Tag: Colorado

map of Kipling and Alameda showing Milestone property location

Rezoning affects Milestone Property

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on . Leave a Comment

By Russha Knauer, Cross-post with permission from nextdoor.com,

The upcoming Rezoning Ordinance meeting is being held on Wednesday evening at 7pm at 480 S Allison Pkwy. This meeting will cover several rezoning issues. If you live in the area of Kipling and Alameda or Alameda and Garrison, this meeting will be especially important for you to submit public comments or attend and make your voices heard. Find information about the meeting and how to submit public comment here: https://lakewoodspeaks.org/items/4256.

Specifically, the zoning ordinance updates will allow for the land along Alameda and Kipling informally known as the Milestone Property to be rezoned to allow for high-density, mixed use urban development. That means that high-rise, high-density development up to 96′ can be developed. This will go against the current zoning and surrounding development of the area.

There are several things that are important to know about this rezoning proposal. First, the rezoning proposal was included in the non-residential zoning map, so many people are unaware that this could happen and how it could directly affect them. Second, this is one of two properties slated for rezoning in this manner; the second is already developed and the rezoning ensures the current development is allowable within zoning regulations. Third, the city stated that the Milestone property is one of 10 “difficult to develop within current zoning regulations” pieces of property. To be clear, this land is currently zoned to be developed as single family homes with mixed commercial use on the corner of Alameda and Kipling. However, the developers have fought the neighborhood for two decades to rezone the property to allow for high-density development. The only thing difficult about developing this land is the developers, not the zoning. Fourth, the city planning department recently told the Planning Commission in a meeting on 4/9 that the implementation of “Envision 2040” is the “city’s”, meaning there is no duty for the City to engage neighborhoods when development or re-development is proposed. Further, the city’s planning department stated in a presentation on 4/18 that going forward, developers will be the ones who have the option to engage neighborhoods when development is proposed, further abdicating the City of their role in engaging neighborhoods. Finally, the City has made this information difficult to understand and find when it comes to identifying nuanced information and how it will affect specific areas and neighborhoods.

Please come and make your voices heard! Make sure the City knows that developers should not be valued more than tax-paying residents; that the City has a duty to engage neighborhoods when development is proposed; and that rezoning should not be allowable in plans that are difficult to understand and provide no clear forewarning to affected areas.

Colorado Revised Statute 31-25-107

Toxic Legacy: Uncovering the Chemical Contamination at the Denver Federal Center – Part 2: Blight or Oversight? The Bend, the LRA, and Lakewood’s Shortcut

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on . Leave a Comment

By Karen Gordey

“Transparency isn’t optional when taxpayer dollars and contaminated land are involved.”

A New Name, A Familiar Pattern

Most Lakewood residents haven’t heard of “The Bend.” That’s because it was previously known in city discussions as the 6th & Union, 4th & Union, or simply part of the Denver Federal Center redevelopment. To longtime residents of Lakewood, it is known as the Horseshoe Property. It quietly rebranded, and with it came an expedited process that skirted public scrutiny.

I attended a West Metro Fire Protection District Board meeting on January 21, 2025, out of concern for wildfire readiness. What I stumbled into instead was a vote on tax increment financing (TIFs) for a development I’d never heard of—The Bend—on land I knew all too well.

As a result of hearing this, I went out to the Lakewood website to refresh my memory on the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority (LRA). From the Lakewood website: “The fundamental mission of the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority (LRA) is to encourage private reinvestment within targeted areas of Lakewood. The LRA has been created by citizens to enhance the City’s ability to preserve and restore the vitality and quality of life in the community.”

So let’s first look at how the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority (LRA) process is supposed to work. (Below is a bullet point version. However if you are interested in seeing the full presentation it is on Lakewood Speaks and you can search for the LRA meeting from March 4, 2024.)

Lakewood’s Reinvestment Authority (LRA) process, aligned with Colorado state law, outlines a clear and deliberate path for redevelopment:

  1. Blight Study / Conditions Survey: Performed non-intrusively by a third party, this survey determines how many of the 11 conditions of blight per state statute are present.
  2. Planning Commission Review: The Planning Commission is supposed to review the blight study and the Urban Renewal Plan (2 separate documents) and make recommendations to City Council.
  3. City Council Vote: Council receives both documents and votes to approve or deny.
  4. LRA Plan Approved: If approved, this becomes a 25-year plan governing redevelopment in the area.
  5. URA Designation: The project area is officially defined and adopted.
  6. Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) + TIFs: Other taxing entities (like West Metro Fire) enter IGAs, and TIFs are created after financial need is demonstrated through a gap analysis.

