The fight to redevelop the defunct Park Hill Golf Course began back in July. That’s when property owner Westside Investment Partners LLC put forward its initial plans for redevelopment.

Since then, the Denver City Council approved a “small area plan” for the 155-acre plot. A December public hearing saw more than 80 people sign up to comment, a majority of whom supported redevelopment.

Looking ahead to Monday’s public hearing, which starts at 5:30 p.m. at City and County Building, there are three public hearings concerning the redevelopment for city council and Denver residents to consider:

• 22-1628: A bill approving the Consolidated Service Plan for the creation of five metropolitan districts in Park Hill.
• 22-1629: A bill changing the zoning classification for the Park Hill Golf Course land to allow for mixed-use development with open space.
• 22-1635: A bill asking Denver voters to remove a city-owned conservation easement on the land known as the Park Hill Golf Course.

The last of the three is the most significant. Should Denver voters reject redevelopment, Westside’s plans are dead in the water. The conservation easement in place on the golf course says the land can only be used as a golf course.

Though support was strong on Dec. 5, many remain opposed. Yes For Parks and Open Space is an advocacy group that wants to see the land turned into 100% open space. Penfield Tate, a leader in the organization, said they remain opposed to all three bills.

Yes for Parks “imagined a great park” in the Park Hill Golf Course. Concept art features a track, multiple ball fields and a mound-like structure they call a ziggurat. The proposal does not include plans for developing or maintaining the proposed park.

“What you’ll see on our website is a concept,” Tate said in an interview. “We don’t have a plan. We’re not developers. We’re volunteers.”

Westside officials have said the developer will dedicate 100 acres of the golf course as park space.

But Tate doesn’t buy it.

“They are claiming 100 acres of parks and open space, but it’s not a contiguous 100-acre park,” Tate said. “The problem with that number is it’s not true. It includes the 25-30 acres in the far northeast corner that is currently part of the city storm water detention and drainage program.”

Tate said this 25-30 acres of land is not suitable for public use. Additionally, he noted the plans from Westside include “parking strips,” which he likened to the greenway spaces between Monaco Parkway and Martin Luther King Boulevard.

Kenneth Ho, a principal at Westside, dismissed these claims.

“The area is well-documented for use by locals as a sledding hill, dog walking area, frisbee golf area, etc., throughout the year,” Ho said in a statement. “It’s important to note that nearly every city park has a detention area, including City Park, Westerly Creek, Crestmoor Park, Washington Park, Sloan’s Lake Park, Berkeley Lake Park and Cherry Creek Trail.”

Tate cites a state law he interprets would require the city obtain court approval before the conservation easement can be altered, amended or dissolved.

“The city and developer have come up with this convoluted and twisted land swap deal to avoid complying with the law,” Tate said. “We fundamentally think that’s wrong.”

Previously, Tate and others filed a lawsuit alleging the city had violated the conservation easement on the land by spending taxpayer money on development planning, according to Denver Gazette media partner 9News. A judge dismissed the lawsuit for being filed prematurely, according to Tate.

On Jan. 17, Yes for Parks filed a protest petition against the rezoning. A release from Yes for Parks claimed they had obtained enough signatures to force a supermajority of 10 councilmembers to approve the zoning changes.

However, city staff and the city attorney’s office conducted a review of the signatures and found the petition missed the threshold by almost 50%.

“City staff were able to validate signatures representing 68 properties and making up 263,724 square feet of land,” said Laura Swartz, the marketing and communications director at Denver’s Department of Community Planning and Development. “However, this is less than 20% of the land area within 200 feet of the proposed rezoning, which would have been 521,221 square feet.”

Four properties received partial credit because only one property owner signed the petition, according to the city. Twenty-two other properties had invalid signatures, many due to individuals signing on behalf of organizations.

The fight over the golf course truly began in 2021 when Denver voters considered two ordinances that were almost identical: Initiated Ordinance 301 and Initiated Ordinance 302. Ordinance 301 requires a citywide vote to approve any residential or commercial construction on a property with a city-owed conservation easement. Ordinance 302 was similar but created a “carveout area” that would exclude developments on the Park Hill Golf Course being put on a citywide ballot.

Ordinance 301 passed convincingly: More than 100,000 Denverites supported it, with 58,000 opposed. Ordinance 302 was defeated: Just under 100,000 Denverites opposed it, while over 59,000 supported it.

That effectively tabled redevelopment, which is still at risk.

Even if all the bills opened to public hearing on Monday pass, the fate of the Park Hill Golf Course is in the hands of Denver voters thanks to Ordinance 301.

Those who wish to sign up for comment at public hearings may do so online, or email written testimony to [email protected]. The sign-up period online is between 3 p.m. and 5:30 p.m. Monday.