As reported by CBS News, a fire in an abandoned gas station on February 3 endangered 20-30 homeless people who were using the building as a shelter. The situation underscores the need to re-examine several ongoing strategies, such as:
West Metro Fire unofficial policy of not enforcing fire safety standards in homeless encampments. West Metro officials have said these fires are a matter of life and death so encampment fires are typically allowed or deprioritized for enforcement activity.
At around 10 p.m. on Monday night a fire tore through a vacant Colorado building that was once used as a gas station. The building at the corner of Alameda Avenue and Harlan Street in Lakewood was being used as a shelter.
A resident of the apartment building next door captured video of flames shooting out of the building’s windows.
“Thank God the response was quick,” Victor Garibay said.
Garibay didn’t take the video, but he lives in the same apartment building. He and his neighbors raised concerns about people coming and going from the building several times.
“A lot of people have gone to the police have gone to the fire department and told them about the issues here — people coming in and out. The drug use, of course. The police have come, the fire department has come but they never seem to really be able to do anything about it,” he said.
One little formatting problem on our website was the tip of the iceberg.
I’ve been putting off some backend changes on the website and while trying to fix one problem, I ended up trying for too much. So Lakewood Informer is live again and we’ll continue to work out the kinks.
Please remember that all input is welcome. This site is for all of us who have stood up and asked City Council for common sense measures, accountability, and upholding the social contract between long-term residents and city government. There are a lot of us out there and more every day!
Thank you all for your patience and support. I’m surprised by how much the site was missed. You are the best audience! You give hope that together we can make a difference.
Mayor Wendi Strom suspended normal City Council procedures to have an emergency discussion on January 13, 2025 regarding issues resulting from the new parkland dedication ordinance. Strom says this was time sensitive so it couldn’t wait until the next meeting and most of Council agreed with her. However, even with the suspension of city policies, Lakewood is still bound by the Colorado Open Meetings laws that require public notice for agenda items. Without that notice, there was no public comment regarding the discussion because no one knew it was happening. One issue Strom initially raised was concern that single-family homeowners are being required to dedicate part of their land to parks. However, other Councilors showed that the real issue was overall development. Strom says the city has not issued any permits since December 7, 2024, when the ordinance was approved. Council Member Nystrom, the only Councilor to sound positive about the new ordinance, pointed out that there may be inaccuracies on how the ordinance is being applied. Nystrom’s point of view was echoed by the author of the ordinance, Cathy Kentner.
Mayor Strom did not say how many people were adversely affected by the new ordinance, but this move is extraordinary. Even in other time-sensitive circumstances, such as when hundreds of Belmar Park residents were begging for emergency intervention, Strom did not suspend the rules. In fact, with her inauguration, she has moved public comment to the end of the meeting in a move that guarantees most people do not stay for comment. The parkland ordinance itself was time sensitive due to the ballot initiative deadlines. Council chose not to address the issue at all.
Strom asked for a vote to direct staff to present some amendments to the ordinance at the January 27 meeting. She also later agreed with Councilor Roger Low’s statement that “it would be incumbent on members of council to proactively draft those amendments and work with the city attorney’s office, presumably to draft those amendments and circulate them [we] will be authoring the amendments and staff merely writing them up.”
It is evident that many processes will still be decided over the next month. No data was presented to demonstrate the problem, but Mayor Strom says that will be coming as staff present real life stories of the harm the ordinance is doing to residents and staff. No one mentioned the residents who were positively affected by the ordinance except for Councilor Nystrom.
Accusations of Bait N Switch
Strom says she does not believe residents knew what they were signing or the unintended consequences of the original petition. This narrative was espoused by several Councilors at previous meetings, including multiple times by Council Member Roger Low. It’s an ironic stance to take coming from the council who approved official ballot language to de-TABOR the city without ever mentioning TABOR.
Council Member and Mayor Pro Tem Shaharezaei went so far as to accuse the resident petition gatherers of pulling a bait and switch. She says they touted the initiative as a way to get more parkland but really it was about reducing density. She says these unintended consequences are something that needs a response.
Shahrezaei did not acknowledge that the parkland dedication initiative was a result of unintended consequences of City Council not being accountable for adequate oversight of the existing ordinance. That issue has been ongoing for over a decade. But Councilor Low ran through some math to acknowledge that resident density and parkland should have some sort of equilibrium.
Parks Versus Development
The ordinance is not about development per se. It is about the fact that more people need more parks in order to sustain the equilibrium Councilor Low spoke of. For decades people have moved to Lakewood for the plentiful parks. So much so that Lakewood Council recently pushed a bill to de-TABOR, partly to fund park expansion.
