Pending Decision

Item 3: RZ21-0006 - Green Mountain Village Rezoning

Case: RZ21-0006

Videos

Applicant Presentation

Staff Presentation

Files

STAFF PRESENTATION SLIDES - RZ21-0006 ( 2.1 MB )
APPLICANT PRESENTATION SLIDES - RZ21-0006 ( 1.24 MB )

Comments & Feedback

Comments
 
This case is closed, online commenting is no longer available.
Online comments closed at 8:00 PM MDT 7/20/22.
As a member of the pool and my kids are on the swim team, I am in favor of rezoning the land to be sold. Thank you, Terri
July 20, 2022, 4:31 PM
Terri Eggebeen
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I have been a member of the pool since 2012. There have been numberous years when I have anticipated that the pool would not be able to open. The pool has long been in disrepair and is indeed in need of major repairs. Recent boards have done an amazing job upping the curb appeal and most recently doing some significant work within the pool grounds. As I understand it, the pool needs to sell this property. As wonderful as it would be to have open space, I don't see the city, let alone the pool, having the resources to make this happen. I would much rather see single family homes than an unknown mixed use development. I am in support of rezoning.
July 20, 2022, 3:58 PM
Lindsey Rankin
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
As a member of the Green Mountain community I support rezoning the parcel of land next to the Green Mountain Swim Club. The rezoning aligns with the current look and feel of the neighborhood. The current zoning, M-E-S is a mixed use commercial and multi-family zoning that allows roof heights to 60 feet. There are already a number of vacant business sitting empty along Alameda and Union. Additionally, there is a large apartment complex currently being built on Van Gordon. This area, the swim club, and the neighboring elementary school would best benefit from single family dwelling, not large commercial buildings.
July 20, 2022, 3:14 PM
Kristin McCabe
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
As a former board member at GMSC, a current member, and homeowner in the area, I am writing in support of rezoning this property to R-16. It makes much more sense to have single family dwellings in this area opposed to a large apartment building.
July 20, 2022, 1:42 PM
Darcey Dobling
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
HI -- I fully support the application to rezone for residential homes. These new homes would likely add to the visual appeal of the area and will very likely benefit nearby businesses as well as schools (which benefit from strong enrollment). Who knows what otherwise might be put on the site in the future -- given current zoning -- and I would strongly prefer a known project (12 homes) to something else in the future that could dramatically increase traffic etc.. A nice side benefit is the funds that would go to the Green Mountain Swim Club (I am a member). Thank you for your consideration.
July 20, 2022, 1:26 PM
David Fulton
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I support the rezoning of this property. I have been a member of the pool for 7 years and a member of the GMSC board for 6 years. The biggest challenge of being on the board has been financial. For many years, the pool struggled with finances and often we were not sure if it would even be able to open. These last couple years we’ve seen an influx of members and it is truly a joy to see the community that this pool creates. My daughter has been a member of the swim team and has spent all of her summers growing up with her friends at the pool. It is truly a special place and offers so much for Lakewood families.The Green Mountain swim club has been a vital part of the Lakewood community for decades, and the sale of this land would allow it to continue to flourish for more generations. The pool is in need of repairs which cannot be done without this financial boost. I believe that considering the alternatives, single-family homes are the best possible use for the land.
July 20, 2022, 1:06 PM
Shannon Baker
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
Hi everyone. We live in the Green Mountain area and have been members of the pool for a couple of years now. We are in full support of rezoning the land next to the swim club for obvious reasons. We understand this will create more traffic & activity in the area, but the pool is in need of some serious upgrades. Everything from the bathrooms, the snack shack, the pool surface & surrounding platform, the list goes on... The profits from the sale will help this! Let's keep the swim club alive and well. Thanks.
July 20, 2022, 12:58 PM
Patrick Dwyer
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am in support of rezoning this land for single-family homes. My family and I are members of the swim club and have lived in the area for 20 years. We know the pool and facility need repairs and that member dues are not enough for the repairs. I do not want to see multi-family housing installed in this area between the school and swim club. Houses similar to the ones in the area are preferred. This is an established community that does not need 60 foot buildings installed. Please consider rezoning to keep the area consistent and to help the loved swim club used for sports and recreation.