What Actually Happened with The Bend

  • The land is owned by Lincoln Properties; however, they used a company by the name of Lakewood Land Partners, LP for the deed.
  • The project was rebranded mid-process, obscuring its identity from the public.
  • The Developer negotiated TIFs with at least the West Metro Fire Department prior to the Planning Commission meeting or City Council approval for a new urban renewal project.
  • The Planning Commission met and approved the development plan without ever reviewing the blight study.
  • TIFs were approved by West Metro Fire before proper public process was complete.
  • This project was set to be heard at City Council for blight designation on February 28, 2025 (per the presentation at the planning meeting) however it is now slated to be discussed in a study session on April 21, 2025 followed by a City Council meeting on May 12, 2025.

Sidebar: Past Precedents

Lakewood has a documented pattern of fast-tracking redevelopment by combining steps for blight designation and plan approval. For example, consider these past projects:

  • Alameda 1 – Council Reso 1998-48 (5/26/1998)
  • Colfax & Wadsworth (Creekside) – Council Reso 1990-70 (8/9/1999)
  • Alameda 2 (Belmar) – Reso 2000-82 (9/11/2000)
  • Lakewood West Colfax Corridor – Council Reso 2005-79 (12/1/2005)

Developer Negotiating TIFs?

At the January 21, 2025 West Metro Fire Department Board of Directors meeting, officials explained that they were approached, not by the City but rather by the developer regarding a new urban renewal agreement for the near 6th Avenue and Simms/Union. This land lies within West Metro’s boundaries, but not currently in their response area.

The meeting minutes show active negotiations over TIF revenue shares, which should raise eyebrows because the developer has no role in negotiating government taxes.

This raises a critical question. Was the developer acting as an agent of Lakewood? Was the developer acting on behalf of a presumed new metropolitan district? 

Screenshot of the minutes from West Metro fire on January 21, 2025, discussing urban renewal agreements
Screenshot of the minutes from West Metro Fire on January 21, 2025, discussing urban renewal agreements

Just weeks later, at the February 18 meeting, the Fire Department approved the TIF Sharing Agreement with the City of Lakewood for the Bend project, again detailing the revenue splits.

Screenshot of the minutes from West Metro fire on February 18, 2025
Screenshot of the minutes from West Metro Fire with vote details on February 18, 2025

While both of these documents can be found on the West Metro Fire Department website, both meeting minutes have been downloaded and can be found here on our google drive:  https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1O0eNIOLdCo833C0xGKrvvRAeH9sUeVez

Here’s the problem: under the Colorado Urban Renewal statute  https://colorado.public.law/statutes/crs_31-25-107 developers are not authorized to negotiate Tax Increment Financing (TIF) agreements. That duty lies exclusively with the Urban Renewal Authority (URA) in this case, the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority (LRA) or the City itself, acting in that capacity.  The minutes of West Metro make no mention of negotiating directly with Lakewood.

Under the statute section (9.5)(a), the taxing agreements must be worked out with the appropriate entities before the plan is approved but there is no new metropolitan district approved, unless one was promised behind closed doors. Even if a new metro district was granted, there should be a meeting and A VOTE of that Board of Directors, with conflict of interest disclosures filed. In this case, the property owners and developers will likely be the only board members so they will act as their own government. They will negotiate deals as a government that will enrich their personal property in a direct conflict of interest. They will be able to do this legally if Lakewood City  Council approves their service plan in May. 

Why It Matters

The LRA has extraordinary powers: it can borrow money, sue and be sued, condemn property, and distribute public financing to developers. When oversight is minimized or skipped, or in this case handed over to the developer; transparency, accountability, and public trust suffer.

And when that’s happening on top of a Superfund site, it’s not just a process problem, it’s a public health issue and fiscal irresponsibility.

Article 3 will dive into the specifics of what’s in the blight report/conditions survey, the gap analysis,  what the city has currently approved for this property, and the lawsuit filed by Lincoln Properties against the Green Mountain Water Board.

Please Note, the author did send an email  on April 7th to the Mayor and City Council requesting to talk about this project.  No one has yet to respond.

