zoning

Kinney: Interview with Mayor Strom

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on August 29, 2025Posted in UncategorizedTagged Colorado, home rule, interview, Jim Kinney, Lakewood, mayor, parking, single family, wealth, Wendi Strom, zoning

Kinney: Interview with Mayor Strom Lakewood Informer contributor Jim Kinney interviewed Mayor Strom on the new zoning changes. The changes are sweeping and, as Kinney points out, they are “bold” and “imaginative”. Just eliminating single-family housing will impact 75%-95% of Lakewood property, and that’s just one provision. Kinney examines the consequences of these changes. Thanks, Jim, for your participation in local news and thank you, Mayor Strom, for your willingness to go on the record with Jim. Bold and Imaginative – Eliminating Single-Family Per State Law Starting the conversation with “why make these changes now?”, Strom answers that the time is right. “We just finished with our Comprehensive Plan process, that was the vision…. The zoning code is the tool.” Kinney says Lakewood’s zoning resolution uses words like “bold” and “imaginative” when he was thinking “slow” and “careful.” Lakewood is currently the only city in the state eliminating single-family throughout the entire city. Strom says Lakewood got an early start because of the comprehensive plan (passed unanimously July 28) and the resolution to change zoning (approved 10-1 by resolution using “bold” and “imaginative” in December, 2024). Strom says, “The elimination of single-family housing is tricky because it wasn’t necessarily actively eliminated, so much as the state eliminated the cap and by virtue of that, the other zone categories were not as accurate.” She continues, “It wasn’t an intentional removal of anything, it was purely ‘How do we address state law.’” Single-Family Housing in Name Only When Kinney asks if eliminating single-family housing will eliminate a wealth-building mechanism, Strom replies that single-family housing is “in name only”. She says this zoning change just matches what people are doing anyway. She then segues into the process for zoning changes, including developing a comprehensive plan and incorporating state law. Strom says that the biggest concern right now is not single-family but limiting the number of people that can live in a home by limiting square footage. Currently, Lakewood allows an 18,000 square foot house in some places. Lakewood is trying to get that number down to 4,000 square feet across Lakewood, rather than per unique neighborhood. The current zoning code does not allow 18,000 sq ft, 30-bedroom homes for MULTIPLE FAMILIES because they were zoned single-family. The 30-bedroom McMansion problem is a creation of the new zoning code. Strom says she doesn’t know if people will want to buy property in Lakewood under the new zoning code yet, but feels addressing the square footage problems puts Lakewood ahead of challenges. Real Estate Effects Kinney notes that realtors have already lost contracts because Lakewood is eliminating single-family. People shopping for homes know that the house next door could now be turned into a multi-family home. Strom was unable to reply directly but said that if other cities decide to eliminate single-family in future, those cities may not consider the 10,000 square foot problem. She says the zones should keep buildings similar in size to what’s there now, if not in usage. The current zoning code and comprehensive plan also claim to maintain neighborhood character. This argument was made and dismissed in the Belmar Park case. What Makes Lakewood Different Than Other Failed Zoning? Kinney asked how Lakewood will be different from all the other cities that failed to produce more housing through zoning. He cites a study by the Urban Institute that examined the results of zoning changes implemented in 1,136 cities over the last seven years. From the Urban Institute As a former City Council Member of the first city to try this said, the study “showed zoning changes across 1,136 cities resulted in less than a 1% increase in [cheap and abundant] housing supply.” Housing supply is the reason for the proposed zoning changes in Lakewood. Strom replies that the zoning changes themselves will not move the needle on “affordable housing”, which is a legal term. She says this will help “attainable housing” or “workforce housing.” NOTE: See “Lakewood Commits to More Housing Under Prop 123” for more information on “affordable housing” and the only defined housing crisis in existence. Home Rule On standing up for home rule, Strom expects cities to lose the home rule cases pending in court. She points out that the Governor has said for over three years that housing is a statewide concern, not a local issue. She also says that Lakewood already incorporated all the high-density elements the state asked for in HB24-1313 so that’s not a consideration. Only the new state parking requirements in HB24-1304 are an issue for Lakewood. As for the parking, she feels Lakewood can sacrifice required parking because banks will ask for it anyway. Strom feels Lakewood is “letting the market decide on parking.” This issue remains confusing because in previous discussion, Strom says the city is accommodating state law by eliminating single-family zones. She references following state law several times in general, but during this discussion on state law, it sounds like Lakewood has decided independently to take action on parking outside of state law, in order to follow state law. No further clarification was possible in the time allowed. When Kinney asked about the funding tied to state law compliance, Strom claimed she did not know any details. Oversight Kinney asks what oversight provisions there are in the code in case staff do not implement as envisioned. Kinney says there are a lot of places in the code where the decision gets made by the Director. Strom replied that there is a limited amount of staff discretion built into the code. The larger decisions already go to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. City Council will not be a part of that oversight, but can change the code when necessary, like when they changed the parkland dedication provision. The explicit duties of each party in the new zoning code are provided below. Note that there are many more discretionary items explicitly defined in each zone section. Public Funding Kinney says that research shows that the biggest

