INC PARC October 17 2017 Meeting Notes

INC Parks & Recreation Committee (PARC) met October 17 at Brookdale UPark. Present were co-chairs Cindy Johnstone FANS and Maggie Price Congress Park Neighbors, Katie and Steve Fisher University Neighbors, Brad Cameron CPAG, Marlene Johnson Hutchinson Hills, Ronnie Crawford Overland Park, Nancy Francis CPFAN, Sonia John FANS, Kathleen Butler Greater Park Hill, Amber Clark College View, Ean Tafoya INC ZAP, Johan Barrios UPTOWN, Derek Cocovinis Winston Downs , Bridget Walsh CPFAN, Diana Helper University Neighbors, and guest Nam Henderson Greater Park Hill of the Green Roof Initiative

GREEN ROOF INITIATIVE I-300

Mr. Henderson said there already are a number of successful green roof treatments in Denver,  The petition to put this initiative on the ballot in November yielded more than enough signatures from supporters.  Originally the Mayor took no position on it but later decided to oppose it, along with many developers, despite that there are options built in for adding solar combinations, granting abstentions, etc. Green roofs take only 7 inches of water/year and are proven to save money by cooling the building, storm-water management, open space amenities, and more.  Visit www.denvergreenroof.org for more information.

UPDATE PARK HILL GOLF COURSE AND RESOLUTION

Brad Cameron updated the complex Park Hill Golf Course situation, gave a history of the conservation easement signed by Mayor Webb and now being discounted.  The proposed contract between Clayton College and the City would allow for a great deal of development in the park space.  Clayton Neighborhood was unable to attend this meeting and asked Jo Barrios to represent them. She said that the Clayton RNO board does not agree with the INC letter sent earlier to the city urging more public input and transparency and presented a letter (found here) that the Clayton Neighborhood board sent to City Council in Oct. Their board believes many in the community want the continued association they now enjoy for their children with Clayton Early Learning, and don’t wish to jeopardize that.  She urged that PARC come to their neighborhood to discuss. Brad pointed out that in the current land sale contract, it appears to have an inherent conflict of interest for Clayton Early Learning to be in charge of the land use Master Plan, since they profit most from development.  A new resolution was presented regarding the Park Hill Golf Course urging the City to amend the current contract 1) to amend the proposed contract between Denver and Clayton regarding Park Hill Golf Course so as to remove Clayton from being the lead on the “Visioning / Master Plan” process, and to delete from the proposed contract reimbursement to Clayton for any participation it might choose to undertake in the planning process; and (2) to commit to the preservation of as much of Park Hill Golf Course as possible as park land and open space, with a goal of 100% if financially possible. Friendly suggestion that the term Park Hill Golf Course Property will clarify that it does not need to be a “golf course” for open space. Motion to send to next Delegate meeting (November) by Bridget Walsh, Second Nancy Francis . Motion passed (15 yes, 1 no, 1 abstain )

INC’S SECOND RESOLUTION RE: DENVER’S ACQUISITION OF PARK HILL GOLF COURSE

Whereas, on April 8, 2017, the INC Board of Delegates adopted by a vote of 35 in favor, 3 against, and 7 abstentions a Resolution regarding Park Hill Golf Course that, among other things, called upon the public officials of the City and County of Denver “…to commit to the preservation of Park Hill Golf Course and thereby prevent all or any part of it from being developed other than for park land…”; and

Whereas, since the adoption of that Resolution, the INC Park and Recreation Committee has uncovered the existence and history of a perpetual conservation easement held by Denver that limits use of the property (which is owned in essence by Clayton Early Learning) to open space in general and a golf course in particular, which history can be found on the INC website; and

Whereas, on September 21, 2017, a complicated proposed contract between Denver and Clayton was publically released (likewise on the INC website) that, among other things, would divide the 155 acres of Park Hill Golf Course into 2 parcels – 50% of the property that would be sold in fee title directly to Denver for $10 million (Art. 2) and the remaining 50% that would be “leased” to Denver (Art. 3.1) but also subject to potential sale to third parties depending on the outcome of a “Visioning / Master Plan” process (Art. 7); and

Whereas, the proposed contract provides that Clayton would take the lead on the “Visioning / Master Plan” process to determine how much of the golf course could be developed and how dense that development could be (Art. 4.1), while also providing up to $350,000 in reimbursement to Clayton for the cost of those planning services (Art. 8.1); and

Whereas, the proposed contract also provides that Clayton would receive 75% of proceeds from the sale of golf course land to third parties (Art. 7.4), with the requirement that all such sales be “consistent” with the master plan to be crafted by Clayton and at the then-appraised market value (Art. 7.2 and 7.3); and

Whereas, the result of the above provisions of the contract is to create a conflict of interest in Clayton because on the one hand Clayton would be in charge of the “Visioning / Master Plan” process, yet on the other hand Clayton would then receive revenues based upon the result of that “Visioning / Master Plan” process such that the greater and denser the development approved for the golf course, the more money Clayton would make from sales to third parties.

Now Therefore, Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation calls upon the public officials of the City and County of Denver (1) to amend the proposed contract between Denver and Clayton regarding Park Hill Golf Course so as to remove Clayton from being the lead on the “Visioning / Master Plan” process, and to delete from the proposed contract reimbursement to Clayton for any participation it might choose to undertake in the planning process; and (2) to commit to the preservation of the Park Hill Golf Course property as park land and open space.

28th AVENUE AND FAIRFAX LAND SWAP

Nancy Francis spoke about the plan to swap land parcels at 28th & Fairfax, so the proposed corner park land would be moved mid-block in a commercial development. The residents feared this would result in a “plaza” between shops or cafes and would not be a real community pocket park.  Unfortunately the news of a corner park was premature and DPR has no budget to build it.  Again a lack of transparency and citizen involvement has occurred.  PARC suggests that this matter start again, this time with full involvement of the community and it was agreed that a letter be sent from INC PARC Chairs when appropriate to City Council.

CITY PARK GOLF COURSE TREES BANDED FOR DEMOLITION

Bridget Walsh said trees are banded in City Park Golf Course for demolition after November 1. Still there has been no word from the presiding judge concerning the lawsuit in heard in August. Residents plan to be on site to object.

MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION

The Brunch Run in Central Park caused some damage to trees, the lawn and fenced out many residences. There is concern that Events & Venues want to list this as a prime event park.  PARC members should start keeping track of problems as we hear of them in any park.

Ean Tafoya attended PRAB and gave a brief report on its elections- mostly the same as before.

Ronnie Crawford was asked to provide fishers to be active during the Confluence Park dedication October 14, and eight arrived and fished for big trout all afternoon.

The meeting adjourned at 7:50 p.m.  Next PARC meeting Nov. 21, 6-8 p.m.

–Diana Helper

From time to time we provide articles that may be of interest regarding topics that have been discussed in previous meetings. We offer this one from the Denverite Oct 20, written by Andrew Kenny

175 total views, 0 views today

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *