DENVER | Main Development Thread #7

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by twister244

So, I am a millenial, and I kinda agree with this actually....

So is Bunt, but he channels the Greatest Generation most of the time including the rampant drinking, womanizing, and sneering at the youth.

[The Dirt]

Soylent Green homeless edition?

I'm just waiting to hear an actual solution here. Clearly, having enough cheap housing will be huge, but that boat has sailed for at least a decade since we're not even building enough market rate housing to house people that can afford it today.

Drug addiction is a big one, but not the only factor. Do we actually want to fund a drug rehab program or are we content with telling homeless drug addicts "bro, just stop using drugs, lol". What do we plan on doing with the working homeless, like the ones that live in the Tiny Homes Village? What about the working single moms that are taking care of kids on a single income? I feel like when it comes to the homeless, this board turns into Denver FUGLY. They 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about ugly new buildings without offering anything of value other than "🞵🞵🞵🞵 those greedy developers." This board 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about homeless people in the same way.

[twister244]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Soylent Green homeless edition?

I'm just waiting to hear an actual solution here. Clearly, having enough cheap housing will be huge, but that boat has sailed for at least a decade since we're not even building enough market rate housing to house people that can afford it today.

Drug addiction is a big one, but not the only factor. Do we actually want to fund a drug rehab program or are we content with telling homeless drug addicts "bro, just stop using drugs, lol". What do we plan on doing with the working homeless, like the ones that live in the Tiny Homes Village? What about the working single moms that are taking care of kids on a single income? I feel like when it comes to the homeless, this board turns into Denver FUGLY. They 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about ugly new buildings without offering anything of value other than "🞵🞵🞵🞵 those greedy developers." This board 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about homeless people in the same way.

I'm not going to pretend to offer a comprehensive solution to address homeless because unlike zoning/development, it's a much more complicated issue that requires subject matter expertise to really offer something good I think. Plus, the solution differs from one homeless person to another I presume.


However... with all that said.... I will state that homeless people should not be allowed to camp wherever they want in public. Sorry.... but no.

It has negative impacts on local businesses, tourism and public health. All of us collectively pay taxes that helped renovate Union Station. Our taxes will ultimately pay to renovate the 16th street mall. Homeless shouldn't get to 🞵🞵🞵🞵 all over that just because they are homeless. Call me cruel, but I have my limits.

[rds70]

Interesting design for the hotel planned at 14th/Court/Colfax. The wavy facade will encroach over the sidewalk, so they need an encroachment permit:

The site plan:


Building elevation:

[TakeFive]

Interesting article

'It’s putting us out of business': Denver business owners say they're being squeezed by property tax
Dec 18, 2019 By: Adi Guajardo - 7Denver News

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Originally Posted by rds70

Interesting design for the hotel planned at 14th/Court/Colfax. The wavy facade will encroach over the sidewalk, so they need an encroachment permit:

The site plan:


Building elevation:

Thanks for posting this. I'll be interested to see this project move forward.

[iNfill]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Soylent Green homeless edition?

I'm just waiting to hear an actual solution here. Clearly, having enough cheap housing will be huge, but that boat has sailed for at least a decade since we're not even building enough market rate housing to house people that can afford it today.

Drug addiction is a big one, but not the only factor. Do we actually want to fund a drug rehab program or are we content with telling homeless drug addicts "bro, just stop using drugs, lol". What do we plan on doing with the working homeless, like the ones that live in the Tiny Homes Village? What about the working single moms that are taking care of kids on a single income? I feel like when it comes to the homeless, this board turns into Denver FUGLY. They 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about ugly new buildings without offering anything of value other than "🞵🞵🞵🞵 those greedy developers." This board 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about homeless people in the same way.