Important Upcoming dates:

April 21st at 7 pm – Virtual Study Session with City Council and the Lakewood Reinvestment Authority (LRA)

May 8th at 6:30 pm – Screening of the movie “Half Life of Memory, Rockleys Event Center 8555 W Colfax Ave, Lakewood, CO 80215.  This event is free!

May 12th at 7 pm – City Council Meeting, 400 S. Allison Parkway, Lakewood, CO, 80226.  7pm  Public Hearing for the 1.) Creation of Urban Renewal District 2.) Creation of Metro District 3.) Approval of parkland dedication, including improvements in-lieu of a site greater than 15 acres.

Picture of traffic congestion on Union

2 + 2 = … Or doing math the developer boot-licker’s way

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on . Leave a Comment

Alex at Somebody Should Do Something posted a lengthy set of articles regarding The Bend development with specific attention to traffic and economic development.

Summary:

  • The Bend development has significant traffic impacts but the Lakewood is considering only half the impacts in order to gain project approval
  • Traffic study minimizes impacts in a pattern first noted in the Belmar Park development
  • Economic benefits cited that disagree with overall city economics, suggesting biased reporting
  • Traffic planning for emergency management situations is suffering in a pattern seen at C-470 and Indiana
  • Plans to pave the south side and render the surface impermeable are meant to decrease contamination fears but raise questions of stormwater drainage, which Lakewood inadequately manages throughout the city
  • Traffic for one half of the project is estimated to increase traffic 10%
  • Total estimated residential units are 2356, 18% higher than the rounded-down figure of 2000 units commonly quoted, with no guarantee of final numbers
  • Metro district application material misleadingly states that there are no other service providers for this area when in fact, there are service providers for everything needed. There are not service providers to fund for development, which is not a purpose of any government.

Highlights from Alex at Somebody Should Do Something

Part 1

“Environmental injury is often the very definition of irreparable harm — often permanent or at least of long duration,” Arguello wrote.

In the latest installment of the “how can a self-proclaimed progressive city council enrich a developer to the detriment of the environment and the community’s well-being”, City of Lakewood is allowing a developer to push forward with a development which will significantly increase traffic on a major thoroughfare, further strain our environment, potentially expose the future residents to toxic hazards AND, again, bring no meaningful economic development to the city.

Royal Lakewood Land Partners has made a submission for a development called “The Bend”, situated on the NW corner of the Federal Center, close to the intersection of the 4th Avenue and Union Boulevard, and, just a hop and a skip away from the off and the on-ramp from the 6th Avenue.

To add the insult to the many more injuries to come, as shown in the 2007 Master Plan, the site was originally slated for Office Development – a perfect potential use, considering the proximity of the LightRail tracks and the dire need for this city to stoke actual economic development.

As usually is the case, the math does not add up. The developer is using the tactic of “here is a traffic study… but it’s only for a part of the development, but we won’t even tell you how many poor souls we want to stuff in to these chicken coops. Then they talk about how this will “hardly” affect traffic, etc.

By the time the locals realize just how badly it will have screwed them, the city council and the bureaucrats, who had enabled this environmental and economic disaster, will have moved on to something else, such as being a State Representative, where they continue to shill for the developer profit (ahem, Rebecca Stewart).

So, lets see if 2 + 2 equals 4, or, maybe, 17, or maybe a dumpster fire for decades to come. Who knows. The math is very political-contribution-size-dependent these days.

Lets look at some of the documents in the submission provided by the developer.

01 – The Bend Minor Subdivision Plat – Traffic Study_2024-10-10

There are only details show for the Southern part of the plat – what about the Northern part of the plat? This is where the math gets hazy, quick. A tactic of piece-mealing the development plans is frequently used (just as is the case with the development near Belmar) to, lets say, omit, the actual impact of the additional car-travel-per-day numbers on the area surrounding the development. Not only will this adversely impact the surrounding area, but also add to the already high total of vehicles having to travel out of Lakewood, since Lakewood has failed to attract localized, high-tech, well-paying employment.

Read the rest about environmental and drainage problems at Somebody Should Do Something

Part 2

Lakewood (and Colorado at large) are not exactly known for keeping up with building up infrastructure needed to support the additional thousands of people they keep stuffing here. Nor are they known for making the developers pay their fair share for the traffic created, parks overloaded, or the schools needed. However, Lakewood is well known for enabling Metro Districts and the potential resident abuse that comes with them.

