DENVER | Main Development Thread #6

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

Why not hire private security like Larimer Square or Cherry Creek Mall, or Union Station?

Because state law (rightfully) does not allow private security to do anything in public right of way. At that point, you might as well just activate a militia of biker gangs to police the city, they'd have the same power, and would probably get more done.

[transistor]

I have a theory about terrible areas of otherwise great cities. The theory goes something like this. If there is a Hard Rock Cafe there stay the f*** away.

Examples include: Times Square, SF Fisherman's Wharf, Baltimore Inner Harbor, 16th St Mall. We can add to this list as necessary.

[TheNightfly]

Originally Posted by transistor

I have a theory about terrible areas of otherwise great cities. The theory goes something like this. If there is a Hard Rock Cafe there stay the f*** away.

Examples include: Times Square, SF Fisherman's Wharf, Baltimore Inner Harbor, 16th St Mall. We can add to this list as necessary.

Don't forget the LV strip brotha.

[corey]

I agree that the homeless and transients are completely different groups and shouldn't be confused with one another. Every time I go to Pearl Street Mall in Boulder there are always some aggressive panhandling young transients hitting you up for money, and often giving you shit when you refuse. People half my age that could easily be working and not be societal parasites. I guess it's gotten worse since the legalization of marijuana. They can really taint my otherwise enjoyable experience of hanging out on the mall for the day. I've seen the same kind of transients in London, Barcelona, Paris, Venice, Rome, Amsterdam, and pretty much every city that has any kind of "scene" and especially tourists to mooch off of. Homeless people, especially elderly or mentally ill, have my compassion and support.

[comoneymaker]

Last year 21.6% or 909,000 residents smoke pot in Colorado. And you know these numbers are low as F so you can only assume the real number is around 33% if not higher.

http://www.usatoday.com/videos/money/2016/06/23/86287592/

[Stonemans_rowJ]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Because state law (rightfully) does not allow private security to do anything in public right of way. At that point, you might as well just activate a militia of biker gangs to police the city, they'd have the same power, and would probably get more done.

The sidewalks of Larimer St. aren't public right of way?

[lumos]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Add Commons Park to the list. Vulgar ratchet adults roaming, sleeping, camping, etc. I used to like things like, launching my drone there but now I just get approached before I even take off and get called, and I quote, 'an Illuminati spy' (whatever the hell that means) and get yelled at from a distance for taking pictures of them.

So I take 14th, 15th(honestly still better than the mall), and 17th through downtown. If I get to Commons, I'll cut over to 15th just so I don't have to deal with the riff raff especially if I have all my camera gear.

Super disappointing and sad.

I have often been approached by the Commons Park 'homeless' but usually it is a representative to ask if I am spying on them and then they are quite easily convinced I am not and are intrigued by the drone. Some are interesting and I have insightful conversations with them. The biggest issue I have in Commons Park is from the Park Rangers who swooped down before I could even launch and tell me that drones are prohibited. Let me know Ryan if you want to fly there this week and we could have an airshow for them.

[EngiNerd]

Originally Posted by lumos

I have often been approached by the Commons Park 'homeless' but usually it is a representative to ask if I am spying on them and then they are quite easily convinced I am not and are intrigued by the drone. Some are interesting and I have insightful conversations with them. The biggest issue I have in Commons Park is from the Park Rangers who swooped down before I could even launch and tell me that drones are prohibited. Let me know Ryan if you want to fly there this week and we could have an airshow for them.

Is that true, are they prohibited?

EDIT: well it looks like it technically is true...

14.3 Flying Objects: The throwing, striking, propelling, launching or otherwise operating
flying or propelled object of a potentially dangerous nature, such as a hang glider, sky diving, sky sail,
drone ("unmanned aerial vehicle"), model airplane or helicopter, model rocket, golf ball, rock, and similar
flying or propelled item ("Flying Object") is not allowed in a Park Facility. A Flying Object does not
include a non-motorized model airplane under a half pound in weight, a Frisbee or a kite. Objects
propelled by Weapons identified in 7.2 above are subject to the restrictions set forth in 7.2. Fireworks
identified in 6.3 are prohibited in Park Facilities. Exceptions to this rule:

14.3.1 Flying Objects are allowed in areas in a Park Facility designated by the DPR
Executive Director for such Flying Objects activity such as a golf course or driving range for golf balls, a
designated model airplane or helicopter flying area, or a rocket launching area, subject to compliance with
such rules and regulations that may be posted in or near the designated areas.

https://www.denvergov.org/content/dam/de...PR_ParkUse_RulesRegulations_05272015.pdf

[lumos]

Originally Posted by EngiNerd

Is that true, are they prohibited?