Easy. Add a minimum sentence of 6 months in jail if you're caught camping in public with any schedule 1 drug paraphernalia. Sentence can be reduced to a hefty fine or less time if you can show up to court with proof of residence. In jail they will have an onsite infirmary, medicine and nurses for medical treatment as well as 3 meals a day- and 6 months will give them enough time to detox and get off the drugs.

If they don't already have it, add a program for group therapy to quit addiction in jail.

[SirLucasTheGreat]

Originally Posted by iNfill

Easy. Add a minimum sentence of 6 months in jail if you're caught camping in public with any schedule 1 drug paraphernalia. Sentence can be reduced to a hefty fine or less time if you can show up to court with proof of residence. In jail they will have an onsite infirmary, medicine and nurses for medical treatment as well as 3 meals a day- and 6 months will give them enough time to detox and get off the drugs.

If they don't already have it, add a program for group therapy to quit addiction in jail.

For a country with the highest incarceration rate in the world, I'm not sure throwing more people in jail for problems not already solved by our Draconian penal system is our best option. There have been many studies demonstrating that our money is much better spent investing directly in treatment, rather than in federal and local law enforcement for this issue.

[iNfill]

Originally Posted by SirLucasTheGreat

For a country with the highest incarceration rate in the world, I'm not sure throwing more people in jail for problems not already solved by our Draconian penal system is our best option. There have been many studies demonstrating that our money is much better spent investing directly in treatment, rather than in federal and local law enforcement for this issue.

Change laws to reduce jail time for many non-violent crimes. Use house arrest more often. We use jail just to punish people - when it should also help people.

And treatment I'm sure works better. A new mercedes drives better than a used ford, but who's going to pay for it? Also, are you giving them the choice? Because for many, they will choose their current life over free rehab...especially if they can camp wherever they want - which will hurt businesses, property value of home owners, etc.

And are the statistics for treatment vs law enforcement including data for those who voluntarily checked into treatment? Because of course that would show better results for treatment. You'll have a pool of everybody, people that are forced into it vs people that made the decision they want to try and get better. There are two types of lies; lies and statistics.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by Ndj

Ok boomer

Haha, I'm a millenial, but throw me into the OK BOOMER mix too.

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by twister244

I'm not going to pretend to offer a comprehensive solution to address homeless because unlike zoning/development, it's a much more complicated issue that requires subject matter expertise to really offer something good I think. Plus, the solution differs from one homeless person to another I presume.

I'll offer up a solution. The ONLY municipality to my knowledge to successfully address homelessness in any meaningful way is Salt Lake City. How did they do it? They built homes - what a thought! When they stopped building those homes, the homesless on the streets instantly started showing up.

Pretty simple to me, but costs a 🞵🞵🞵🞵 ton of public money and should the government really be shelling out the dough for that use? Is that the purpose of government? Or is the purpose to allow Americans to thrive and contribute to a vibrant economy by building more homes. Any short term fix won't solve the issue. To me, it's clear the issue is one of 1) a lack of zoning for housing of all types, 2) behavioral/mental health gap in society that used to be filled by sanitariums and psychiatric facilities, and 3) society's acceptance of homelessness (it used to be you ruined your family name if you were homeless and that threat of societal alienation is gone these days).

[laniroj]

Originally Posted by TakeFive

Interesting article

'It’s putting us out of business': Denver business owners say they're being squeezed by property tax
Dec 18, 2019 By: Adi Guajardo - 7Denver News

I've heard through the grapevine the new building called Platte Fifteen is anticipating RE taxes around $20 PSF. A decade ago that was a full service gross rate in any downtown Denver building. Crazy to me that TABOR hasn't kicked in to limit those taxes...

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

And if the millennials would just stop sending each other memes all day long they could afford to buy a house.

Excellent point.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Ndj

Ok boomer

Lol. There has to be someone from the millennial generation who’s not mired in poverty and whining constantly about how unfair life is. That’s diversity. It’s not my fault most of us are failures.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

Soylent Green homeless edition?