Residents Fighting Back Against Zoning Changes

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on August 28, 2025Posted in UncategorizedTagged activism, Development, Lakewood Is For Everyone, parking spaces, single family, yard sign, zoning

Residents Fighting Back Against Zoning Changes Across the country, cities and states are experimenting with new taxes on so-called “luxury” homes. The pitch is simple: target properties above a certain value, often $1 million or more, and funnel the money into local programs. But the reality is far more complicated—and the impacts often hit ordinary homeowners, not just the wealthy.

Special Zoning Treatment for The Action Center at Emory

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on August 12, 2025Posted in Development, Jeffco, Transparency, Word GamesTagged action center, Colorado, Emory, jeffco, Lakewood, schools, zoning

Lakewood is adding a new word to the dictionary — an innocuous move that covers up a dedicated zoning change for the Emory-Action Center swap while also shutting down future resident protests. Lakewood is planning on adding a new “Community Resource Facility” use to the zoning code to enable an “Amazon” warehouse-type low-income distribution center to operate anywhere in Lakewood. This new use is necessary for changes to the Emory Elementary property that Lakewood proposes to sell or exchange with the Action Center, which will convert it into a “Community Resource Facility”. That swap is not mentioned in the May 19th meeting on the zoning code change, even though the swap is what prompted the change in the first place. To listen to that meeting, one would think that there has just been a glaring oversight for the past 50 years, and no non-profits have been able to operate food pantries. Taken in isolation, residents could be forgiven for thinking that Lakewood didn’t have the ability to allow what is clearly already allowed in multiple places. Therefore, once again, residents must dig deeper to understand what is going on. In this case, allowing high populations of low-income support services in every zone in the city, including those previously reserved for schools. (For background, read Lakewood news at https://lakewoodinformer.com/springsteen-files-injunction-regarding-emory/) Travis Parker, Chief of Planning and Community Development, says Lakewood hasn’t had a request for something like this during his time with Lakewood, which may give residents an idea of the scale of the facility that is envisioned. The Action Center currently operates in a commercial area and sometimes has customers lined up down the block. The new “Facility” will be much larger. Envision the difference between the local retail shop and the Amazon warehouse. Are residents prepared for the warehouse of low-income services anywhere in the city? *Another word game warning: since places like the Action Center and Recovery Works are paid for by donations, Lakewood claims they are different from commercial activities, so they use the word “guests” instead of “customers”. They say this is a “distribution of goods and services” instead of commercial activity. The medium of exchange might be different, but the underlying intent is the same. The new code discriminates against for-profit businesses that are not eligible to operate everywhere in the city. Lakewood is a government, not a charity, and this type of special treatment drives out other commercial businesses who cannot compete with special favors granted by the government. It also discriminates against smaller non-profits that currently operate throughout the city but are not getting financial favors from the city to host a “facility” — like the one envisioned by Lakewood for the Action Center. In a city where small businesses are closing everywhere, why give special treatment to organizations that don’t pay taxes? When a City Council member asked how existing operations were allowed, the answer was that they were in a mixed-use zone, but it was unknown under what technical use definition. Historical precedence seems to be pertinent to the discussion. Is it possible the man in charge doesn’t know how this could have been accomplished in the past? Or is the change specific to something that could be pertinent only to the Emory property swap Councilor Isabel Cruz asked what this change would look like outside of the school disposition process. Her question suggests an understanding that the change is driven specifically by the Action Center swap, even if that is not communicated directly. Councilor I. Cruz asks about smaller non-profits, but they are already allowed under existing rules. This change is necessary only to allow the Action Center’s mega-warehouse tied to land swap. Lakewood is making changes behind the scenes to preempt resident objections. Under current zoning, residents would have a chance to protest the Emory Elementary use change later. Adding this definition makes the change happen now, without specific public notice.

