Regional housing analysis shows major shortfall; Glenwood Springs allocated roughly 1,800 net units over 10 years, presenter says

The Glenwood Springs City Council received a presentation on July 16 of a regional housing needs assessment prepared by Economic & Planning Systems (EPS) and commissioned by area partners. Rachel Shinman of EPS and Watkins Folk Gray (city housing development manager) walked council through demographics, jobs, housing stock and methodology required by Senate Bill 24‑174.

EPS reported a regional gross need through 2035 of just under 7,700 units (about 2,850 in the upper county area referenced by the presentation and roughly 4,830 in Garfield County). Based on the study’s job‑based allocation method, Glenwood Springs was assigned about 39% of Garfield County’s share, yielding a gross need near 1,922 units for the city, and a net need slightly above 1,800 units after accounting for pipeline development, EPS said.

Shinman emphasized the assessment is informational and not legally binding; the state statute requires the needs assessment but the subsequent housing action plan (a separate, adoptable document) is the next step and must be completed by January 1, 2028. EPS also noted methodological caveats: data lags (latest full year available was 2024), choice of income definitions for program eligibility, and assumptions on household formation and jobs‑to‑household translation.

Councilors asked detailed questions about the displacement definition, whether the regional study reflects Glenwood Springs’ particular needs, commuting data, vacancy rates and rent estimates. Several councilors expressed wariness about treating the study as a directive; others said the data will help staff prioritize local policies, preserve mobile home parks and evaluate employer‑based housing strategies.

EPS and staff outlined next steps: council may 'receive and file' the assessment to satisfy SB 24‑174 requirements, use the report’s data to inform a local housing action plan that will be subject to future council adoption, and engage stakeholders for the action plan stage.

No formal vote on adopting policy followed the presentation; council discussion centered on how to use the assessment’s findings in forthcoming local planning and the required action plan.