Get AI Briefings, Transcripts & Alerts on Local & National Government Meetings — Forever.
Council hears concerns about wildfire resiliency code, sends measure to third reading after lengthy debate
Loading...
Summary
Public commenters and multiple councilors raised questions about scope, retroactivity and homeowner costs for a proposed Lakewood wildfire resiliency code; staff said triggers are generally limited to new construction or substantial additions and enforcement will be complaint- and permit‑triggered. Council set the ordinance for third reading on May 11 (9–2).
At its April 27 meeting, the Lakewood City Council heard a detailed public hearing and hours of council questions about a proposed wildfire resiliency code that would add Chapter 14.31 to the Lakewood Municipal Code and adopt a corresponding Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) map.
Karen Gourde, a Ward 5 resident who opened public comment, said the ordinance "applies broadly" and urged the council to clarify whether new requirements would be applied to existing homes. She warned that common repairs such as roof replacement could "exceed the 25% threshold and trigger compliance" leading to upgraded materials, additional costs and possible vegetation modifications that homeowners may not expect.
City Engineer Keith Hensel answered technical questions from councilors, saying the code is generally triggered by new construction, additions or substantial alterations (for example, an addition of 500 square feet or more). He described two site zones the code uses — an immediate zone (0–5 feet from the structure) and an intermediate zone — and said removal or pruning in the immediate zone is only required when the project triggers the code. On roof repairs after a hailstorm he said, "If a roof is constructed or needed because of hail ... that does not trigger the defensible space requirements." He added the city already requires Class A roofing across Lakewood.
Gus Gank of the City Attorney's Office explained the narrow scope of retroactivity in the draft: the code applies to conditions arising after adoption, to structures not legally in existence, and to conditions the building official reasonably deems hazardous. He said enforcement will follow typical code-enforcement steps: a notice, outreach and escalation if property owners do not respond.
Councilors expressed a mix of urgency about public safety and concern about community understanding and implementation details. Several members urged more public outreach and a clear, plain-language handout explaining when the code will apply and potential homeowner impacts. One councilor proposed temporarily adopting the state's map as an interim step to ensure compliance with state deadlines; staff advised that simply swapping maps would require further code edits and recommended using existing time before the July 1 enforcement date to finalize details.
After debate, a motion to move the ordinance to a third reading on May 11 passed 9–2, with two councilors recorded as voting no. Councilmembers also voted to table a related ordinance (O-2026-15) to May 11.
The council did not adopt the wildfire code at the April 27 meeting; staff said they will return with clarifying materials, including a proposed handout and additional explanations about triggers, exemptions and the exemption-request process for properties that believe they should not be in the designated WUI area.
What happens next: the ordinance will return for a third reading and possible adoption at the May 11 regular meeting; staff indicated an intent to publish explanatory materials and attend ward meetings before then.
