July 12, 2024, Reston, VA – Bowman Consulting Group Ltd. (the “Company” or “Bowman”) (NASDAQ: BWMN), a national engineering services firm delivering infrastructure design solutions to customers who own, develop, and maintain the built environment, today announced the acquisition of Element Engineering LLC (“Element”), a civil, water and wastewater engineering services firm based in Lakewood, Colorado.
Element serves rural communities and specialty districts throughout the Rocky Mountain West and Midwest. The firm delivers a comprehensive suite of professional, innovative, and cost-effective engineering solutions to its clients. Working with primarily municipal clients, Element strives to meet each client’s unique assignment and specification.
“Element adds additional depth to our growing national water-wastewater practice and extends our presence throughout Colorado,” said Gary Bowman, chairman and CEO of Bowman. “Nick and his team have built a thriving business by focusing on the details of building relationships and delivering unrivaled client service. Their proximity to our Denver operations provides an attractive opportunity to leverage each other’s relationships and resources. I am confident this will be a successful combination of cultures, customers and opportunities.”
“We started Element to deliver civil, water and wastewater engineering to smaller water authorities and municipal customers who weren’t being served by larger firms,” said Nicholaus Marcotte, founder and president of Element. “With Bowman, we will be able to continue our commitment to underserved customers but with a bigger set of resources and a deeper suite of services. We will also be exposed to a broader assortment of local and non-local projects which is an exciting prospect for everyone at Element. We’re pleased to be moving into this next phase of our company’s growth and evolution.”
Financed with a combination of cash, seller notes, and equity, the acquisition falls within previously discussed target multiples and operating metric ranges. The Company anticipates the acquisition will initially contribute at an annualized net service billing run rate of approximately $4.0 million and be immediately accretive. More detailed information on M&A activities, pipeline, and guidance updates are provided in connection with scheduled quarterly and annual communications.
About Element Engineering
Element Engineering has been providing civil, water and wastewater engineering services since 2014. Founded by Nicholaus Marcotte, P.E., the firm has grown over the past 10 years to become a trusted service provider to many rural water authorities and municipalities throughout the Rocky Mountain West and Midwest. Specializing in water and wastewater treatment design, permitting, planning, funding, and design; enforcement orders assistance; GIS, mapping and asset management; and distribution and collection system modeling, analysis, and design the firm has licensed specialists providing designs to meet all related customers specifications. For more information on Element Engineering, their projects, and their services, visit www.elementengineering.net.
About Bowman Consulting Group Ltd.
Headquartered in Reston, Virginia, Bowman is a national engineering services firm delivering infrastructure solutions to customers who own, develop, and maintain the built environment. With over 2,200 employees and more than 95 offices throughout the United States, Bowman provides a variety of planning, engineering, geospatial, construction management, commissioning, environmental consulting, land procurement, and other technical services to customers operating in a diverse set of regulated end markets. Bowman trades on the Nasdaq under the symbol BWMN. For more information, visit bowman.com or investors.bowman.com.
Editor’s Note: City Council held a workshop on July 8, 2024, for the “City Manager’s Update to Council”, that is not available online. The meeting was expected to be one of four quarterly meetings to hold the City Manager accountable for the projects and priorities set at the annual retreat. Holding the City Manager accountable is arguably the single most important function of the City Council, since the manager runs the city. The discussion was not held in a regular meeting, nor was it broadcast. A few dedicated residents watched, recorded and reported for the rest of us. Thank you! This article is a summary of that meeting that turned out to have no accountability measures at all.However, there was important information about the budget, school closures, Foothills Animal Shelter, and the unhoused.
Guest post from Joan from Lakewood
*Minor edits to content made 7/15/2024
I personally attended the workshop meeting that was a pilot meeting held without any video or hybrid capacity.
This was an hour meeting held before the regular meeting of the Lakewood City Council. I believe this program was instigated because there are supposed to be quarterly reports by the City Manager as to what is happening in the city.
The City Manager, Kathy Hodgson gave a report with a list of topics that she said were top of mind.
She gave a preview of the budget, which will be approved in August. She addressed to city employee vacancies, a long time employee with the City Manager’s office and the Director of Community Resources (Kit Newland has retired- Amber Thill is Interim Director) which should be filled by the end of the month.
There was a brief mention of the slash/recycle project.