Many Councilors returned to the original argument from months ago that there was no way to mandate reasonable parkland dedication and still allow development. Those Councilors just want the development. Urban versus suburban development.
Councilor Mayott-Guerrero said that she hears the frustration of residents but there are several projects in her ward that are underway and are affected by this ordinance. She says that she has not heard any objection to developing several large lots in her ward. “Whatever your motivation and your impetus is, I believe that the way that this was written is going to result in a level of cost to the people of Lakewood and to the community that is really irresponsible for us to allow to continue.”
Council Member Cruz pointed out that this is impacting affordable housing developers. Affordable housing developers include Metro West Housing (MWH). Cruz did not discuss the MWH attempt to put 44 units on 1.6 acres, without including enough parking or a wide street, let alone neighborhood parkland for these new residents.
Councilor Sinks clarified that there was not a ordinance rewrite. Councilor LaBure agreed, stating that this would not be a rewrite, but rather tweaking some words.
Willful Misinterpretation
Councilor Nystrom says there are inconsistencies and, in her opinion, inaccuracies around the way the new ordinance has been applied. She also pointed out that there are many positive emails from residents, it’s not all negative as the other Councilors state.
Nystrom’s comments hint that the ordinance interpretation may be being used as a political football. She is the only Councilor to bring up a contrarian view and sound supportive of the resident-sponsored initiative.
Normal City Council procedure requires Councilors to submit a Request for Council Action to start a discussion. In other governments, elected officials can introduce legislation and call for a vote. In Lakewood, instead of Council Members authoring legislation, they must gain agreement from a majority of Members to hold a study session to generate ideas. Alternatively, they can assign staff or a committee to find solutions.
No Time to Think It Through
City Attorney McKinney-Brown says this move is “unusual but nothing illegal.” City Council must work by passing ordinances. She continues, “If the City Council believes they have plenty of time to workshop this and think their way through it, then you can start from a, a less intensive jumping off place.”
Her statement seems to suggest that Council may be acting off gut reactions and hasty conclusions. However, Council Member Low “signaled” that a third reading may be used to add additional time due to the amount of public interest in the topic and Councilor Rein agreed.
Council voted unanimously for the motion to have a first reading January 27.
Solid Ground Apartments opened in Lakewood in 2024. It is a Jefferson Center facility that is located in the Two Creeks neighborhood. Lakewood was a community supporter. City Council members voted to tour the facility in order to learn more about any future facilities that Lakewood would own, operate or support, which is a Council initiative.
Solid Ground appears to be the first permanent supportive project for the unhoused from the Jefferson Center and they found a home in Lakewood. The funds came from a federal grant. According to HUD, permanent supportive housing is “permanent housing in which housing assistance (e.g., long-term leasing or rental assistance) and supportive services are provided to assist households with at least one member (adult or child) with a disability in achieving housing stability.”
During the time that the Jefferson Center was working on this supportive housing, the Center was forced to close the mental health program for kids. There is no evidence that the Center could have used federal grants to sustain the mental health program with or without housing. Federal grants for affordable housing are paid for by printing money which leads to inflation of consumer prices, including higher housing prices.
From jcmh.org: “Jefferson Center proudly manages over 420 housing vouchers that range from Housing Choice Vouchers (formerly Section 8) through Permanent Supportive Housing Vouchers.”
By jcmh.org statistics, there are about 453 people counted living on the streets.
Lakewood Council may also tour other facilities as part of researching future opportunities.
The Jefferson Center is a non-profit who has provided Jefferson County with mental health services for 66 years. It was previously known as the Jefferson Center for Mental Health. Their stated missions is “To inspire hope, improve lives, and strengthen our community by providing mental health and related solutions for individuals and families.”
The widespread zoning changes Lakewood made in 2013 resulted in a resident-initiated movement known as “strategic growth.” Residents were unhappy with the increased, high-density residential units being built that unbalanced the economic growth of the city. Ten years later, city leaders are still not listening to residents. On December 9, 2024, Lakewood City Council passed a resolution stating the city will have a “zoning rewrite that is bold, imaginative, embraces innovation, and the diversity of needs for the full City of Lakewood.“
This resolution is not normal procedure. Normally, there is a proposal presented to the public that will show specific plans on promoting homes for the unhoused, increased density, and decreased greenhouse gas emissions. This is not that.
Rather, it is a declaration that the city already has its mind made up to implement these changes. And because they seek to be “bold”, the Council will approve whatever the contractor recommends, whether or not the public likes it.