July 20, 2022, 6:52 AM
Jodi Yutzy
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I support this rezoning application from M-E-S to R-1-6. The rezoning will enable adding single family homes to the area, which aligns with the original vision of acceptable/desired growth for this Green Mountain Village neighborhood when planned over 60 years ago. I understand and am not dismissing the general concerns about Lakewood growth and local traffic concerns. However, I believe rezoning and supporting this land use is the best option for the neighborhood given it aligns with the original vision and avoids the alternative structure/usages allowed under M-E-S. As a Green Mountain homeowner and Green Mountain Swim Club (GMSC) member, I believe the GMSC is a precious asset in our area that needs to be preserved. As many stated, the GMSC has provided a safe haven for local families for many decades, providing life-long memories for generations, jobs for local teens, swimming lessons (open to the public), and a thriving swim team (open to the public). As a former GMSC Board member, I understand that the GMSC requires capital improvements and maintenance, as well as the assurance that it can continue to cover significant operating costs for generations to come. As a Board member, I learned both were out of reach based on membership fees alone and that not preserving the pool's long-term viability would adversely impact the neighborhood and community. I can state without reservation that the all-volunteer GMSC Boards that I worked with directly - or been acquainted with as a member - are dedicated, community-minded people who are committed to doing right by the neighborhood. This includes carefully evaluating all available options for its vacant lot in question, with a keen focus on ensuring the best outcome for the neighborhood. Rezoning to R-1-6 would achieve this outcome and help avoid an outcome that would be much less desirable to the neighborhood (whether that be M-E-S development or the slow decline of the GMSC pool/infrastructure). Thank you for the opportunity for public comment.
July 19, 2022, 8:03 PM
Julie Sharpe
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
We are 100% in favor of the rezoning! We are 100% in favor of the GMSC remaining open and thriving from the sale of the parcel. We are however, 100% AGAINST 12 homes! Parking and safety along Van Gordon being the primary concern. The attached picture is from a recent weekday swim meet. How are families suppose to navigate Van Gordon to access the pool on an already heavily traveled, speedway with a dangerous curve right in front of the proposed development? This is a huge safety concern. Is it going to take another small child being killed before changes are made?
July 19, 2022, 6:30 PM
Lori Raymer
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am writing as a homeowner in Green Mountain, and a member of the Green Mountain Swim Club (GMSC). This is my first year serving on the board of the GMSC. I am voicing my opinion as a community member, not as a member of the board. I have watched large apartment complexes pop up in places that used to be vacant land. Developers are building large apartment complexes in locations zoned as mixed use. As it stands now, this land between the pool and Green Mountain Elementary is currently zoned as mixed use. The land behind the Safeway on Alameda, across the street from Foothills Elementary is zoned as mixed use. There are now multiple large apartment buildings on land that was previously vacant. I do not believe the community wants this type of development next to Green Mountain Elementary. This is our chance as a community to rezone the land to something more palatable, and we will be preserving a community asset. By rezoning this property, GMSC will receive the money it needs to repair, maintain, and upgrade facilities. GMSC has been a staple of this community since 1962. GMSC is an asset to the community and is a healthy place for families and community members to enjoy summer, in the form of athletics, leisure, and employment. Future generations will be able to enjoy this pool for years to come if we change the zoning. If we do nothing, we face the possibility of more traffic, and the pool closing. The decisions we make now impact the future of this community. I support rezoning the land to single family residential.
July 19, 2022, 1:32 PM
Jennifer Skilling
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I support the rezoning of this property. I have been a member of the pool for more than 10 years and also manage the swim team that is housed at the green mountain swim club. I have seen this pool struggle financially and be unable to afford necessary repairs and maintenance for the entirety of my tenure. Without the sell of the land, the physical pool structure will crumble and no longer be usable. The pool has been a positive community asset since its inception more than 50 years ago. Thousands of community members have passed through the gates and found a safe retreat for their families. Kids continue to learn the life-saving skill of swimming and the positive impact of camaraderie through the swim team. We understand that rezoning this area will impact the community. However this impact will be minor in comparison to the closure of the pool.
July 19, 2022, 12:18 PM
Danielle Nicholson
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am a former GMSC Board Member and current member of the Club. The Swim Club has worked diligently since 2018 to find the correct partnership that would provide funding to the pool and be the most beneficial to the surrounding area. It would have been much easier for the Pool to sell the land to a M-E-S development and put up a strip mall or storage unit, but the goal was to find the BEST partnership for the area and protect the community surrounding the pool. As a parent, I agree with some of the feedback regarding sidewalks, assistance with traffic control, etc. Those certainly need addressed by the city and those involved moving forward. These are valid concerns, but these actually SUPPORT the need for the rezoning, highlighting the need to avoid high capacity, heavy use development. The most important issue is to change the zoning to restrict the land to single family homes. The alternative does not mean the land will be vacant, it will mean the land can be used for many other things OTHER than single family homes. Thank you for supporting the zoning change.
