Many residents from the Belmar Commons area showed up at Lakewood City Council meeting to ask Lakewood to reconsider dense re-development without adequate street development or consideration for the park sanctuary. Lakewood has responded with additional information, including the fact that Belmar Park is not a bird sanctuary.

After the public outpouring, the Mayor responded that residents should continue to work on the issue with their Councilor. Attendees expressed their skepticism that any action would result from that conversation, as well they should since the Mayor already said no action could be taken by the Council. The response from city indicated that all of the resident concerns were unfounded.

One resident shared her public statement:

“My name Is Barbara Millman. I have lived in Lakewood for 30 years. Ward 2. “One of the true jewels of the City of Lakewood park system, Belmar Park, is a peaceful enclave in the center of town.” That is a direct quote from the city of Lakewood’s website describing Belmar Park. I agree. I visit it often because it’s my sanctuary away from the rush of city life and noise. The majority of people I encounter there are friendly and appear happy. I am happy walking my dog on its well worn paths, spotting at a pond’s edge turtles lined up on a log facing the sun, further away seeing Canada Geese parade down the center of Kountze Lake, nesting cormorants content on a little island, and a Great Blue Heron taking off for points unknown. The park – even during the pandemic – was never overrun with people. It actually helped get us through it. The park is indeed a “peaceful enclave in the center of a town.” Belmar Park must not become the backyard of a large development of 412 units and as many or more cars. The impact of this dense development adjacent to our park is unfathomable and very concerning to many users. Philanthropist May Bonfils Stanton purchased the land that is now Belmar Park in 1936 to protect wildlife on Kountze Lake and the rest of her property. That included 30 mule deer, many peacocks, ducks and geese. She had Colorado officials approve it as “State Licensed Preserve No. 557,” where “hunting, fishing or trespassing for any purpose” were forbidden. The grounds were patrolled by armed security guards. May Bonfils Stanton would be crushed to learn what direction her paradise is now taking. I urge you to preserve this sanctuary that as it is to make people happy and critters thrive. I urge you to Save Belmar Park.

With regards to the park and bird sanctuary, Lakewood responded that “An environmental study is not required. Belmar park is not a bird sanctuary, though we are aware of the many species of bird that reside in and pass through the park.”

Lakewood also says there are no safety concerns within the development. although the city does not have to have emergency plans, “West Metro Fire Rescue reviews new development proposals within the city to ensure that sites are designed in accordance with applicable fire codes, inlcuding emergency access condiserations and requirements.”

The traffic study was completed in June-July of 2021, which appears to be before the site design for the current development. Lakewood reports that “Transportation Engineering staff have determined that existing street infrastructure can accomodate the additional vehicular traffic.”

Despite the reassurances from Lakewood, residents have seen cause for concern where problems have developed with traffic and stormwater in areas where Lakewood has fully evaluated and approved development.

Reader recommended business: Foothills Acupuncture

Lakewood Informer will be hosting a candidate forum for Lakewood’s Mayoral Candidates. It will be a recorded conversation posted by 10 am on October 4th.

Cathy Kentner and Don Burkhart have both agreed to participate. Wendi Strom is unable to join us.

If you have questions, please submit them to [email protected] for consideration.

Thank you, candidates, for your participation in this new setting that will be available to all Lakewood residents.

from Guest Commentator Tom Dearth

Belmar Commons is a small 45-unit patio home development on Yarrow Street near Alameda and Wadsworth. It is across from the Belmar Library and the Beautiful Belmar Park/Bird Sanctuary. 

There are plans to begin construction on a 5-story, 412 unit apartment building on Yarrow, a narrow curved street with only 2 emergency exit routes to Wadsworth. The emergency evacuation issues have been ignored and the people currently living in the area had no idea this was going to be built until it was “a done deal!”

Issues:

• If there were ever a Marshal-type fire or Lahaina, Hawaii fire from the overgrowth in the park west of Yarrow street, we would not be able to evacuate the area and the first responders would not be able to get in. With 500 or more additional cars on that 3-block curved street, we would not stand a chance of evacuating. When this concern was brought up at a city planners meeting, the response was that the new building would have sprinkler systems, an answer that seems to suggest there will never be an emergency.

