[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,99],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6617174,"mediaKeyId","2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497","parentId",2842965,"title","Residents press Littleton for quick Littleton Boulevard crosswalks; brewery noise and street parking strain nearby blocks","audioSeconds",4196,"startMs",599000,"endMs",4795000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497&start=599&end=4795","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497/thumbnail_599000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6617174/Littleton-City/Arapahoe-County/Colorado/Residents-press-Littleton-for-quick-Littleton-Boulevard-crosswalks-brewery-noise-and-street-parking-strain-nearby-blocks","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617174-24e1f05a3f45e74a55f9cfae94d5001b/orig.mp4?Expires=1771171449&Signature=WzPkvEdj6nHhQnQnxgztRUdcnm1Nn0TZeakImRKNoskp2KrgTZiXINcCf165L9QSsRIawDFy-RdrSrx8N4MjwHQS64TwQxFLhLqrrvRd0ormkCjBZ31-HKv56r8ulJfs153fawAuzB0aNp-OsEifxpgrF7DJXoE68u8e4Fh~F1-cBqNoxGwaUxm2GZPUhQIR2XdDr5LDgKGT7lJtuC1SBnRGlOISvoMd39JCs8Ir4o62gnP1aqy6757zbJggg6qFiEBWUUm1qgZqLh0pJOR9H2wbogBs4cg3fkYQL7khwmDHIy-wYp1idUdQAu1ojI9hA8f9fhXwIYeO6NEngzoqzg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Littleton City, CO","date","2025-04-02T04:32:09.527Z","article","Residents and council members urged the city on April 1 to move more quickly to install safer pedestrian crossings on Littleton Boulevard near the new Littleton Brewing Company and other businesses, and they described secondary problems of noise and overflow parking spilling into adjacent residential blocks.

“Littleton Boulevard has very few crosswalks…people will choose the easiest pathway. And in this instance that is unsafely crossing Littleton Boulevard,” said Keely Quinn, a District 2 resident who asked the council to prioritize a quick fix at the crossing between Gallup and Forest Hill near Lost Coffee and the new brewery. Jose Briones, another resident, recounted seeing people “playing Frogger” at the intersection and said he worried about weekend crossings by people who may have been drinking.

Neighbor Dee Bohm, who lives on Forest Hill Street, said on‑street parking tied to brewery patrons has made daily life more difficult: residents said they now move cars daily to preserve spaces, find privacy reduced, and reported increased litter, dog waste and public urination or vomiting. “Our quiet, peaceful neighborhood is gone,” Bohm said, and urged restricted parking on Forest Hill and better outreach from the business on alternate parking options.

Several speakers and council members connected short‑term safety measures to longer‑term planning for the Littleton Boulevard subarea; Aaron Rosales Burger suggested reviewing shared‑parking rules and conducting a parking survey to unlock off‑street parking capacity so businesses need not rely on neighborhood street parking.

City staff said the transportation planning and engineering team has been on site evaluating the safest location for a potential new crosswalk and expects to return recommendations within weeks. The city manager also said the code compliance team has been working with the brewery on noise and that the police chief is exploring options to increase parking enforcement capacity, including contract solutions to supplement staff.

