Tag: water

Lakewood City Council stopped efforts by city staff to put up signs that would discourage panhandling or window washing. In July, Lakewood City Manager Kathy Hodgson proposed draft language that would ask residents not to give money to panhandlers. After getting feedback from Council Members in August, all efforts were put on hold. City Council apparently would not support putting such signs up. An online community discussion, summarized below, shows Lakewood residents are frustrated with Lakewood’s lack of action. Lakewood implies permission by continuing to deny action against it.

The proposed signs would not be a solution by itself. In fact, it would have blamed the givers rather than addressing the panhandlers. Other cities post signs similar to those below. Douglas County has claimed to have “nearly eradicated its own unhoused population with a simple message to its citizens: “Handouts Don’t Help.””

Examples of posted signs
Examples of signs used by other cities. Lakewood did not have public drafts.

A recent discussion on nextdoor.com started with one Lakewood resident wishing that Lakewood would follow Arvada’s example by posting signs discouraging window washers. From the discussion, it is clear that most residents are frustrated with the presence of window washers in Lakewood. The key sentiments include:

  • Safety Concerns: Many residents express concerns about the dangers window washers pose to themselves and drivers by running through traffic, potentially causing accidents, and creating legal liability issues.
  • Aggressiveness and Intimidation: Several participants feel uncomfortable and even intimidated by the aggressive behavior of some window washers, especially when they continue to wash windows despite being told “no.” Women, in particular, report feeling harassed in these situations.
  • Policy and Law Enforcement: There is widespread frustration with Lakewood officials for allowing this activity to continue, contrasting with neighboring Arvada, where police reportedly prevent it. Residents feel that Lakewood is not enforcing existing laws and is not taking action to protect them.
  • Mixed Views on the Washers’ Intentions: While a few participants argue that window washers are trying to earn an honest living, most residents perceive it as an unwanted and intrusive form of begging, with some even equating it to harassment.
  • Desire for a Ban: A large number of residents would prefer that Lakewood implement a similar policy to Arvada, banning window washers from medians and intersections.

Overall, the general consensus leans toward a desire for stricter regulation or a complete ban on window washing at intersections, driven by safety concerns and the negative experiences of many residents. (Note: discussion summary and conclusion by ChatGPT)



Correction 9/21/24: There is no single commercial applicant currently under consideration for the Vivian property. This month, following a pre-qualification process, several applicants were invited to submit final proposals which are due in October.  

Correction 9/26/24: Paula Reed represents District 2, not District 1. District 2 includes Green Mountain and Lakewood High Schools . Erin Kenworthy is District 4 which has Alameda High School and the now closed Emory Elementary. Three Board Members are up for election this year: Danielle Varda – District 1, Paula Reed – District 2 and Mary Parker – District 5 

Thank you readers for your corrections and information!


An untested process caused misunderstandings and hiccups resulting in delays to Lakewood purchasing shuttered Jeffco schools. Lakewood is now negotiating to buy 3 acres of Vivian Elementary School. They are also still asking about acquiring Emory Elementary for use by the Action Center. At a meeting on September 13, 2024, City Councilors and Jeffco School Board Members were able to get a lot of their positions stated for the record; however, this remains a closed process with both managers negotiating on a staff level. There has been no presentation to the public of a plan for school properties. School district documents show that the district must approve the use designation. That means that Lakewood must have presented their plans for the Action Center months ago, during the same time Lakewood Mayor and City Manager were calling the stories “misinformation”.

City officials appeared united in their efforts to buy school property at less than market-rate for city use or for general community sustainability. They cited multiple reasons for deserving a price break:

  1. Due to the trauma of the school closures, giving the property to a deserving party for less than market-rate would be healing
  2. The school board has a history of giving property away for community use so they should stand by that precedent (two examples cited including a property sold to Gold Crown for $1)
  3. Non-profits like the Action Center do a great community service and there should be an equivalent value included in the decision-making process

School District officials were divided in their response. Although everyone from both organizations signaled their willingness to work together, officials are making hard decisions.