• The REAL concern is that if there were hundreds of cars on Yarrow Street during an evacuation, there would be no way for any emergency vehicles to get in or out of the area. The residents of Belmar Commons would not be able to use their only exit onto Yarrow Street. That scene would resemble the after effect of burned-out cars in Lahaina, HI. We were told by the fire department that fire trucks need 28 feet to move freely. With our parking situation and the new overflow of cars from the apartment, emergency vehicles would not be able to get through to us.

• The narrow street cannot currently accommodate an 18-wheeler truck and simultaneous oncoming traffic.

• Traffic on Yarrow Street is already heavily used daily by fast moving delivery trucks and trash collectors serving a small two-story office building. That building is slated for demolition and that site is where the apartment building is scheduled to be built. The number of new trucks on Yarrow would increase by a large factor. After a winter snowstorm or when there are special events at the Heritage Center just south of the building site, Yarrow Street is already tightly congested.  

• The street department said they did a traffic study on Yarrow Street, but it was done during the Covid19 shutdown when the library was more than likely closed. The need for a traffic study is itself unlikely when the impact can be readily deduced. The streets were only developed for the minor traffic of a small business, not a huge residential use.

• In the community there is a blind person and another who is confined to a wheelchair. Their safety and wellbeing are a major concern for the community. Their access to the park would cause them great danger if the traffic were increased by a large factor. The majority of other residents are senior citizens.

• The community was told by the police officers who attended our Neighborhood Night Out meeting, that crime rates do go up when the density of people and cars goes up. This building would change the number of people living on Yarrow Street from approximately 70 to close to 600. (These are guesses – not facts)

• The Park/Bird Sanctuary site for which the new building is slated, is a pristine natural habitat for numerous species of birds. If you have never been to Belmar Park, it would be a wonderful experience for you to visit.

The city has not responded to requests for more information at the time of this posting.

Lakewood City Council Member Mary Janssen announced she will be proposing a mill levy decrease in an upcoming meeting.

As seen in the video, her proposal is based on getting tax relief for Lakewood residents. Lakewood’s current mill levy is 7.411 and she is considering proposals to reduce the rate to between 2.5 and 3.6. According to Janssen, Lakewood has added a variety of different taxes in the recent past, such as internet taxes, delivery taxes and taxes on some food products, as well as currently retaining all TABOR refunds.

City Council can lower the mill levy without a vote of the people so it is within Council’s power to provide this relief. Council Member Olver signaled his support for such a measure.

“If we sit back and do nothing, we’re letting a double-digit tax hike sucker punch Lakewood citizens when they’re already winded.”

Councilor Mary Janssen

As residents and business owners cry for help in controlling the effects of drug use and crime surrounding our homeless populations, Jefferson County is supporting safe drug use in our most affected communities. Serving all of Jefferson County, Points West operates out of Lakewood to provide harm reduction materials and service referrals to those who want them. Lakewood business owners are now coming to City Council, pointing out that the need for a safe society for business operations conflict with providing materials for continued drug use.

Points West has an outreach program that was started in 2020. Their website reads, “Initially intended as COVID-19 mitigation… within a few months the program evolved into a Points West project centered on harm reduction.” Points West now conducts street outreach efforts throughout Jeffco on Tuesdays and Fridays by actively driving around to search for people who appear to be living outside. They specifically serve the Lakewood area every other week. Their schedule is posted at https://www.instagram.com/pointswestssp/

Harm reduction drug use materials have helped many individuals avoid diseases that can be communicated through shared needle use.  These supplies are intended to help the entire drug use population and are not linked to any recovery effort or incentive program.

Some residents and business owners experience the negative effects of growing drug use among a swelling homeless population. According to one Council Member, residents are finding drug paraphernalia near their houses and sidewalks where it is was not found before.

