Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Author : Lakewood News from Karen

Limiting New Gas Stations

Lakewood passed a new ordinance to reduce new gas stations in order to increase public health, January 13, 2025. Not only will this decrease the number of future gas stations, the ordinance demands the new gas stations provide electric charging stations, one of which must be the latest, fastest technology. This is will substantially increase the cost to construct a new gas station while benefitting a diminishing number of customers who are purchasing electric vehicles. Lakewood also eliminated two zoning codes from permitting gas stations. If Lakewood’s plans to bring in thousands more residents through affordable housing efforts pay off, everyone in Lakewood can anticipate waiting longer in lines. Gas stations are one of the few businesses that are still thriving in Lakewood. Rather than re-inventing the wheel, please read the article below for more of the adverse effects of similar legislation in Denver. In another parallel move, Denver passed the same legislation as Lakewood, a week before Lakewood voted (correction 1/15/25 – Denver’s ordinance only passed to committee) Lakewood’s ordinance is more extreme than Denver’s because of Lakewood’s market manipulation in demanding charging stations, even dictating the type of stations, but otherwise the legislation is similar. The adverse effects were not discussed by Council. Sharf: Denver gas station ban a swipe at car mobility January 13, 2025 By Joshua Sharf, Complete Colorado Denver city councilors last summer proposed to limit the construction of gasoline stations in in the city, ostensibly in response to a citizen outcry a deluge of new gas stations being built on land that could instead be used for housing. Actual legislation has now been okayed by the city planning board, and is worse than imagined. A sweeping ban The ordinance would enjoin new gas stations from the overwhelming majority of Denver, including near areas where new, higher-density housing is being built.  It is hard to escape the conclusion that the proposed legislation is part of the city council’s campaign to make driving in Denver as miserable as possible. Sponsored by council members Paul Kashmann and Amanda Sawyer, the bill would ban new gas stations within ¼ mile of any existing gas station, within ¼ mile of a light rail station, and within 300 feet of any protected districts, zoned for low-density housing. A staff study from last May discussed exempting gas stations catty-corner to existing stations, but now there will be no such exemption.  There will, however, be an exemption for gas stations that are part of new large-sized grocery stores with over 20,000 square feet of space. Read more…

