It's hard to build housing in Littleton
It’s hard to build housing in Littleton. When the council tried to make it easier, residents revolted.
After months of acrimony, Littleton voters this November will get a more direct say in city housing policy through city charter amendment 3A and a slate of mayor and council races that have become a referendum on growth.
BY BRIAN EASON, THE COLORADO SUN
In December 2019, a proposed community of 85 relatively affordable homes was on the cusp of approval in the south Denver suburbs.
Two months earlier, the Littleton City Council had voted unanimously to adopt Envision Littleton, a long-term plan that called for more apartments and starter homes. Without more housing options, planners concluded, the city was becoming unaffordable for working class families.
So when a developer wanted to build narrow single-family homes on small lots, priced at around $450,000, the city planning staff recommended the project as a good use of an old industrial lot at the corner of West Powers Avenue and Delaware Street. The planning commission agreed, voting in the project’s favor.
But the council refused to rezone the land.
As Gov. Jared Polis and state lawmakers promote density as a solution to Colorado’s affordability crisis, success will depend on places like Littleton, where homebuilders say the deck is stacked against them.
Housing projects have to navigate a web of red tape just to get through the early stages of planning, housing professionals and local officials say. And even if they survive the initial approval process, months or years spent fine-tuning blueprints can be all for naught if enough residents rally the council against new housing.
In recent years, a more housing-friendly City Council has pushed to overhaul Littleton’s land use code. They legalized accessory dwelling units or “granny flats” in accordance with state law, and empowered planning staff to approve some projects on their own, bypassing the usual gauntlet of neighborhood opposition. But in January, a proposal to allow “missing middle housing,” like duplexes and small townhomes, in single-family neighborhoods proved a bridge too far.
Homeowners pushed back in force, packing public meetings and threatening to unseat the mayor and most of the city council. The backlash led the council to table its zoning rewrite and pledge to work more closely with neighborhood groups on future planning efforts. But that wasn’t enough to satisfy opponents.
After months of acrimony that culminated in a brief court dispute, voters in November will get a more direct say in city housing policy through a city charter amendment and a slate of mayor and council races that have become a referendum on growth.
CONTINUE ON THE COLORADO SUN →
Why your vote in Littleton’s local election matters more than you think
The recent No Kings protests have energized many of us with a renewed commitment to protecting democracy. This momentum is exactly what we need to carry forward into Littleton’s local elections this November. While presidential elections often dominate the spotlight, local elections are where decisions directly affecting our daily lives are made, and your vote matters now more than ever.
Why local elections have a greater impact than many realize
Civics education in the U.S. often overlooks the power and importance of local government. The reality is that your city council, mayor, and local boards influence many aspects of your family’s life, from property values and neighborhood character to school quality and public safety.
Consider this:
- Neighborhood growth and housing: Local officials decide how neighborhoods develop, which affects housing affordability and the overall community feel.
- Public services and infrastructure: City leaders set priorities for road maintenance, parks, libraries, emergency services, and more.
- Education funding: Local government influences school resources, directly impacting education quality.
- Public health and environment: Local policies govern public health initiatives and environmental stewardship in Littleton.
Because these decisions shape our everyday experiences, skipping local elections — often dismissed as “off-year” or “less important” — means missing a critical opportunity to influence your community’s future.
What’s at stake in Littleton this election?
This year’s election isn’t just about electing names to office. It’s about defining what kind of community we want to build. One of the most consequential issues on the ballot is Ballot Measure 3A.
At first glance, 3A presents itself as a safeguard to protect neighborhood character by limiting density changes. But a closer look reveals that the measure would:
- Freeze current zoning and land use rules as of January 1, 2025, permanently locking in place regulations before recent updates took effect.
- Undo recent progress on Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), which were made legal under state law to help homeowners create affordable, flexible housing options. This rollback would put Littleton at odds with state requirements.
- Restrict the city’s ability to make even minor zoning adjustments, requiring costly and time-consuming citywide votes for changes that are currently handled through the flexible Unified Land Use Code (ULUC).
- Create legal and financial risks for Littleton, including potential loss of state grants that fund essential services like road repairs, sidewalks, and infrastructure projects.
- Reduce Littleton’s capacity to adapt to future challenges, whether demographic shifts, new state laws, or evolving community needs.
3A essentially enshrines inflexible, outdated zoning rules into the City Charter, a move that undermines the responsive, collaborative planning process Littleton needs to thrive.
Leadership matters: Who’s running and what they represent
This election also features candidates aligned with divisive MAGA politics, supported by well-funded special interest groups and deep-pocketed donors. These candidates have opposed critical community resources, environmental protections, and have even been implicated in unethical behavior, including election tampering. This is not the leadership Littleton needs.