Of course, there will be a Metro District. Following are some of the snippets from the Metro-District-related documents submitted by the developer for The Bend

“The population of the District at build-out is estimated to be approximately 3,350 people, based on a projected number of 2,000 multifamily units and 100,000 square feet of commercial, and a population estimate of 1.5 persons per multifamily unit and 3.5 employees per square foot of commercial property.”

So, HOW MANY UNITS WILL THERE BE? And just as was the case with the Red Rocks Ranch, the development might potentially work out as a net negative to the county and the city?

The Bend @ Lakewood MD Service Plan Application Memorandum 4875-7617-6597 4 .DOCX

“The existing service in the area to be served by the proposed project is inadequate for present and projected needs. There is currently no other jurisdiction or entity, including the City, that considers it feasible or practical to provide the Development with the water, sanitation, street, storm sewer, or other improvements and services described in the Service Plan necessary to serve the anticipated Development. Current services are inadequate, and it is necessary for the District to be organized to provide such Public Improvements and services for the benefit of its future inhabitants.”

In fact, there IS sanitation service and fire service and storm-water service. These are all covered by existing city and special districts in which the property is located. However, there is no taxpayer funding for development, and that is what the metro district will provide.

And of course, any service provided would have to follow the rules in place, rather than creating their own rules, right? For example – lets look at the Rules and Regulations of one of the nearest Water and Sanitation Districts, Green Mountain Water and Sanitation.

Read the rest of Part 2 at Somebody Should Do Something

Demolition photo at 777 S Yarrow

No Permits For Kairoi Demolition?

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

From savebelmarpark.com

Update 3/19/25: Permits were straightened out (very quickly) and demolition on track

Greetings Supporters of Save Belmar Park,

This is an update on the attempted demolition of the Irongate Campus we told you about yesterday.

The top image is 777 S Yarrow Street in Lakewood, CO after 24 hours of illegal demolition.

We now know that Kairoi Residential had moved forward with the attempted illegal demolition without obtaining proper permits.

Kairoi Residential attempted to illegally demolish the Irongate Office Campus at 777 S Yarrow Street.

Local activists intervened and the city ultimately had to shut down the illegal project.

So please consider this.

If you happen to be in the construction business, obtaining permits is standard operating procedure.  At least for any business that intends to obey the law.

Even if you want an electrician to install a circuit in a residence, you need a permit.

The idea a company that has been involved in the construction industry in Colorado and other states for many years does not know how to properly permit the demolition phase of a project raises some questions.

Especially considering that their own civil engineers at Kimley-Horn prepared a large document titled: “EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL REPORT” that included great detail on the topic: “SEQUENCE OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES”

The first listed responsibility in the Kimly-Horn document is:

“The city does not authorize any work to be performed until the City Grading, Erosion, and Sediment Control Permit has been issued.”

Did Kairoi bother to obtain a grading permit?  NO.

Did they plan to intentionally proceed with this illegal major demolition project?

Given these facts, it seems quite possible that their bad behavior was intentional.

But it also could be that they are so incompetent, they really do not know what they are doing in the first place including not knowing about the permitting process?

Because the Planning Department certainly seems that incompetent.  The Planning Department even proclaims today on their website that:

“Demolition of the existing building has begun under a demolition permit issued by the city.”

Obviously, either the City Of Lakewood has no clue about properly permitting a project or they conspired with the developer to intentionally approve an illegal demolition project.

Which is it?

And we live in a city that is more likely to arrest citizens for clapping at a city council meeting than they are to slap a fine on Kairoi.

And a city where they city attorney tells city council they cannot discuss a proposed ordinance because they are only ‘administrative officers’ and are not even allowed to talk about it.

Basically, a city with more clowns than the circus.  To be diplomatic about it.

Why would any well-run city want such a rag tag developer doing anything within the city limits?

Stay tuned and thanks for listening,

Steve

View original email here

People catching onto the “affordable housing” scam

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

A pair of articles in the Denver Post show that Colorado residents are catching onto the fact that “affordable housing” isn’t the universal panacea that is being promised. New housing is not affordable, unless it’s government-backed, while higher densities are killing the very reason that people enjoyed their city in the first place.

Pro-development progressives in Boulder won’t solve the housing crisis

“Building a lot more housing won’t reduce prices because there’s an unlimited supply of people nationwide who’ll pay whatever it takes to live here. Boulder is a unique blend of access to culture and nature in a small city. There are plenty of people who want to move here and have the means to do so.”

