Friday, October 31, 2008

Additional Comments on Master Plan

Besides email comments, survey responses, and other comments from individuals (posted on this blog), we have recently received several letters addressing organization's comments on the Master Plan. These include:


Recently, the Denver Parks and Recreation Department sent a letter to City Council addressing rock climbing in the Mountain Parks. Copies of the letter were sent to Access Fund.

Comments from Open Space Advocate

From John Litz, PLAN Jeffco*, October 22, 2008:


I have carefully reviewed the Denver Mountain Parks Draft Master Plan and must say that I am impressed. The PLAN Jeffco Board of Directors have not collectively reviewed the plan, but I believe that I can convey the consensus.

The plan is very ambitious, which it must be after more than 50 years of benign neglect. I would put maintenance, restoration, and updated restrooms at the top of the list. Jefferson County Open Space's (JCOS) experience is that vandals are less apt to chose well-maintained facilities. Next I would put upgrading of trails and attempting to close social trails. JCOS has good experience using volunteers and youth work programs. It seems to me that one can find grants for funding work programs for inner-city youth. That also might impact the park use by African-Americans. (It is interesting to note very high use of the parks by those of Hispanic heritage.)

Following are comments relating to specific pages in the draft.

  • Page 19: The values used for the land values are low. The Open Space Advisory Committee has just approved a $100,000+ per acre purchase adjacent to Elk Meadow Park. I think that $10,000 per acre would be a better average; since much of the acreage in the larger parks is very developable.

  • Page 35: In discussing revenue items comment is made on sharing Jefferson County sales tax. Note that this tax is not a use tax so it only would apply to items purchased on site. At 0.1% I doubt that the amount collected could have a significant impact on the DMP budget. Additionally the enabling resolution only allows the tax to the shared with cities based on automobile registrations. Red Rocks is neither a city nor has any resident vehicles.

  • Page 36: I definitely agree on the need for dedicated funding.

  • Page 64: I would not count on being able to make fixed facilities on the parks profitable. JCOS has found the maintenance of buildings exceeds the potential revenue. An example is the Boettcher Mansion on Lookout. Jefferson County has had to use Conservation Trust Funds as the financing source for necessary maintenance. The income can cover operating costs, but not major maintenance. The Cody [Buffalo Bill] Museum is unique in that it is an international draw.

  • Page 153: Because the DMPs are integrated into other County park systems, partnerships can be a way of extending the resources of both parties. Unfortunately, without better funding DMP cannot provide much financial resources to the partnerships.

So it all gets down to dedicated funding. PLAN Jeffco has managed two campaigns to obtain voter approval for funding. Our experience is, with a campaign that gets adequate information to the voters, approval is possible. Our two favorable votes were 60% and 74%. I believe that in 2006, 70% of park and open space issues across the country passed. Your resistance will be the Denver City Council not the voters. In 1972 we had no support from city councils, just their staff.

Good luck as you move the Plan forward.

John Litz, PLAN Jeffco Vice-Chair/Treasurer



*PLAN Jeffco is a citizen’s organization who helped start Jefferson County’s Open Space program in 1972 and is still involved in an oversight capacity.

Friday, October 17, 2008

Last Day of Comment Period

Today marks the end of the official comment period for the Denver Mountain Parks Master Plan. We'll be taking comments through the end of the day and will post them on this blog. A few new comments are posted immediately below this note.

Thank you for your interest in the Master Plan and for providing input to it. In the coming weeks, we'll be revising and finalizing the draft. We'll continue to keep you posted at this site.

A Few More Comments

Steve from Denver County, October 17, 2008, says:
Please allow rock climbing in the mountain parks. It works in Boulder. Please enforce the dog leash laws in all the parks.

Adam from Boulder County, October 16, 2008, says:
I am a Boulder resident and a graduate student in Physics at the University of Colorado-Boulder. I am doing my Ph.D. research at the National Renewable energy labs in Golden. As an avid climber, I have explored many of the areas around both Boulder and Golden. Of course, climbing requires a certain amount of technical knowledge and safety is always a concern. However, the climbing community in Colorado is a very well-informed and responsible group who understand and accept the risks involved. They are also taxpayers who help support and fund the park systems across the state. Opening the 1,400+ acres in the Denver parks would not interfere with other use of the land and would end an outdated, unnecessarily restrictive policy. I support the position the Access Fund has taken on this issue.

Alec from Gunnison, October 16, 2008, is "Supportive."

Clint from Boulder County, October 16, 2008, says:
I live in Louisville, Co and spend a lot of time in the mountains here in Colorado. I would like to side with the Access fund an their letter sent to you (see attachment). Rockclimbing is an major part of Colorado history past and in modern times. It is exciting that Denver Mountain Parks is considering allowing rockclimbing in it's parks. I want to thank you for that.

Friday, October 10, 2008

Park Maps Update

Continued work on interim park maps has resulted in a new Park Maps index page on the website at Mountain Parks History (MPH). This page will be updated whenever new maps are available, and will be linked from the MPH homepage shortly. (It is now linked from the Parks Information page, where you'll also find links to new pages on picnicking and park regulations.)

Maps are posted for Dedisse Park, Echo Lake Park, and Genesee Park; more are on the way. Keep in mind that these are basic working maps to enable you to find the Parks more easily and better enjoy the system. We welcome your suggestions for improving them. A new system map has also been posted in three sizes.