Danielle Varda acknowledged the many great ideas they have received for using each building but said there is no way the district can give away all those properties because constituents expect proper fiscal management of public dollars.

“What I’ve been concerned about since day one is that we have a fair process that’s very public, that all people follow and there’s no backdoor deals, no handshakes.” – Daniella Varda

Paula Reed encouraged a new metric to be added to the evaluation process so that properties could be utilized for other uses, not necessarily getting market-rate. She said that Board Members have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that all assets are used for student education but there are lots of ways to contribute to that, including community sustainability. Reed represents School Board District 1, which covers Lakewood schools

School Board President Mary Parker pointed out that every time they would make a deal with one city, another city would expect the same. Indeed, City Council Member Mayott-Guerrero already brought up Mulholm Elementary in her ward, which is not up for disposition yet, but would be of interest to residents there.

Purchase proceedings were held up not only by price but by parcel size. Lakewood seems to be asking for 3 of the 9.9 acres of Vivian Elementary School property, which will be used as a park. One of the initial guiding principles of the School Board was that the property not be subdivided, which contributed to Lakewood’s delayed offer. Under the old rules, Lakewood could not buy just three acres.

Now the school board is rethinking its decision and will allow subdivision. Lakewood is in active negotiation for the 3 acres of Vivian. The rest of the land is being considered by Cardel Homes (among others) for development. There was no Council discussion about Vivian’s purchase but the residents there have mounted intense public pressure to preserve the land and it has been discussed in ward meetings, indicating some Council Members knew of the plan. Apparently, a new purchase option was issued to show the 3 acres as separate but Lakewood Informer cannot readily find that information.

Lakewood has already met once in a mysterious executive session that did not include a specific reason, contrary to Colorado Open Meetings Law. However, at the end of Monday’s study session, Council agreed to another executive session on September 19 to confirm negotiations on a school property. That meeting agenda also does not state the specific property or use they are negotiating for.

The case for Emory Elementary is less clear. Council Member Shahrezaei asked the hard question about whether Lakewood could get the property in exchange for community use. There were no easy answers to that question and no apparent change to Lakewood’s plan to purchase the entire property and let the Action Center use it.

Lakewood may have the same dilemma as the school district if they start giving any non-profit preferential deals, especially if there are multiple properties purchased.

The Municipal Option for school property purchases seems to be in flux as Jeffco schools test the process on Lakewood. According to the posted process (below), Lakewood and Jeffco Schools should have a joint public session after negotiations have concluded. At this point on Sept 18, it is all being handled by privately by staff.

Flow chart of purchasing process for a city.
Municipal Process provided by Jefferson County School District

School district officials seem willing to engage in a public discussion about property use but it’s a fast-moving process. Lakewood is finalizing negotiations on Thursday morning. As of Tuesday night the district website does not show an updated status for the school properties.


Lakewood’s offer to buy Emory Elementary School was turned down by Jefferson County. Lakewood City Manager Kathy Hodgson reported offering in-kind services in return for the school property. City Councilors expressed concern in July meetings at the concept of market-rate pricing but there is nothing the city can do. At the June meeting on the Glennon Heights Elementary School disposition meeting, residents were told that the developer, Cardel Homes, was looking at purchasing multiple school sites for residential use.

No word on what kind of residences would be built in an area that doesn’t have a neighborhood school.

Narrative Change Confirms False Front

The comments from multiple Council Members bemoaning the inability of the city to purchase the school property shows a change in narrative. This change confirms the city was, in fact, trying to buy the property, most likely in concert with the Action Center as previously stated by the City Manager. However, when asked about the purchase in the past, the city narrative from the Manager, Mayor and some Councilors, was that the city “had no direct control over school property.”

This was not a denial. It was misdirection that made residents feel ignorant and foolish for asking when it was true.

This is proof of lack of transparency from the City Manager and Mayor.