Lakewood to help fund major development at 6th and Union

On January 22, 2025, the Lakewood Planning Commission will vote on designating a new development area as an Urban Renewal. This designation will allow the city to fund part of the development. The development in question is called “The Bend” and is located on what used to be the Denver Federal Center, southeast of the 6th and Union intersection. The property includes an ex-Superfund site that has not been remediated. However, the property was not blighted before the property sale, when all buyers could plan for city assistance. Instead, the area was deemed a prime location for commercial activity, according to comprehensive and special studies. Once again, Lakewood has contracted a study to prove to the residents that they have no choice except to do what is really a discretionary action. The study by Ricker Cunningham shows that “the survey concluded that nine (9) of the 11 total possible factors [for blight] are present at varying degrees of intensity, but all at levels considered adverse to properties, businesses, and persons living, working, and traveling through the area.” Read the study: The study is some research but more justification for what the city apparently wants to do. There is no explanation from anyone about why it wasn’t blighted anytime in the last 30-50 years since the site was decommissioned. An earlier designation would have created a more equal playing field for those bidding on the property, in the name of full disclosure. As it stands, it seems that one developer is getting a special deal. The study even documents that the Planning Commission meeting is a foregone conclusion: “… in addition to the public hearing (February 24, 2025), were scheduled, noticed, and conducted. Specifically, the Authority considered the Plan on XXXXXXX at a duly noticed meeting, and the Planning Commission reviewed the same on January 22, 2025, where they determined it to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.“ – Study, pg 8 Jefferson County, City of Lakewood, Jefferson County School District R-1, West Metro Fire Protection District, and Mile High Flood District have already negotiated tax assessment and revenue agreements, prior to the public hearing. “It is the intention of City Council in adopting this Urban Renewal Plan that the [Lakewood Reinvestment] Authority has available to it any and all powers authorized in the Act and considered necessary and appropriate to implement this Plan.  Because powers conferred by the Act include facilitating the completion of improvements for which public money may be expended, the intentions of this Plan are considered to be in the public interest and a necessity, such finding being a matter of legislative determination by City Council with its adoption.” – Study, pg 9 Lakewood May Pay for Site De-Contamination Is this prime location for commercial activity really an area of blight? Debatable since it is called both prime and deteriorated in city documents but without this blight designation, Lakewood cannot fund the development. “Union Boulevard has grown over the years and has achieved recognition as a prime location for business” – Union Boulevard Corridor Plan To qualify for a blight designation, the site has been deemed deteriorated. This property was a federal military site that contains a toxic landfill. The study says the city may pay for old infrastructure and decontamination. Is the city signing up to pay for environmental remediation? Or is that only useful for designation purposes. So far no one has suggested actually decontaminating the site. Instead, the proposal is silent with respect to current plans but in the past the intention was to build over the hard parts. In the quote below, the bold is the blight condition, and the suggested city contribution follows. “Deterioration of site or other improvements – removal of trash, remnant infrastructure, weeds, and contaminants;” – Study, pg 11 Many of the conditions of so-called “blight” mean that the property is undeveloped. For example, to read this report, any property without a water line, or a street without curbs should be blighted. “Existence of conditions that endanger life or property by fire or other causes – fire protection equipment, water lines, and storage facilities to ensure adequate flow;” – Study, pg 11 Since these are all conditions of an undeveloped property, and the developer bought the property knowing this and is now asking for the property to be blighted so the city can contribute, the question is: how much did the city promise the developer before purchase? How much did the developer plan on receiving? Did they ever plan on doing this on their own? The primary purpose of the plan is to allow the city to spend money “the first objectives of any and all urban renewal plans is to provide the municipality with a workable program for expending available resources to mitigate and prevent the spread of blight, foster needed rehabilitation of improvements within designated locations, and advance community priorities expressed in adopted policy and planning documents.”-  Study, pg 9 Contrary to what may sound like an innocuous renewal area recommendation, this is a major commitment to develop an environmentally sensitive area, with contentious high-density homes in an already congested traffic area. The plan aims to “advance community priorities,” which is a very subjective statement. The plans refer to designs started in 2008. Think of how much traffic has increased since then. The 2017 traffic study says traffic allowances will be needed and makes several recommendations, see below, which the city will also pay for. Current plans for the Union corridor are based on the layout of Portland, Oregon to increase density and walkability (see page 30). The new walkability plan completely rewrites the original city plan and block layout of a previous generation. The current plan also claims to be written for the next 50 years but is evidence that 50-year planning is difficult at best. This plan is a complete overhaul and urbanization of the Lakewood people here love. Do residents want to partner with developers to build 2000 units near an unremediated toxic

Littleton indefinitely postpones ordinance for multi-unit homes after packed meeting

Note: This is pertinent to Lakewood because Lakewood is trying for exactly the same kind of high-density, multi-unit homes. They have already contracted new codes to be written, and it’s scheduled to be voted on this spring. This is not a resident-led iniative but a regionally coordinated agenda. From Rachel Saurer, KDVR.com LITTLETON, Colo. (KDVR) — On Tuesday (7 Jan), the city of Littleton held a public hearing to allow people to provide feedback on a proposal to amend Littleton’s Unified Land Use Code regarding housing types. At the end of the meeting, city officials made the decision to indefinitely postpone the ordinance. “Our goal is to see if we can address some of the housing issues that we have here in Littleton and the whole metro area,” said Mayor Kyle Schlachter. Read more and watch video…