There was an update on the Jefferson County school closures. There are five school properties in Lakewood that are being disposed of. Supposedly these properties should be sold at market rate. This contradicted what was told to the Vivian neighborhood at their Information meeting. Hodgson told how this disposal is not as easy as Jeffco Schools imagined. There was a school property in Westminster that had in its deed that if the school was closed, the property would revert to the City of Westminster. The city is planning on demolishing the building and creating a park. (this is what the neighborhood of Vivian elementary would like to see happen. I suggest they do a deep dive into the history of that property.)
Hodgson then mentioned a project they were looking at located at 20th and Quail. This is a piece of property currently owned by Denver Water that was previously a YMCA camp. I believe there is talk about assuming ownership of the space.
There was a scheduled tour for the city council members on 7/9 to view the recently approved purchase of the land to expand the Lakewood maintenance buildings. This is a big project and will require more funding in the years to come. It seems that it will take 5 to 10 years to complete this project.
Kathy Hodgson then addressed that she’d received a memo from the Jefferson County manager on the fact that the county would no longer be supporting Foothills Animal Shelter. This is not a done deal and there is conversation and negotiation happening around this situation.
The other update was about the Navigation Center and Recovery Works operation during renovation. Because the navigation center must remain as an emergency shelter, no construction can be done between 1 October and the end of April. So the renovation must occur during more months and that leads to the navigation center being closed for the summer months of 2025 as construction cannot happen with the building being occupied.
The other Lakewood news about the unhoused and the City Council is the development of a municipal code for sleeping units. This is not a zoning change so there will be no hearings on this topic. They are looking for a site to develop palette or small houses for the unhoused. The first reading of this code change will happen In the future (tentatively scheduled for 8/12 for the first reading and 8/26 for the second reading).
The last issue addressed was an operational issue about busy intersections and window washing. Kathy Hodgson introduced a sign and discussed some of the solutions that DrCOG, City of Denver, and City of Arvada have arrived at. There was some discussion and it was decided that city Council members would review the draft sign and give feedback by Monday 7/15.
There was a very little time for questions by the City Council members, and it was noted that this was a good start on communication.
I believe that they will use this format next quarter with a little more time scheduled.
I personally did not understand why this report was not made in the regular meeting that followed, and why there was no video recording of this meeting.
Here is the disclaimer -as I was taking personal notes and might have gotten some details wrong please consult with your city council members if you have any questions.
Recording of meeting (thank you Cathy!):
Recording is hard to hear. Unedited transcript available here
A multi national $20 Billion developer from Dallas Texas has proposed a metro district at the Federal Center development. Their counsel is one of the premier developer law firms who has led the way in creative ways to maximize developer control over resident metro districts and maximize developer profits.
Here is an evaluation of the proposed Service Plan – the charter which will create the district if adopted by Lakewood City Council. Also here is also an evaluation of the proposed resolution the developer asked GM to sign supporting the new metro district and creating an IGA to hook up with GM (Green Mountain Water and Sanitation Board).
Both the full Service Plan and the proposed pre IGA resolution with GM are attached below. References to the Service Plan are provided throughout the presentation.
The Jefferson County Commissioners met at 9 AM on, 9 July, 2024 in a public meeting to vote on a ballot proposal to allow them to keep all the excess funds they overcollected with our 2024 property tax billing. These excess funds would normally be refunded to us because of TABOR. I attended the meeting.
Why overcollected? For several years, the County Commissioners have failed to produce a sound budget. Instead, they spent more than their revenue and drained reserve funds to make it APPEAR they had a balanced budget. This year, they ran out of reserve funds and accounting tricks. The County Assessor did a reappraisal in 2023 as required by State law. Overall, the appraised value of all properties increased by about 37%. By State law, the commissioners were supposed to adjust the mill levy downward to adjust the overall revenue to equal the County budget. Governor Polis even sent a letter asking them to reduce the mill levy. They failed to do so. Instead, they intentionally kept the previous year’s mill levy knowing full well they would collect millions of excess dollars.
The Commissioners then contracted to spend $340,000 of our tax dollars with a politically connected company, The Bighorn Company – Democrat Brittany Pettersen’s husband’s company, to write a ballot proposal (read more about Jeffco and Lakewood lobbying).
I attended the 9AM meeting and it originally seemed all sides of the issue would be heard fairly. I was wrong. The commissioners gave no serious consideration to budget cuts and didn’t mention wasteful spending (such as the County Clerk’s holiday party). They politely listened to all public comments, then IGNORED all comments against or to improve the ballot proposal, and quickly voted to approve it with little discussion and no changes.