Stop the Lakewood Zoning Code Fiasco

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on August 4, 2025Posted in Community, Development, SustainabilityTagged affordable housing, code change, fiasco, Minneapolis, single-family, subsidies, zoning

From Jim Kinney Friends and neighbors, I hope you all have had a chance to study the draft City of Lakewood Zoning Code being pushed forward by what appears to be the majority of City Council, the Mayor, and the City Manager and the Director of Planning. The new code is being “sold” as the answer to fix the problem that our City needs affordable housing. Minneapolis was the first city in the nation to abandon the single family zoning category, in about 2018, thinking that action was the answer to magically have the city filled with affordable housing. The article, Counterpoint: Upending Single-family Zoning Isn’t the Answer: Like many zombie ideas, the idea that zoning changes will magically provide abundant affordable housing just doesn’t die, was written by Linda McDonald, of Minneapolis, who is a former City Council member and is one of the founding members of the citizen group Minneapolis For Everyone. The following quote is taken from her article (my highlighting). “In addition, the Urban Institute found no evidence that more low-cost housing was built, or that lower-cost housing became less expensive when zoning was reduced. This isn’t surprising. The real reason new housing is so expensive is that the costs to build — lumber, copper, labor, etc. — have been increasing much faster than inflation. The private marketplace simply cannot produce deeply affordable housing, the housing critical for truly low-income persons. In Minneapolis, there has been an increase in deeply affordable housing, but only because the city has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in subsidies.” The draft Lakewood zoning codes proposes abandoning single-family zoning to solve the City’s lack of affordable housing. It has already been shown this approach has very little effect producing affordable housing. Tell City Council, the City Manager and the Director of Planning to abandon these draft new zoning codes, that abandoning single-family zoning is not the answer. If there is a reason to rewrite our current City Zoning codes, it is not to remove single-family zoning as the answer to magically adding abundant affordable housing. Educate yourself. Stand up and speak up. Council is planning on voting to make these disastrous draft codes our City law on August 25, 2025. In democracy,Jim Kinney

Lakewood Sacrifices Home Rule For No Reason

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on August 4, 2025Posted in Development, Sustainability, TransparencyTagged home rule, lakewood colorado, local support, preemption, state control, zoning