Terumo BCT draft permit modification open for public comment until Feb. 6, 2024

via reader notification – thank you! The CDPHE Air Pollution Control Division is actively working with Terumo BCT to further reduce ethylene oxide emissions. A draft permit modification for Terumo BCT to install and operate additional devices to reduce ethylene oxide emissions from the facility is now available on the division’s website. Terumo BCT currently uses a device known as a “dry scrubber” to reduce ethylene oxide emissions. The proposed permit modifications would allow Terumo to use a new control device called a “thermal catalytic oxidizer abatement plant” as its primary emissions control. The dry scrubber would then serve as a backup control.   The draft permit is open for public comment from January 7, 2025 – February 6, 2025. Division staff will review all public comments received and use relevant comments to inform the permit updates. The permit is available on the division’s air permit public notices web page. That web page has details and tips for submitting effective public comments. Terumo BCT has indicated new control equipment could be fully operational in early 2025. Once the equipment is fully operational, Terumo BCT would have to test ethylene oxide emissions to ensure it meets the permit requirements. These tests would use U.S. EPA-approved methods to evaluate emissions reductions.   More air quality monitoring around Terumo BCT  The air division conducts its own air quality monitoring around Terumo BCT and will continue doing so after the new equipment is in place. The division will make this data available to the public on its website once it has undergone quality control assurance and review. The division will use this information to inform its ongoing work protecting clean air in Colorado’s communities. New regulations and proposals that apply to Terumo’s emissions of ethylene oxide March 2024 federal ethylene oxide rule Terumo BCT must comply with the U.S. EPA’s new rule to reduce harmful ethylene oxide emissions and exposures. This new rule applies to four commercial medical sterilization facilities in Colorado, including Terumo BCT. The federal rule is expected to reduce ethylene oxide emissions at these facilities. Learn more on EPA’s website. Ethylene oxide proposed as priority air toxic in Colorado From January 16-17, 2025, the Air Quality Control Commission will hold a rulemaking hearing on a proposal to identify up to five priority air toxics in Colorado. Ethylene oxide is one of the five priority air toxics proposed for commission consideration. After the commission determines priority air toxics, Colorado will then work to establish health-based standards for each one through a separate rulemaking later in 2025. This is one of the requirements under Colorado’s Public Protections from Toxic Air Contaminants Act. The division developed the draft proposal with input from monitoring and modeling data, the public, and a technical working group of scientific experts. The division may propose adding more priority air toxics in the future. You can register to offer a verbal public comment or listen to the January 2025 rulemaking hearing. A registration link to listen or offer verbal public comment is available on the commission’s website.  Contact us To submit permit comments, visit the division’s air permit public notices web page. You may contact us anytime at the following email addresses:

An Unused Strategy to Housing Affordability

From SaveBelmarPark.com Have you noticed that Lakewood City Council has dug in pretty deep on their pretend parkland ordinance crisis and their related commitment to litigation and media manipulation over their job which is legislation to address the issues they created?  We hope a more constructive attitude eventually emerges on city council. In fact, we noticed the other day a Lakewood resident and attorney popped up on TV news with an issue that Lakewood wants 1,300 square feet of parkland dedication to allow her ranch home to be leveled and a new home built. While this nice lady made some excellent points, the news reporting seemed to implicate the thousands of good citizens of Lakewood who brought forward the fee-in-lieu removal ordinance for causing the problem as if City Council has no authority or responsibility to consider any useful changes to the ordinance they adopted. I did take the liberty of contacting her architect from their public email address and suggesting that City Council is authorized to address her concerns.  I had previously communicated that information to the reporter but apparently some facts are not news. Read the full email here… And read more about the housing design strategy already used in Europe here…to learn about

Some Coloradans in Lakewood concerned about voter turnout in upcoming special election

 By Andrew Haubner, CBS News Note: Thank you Andrew Haubner for shining a light on Lakewood in time for people to learn about the special election! The election will be held before March 25, 2025. Some residents of the municipality of Lakewood are concerned about the possibility of low turnout in an upcoming special election. There are two city council seats, Ward 3 and Ward 4 — two of the largest wards in Lakewood — that are up for grabs this year. Council member Rich Olver, who was known as a dissenting voice on the council, resigned and moved to Arizona. Resident Karen Morgan said his voice was needed in the face of a council that typically is in lockstep.  “[There are] little details that Rich would bring up and that was great,” she told CBS Colorado, “and we won’t have that.” Some of the largest issues in Lakewood persist; crime, homelessness, and housing. In Ward 3, in particular, the continuing fight over property development in Belmar Park will be an important part of the voters’ decision. Read more and watch video…