This proposal is sneaky and deceptively written:
“WITHOUT INCREASING ANY TAX RATE OR MILL LEVY RATE, AND TO FUND:
● TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE (BUILDING, MAINTAINING, AND REPAIRING ROADS, BRIDGES, POTHOLES, AND OTHER COUNTY INFRASTRUCTURE); AND
● PUBLIC SAFETY (WILDFIRE AND FLOOD MITIGATION AND RESPONSE, ADDICTION AND MENTAL HEALTH PROGRAMS, CRIME PREVENTION PROGRAMS AND STRATEGIES, AND OTHER COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY FUNCTIONS);
SHALL JEFFERSON COUNTY BE AUTHORIZED TO COLLECT, RETAIN, AND SPEND THE FULL REVENUES FROM AUTHORIZED REVENUE SOURCES BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 2024 AND IN EACH FISCAL YEAR THEREAFTER; AND SHALL RESULTING REVENUE AND EARNINGS BE TREATED AS A VOTER APPROVED REVENUE CHANGE AUTHORIZED BY ARTICLE X, SECTION 20 OF THE COLORADO CONSTITUTION OR ANY OTHER LAW; AND SHALL RESULTING REVENUE AND EARNINGS BE REVIEWED ANNUALLY BY AN INDEPENDENT AUDITOR AND A CITIZENS ADVISORY COMMITTEE?”
Why is it deceptive? The ballot provision does away with ALL current and future TABOR protections – but doesn’t say so. It also does away with the annual 5.5% property tax cap. It implies there would be no tax increase. In fact, it’s a major tax increase. It says no increase in the tax rate or mill levy which is a half-truth. With the huge increase in the 2023 property appraisal, the mill levy was supposed to be reduced. Instead, they kept it at the previous high level resulting in a windfall increase in revenue. As a result, it allows the commissioners to INCREASE future tax rates without any taxpayer control.
Looking at and analyzing the facts and events that led to this ballot proposal, it certainly appears this is a deliberate, planned effort by the Commissioners and county to keep and spend the excess property tax revenue they collected this year (2024) and eliminate TABOR and all other legal restrictions on increasing property tax in the future.
Don’t be fooled. The commissioners want us to vote to approve a huge property tax increase now and into the future with a clear attempt to pull the wool over our eyes.
People who don’t own real estate in the County may think this won’t affect them, but it will. Landlords will pass along the tax increase in higher rental rates and businesses must pass along the tax as higher prices on their goods and services. This ballot proposal will increase inflation even more.
The City of Lakewood is looking for a consultant to write new zoning codes to:
densify existing neighborhoods,
improve equity, and
remove parking restrictions.
Current efforts to density have caused Lakewood to develop problems with traffic, stormwater drainage, parking and more. Existing developments have not been designed for high-density.
The city has not offered any solutions to these problems. In fact, parking is such a problem that Lakewood is studying requiring parking permits for residents – paid for by residents – rather than mandating increased parking in development plans. This proposal will intensify that problem and increase the amount of resident-funded parking permits throughout Lakewood.
Lakewood appears intent on exacerbating existing problems by allowing more densification to solve another problem… affordable housing.
It must be noted that parking, traffic and stormwater management are key functions of the city government, whereas housing is traditionally regarded as a market-based function.
There are two citizen-led initiatives in Lakewood news demonstrating that current densification is not in line with the city’s existing ordinance to maintain the existing characteristics of existing neighborhoods: a new development near Belmar Park and on Whippoorwill near Youngfield.
City ordinances are a series of laws that rule Lakewood’s development. However, Lakewood staff can interpret these rules through the lens of the city’s Comprehensive Plan.
The existing Comprehensive Plan states (pg 3-12):
“The City will continue to support the diverse image and character of the community by maintaining the existing characteristics of neighborhoods with existing single-family residential zoning; creating appropriate transitions betweencommercial, multi-family, and mixed-use development and single-family zoned areas; and encouraging contextually appropriate infill and redevelopment projects.”
For the last several years, Lakewood has de-emphasized the existing characteristics of neighborhoods and transition zones in favor of other factors, which has caused conflict with resident groups, such as those mentioned above.
Lakewood is currently developing a new Comprehensive Plan to show the direction of the city for the next fifteen years. The densification proposal coming out before the 2040 Comprehensive Plan is finalized shows that Lakewood anticipates knowing what the results will be, regardless of any input the community provides.