It’s like Lakewood is playing a Jedi mind trick. Lakewood leaders want a zoning code to accomplish a bold new agenda and they are saying: you can’t see the code but it will be good for you. You will like it.
Residents are waking up to the fact that the “anti-growth” narrative was just a way to belittle those who disagreed with the establishment. Look at how residents react to the proposed developments at Whippoorwill and Belmar for proof that no one is asking to stop all development. They just want it done reasonably and in line with existing neighborhoods.
Residents are also waking up to the fact that the “affordable housing” narrative is false because Lakewood doesn’t have a housing shortage. These two narratives are how Lakewood justifies the need for this zoning code change. Lakewood needs to pass this resolution and zoning code before more residents wake up. Going through proper public discussion took years for a short-term rental policy and the zoning code is much more significant.
Being “bold” seems to be a new political buzzword meaning leaders are crossing a line. Bold is fast-moving, which could be dangerous in government designed to work slowly through public discussion.
In this case, as you can see below, the new zoning code will potentially destabilize neighborhoods by extensively changing the rules to densify development in every code. The zoning code was established to keep neighborhoods stable, so residents know the type of neighborhood they are moving into. With these proposed changes, the zoning code can even be used to expedite spending for the homeless, which is a budgetary process normally outside the scope of zoning.
The resolution cites the new comprehensive plan as proof that residents approve of this zoning code change. This is disingenuous at best because:
The comprehensive plan doesn’t mention specific action, just “feel-good” goals. Think in terms of everyone agreeing on world peace except that for one person peace means the peace that comes after world war.
Lakewood hired a consultant to rewrite the zoning code BEFORE the results of the comprehensive plan were finalized, substantiating that the game was rigged.
Read the resolution below and see how wonderful it sounds. For each bulleted objective from the resolution, there is an example (in white italics) that shows how it could be twisted into something that residents would not like, most of which have been mentioned by city and state leadership.
The revised Zoning Code will:
Be a zoning rewrite that is bold, imaginative, embraces innovation, and the diversity of needs for the full City of Lakewood, including:
Strategies that target the full range of housing needs compatible in scale and form with existing neighborhoods;
Increase flexibility in all zoning districts where appropriate to provide needed additional density;
(A pertinent example of this in the Belmar Park development fiasco where a new mega-apartment complex will be built that does not match the existing neighborhood. And that’s within existing zoning! Imagine an apartment building in place of your next-door neighbor’s house or the gas station on the corner.)
Lead to an increased supply of housing that is more affordable and attainable for individuals below 100% AMI, including for seniors, teachers, first responders, frontline workers, artists, and younger families.
(Since there is no way to guarantee new housing goes to seniors, new housing will likely go to investors just like it goes to investors now. This point is just emotional blackmail.)
Eliminate minimum lot sizes while maintaining reasonable setback and other dimensional standards;
(Buildings are now being built within a few feet of the sidewalk, as opposed to having ten feet of grass and a parking lot in front. This change increases wildfire hazard. It could also mean eliminating the original house to put four tiny houses on one lot – as discussed during a planning commission meeting. Or putting 15 units per acre, as per state suggestions.)
Improve connected lighting, sidewalks and bike paths;
(More bike lanes and less car lanes. Think of the separated lanes on Garrison or narrow lanes in Belmar.)
Improve mixed-use development;
(the 2013 rezoning already “improved” mixed use, resulting in replacement of promised commercial units with purely residential. This will eliminate even more business space.)
Codify a 90-day deadline to approve affordable housing projects;
Adopt a meaningful inclusionary zoning policy, either as part of, or as an accompaniment to, a zoning rewrite, which creates below market sale and rental units.
(inclusionary zoning is a market manipulation. It is modern day rent control, demanding all other units have high prices to subsidize around 10-20% of units being below market rate.)
Promote strategies and policies that will meaningfully and measurably reduce Lakewood greenhouse gas emissions, conserve water, and incentivize sustainability, each with timely goals and implementation;
(This includeseliminating parking requirements, even less gas stations or bringing back the fee-in-lieu option for parkland.)
Lead to Lakewood* meets the requirements of Proposition 123 (as modified by HB 23-1304) regarding Affordable Housing Programs;
(assuming this means fully adopting the state agenda and giving up the fight on local zoning rights that other cities are picking up.) *-”Lead to Lakewood” is in the original resolution. No idea what this means
Put fewer constraints on homeowners and renters, give Lakewood residents more choice, raise property values over time, and promote naturally occurring affordable and attainable housing;
(For example, there have been several suggestions to remove occupancy limits which could lead to overcrowding, health and fire hazards. Group homes in the middle of R1 neighborhoods have already caused problems in Lakewood. There are also suggestions to eliminate emergency staircase standards.)