I'm just waiting to hear an actual solution here. Clearly, having enough cheap housing will be huge, but that boat has sailed for at least a decade since we're not even building enough market rate housing to house people that can afford it today.

Drug addiction is a big one, but not the only factor. Do we actually want to fund a drug rehab program or are we content with telling homeless drug addicts "bro, just stop using drugs, lol". What do we plan on doing with the working homeless, like the ones that live in the Tiny Homes Village? What about the working single moms that are taking care of kids on a single income? I feel like when it comes to the homeless, this board turns into Denver FUGLY. They 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about ugly new buildings without offering anything of value other than "🞵🞵🞵🞵 those greedy developers." This board 🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵🞵 about homeless people in the same way.

I'm with you 100%. I have about a dozen things I could add, but suffice to say, it is clear that many many people take a point of view on this that is downright cruel and more akin to a distopian eugenics program than the actions of a 21st Century democracy that values human life. We are talking about human beings here and yet many are content to talk about these people more like heads of cattle that we might just rather "put out to pasture." It's like saying that if we're unable to quantify an economic value to a person's existence then that entitles us to see them as a mere animal and we can clear our conscience about what subsequent horrible things might then happen to them out in the world. It's some straight-up Social Darwinist BS if you ask me and speaks to an ugliness of character.

Saying "not in public" is basically a way of saying "not my problem." If not in public (in a major city which might be the only place they can find food, emergency shelter, adequate clothing, and public transit) then where, exactly, is it okay for these people to rest their heads at night? In private? Because that's just the thing - these people have no "private" to go to. Oh yeah - and there aren't enough shelter beds either.

Or maybe "not in public" is basically just a euphemism for "don't know, don't care" - go find a nice highway bridge or national forest to quietly freeze to death out of view of "successful people" and stop being a burden to society. If they go far enough into the wilderness maybe we can even hope for a wild animal to clean up the carcass for us. BTW, these locations would still be in "public."

[twister244]

Originally Posted by mr1138

I'm with you 100%. I have about a dozen things I could add, but suffice to say, it is clear that many many people take a point of view on this that is downright cruel and more akin to a distopian eugenics program than the actions of a 21st Century democracy that values human life. We are talking about human beings here and yet many are content to talk about these people more like heads of cattle that we might just rather "put out to pasture." It's like saying that if we're unable to quantify an economic value to a person's existence then that entitles us to see them as a mere animal and we can clear our conscience about what subsequent horrible things might then happen to them out in the world. It's some straight-up Social Darwinist BS if you ask me and speaks to an ugliness of character.

Saying "not in public" is basically a way of saying "not my problem." If not in public (in a major city which might be the only place they can find food, emergency shelter, adequate clothing, and public transit) then where, exactly, is it okay for these people to rest their heads at night? In private? Because that's just the thing - these people have no "private" to go to. Oh yeah - and there aren't enough shelter beds either.

Or maybe "not in public" is basically just a euphemism for "don't know, don't care" - go find a nice highway bridge or national forest to quietly freeze to death out of view of "successful people" and stop being a burden to society. If they go far enough into the wilderness maybe we can even hope for a wild animal to clean up the carcass for us. BTW, these locations would still be in "public."

Again, not an excuse to just camp out wherever they want...... I never said I wasn't for more solutions, or funding to address the issue. But.... just giving folks a green light to behave however they want in public, 🞵🞵🞵🞵 on the sidewalks, shoot up drugs, etc is completely and utterly unacceptable. I don't care what their situation may be, how down in the dumps they are, etc. You don't get a green light to perform some of this behavior in public just because you flash that homeless card around. These are lazy solutions to a complex problem and don't do a damn thing to help anyone out.

[corey]

I like the design for the hotel on 14th. It kind of reminds me of the work of Edward Durell Stone. It also satisfies my deep rooted need for symmetry because it complements the Gio Ponti art museum wing of the DAM on the other side of Civic Center Park. It seems brise soleil screening is coming back. “Sun screen” sounds fancier in French.