The proposal reads: “The Contractor will identify goals, recommendations, and implementation strategies, to ensure the new code is consistent with the 2040 [Comprehensive] Plan.“
Since this proposal calls strictly for plans to densify, it appears that the Comprehensive Plan may have to be adjusted to match densification, rather than vice versa.
The Planning Commission will serve as the community input for this project.
Guest Submission from Toni Riggio, sent to City of Lakewood Planning, Engineering, Traffic and Ward 1 members
This letter is in response to the Subdivision Notification Letter received by mail by the City of Lakewood on 5/3/24. There is a multi-family development that is proposed at 1515 Whippoorwill Dr (Ward 1) with the Ingress/Egress at Youngfield St, 15h Pl and Youngfield Dr and I am writing in opposition to that access point based on the following reasons:
Concerns and Comments for Case# FI23-0016 and S23-0025/1515 Whippoorwill Dr
Proposed Ingress/Egress is where 3 streets come together
1- Youngfield Street: is an increasingly busy corridor. Traveling South requires a full stop at the blind curve to see oncoming traffic before turning onto 15th Pl. Traveling North has low visibility as you turn right onto 15th Pl.
2- 15th Place: Per Aldridge Transportation Consultants recent memo in etrakit, is “a steep 10% grade” uphill as you turn in. This street is a no outlet/ not a thru street that serves 13 homes.
3- Youngfield Drive: is currently a narrow dirt road, not a through street with limited width to expand to the required 36’ for Mixed Use zoning. Lakewood has made an exception for 28’ which makes the entirety of the Road a fire lane per Metro West Fire Dept.
The neighbors have proposed the Ingress/Egress to be at Colfax Ave for a myriad of safety issues and concerns which are highlighted in this document. The ongoing meetings the neighbors and Applewood Valley Assoc have had with both the developer and the City of Lakewood to have access at Colfax Ave have yielded little results to date. This plot of land was originally zoned Residential (R-1A) and in 2012 rezoned to Mixed Use Suburban, because it backs Colfax Ave. We were given a few reasons why the entrance and exit can’t be on W. Colfax; however, the 2014 plans from the City of Lakewood mandated the access to the site to be at W. Colfax Ave, for the same developer and site. In 2023 the City of Lakewood allowed a Multi-family Residential unit to have access from W. Colfax. This site is across the street from this proposed Williams Point site. Further, based on the CDOT referral, it appears that CDOT is not opposed to the development to be accessed through W. Colfax Avenue as they note in their referral “No access is being proposed on Colfax. If access to Colfax is proposed in the future, the City of Lakewood is the Issuing Authority, so the discussion for access will need to begin with Lakewood.”
This 1.6-acre plot has challenging topography, is crammed with utilities; electric, gas, water, sewer and communications. It has been owned by the current Developer for over 20 yrs. It wasn’t until they received a 9% tax credit from CHFA that they were able to get green lit for max density housing. The CHFA funding was approved based on half-truths of being adjacent to a bus stop and community outreach and acceptance, both which were requirements. None of the immediate 13 homeowners to the proposed project were ever notified prior to this grant. Also, the bus stop, while adjacent to the property, has no direct access from the development without walking/biking .8 miles down a 10% grade on W. 15th Pl, without sidewalks or street lights, out to Youngfield St up to W Colfax Ave which has high traffic, steep grades and no sidewalk, creating safety, ADA concerns and other complexities. Further, employment opportunities, schools and parks are between 1 to 1.5 miles away There is a proposed retaining wall and infrastructure to hold up Colfax Ave which will prevent direct access to and from the public transportation from the proposed development site. (Note: Per CHFA requirements the access to public transportation needs to be within a half mile.)
A traffic study by Aldridge Transportation Consultants, estimates a daily 300+ car trips entering and exiting. The proposed project will have (44) 1- 3-bedroom units with 70 parking spaces. This will result in overflow parking on the fire lane and existing neighborhood, where little enforcement will be available or take even place. The Aldridge traffic study does not take into account the addition of Lutheran Hospital employing 2200 people and many other high-density housing going in nearby. Also, traffic is re-routed to Youngfield St whenever there is an accident on the parallel I-70 highway. This creates bumper to bumper traffic on Youngfield St. each time. The most recent memo from Aldridge fails to address traffic approaching 15th Pl travelling South on Youngfield St and turning left onto 15th Pl.
We are extremely concerned about emergency access back to our neighborhood, as we have had two fires within 10yrs. We are in a special high wind district, which was recently cited by Metro West Fire Dept to be the leading cause of dry brush fires, that is no longer seasonal, but year round.