Expedite the site selection and procurement of temporary sleeping units and shelters, and promoting and prioritizing permanent supportive housing;
(Give less notice that a homeless shelter is moving into your neighborhood – there are too many things wrong with this to list. And procurement has no place in a zoning code.)
Require that the construction, maintenance, and improvements of buildings owned or leased by the city will, where reasonably appropriate, minimize emissions, maximize sustainable design principles, and be built, maintained, and improved with a view towards also serving as a community asset beyond their utilitarian function.
(Some City Councilors are concerned that the city is not getting LEED certified or have net zero emissions, both of which are EXTREMELY expensive.)
The Lakewood resolution was written at the direction of the City Manager, thus by-passing public input. This allowed City Council to “signal” residents that this bold change was coming. That way there is nothing for residents to oppose until it’s too late to make changes.
The reality is Lakewood does not have a shortage of housing. Changing the zoning code in the name of affordable housing is misleading. Read “The Totally 100% Fake Housing Shortage”.
Progressives (and, the RINOs) in Colorado all but ensured that many people can no longer afford to start a family (or to keep their family comfortable), as it is way down the list of the Best & Worst States to Raise a Family.
While ranking 18th overall, unsurprisingly, it ranks 40th in Health & Safety and 36th in Education & Child Care. Furthermore, if one looks at Massachusetts (ranked 1st):
“Massachusetts is the best state to raise a family, in large part because it provides a good blend of economic opportunities and safe conditions for children. The Bay State has one of the lowest unemployment rates in the country and lots of job opportunities relative to the labor force, which ensures that parents will be able to provide for their children. It’s not the cheapest state, as housing and childcare costs are relatively high compared to most of the nation, but residents make up for this with fairly high incomes.”
And Minnesotta (ranked 3rd):
“Minnesota is the third-best state to raise a family, at least if you’re not averse to its harsh winters. Minnesota is a great place to find a job to support your family, as it has one of the highest median family incomes after adjusting for the cost of living and one of the lowest unemployment rates. In addition to good pay and job stability, residents also receive reliable long-term benefits, as Minnesota ranks at the top for employer-based retirement plan access and participation.”
Even looking at other states in the top 10, the theme is common, “the housing is expensive, BUT, the people living there have much better economic opportunities, being able to secure better pay relative to the cost of housing and, in turn, being ale to pay for the housing, regardless of it being expensive.”
In the meantime, Colorado’s common clay of the new West has spent close to a decade destroying the economic potential of the state. They finally succeeded – “Colorado’s economic growth fell from 5th in the nation to 41st, according to new report.” It is as if only focusing on building “luxury apartments” and metro-district infested suburbs is not the way to create a vibrant, multi-faceted state economy. Colorado now has an imbalance of well-paying jobs vs. some of the most expensive housing in the country. A single person in Colorado needs an income of $106,579 and a family with two children, an income of $272,314, just to ‘live comfortably’ in Denver.
The common clay of the new West has decided that we need gobs of boxes ensuring profit for the corporate entities, under the guise of “if we build more housing, there will be more jobs”. What jobs? While adding thousands of Metro-District-fee-paying and rental units, Lakewood, one of the largest cities in Colorado, has lost jobs.
The common clay in the Jefferson County, Colorado, not only rolled over for the developers, but all but ensured that large swaths of the county are now setup for an economic failure (and a potential wildfire disaster).
When I was a director on the Board of one of the water and sanitation districts in Jefferson County, after inquiring about the insufficient water pressure in some of the fire hydrants in parts of the District, I got the good-ole-don’t-worry-about-it. With some follow-up claims of how “pumps would keep pumping if needed” or something to that effect. One now wonders if such assurances were made to the residents of Pacific Palisades?
In the meantime, Jefferson County’s common clay of the new West ensured that thousands more houses have been built on the other side of the hill from the said district, in a high fire risk area, with “interesting” wind patterns and with questionable water availability. Nor did they seem to study the findings of the report on the Marshall fire, with one of the findings being that the structures were placed too close to each other. Who wants to place bets on who and what will be blamed if another calamity takes place?
Instead of wisely allocating water to the purposes of driving economic development, the common clay handed over the precious drops that remain to the big business interests to bolster their profits, while the rest of us get told to conserve.