Apparently it is an old law meant to stop you playing throw the horseshoe, modified to allow kites but drones fall foul. I explained that whilst I respected his right to stop me taking off from a Denver Park he had no jurisdiction over the airspace so `i could step 4 metres to my right and take off from Little Raven St then fly straight back to me in the park. They were all for that as they were desperate to see it fly. They were really polite so I went home so as not to put them in a difficult position.

[COtoOC]

Originally Posted by corey

I agree that the homeless and transients are completely different groups and shouldn't be confused with one another. Every time I go to Pearl Street Mall in Boulder there are always some aggressive panhandling young transients hitting you up for money, and often giving you shit when you refuse. People half my age that could easily be working and not be societal parasites. I guess it's gotten worse since the legalization of marijuana. They can really taint my otherwise enjoyable experience of hanging out on the mall for the day. I've seen the same kind of transients in London, Barcelona, Paris, Venice, Rome, Amsterdam, and pretty much every city that has any kind of "scene" and especially tourists to mooch off of. Homeless people, especially elderly or mentally ill, have my compassion and support.

I go to San Francisco quarterly for work and stay downtown... nothing much different there than downtown Denver regarding the panhandlers. While it's sad that people have sunk that low in life, you just have to ignore it. I took my kids down to the 16th St. Mall last Friday and saw a few of them here and there, but no one bothered us. The only people I talked to were friendly people waiting for the shuttle and an old couple that wished me a happy Father's Day. I did give a buck to some dude playing the saxophone. I don't mind those people (if they have talent) since at least they're trying to earn the $$.

[Cirrus]

Ok. Adults and teenagers are different. But what do people propose be done about this, besides "the police keep doing what they're doing?" You can't kick someone off the mall for how they look and you can't say "no loitering" in a part of the city that exists specifically for loitering. More foot patrols? Harsher penalties for anyone convicted of a harassment type crime on the mall? Or are we just complaining and really everything's fine? I can get behind that, I suppose.

Originally Posted by transistor

If there is a Hard Rock Cafe there stay the f*** away. Examples include: Times Square, SF Fisherman's Wharf, Baltimore Inner Harbor, 16th St Mall.

But 16th Street is the main street in downtown. It's completely integral to most shopping and dining downtown. You really can't stay away from it unless you avoid downtown altogether. You can go to LoDo I suppose, but that's a different place. Times Square is sort of analogous for part of Midtown Manhattan, but Fisherman's Wharf and the Inner Harbor are a lot different; they're isolated spots that are well isolated from the rest of their city.

If River North were Denver's tourist mecca then sure, it'd be easy to avoid. But 16th Street is integral.

[jhwk]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Ok. Adults and teenagers are different. But what do people propose be done about this, besides "the police keep doing what they're doing?" You can't kick someone off the mall for how they look and you can't say "no loitering" in a part of the city that exists specifically for loitering. More foot patrols? Harsher penalties for anyone convicted of a harassment type crime on the mall? Or are we just complaining and really everything's fine? I can get behind that, I suppose.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/04/us/hawaii-homeless-criminal-law-sitting-ban.html

This would be a good start.

Some steps I would like to see the city take:

- Increase the number of (secular, city run) services available to the homeless. Many people refuse the shelters we have due to overcrowding, mandatory religious services, and security concerns.
- Adopt a "housing first" mentality in practice, not just in words. Drug treatment, job education, etc can come later.
- Spread out those services. I think the area by Anschutz would be a good place for a central shelter as it is close to the VA, other healthcare services, the jail, and transportation. Packing all the homeless into Arapahoe Square will limit the growth of downtown and encourage more vagrancy in the area.
- Once more resources are in place, strictly enforce a camping and loitering ban. We shouldn't let anyone sleep on the street, in city parks, or down by the river. Don't want to go to the shelter or just a "traveler"? "Travel" somewhere else or go to jail. Before this crackdown, however, we need someplace for those people to go.

This will be hideously expensive and require leadership not only with vision but with the ability to make it happen. Denver's last ten year plan to end homelessness seems like it went about as well as the Great Leap Forward.

