Boulder architect eyes homeless village at Valmont City Park

[Skip]

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...t-valmont-city

Normalizing homelessness?

A Boulder architect has a vision of a New Chautauqua Eco-Village where a self-governing group of homeless people can find both shelter and community in a collection of tiny homes or tents with basic city services.

So electricity (heat), water, sewer likely subsidized by taxpayers.

Anyone who says the economy is declining is lying

I suppose we'll always have homelessness. It's somewhat of a choice for most given the private charities and public programs. But why would Boulder hippies want to create an incentive and attract more?

Colorado is becoming a bad joke.

[Dave_L]

Ive heard there are people in Boulder that are concerned about this. This was the article I read:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingne...ess-youth-plan

A proposal to build a three-story complex to provide long-term housing and services for young people struggling to find shelter is challenging Boulder's sense of itself.

Seems like Boulder will be a hotbed for homeless.

[.455_Hunter]

Just because some loony bin architect proposes something does not mean that all of Boulder is jumping up and down to get it implemented.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Just because some loony bin architect proposes something does not mean that all of Boulder is jumping up and down to get it implemented.

I don't know. Boulder seems to be the Berkeley of Colorado so I'm looking at this with all the amusement of someone watching a trailer trash cat fight over a toothless alcoholic druggie. Then I realize what this portends for the future of our state and I cry.

[Zundfolge]

Suggest we stop allowing people from the Islamic world into the country temporarily while we "figure out what's going on" and you're a NAZI sympathizer and Hitler wannabe ... suggest we put the homeless in "camps" and you're a good, big hearted progressive?

[Skip]

I don't know. Boulder seems to be the Berkeley of Colorado so I'm looking at this with all the amusement of someone watching a trailer trash cat fight over a toothless alcoholic druggie. Then I realize what this portends for the future of our state and I cry.

That's where I am too. The folly of Libs is fine if it's their money/time/safety. Colorado seems to be putting everyone "all in" the more we slide to the Left. On one hand, it's getting harder for honest working people to make it (cost of living). On the other, the gov(s) is putting out the freak light for anyone who wants to come live on the backs of others.

Just because some loony bin architect proposes something does not mean that all of Boulder is jumping up and down to get it implemented.

The proposal suggests there is opportunity. This isn't the first time I've heard the idea of legitimizing a shanty town in Denver/Boulder but it is the first time I've seen it approached from a city planning perspective. Colorado Springs has their own too but it exists without approval/support.

[sniper7]

Suggest we stop allowing people from the Islamic world into the country temporarily while we "figure out what's going on" and you're a NAZI sympathizer and Hitler wannabe ... suggest we put the homeless in "camps" and you're a good, big hearted progressive?

Unless you are Eric Cartman with the intent to round up and exterminate the hippies, which is comedy gold.

[Guylee]

Fine, let them infest Boulder.

[.455_Hunter]

Yup- No homeless problems in Colorado Springs or Fort Collins.

Sometimes the anti-Boulder theme on this board gets tiresome.

... but it is the first time I've seen it approached from a city planning perspective.

A wack job makes a proposal to a city planning board, just like ANY CITIZEN can do, and now its being "approached from a city planning perspective"?

Here was their response. Sounds like they jumped right on the bandwagon to me...

"Please note that the property is currently owned by the City of Boulder and is slated for the development of the second phase of Valmont City Park," city planner Charles Ferro wrote to Bean in an e-mail. "The subject property is not available for the establishment of any other uses at this time."

To be honest, putting all of the "homeless" folks in a somewhat controlled area is preferable to what is happening now along Boulder Creek, and would probably help separate those who are truly "homeless" and need help from those who are "vagrants" and need a swift boot in the ass out of town. Make them earn their keep doing basic jobs, like weed control, and it kinda makes sense.

[speedysst]

If you're so tired of the "anti-Boulder theme" then perhaps you should not have read this particular thread. Just saying.