The existing neighborhood was built in the 50’s. The 2 roads 15th Pl a cul-de-sac and Whippoorwill Dr. a dead end. In most sections, the widths are 21-22’ no curb and gutter and drainage ditches on both sides and each with roadside mail delivery and trash pickup. This is where overflow parking will occur but is not adequate to receive the additional cars and would make it very difficult for emergency or fire crews to reach the existing neighborhood.
The neighbors in this area have witnessed pedestrians falling in the street while walking out of Youndfield Dr onto 15th Pl steep grade next to Youngfield St in winter conditions. There have been a multitude of cars getting stuck and/or sliding down 15th Pl to Youngfield St with snow and ice conditions. This has also included delivery/mail trucks, City of Lakewood snow plows getting stuck in the ditches at the intersection of 15th Pl and Youngfield St When approaching entrance to 15th Pl in the snow, you need momentum and speed to get up the 10% grade requiring 4-wheel drive vehicles to be successful. While having this grade may not be uncommon in our mountainous State, this is a contentious intersection with the convergence of these three streets. 2 with steep grades, 1 an increasingly busy street with questionable visibility in both directions.
We have documented the above stated events with videos and photos over the recent 2 years, some but not all are attached here, which have been shared and or provided to City Planning/ Engineers/Commission, City Council members, Developer, AVA, and many residents. I would add that as a resident of this neighborhood for 30 years, I have witnessed these occurrences many times over each and every year, including a head-on-collision at the Youngfield St curve a decade ago. These incidents and accidents will only rise with the addition of this Subdivision development.
Reference Lakewood Title 16.3.1, 16.3.2 Subdivision Standards, 16.3.8 1-4Street andtransportation patterns and connectivity and 16.3.9, this Subdivision does not meet the City’s own Ordinances unless many exceptions, variances or different interpretations are made.
While this only represents a partial detail of concerns, my hope is you will strongly consider these life, safety and ADA issues and concerns brought forth in regards to the Access point for this Subdivision Plat going forward and require the Ingress/Egress to be at Colfax Ave.
Safety First!
Thank you for your time and consideration,
Toni Riggio
Applewood Heights Resident
Photos and Videos below to account for the issues brought to your attention regarding the Subdivision Plat Case # FI23-0016/ D23-0025
15th place demonstrating our narrow roads are not equipped to handle overflow parking and hampering the ability of emergency and other vehicles to access our neighborhood. West Metro Fire Dept responding to a Fire on Whippoorwill Dr. 2yrs ago. Thankfully no cars parked on either side of the street.raffic jam on Youngfield St. and 15th Pl intersection, when traffic is rerouted due to accidents on I-70. A common occurrence.City of Lakewood Snow plow stuck at intersection of Youngfield Dr. and 15th Pl.
Links to vehicles without 4WD trying and failing to get up the 15th Pl steep grade in the snow. (Copy and paste link to view)
Link to Prime driver unable to come up the 15th Pl grade, parked at the blind curve to deliver packages, forcing cars to go around into oncoming traffic.https://photos.app.goo.gl/o2TRfw9B8UYMkMWm6
Lakewood has approved construction of Additional Dwelling Units (ADUs) that are up to 1400 square feet large, bigger than the original house in some areas, in an effort to “remove barriers” to affordability. ADUs are sometimes known as “mother-in-law” suites, a separate apartment that can be rented out on your primary residence. Councilor Stewart made the original request to research increasing ADU use in Lakewood, over a year before the motion passed on June 10, 2024. The two main barriers are the concept of single-family zoning (R1 vs R2) and infrastructure costs. By passing these revisions, Lakewood has densified single-family zoning into dual-family zoning, for every property that can fit an additional dwelling unit onto the land. According to research conducted by the Planning Commission, most people say they do not build an ADU after they find out they would need to pay more for additional water and sewer infrastructure. There seems to be a common belief that because there is room on the land, there should be extra room in the pipes, which is not true. Rather than acknowledge that water districts set those infrastructure fees, Planning Commissioner and Chair Kolkmeier suggested doubling the size of an allowable ADU, from 700 sq. ft. to 1400 sq. ft., so that the infrastructure cost would be a lesser percentage. So overall costs would go up in the name of affordability.
Custom-built ADUs are already expensive compared to commercial apartment buildings that are mass produced. However, an economic analysis of construction costs or rental profits was not researched. Among the ADU proponents, including Councilor Stewart and Shahrezaei, there seemed to be an understanding that someone who went to the expense of building an ADU would be happy to rent the unit at- or below-market price, to a family member or friend.