No formal council action was taken. Council members repeatedly urged staff to act sooner rather than waiting for long‑range subarea planning; staff emphasized that a targeted crosswalk or signalized crossing can be implemented incrementally and does not necessarily preclude a later, larger reconfiguration of the corridor.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","City Council Regular Meeting & Executive Session - 04/01/2025","oneSentenceSummary","Residents and council members urged Littleton to quickly add pedestrian crossings on Littleton Boulevard near the new Littleton Brewing Company, and raised related complaints about parking overflow and noise affecting adjacent neighborhoods.","taxTitle","Littleton City, Arapahoe County, Colorado","taxId",52180,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6617179,"Trailmark residents urge Littleton for immediate police patrols and traffic enforcement after weekend break‑ins",2161,969000,3130000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497&start=969&end=3130","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497/thumbnail_969000.jpg","/articles/6617179/Littleton-City/Arapahoe-County/Colorado/Trailmark-residents-urge-Littleton-for-immediate-police-patrols-and-traffic-enforcement-after-weekend-breakins","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617179-17693fea81beb18d6e9e46a3bd7fba77/orig.mp4?Expires=1771171449&Signature=ayBD7PNceJoCKv29gcuM2dNU20RR3DqqolvzNaSQTR60KV~0cMY5Rsr5s-vkFOMQjYhMSFA4wVCJJF0uTvvWV0~fGe2hk5bKZeWgyJ3erBHLGMe0rF0mfYXtaCH8orZnCxOUMpIZJTcLl1sCFTe2Nww1zNRKtMSYEydWnoKT5KH03NVeDL2CklgaWSzQZvuLGCPLyDr5t7C0vYrMXcpP-MgMpN-Ylsw-x9E-5adSAwfozQsIH4t30mbJRVOuxtX2ZmhQXuX6Aa93FaFWvx0~XN5lXqwTg8I9xIlV42FTrdlMmkTDdcAnheDWbIvLevylQu3sUhSvj9OLYCj3mQsxhw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents from the Trailmark neighborhood told Littleton City Council on April 1 that a string of vehicle and garage break‑ins over a single weekend has left neighbors shaken and asking for immediate, sustained police presence and targeted traffic enforcement.

“Several cars and a homeowner's garage were broken into…one block had six cars that were broken into,” said Ken Cooley Z, who identified himself as the HOA president for Trailmark. He said a visiting veteran lost a laptop, cash and medication and a homeowner lost a $6,500 mountain bike. “We want consistent, frequent, reliable and prominent police services,” Cooley said.

James Olsen, a Trailmark resident who identified himself as a parent, said the break‑ins had frightened his 7‑year‑old daughter and urged the city to adopt a strategic, proactive policing posture rather than a reactive one. “I'm asking for…people there when the buses pick up,” Olsen said, describing five incidents he has tallied of cars speeding through his daughter's bus stop.

City staff and the mayor acknowledged the neighborhood concerns. The city manager and police chief were reported as working with the HOA, and the city manager said the police department had stepped up patrols in the area and would continue to review data to determine appropriate, sustainable patrol levels. Staff encouraged residents to report active crimes to the Littleton Police Department at (303) 794‑1551; the city also directed residents to the SeeClickFix portal for non‑emergency reporting such as graffiti.

Speakers also asked for greater traffic enforcement in neighborhoods where children wait for school buses. Several residents described repeated high‑speed passings at bus stops and called for officers to be present during pick‑up and drop‑off times and at random early‑morning hours when thefts have occurred.

No formal action or vote was taken at the meeting; the city reported stepped‑up patrols and that the police department will continue to coordinate with the HOA on patrol levels and targeted enforcement.","Trailmark residents described multiple vehicle and garage break‑ins over one weekend and asked Littleton to increase visible police patrols and targeted traffic enforcement at school bus stops. City staff said the police have stepped up patrols and will continue to evaluate response levels.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6617184,"Residents press Littleton to stop planned concrete paving of Mineral Spur Trail; city warns changes could jeopardize funding",2302,775000,3077000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497&start=775&end=3077","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497/thumbnail_775000.jpg","/articles/6617184/Littleton-City/Arapahoe-County/Colorado/Residents-press-Littleton-to-stop-planned-concrete-paving-of-Mineral-Spur-Trail-city-warns-changes-could-jeopardize-funding","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617184-f9871f4551a1241e1ee989af41cb1e15/orig.mp4?Expires=1771171449&Signature=BfF7gUQq9-4u0qMTnBZ-ogak5M~nn9AIwO4uq2LDVDqlwSwo6KJKnWnyEdpUygWqKzUZIMEPVr2MQrq56I6dgMjaRRLTro7b9q50bPzJXZs5WWOPbmMxw8FsgcC~t7B818AuA-1rJqst1hNqZDImNs0HXYoCW6FursDymZ5k8L-1~VjVbfXEh23jOYKBvXQFp8dEQYs9J2rFw1UQnm311aUJQ0K25bWTXyvEjbh274l8KmChJKMscZhtIlQcRIgUzLZXvjNiUCWeo3V80E7rxHq3Rs85XghjXrKz6hBXN9mmM9nPmB4Ec0H-ILaVPVbcfE7RjFZn-IEIyReQUL6QhQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Residents and trail users asked the Littleton City Council on April 1 to halt plans to pave the Mineral Spur Trail and to adopt a dual-surface design that would keep a soft-surface path for pedestrians while adding a separate hard surface for cyclists and other users.