Radiant Painting & Lighting

Promoted post At Radiant Painting & Lighting, we are more than a service provider; we are partners in transforming your home. Led by Karen Gordey, a longtime Lakewood resident, our team delivers personalized, professional, and exceptional painting and lighting solutions across the Denver Metro Area. Karen’s background as a customer service executive and paint expert ensures that every project is approached with care. She starts every job, uses quality products, and makes sure the job is completed flawlessly. CONTACT: https://paintwithradiant.com/ 720-940-3887

Lakewood’s Gross Misinterpretation

From Cathy Kentner This week it came to light that the city of Lakewood is disseminating purposeful and gross misinterpretations of the new parkland dedication ordinance. City officials have made the decision to require land dedication for the replacement of a single family home while blaming it on the recently passed Save Open Space Green Initiative.  And, what is even more ridiculous, they have told a landowner they must create an easement, a part of their yard, that would be open to the general public. This is clearly not what the new ordinance states. 1. The parkland dedication ordinance does not require land dedication when an individual is replacing a single family home with another single family home. For decades the parkland dedication ordinance, and resulting formula, has been based on the number of anticipated residents added to the city. Therefore, when replacing a single family home with another single family home, no land dedication is required because there are no residents being added. 2. The parkland dedication ordinance does not require an easement for public access on private property. Even if the city were to erroneously require land dedication, the ordinance clearly states “The land area that may remain in private ownership must be added to the project’s open space requirement…”  The open space requirement on a home does not require an easement open to the public. It would seem that the City is deliberately putting up an unnecessary barrier for a single family home replacement and blaming it on the newly passed ordinance. Yet at the same time, the city is going out of their way to mitigate if not eliminate any barriers that would inhibit large developments of market rate and luxury apartments. Instead of encouraging families to stay, we cater to big money developers and corporations. In the process we displace longtime residents who can’t afford to live here anymore and cause urban sprawl as they go further from Lakewood for a single family home. The Save Open Space Initiative was not created on false pretenses. There is no covert agenda to stop growth as some have suggested. The reality is we have a finite amount of land. If it is being absorbed by large expensive developments with no required provisions for open space, parkland dedication, trees, or affordable units, we will be creating an unaffordable, unhealthy environment for future generations. This initiative aims to restore the balance of open space and parkland with the creation of the kind of housing that is wanted and needed. Much was lost over the past 12 years when developers all chose to pay a fee in lieu of land dedication. The Save Open Space Lakewood Green Initiative was passed by the city council who can, and arguably should, direct their staff to follow it appropriately. If necessary, council could very easily amend the ordinance to clarify that adding one unit does not meet the threshold for parkland dedication. Perhaps if the city supported its residents with the same vehemence shown to developers, we could diminish the divisiveness that dominates our discourse. Original News Story Lakewood family looking to rebuild home told they must give up part of property under new ordinance, Danielle Kreutter, Denver 7

Lakewood Crime for December

Maps clipped from Community Crime Map for the month of December, 2024, in Lakewood, Colorado. Note: Statistics seem to vary slightly per application (density map versus event map). This website is very user friendly and can be zoomed in for better detail although exact locations are changed for privacy. Compare to December of 2023 below. Note that comparison is done visually since numbers for “Lakewood” include parts of of Denver, which doubles the number of crimes.

