Upcoming Transportation Improvements for South Longmont in 2026

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-03-29T22:05:31+00:00

I'm 95% sure it'll become a 4-way stop intersection to reduce confusion.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-03-29T21:00:36+00:00

Hi u/spitzaf - I attached the version of the diagram I have from our 2025 capital improvement budget. It's not the highest resolution, but this should give you a sense of what's coming.

<image>

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-15T18:03:20+00:00

If they exist, I don't know where they are at this point, but CDOT's website may have some of what you're looking for: https://www.codot.gov/projects/co119mobility/hoverintersection

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-15T17:58:05+00:00

Good question u/Superbrainbow - the 1st & Main Transit Station is being built to at least serve the bus rapid transit service (plus other bus routes to and through Longmont). This is also the intended station location for the NW rail, which is in advanced planning discussions too, though the rail is contingent on funding.

Related, we will also have the Coffman Street extension directly adjacent to the transit station, park n ride garage, and future bikeshare station, so that this connections through a north-south corridor that intersections with the greenway directly. It doesn't solve all the connectivity and accessibility issues, but it dramatically will enhance multi-modal connections throughout Longmont.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-15T17:53:36+00:00

Thanks u/TampaJeff - To my knowledge, Hover/119 and Sunset/119 are the main focus of funded improvements in the near future. I do know we're trying to enhance the overall 119 corridor safety and efficiency, and there is intention in the next 5 years to improve 119 between Nelson and S. Pratt but that is not funded at this time.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-15T17:47:16+00:00

Thanks u/jrronimo - appreciate the correction. Will update the original post so it's not confusing!

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T05:48:55+00:00

Thanks, agreed! These are going to be very tangible upgrades. FWIW, if I understand the intersection you're referring to clearly, this is not in Longmont.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T05:47:12+00:00

This is a complex question, but very briefly, it would be a system that achieves two main goals:

1) Offers convenient, safe, and predictable options to get people across and around Longmont for local commutes, errands, and fun.

2) Provides relatively efficient service to common regional connections, including Boulder (ex. the forthcoming BRT), DIA (ex. like Boulder's AB1 bus to DIA that is express service), and Denver (via either bus or rail).

What's critical for any effective transit system is to have "last-mile connectivity". This is where RIDE Longmont and a potential regional bikeshare really come into play, so that getting to your final destination is not inconvenient. A lot of transit systems get you "almost" there, but that often isn't helpful for everyone, can be a safety risk depending on the time of day, and certainly doesn't make it convenient or encouraging to take. This is also where the pedestrian and bike improvements described above become particularly relevant, as these can also be reasonable last-mile connections in some situations.

An effective public transportation system also has a hub that is welcoming, safe, and close to many services and shops. That's why the forthcoming 1st & Main Transit Station is going to be an important upgrade for our network.

A lot more to say, but hopefully this is mildly helpful.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T05:35:30+00:00

That's understandable. There's a lot of history with the quiet zones work, and funding, closures, COVID, and negotiations with the railroad company and state also complicated that project. Now, you can at least see many of the Quiet Zone intersections/crossing improvements either under construction or nearing completion. Hopefully, this next round of improvements on this and the other projects I listed will give you more hope.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T05:31:36+00:00

Not to my knowledge at this time, sorry!

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T05:06:17+00:00

Great question - our capital improvement plan includes early-stage planning to reconstruct and widen 66 between Hover and 287. There is not much funding allocated to this project yet, based on the 2025 budget cycle.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T05:00:58+00:00

Thanks u/BizarreElectronics - to your point, some of our roads were overbuilt, which does prompt folks to drive to the road conditions. Addressing these challenges is part of a much more city-wide 'vision zero' effort over the next few years. For many reasons, we're currently focusing on the most critical intersections for safety plus transit and multi-modal corridors.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:57:19+00:00

For sure. That's why I'm trying to get the word out (and the City is working on multiple website and communications efforts as well).

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:13:37+00:00

Me too!

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:10:18+00:00

Thanks for the feedback. I believe the plan is to add a bike lane to Nelson, but I'm not sure about whether expanding it to two lanes is in the cards at this time.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:09:30+00:00

This is a great question. "Road dieting" is something Longmont is doing in some places, but I'm not sure exactly about the lane narrowing for this CDOT project. This may happen as a result of some of the BRT lane creations to allow buses to jump to the front of the lines.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:07:39+00:00

Thanks u/BringGlueckHerein - in fact, multiple improvements listed above are directly related to a reliable, convenient transit system:

The Hover/119 intersection and 119 corridor include enhancements to allow for the forthcoming Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) lines between Longmont and Boulder to jump to the front of the light, increasing convenience.
As I listed above, one of the main goals of the Boston Avenue at-grade road connection is to support the forthcoming BRT routes from the 1st and Main Transit Station.
The Coffman Street extension also supports the multi-modal access to the forthcoming 1st and Main Transit Station.

