Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news about Lakewood, Colorado

city-council

Lakewood Paying for RTD Lights

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in UncategorizedTagged , , , , ,

Fixing the bridge lights for RTD on the 6th Avenue overpass is an $800,000 budget item for Lakewood… to fix RTD property. The large line item caught the attention of Council Member Olver at the time. How did this get to be in the budget with no prior public discussion? Why isn’t RTD paying for their own repairs? A series of open-records requests reveal not a single communication in 2023 between RTD and any city official discussing the details of how the project came to be. Not who would pay or for what, not what they think the problem is, or why RTD cannot pay for it…. Nothing. As seen in the highlighted screenshot below, open-records requests revealed an email between the RTD point of contact and Council Member Shahrezaei. Shahrezaei responded that she would speak over the phone. Phone conversations increase communication but cannot be provided through open records requests. As the Council representative to DRCOG, Councilor Shahrezaei is in frequent contact with regional boards like RTD. The city shared that this project was submitted to the budget by the Public Works Department during the 2024 budget process. No communications came up between staff and RTD on this topic but the city says they have been in discussion about the project for years. No Council Discussion but Presumed Permission According to the city, this budget item aligns with City Council Goal 3, “Beautiful and Sustainable City.” Normally, setting goals is admirable but this statement reveals the public policy disparity with the City Council setting goals. Public and City Choose Different Bridges These bridge lights will be beautiful – if they can stay lit. Unsubstantiated sources suggest that the lights cannot remain functional through the train vibrations that displace electrical wiring. In the bigger picture, there was public outcry in 2023 for a different bridge. Public wanted to keep the use of a pedestrian bridge in Ravines Open Space park. 290 residents signed a petition to keep a bridge that will now be lost. For the price of the lights that are RTD property, the city could have kept the city beautiful a different way. Now those park users will have an unusable pipe-hanger while RTD gets bridge lights that will, certainly, be enjoyed by all. Footnote: then-Counselor Janssen did not receive any answers to her questions before Council voted to approve this budget.

Read More

Fees for Park Land Static Since 2018

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on Posted in UncategorizedTagged , , , , , ,

The development near Belmar Park, on 777 S Yarrow, has brought into focus the “fee in lieu” provision of Lakewood, Colorado’s Municipal Code L.M.C. 14.16.010. These fees have not been reviewed, or changed, since 2018, resulting in potential under-compensation to the city. Historically developers have had to provide park land for their residents to use. The fee was instead of park land. Existing Lakewood parks would provide park services for the new development. In light of the confusion regarding the fee in lieu of land dedication/policy the following was sent out to Council and staff on Dec. 31, 2023:  Begin forwarded message: From: Lenore Herskovitz <lenoreherskovitz@gmail.com>Date: December 31, 2023 at 2:56:12 PM MSTTo: Wendi Strom <WenStr@lakewood.org>, CityCouncilMembers@lakewood.org, Kathy Hodgson <KatHod@lakewood.org>, Travis Parker <TraPar@lakewood.org>, abrown@lakewood.org, kitnew@lakewood.orgSubject: Fwd: land dedication fee in lieu “I don’t know if you’ve seen this before but this is the fee that was set by Director of Community Resources in 2018. The fee is determined by the Director. The ordinance was supposed to have been reviewed by Council no later than Dec. 31, 2023. Also, the fee is due at the time of site plan approval or can be delayed by the Director (Kit Newland) until building permit issuance. The amount to be paid shall be the fee in effect at the time of payment (although it is interesting to note that the fee mentioned in the document expired on Dec. 31, 2019). As far as I know, the fee has not yet been paid. There has been misinformation sent out by the planning department stating “the city staff cannot change this valuation without an act of Council”. However, 14.16.07B of the 2018 document says that the Director shall set the fee equal to fair market value…The only job of Council right now is to review this ordinance. Why was this not placed on the agenda months ago? Staff should have been well aware that this needed to be addressed before the end of the year and it should have been posted. Former Councilor Springsteen mentioned this in October and no action was taken. Why are we updating fees so rarely? Prior to 2018, the only ordinance addressing this was passed in 1983. Obviously, property values fluctuate greatly and fair market values should reflect that. How much potential revenue have we lost over the years due to this antiquated system of determining fees? Council should review this ordinance at the next scheduled meeting and alter the terms as needed.” See ordinance and policy letter below:

Read More
Scroll to top