This sentiment also applies to Lakewood, revealing the lie to all the promises that more housing will solve problems.

Denser housing vs. the ’burbs

“While Colorado lawmakers require upzoning and offer incentives in their push for denser housing concentrated at Regional Transportation District bus and train hubs, thousands of metro Denver residents like the Wellners are migrating to suburbs. They give multiple reasons for their moves: affordability, elbow room, quietness, safety and parks — things that transit-oriented development (TOD) often lacks.”

Many people moved to Lakewood for exactly this reason – wanting elbow room and safety. But Lakewood aspires to become more like urban Denver, in the name of affordability. Meanwhile, there are plenty of people who will pay “whatever it takes to live here.”

Lakewood is planning on changing the zoning code to increase density even more. The Planning Director is already out talking about the change. It was baked into the results of the latest comprehensive plan, whether residents wanted it or not. Those people who do not want increased densification have until the new code is adopted to object.

How Expensive is Lakewood Electrification?

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

Lakewood has a sustainability agenda to push electrification in order to decrease fossil fuel emissions. Electrification means changing your gas appliance to an electric one. Xcel is asking for an extra $5 billion to upgrade infrastructure that is needed for this change. Xcel will fund this by charging all customers more on top of an ever-increasing bill. A recent podcast from PowerGab called “Heat Pump Surprise”, pondered whether our elected officials know the total cost of their agenda. This was a good question so LakewoodInformer news asked Lakewood City Council if they knew the total cost for Lakewood residents. We got two responses and zero answers. All Lakewood residents are paying for electrification efforts through these additional fees. It’s not just the cost of a new appliance.

“Xcel Energy, seeking to meet an increasing demand for electric vehicles, rooftop solar arrays and heat pumps and general growth in electricity use, is proposing a $5 billion plan to improve the links between the grid and homes and businesses.” – Colorado Sun

The possible new fee is a result of the Fenberg Rider, passed by Colorado legislators in 2024.  This fee will improve only one leg of an overloaded distribution center. Electrification is one of, if not the most, expensive ways to decarbonize energy.

“Whether or not you actually convert to a heat pump you’re still gonna pay for this…. It’s even more perverse than that because what the PUC actually did was tack on a fee for existing natural gas customers to pay to subsidize folks to switch” – PowerGab

Does Lakewood know how much it will cost to switch to electric appliances?

Only two out of eleven Council Members responded to an emailed question. Neither answer included total costs. All Councilors affirmed their commitment to sustainability as a worthy goal. Sustainability, including any electrification, is a city priority.

Councilor Sophia Mayott-Guerrero provided a swift response, saying she previously worked in climate justice and clean energy policy. She points out the “current rate structures that Xcel uses is actually very beneficial to most customers as more electric appliances come online. As you know, heat pumps are most used in the night, and are also statistically more likely in homes where at least one person is home in the day, meaning continued use (on average) in the none-surge pricing hours. This all results in something often referred to as “flattening the curve”.

Flattening the curve does not stop the overall line increasing. The experts at PowerGab estimate (min 12) that the total necessary infrastructure upgrades total about to $695 billion for the necessary 82 gigawatts of power. The question remains, are climate justice warriors aware of the total cost?

Councilor Paula Nystrom says, “The concern is air quality, not just the cost… we [Lakewood] have deadlines to meet.” She says that it’s important to think of the global problem and how people suffer with air quality while trying to enjoy the summer outside. She did not know of any specific fees or sources of funding, but did say that there was enough tax credits and grants that residents wanting to switch to electric appliances could do so at about half the sticker cost.

Is $695 billion in new statewide spending possible? And is it worth it to achieve decarbonization goals?

Lakewood Council, Sustainability Committee and staff have been running a recurring false narrative that electrification is cheap because it uses “free money” like tax credits or subsidies when the reality is that everyone pays to make this money available. Lakewood will require that new buildings have electric heat pumps versus gas furnaces, relying on the fact that residents will believe the free money narrative over the total cost narrative. This change is likely to happen in spring of 2025.

Lakewood will also spend more on city buildings to meet these sustainability goals through increased taxpayer funding.