July 18, 2022, 8:40 PM
Angela Busse
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am a homeowner in the Green Mountain area and a member of the Green Mountain Swim Club. I support GMSC's rezoning application from its current zoning, M-E-S, to single family residential, R-1-6. There is no doubt our community is growing and evolving rapidly, which can bring additional traffic, crime, etc. Building 12 new single-family homes sounds like a lot for that land, but will not have a significant impact on the traffic on Union and crime rate in the area. GMSC will sell this land eventually, so rezoning to single family residential will be the least impactful option on the community. If the rezone is not approved, the land can be sold as high-rise multi-family units, which is a much less desirable option for our neighborhood. Let’s take some control over what happens to this land and support the least-impactful option for our community by approving GMES’s application to rezone the land.
July 18, 2022, 7:31 PM
Jessica Rotan
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am writing on behalf of the zoning concerns brought forward through the Green Mountain Swim Club board as they attempt to sell the vacant adjoining lot. My understanding of the issue is as follows: the current zoning allows for multi family residences such as multi-level apartment buildings that exceed the current single family height restrictions. The re zoning converts that land into single family building sites. As a 10 year resident home owner in this neighborhood and as a person that can appreciate the interest in having expanded housing opportunity, I would like to voice my favor for the re zoning to single family dwellings. My decision is in part because I experience the already high traffic in this neighborhood with traffic more often than not exceeding the posted speed limit. That empty lot being developed is inevitable, but stacking more people means more cars and traffic and frankly, more children which leads to my next and biggest concern. My daughter is going into 2nd grade at Green Mountain Elementary school. We often walk and the traffic issue notes previously makes that unsafe under current conditions. The school shares a fen line with GMES and in full transparency, despite my love for this school, I will move my daughter to a different school if there is a multi-family structure(s) built next door. Without judgement, statistics clearly demonstrate that there is increased crime rates in areas where there are multi family residences. The single family housing will likely provide additional students to the surrounding schools without over crowding the classrooms and reduce the likelihood of rising crime rates, increased traffic, and reduced physical safety. In addition to this, aesthetics of the neighborhood, the charm of the current housing types, will be diminished by large, imposing buildings. This may be a lesser concern to the zoning committee, but it is a concern to me as a homeowner in this neighborhood. There is much work to do with no additional housing being developed on the vacant lot in this neighborhood; given the inevitability that housing will be developed it makes sense to re zone for single family dwellings. Jeanne Weihrauch and family Green Mountain Resident
July 18, 2022, 7:26 PM
Jeanne Weihrauch
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I support the rezoning to allow for single-family housing on the land just to the north of the Green Mountain Swim Club. Many here have expressed legitimate concerns about some of the issues in the immediate vicinity. Others before me have addressed them, but here's my 2 cents worth: - The strip mall on Union is a separate, private entity and has been run-down since at least 1981 (when I used to play video games in the little grocery store that was there). This seems beyond the scope of the rezoning request. - I don't live along there, but I'll accept from those that do that the speed of traffic along Van Gordon is _already_ a problem. Seems like an issue with an elementary school right there. Perhaps as part of this rezoning and development, a speed bump or traffic circle (similar to those just installed on Green Mountain Drive) could be installed? Or perhaps a few random days with the photo-radar thing? - Traffic in the neighborhood has increased quite a lot in the past 15 years. As it has in the entire state. In our neighborhood, maybe that has more to do with the changing demographics as young couples with families purchase homes from the original owners. Again, seems beyond the scope of this request. - I have served on the board of a summer-only swim club and have communicated with many from other pool boards, and a common theme is that they are fortunate to barely scrape by with a penny of "profit" from a season. They tend to kick the can of needed maintenance down the road, out of no other choice. That can only last for so long. If you are worried about 12 houses, I urge you to consider what the entire property would turn into if the pool were to have to financially go under. I am not privy to any financial information from GMSC, so this is my speculation, but I'm pretty confident that I'm right. The GMSC board has directly stated that they intend to "invest in the pool through much needed improvements and establishing a trust or other financial bedrock for the pool to operate on going forward." It seems like the choices here are a) rezone and allow GMSC to invest and "survive and thrive" (as said below), or b) play a waiting game until GMSC can no longer stay financially viable, and then the whole property gets developed, likely as condos or apartments. If you don't like development, option a is a whole lot more appealing than option b. I am a member of Green Mountain Swim Club, and have a child on the swim team. That being said, we will likely "age out" before the funds can be used to improve the pool. So I don't feel like I'm being self-serving here, other than trying to support what I believe is the best resolution for the neighborhood. Thank you.