Lakewood seems to be giving up local control through home rule: The sacrifice is being made in order to gain state funding for local initiatives that ALSO have not been transparent and do not have resident support. Lakewood City Council is throwing away the bedrock of local representation – home rule – in a bid to win political support for zoning changes. New Colorado statutes preempt local zoning code, a move other cities are fighting. But Lakewood is using Colorado’s preemption to show: The majority of Lakewood City Council agree with the proposed zoning changes and have already voted by resolution to accept the proposal (only Councilor Olver dissenting – Ken Cruz and Bill Furman not yet on Council). No Reason With the majority of Council in favor of the proposed code, Council should not have to worry that the changes will pass. There is no need to sacrifice home rule in order to pass the new code. Lakewood could fight for the principle of home rule – a principle Lakewood was FOUNDED ON over 50 years ago – and still enact the zoning code changes that Council feels are necessary. Instead, Lakewood will change its code so that for the first time state statutes will override local zoning (see highlighted insert from the version 3 redline proposal below). No Transparency According to resident Karen Gordey in Lakewood Informer news, the authority for the zoning came from home rule itself. She wrote: “… the Authority section (17.1.5). It originally cited “the city home rule charter” — a key phrase affirming Lakewood’s autonomy. That language? Now redlined. Gone. Instead, we’re left wondering whether the City is scrubbing references to home rule on purpose… or just by accident (which, frankly, would be just as troubling).” There has been no public policy discussion nor vote on whether to yield home rule. Instead, it’s just being quietly edited out. This language may be extended next year because City Council has engaged a City Charter Committee to discuss changes. Note: cities zone to keep order and make sure there is a good balance between residents (cost burden) and businesses (fund providers). But in order to do that, property rights had to be violated to tell people what they could and couldn’t do with their property. Now Lakewood is saying they are “de-regulating” to give property owners more choices, but they are still picking the choices. An owner cannot go back to agriculture property, for example. State Preemption Governor Jared Polis signed an Executive Order forcing states to comply with housing laws in order to receive state funding. From ColoradoPolitics.com, the laws include those listed below: Colorado also passed TEN new laws in 2025 that the Colorado Municipal League determined preempted local control. Instead of fighting against any of these, Lakewood supported key legislation, such as HB25-1093, which reversed a vote of Lakewood residents. Lakewood Council Will Not Fight for Rights Lakewood did not take the opportunity to join the lawsuit that six cities are bringing against Colorado for overstepping home rule boundaries. Thornton recently passed a resolution backing the lawsuit of those six cities. So far, no member of Lakewood City Council has brought something similar forward as a Council initiative. Most Council Members have made comments that Lakewood must comply with the state law. False Argument The argument that Lakewood has no choice but to comply with state law is completely false, as proven by history, other active lawsuits, and a legal opinion provided by the Colorado Municipal League (CML). The Colorado Sun reports that “the Colorado Municipal League this month advised cities in an email that it views the governor’s executive order as illegal. ‘It is CML’s position that this order exceeds the governor’s authority … and promotes arbitrary and capricious agency action.’” State Perspective Lakewood resident Lenore Herskovitz voiced concerns over home rule to a panel of Colorado Democrat leaders. She pointed out: Colorado Representative Rebekah Stewart responded by: Watch the video below: Local Support Lacking Ms. Lenore Herskovitz is one of many residents to bring up mountains of evidence about the abundant housing availability, such as her article titled “Affordable v Housing Crisis” or an article by savebelmarpark.com on Debunking the Supply and Demand Myth. These alternative points of view are not part of official presentations and are routinely dismissed. There doesn’t seem to be an answer to the question of how can a statewide, or even nationwide, affordable housing problem only be solved by changing multiple, unique, local zoning codes. What is known is that Lakewood already has the authority to change its zoning code if the residents support it. Lakewood officials seem to be using the state law as a crutch to win local support, but in the meantime, they are sacrificing home rule control without even bringing it to the attention of residents. As previously reported, Lakewood seems more concerned with getting state funding than gaining resident support for zoning changes. The state deadline for funding is in October 2025. That funding is used for other initiatives that don’t get resident support. Does Lakewood need a City Council if the only concern is what the state would do?

“Rooted In Littleton” Provides Blue Ribbon Example

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on July 20, 2025Posted in Community, Development, Transparency, Word GamesTagged Colorado, densification, densify, denver, desnity, Lakewood, littleton, Rooted in Littleton, survey, zoning

Littleton residents claim to be amateurs in the political sphere but you won’t believe it when you see how they have successfully organized against density-driven zoning changes. Rooted in Littleton got density changes postponed in January and kept fighting to recently gather enough signatures for a petition. Their website reads: “We are passionate about preserving the small-town charm and beauty of Littleton. Our deep roots inform the perspective that good things grow slowly and knee-jerk responses to large social issues don’t produce lasting results. Let’s not let increased density usher in a new era of increased traffic, crime and big city-problems in our little town.” Does that sound familiar? They have many of the same objections to densification as Lakewood residents, such as the attempt to “to erode our home-rule rights with a top-down, one-size-fits-all approach that could strip our community of its uniqueness.” Check out their website for excellent material that could be used as a blueprint for others fighting this issue: Survey Have you ever felt that Lakewood presents data on “housing density and housing shortages in 2024 [that] was insufficient and skewed toward City Council insiders”? That’s what Rooted in Littleton wrote but Lakewood residents have also been making that point for months. The argument really gained traction after the Belmar Park fiasco. (See these articles from savebelmarpark.com: Lakewood’s Housing Affordable Surplus, Lakewood’s 10-year Housing Surplus, Denver Has Enough Housing.) Instead of just complaining about it, Rooted in Littleton organized a survey of their own and provided it for the public. Unsurprisingly, they found that 45% of Littleton residents felt that densification is NOT the best solution The survey they conducted showed that “76% of the survey participants said they want a voice in all major housing legislation, especially as it relates to adding duplexes, triplexes and multiplexes in currently zoned single family residential neighborhoods.” They also found that a majority of people DO NOT believe in the “benefits” of the proposed densification, as shown below: This group is truly inspiring. I can’t tell you how many times I have heard Lakewood residents share the same sentiments that Rooted in Littleton share: Lakewood residents love Lakewood for the existing characteristics. Just like Rooted in Littleton likes their city. Check out their website and spread the word if you know people in Littleton.

