Why I’m Voting No on Lakewood Ballot Question 200

Why I’m Voting No on Lakewood Ballot Question 200

For several years now, growth has been the number one issue I’ve heard about as I knock on doors across Lakewood. People are worried about population growth and what it means for our historically underfunded schools and transportation infrastructure. We have all seen the traffic congestion on highways like 6th Avenue and C-470 and thoroughfares like Wadsworth, Kipling, Union, Colfax, and Alameda, and we don’t want it to get worse.

Lakewood has a long tradition of developing plans in a collaborative way, moving slowly and taking community feedback every step of the way. That’s how we ended up with our Comprehensive Plan, Sustainability Plan, and several other community plans. And that’s what’s driving our current Development Dialogue, which has already led to many changes in how the city deals with development.

This week, Lakewood voters will receive mail ballots asking them whether to support Ballot Question 200. I’m voting no, and I hope you do too. Though I share many of the proponents’ concerns about growth in our city, I feel that passing Question 200 won’t stop growth – it will just increase sprawl and make Lakewood’s housing affordability and traffic problems worse.

We already have a shortage of affordable housing that can only be solved by true strategic planning. If passed, Question 200 will make it much more difficult to build new affordable housing and will drive up rents and property taxes for people who already live here.

For the teachers, police officers, firefighters, young professionals, and others who work in Lakewood but can’t afford to live here, Question 200 will mean they have to drive in from somewhere else. That means more cars driving in and out of Lakewood every day, and thus more congestion on our roads.

So if not in Lakewood, then where? I’ve had constituents suggest that growth can just happen east of Aurora, but that’s just not realistic. If people are working in Lakewood, they’re not going to want an hour commute every day. That means increasing demand for developments in unincorporated Jefferson County that would sprawl out across the undeveloped spaces that contribute to our views of the foothills.

That’s really the choice we face. If we pass Question 200, we make Lakewood less affordable and increase sprawl and congestion. If we defeat it, we can resume our thoughtful, collaborative, and strategic planning process for the future.

I believe that we all want Lakewood to be a community accessible to young families, seniors, and everyone in between. I believe we all want to protect our beautiful parks, open spaces, and views. I believe we all want safe neighborhoods and great public schools. I believe we all enjoy having a growing number of unique restaurants, breweries, stores, and other amenities right here in our own city.

And how about the revitalization that has begun on West Colfax? I have loved seeing the emergence of art galleries and the facelift on the old JCRS shopping center, but we’re still seeing too many vacant units that could be filled by a new restaurant or store. And many of northeast Lakewood’s residents have to drive a couple miles to reach the nearest grocery store, which can be a real problem if you don’t have a car.

Why is that? It’s because businesses won’t move into areas that don’t have enough residents. New multi-family housing in northeast Lakewood – one of the growth areas designated in the Comprehensive Plan – could make a big difference in continuing the West Colfax renaissance.

What if we had a new restaurant row on Colfax instead of the growing number of storage units? Or retail establishments other than dollar stores? What if we could be sure that our kids will be able to afford to raise their families here? And that our parents will be able to retire here?

If we want to be thoughtful and strategic about growth, we must push our city council to continue the Development Dialogue, taking community feedback as they plan the right ways to grow. Passing Question 200 will not make growth more strategic – it will only increase sprawl and congestion while making Lakewood a less affordable place to live. Please join me in voting no.

Learn more at OurLakewood.com.

2 comments

  • Dani east

    By Dani east

    Reply

    I agree and will be voting no

  • John Weiland

    By John Weiland

    Reply

    I’m voting “NO!”
    Gentrifying this community by banning any and all affordable housing anywhere in the City except along Sheridan and West Colfax is their wish. It already takes as long 2 to 3 years with red lights, sirens, and guns out to get thing through the required development permitting process here now. The fear of the people who have put this special election thing before the people of Lakewood(at a cost of $300k of City monies) is far outweighed by the damage it has already started when the idea was first brought up. Any remodels, upgrades or improvements to any businesses starting with grocery stores are a moot point if the development is suddenly slammed shut. Lakewood has recently become an equitable place to start a small business again. There have only been 1 or 2 years in the last 20 where new residential construction has been at or above 1% of our total population. To mandate any tighter restrictions will cause any developers with plans to bring lawsuits against the City at even more unneeded City expense. The developments at Ohio/Mississippi, or the White Fence Farm are a go. Green Gables is not in the City of Lakewood. Oak Street Station was zoned for it as well as everything along the Union Blvd area. The Federal Center is another place where the City has no say in what’s to come. So this is just a start in what can go wrong with how this issue is so poorly worded.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>