Proposed Zoning is not for “Lakewood” residents

The intent of the proposed Lakewood rezoning eliminates the words “of the City of Lakewood” so that the code reads to be for general purposes of anyone anywhere. In the current version, stating “Lakewood” may seem redundant or inherently understood, but why take it out? By taking it out, the new inherent question is “for whom”? In the redline below from section 17.1.2 of the proposed code, if the zoning code is not to ensure the economic vitality of the city, whom is it for?

Even worse is where the wording changes from “citizen of Lakewood” to “resident.”

Perhaps Planning Commissioner Elena Overall articulated it best when she said:

“We must allow more housing to be built, and that’s not to the comfort of the existing property owners, um, who are here. There are many people who are not here because they are not here yet.”

In other words, the zoning code doesn’t need to change for the people of Lakewood. It needs to change to bring in others. Even though Lakewood officials owe representation and allegiance to the residents of Lakewood, concerns about REMOVING “citizens of the City of Lakewood” are valid.

Perhaps this is a little detail, but with this change, it will be entirely possible for Lakewood to justify a development like The Bend because it ensures economic vitality -– for that developer. The city will subsidize development by sacrificing taxes and has now assumed liability for future environmental impacts. This move did not ensure the economic vitality of the City of Lakewood. So it’s time to change the rules.

We have too much legislating by clamor, by tumult, by pressure. Representative government ceases when outside influence of any kind is substituted for the judgment of the representative. — Calvin Coolidge