Others, including Councilor Nystrom and Olver, questioned whether these units would be available for investors, therefore not guaranteeing it would be “affordable”. Nystrom said she was in favor of creating more ownership situations, not rental situations. Olver quoted the real estate mantra “Location location location” and said that creating more supply will not lower housing prices in a desirable location such as Lakewood. Olver’s point has been proved because Lakewood has excess supply yet housing costs have not come down.
Councilor David Rein proposed an amendment to make owner-occupancy required. The motion failed on a 5-5 vote, with the ayes being Councilors Rein, Olver, Nystrom, LaBure and Mayor Strom. The nays were Councilors: Shahrezaei, Low, Mayott-Guerrero, and Sinks. (Councilor Cruz absent).
Without this amendment, the ADU and property can be used for two, full-time rental properties, making them attractive to investors.
Planning Commission Chair Kolkmeier explained that even though these revisions might not increase ADU construction, our current ordinance strangles growth and our residential development is in a death spiral but did not offer evidence. He argues the changes are one way to bring back families and possibly schools but he did not explain how if he believes the changes would be largely ineffective. No one offered evidence, just beliefs that some kind of change by someone was necessary.
Even though housing may be more expensive with these changes, the goal of “liberalizing” the code was achieved.
Councilor Sinks pointed out that these revisions seem like a work around to getting a property subdivided. The property could not be subdivided for separate ownership. A property with two houses would be much more expensive to sell.
If these changes are successful in increasing ADUs, the Councilors who voted for ADUs will be responsible for increasing property prices.
The other barrier, infrastructure costs, was discussed at some length during Planning Commission and Council meetings. The infrastructure fees are set by water districts individually and are not under city control. Rather than acknowledging this fact, Planning Commission Chair Kolkmeier and Councilor Roger Low enlisted the help of State Representative Chris DeGruy-Kennedy to change state law, asking to restrict a district’s ability to set infrastructure costs. This would make existing customers responsible for paying for necessary capacity increases to accommodate new building. That proposed legislation, HB24-1463, was largely defeated. No one at the state or city level explained, or even seemed to know, what the infrastructure fee would pay for, despite explanations available from resident water districts (see below).
Councilor Jacob LaBure picked up the gauntlet of problematic costs by suggesting the creation of a housing fund that the city can use to pay for people’s infrastructure costs. This suggestion was heard before during meetings on Strategic Housing. Lakewood has already subsidized tap fees before through the Community Grant Program.
The State of Colorado also passed new legislation regarding ADUs this year. That bill, HB24-1152, will require that Lakewood remove owner-occupancy provisions. However, as a home-rule city, Lakewood always has the option to challenge state law for the right to local government. As Lakewood attorney Lauren Stanec said, “if the city decided they wanted to comply with the state ADU bill….”, presumably meaning that as a home-rule city, Lakewood always has the option to fight for its right to local government. The city could remove the owner-occupancy provision now. Lakewood did not, and passed all changes as originally proposed by the Planning commission.
Scorecard: Expanding Additional Dwelling Unit Possibilities in all R1 zones
Maps clipped from Community Crime Map for the month of June, 2024, in Lakewood, Colorado.
Community Crime Map displaying 500 of 718 crimes in Lakewood, CO, June, 2024Community Crime Map – Density analysis showing 500 of 864 crimes in Lakewood, CO
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 June of 2023 below. Note that comparison is done visually since numbers for “Lakewood” include parts of of Denver, which doubles the number of crimes.
Changes to the zoning code in 2012 and new exemptions from the City of Lakewood are causing Applewood residents to fear for their property, road safety, parking and emergency circumstances. Lakewood will allow a narrow access road through the neighborhood to serve a multi-family, affordable housing development rather than route traffic to Colfax. Residents have organized a neighborhood garage sale for Friday and Saturday, June 28-29, to raise funds for the cause. Please stop by to support them and see the site location for yourself.
The property was originally zoned as residential. The roads and stormwater runoff are appropriate for residential use. The city could insist on development that is consistent with the neighborhood and existing roads, as per ordinance. To do that, the city would have to follow it’s own advice from 2014 and route multi-family traffic to Colfax, which is right behind the property. Instead, these residents will be forced to bear adverse affects of development that could easily be mitigated by following existing ordinance.
Just like the residents advocating against the Belmar Park development, Applewood residents are organizing and hiring a lawyer. Your financial and moral support Friday and Saturday could make a difference.