“This means you writing a check with a comma in it to pay your utility bill every single month. So $1,000 plus monthly utility bills.” – Amy Cooke, PowerGab

This informal survey of Lakewood City Council seems to prove PowerGab’s theory that legislators championing electrification have not added all these numbers up.

“This is a regressive tax. If you want to hurt poor people, you drive up the cost of keeping lights on… Affordable housing won’t matter. We are literally bankrupting the state.” Amy Cooke, PowerGab, min 7:30 mark)

“We need to account for the fact that increased load does have a cost,” Senate President Steve Fenberg, a Boulder Democrat and cosponsor of the bill, told a Senate Finance Committee hearing. “There are investments that need to be made.” –  Colorado Sun

The Council responses also shows that only two out of eleven Councilors were willing to explain their beliefs in the face of a competing cost narrative. All beliefs are worth consideration, and their answers showed true respect for all their constituents. Thank you!

Watch the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIExE1OlL-4

What Did You Expect?

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

From Alex at Somebody Should Do Something

“What did you expect? Welcome Sonny, make yourself at home? Marry my daughter? You gotta remember that these are just simple [progressives and RINOs]. These are people of the land. The common clay of the new West. You know? Morons.”

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?

To add ever more icing on that shit-cake, Colorado’s common clay of the new West (namely, representatives from Lakewood and Morrison) also turned what should have been a job-generating development with public transit options, in to a sea of houses. Even the developer-provided study showed what a shit deal it was for the county.

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.

Continue reading here…

Radiant Painting and Lighting 720-940-3887 karen@paintwithradiant.com https://paintwithradiant.com/

Limiting New Gas Stations

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

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.

Don't Denver My Lakewood

Sharf: Denver gas station ban a swipe at car mobility

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.

Read more…

Metro Districts of No Benefit to Taxpayers

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

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

Lakewood Still Ignoring Window Washers

Written by Lakewood News from Karen on .

When Lakewood City Council had the opportunity to study the effects of repealing laws like those that govern panhandling in the street, Council voted no. Council Members said they, “can’t imagine telling a voter that we said we’re going to get rid of the consequences to crime.”

What residents heard was “we want our laws to stay.”

What Council meant was literally, “we can’t tell people what we are doing.”

Nobody used false words, but a year later, Lakewood is still not enforcing its own laws and has not acknowledged the effects of removing the consequences.

Since that time, Lakewood has doubled down on permitting window washing by deciding not to put up new signs to deter window washers, while voting to put up new signs to change the speed limit, both of which carry the same traffic risk.

Residents are still voicing concerns and noting the lack of enforcement. A new thread on nextdoor.com appeared January 6, 2025. It disappeared within a day because Lakewood has vocal supporters on nextdoor who get people canceled (A big reason to support independent media!). Before it was removed, the post had over 200 comments, most of which agreed that panhandling and window washing on street medians was dangerous. Residents want Lakewood to do something about it.

Original post:

Nextdoor post: Every single day, there are groups of men standing on medians by the intersections in Lakewood with their "windshield cleaning tool" going up to cars and touching them after people tell them "no". All it takes is one of these guys to say someone "hit them" for a taxpaying citizen to be sued. In addition, when I've tried to tell them to not touch my car, they get aggressive and nasty, take pictures of my car and myself, mock me, and group around my car at the stop light with their phones on me. I have called the Lakewood Police Dpt and they say there is only so much they can do. Other cities in the area have laws that people cannot stand on the medians (this is common sense, this is safety). Lakewood needs to do the same. The gentleman said it also has to do with politics, and he suggested I reach out to the city council members. He said the more people that speak up about this, the better chance something will be done. If you agree that this is dangerous and shouldn't be happening, I urge you to speak up to the city council members. The more voices the better.
“Nextdoor post: Every single day, there are groups of men standing on medians by the intersections in Lakewood with their “windshield cleaning tool” going up to cars and touching them after people tell them “no”. All it takes is one of these guys to say someone “hit them” for a taxpaying ciizen to be sued. In addition, when I’ve tried to tell them to not touch my car, they get aggressive and nasty, take pictures of my car and myself, mock me, and group around my car at the stop light with their phones on me. I have called the Lakewood Police Dpt and they say there is only so much they can do. Other cities in the area have laws that people cannot stand on the medians (this is common sense, this is safety). Lakewood needs to do the same. The gentleman said it also has to do with politics, and he suggested I reach out to the city council members. He said the more people that speak up about this, the better chance something will be done.  If you agree that this is dangerous and shouldn’t be happening, I urge you to speak up to the city council members. The more voices the better.” – E on Nextdoor.com

Complaints:

Most neighbors said they felt threatened by the activity, especially females. Others felt endangered due to the high risk of accidents. Still more expressed frustration with Lakewood for not taking action the way other cities, like Arvada, are doing.

