Search by keyword or six-digit Content ID


What's Hot

ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
Lakewood [Change Location]

On the eve of the land swap vote


Unlike the developer's land exchange PR campaign, I don't have access to the big bucks. I don't have a multi-color brochure to mail to all the Lakewood households. I am not a telemarketer from New Jersey hired by Carma to call homes directly. I have a simple black and white flyer asking my fellow Lakewood citizens to vote against the land exchange.

While walking through the neighborhoods distributing this flyer, I have spoken to a number of you about the exchange. The most common response is surprise and then outrage that we would give away land that was given to the city for use as a park. Why, I was asked more than once, would anyone donate land in the future for use as a park if the city will allow a developer to take and build on the land? This land was accepted by the city "for park and other municipal purposes." I wonder what Mr. Forsberg would think of the million dollar private homes that will occupy his parkland instead.

But this election is about more than setting a bad precedent for the exchange of city park land. It is really about the intrinsic value of a piece of land that far exceeds what we will get in exchange. Mr. Forsberg did not give us a drainage gulch. He gave us a park with outstanding views of Red Rocks and Dinosaur Ridge. He gave us an easily accessible open space that we can use for exercising the dog, playing with the kids or just admiring the sunsets.

I'm sure my feeble attempt to reach my fellow citizens pales before the juggernaut of the developer's campaign. What keeps my hopes up, however, is the responses of my fellow Lakewood citizens. Enough of you want to honor Mr. Forsberg's legacy that we just might pull it off.

Guidelines: Be kind. Abusive commentary may be removed. If you believe someone has been abusive, please click "Report Abuse".

SUBMIT COMMENT
Talk Back : submit comments to the story

*Note: you need to log-in to add a comment or rating.
Thank you! Your comment has been updated.
Showing 1-7 of 7 comments

We prevaied, 57% AGAINST the swap Jan 2, 2007.

I've come to this whole "discussion" late after seeing something in the local paper two weeks ago then getting my first Carma flyer. Those two things piqued my interest enough to start digging online (which led me here). I took my girlfriend to see the land being swapped last week. Now this is someone who has no idea about property values (and isn't particularly concerned with them) but as we stood at the top of the hill and looked out on the two pieces of land she looked at me confused and asked "didn't you tell me that someone claimed these two parts are of equal value? How can they even begin to think that?" While I realize that "land value" can be debated it's extremely obvious to anyone standing there looking that the swap would be a real boon to Carma, which makes me believe there is nothing "equal" about the values.

Yes, Scott, I do use the park. Probably more than those who have the gulch in their backyard and don’t want a “view of an unbroken sea of homes” cluttering their mountain vista. (Are you one of these?) You have to understand that the rest of us are concerned, no, dismayed, about the potential for a sea of homes climbing 22 acres farther up Green Mountain! Donald, Mr. Forsberg was a developer. Yet, he donated this track of land (all 162.8 acres of it) to preserve it. I’m sure the irony doesn’t escape you. The developer set aside the land to protect it from development. It’s not trivial that 14% of the Forsberg/Iron Springs park will be lost.

Great article. Thank you for speaking out. We will prevail in this issue! And thank you for your support. Your neighbors and the citizens of Lakewood are behind the AGAINST vote.

Scott, that was uncalled for. Give the opponents the money that Carma has given the proponents and it might be a fair fight. Donald, do you truly believe that this is the best deal that Lakewoood could get in the trade?

You are correct when you state that your attempt to reach your fellow citizens is "feeble", but it has nothing to do with resources. This fellow citizen doubts you have even visited the site when you label the subject land a "drainage gulch". This fellow citizen thinks you leave out important facts because your side has an agenda that has nothing to do with a land swap.

We are not "giving it away" we are EXCHANGING it for property of equal value. Why was the term "park and other municipal purposes" used on the conveyance document if the donor only meant "park" as you assert? Must have been some reason for that. We are not receiving a "drainage gulch" in exchange. Only 3 acres of the 22 acres contains gulch or ditch. And 140 acres out of 162 acres (about 86%) of the land donated by Mr Forsberg will still be there to enjoy those views, and you will like this, it will even be more accessible after a rainstorm, with an improved parking area instead of a mud pit after a hard rain or snow storm, and yes the dogs and kids are wlecome to join you and me to enjoy the sunsets from Forsberg/Iron Spring Park
Showing 1-7 of 7 comments