The Comprehensive Plan Bait and Switch

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on July 2, 2025Posted in Community, Development, Entrenched Bureaucracy, Transparency, Word GamesTagged 15 minute, 15-minute, bait and switch, community input, comprehensive plan, word games, zoning

Comprehensive plans are easily readable documents that explain a vision for the future of the city in a moment of time. It speaks in plain English to what the zoning code describes in technical detail. The problem is that the zoning code details are what carry the force of law and because technical details are harder to read, it is easy for residents to overlook inconsistencies in proposed zoning compared to plans. This is otherwise known as a bait and switch. For instance, in the comprehensive plan, Lakewood promises to maintain neighborhood character; while in the zoning code, Lakewood implements high-density urbanization which resulted in the destruction of Belmar Park-adjacent property. Pieces of Lakewood’s Comprehensive Plan were used as evidence to fight against the Belmar Park development. Lakewood officials discounted all such arguments. Now that residents have caught on to the inconsistencies, Lakewood staff argues against using the Comprehensive Plan to guide zoning. Instead, Lakewood proposes changing the ordinance so that the zoning code is no longer tied to the comprehensive plan. With this change, residents could not form legal challenges based on compliance with the comprehensive plan and there is less room to fight against maximum buildout in adjacent properties. Do Residents Need a “Vision” Document Why have a comprehensive plan at all? This is a long-term plan that locks in the vision for this moment in time. It includes aspirational goals with no implementation details. Therefore, the details are filled in by staff using their discretion to interpret the zoning code. Technically, one government cannot bind future governments to its decisions. If tomorrow’s City Council wanted to change the vision of Lakewood, it could choose to do so. However, having a long-range plan laid down by yesterday’s Council is a roadblock that is not easily overcome. Residents would better understand the zoning code if each change had to be justified with open debate. Instead, as is currently occurring, the entire zoning code can be changed by saying the code matches the ambiguous goals of the comprehensive plan. For example, the as-yet unapproved Comprehensive Plan seeks affordable housing. Therefore, City Council reasons that ANY CHANGE to the zoning code will be acceptable as long as affordable housing is the intent, not necessarily the outcome. There is no need for an updated 100-page vision plan document to update 300 pages of zoning code. Why not just introduce one little change at a time that is easily understood by the residents, and easily tested for effectiveness? The proposed zoning changes are still being discussed and changed. City Council have taken months to understand these detailed changes. Residents will have a couple weeks. However, residents did spend months providing input into the comprehensive plan, that will no longer have much meaning. The Proposed Change Lakewood intends to remove the binding zoning code connection to the Comprehensive Plan. As first noted by savebelmarpark.com: Lakewood zoning code currently states that the Comprehensive Plan is the foundation for the Zoning Ordinance. However, the proposed redline removes the “consistency with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan”. When the new zoning passes, all the aspirational goals laid out in the plan can be disregarded at will. Which really is no different than today, as shown by the Belmar Park debate except that today such a decision could be legally challenged and tomorrow it can’t. This specific change to the zoning code was not discussed at any public meeting. Comprehensive Plan Goals Not Followed The Comprehensive Plan states (pg 4-10): “Through the site plan review process and design guidelines, ensure that new multifamily, mixed use, and commercial developments adjacent to single-family neighborhoods are compatible by incorporating appropriate design, scale, height transition, and connectivity to seamlessly integrate with the neighborhood.” Residents compiled argument after argument to show that 777 S Yarrow St does not integrate with the neighborhood and does not meet environmental goals from the plan. Residents can clearly see that the Comprehensive Plan promises integration with the neighborhood. Residents can also clearly see that is not what staff implemented be allowing trees cut down to develop to the lot line near Belmar Park and new high-density apartments that don’t match the nearby buildings. . 15-minute Cities In other communities, residents are also waking up to this bait and switch. An opinion piece in the Boulder Daily Camera highlights this problem by examining Boulder’s 15-minute cities. This is particularly relevant since Lakewood leadership constantly mentions their desire for 15-minute city amenities. The proposed zoning code allows retail in residential zones for 15-minute planning. Steve Pomerance, in the Boulder Daily Camera, addresses this issue: “The underlying problem with this whole conceptual framework is the self-contradictory assumption that we can have commercial centers in neighborhoods that provide an adequate variety of goods, services and transit, all within 15 minutes of where people live, but still keep our relatively low-density neighborhoods intact. This is simply not supported by the economics or the geography.” – Steve Pomerance Read the rest of that article to understand the same sense of contrasting values Lakewood is “selling” to residents. The new development at The Bend is promising 15-minute city amenities. “Selling” is the appropriate term used here because the zoning was contracted before the comprehensive plan was finalized. In another eerie coincidence with Boulder, Pomerance wrote, “It’s as if those who wrote these objectives had already decided that the results of the cost/benefit study would support implementing this concept, and thus support the massive densification required to create such neighborhoods. Community Input Into Zoning Up to this point, residents have had no input. It was not a resident-driven development. Lakewood’s Chief of Sustainability and Community Development, Travis Parker, has been attending ward meetings to educate and also to promote the good points of the new zoning code — as if there are no other options. No one has addressed the dissatisfaction with the current densification in Lakewood. Does a desire for affordable housing mean automatic agreement to sacrifice current neighborhoods? More