"The authorities need to get them out of the intersections, and stop harassing the drives. It's horrible. It makes Lakewood look like the hood."
“The authorities need to get them out of the intersections, and stop harassing the drivers. It’s horrible. It makes Lakewood look like the hood.”
"Kipling and Colfax are awful too. The median is very narrow and when they have little kids in strollers sitting there it's just unsafe."
“Kipling and Colfax are awful too. The median is very narrow and when they have little kids in strollers sitting there it’s just unsafe.”

Some people disagreed that window washing was a problem at all. They didn’t seem to argue about its legality or status as a traffic hazard. Rather than addressing those issues, they argued that residents should be more compassionate. To those that feel threatened or endangered, the overwhelming response was to tell people to deal with it. That is, it was your fault for feeling threatened, not the fault of the window washers or the situation.

"I've never once seen them get aggressive. I have had them clean my windshield even after having them off. They are just trying to make a living. Isn't that what we preach? Try to remember that these men came over the Darien Gap. Maybe even get your windows washed once in a while. This world is crazy. We don't need to make it crazier by getting our panties in a wad. Sorry."
“I’ve never once seen them get aggressive. I have had them clean my windshield even after having them off. They are just trying to make a living. Isn’t that what we preach? Try to remember that these men came over the Darien Gap. Maybe even get your windows washed once in a while. This world is crazy. We don’t need to make it crazier by getting our panties in a wad. Sorry.”

Misinformation:

More troubling is the amount of misinformation out there. For instance, one resident said this wasn’t a Lakewood issue. She advised people to call the state. During this process she agreed with Lakewood’s strategy of unofficially repealing crimes without resident consent.

Lakewood Informer reached out the CDOT and the Colorado State Patrol and confirmed that Lakewood are indeed the responders to this situation, if they so choose. Lakewood should have time to police all its laws.

"I'd rather have LPD responding to serious crimes, such as assault, rape, shooting, robbery, etc. BTW Colfax, Wadsworth, Kipling, etc., are all state highways,. Contact the state."
“I’d rather have LPD responding to serious crimes, such as assault, rape, shooting, robbery, etc. BTW Colfax, Wadsworth, Kipling, etc., are all state highways. Contact the state.”

One resident said he reached out to Lakewood City Council and was told there was no law against panhandling. Does City Council really not know the laws that have been brought to their attention numerous times?

"I contacted Lakewood City Council including the mayor and I was told there's no law against panhandling. But these illegals are not panhandling. They try to intimidate people and stand in the road. The City of Lakewood will not do anything. I tried for weeks and didn't achieve anything. If people would STOP giving these people money they would go away."
“I contacted Lakewood City Council including the mayor and I was told there’s no law against panhandling. But these illegals are not panhandling. They try to intimidate people and stand in the road. The City of Lakewood will not do anything. I tried for weeks and didn’t achieve anything. If people would STOP giving these people money they would go away.”

According to another resident, Mayor Wendi Strom specifically called these “crimes of survival” – a concept Council denied defending when refusing to research repealing the law.

"I spoke up about this at city council meeting and Wendy the mayor told me it's a crime of survival."
“I spoke up about this at city council meeting and Wendy the mayor told me it’s a crime of survival.”

Are Council or staff interpreting Lakewood laws are illegal and so are unofficially repealing them without a proper vote?

Or are they playing word games to say “panhandling is not illegal” while not addressing the fact that there are laws that address the issue?

According to staff, Lakewood has repealed several panhandling laws. However, there are others still active for roadside solicitation (LMC 12.18.020).

City Council has refused to research effective policing strategies or to take action to enforce Lakewood laws. They have also not officially repealed any laws. But Lakewood residents seem to have no doubt that Lakewood is not enforcing its laws and they are noticing the detrimental effects.

  • 1
  • 2
  • …
  • 6

Lakewood Informer

Resident generated news for Lakewood, Colorado.

Contact Info

Subscribe

© 2022 Lakewood Informer | All Rights Reserved
Designed by Mile High Web Designs