July 18, 2022, 6:03 PM
Doug Felton
7 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am writing as a homeowner in Green Mountain and a member of the GMSC (not a Board member now or in the past). I don't disagree with many of the concerns voiced by my neighbors here: traffic, the old strip mall, crime, and affordable housing. However, these concerns are beyond the scope of this rezoning application and are wider issues are community faces. This application is about having some control over what type of development goes in because like it or not, the land will end up developed. As a third generation Coloradoan, I sympathize with the sentiment that our area has grown too much, too fast. I wish it hadn't but we cannot stop it. Rather we can try to support a development that is the best possible match for the community and recognizes that GMSC is an asset to this community. Personally my family would be heartbroken if the pool closed because it could not afford needed repairs or maintain members because the cost became too high. We love the pool, as have generations of other Green Mountain families. For our community, I would be heartbroken to see yet another high-rise development go in that doesn't match the character of the existing neighborhood and adds to our traffic woes. I just don't see 12 single-family homes doing that. As to the cost of these new homes, $800-900K is sadly not out of the norm for Green Mountain anymore. Even 1970s Hutchinson homes are selling in the mid to high $700s. I support GMSC's rezoning appication from its current zoning, M-E-S, to single family residential, R-1-6. It is making the best of the situation and gives some control over what our neighborhood looks like moving forward. Thank you.
July 18, 2022, 11:36 AM
Kathleen Legg
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am writing today in support of the rezoning of the land to the North of the Green Mountain Swim Club from M-E-S to R-1-6. I believe the plan for 12 detached single family units will bring an opportunity to help with much needed housing issue currently ongoing. It will allow for single family homes instead of multi-family buildings, which have taken over much of Denver-Metro. The community is in need of single family homes that aesthetically fit into the surrounding neighborhoods. With the sale of the land, Green Mountain Swim Club can continue to operate as an affordable, private swim club for both members and Swim teams. The Swim Club is such a needed venue for the community as you can easily interpret from calling multiple swim clubs around the area, and hear about the lengthy, multi year waitlists. It shows that our community WANTS and NEEDS these pools for family fun and safe teenage hangouts during the summer months. Not to mention the jobs it provides for our youth during these months while on school breaks. Please approve this re-zone to better our housing needs and help Green Mountain Swim Club thrive for years to come.
July 18, 2022, 11:06 AM
Dana Whisker
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am a current resident in the area of the Green Mountain Swim Club. I have lived in this area for 24 years. I am in support of the rezoning and selling of the land next to the swim club in order to assure the swim clubs longevity. The swim club is a huge asset to our community, there is not another facility like this in our area. The pool allows families to participate in healthy outdoor activities, family bonding and a sense of community in a time of too much technology. It supports a swim team, which provides youth with a place to be active and work towards athletic goals. It also employs our youth and provides a place for community service hours to be obtained. A 12-family development is so much better than a high rise, multiple apartment buildings or another strip mall. If the pool does not survive than the plot of land available will increase in size and I would hate to see what type of developers that would draw. Many of the concerns being expressed regarding traffic, and crime are already issues and, in my opinion, are not related to what is being proposed. Those issues should be addressed, just not tied to this rezoning issue.
July 18, 2022, 11:05 AM
Ann H Felton
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I believe the builder is proposing way too many single family homes for the space however I do believe it would be a better use than mixed use or multi-family homes. I vehemently oppose the idea of a multi-family structure with roof heights of up to 60 feet being built on this lot, you would completely lose the feel of an established neighborhood and the amount of traffic as a result would be terrible. I do firmly believe that the city of Lakewood also needs to do the right thing and look at what is best for the area, and in my humble opinion a large mixed use or multi-family residence on such a small lot would be bad for not only the elementary school adjacent to the property but the swim club as well.