[The Dirt]

Originally Posted by twister244

Again, not an excuse to just camp out wherever they want...... I never said I wasn't for more solutions, or funding to address the issue. But.... just giving folks a green light to behave however they want in public, 🞵🞵🞵🞵 on the sidewalks, shoot up drugs, etc is completely and utterly unacceptable. I don't care what their situation may be, how down in the dumps they are, etc. You don't get a green light to perform some of this behavior in public just because you flash that homeless card around. These are lazy solutions to a complex problem and don't do a damn thing to help anyone out.

I'm pretty sure nobody actually prefers to 🞵🞵🞵🞵 in the street. I'm sure anyone going through a mental breakdown would also not prefer to do it in public. Outlawing homelessness in not how you stop homelessness. Legalizing urban camping (or whatever you want to call it) would be completely invisible if most of those people had actual homes to go to, drug rehab programs, and mental health facilities. The result is the same. Less homeless on the street. The homeless by preference folks are a vast, vast minority. So are the mentally ill, aggressive panhandler types that we all want to use as the stereotype. The homeless are a lot more diverse than what you see.

[mr1138]

Originally Posted by The Dirt

I'm pretty sure nobody actually prefers to 🞵🞵🞵🞵 in the street. I'm sure anyone going through a mental breakdown would also not prefer to do it in public. Outlawing homelessness in not how you stop homelessness. Legalizing urban camping (or whatever you want to call it) would be completely invisible if most of those people had actual homes to go to, drug rehab programs, and mental health facilities. The result is the same. Less homeless on the street. The homeless by preference folks are a vast, vast minority. So are the mentally ill, aggressive panhandler types that we all want to use as the stereotype. The homeless are a lot more diverse than what you see.

I again, agree 100% with everything you say here.

Those of us arguing against camping bans are not trying to say that permanent squatters camps in our public squares and sidewalks are a solution. To suggest otherwise would be to put words in our mouths. My personal point of view is that it IS the government's job to provide adequate shelter, even if that shelter is quite small and spartan and not in the best location.

What we ARE saying is that banning camping is NOT a solution. The Dirt puts this about as well as I can imagine above - You don't get to solve this one by suggesting a stick, but offering no carrot.

Simply trying to outlaw homelessness without providing a reasonable alternative strikes me as being even worse public policy than prohibition. It solves NOTHING, except perhaps to metaphorically turn the situation into one of those toys that jumps out of your hand every time you squeeze. The people who's camp you swept up yesterday will be somewhere else tomorrow, and I can easily see this situation becoming something that pits jurisdiction against jurisdiction. These are humans who will end up somewhere. Either in somebody else's jurisdiction, or somewhere else entirely. And yes, that place often is freezing to death under a freeway bridge - that is not hyperbole.

That said, the question about whether or not this is the city's responsibility is a real one. Historically, this would be considered a matter of Health and Human Service, which is the role of the county (delegated by the state) and not the municipality. The potential for municipalities to turn the metro homeless population into a race-to-the-bottom game of hot potato is a pretty good example to me of the logic behind this.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by mr1138

Saying "not in public" is basically a way of saying "not my problem."

Not really; in reality it's everybody's problem. But let's put the moralizing aside since you offered no solutions.

City of Denver's budget includes $50 million for the homeless problem. The latest count is 5,750 people are homeless; that's about $8,700 per person.

Just for grins, City of Phoenix with over twice the population has about 6,600 homeless people of which 3,426 are considered 'sheltered'. Doesn't appear that Phoenix has much of a budget for homeless aside from passing out a few grants. I assume some of the cost may be buried in different budget pieces like cleanup. They did allocate $10 million this year for more affordable housing.

twister244 has it exactly right.

Being homeless doesn't give one the right to spoil the environment for everybody else. Leaving used needles scattered around is a health hazard etc etc.