The city narrative changed from:

  1. “We are working with the Action Center to purchase the property so Lakewood can use existing Action Center property for homeless.” When that got negative public feedback, the story changed to ….
  2. “We have no direct control over the school property” while calling other reports “misinformation”. At the same time, reports were quietly rumored through City Council that….
  3. The City Manager was only interested in purchasing the property to use the soccer fields

No matter what the story, Lakewood has not been transparent since they started working on a plan in 2023.

Win-Win

This may be a win-win for residents. Since Lakewood cannot purchase the property, Lakewood will not make a deal behind closed doors that residents would not have had adequate time to consider before approval.

Likewise the county will not lose money on a private deal for less than market rate.

The sale of school property shows why market forces predominate the housing market. Even when an entity, like the school board, got the land and/or building from the developer for free, no one likes to give away an asset for less than market rate.

Lakewood did not respond to requests for clarification.


Host an exchange student with ASSE

The mid-year report on Lakewood’s homeless shelter showed some progress  and some new problems. The April 15, 2024, Council Study Session highlighted the 50-person capacity of the new “emergency” cold weather shelter at the location of the new Navigation Center on West Colfax. This was a planned shelter, used on an emergency basis because the building is not ready or approved to act as a shelter. As a new venture, the shelter encountered problems that Lakewood is learning from, such as determining the capacity of the building in-transition. Other problems that will be more difficult to solve are becoming apparent. For example:

  1. Lakewood may in fact be turning into a magnet for homeless due to its shelter
  2. Other cities are not stepping up to help as Lakewood anticipated
  3. Scope creep is already occurring including funds being spent for transportation to facilities and requests for food services.

The success of the shelter was evidenced by the number of people using the program. The Navigation Center can currently support 50 people, and it exceeded that limit several nights. Guests who exceeded capacity were offered vouchers for hotels, paid for by Jefferson County. This has led to some policy changes so that people are not incentivized to wait for a hotel opportunity. Lakewood has started providing transportation services to and from these hotels for the people who want to use a hotel voucher in another city but want to remain in Lakewood. Transportation includes coordinating volunteer efforts and paying Bayaud Enterprises.

City Council Members pointed out that problems would be decreased if other cities made the same switch Lakewood has, with the government taking on the work of what was previously non-profit domain.

It was never envisioned that Lakewood would be the sole provider of navigation services. So we really need to see that so that Lakewood doesn’t become a magnet for those in need.” Deputy City Manager Ben Goldstein (24 min mark)

Despite not having the current emergency operation under control, City Council is already pushing for more services.

Councilors Mayott-Guerro and Cruz asked for city resources to set up a food network. Staff respond that having food service is difficult without some consistency.

Councilor Shahrezaei advocated for being open more nights. Staff say changing the opening requirements makes it hard for staff to anticipate what is needed and may lead to being open for most of the winter.

According to Deputy City Manager Ben Goldstein, it will be a couple of years until the Navigation Center is fully operational as a shelter. The city is still in the acquisition phase for the shelter property.

We all want to figure out how to not let people die from weather, right? And that’s such a cool shared value because it’s actually just not that radical, but it was five years ago.” Council Member Mayott-Guerrero on Lakewood’s switch in city philosophy (30 min mark)

The idea of shelters is not radical for an individual or a charitable institution, but it is more so for a government. The Lakewood Informer reported in August, 2023, that local governments hoped someone else would step up to serve, without themselves committing to take responsibility. Previous letters of support to Lakewood made no promises of financial support.

At this time, Arvada does not have a plan for a navigation center, such as the one in Lakewood.  Like other cities in the metropolitan area, we are evaluating a number of ideas that might help address the unhoused population.  Arvada intends to observe what happens at the Lakewood navigation center with their implementation.” Arvada email dated December 7, 2023

Council is concerned about reaching the limit of shelter capacity next year. Goldstein says Lakewood cannot open another shelter without becoming an even greater attractant (58 min mark). Many of the area’s unhoused are now counting on the Navigation Center for shelter, as opposed to the local non-profits that fill up. This will especially be a problem when the center is closed for renovations next winter. Retrofits are now expected to go into 2026, rather than being completed in 2025 as expected.