July 18, 2022, 10:47 AM
Lisa Landis
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I am writing as a person who lives in the neighborhood, is a member of the pool, and sits on the Green Mountain Swim Club (GMSC) Board. I appreciate the feedback left to date and as someone who came into the rezoning, sale, and overall process only this past January, is sympathetic to the concerns of the community. The feedback here is something the GMSC Board has discussed at length and has spent hours learning about the history of the sale, the options, and does not enter into lightly. To be clear, what I am about to say is my personal opinion and in no way reflects on the pool or the Board; but I want to be honest about my connections to the pool as well. This rezoning and sale of the vacant land will allow the pool to thrive and stay open for years to come. The pool and the grounds are in need of significant improvements over the next 1-5 years and with this sale the pool does not have to borrow money or raise member's costs over the next several years. It also means that single family homes will be built and not apartments/condos/or townhome or a multi-use business development. If the rezoning is not approved, the current MES zoning allows for the GMSC Board/Membership to sell the land for any/all of the uses allowed with MES and those options will likely result in whomever buys the land to build any number of things; none of which may be a better option than single family homes that are like the current ones in the neighborhood. The GMSC pool is a vital part of this community and allows for a safe place for families to enjoy the summer months; the thought of the pool not surviving or going into debt concerns me. This factor is enough for me to support the sale and rezoning. It allows the pool to thrive, for only single family homes to be built (that are similar to those in the neighborhood), and guarantees that no other type of multi-family structures or business is built on the land. My hope is that the city and surrounding community understands that the pool is in a position where the sale of the land is likely the best way for the pool to survive and thrive; selling to a developer who will build homes that fit with the aesthetic of the neighborhood feels better to me than to sell to someone who will do as they please with their only thought being making a profit. Upon approval of the rezoning, my hope is that the city takes the concerns about traffic and does what is necessary to keep the community safe. The school traffic alone seems to warrant action for traffic concerns even without the development of this parcel of land. Thank you for your time and consideration.
July 18, 2022, 9:37 AM
Dee Dee Craig
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
Good afternoon,  I am writing today as a member of the neighborhood and as the president of the swim club board. This letter is not the view of the board, but as president and a neighborhood member, my motives are the same; to make my community the best that it can be.  I am in strong support of this project for a number of reasons. Primarily, it reconciles the zoning designation from M-E-S, which is incompatible with current zoning to R-1-6, single family residential, which matches surrounding zoning and aligns with the original neighborhood covenant. The current zoning, M-E-S is a mixed use commercial and multi-family zoning that allows roof heights to 60 feet. This is too tall for the neighborhood.   By approving the rezoning to allow for single family residences the swim club can have more control over what is built on the vacant property when sold. The current sale of the land is contingent upon the rezoning. The sale negotiation began two years ago when the pool had no other choice but to sell the land and wanted to make sure the development matches the neighborhood and did not lead to an overly dense or excessively tall development. Approving the  rezoning allows the swim club to invest in the pool through much needed improvements and establishing a trust or other financial bedrock for the pool to operate on going forward. Something the swim club has never had.  The swim club provides a resource not only to its members, many of whom are neighborhood residents, but also is home to the Green Mountain Gators swim team. The Gators swim team has grown to 150 this year providing swimming and competitive athletic opportunities for kids of all ages. The Gators are part of the Foothills Swim Association and host meets for the other participating teams throughout the season. The swim team provides opportunities for members and non-members alike. There is a lot of good for the pool and the community that comes from the sale. Keeping the pool and the grounds well maintained and not becoming, or continuing to be, an eyesore is part of that. Two years ago without proper funding the pool was at risk of closing. The Green Mountain Swim Club continues to offer a good value for a private swim club and it much more affordable than other swim clubs in the area. We have kept membership prices low for decades while the pool has continuously operated at a loss. The new board has begun to turn this around. The sale of the land will ensure that we can keep prices lower.  