Not to be outdone by Morrison in the “we have no clue what economic development means” department, Lakewood’s common clay of the West has been working overtime to ensure that one of the largest cities in Colorado is set up for an economic implosion. The signs are all over the place:
Photo from Alex: Results of Lakewood’s “economic development.” Their only answer is, “well, we need more housing”.” Never mind that there is nothing but housing around the businesses which are closing down in droves.
The latest episode from a relatively new local podcast with a philosophical viewpoint: White Blood Cells – Protectors and Leaders. Take a look and see what you might have in common.
Quotes from this episode:
“This dam analogy — it’s holding stuff back and the media was part of their [Democrat] dam, a big big part of their dam, the the Legacy Media is a big part of their dam, the legal system, the capital market system, the corporate America system was all part of that dam that was holding this truth back. You can call the water a lot of different things, I think it’s working class Americans, they’re behind the dam, the truth is behind it, there’s a natural gravitational pull that’s got to be dammed up”
“that’s plunder if you have an illegal money system and I don’t want to go too far into that because it’s complicated, that our money system — the Federal Reserve notes that we use to exchange — it’s fiat currency and that is theft.”
“back in 2008, it’s like when all these Banks got bailed out and everybody got slapped on the wrist but there was really no consequences and no one was able to fail it’s like that just perpetuates the problem because no one got indicted during that whole Global financial crisis”
“this [healthcare] CEO thing is just a tiny representation of cracks showing up in this dam and the and the thing that helps you understand the pressure behind it is all this social media response”
“Everybody knows that the only thing that solves every problem is your willingness to do hard work. If you are willing to do hard work well you know you’ll be fine”
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.
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.
January 13, 2025, Lakewood City Council will vote in a new ordinance regulating metropolitan districts. The Denver Post has done deep investigations into metro districts, exposing them as mechanisms that bury taxpayers in debt with no accountability. Other cities are starting to pay attention and not allowing metro districts. Lakewood, on the other hand, is still supporting developer-sponsored metro districts. Staff has been bringing forward this ordinance since 2021 and backing down against resident pushback in Lakewood and across the state. Now the time has come.
The new ordinance has language attempting to fix some existing problems with metro districts. However, a city ordinance cannot fix the problems that exist within state law. Lakewood is passing the ordinance now to enable the developers of The Bend to apply for metro district status, which is anticipated in February.
Metro districts are critical for developers to make money from bonds without a vote from residents – because there are no residents to vote yet. Research shows this debt does not benefit residents.
“…developers issue a small tranche of debt on the bond market with unfavorable terms (above-market interest) and then buy the debt themselves so future homeowners will end up paying the developer for decades through their property taxes for a completely unnecessary load of bad debt.” -Denver Post
“Metro district financing is the opposite of affordable housing.” – Rooney Valley News
Will Lakewood have a “safe” metro district ordinance? Not if state law prevails. They can only make baby improvements.
“[metro districts] all lead to the same result – taxing residents without representation based upon single party agreements by a developer with a confessed conflict of interest to pay themselves profits by issuing taxes with no accountability for how the money is spent.” – Rooney Valley News
“…debt is often intentionally hidden and getting true control of metro districts can be hard if not impossible.” – Denver Post
For example, one of the improvements Lakewood attempts is to reveal home cost differentials showing that residents will not be over-paying for homes. Except there is no way to audit the costs, get company financials, or hold the developers accountable if they are overcharged.
“The Service Plan shall include a cost estimate of what an individual property within the District would cost an End-user with and without the establishment of the District.“ – proposed ordinance
Once the metro district status is granted, Lakewood has little authority to make sure the developer governs fairly, a point that several Council Members brought up in past meetings. As the quotes above show, metro districts are historically problematic and more expensive for the end-residents. Lakewood hopes it will be different this time.
“This time” includes The Bend development at 6th and Union. As of fall 2024, the developer anticipated applying for metro district status in February. Then they would have the advantages of being a government entity, while being blighted and thereby partially funded by Lakewood.
All opinions in this or any post are the personal opinions of the author
Votes seem cemented due to prior planning with developer
Property not blighted prior to sale
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.
Site boundaries from the Union Blvd Corridor Plan, 2011, pg 2
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.”
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 landfill?
The plan is to “use financial resources available to the [Lakewood Reinvestment] Authority for the express purpose of the same; and to actively promote and partner with private investment and reinvestment interests.” – Study, pg 10
The vote to approve the blight is January 22, 2025 with the Lakewood Planning Commission.
*All opinions expressed in this article are the personal opinions of the author