Council Member Low praised the program for saving lives during the cold winter nights. When asked how much the number of deaths decreased, staff responded that they never tracked deaths, and if they did, it would be impossible to tell whether the death was from cold or not.

Life-saving or not, 50 people were provided shelter over about 20 nights. According to the staff memo, this could be a total of over 887 individuals, or the same 50 people multiple times. Another measure of success was the 52 Facebook posts the city made, which received over 150,000 impressions on social media.


Guest Post from Save Open Space Lakewood

Lakewood residents petition to save their parks and open space which the City likes to give away to developers. On April 27th they were at Lakewood’s Belmar Park with petitions.


Background

Local environment advocates will circulate a petition at Lakewood’s Earth Day, on Saturday, April 27, that would force the City from its arrogant behind-the-scenes approval of out-of-control developments to provide significant environmental stewardship for Lakewood.

Once certified with 6,000 required signatures, the petition becomes an initiative which Lakewood is required to vote for. If it doesn’t, it will be placed on a citywide ballot. Over one thousand signatures have already been collected in less than a month.

When: Saturday, April 27
Time: 11 AM -7 PM
Where: Heritage Lakewood Belmar Park, 801 S. Yarrow St., Lakewood 80226

“It’s become clear that nothing short of this petition is going to change complacent City staff, the City Council and the Planning Commission to be responsive to citizen concerns and also supportive of preserving our parks and open space,” said Cathy Kentner, who co-created the petition with fellow longtime community activist Rhonda Peters. Both founded Save Open Space Lakewood which is organizing this all-volunteer petition effort.

The petition, titled the Lakewood Green Initiative, was inspired after the public learned Lakewood staff had worked for several years to preliminarily approve and advance the plans of Kairoi Residential, a Texas developer, for a 412-unit, 83 unit per floor, 6 story luxury apartment building with a footprint the size of two football fields which would share the eastern boundary of Belmar Park.

Belmar Park is a 132 acre beloved park in the middle of Lakewood’s growing concrete jungle. It is a peaceful haven for over 230 bird species (many protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act), abundant wildlife and innumerable human visitors.

In preliminarily approving the Kairoi plan, the City ignored its own ordinances on protecting parkland and wildlife, improving tree canopy, fighting climate change and providing affordable housing. Instead it supported the gigantic 800,000 square foot design with no buffer with the park, the elimination of 69 mature trees, and lack of serious analysis of the development’s effects on the environment and on the safety of nearby residents who can only exit on a narrow street.

The public was notified very late as if it was an afterthought. Now the City claims many elements of the project are a done deal and they lack the power to correct this.

Since this deal was initially revealed, the City has placed numerous obstacles in the way of citizen attempts to have input on the development’s
outcome. Likewise, Lakewood staff has been actively attempting to thwart approval of the petition. The latest effort was an unprecedented five-day delay. Interestingly, a few hours after a local TV reporter submitted questions to the City, the petition was promptly approved and released to Kentner.

The Initiative Summary as Set by Lakewood City Clerk

Shall the City of Lakewood Municipal Code Chapter 14.16. PARK AND OPEN SPACE DEDICATION be repealed and replaced to eliminate the option for developers to pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication and to require the City to accept open space and land dedications for current and future developments.

Longer version: See soslakewood.org

Several years ago Kentner, who ran as an independent candidate for Mayor and has served on the Lakewood Planning Commission, successfully authored and helped pass a petition to limit population growth in Lakewood; it was subsequently approved in a citywide election.

By not following its own standards, Lakewood has effectively sold what should have been more than a dozen acres of parkland in the last decade. According to information provided by the city, Lakewood has not required land from developers since the Solterra development in 2007 and 2013.

Kentner said there appears to be a gentleman’s agreement between Lakewood and all of its developments so they are allowed to pay the City instead of providing open space.

Although citizens have long felt powerless as Lakewood approved large apartment buildings in charming neighborhoods and at the perimeter of parks, the Kairoi monolith at Belmar Park inspired several groups to work to either limit the size of the building or eliminate it entirely.