If the pool closes, goes belly-up, and is forced to be sold to developers in the future under the current M-E-S zoning then there would be two properties, the vacant lot and the main facility property,  that would very likely host five story apartments, storage, gas stations or the other low barrier to entry projects that keep drawing developers to the area. Rezoning to single family residential (R-1-6) ensures compatibility of uses and is a proactive measure against future incompatible, overly dense development in this single family residential neighborhood.  I think it is fair to say as others have, that the Van Gordon thoroughfare is in need of improvements. I can appreciate staff measuring the traffic flow to see if it warrants speed or volume interventions. Although the data collected did not rise to that level, I can assure you that given the old narrow sidewalks in the area that there are usually people walking in the street with dogs or baby strollers, kids on bikes and skateboards. The neighborhood is not pedestrian friendly. It is more common to see somebody driving at what seems excessive speed than it is to see cars come to a complete stop at any of the neighborhood's stop signs. The posted speed limit should be dropped to 20 miles an hour and 15 in the school zone. Flashing yellow lights on either side of the school and probably some visibility enhancements on the curve between the school and swim club.  As for parking, I think it is a non-issue for single family residential. Most people will have two cars that will fit in the driveway or garage. The parking needs and availability are very different from a condominium or apartment complex, which almost never have a adequate parking. The current development plan includes driveway and garage parking for each single family unit. The smaller lot sizes have no bearing on parking or traffic.  Many of the other issues and complaints voiced in the comments are simply not relevant to the project. There are issues that the city should address regardless or are out of the city’s control, like the rundown strip mall east on Union or the gas station that gets broken into several times a year. For those saying crime will increase because of the homes built, crime is here. The gas station is a constant target, people’s vehicles are regularly burglarized and the vacant land we aim to rezone and sell is regularly used for illegal dumping, drinking liquor and all manner of inappropriate activity. Sincerely,  Eric Brown W. Arizona Ave
July 18, 2022, 9:12 AM
Eric Brown
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I think the Green Mountain Swim Club is a wonderful thing. Having said i think the rezoning would be a mistake. The traffic alone would create more of a nightmare on union. They added that light at florida which at the first snow storm will back traffic up to west jewell. The incompetence of Lakewood's traffic engineers is staggering. you cannot drive from south lakewood to north lakewood in the middle of the day in less than 30 minutes. Furthermore Lakewood is already over built and will eventually pay the price once the economy shifts. Today it took me an hour and a half to drive from the old stapleton to jewell and garrison. 20 minutes of that was driving from wadsworth and 6th avenue to jewell and wadsworth. i drive 4 miles every day from jewell and garrison to alameda and center street. 4.3 miles . it can take 20 minutes some days. In addition, the builder is mistaken you cannot fit 12 homes in there nor should you try. Green Mountain Water is already having issues and the last i heard the board was out and out demonstrating pure incompetence. Instead of selling the land. use it as it was intended. Think bigger; make the swim club bigger. expand. make it a facility. make it a complex, park, a center that many people can enjoy not just those that belong to the club. your parking has to be expanded. the first thing you did this year was put a covering over the fence. let people see what you do . how fun it is. add tennis courts, actually add pickle ball courts. make it a place to go; how much are the improvements you talking about? so you are going to sell your soul for some money to make what $100,000-$200,000 in improvements. are you already a nonprofit?? i am thinking you might be. there are grants for swim clubs for improvements. i realize this is a lot for a volunteer board. i realize you have a restriction on the number of families that can attend the pool. i also realize its nice to have a private pool with a limited number of families so it doesnt take on the persona of a public facility. However, if you could increase the number of families and generate additional income
July 16, 2022, 6:16 PM
howard masini
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/14/upshot/housing-shortage-us.html?unlocked_article_code=AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACEIPuonUktbfqYhkT1UaBybIRcMnqQHBhf_S2706iTrlLC-PVT9NwqEIGM6A50LJL-JFVucE4g66FpVHIaN9A7t71PNeNEhgDFOl8paIkslZZng_p9j2AzI71NfHA-FotDSxYDS0I7sjmbe0tljOKjW_ANyp2nEiJwtlppJnZAvqjSROnvGZZ7Yzjtpu3v4hBYR4QyMDYUSJu_rvAhZ8PraWf02Wq1l2C6wCB2alzZPL4KkAcQ5SFVvDUHh1hG47499WM9odV73tun1y-Dm0A-VTj4ZGZ8C6EQ&smid=nytcore-ios-share
July 14, 2022, 10:05 AM
matt dendorfer
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
This used to be a nice neighborhood. It has be o e a sore spot with very little unrestricted open space. Green mountain water is already strained with the new homes in solterra, etc. why not spilt the space- city of Lakewood purchase most leaving just enough for swim club parking and leave it a natural open space all could use and enjoy without further burdening the water supply. 12 homes in that spot is ridiculous. We now feel like we live in Denver. This neighborhood needs more open space- not less.
