Hampden

The residents of Hutchison Hills whose properties back up to Hampden Ave (East of Tamarac, South side of Hampden) recently received a letter dated 7/31/08 from Ms. Eleanor Garcia - Denver Senior City Inspector. 

In this letter she advises residents:

 "Our office has received a number of citizen inquiries about uncut grass behind the homes along Hampden Avenue....in the area between the fence and the curb.  We also receive a large number of calls concerning the sidewalk area not being cleared of snow in the winter months.  This is especially important with the bus stop located on the SE corner of Hampden and Tamarac. 

Denver ordinance requires that the adjacent property owner maintain the sidewalk and lawn between their property line and the curb as described below.

The Denver Ordinance is Chapter 49, Section 551.1, Maintenance of improvements in the public right-of-way which states: (a) It shall be the duty of the owner, occupant or lessee of any real property abutting a constructed right-of-way to provide for continuing care, maintenance, repair and replacement of all improvements installed in any right-of-way area between their property line and the curb line adjoining their property..."

A copy of the ordinance was then attached.

This issue was initiated (from our understanding) through HOA inquiry.  Our concern is that this has never been an issue over the last 35 years Hutchison Hills has been in place.  This has only become a concern with in the last couple years. WHY?

Are certain representatives of our HOA acting in the resident's best interest?  It seems there are isolated members or perhaps residents who may not even be HOA affiliated, that have all of the sudden become concerned with the maintenance and care of what, if you ask most people, is considered a part of Highway 285.  While it is important to us all that the safety and integrity of our neighborhood be maintained and kept beautiful - it's ironic that such a surge of "several inquiries" has come about as new "blood" has moved in. 

After talking with several adjoining neighbors (both old and new) NEVER has such a reference been made. "In all the years I've lived here - this has never been an issue" states one senior resident.  Not only is access to this "abutting area" non existent for the lion share of affected residents - but the suggestion offered by our neighborhood inspector to hire a contractor, is not conducive to several residents who are on fixed budgets.

I just don't see how residents along this stretch of "highway" can reasonably maintain and care for this property.  I respect that the safety of pedestrians, not only elderly or disabled (as was isolated in the letter from Ms. Garcia), but all is of great importance.  However, she is also suggesting that snow removal be contracted, which in most instances negatively impacts the very group of people she is defending.

Beyond this, the fence that separates the properties' is maintained by CDOT.  Is this then, their property thus becomes the "adjoining property", therefore is the cleaning and care of this stretch of sidewalk really the responsibility of the state? 

No one seems to know.  It's been beyond challenging trying to pursue these answers.  Any tips, suggestions, or direction anyone has to offer in getting this issue resolved would be greatly appreciated.

This whole situation seems to further emphasize the perspective that Ms Garcia's observations are targeted to a specific group of residents.  Some "older" residents have even commented to the effect that in all the years of residing in Hutchison Hills, they never received warning or citations for infractions newer residents are being specifically cited for - even though they have (the older residents) admittedly been guilty of the same "violation" at some point or another in the time they've resided here.

Coincidence?  Hmmm, not really.  It seems FAR too coincidental that when these warnings and citations are posted, it is within very few hours of such infractions.  One may defend that our Resident Inspector is optimally efficient in performing her duties.  This would be a supported perspective if in fact it were the case wholly and completely.  Our observation has been, however,  that she will arrive to the scene specified, post the notice and leave, without making full circle review of the surrounding properties.  This was specifically observed when a citation was posted on a neighboring house, due to ice removal at the foot of their driveway.  However, the house RIGHT NEXT DOOR had the same "violation" and received nothing! 

These events are not isolated and this has been observed more than once.  It seems we have a voice of influence in our neighborhood.  It seems Ms. Garcia responds very efficiently when contacted by this individual or perhaps there is a couple? It seems targeted and at times malicious and petty.

This letter has resulted in a lot of tension and unfortunate finger pointing within our peaceful neighborhood, and it saddens me that those "concerned citizens" are causing such an unproductive stir.

Just my two-cents.

So as this issue continues to escalate - a meeting of HOA representative has come to pass, to which a letter to the homeowners is being drafted offering reassurance that their best interests and efforts of support are at hand.  With benefit of doubt and opportunity to hold true - we'll see if the efforts pay off.

Measurements of properties and review of easements has raise further question to the issues of property owner responsibility.  Further, observations have been made and noted that the properties, which back up to the west side of Yosemite are cared for by the City Parks and Recreation Department.  So, why the double standard? 

Apparently, further discussions have taken place as it relates to the correspondence of Ms. Garcia and the negative response (or lack thereof) by our district 4 city council representative Ms. Peggy Lehmann.  http://www.denvergov.org/Default.aspx?alias=www.denvergov.org/CouncilDistrict4.  As a member of the City-School Coordinating committee, Greenprint Denver Council, Strategic Transportation Plan Task Force, the South I-25 Urban Corridor committee, and one who serves on the board of the Urban Drainage and Flood Control District, one would believe this to be an opportunity to rise to the occasion and represent the best interests of those who reside in the community she represents.  Instead, those who have persisted in their efforts to inquire and seek resolution have been cut short and turned away - (as has been represented by HOA representatives). Dear Ms. Lehmann, this is not how one retains support of your district residents. 

With committee assignment with in Public Works; whose services have earned Denver an international reputation as a beautiful city. Public Works employees are credited to have helped to build this reputation through the quality of their work; work that directly impacts the quality of our environment, transportation and construction. If Public Works it is truly a diverse department that shares one common goal, working to improve our quality of life in Denver; doesn't it seem reasonable to expect the quality of life be considered for all parties involved, and not just limited to pedestrians?  Shouldn't it be up to Public Works to seek a reasonable solution that benefits all parties involved - rather than enforcing an ordinance that is not reasonably achievable (by resident or independent contractor).  After all, wouldn't extensive permitting be required for contractors to safely and reasonably provide snow removal on the sidewalks- only for the city to cover the affected areas - each time they plow? 

As the HOA persists in their endeavor to find resolution to this impeding issue - the ordinance remains, and tempers continue to soar.