Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lakewood planning commission approves 411-unit apartment at edge of Belmar Park
Summary
The Lakewood Planning Commission voted 5-0 on May 7 to approve a major site plan (SP22-0010) and minor waiver (WI24-0003) for a proposed six‑story, 411‑unit apartment building at 777 South Yarrow Street, adjacent to Belmar Park.
Get email alerts on the Land Use Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Lakewood Planning Commission voted 5-0 on May 7 to approve a major site plan (SP22-0010) and associated minor waiver (WI24-0003) for a proposed six‑story, 411‑unit apartment building at 777 South Yarrow Street, immediately adjacent to Belmar Park.
The project, proposed by Kairoi Residential, would redevelop a roughly 5.2‑acre parcel (5.05 acres net after a planned parkland conveyance) into a six‑story building with 561 parking spaces in an internal garage, rooftop amenities and a proposed 8,600‑square‑foot parkland dedication where an historic pump house sits. The developer asked for a minor waiver to allow limited architectural encroachments into the zoning‑required facade stepback so rooftop and balcony elements could project into a 10‑foot stepback area.
Planning staff recommended approval after reviewing the proposal under the mixed‑use urban core (MCU) zone district standards and the enhanced development menu. “The planning director has the authority to review and render a decision on a major site plan,” senior planner Bria Pafford told the commission, and staff’s analysis concluded the application met the applicable standards in articles 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 13 of the Lakewood zoning ordinance. Pafford summarized required public‑improvement steps still needed before building permits are released, including platting, recording a water‑district easement, a public improvements agreement and payment of tree mitigation fees.
Planning Director Travis Parker framed the hearing as a transparency step and urged commenters to focus on the review criteria. “Development review staff … are experts in the zoning code,” Parker said, using a police analogy to explain staff’s limited discretion: they can enforce the written regulations but not substitute personal preferences. The staff report and presentation said the proposed design satisfies the MCU district’s dimensional and urban design standards and achieves the 50 points required on the enhanced development menu through items such as roof‑top amenities, bicycle parking and energy‑efficient lighting.
Applicant Sam Kasparik, co‑founder and managing partner of Kairoi Residential, said his company had worked with city staff for years and asked the commission to approve the major site plan and waiver so the project could proceed. “We respectfully ask for your support in approving our major site plan and minor waiver request so that we can construct and operate this thoughtfully designed community,” Kasparik told the commission.
Public comment lasted more than three hours. Speakers opposing the project cited tree loss, wildlife impacts, light and noise, and neighborhood compatibility. Dr. Michael Pardo, an ecologist, told the commission the site supports breeding birds and other wildlife and warned the building’s proximity to the park could increase habitat loss, window collisions and predation by domestic cats. “This project would be a disaster for birds in Belmar Park,” Pardo said. Save Belmar Park Inc. and other nearby residents urged a reduced building scale, additional setbacks from the park and more on‑site mitigation for trees and habitat.
Supporters said the proposal advances housing, walkability and transit goals. “Housing humans is important,” supporter Nate Whiteman said, adding the project would add density in one of Lakewood’s most walkable neighborhoods and reduce per‑person vehicle miles traveled relative to sprawl.
City staff and consultants answered technical questions raised in public comment. Ken Hargrave of Public Works’ engineering division listed required public improvements including an 8‑foot detached sidewalk along Yarrow Street and new driveway improvements. Hargrave also described how the project’s drainage design changes flows: the review found historic overland flow to the adjacent Belmar Commons area would be reduced (the staff summary cited a reduction from about 6.2 cubic feet per second to 0.46 cfs for the 100‑year storm routing toward that neighborhood) by detaining runoff on site and releasing it to the park’s outfall at a controlled rate.
Questions about trees were frequent. Staff reported the application identifies protecting seven on‑site trees, removing 66 trees and planting 74 new trees; a mitigation fee of $415,200 was listed in the staff report to address the difference in required caliper inches. Community Resources staff said replacement trees would be planted per city standards and that fee‑funded plantings are typically scheduled during the next available planting season after funds are received.
On the minor waiver, staff and the applicant argued the architectural encroachments would create better‑functioning outdoor spaces and improve the building’s interface with the street; opponents said the changes were still out of scale with nearby two‑story homes and Belmar Park. After commissioners discussed the record and findings, Commissioner Overall moved to approve the major site plan and minor waiver; the motion was seconded and the commission voted to approve the case, 5‑0.
What’s next: staff said procedural items must be completed before final plats and building permits are issued. Those items include completing the plat and recording the parkland conveyance and public improvements agreement, payment of tree mitigation fees and approving civil construction plans. The planning commission’s approval allows the project to proceed into those next permitting steps but does not itself authorize construction to begin.
Votes at a glance: The Planning Commission approved major site plan SP22‑0010 and minor waiver WI24‑0003 for 777 South Yarrow Street with a recorded vote of 5 in favor, 0 opposed. The commission’s decision adopts staff’s findings that the proposal complies with the applicable zoning standards listed in the staff report and the minor‑waiver review criteria.

