Dear Editor,
First, I’d like to thank the Ned BOT for their public service. What they do takes time and thoughtfulness, and I am grateful for the sacrifice they make.
I have a few comments
This item is available in full to subscribers.
At this time, we ask you to confirm your subscription at www.themtnear.com, to continue accessing the only weekly paper in the Peak to Peak region to cover ALL the news you need! Simply click Confirm my subscription now!.
If you are a digital subscriber with an active, online-only subscription then you already have an account here. Just reset your password if you've not yet logged in to your account on this new site.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
Questions? Call us at 303-810-5409 or email info@themountainear.com.
Please log in to continue |
Dear Editor,
First, I’d like to thank the Ned BOT for their public service. What they do takes time and thoughtfulness, and I am grateful for the sacrifice they make.
I have a few comments regarding the Central Business District (CBD)/ rezoning of the 100 1st Street situation reported in one of the latest The Mountain-Ear editions.
There have been many public comments about housing needs around the area. It will be nice to have an actual housing-needs analysis done, and it appears that the company, Bohannan Huston, is currently working on one for the Town. I am sure their results will be interesting and influential in order to make good public policy.
I think the BOT would be best served to wait until the housing needs data comes in, and then determine whether or not to rezone lots that are currently zoned for high-density residential. It wouldn’t look good to remove a property currently zoned for High Density Residential (HDR) within the town limits, only to have the housing needs analysis come back to show the town really needs these types of HDR parcels.
If it is the town’s intent to decide on the CBD rezoning application before the housing-needs results, there appears to be strong previous data that would demonstrate that there is already a need for infill housing. And the towns with the best zoning practices usually plan for a higher population density center, with lower population density rings around that center. This prevents urban sprawl and allows towns to maintain a vibrant city center and a strong town culture. We think it is important for the Town’s decision makers to evaluate these types of decisions with these important facts in mind.
Personally, I believe paid parking to be one of the least culturally additive types of developments available. If we want to build and maintain a unique culture to our town, we should not discourage visitors or locals from visiting the town center by making it harder or more expensive for them to do so. This arrangement will benefit one individual, to the detriment of the town, visitors, locals, and just about everyone else. I suggest the town and the public should be wary of Ron Mitchell’s application to create a paid parking lot in the CBD/downtown area. We should only consider and be thoughtful about additions to the town that add to our unique culture.
If Mitchell is still interested in developing a commercial/ business interest on residential-zoned property, rezoning that property to a mixed use might make a lot of sense. This is best demonstrated by the Kathmandu building, which offers the public a nice retail/restaurant option, with good housing options above.
Mitchell also suggested that the town could grant him the ability to put up a paid parking lot while still keeping the land zoned for high-density residential. I think the town will find there will be paid parking for perpetuity with no actual efforts made to add high-density residential. A poor outcome for the town.
Thanks for reading! Looking forward to hearing other’s opinions on improving the culture and the downtown area of Nederland.
Eric Davis
Nederland