At one City Council meeting in August, two business were heard regarding regional homeless, drug and crime increases that have negatively affected their business. In both these cases, the city has been unable or unwilling to effectively help. These businesses have asked the city for help multiple times, requesting actions such as increased patrols and posted signs for deterrents. For them, supporting drug use does not make sense.

One owner expressed his frustration with finding Points West onsite supporting the population he believes is causing him to lose tenants. “I believe the ability to be safe is important, but to come to the area that we’ve identified multiple times as a problem — I don’t believe that’s ok.”  Another business owner said she may lose her license due in part to regional problems along Colfax Ave. 

Points West provides outreach to all areas including urban corridors and suburban neighborhoods. They visit homeless encampments they’ve seen or areas they’ve been to before, such as Colfax or the area surrounding the RTD station on Wadsworth that was discussed in City Council. For this reason, author Michael Shellenberger points out that what America calls a “homeless encampment”, Europe calls an “open drug scene”.

Jefferson County Public Health estimates that Points West serves an estimated 150-250 people per month, including those served for sexual health tools and referrals to other services.

Why are safe drug use programs increasing while residents continue to experience negative effects of a population with high drug use rates in their neighborhoods? To quote an old saying: “Follow the money!“   According to Points West, their street outreach program was initiated through COVID-19. Unfortunately, there has been no increase in comparable grant funding for police and court action needed to prevent and prosecute low-level criminal drug use.

Points West currently has a temporary office at Recovery Works on Colfax. Lakewood has applied for a Department of Local Affairs 0grant that will be used to fund the expansion of Recovery Works .

Reader Recommended Business:

JD Services: 346-217-8958. “We do fences, patios, ponds and so much more.”

via KDVR by Rogelio Mares

LAKEWOOD, Colo. (KDVR) — A Lakewood City Council member has been on a monthslong mission to get information about a police shooting back in March that left a 17-year-old dead.

Council Member Anita Springsteen wants answers after multiple police officers shot and killed the teen, who was accused of robbing a mail carrier.Video released of woman’s killing by Westminster police officer

But after Springsteen read an autopsy report for the teen, she had questions about what happened that day.

Read more…

Reader Recommended Business: H&H Solution’s

In a contentious meeting rife with head-shaking, eye-rolling and looks of disgust, Lakewood City Council voted to overturn the will of the voters and sunset the Strategic Growth Initiative (SGI)  aka Lakewood’s Growth Cap.  The sunset will occur in 24 months, ostensibly to bring the city in line with Colorado’s new law to preempt “Local Regulations Limiting the Number of Building Permits“, Colorado HB23-1255. This decision will allow Lakewood 24 months to discuss next steps and work towards compliance, without waiving any Constitutional rights. The discussion allowed residents to see if and how each City Council Member would fight for Lakewood’s local rights as well as voters rights.

Debate seemed divided between those citing affordable concerns and/or wanted time to find a solution and the people who wanted to uphold local control and/or the will of the people.

Of those who discussed the need for affordable housing as a reason to overturn SGI:

• None of these Councilors addressed the charge that this council has been able to add low-income affordable housing under existing statute
• Of those who addressed the voter-passed initiative as a “will of the people” question, one Counselor said that was a different time, two said they understand but there are others who didn’t vote for it; one Councilor said they would honor it but needs time.
• Some of these Councilors thought they could do Strategic Growth better.
• If there was any mention of local control it was in reference to regional problems that would necessitate giving up local control. (Note: This begs the question of what Lakewood City Council can do regarding affordable housing at all.)
• A majority or all of these Councilors lamented the lack of an executive session at least once. None of these Councilors mentioned seeking legal counsel prior to this meeting, in the time since the last executive session did not proceed.

Councilors who voted against the sunset and/or in support of keeping SGI intact argued:

• Half stated their belief that the existing SGI ordinance could have helped affordable housing, if used properly.
• All mentioned wanting to uphold the citizen-led initiative.
• All mentioned local control. (Note: there is no real debate here, “preemption” is in the state law title)
• Most voiced transparency concerns. Did not require additional legal advice.

What did your Councilor say about it?

Mayor Paul: Said options are limited without an executive session.

