Invested: Zoning allowances alter our home life too much
For most Americans, their home is, by far, their largest investment. There is usually a great deal of care when choosing where one will live. Now, at a stroke, the governor and legislature could put this at risk.
How would you like an investor to erect a four- or six-plex next to your home? In 2021 nearly one-quarter of Denver homes were purchased as investments, so this is a very real possibility. Bear in mind that the people who build four- and six-plexes are never going to live there. If you think that parking is an issue now, what will happen when the four-plex goes up next door? The developer will make a quick buck, and you will be left to deal with the noise and parking issues while you watch the value of your property decline.
The reason that zoning was invented is because people were tired of having their lives uprooted by someone who could do whatever they wanted with their property because “they owned it.” The governor’s libertarian zoning plan benefits developers at the expense of owner-occupiers. Make sure your legislator knows what you think about this.
Guy Wroble, Denver
It’s the elected officials who betrayed voters
Re: “Park Hill developers are just bad sports,” April 9 commentary
What Megan Schrader overlooks in her column is the fact that the Park Hill Golf Course debacle represents a multi-year political failure as much as anything. Remember the 301 and 302 Ordinances — the ultimate in political gamesmanship by many parties — took the decision from the mayor and city council and gave it to voters. Then, over the next two years, they produced and unanimously passed Referred Question 2O. The 60-40 loss of 2O suggests that our mayor and city council were either completely out of touch with Denver residents or lacked the leadership to finish a project they truly believed in. The fact that several council members stated they did not support 2O – even after they voted in favor – suggests some serious dysfunction within city leadership.
We can criticize Westside all we want (they’re the easy target). Let’s not forget to hold all our elected leaders accountable because they failed on this task.
Jeffrey Sippel, Denver
Will mayoral candidates heed the voice of the voters?
Once again, the Denver voters have overwhelmingly voted against a prominent land developer who plans to destroy the last large parcel in Denver from becoming one of Denver’s parks. As usual, the developer claims the need for new housing is critical. The land the developer owns must be used to create badly needed housing units, whether single-family or up to 12-story apartments. But many other developers have also recognized the need for more housing units and their efforts to create them are already well on their way, such as the Central Park Condos; Urban Land Conservancy’s plans to build hundreds of income-restricted units near the Park Hill Golf Course; as well as high-density development around the 40th / Colorado train station and along 40th Avenue. These will all be built around the open space, not in the open space.
Knowing the overwhelming vote Denver voters gave in the recent election for preserving open space, it will be interesting to see which mayoral candidates will first go after those voters.
Richard E. Young, Denver
Zoning changes might aid a car-free lifestyle
Re: “Zoning reform set for tweaks as battle lines take shape,” April 8 news story
Your story on Gov. Jared Polis’ zoning reform bill caught my attention. As a Denver resident without a car, I hope the bill — with amendments to ensure affordability and prevent displacement — is passed because more compact housing development would make a huge difference in my life.
Some days, my car-free lifestyle is great. It’s more affordable, climate-friendly, and great for my physical and mental well-being. On other days, it can be an exhausting puzzle. A snowy day, a canceled bus, or road maintenance can make getting around less safe, more time-consuming, more costly, or simply impossible.
There are only a few neighborhoods in Denver where living car-free is easier, and those neighborhoods are also where housing is most expensive. My closest transit line only runs once an hour and cuts off my stop after 7 p.m. The nearest grocery store is over a mile away.
My choices are these: swallow the cost of buying a car, move to a more expensive neighborhood, or continue to spend an inordinate amount of time and energy getting around. While for me living car-free is a choice, it is not one for households without access to a personal vehicle. I want to live in a community where people have full autonomy to go where they want to without relying on a car. For that to be true, we need more housing options that are affordable and close to businesses, schools, and jobs. Senate Bill 23-213 would help.
Rachel Galton, Denver
Gun-toting students don’t have rights to attend class
Re: “Balancing safety vs. educating all,” April 9 news story
The fallacy is in the headline. We all have a natural right to safety — we do not have a natural right to education when it interferes with one’s safety. Today, more than ever, we must pay attention to the founding principles of our country if our children stand a chance.
“All men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” Life — the right to live safely. Liberty — the right to live freely. Pursuit of Happiness — the right to pursue joy without violating the rights of others.
The Denver Public Schools Board of Education violated the rights of all students when they removed school resource officers. They removed the sole responsibility they have — educating students in a safe environment, and it has come home to roost.
It is ironic that DPS is proud of its low and declining expulsion rate. It is not that fewer weapons are in schools; it is because educators are turning a blind eye in the name of equity and justice. For whom? For those who seek to harm innocent students and staff.
Students who bring weapons to school have no right to an in-person education. Students who bring weapons to school should be expelled and only allowed an online or home-school education.
We must preserve our unalienable rights as citizens because our future depends on it. Institutions, such as the DPS Board of Education, are seeking to destroy individual rights.
Ann Moore, Centennial
“… we operate in a society that loves guns more than children.” No kidding. I foresee one lawsuit after another, kids changing schools, families moving, teachers quitting the profession, less qualified teachers being hired, more shootings, and one lawsuit after another.
In other words, where have all the flowers gone?
When I read that a student who had been expelled from another school was enrolled at East where he was frisked for weapons, I shook my head in disbelief. Instead of “farm to table” we have something called “school to prison.”
Trying to be fair to the perpetrators impacts an entire school, parents, neighbors, and communities.
A suggestion: Look closely at the home life of each student who is expelled, each student who brings a gun or a knife to school, and report findings at length, just like The Post has done here.
Won’t happen, will it?
Craig Marshall Smith, Highlands Ranch
There is no absolute right to buy a gun in the USA. “But State governments have never been required to stand idly by and watch the carnage rage,” wrote the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals in March, upholding a Florida law that bans gun sales to people under age 21. We need focused reporting like The Denver Post’s interviews with educators; we need laws like those passed by the Colorado General Assembly to restrict gun ownership; and we need to listen to our students and protect them.
Katherine Millett, Denver
I think I know when we will have sane gun laws in this country. It’s when today’s students who have witnessed a school shooting or are so familiar with school shootings from Columbine through Sandy Hook, Parkland, Uvalde, and now Nashville, who have to enter schools through a metal detector, who practice active shooter drills or who are afraid to even go to school, reach voting age and replace the old white men who are petrified of offending their “base.”
Steve Helzerman, Denver
We “must do better once we know better”
Re: “Tennessee: House GOP expels two Dems over guns protest,” April 7 news story
The Tennessee House GOP members recently illustrated why governmental bodies must do better once we know better. When legislative decorum and rules do not comport with ethics, it becomes necessary to change the decorum and rules. When constitutional law conflicts with moral law, the Constitution must be changed and amended to ascend to moral law. This has been the highest virtue of American history.
Political enfranchisement of women and former slaves are just two salient examples of America doing better once we know better. Laws must change to match our growing understanding of morality. Hence, Tennessee laws and United States laws must be amended to match our growing understanding that people, and especially children, are more valuable than gun rights. This is the moral stance of the two young men expelled from the Tennessee State House. They are voicing the growing conscience grasped by the majority of the gun violence generation, and for the majority of Americans, for that matter, that gun safety laws are a higher moral priority than gun rights.
It is past time that we change our laws and our Constitution to elevate to that level of moral conscience.
Dan Sage, Centennial
Sign up for Sound Off to get a weekly roundup of our columns, editorials and more.
To send a letter to the editor about this article, submit online or check out our guidelines for how to submit by email or mail.