In contrast, we support candidates who bring experience, integrity, and a commitment to inclusive, pragmatic governance:
- Kyle Schlachter for Mayor
- Joel Zink for City Council, At Large
- Amanda Henderson for City Council, District 3
- Merrill Stillwell for City Council, District 1
These candidates are dedicated to keeping Littleton a vibrant, welcoming community that can face future challenges with smart, adaptable solutions.
Your vote is your voice, so make it count!
Regardless of your political affiliation, this local election is your opportunity to influence the future of Littleton. Democracy isn’t just an event every four years; it’s an ongoing process, starting with engagement in our own neighborhoods.
Take time to carefully review your ballot, understand the stakes — especially around measures like 3A — and vote with intention on Election Day. Littleton deserves leaders who listen, adapt, and act with the community’s best interests at heart.
Let’s bring the passion from the No Kings movement into the voting booth. Local democracy is where real power lies. It’s time we take it seriously.
Background
Lots of good information in how to frame the issues at stake here: http://littletongrowstogether.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/09/LGT-Final-Results-Presentation.pdf
Key takeaways:
Most effective message is "Don't HOA our city," with general voters.
Close second is "a Littleton where our kid and grandkids can find a home they can afford."
For detailed crosstabs, see here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/18rlL5zHPY4ghof2qqFGapxKrqPJK3ebHTt1nyIa-TdE/edit?gid=1519784800#gid=1519784800
Littleton at a Crossroads: Electing City Council Leaders Who Will Move Us Forward
This November, Littleton voters face a defining choice. We will decide whether to elect leaders who can guide the city through a thoughtful and inclusive process or choose candidates who want to lock Littleton into the past and resist change. With four city council seats up for election and Ballot Question 3A, this election will shape our city for years to come.
Ballot Question 3A proposes a dramatic change to the City Charter that would severely limit Littleton’s ability to make even modest housing and land use updates. If passed, any changes to how residents use their own property, such as adding a backyard cottage or adjusting daycare operations, would require a citywide vote. It’s a broad restriction on property rights that would stall everyday decisions and paralyze local governance.
Candidates aligned with Rooted in Littleton do not treat this as a problem. They speak in tones of caution while advancing policies that resist change. At-large candidate David Carlton, for instance, says, “Growth occurs in thriving communities, but it should never come at the expense of the character and livability of Littleton’s established neighborhoods.” The sentiment may sound balanced, but it reflects a familiar pattern: protect appearances, postpone action, and ignore the urgency of housing access. Carlton backs the referendum that locks new housing options, even as essential workers like teachers, nurses, and first responders are priced out of the community they serve.
Joel Zink offers a clear alternative. He supports a range of housing options in well-connected areas—near transit, shops, and services—where properties meet real community needs. He emphasizes the importance of supporting Littleton’s workforce, noting that many public servants cannot afford to live where they serve. His approach is pragmatic and compassionate, grounded in the belief that housing is not just about buildings but about belonging.
In the mayoral race, Patrick Driscoll frames the election as a referendum on leadership. “The citizens have a choice in what direction they want Littleton to move over the next four years,” he says. “I believe strong leadership is the key to good governance.” Yet his critique of the current administration doesn’t match public sentiment. According to Littleton’s 2024 community survey, 75 percent of residents said the city has an effective government, up from 71 percent in 2022. Eighty-one percent rated city services positively, matching 2018 levels. This is not a government in decline, but one responding to real challenges.
Those challenges are clearly defined. Thirty-eight percent of residents named affordable housing and cost of living among the top three issues facing Littleton. Driscoll’s response? He suggested residents explore housing options four hours south in Trinidad. It was a complete dismissal, and a telling example of his leadership style. If you don’t already belong, look elsewhere.
Kyle Schlachter offers a more grounded vision. “I don’t think growth and preservation are inherently in conflict,” he says. “If you look back throughout the history of Littleton, it’s constantly changed.” He cautions against freezing the city in place, advocating instead for a flexible framework that meets the needs of the times. Schlachter envisions a future where Littleton continues to adapt while preserving its core assets—parks, open space, and a historic downtown that remains vibrant through thoughtful change. “You set the framework and allow residents to shape what happens,” he explains. His approach reflects a belief that resilience comes from balancing tradition with responsiveness.
