A Littleton group has collected enough signatures to force a vote on the city’s proposal to allow multiplexes, duplexes and similar housing options in communities zoned for single-family homes.

Critics of the push for housing “density” argue that it would change the character of single-family home neighborhoods, diminish property values and undercut what homebuyers thought they were getting when they purchased their houses.

Proponents counter that the proposal will provide more affordable housing options in a competitive market.

The Littleton City Council indefinitely postponed the matter at a meeting in January.

Rooted in Littleton, a group which opposes the city’s proposal, turned in more than 2,000 signatures, enough for the question to appear on the Nov. 4 ballot. The city clerk’s office still needs to validate the signatures.

“The overwhelming response from residents shows how deeply people care about protecting the integrity of their neighborhoods,” Rooted in Littleton President Tammy Whitney said in a statement. “This amendment empowers residents to have a clear voice in future land use decisions.”

The ballot initiative seeks to “preserve single-family residential land use” and ensure that current and future property owners can rely on the existing land use restrictions.

The amendment freezes such land uses according to what’s in place as of Jan. 1, 2025. It also requires notifying all affected property owners of any action by the City Council to rezone their land.

The city is pushing to allow for the construction of multiplexes within communities zoned as single-family homes and ease requirements for accessible dwelling units (ADUs) — the so-called “granny flats.” Those housing types would include duplexes, small-lot residential complex units, three-to-four-unit townhomes, multiplexes and “cottage court communities.”

“We want an opportunity to vote on a massive change, like adding duplexes, triplexes and quadruplexes into every single family neighborhood that exists in Littleton,” Mark Harris of Rooted in Littleton told The Denver Gazette.

“If that’s what the City Council wants to pursue,” he said, “we want notice. We want an opportunity to vote on it.”

“This gives us basically a two-year time to send the message, get together with the council, figure out a smart solution to density to the extent it exists,” Harris said.

Proponents have argued that the move would help address the town’s lack of housing options. Back in 2017, Littleton officials said the city needs 6,550 housing units over the next couple of decades.

“The housing options that the city is considering, or was considering, are the kind of homes that young families are looking for when they want to move to a neighborhood where they could live in a smaller place,” Patrick Santana, a Littleton planning commissioner and member of the group Littleton Grows Together, told The Denver Gazette.

Santana balked at Rooted in Littleton’s push for a public vote, arguing it is a “one-sided demand” that “precludes further conversation.”

“Their solution isn’t to actually find a way to address that shortage of homes,” Santana said, “but it’s to kind of preserve the status quo and roll it back to January as if that’s some solution.”

Jane Brennan of Rooted in Littleton suggested an alternative — to develop other areas, instead of already-existing, single-family home neighborhoods.

“Our focus is, let’s go back and look for distressed areas, blighted areas, commercial zones that are along the (Regional Transportation District), so that there’s greater walkability,” Brennan said.

“This isn’t NIMBYism,” she added. “We are for intelligent, sustainable, affordable growth, not just opening up our entire city to mass development.”

In an emailed statement to The Denver Gazette, Littleton Mayor Kyle Schlachter said the issue has become “quite frustrating,” calling Rooted in Littleton’s efforts “vague at best and unconstitutional at worst.”

“This petition goes completely against the idea of working collaboratively over the next few years to reevaluate and revise the housing policy,” he said, adding the ballot campaign “effectively attempts to end that dialogue.”

During a Tuesday night study session, Littleton City Attorney Reid Betzing outlined concerns over “ambiguities” with the ballot language, questioning whether or not it’s constitutional.

Betzing said the proposed charter amendment is retroactive to laws already in place.

“Changing your city charter is difficult, time consuming and expensive,” Betzing said, adding the charter needs to fully comply with Colorado law.

The city attorney suggested alternatives, such as drafting an ordinance that would require “expanding the notification process” for Littleton residents. Councilmembers expressed interest in doing an ordinance instead of a charter amendment.

“If the petition is ultimately certified and placed on the ballot,” Schlachter said, “I am hopeful that our community can have a robust and honest discussion about what this charter amendment would ultimately mean to our residents, to our businesses, and to our city overall.”