“Please don't keep saying it's too late to stop the paving project,” said Mark Flank, who described walking the corridor and finding a proposed 16-foot-wide concrete swath “absurd” in the open-space setting. Ned Stern told council the current plan would “destroy 0.7 miles of the railroad spur trail” and cited a city staff estimate that concrete work for the project would cost $750,000 with an additional $200,000 to widen an adjacent concrete path, for a combined concrete cost of about $950,000.

The push from speakers — which included Trailmark and District 4 residents, a civil engineer and other specialists who met with staff — focused on preserving the trail’s soft-surface character and avoiding what they described as a “landing strip” feel. Frank Atwood asked the council to issue a change order deleting the paving for the spur segment of phase 1, use CDOT funds on other phase‑1 work, and direct the phase‑2 consultant to review designs with public input.

City staff and the city manager told council that the project is funded through multiple partners and that making a change now could jeopardize approval and the funding package. The city manager said the current funding ratio is approximately four to five to one (non‑city dollars to city dollars) and warned that design changes would take many months and risk losing that leveraged funding. Staff said the project includes intersection safety improvements at Jackass Hill and Mineral and other mobility benefits that factor into the grant approvals.

No formal council action or vote to change the project was taken at the meeting. City staff said they will continue discussions with partner agencies, including South Suburban Parks and Recreation, and that they intend to work toward preserving crusher‑fin (soft) trails where possible during future coordination once partners have stable leadership in place.

Speakers emphasized that the dispute is not about stopping all mobility work in the Mineral corridor but about how the spur trail segment is surfaced. Several speakers proposed a dual‑surface approach that would add a crusher‑fine path alongside the new pavement so soft‑surface users would retain an option.

City staff asked the public to continue providing input and reiterated that changes at this stage risk losing outside funding and delaying the safety improvements included in the project.

What happens next: staff said they will continue coordination with funding partners and South Suburban Parks and Recreation and will report back to council; no schedule for a revised public design or change order was announced.","Residents and trail users urged Littleton officials to halt plans to replace the unpaved Mineral Spur Trail with a 16-foot concrete path, proposing a dual-surface alternative. City staff and the city manager said altering the plan now could risk state and partner funding and delay the project.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6617169,"Littleton City Council backs construction‑defects bill, opposes five state measures that would preempt local authority",0,5288000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497&start=5288&end=5288","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2842965-468c2fa667e80d6dcd76690a9432c497/thumbnail_5288000.jpg","/articles/6617169/Littleton-City/Arapahoe-County/Colorado/Littleton-City-Council-backs-constructiondefects-bill-opposes-five-state-measures-that-would-preempt-local-authority","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6617169-b1749f0468b338177bedc04e23f1b3c8/orig.mp4?Expires=1771171449&Signature=Ibr5kmA2i2fQDVHUNpzDKeL8r~O00nliozVxa3~UfnWn97sXhOVQJBr5v8QouFJsFLIpbCTZR8llhJcBFwU38NzkHh7q2O6LzFXqIaI~0pDMZ~I9o6vT--K4JrCszfk-GJMoW2sP5jzQv1lc2ZEkNjAVNC6S0lNfk2RH9YVkiIBp2SAGnBu-WRFEaIKYxltPOIeNtniCfmpUdsHgPZO53ym5uMNqdOhbQxwcP6n3ucm0w4jH-56hTgyCZuGPhFSf~IKfOMF1tr2szuGqnur7sgNHtj~1T9Pdp5L5Eldp8pacKbqs2M~0DCHzQK8Ca9Ti5WhypL3PzXl9tuDpwSofpA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Littleton City Council on April 1 voted to take positions on several bills moving through the Colorado legislature, supporting one bill meant to address construction‑defect claims and opposing five measures the council said would encroach on local authority or create operational problems for the city.