[enjo13]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Times Square is sort of analogous for part of Midtown Manhattan, but Fisherman's Wharf and the Inner Harbor are a lot different; they're isolated spots that are well isolated from the rest of their city

That's not where the problem in San Francisco is tho. It's Union Square down to Market (the Westfield Center essentially). Which IS an integral part of San Francisco. It's actually sort of interesting now that I think about it, it's almost identical to Denver. The Ferry Building (Union Station in Denver) is unaffected for the most part. Central Downtown is fairly nice (LoDo) and get progressively worse in all directions to out of Downtown proper. Neighborhoods like Union Square and Russian Hill.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by lumos

I have often been approached by the Commons Park 'homeless' but usually it is a representative to ask if I am spying on them and then they are quite easily convinced I am not and are intrigued by the drone. Some are interesting and I have insightful conversations with them. The biggest issue I have in Commons Park is from the Park Rangers who swooped down before I could even launch and tell me that drones are prohibited. Let me know Ryan if you want to fly there this week and we could have an airshow for them.

I mean... I might be flying for the new world order. I might be a henchman that nobody knows about...

I know the rules state that you can't do it but I've never encountered any park rangers at any park. But agreed, I will just move to the public right-of-way and fly there if I get kicked out of the park. I mean, I used to launch model rockets many-a-weekends in parks and not once was talked to about it but whatever. I get why they don't like remote aircraft.

I'll definitely let you know when I'm flying next for fun. Got lots of business to do and I'm significantly behind due to the haze and cruddy weather we've been having lately.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Stonemans_rowJ

The sidewalks of Larimer St. aren't public right of way?

They are. I don't know what private security force you are referring to, or what they do. They probably can't do anything. (Unless they are off duty peace officers, which is what has been used on 16th Street.)

[RyanD]

How hard would it be to privatize the 16th Street Mall?

Pros? Cons?

[bunt_q]

I'll buy 24 square feet for my tent. Except I won't win; some dickhead cash investor will come in with no inspection contingency and a 6-hour close commitment, and I'll be left squatting at the Aurora civic center instead.

[Fritzdude]

How about this idea to implement the "Honolulu Plan" for creating passionate disturbance: Put in 500 temporary units on the grounds of Rocky Flats. Something that has basic sleeping quarters and very minimal accessories that cost approximately $1,000 to put together: something like this:



Treat it like a supervised camp ground and have one main eating area and another main lavatory with toilets and showers. Give people security jobs to maintain law and order. Create a work area that teaches job skills and assists with improving areas of stability.

Meanwhile, put in an "overflow" living area that can house up to 1,000 people made up of modified pole barns that sleeps 20 in a group sleeping arrangement, basically everyone gets one cot with minimal privacy. These cost about $10,000 so the cost per person is roughly $500: something like this:



If you're homeless; you would have the incentive to show up early to claim your own private residence for the night since it's first come, first serve. Those who come last get relegated to the overflow sleeping quarters. Complimentary buses leave from various Denver locations every hour starting at 6:00 pm and include 1 free meal, 1 free shower, and access to a mental health adviser, social worker, or case worker (etc..). If you are not on a bus before 10:00 pm and you are found "camping" in Denver, then you get a fine and can either go to jail or get a ride out to Rocky Flats for an additional cost. Perhaps they forego any benefits they might receive for getting there early, whether it be food, TV, or game room (whatever rewards might initiated to force compliance).

My estimate is that temporary (emergency) housing for 1,500 people could be put together for <$5 Million, which is way beyond the capacity that is required right now. Ongoing expenses, such as bus service, security, food, and general overhead would probably be at least $1-$2 Million per year. And if a homeless person wants to stay on the premise instead of getting bused back to wherever..? Then the fee to stay on site can be off-set by helping clean up the place, wash linens, clean bathrooms, prepare meals, etc..

So, Denver could provide a safe alternative to being homeless in the city and bring the necessary resources with economies of scale. And then what would the taxpayer cost be for a movement like this? Probably about $10 per taxpayer each year.

What would be the holes in a plan like this?

[seventwenty]

Well Honolulu's being sued by the ACLU for one. Granted it's not the whole plan being sued.

Another is that your pretty tiny houses picture may be from in Sacremento. Elsewhere, LA seized them from the homeless, citing public safety concerns.

[Fritzdude]

Originally Posted by seventwenty

Well Honolulu's being sued by the ACLU for one. Granted it's not the whole plan being sued.

Another is that your pretty tiny houses picture may be from in Sacremento. Elsewhere, LA seized them from the homeless, citing public safety concerns.

Honolulu is being sued by the ACLU because they're not providing alternatives to being homeless. On the contrary, Denver would meet that need by erecting these mobile living areas that are maintained on private land. Meanwhile, the reason LA seized their ,"tiny houses" is because they were put down in parks or parking lots. However, nobody would seize this property if the city of Denver owns it (or is leasing through a 3rd party) and proving the land usage rights for it's use,.