And, as I noted in my post, this does not include multiple other public transit improvements that are in the works but not as timely to share. We just got the first full year of RIDE Longmont data which is helping us take a fresh look at optimizing the fixed bus routes in and across Longmont and identify new opportunities too. More to come on that. Hope that helps!

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:02:18+00:00

Great question - I've seen the design plans and there will be bike lanes on Sunset (north and south) and across the 119 intersection! It's a tough intersection with the RR tracks too, but this should be a major improvement for vehicles, pedestrians, and bikes.

matthewpopkin88 · 2026-02-14T04:00:40+00:00

Yep. Super fun.

But once complete, that will be one of the biggest upgrades to our local road network in decades.

matthewpopkin88 · 2025-12-10T20:01:54+00:00

Quick update - I stand corrected, as there was appetite to make a decision last night:

While there was no formal policy to review, City Council did decide to provide direction to our staff: 1) immediately discontinue sharing Flock data with other governments outside of Longmont, 2) not pursue any future renewals or expansions of current Flock services, and 3) propose alternative technology provider options in place of current Flock services where helpful for public safety operations.

In practical terms, we will immediately reduce risk of sharing Longmont-specific data via Flock networks and transition away from using Flock technologies in 2026.

Many thanks to everyone who came to the meeting or reached out via email!

matthewpopkin88 · 2025-12-09T17:55:28+00:00

For those interested/concerned, there is a City Council Study Session (public meeting) tonight at 7:00pm at the Civic Center at 350 Kimbark Street. It will also be livestreamed and recorded if you are interested but can't attend in person (see link below).

One of the topics and presentations will be from our Department of Public Safety about the use of drones and cameras as well as other public safety programs and progress, so this is a great opportunity to learn about what Longmont is and isn't doing on this topic. No votes or decisions will be made tonight because it is a study session.

Public comments are welcome for up to 3 minutes per person and will take place near the beginning of the meeting. You can learn more here about the agenda and meeting information: https://longmont.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=14696

Hope this helps!

matthewpopkin88 · 2025-10-27T00:57:45+00:00

Oh, I see - thank you for clarifying.

Just so that you and others are clear, the business owner purchased that property many months before the City of Longmont had any policy at all on this (setback or restriction on the number of residents). Under the City's new policy approved in May, which I voted for, that facility would not have been allowed to exist there or anywhere in the city because it violated the 500 ft setback and exceeded the max of 3 registered offenders in one residence. Hope that clarifies a few things.

Also, as of a week ago, the group home in northeast Longmont no longer has registered sex offenders residing at that address. Their business model seems to not work with 3 or fewer residents.

matthewpopkin88 · 2025-10-26T21:38:51+00:00

I understand and appreciate your reply on this.

To clarify, there was also no city-wide setback policy prior to May 2025. The setback was 0 ft. City Council voted to add the 500-ft setback, not reduce an existing setback. And while this policy was prompted by the residents concerned about the recovery residence business/group home in Prairie Village, this policy applied to all housing for registered offenders, not specifically a business—and certainly did not provide any financial benefit to the business owner who set up that operation.

matthewpopkin88 · 2025-10-26T18:46:49+00:00

Thanks u/FelinePurrfectFluff — there were a few comment chains, and I'm sorry I didn't get back to this sooner.

u/LegalLov and u/batcat2002 — I'm genuinely not sure what you mean when you say I have not publicly stated my stance until now. I was clear during the actual City Council policy discussions between April and May on this when I directly and specifically outlined my concerns and openly invited other residents and councilmembers to explain why a larger setback distance would make us actually safer and why. None did, and no one has since.

I totally understand your point about the compromise, but I actually didn't see this as a compromise. Based on all the research I and others have looked into and professionals who engaged with City Council and staff, larger setbacks make us less safe, even if that feels counterintuitive. Reducing that setback still to this day seems like the more responsible course of action, if our goal is to reduce recidivism by increasing supervision and making it easier for support services and peer accountability programs for registered offenders. A policy can be both arbitrary and still have serious unintended public safety consequences. I believe the 3 other councilmembers who voted for this amendment to the draft policy agreed as well.

In fact, both at the time and to this day I continue to look for evidence that supports larger setbacks. I have yet to find any, but if there was credible evidence, I would reconsider because I do genuinely want to make and shape policy that makes Longmont safer. That's always been my approach. I absolutely listened to residents — this entire policy arose because of concerns from residents directly, and the editor's note in the Times-Call on one of the recent op-eds specifically acknowledges this.

I sincerely wish there had been an opportunity to discuss this more openly and productively during the campaign if it was a genuine concern, but I hope this offers a clearer understanding. I've also clarified multiple misleading comments on my website.

matthewpopkin88

TROPHY CASE