July 9, 2022, 6:39 PM
Lori Hugh
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
At the meeting last Summer the Developer indicated the 12 homes would be in the mid-800's price range. One would think with the current housing market, those prices are going to be pushing $900k now. Again this is NOT comparable to the existing homes. Also, on average the existing homes have .25 acre lot size. If the Developer wants to build a similar project, the two acres would be 8 homes, NOT 12. I understand they want to do what makes financial sense for them, but they are totally disregarding how that decision impacts the existing residents. The majority of the pushback pertains to the number of homes plain and simple! 12 is absolutely OVERKILL! In the presentation, slide #10 specifically, it addresses local businesses that would gain from new neighbors. "If" those neighbors spend $900k do you honestly think they'll frequent these businesses (photo's attached). Slide #10 states these businesses: Bakery (not a walk-in grab a coffee and donut establishment), convenience store (combined with the gas station), gas station (combined with the convenience store), auto service, car wash, nail salon, insurance (all still valid businesses) and assisted living (small private memory care facility that likely doesn't impact ones decision to purchase a neighboring home). Do your homework before using that as a selling point for this project. Look at the attached picture of a desolated strip mall! As Jen P. mentioned what is the City going to do to offer incentives to local business to improve the upkeep of their storefronts and beautify their look. Look at the attached pictures. The strip mall is in disrepair. The signage isn't even updated; the Vet (wonderful Red Rocks) hasn't been there for over 5 years, Hi Grade Liquor has been gone for over 3 years and I never knew there was a hair salon there (if there was, it's gone now, as is the "Homemade European Food". This may all seem trivial but it points to inaccuracies that appear to be sugar coating the facts. Has any planning commissioner even driven this area? They approve a development that will increase values, etc. but turn a blind eye to existing businesses and issues (crime, traffic, code violations, etc.). I keep harping on the traffic this development will bring. I invite the planning commissioners to bring a shade source and a camp chair and observe for just a few hours the amount of traffic, especially speeders that use Van Gordon Court on a daily basis. Then envision how much worse it'll be by adding 12 additional residences.
July 9, 2022, 2:52 PM
Lori Raymer
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I have a suggestion for a condition to include as a requirement for this rezoning application that would help contribute to the walkability of the community. At the end of the cul-de-sac, and as part of the water detention area, the developer would be required to incorporate a sidewalk (or accessible ramp if steeper than 5%) to connect Union Blvd's western sidewalk to the new street/cul-de-sac. This would give the neighborhood better access to the community activity area to the east of Union Blvd as well as the shops along the corridor.
July 9, 2022, 1:23 PM
Donaldo H Visani
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
I echo Connie Mar's comment about this rezoning. Lakewood needs affordable housing and not luxury condos and apartments. Please opt for REAL affordable housing that is affordable to the many residents working in lower income jobs. This includes so many of the service industry workers.
July 8, 2022, 3:10 PM
Roger Ball
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
The only way this zoning change can help the city of Lakewood and this community is if the houses built are actually affordable. Not luxury, expensive homes. Lakewood has only been building luxury apartments and homes for the past 15 years, with a few exceptions where subsidized housing was built/refitted. The extensive wait lists for affordable housing shows a definite need. There is no need for more luxury, expensive housing in this community.
July 8, 2022, 2:18 PM
Connie Mar
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
Good Afternoon – I am writing to express a few concerns about this rezoning effort, and the subsequent potential sale and construction / development. I would appreciate if these concerns and questions could be specifically addressed. I am a homeowner, member of the swim club (GMSC), and mother of children that will attend Green Mountain Elementary. I understand the swim club would like to remodel with the proceeds of this sale, which could be very beneficial for the community. However, I don’t believe the current plan and proposal addresses surrounding community concerns effectively. Below are my concerns / questions: 1) I am already concerned about traffic and street-crossing safety on S Van Gordon Ct, and the potential of adding 12 new homes increases my level of concern. How will the city increase road safety, especially for children crossing the street, on S Van Gordon Ct? I understand a study was done and the criteria for speed bumps was not met; what are the criteria? I urge the city to reconsider and to weight the presence of an elementary school more substantially in their evaluation. Could a 3 way stop at the intersection of S Van Gordon Ct and W Tennessee Place be considered? 2) How will parking be addressed by the developer and city? The 12 proposed homes look very close together and don’t appear to allow for ample driveway/garage parking. Will there be consistent street parking as a result, which will spill over onto S Van Gordon Ct and up the additional side streets (W Tennessee Place and W Tennessee Ave), especially during high-demand times like swim meets and schools drop off / pick up? 3) How will the aesthetic of the homes integrate with the Hutchinson homes that currently exist here? 4) Is the developer able to adjust the plan for single family ranch homes after rezoning approval / through to construction without city intervention? I’m very concerned that if 12 homes are required for the project to be economic, the developer may be incentivized to produce more dwellings through a townhome/condo/apartment complex given the physical constraints of the lot. Thank you in advance for your review and response.