Resident Voices Community Potluck with Lakewood Informer June 26

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on June 16, 2025Posted in CommunityTagged Accountability, affordable housing, City Council, Colorado, karen gordey, Lakewood, lenore herskovitz, organization, potluck, rich olver, sanctuary, zoning

Lakewood Informer wants to hear from you at a community potluck Is Lakewood on the right track? What events triggered you to get involved in Lakewood politics? Do you think Lakewood city management listens to you? And the big question – can you MAKE THEM listen? Join us for a potluck dinner at Addenbrooke Park on June 26, 5:30-9 pm and meet others who are concerned about the city. Bring your stories to share through the Lakewood Informer. Meet Lakewood Informer authors to get the latest information and meet your fellow residents. Discuss actions to get Lakewood’s attention on critical issues. –Karen Gordey on selling out neighborhoods–Lenore Herskovitz on affordable housing–Nancy Pallozi on Emory Elementary–Issues like sanctuary cities, The Bend, home rule, and getting organized–We don’t all agree on any of these items but it’s a starting point for discussion Tickets are free but a $10 donation would help defray costs for shelter rental and make future events possible. Hot dogs provided. Bring shareable food dishes at 5:30 for a meeting start time of 6 pm.Small group discussions start at 7 pmWrap up with solutions at 8 pmCapture your stories with video for sharing all night!Must be vacated at 9 pmWill be held rain or shine Tickets are limited, so please reserve asap. Maximum 2 tickets per person. Ticketing will be enforced to ensure park capacity limits do not prevent the meeting from happening. Summaries and videos of the event will be posted to the Lakewood Informer afterwards. There is a $10 suggested donation to cover costs (like park permit). Get a ticket with $10 donation here: https://checkout.page/s/R7jzvq1NxJ8Bu or scan: Free tickets are also available Due to a bad actor with a penchant for using false names, free ticketing is not available at this time. Please email me directly for a free registration with confirmed email and phone number. Karen at thedesk@lakewoodinformer.com These free tickets will not be honored because they didn’t follow the rules. If you have suggestions for discussion topics or would like to be a discussion leader, please let me know!

Jedi Mind Tricks – The New Zoning Code WILL BE Good

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on January 18, 2025Posted in UncategorizedTagged affordable-housing, housing, news, real-estate, zoning