Curt Samuelson, district 3 candidate, offers a final glimpse into Rooted’s rigidity. He cites the Envision Master Plan and notes that over 81 percent of residents commute by car, concluding this is unlikely to change. His vision leans on telecommuting and autonomous vehicles, with vague gestures toward bike lanes “where practical” and a circulator bus “in the future.” Even as bike-related incidents rise, many involving children and commuter cyclists, he suggests waiting for nearby development projects to wrap up before reassessing transportation needs. “As the projects near completion and build out, a new study of transportation patterns may be appropriate and new infrastructure projects approved.” It’s a disappointing response to an urgent problem.
Amanda Henderson, in contrast, brings overdue attention to transportation. She points out that Littleton’s current transit system leaves many residents behind, especially seniors, people with disabilities, and families without reliable access to a car. The city’s street design, she argues, fails to protect children on bikes, seniors crossing intersections, and leaves drivers navigating unsafe conditions. “If elected, I would prioritize pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure,” Henderson says, “advocating for more bike lanes, safer crosswalks, and improved sidewalks.” She plans to work with RTD to improve transit connectivity in underserved areas through increased service frequency, extended hours, on-demand options, and investment in micro-mobility. Her approach centers on community input, cost effectiveness, sustainability, equity, and long-term impact.
This contrast between leaders who see change as a threat and those who see it as a responsibility is at the heart of this election.
Littleton’s residents have made their priorities clear. They want action on housing, safer streets, and infrastructure. They trust their local government. They value the services they receive. What they need now is leadership that listens, adapts, and leads with integrity. This fall, let’s choose a council that reflects the best of Littleton. Let’s move forward into the future, not lock ourselves in the past.
NIMBY in Littleton
Krista Kafer, a columnist at the Denver Post, adjunct professor, and broadcaster, writes an insightful take on the push to block everything but Single-Unit Homes and rental apartments from Littleton. Her January 2025 piece is worth revisiting as the city's voters consider a Charter Amendment to lock housing uses to January 2025, permanently. "Growth is good. And it need not change the character of a city; in fact it often improves it. I grew up in the Columbine High School area when Downtown Littleton was seedy and threadbare. The influx of new residents and new diverse housing from condos to million dollars homes and new and updated commercial districts make it the vibrant city it is today."
Littleton Mayoral Candidate's Comments on Housing Draw Scrutiny
LITTLETON, CO — Mayoral candidate and current City Council member Patrick Driscoll is facing criticism following remarks he made during a recent City Council study session on housing and transportation. Driscoll's comments, which came in response to a presentation revealing that more than half of Littleton residents are "cost-burdened" by housing, are being called out for their lack of empathy and a troubling disconnect from the financial realities facing many residents.
According to a presentation given to the City Council, 52% of Littleton residents spend more than 30% of their income on housing, with one in four spending over 50%. Experts widely agree that housing costs exceeding 30% of income make it difficult for families to afford essential expenses like food and healthcare.
During the session, however, Driscoll suggested that spending half your income on housing isn't a burden. He also claimed that government guidelines allow for debt-to-income (DTI) ratios up to 50%. This is incorrect; most homebuyers are capped at 36% DTI, and 50% is extremely rare.
Tamsen Sear, a District 2 resident, voiced her concern about Driscoll's comments. "Council Member Driscoll’s comments lack empathy for those in lower income brackets," she said. "The fact that a mortgage broker (a position traditionally seen as having fiduciary responsibility to clients) is recommending borrowers go up to 50% of their gross income on a mortgage alone is irresponsible, unwise, and serves only his own financial interest."
Driscoll's remarks didn't end there. He also told residents to "stop traveling the world" and make sacrifices to afford a home. This comment ignores the financial struggles of the majority of Littleton families—61% of whom earn $100,000 or less, according to census data. Many of these families are already juggling rising costs for basic necessities.
District 2 resident Keely Quinn reacted to the comments, stating, “It’s frustrating that Driscoll seems to think owning a home should be enough to keep someone content, even if they can’t afford to travel or seek experiences beyond it. A house shouldn’t be a trade-off for a full life. Stability shouldn’t mean settling for less.”
Perhaps Driscoll's most criticized comment was his suggestion that those struggling to afford housing should "look at Trinidad, Colorado." Trinidad is a small town nearly four hours away, and critics say this remark is a deflection from addressing the city's affordability crisis.
"Councilman Driscoll is out of touch with reality," said Kaia Friedli, a mother of two from District 3. "His suggestions are absolutely impractical. I am working hard to afford rent full time on a single income. Right now, buying a home in Littleton is simply unattainable for me, and so many others who love this community."
The comments have raised questions about how Driscoll would approach the city's housing challenges if elected mayor.