Able: Fought against the notion that we needed to overturn SGI for affordability reasons. Before SGI we weren’t getting “the housing types that were called for in our housing studies, we didn’t have any move towards affordability and as far as I can see we still haven’t made a move towards affordability. The committee that was going to deal with affordability had its knees chopped off… The housing committee has not had the discussion yet.”

Shahrezaei: When [the original referendum was] passed it was a different time. Now, she has a hard time supporting the proposed ordinance because “We give ourselves two more years of living through this bad policy. … We need to support our community by working with [affordable housing needs.]” (Note: made motion to call the question of keeping SGI intact after only 4 minutes of debate saying it was on the agenda, although the City Attorney made repeated references to all these options and others being available to Council.)

Vincent: says neither she nor her ward were a fan of SGI, but she has to uphold the votes of the city as a whole. She supported the new ordinance as way to get time to discuss.

Mayott-Guerrero: Wants to figure out ways to do smart local growth that the city has more control over. Wants increased affordable housing. Votes for new ordinance to have time for discussion but still complies with law. Advocates for increased affordable and mid-range housing and sustainability measures and believes SGI is inadequate for that purpose.

Springsteen: “All of you who vote to override our local law are voting for those corporate interests and many of you were very much supported by them.” She believes in SGI as a way to stop gentrification. (Note: Made motion to get SGI language into the recitals of new ordinance)

“The rights of the local community’s self-government serve as the foundation for the American system of law and is a central tenant of our Declaration of Independence and state and federal constitutions. The people’s right to government have been routinely ignored by our elected representatives and over-ridden by the courts in favor of corporate rights.”

-Thomas Lindsay via Council Member Anita Springsteen

Stewart: Would have like the new ordinance with a 12-month sunset, rather than a 24-month timeframe. She acknowledges the need for income-based housing but also greenspace and accountability. (Councilor Stewart claimed to have led the Legislative Committee against HB23-1255. Meeting videos will show that Janssen and Olver were strongest against 1255 and that Lakewood entered the fight too late, with no visible action).

Franks: Made repeated remarks lamenting the lack of an executive session.

Olver: Voted to keep local law in place and will look into why Lakewood didn’t make more of an effort to fight against 1255. (Note: Made motion to change language of proposed language to retain SGI titles. Voted to keep SGI intact and for new ordinance also)

Strom: “We have complex community needs” on both sides of SGI and we need to figure out a path forward … Two years gives opportunity to work it out … this is a significant shift. We have people begging for more affordable units [to be developed].  (Made motion for new ordinance)

Janssen:  Said 1255 was a gross overreach by the state of Colorado and Governor Polis. The problem extends beyond SGI. The excuses that politicians at the capitol use reflects that they don’t care about local control or voter’s voice. “As City Councilors, our residents need us to stand up” (Note: Made a motion to keep local law in place)

“As City Councilors, our residents need us to stand up”

– Council Member Mary Janssen

Other Coverage:

https://www.denver7.com/news/front-range/lakewood/lakewood-passes-emergency-ordinance-ahead-of-statewide-growth-restriction-ban

https://kdvr.com/news/local/lakewood-votes-on-controversial-growth-cap/

https://www.cbsnews.com/colorado/news/lakewood-growth-cap-set-to-expire-colorado-state-law-takes-effect/

Support Lakewood teacher and author: Angela Chirila

On July 24, 2023, Lakewood City Council voted in a new ordinance that could penalize leaving your property vacant for more than 30 days. Many of the Council Members who spoke, expressed reservations with the ordinance as written. City staff say they will take their concerns into account and use staff discretion when enforcing the new ordinance. This ordinance arose from discussions on the increased calls for service to distressed properties, specifically involving the homeless population. This measure may be part of a strategy to decrease homeless activity around vacant property by penalizing property owners rather than the homeless.

How this affects residents

The new ordinance states that if your residential or commercial property is vacant for more than 30 days you will need to register it as vacant and have mandatory inspections. The new ordinance will particularly affect vacant homes for sale; an exemption can be applied for.

The ordinance includes the provision that property owners shall have a plan to inhabit or demolish any buildings within six months of vacancy, meaning no structures will be vacant for more than six months.