SaveBelmarPark.com is a comprehensive website that includes a petition to declare eminent domain on the land between the building and the park in order to create a buffer zone.

Save Belmar Park, Inc. has been organizing, educating and fundraising to pursue legal channels to protect the park.

Save Open Space Lakewood (SOS Lakewood) created a petition to bring these groups together to work toward a common goal of protecting Lakewood’s natural environment.

Guest Post from Save Open Space Lakewood

Lakewood residents petition to save their parks and open space which the City likes to give away to developers. On April 27th they were at Lakewood’s Belmar Park with petitions.


Background

Local environment advocates will circulate a petition at Lakewood’s Earth Day, on Saturday, April 27, that would force the City from its arrogant behind-the-scenes approval of out-of-control developments to provide significant environmental stewardship for Lakewood.

Once certified with 6,000 required signatures, the petition becomes an initiative which Lakewood is required to vote for. If it doesn’t, it will be placed on a citywide ballot. Over one thousand signatures have already been collected in less than a month.

When: Saturday, April 27
Time: 11 AM -7 PM
Where: Heritage Lakewood Belmar Park, 801 S. Yarrow St., Lakewood 80226

“It’s become clear that nothing short of this petition is going to change complacent City staff, the City Council and the Planning Commission to be responsive to citizen concerns and also supportive of preserving our parks and open space,” said Cathy Kentner, who co-created the petition with fellow longtime community activist Rhonda Peters. Both founded Save Open Space Lakewood which is organizing this all-volunteer petition effort.

The petition, titled the Lakewood Green Initiative, was inspired after the public learned Lakewood staff had worked for several years to preliminarily approve and advance the plans of Kairoi Residential, a Texas developer, for a 412-unit, 83 unit per floor, 6 story luxury apartment building with a footprint the size of two football fields which would share the eastern boundary of Belmar Park.

Belmar Park is a 132 acre beloved park in the middle of Lakewood’s growing concrete jungle. It is a peaceful haven for over 230 bird species (many protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act), abundant wildlife and innumerable human visitors.

In preliminarily approving the Kairoi plan, the City ignored its own ordinances on protecting parkland and wildlife, improving tree canopy, fighting climate change and providing affordable housing. Instead it supported the gigantic 800,000 square foot design with no buffer with the park, the elimination of 69 mature trees, and lack of serious analysis of the development’s effects on the environment and on the safety of nearby residents who can only exit on a narrow street.

The public was notified very late as if it was an afterthought. Now the City claims many elements of the project are a done deal and they lack the power to correct this.

Since this deal was initially revealed, the City has placed numerous obstacles in the way of citizen attempts to have input on the development’s
outcome. Likewise, Lakewood staff has been actively attempting to thwart approval of the petition. The latest effort was an unprecedented five-day delay. Interestingly, a few hours after a local TV reporter submitted questions to the City, the petition was promptly approved and released to Kentner.

The Initiative Summary as Set by Lakewood City Clerk

Shall the City of Lakewood Municipal Code Chapter 14.16. PARK AND OPEN SPACE DEDICATION be repealed and replaced to eliminate the option for developers to pay a fee in lieu of parkland dedication and to require the City to accept open space and land dedications for current and future developments.

Longer version: See soslakewood.org

Several years ago Kentner, who ran as an independent candidate for Mayor and has served on the Lakewood Planning Commission, successfully authored and helped pass a petition to limit population growth in Lakewood; it was subsequently approved in a citywide election.

By not following its own standards, Lakewood has effectively sold what should have been more than a dozen acres of parkland in the last decade. According to information provided by the city, Lakewood has not required land from developers since the Solterra development in 2007 and 2013.

Kentner said there appears to be a gentleman’s agreement between Lakewood and all of its developments so they are allowed to pay the City instead of providing open space.

Although citizens have long felt powerless as Lakewood approved large apartment buildings in charming neighborhoods and at the perimeter of parks, the Kairoi monolith at Belmar Park inspired several groups to work to either limit the size of the building or eliminate it entirely.