City Attorney discusses all the negative ramifications about Rooted's referendum
City Attorney discusses all the negative ramifications about Rooted's referendum
Please watch last week’s City Council study session about the Rooted in Littleton referendum. LINK: https://youtu.be/OEQ1kVRNCgc?t=7560 (This URL will skip forward to start of the referendum discussion). City Attorney Reid Betzing and the other attendees of the study session express their concerns about the way the Rooted referendum is written.
We encourage you to watch the whole discussion as it really identifies all the questionable outcomes (mostly negative and or ending in expensive lawsuits) of the passage of this ballot referendum. Wouldn’t you rather our tax dollars be spent on more important needs such as the Library or Museum?
AARP's gallery of missing middle homes
"In advocating for Missing Middle Housing, it is important to start thinking about housing as a range of types and forms," Daniel Parolek writes in Missing Middle Housing: Thinking Big and Building Small to Respond to Today’s Housing Crisis.
An architect and urban planner, Parolek is credited with coining the missing middle terminology. "Developing an understanding of Missing Middle Housing types and their characteristics can help to inform general conversations about providing housing choices within communities," he adds.
The photographs in AARP's Livable Communities newsletter show the range of housing styles, forms and characteristics that can be found in some older neighborhoods but are largely missing from the nation's housing stock and new construction market. Zoning restrictions from the 1970s have made these traditionally-smaller home types illegal to build. And here in Littleton we face a referendum to outlaw them indefinitely.
Check out the full story at AARP.
Subscribe to AARP's Livable Communities Newsletter.
I Spy ... Missing Middle Housing
"If you walk down any tree-lined street in a pre-1940s neighborhood in any city across the country and look very closely, you will notice some of the buildings are not quite like the others," writes Daniel Parolek in the opening of Missing Middle Housing: Thinking Big and Building Small to Respond to Today's Housing Crisis. "Some buildings will look like and are the scale of single-family houses but have two doors or four gas meters, which means there are multiple units. These buildings are often a seamless part of a street and block with mostly single-family homes." Other Missing Middle clues: multiple doorbells or mailboxes.
Side-by-Side Duplex
The width, depth and height of a one-story duplex are the same as a typical single-family house. "As a housing type, the one-story duplex was built historically to provide affordable housing," Parolek explains. "But what is typically delivered today is a duplex with two two-story, large units because there is no incentive in a density-based system to build smaller units, thus not truly delivering attainability. This result of two large units often delivers more attainability than a single-family home but it is not an ideal solution in terms of delivering attainable housing."
Stacked Duplex
This type of duplex can fit on a narrow lot as small as 30 feet wide. The stacked duplex, says Parolek, "is a great type for builders who want to sell a multi-unit property to one buyer. The owner can rent the second unit to generate income from short-term or long-term rentals or use it to house aging parents or boomerang children or to simply have other family members close by." Buyers of this type of residence can use a conventional single-family mortgage if they will be living in one of the units.
Cottage Homes
Cottage houses are typically detached and oriented around a small shared court that is usually perpendicular to the street. Cottage communities sometimes have a shared laundry room, storage space or parking area. As buildings with a very small-footprint, cottages are, explains Parolek, "compatible with single-family homes, so it is the easiest type to justify allowing in single-family zones, even in neighborhoods with larger lots."
Side-by-Side Triplex
From a distance, the building appears to be a single-family home. In reality, the units are more similar to a set of connected town houses. (More about those later.) The residents of these three, two-story attached homes in downtown Annapolis, Maryland, can walk to the water, restaurants, shops and the U.S. Naval Academy.
Stacked Triplex
Three-story residences (aka "Triple Deckers") are the tallest among the homes that can be considered Missing Middle Housing. Access to the upper floors is through a shared staircase (or, in new constructions, an elevator). "Because they have only one unit per floor, stacked triplexes can often fit on lots as narrow as 30 feet wide, especially if the lot has an alley," explains Parolek, who notes that each apartment in the triplex should should have its own outdoor space, such as a porch or balcony.
Fourplex
Each of these grand houses contain four homes. One off-street parking spot is typically provided per unit. This Missing Middle Housing type is attractive to builders and popular with renters and buyers because the residences feels and looks much like a single-family home. "Considered the holy grail of Missing Middle Housing, very few for-sale fourplexes have been built recently due to many obstacles, and even newly constructed for-rent fourplexes with this stacked configuration are rare," writes Parolek. "Figuring out how to enable and deliver more of these types is critical for cities of all sizes."