Council supported a resolution backing House Bill 25‑1272, described by staff as changes to construction‑defect law intended to make filing class claims more challenging and to encourage remedies and mitigation before litigation. The council voted unanimously in favor of the resolution.

The council adopted opposing resolutions on the following bills:

- Senate Bill 25‑1 (Colorado Voting Rights Act as drafted): Council opposed the bill unless its municipal provisions are removed and provisions are applied only at the state level. The council expressed concern that the measure could force municipalities to align local election timing or procedures with state elections and could impose new mandates and translation/ reporting costs; the resolution passed unanimously.

- House Bill 25‑1056 (local government permitting for wireless telecommunications facilities): Council opposed a proposal that would deem permits approved if a local government did not act within a set time, arguing that the bill would grant preferential administrative treatment to a single industry; the resolution passed unanimously.

- House Bill 25‑1060 (electronic fence detection systems): Council opposed legislation that would classify an electric fence/detection system in ways the city said could create safety, aesthetic and home‑rule issues; the resolution passed unanimously.

- House Bill 25‑1147 (fairness and transparency in municipal court): Council opposed aspects of the bill that would prescribe sentencing and penalty maxima for municipal courts and could shift caseloads to county courts; the council voted unanimously to oppose the bill.

- House Bill 25‑1169 (housing development on faith/educational lands): The council voted to oppose the bill, arguing state preemption of local land‑use authority is inappropriate; the measure passed with a 5–2 vote (two members recorded as voting no).

Each resolution was introduced, seconded and voted on at the April 1 meeting. The motions carried as recorded in the meeting minutes: most opposition resolutions passed unanimously; the housing‑on‑faith‑lands resolution passed 5–2. Council members expressed a mix of support for expanding housing opportunities and concern about state preemption of local land‑use control.

Votes at a glance:
- Resolution 31‑2025 — Support HB 25‑1272 (construction defects/middle housing): Approved, vote 7–0.
- Resolution 24‑2025 — Oppose SB 25‑1 (Colorado Voting Rights Act as drafted): Approved, vote 7–0.
- Resolution 30‑2025 — Oppose HB 25‑1056 (wireless permitting time‑limits): Approved, vote 7–0.
- Resolution 28‑2025 — Oppose HB 25‑1060 (electronic fence detection systems): Approved, vote 7–0.
- Resolution 26‑2025 — Oppose HB 25‑1147 (municipal court fairness/transparency): Approved, vote 7–0.
- Resolution 25‑2025 — Oppose HB 25‑1169 (housing development on faith/education lands): Approved, vote 5–2 (two members recorded as voting no).

Council did not take any implementing legislative actions beyond passing the resolutions; staff said they will transmit the council's positions to the state legislature and monitor the bills for amendments and next steps.","On April 1 the Littleton City Council voted to support House Bill 25‑1272 (construction defects/middle housing) and adopted resolutions opposing six other state bills that council members said would infringe on local home‑rule authority or create operational challenges for municipal courts, permitting, and other city functions.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Residents press Littleton for quick Littleton Boulevard crosswalks; brewery noise and street parking strain nearby blocks

Trailmark residents urge Littleton for immediate police patrols and traffic enforcement after weekend break‑ins

Residents press Littleton to stop planned concrete paving of Mineral Spur Trail; city warns changes could jeopardize funding

Littleton City Council backs construction‑defects bill, opposes five state measures that would preempt local authority