SaveBelmarPark.com is a comprehensive website that includes a petition to declare eminent domain on the land between the building and the park in order to create a buffer zone.

Save Belmar Park, Inc. has been organizing, educating and fundraising to pursue legal channels to protect the park.

Save Open Space Lakewood (SOS Lakewood) created a petition to bring these groups together to work toward a common goal of protecting Lakewood’s natural environment.

The development at 777 S Yarrow St, Lakewood, Colorado, has brought residents concerns over development to the forefront. Despite having ordinances and zoning codes, residents have identified concerns with traffic impacts, wildfire and emergency response, the loss of trees and questionable park fee implementations. Residents continue to act for this cause, at SaveBelmarPark.com, and there has been rumors of possible legal action. However, if Colorado House Bill 1107 gets passed, residents will have an even more difficult time bringing legal action against the city, because they will face legal fees if they lose the case. The bill is meant to decrease suits from residents, who don’t understand that the city has done research to show that the city is right, and therefore, resident concerns are generally unfounded and possibly frivolous. The Lakewood Legislative Committee, has taken a support position on this bill, meaning they support making it harder for residents to bring legal action against the city. This position provides an insight as to why so many resident complaints, like those of hundreds of people against the S Yarrow St development, are often given lip-service or outright ignored.

The issue highlights an important dichotomy in government. Technically, in a representative democracy, the residents should be telling elected officials what they want in terms of legislation. The elected officials then vote on a policy and the city staff will implement it. But what happens when politicians use targeted words to get a policy through that means something other than what people think? What happens when words from last year can be reinterpreted to mean something different this year, so that policy can change without so much as a public discussion?

These are the questions that residents ask when looking at the rules for developing S Yarrow St. How is it possible that a little street with a small building footprint can have no negative impact to traffic if you change it to high-density residential an add an extra couple hundred cars? Aren’t there rules to maintain a neighborhood in similar fashion?

In Colorado Springs, residents have found the answer in taking legal action against the city. Springs residents’ often cite the same problems – and developers are tired of it. According to this article in The Gazette, developers cite the need for more housing while residents cite safety concerns. Reading this article, where they talk about the 7-story complexes going in that are causing traffic concerns for the residents, you may think you are reading about Lakewood.

City Has the Experts

Lakewood will often require a traffic impact study, or environmental study when necessary. This expert testimony is the basis for approving projects. As one quote from the Gazette article stated, “”When [neighborhoods] fight these projects, they are not agreeing with the experts. They are deciding for themselves that it’s not safe.”

“In recent years, numerous political theorists and philosophers have argued that experts ought to be in charge of public policy and should manipulate, or contain, the policy preferences of the ignorant masses.”  – Nicholas Tampio, aeon.co

It is rare that cities will change their mind on project approval. Residents concerned with 777 S Yarrow have been told for months that nothing substantial can be done. So legal action brought by residents will typically delay a project, but will not cause any particular change.

To limit these delays, developers and cities need a way to stop residents from pursuing legal action. One way to achieve that is through HB24-1107 which proposes that residents who legally challenge the city will have to pay legal fees if they lose.

Passing HB24-1107 is sure to discourage residents, who already have less financial and legal resources than the city or developers they are facing.

Lakewood Council Member David Rein pointed out that this legislation is very one sided because developers are still free to bring legal action with no increased risk to themselves, which will not be the case for the residents. However, with his “city hat” on, Rein supports the legislation.

Councilor Glenda Sinks said that Lakewood should support this bill because it’s a way to support staff.

No one publicly considered the increase in legal action as a cry for help from the residents, who have presumably asked for the ordinances to be enforced in the way residents commonly understood they would be (for example, open space would be park space, not including dumpster space.)

Unanimous approval from the Legislative Committee: Council Members Sinks , Cruz, Stewart, Rein, LaBure (absent)

Legislative positions are not posted anywhere or shared unless there is a “strong” position. But this signals to the residents that Lakewood considers resident appeals to be generally not worthy of support.


Lakewood Informer


Resident generated news for Lakewood, Colorado.

Contact Info


Subscribe


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