No data was presented as to how many vacant properties this would affect outside of the few problems that have been discussed in Council meetings.

Each vacant property registration will require a fee. Council Member Shahrezaei inquired as to whether a additional fee could be used to establish a fund that would provide monies to neighbors in a non-vacant property to mitigate their hardship. The city attorney replied that there may be a way to achieve this but it is not known at this time.

Determining Vacancy and Residential Applications

The city will determine vacancy based on the appearance of the property, such as an unkempt yard or lack of window coverings. Council Member Mayott-Guerrero was the first to object to this basis for determining vacancy. She expressed, with broad agreement among Council Members,  it was not the City’s role to “penalize the attentiveness of homeowners.”  Mayor Paul agreed that the city just adopted the  2021 maintenance code that could penalize rundown properties. This new ordinance allows multiple ways to potentially penalize the same set of conditions.

“…not the city’s role to penalize the attentiveness of homeowners.”  – Council Member Mayott-Guerrero

Mayott-Guerrero stated her understanding that Council agreed this ordinance was intended for long-term vacancies of commercial properties. Councilor Olver supported the sentiment that the ordinance was only going to apply to commercial property and/or out-of-state owners. Although there seemed to be general agreement on this point, however that is not what happened.

Ordinance O-2023-29 will apply to residential properties and vacancies starting at 31 days.

City staff are not intending to enforce the rules against vacant school buildings, which would get an exemption. Neither do they anticipate enforcing the rules against people that move to warmer climates during the winter months. The assumption is that part-time residents will make arrangements for property maintenance while they are gone so the property will not look vacant.

Council Member Strom expressed general support for the ordinance, saying that this was a public safety concern which everyone pays for. She explains that vacant properties are “situations that are inviting criminal behavior”. This ordinance then creates a new “crime”, having vacant property, without making any additional provisions for the criminal behavior referenced.

Overall Councilors seemed to disagree with the presumption of vacancy provisions, the limited 30-day timespan, the inclusion of residential properties and the duplication of maintenance code provisions.

Despite that, no amendments were offered. The ordinance passed 8-2 with Olver and Janssen dissenting.

Resident Recommended Business: Foothills Mobile Dog Grooming

Jefferson County seems to think Lakewood and Arvada will build a navigation center that Jeffco can contribute to, according  to the August 1, 2023 Jefferson County Commissioner work session. Lakewood mentioned that Jeffco is looking for a navigation center site early in the year. Meanwhile, Lakewood and Arvada are applying for state grants that would go to expanding nonprofit organizations. Ideally, the proposed navigation centers would host services, permanent housing and shelter beds.

A navigation center, a concept pioneered by officials and advocates in San Francisco in the past decade, is a place where a city’s unhoused residents can stay until they can be connected with permanent housing.

– msn.com

Jeffco secured $6 million through the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), also called the COVID Stimulus Package, of 2021. The money was intended to be used for two navigation centers where homeless resources could be centralized and coordinated. Ideally, the centers would host services, permanent housing, and shelter beds. Jeffco has committed those funds for two years, and time is running out to have it spent.

Arvada has purchased land with a building, but unfortunately Arvada found environmental problems with the building that caused delays. Lakewood has reportedly been looking for an acceptable site to build a shelter for the last year. Lakewood says they are still open to that plan, but the current focus is on Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) grants to expand RecoveryWorks. Likewise, Arvada is also applying for the same grant to be passed to an associated nonprofit, Community Table.

Should Lakewood and/or Arvada commit to building a navigation center themselves, the project is expected to take longer than the ARPA funds allow. Therefore, Jeffco is discussing other ways to use the funds that will preserve the navigation center option. Commissioner Kerr expressed that Jeffco was still committed to following the American Rescue Plan Act.

None of these projects would be possible without state and local funding. However, the grant is only for the initial stage. After the initial grant the city must secure permanent funding which is estimated to be considerable. Likewise, the county does not seem to have plans to build a navigation center themselves. The $6 million ARPA funds must be spent in August.