Study Session
May 9, 2006
Recorded by Carol Brzeczek

There were three items on the agenda.

Tri Cities River Corridor Project
Permit Parking in Residential Areas
Street Maintenance on Private Streets In Littleton

1. Tri Cities River Corridor Project

Susan Beckman, Arapahoe County Commissioner, gave a presentation to council about the possibility of Littleton joining with Englewood and Sheridan to acquire open space along the Platte River. All three cities are facing redevelopment and high density and it is not going to stop. Now is the time to get this project underway. Sheridan and Englewood are on board. The County is willing to take on the role of facilitator. She thinks the state would be generous with grant money if the three cities were working together.

Shannon Carter said that there had been a number of plans and studies but the question is how do we implement? With the tri-cities together, along with South Suburban, talent and finances can be leveraged. Not only are they talking about the open space but protecting the water quality and the trail development. There are other organizations that are willing to participate.

The discussion focused on the acquisition of private land for public use. Littleton doesn’t have that much to purchase – Englewood has more obstacles.

There is an advisory board that is only 2 years old that will identify grants and opportunities to develop the river corridor.

Dave Lorenz, from South Suburban, said the time is now and he was pleased to hear the conversation and thought it should have a high priority. He said not to worry about higher density but to worry about the design and form. He said money isn’t an issue. There’s plenty of money in the Conservation Trust Fund and based on growth rate and lottery funds there could be $67 million available in the next five years with matching grant money from the Colorado Great Outdoors.

Jim Taylor said he would like to represent the council on this project.

Cronenberger wanted to know about how they would go about the project – would we be delineating certain parcels of land? She was told that they would look at an existing plan for each jurisdiction and identify 10 to 15 properties that they know they could acquire that would significantly contribute to the vision, 10-15 properties that they would like to have but have a secondary priority. They have done this before and have been very successful.

There was a discussion about the future of the Chatfield Reservoir – the capacity will be increased by 100%, which will increase the water flow on the Platte River. There will be enough flow to promote fly-fishing and boating. There is a need for more east-west access on pathways too.

There was no opposition to the idea at this time.

2. Permit Parking in Residential Areas

Currently there is only one place in Littleton where parking by permit only is allowed and that is around Heritage High School.

There have been a number of complaints from various areas in Littleton where the homeowners are unable to park in front of their own homes because other citizens are parking their vehicles before catching light rail, or walking across Broadway to their jobs at the auto dealerships, or students parking around Littleton High School. The city staff was asking for direction.

Cronenberger wanted to know why the city had been hesitant on parking permits in the past. Management and enforcement have been the obstacles.

Charlie Blosten told council that this is a problem that will continue although time takes care of some problems. However, light rail has been here for six years and it is time to look at the problem citywide. There are times when a non-residential use has a negative impact on residents.

It was stated that South Park residents are really impacted. Students don’t mind walking to catch light rail downtown and when RTD starts charging for parking it will get worse.

There was a discussion about how the program works in the HHS area.

Ostermiller was concerned that with the increased areas of permit only parking the enforcement would not be available and citizens would expect it to be.

Cronenberger said she thought it was no different than the animal control officer – if the animal control officer is not on duty then a patrol officer is sent when available. Why would this be any different?

Craig Faessler, Traffic Engineer, told them that the 2-hour permit would be more difficult to enforce.

Cronenberger told them that she had attended a conference on parking and there is a high cost associated with parking. When you go to a permit no one parks there anymore; then there is empty space where someone could park. Some neighborhoods are selling permits for their neighborhoods with the funds going to the HOAs. She was interested in other solutions and suggested that the citizens requesting the permits get with the HHS citizens and see what creative options they could come up with.

Kast wanted to move forward with an ordinance now.

There was a discussion on how you determine how much of the neighborhood you include in the area, who gets a say so and what happens when you disallow parking in one area and the cars just move to another.

Taylor thought that neighborhoods would expect enforcement if they went to permit only parking and it would be a waste of resources for trained police to enforce parking.

Conklin wants a long-term solution and that is why she likes Cronenberger’s plan. It is worthwhile to get the citizens involved in the discussion before writing the ordinance. The ordinance could identify some ways to deal with the problem.

Kast wanted a broader ordinance and is looking for a quicker fix. We either allow permit only parking or we don’t. The people in South Park have been waiting for a long time.

Clark thought the real problem was the inadequate parking in the cases sited and that problem should be addressed and fixed where it can be fixed.

Kast said they let it happen at HHS and we need to let it happen again.
Council was asked if it would be helpful to see sample ordinances from other cities. Cronenberger said, “No, I don’t want to read a bunch of ordinances” we either decide for or against permit only parking.

Ostermiller, again, wanted to know who was going to enforce it. If we do something we have to enforce it.

Cronenberger said we need to get ahead of this because RTD will be charging for parking in the near future.

3. Street Maintenance on Private Streets In Littleton

Coventry has asked the city to make street repairs on their private streets and charge them accordingly. Currently the city does the street sweeping and does provide law enforcement for those communities. The sweeping is not time consuming and an easy task.

The council was provided a list of all the private streets in Littleton and the discussion focused on what would happen if everyone asked for the same service as Coventry.

Blosten told the council that he would be in a deep hole – his crews would not be able to keep up. To make the long story short, council decided that it would be alright if the areas with private streets wanted to “piggy back” on contract bids that the city has and that they be allowed to do so as long as the city was not billed for the service.

That way those HOAs etc. could benefit by our low negotiated rate. However, the city was not in a position to do any R&M using the city’s staff on those same streets.

There was a vote with Kast, Clark, Mulvey and Cronenberger voting No to providing R&M to private streets in Littleton.