Rooted In Littleton 2025 Housing Policy Survey

Magellan Strategies is pleased to present the topline results of an online survey of 1,197 registered voters in Littleton, Colorado. The interviews were conducted from March 6th to 11th, 2025. The survey data were weighted to represent the voter registration demographics for the City of Littleton.

Magellan Strategies conducted an online survey of 1,197 registered voters in Littleton, Colorado, on behalf of Rooted in Littleton, with interviews fielded from March 6 to March 11, 2025. The survey carried a margin of error of +/- 2.79% and was weighted to match the city’s voter registration demographics. Two MMS text invitations were sent to 27,992 cell phone numbers, 1,586 respondents initiated the survey, and 1,197 completed it, yielding a completion rate of 75.4% and an overall response rate of 5.6%. Rooted in Littleton commissioned the project after concluding that the city’s own 2024 housing outreach was insufficient and skewed toward City Council insiders.

Littleton voters were closely split on whether a housing shortage even existed. Just under half, 49%, said the city had a housing shortage, while 42% said it did not and 9% were unsure. When asked how serious the issue was, 46% described it as a big or somewhat of a problem combined, while a comparable share saw it as either not too much of a problem, 17%, or not a problem at all, 24%. In their open-ended answers, many respondents opposed high-density and high-rise housing in single-family neighborhoods, suggested directing growth to other communities, favored repurposing vacant buildings, and argued that supply and demand rather than government intervention should guide housing.

On the central policy question, voters opposed increasing housing density. A majority of 54% opposed policies to raise density in some neighborhoods, with 43% strongly opposed, while 44% supported such policies. When the idea was framed as adding density only with neighborhood consent or near transportation corridors, 45% still rejected the viewpoint outright, though a combined group supported it under conditional circumstances.

Voters were deeply skeptical that added density would deliver the long-term benefits the city had cited. Only 44% believed it would lower housing prices, and just 20% thought it would reduce traffic and congestion, against 77% who said it would not. Skepticism extended to the other claimed benefits as well: 62% doubted it would reduce homelessness, 65% rejected the idea that it would cut carbon emissions, 60% disputed any wildfire-risk reduction, and 54% did not believe it would add trees or open space.

A proposed ordinance encouraging duplexes, triplexes, and quadplexes in areas zoned for single-family homes drew narrow opposition, with 51% opposed and 47% in support. Support shifted depending on where density would be allowed. A majority, 53%, supported density on undeveloped or distressed land, and 56% supported it in communities that had voted for it. Support fell to 48% within one block of major corridors and to 44% within two blocks, and dropped sharply to 33% when the location would be left to the discretion of the City Council and planners, who faced 59% opposition.

Open-ended responses reinforced these patterns. Many voters supported redeveloping blighted or underused sites such as Aspen Grove, Southwest Plaza, and Columbine Square, and some favored density near light rail and commercial hubs to support walkable communities. A strong and recurring theme, however, was resistance to density in established single-family neighborhoods, citing traffic, parking, crime, lost character, and overcrowded schools, alongside calls for case-by-case planning and meaningful community input.

When the question turned to voters’ own neighborhoods, opposition grew firmer. A clear majority of 61% opposed a significant rezoning of their own neighborhood to allow more density, with 53% strongly opposed. A majority, 57%, also agreed that changing zoning to permit duplexes, triplexes, or quadplexes in single-family areas would disregard homeowners’ rights, including 41% who strongly agreed. On process, voters overwhelmingly wanted a direct say: 76% preferred that ordinances affecting more than 10% of the city’s housing units be decided by a ballot measure election rather than by a City Council vote, which only 16% favored.

Demographically, the sample was 52% female and 48% male, and ranged across age groups, with the largest shares aged 18 to 34 at 29% and 65 or older at 25%. Unaffiliated voters made up 49% of respondents, followed by Democrats at 26% and Republicans at 23%. The sample was 85% White, 63% held a four-year college degree, and 38% had lived in Littleton for more than 20 years. Homeowners accounted for 67% of respondents and renters for 30%, and reported family incomes spanned the full range, with 19% reporting $100,000 to $149,999.