Townhouses
Common to old East Coast cities (Boston, Philadelphia, New York), a traditional townhouse features two or more multistory units with shared side walls on both sides. They typically have entries facing a street and a rear yard or small court with detached parking garage or parking area accessed from an alley. Town houses represent the largest-growing percentage of new housing built between 2011 and 2017, far outpacing other Missing Middle types. "The major benefits of townhouses today is that due to their more efficient use of land, small footprints, and shared walls, they can often be built and sold at a price point lower than detached single-family homes," says Parolek. Another benefit: "They can be sold as fee-simple units, meaning the buyer owns the land the unit is on, and they are not stacked, which avoids perceived or actual concerns about privacy and noise."
Live-Work
Sometimes called a "flexhouse" or "flex space," this building type can accommodate a range of nonresidential uses in a downtown neighborhood or a transitional space located between a business district and residential area. "Flex houses enable an owner or renter to start a small business, use the space as an art studio, or rent it to another business to help pay the mortgage," says Parolek. "Cities do not typically have zoning to enable this type because it does not fit easily into either commercial or residential zones. It is best applied in areas where a city currently has zones for medium-density or multifamily residential. The application of this type has been done very poorly in many examples, thus giving the concept a bad reputation."
Courtyard Homes
Consisting of multiple side-by-side or stacked dwelling units, courtyard housing is oriented around a courtyard or series of courtyards. Each unit often has its own individual entry, or up to three units may share a common stoop, stair or entry. Parolek writes: "If the depth of the space along the sidewalk edge is 20 feet or less and is not defined by a privacy wall or element, it should be considered a forecourt. If it is larger than 20 feet deep and/or defined by a privacy wall or element, then it should be considered a courtyard."
Housing Options
Since multi-unit Missing Middle Housing typically has a footprint similar to that of a single-family home, it's easy to integrate it into existing neighborhoods. "Many neighborhoods built prior to the 1940s that people think include primarily single-family detached homes actually have a mix of Missing Middle types," explains Parolek. In the photo above, a single-family house and a small condominium building are neighbors along an urban greenway in Providence, Rhode Island.
70% of Colorado land zoned for housing prohibits the most affordable types of homes
Certain Littleton groups keep pushing a ban on smaller home types (duplexes and townhomes) in our neighborhoods, so to meet the need for homes then what gets built are larger multi-unit building. The Colorado Sun has a great piece on how residential zoning prohibits the most affordable types of homes (the kind people might buy).
You can build a house almost anywhere in Colorado.
You just can’t build one that most people can afford.
That’s the stark takeaway from a landmark zoning report released last month by the National Zoning Atlas, a group of researchers who have spent the last two years conducting a first-of-its-kind study of land use codes across 334 Colorado cities, towns and unincorporated areas.
The group found that on the vast majority of land, in the vast majority of Colorado communities, it’s not just difficult to build housing the average household can afford — it’s outright illegal.
Read the full story on The Sun → coloradosun.com/2025/07/01/national-zoning-atlas-study-colorado-land-use-apartments-townhomes-lot-sizes-parking/
Littleton Independent: Mayor Speaks Out About Referendum Misinformation
Littleton Mayor Kyle Schlachter sets the record straight about a proposed 'anti-missing middle' housing referendum, in this week's Littleton Independent. In addition, he notes, "It is important to note how this petition disrupts good governance. It seeks to freeze land uses across much of our city. The petition’s ambiguous language also creates conflicts with our existing code, city charter, and state law that will lead to lawsuits if it is ultimately successful."
"Firstly, some have suggested that city council attempted to push a housing policy through without community input. This simply is not true. Exploring how Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Missing Middle Housing, such as duplexes and small townhomes, could be included as allowable land uses was actually recommended by our Housing Task Force back in 2023," writes the mayor.
"Secondly, I have heard there are continued concerns that the city council is still imposing unwanted housing into our neighborhoods, leading to the belief that this charter amendment is needed to stop us. I want to reassure you that this is not the case. On January 7, 2025, the council voted to discontinue the 'Neighborhood Housing Opportunities' ordinance in direct response to community feedback. Currently, there are no housing policies being discussed, as we have paused this conversation to listen to community input. In 2026, the next city council may choose to revisit the topic with fresh perspectives and more community guidance," he continues.
"Lastly, it is important to note how this petition disrupts good governance. It seeks to freeze land uses across much of our city. The petition’s ambiguous language also creates conflicts with our existing code, city charter, and state law that will lead to lawsuits if it is ultimately successful. Most importantly, this petition is unnecessary, as there are no immediate housing changes planned, and the city is actively working on improving communication — goals the petition aims to achieve," he closes with a strong argument against the measure.