The widespread zoning changes Lakewood made in 2013 resulted in a resident-initiated movement known as “strategic growth.” Residents were unhappy with the increased, high-density residential units being built that unbalanced the economic growth of the city. Ten years later, city leaders are still not listening to residents. On December 9, 2024, Lakewood City Council passed a resolution stating the city will have a “zoning rewrite that is bold, imaginative, embraces innovation, and the diversity of needs for the full City of Lakewood.“ This resolution is not normal procedure. Normally, there is a proposal presented to the public that will show specific plans on promoting homes for the unhoused, increased density, and decreased greenhouse gas emissions. This is not that. Rather, it is a declaration that the city already has its mind made up to implement these changes. And because they seek to be “bold”, the Council will approve whatever the contractor recommends, whether or not the public likes it. It’s like Lakewood is playing a Jedi mind trick. Lakewood leaders want a zoning code to accomplish a bold new agenda and they are saying: you can’t see the code but it will be good for you. You will like it. Residents are waking up to the fact that the “anti-growth” narrative was just a way to belittle those who disagreed with the establishment. Look at how residents react to the proposed developments at Whippoorwill and Belmar for proof that no one is asking to stop all development. They just want it done reasonably and in line with existing neighborhoods. Residents are also waking up to the fact that the “affordable housing” narrative is false because Lakewood doesn’t have a housing shortage. These two narratives are how Lakewood justifies the need for this zoning code change. Lakewood needs to pass this resolution and zoning code before more residents wake up. Going through proper public discussion took years for a short-term rental policy and the zoning code is much more significant. Being “bold” seems to be a new political buzzword meaning leaders are crossing a line. Bold is fast-moving, which could be dangerous in government designed to work slowly through public discussion. In this case, as you can see below, the new zoning code will potentially destabilize neighborhoods by extensively changing the rules to densify development in every code. The zoning code was established to keep neighborhoods stable, so residents know the type of neighborhood they are moving into. With these proposed changes, the zoning code can even be used to expedite spending for the homeless, which is a budgetary process normally outside the scope of zoning. The resolution cites the new comprehensive plan as proof that residents approve of this zoning code change. This is disingenuous at best because: Read the resolution below and see how wonderful it sounds. For each bulleted objective from the resolution, there is an example (in white italics) that shows how it could be twisted into something that residents would not like, most of which have been mentioned by city and state leadership. The revised Zoning Code will: The Lakewood resolution was written at the direction of the City Manager, thus by-passing public input. This allowed City Council to “signal” residents that this bold change was coming. That way there is nothing for residents to oppose until it’s too late to make changes. The reality is Lakewood does not have a shortage of housing. Changing the zoning code in the name of affordable housing is misleading. Read “The Totally 100% Fake Housing Shortage”.

Lakewood’s Gross Misinterpretation

By Lakewood News from KarenPosted on January 5, 2025Posted in UncategorizedTagged government, housing, Lakewood, news, save-open-space, zoning

From Cathy Kentner This week it came to light that the city of Lakewood is disseminating purposeful and gross misinterpretations of the new parkland dedication ordinance. City officials have made the decision to require land dedication for the replacement of a single family home while blaming it on the recently passed Save Open Space Green Initiative. And, what is even more ridiculous, they have told a landowner they must create an easement, a part of their yard, that would be open to the general public. This is clearly not what the new ordinance states. 1. The parkland dedication ordinance does not require land dedication when an individual is replacing a single family home with another single family home. For decades the parkland dedication ordinance, and resulting formula, has been based on the number of anticipated residents added to the city. Therefore, when replacing a single family home with another single family home, no land dedication is required because there are no residents being added. 2. The parkland dedication ordinance does not require an easement for public access on private property. Even if the city were to erroneously require land dedication, the ordinance clearly states “The land area that may remain in private ownership must be added to the project’s open space requirement…” The open space requirement on a home does not require an easement open to the public. It would seem that the City is deliberately putting up an unnecessary barrier for a single family home replacement and blaming it on the newly passed ordinance. Yet at the same time, the city is going out of their way to mitigate if not eliminate any barriers that would inhibit large developments of market rate and luxury apartments. Instead of encouraging families to stay, we cater to big money developers and corporations. In the process we displace longtime residents who can’t afford to live here anymore and cause urban sprawl as they go further from Lakewood for a single family home. The Save Open Space Initiative was not created on false pretenses. There is no covert agenda to stop growth as some have suggested. The reality is we have a finite amount of land. If it is being absorbed by large expensive developments with no required provisions for open space, parkland dedication, trees, or affordable units, we will be creating an unaffordable, unhealthy environment for future generations. This initiative aims to restore the balance of open space and parkland with the creation of the kind of housing that is wanted and needed. Much was lost over the past 12 years when developers all chose to pay a fee in lieu of land dedication. The Save Open Space Lakewood Green Initiative was passed by the city council who can, and arguably should, direct their staff to follow it appropriately. If necessary, council could very easily amend the ordinance to clarify that adding one unit does not meet the threshold for parkland dedication. Perhaps if the city supported its residents with the same vehemence shown to developers, we could diminish the divisiveness that dominates our discourse. Original News Story Lakewood family looking to rebuild home told they must give up part of property under new ordinance, Danielle Kreutter, Denver 7