Lakewood Expanding Homeless Program

Denver’s Sanctuary City status has pushed many of Denver’s homeless into Lakewood. As a result, Lakewood has taken up Denver’s homeless industry and is building a multi-million dollar business. And just like Denver, Lakewood is relying on growing the homeless response. Left unsaid, is that to continually have more response, there must always be homeless to respond to – a reinforcing circle of political expediency that has caused Denver to be one of the worst in the nation despite spending $274 million. Lakewood’s latest study session reveals city staff expanded emergency days and City Council is asking for more. All without any council vote on a city homeless policy – which would easily pass but would require public hearings. All Council Members who spoke at the meeting encouraged more spending and more services for the homeless shelter. Several thanked staff for coming up with this policy although policy is Council’s domain – after a proper vote. Mayor Strom acknowledged on November 18, 2024 that homeless advocacy was a new thing for Lakewood to get involved in and there have been growing pains. She also acknowledged that having good communication to notify people when the shelter was open was very helpful. Council Member Mayott-Guerrero was also thankful for more communication between staff and Council but was concerned even more was needed. She asked if Lakewood had enough homeless navigators to get the word out to the homeless community. Like Mayor Strom’s statement, there was no concern expressed for letting the rest of the community know what was going on or if they agreed. Chris Conner, Manager of Housing and Thriving Communities, said several times that turning people away from the shelter was untenable and that Lakewood would need to grow services in order to be sustainable. He said he did not want to open the shelter permanently without knowing that there was overflow capacity, which the county is currently filling. Jefferson County provides hotel vouchers for shelter overflow. Vouchers are coveted commodities so Lakewood staff work hard to randomize so that no one can exploit a system just to capture a hotel room. Hotels may not be within Lakewood. Lakewood provides transportation to hotels, through Bayaud Enterprises. Jefferson County pays to bring people back from hotels in order to return the unhoused to Lakewood. Lakewood had a bid out, as of November 18, that would include paying for transportation again in 2025. The unhoused are incentivized, and reportedly prefer, to stay in Lakewood, a growing program. Lakewood staff has new emergency criteria that will open the shelter 50-70 nights a year while also increasing the amount of people served by 50%. Conners said that solutions to homelessness would be to either increase shelters or move people into housing. He said that the move to housing will be when he would be asking for more help in terms of personnel and budget, meaning he is not talking of personal homes. Keep in mind that Lakewood is altering its ordinances to allow for temporary housing, that seems to fit the definition of housing as a solution, i.e. Lakewood permanently funding housing for a population. In every case, the feeling is that more resources are needed with no limit. Councilor Sinks expressed the concern about getting the 24/7 operations started soon. Council Member Cruz acknowledged there is more need in Lakewood than we can currently handle so she welcomed the county program to pay for hotel rooms. She is happy that Lakewood expanded the days the shelter will be open. Again, no council vote was taken on any policy regarding days or policy to open. Many Councilors expressed the hope that other cities follow Lakewood, including Mayott-Guerrero, Cruz, Shahrezaei, Low, and Rein, and some asked how Lakewood could pressure other cities into participating. Will surrounding cities give in to peer pressure to start homeless initiatives or will they listen to their constituents first? Arvada had to cancel the plans of City Council after listening to residents. Lakewood is not even listening to the neighbors of the shelter as crime increases and Lakewood becomes a magnet for homeless. Mayor Pro Tem Shahrezaei expressed gratitude that city staff built a policy that includes what she was hearing from stakeholders. What stakeholders? There was no city survey like they do for much smaller projects such as an individual park plan or giant multi-step surveys to keep your tax dollars. And isn’t it the job of City Council to set policy? Shahrezaei’s statement acknowledges the runaround and backroom dealing that made this homeless shelter slash navigation center possible. Her statement also corresponds with that of Strom and Mayott-Guerrero, celebrating the increased communication with everyone but the community at large and only after the plan was implemented. Council Member Low thanked the staff for “framing the discussion around the hypothermia issue and the emergency room visits.” He went on to say, “I think that’s a very sobering but meaningful statistic for us to be looking at and hopefully we can continue to have that number be zero or as close to it as possible so if we could have the city continue to get us that at least annually to assess whether this is continuing to save lives.” There was no explanation as to why, if the number of deaths has always been zero or close to zero, Lakewood would need a shelter. It is unlikely that a shelter will decrease deaths below zero. Low is also interested in having city staff expand meal services at the shelter, an idea brought up by several councilors previously. He encouraged staff to increase the budget for next year as necessary to support the clear agenda of City Council regarding this activity. All Council Members who spoke at the meeting encouraged more spending and more services for the homeless shelter (Councilors Olver and Nystrom were silent). Nothing really new came out of the study session, except this may be the only time residents will hear that Lakewood will be expanding homeless

Scroll to top