Tag Archives: park

INC PARC Recommended Resolution RE: Acquisition of Park Hill Golf Course

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

Whereas, Park Hill Golf Course is approximately 155 acres in size and is generally located between Colorado Boulevard on the west, Smith Road on the north, Dahlia Street on the east, and 35th Avenue on the south, and has been operated as a golf course for over 100 years; and

Whereas, contrary to popular belief, Park Hill Golf Course is NOT owned by Denver, but instead is owned by Clayton Early Learning, which is a nonprofit foundation whose mission is to promote early childhood education

Loading

Continue reading →

16CA0920 Whitelaw v. Denver City Council Mt. Gilead/Crestmoor Park

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

This case presents several precedent-setting issues of state-wide importance about the integrity of the local land use planning and quasi-judicial rezoning process, which affect all local government officials and Colorado property owners in zoned communities.

Loading

Continue reading →

Before and After Globeville Landing Park

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

As stated in previous correspondence, we are concerned about the proposed transformation of Globeville Landing Park from its existing conditions to a major detention and conveyance area without full discussion with the community.

The process and proposed utilization of the park is unacceptable. As we discussed, a community meeting in January is essential. Please propose date, time, place for that meeting.
We expect that in addition to your presence, public works, storm drainage, parks and NDCC will be present.
Set forth below are particular issues that must be addressed at the community meeting:

Loading

Continue reading →

First set of Discover Requests for the City Park Golf Course lawsuit:

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

PLAINTIFF’S FIRST SET OF DISCOVERY REQUESTS
Plaintiff, John D. MacFarlane, by and through undersigned counsel, and pursuant to C.R.C.P. 26, 33, 34, and 36, requests the following discovery from Defendants:
DEFINITIONS
1. The term “City” refers to defendant the City and County of Denver.
2. The term “CDOT” refers to the Colorado Department of Transportation.
3. The term “Golf Course” refers to City Park Golf Course.
SERVED ONLY: February 20, 2017 11:46 PM
FILING ID: 66E680DB82F17
CASE NUMBER: 2016CV321262

Loading

Continue reading →

Globeville Landing Park Update

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

To: “Proud, Christopher N. – CPD North Denver Comerstone”
Cc: ,albus.brooks@denvergov.org, jennifer.hillhouse@denvergov.org, , “Wenskoski, Todd T – CPD Planning Services”
, cincere.eades@denvergov.org, “Leid, Kelly R – Mayor’s Office”
, bret.banwart@denver.gov, Debbie Ortega – At Large
Bcc: Mickey Zeppelin
Chris – thanks for the conversation and quick hierarchy project leadership. l am emailing on behalf of the Globeville Civic Partners and representative of Globeville community.

As stated in previous correspondence, we are concerned about the proposed transformation of Globeville Landing Park from its existing conditions to a major detention and conveyance area without full discussion with the community.

Loading

Continue reading →

JUDGE DENIES DISMISSAL OF LAW SUIT REGARDING CITY PARK GOLF COURSE

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

This case is premised around the alleged construction of an “industrial-level stormwater management project in designated parkland,” specifically Denver’s City Park Golf Course (“CPGC”). Compl. ¶1. Macfarlane argues that such management project (the “Project”) is “designed specifically to protect a highly-controversial federal highway project and other new construction.”
Macfarlane asserts that the Project: 1) violates Denver’s zoning code; 2) violates Denver’s Department of Parks and Recreation (“DPR”) charge of the Denver City Charter; 3) without popular vote, would violate usage restrictions; and 4) is contrary to caselaw interpreting similar dispositions of parkland.

Loading

Continue reading →

Park Hill Neighborhood Divided by Battles Over Historic District, Subdividing Lots

Inter-Neighborhood Cooperation Posted on by

The 2010 zoning code classifies the Montview corridor as an “urban single unit” (U-SU-H) district, with minimum lot sizes of 10,000 square feet; under the current arrangement, the Wongs would need to have a 20,000-square-foot lot in order to split it up, but their total lot size is 18,750 square feet. So the couple has applied for a zoning change that would essentially take the 50 x 125 strip behind the house out of the U-SU-H district and allow it to be developed as a Glencoe (rather than Montview) address — since, on the side street, the minimum lot size is only 5,500 square fee

Loading

Continue reading →