July 8, 2022, 11:33 AM
Lesley Perez
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
When i purchased my home on S Van Gordon Court in 2005, the street was somewhat quiet, today it is a racetrack, the "All Way" stop signs at Miss & Van Gordon are completely disregarded and all walks of life seem oblivious with the presence of a sharp corner and an elementary school, and all the young children that live and play in this neighborhood. Most neighbors use the Green Mountain elementary school playground and the play field that was purchased by the Colorado Lottery. The city of Lakewood is looking out for the city of Lakewood financials! How about this - The city of Lakewood gets the overwhelming crime under control, people to drive within the rules of the road and take a good look at the buildings that could use a new look to increase their revenue which will increase the city's revenue. I can tell you as a resident in this neighborhood since 2005,the only place i conducted business with on the corner of Mississippi and Union, the Veterinary Clinic. (Dr. G) Everyday mart is a complete joke to this neighborhood and their appearance should be noted by Lakewood Code Enforcement! The field next to the pool is harmless and would never invite crime, i do see people driving through the snow and mud over there at times and this would be a law enforcement issue for Lakewood PD. The Pool - Yes they got a chunk of money from somewhere? Have any of you City Council members stopped by the area when they have a swim meet?? Many cars parked on Van Gordon as well as in the field. Some of us have already submitted our questions and concerns when the city notified any residents that live within 250' or so of the proposed site. My suggestion is to beautify the area in question and that will attract more consumers, 12 houses is going to create an even bigger monster on South Van Gordon Court! (Mic Drop)!!!!
July 8, 2022, 11:30 AM
Kevin Papineau
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
Is the City of Lakewood going to invest in the surrounding business as well to beautify and update the buildings? There is a building on Union adjacent to Dairy Queen that has not progressed in construction since moving in Oct-2021. What is the intent from Lakewood for the surrounding area of the new development if it passes? The South of Alameda Comprehensive Plan link is broken. Why is it "OK" for W Mississippi Ave to have speed bumps but not Van Gordon Ct when there is an elementary school on our street? People use Van Gordon Ct as a cut through.
July 8, 2022, 10:47 AM
Jennifer Piwonski
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
* Why doesn't the city buy the parcel and convert it to a park. Better yet, split the parcel with the Pool so they can add additional parking. Van Gordon is often used for their "over flow" parking, which isn't safe. * I'd like you to address the point that development will alleviate crime in the field. What crime has taken place there? The city doesn't address crime as it is now! 12 new residences will invite crime. Construction materials initially and then future residents' property. Have you looked at crime rates in our area? Two houses south of the pool have been victims 4 times in the last 8 months!!!! * How does similar architectural design of "mid-modern" compare to homes built in the 60's? Only 4 homes were built in 1982? The renderings posted look nothing like any homes within 2 miles * "Enchance the appearance of the community" - how when none of the houses face either Van Gordon or Union? There is no "curb appeal" from the side of a home. * Support local businesses? Other than DQ, everything within walking distance, including the retail center adjacent to the parcel are vacant or in need of repairs/improvements (which I'm sure they get no incentives from the city to do). The majority of people will drive north to the Union corridor for these services. It feels as if you are sugar coating the retail aspect a bit much. * These houses will promote membership to the Swim Club? Do they receive a membership with the purchase of their home? Doesn't the swim club have a maximum capacity? I believe they have reached it. * We are NOT opposed to development, nor new construction within our community. What we are opposed to the destiny. The developer has explained it doesn't make financial sense for them to build LESS than 12. But they don't consider the traffic, the noise, the appearance. The current homes have decent lot sizes, again the appearance won't match in this regard either. * The traffic study from 2020 to 2021 already shows traffic more than doubled in the time frame and the average speed exceeds the posted speed limit despite it being a school zone. So again, we request speed bumps be considered! TRAFFIC IS A SERIOUS ISSUE, and this development would add at least another 24 vehicles!!!!
July 8, 2022, 10:37 AM
Lori Raymer
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
As a new homeowner to the area (Oct-2021) and across the street facing Van Gordon at Tennessee from this proposed development there are several concerns. I want my concerns heard and addressed. 1. 2 year construction plan - significant noise increase, significant traffic increase, as well as air quality issues. As a family with allergies, this is concerning as this will cause increased dust in our house. 2. Open space view will now be blocked with homes. What will the new HOA impact be for the new homes? Will the HOA be only imposed on the new homes, or no HOA at all? This is not clear in the attachments. 3. Increased population, increased potential for crime with increased parking on Van Gordon Ct. 4. Changes the current aesthetics of the vintage 1960's brick homes. 5. Van Gordon Ct "speedway". I'd like to see the answer to the speed bumps or traffic control plan. The elementary school will be the new homes neighbor, and there is already significant traffic. What improvement to Van Gordon Ct will be made? 6. Question - Do the current home owners have a say in the review and approval of the build plan and new home elevations? 7. How will this impact the current homes under Lakewood building codes? Are there any ongoing revisions to the Muni-code with this new development? Thank you Jennifer and David
July 8, 2022, 10:26 AM
Jennifer Piwonski
9 / 7 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Your Question has been submitted.