planning a purchase now, the choices are homes actually available on the market.
Kenna's Denver homes for sale and Aurora homes for sale pages provide current property searches. The Colorado home buying tools can help compare budgets and purchase considerations.
If you're considering a move in Denver Metro or elsewhere along the Front Range, contact Kenna Real Estate Group or use the buyer form below to discuss your home search.
The new law gives qualifying institutional landowners another way to pursue housing. RTD's property studies show the decisions that must come before development. Augustana Homes shows what a committed partnership can eventually produce.