Glenwood Springs Mayor Demands Parking Over Density

“Parking lots are dead spots in the downtown area and should be developed.”

That’s what Mayor Don “Hooner” Gillespie told us. He said it after the council approved a 24-unit apartment building under the GID and DDA guidelines. There are no provisions for parking. The mayor thinks we’re wasting space. He thinks we should pave over empty asphalt and build up.

Gillespie wants to put “For Sale” signs on the whole downtown if we aren’t careful. He argues that turning the core into an apartment city won’t help businesses. It won’t help immediate neighborhoods either. We’re already choking on traffic. Adding density without adding parking is a recipe for gridlock.

The writer notes the GID and DDA have been around for 40 years. They should be updated. Or scrapped. The letter argues they no longer bring in enough revenue to justify the overlay. The old “in-fill” logic is gone. We don’t need more density if we can’t park.

Then there’s the money. The accommodation tax brings in $1.7 million. Gillespie says that should house police, firemen, and essential workers. Not more condos. We need to catch up on amenities before we keep adding to the population. That’s the local angle. We’re building units we can’t park near for people who can’t afford them.

“Subsidized unaffordable housing” is the phrase used. It interferes with the free market. That’s the claim. The writer argues there is no truly affordable housing in Glenwood Springs. Just subsidized versions that don’t solve the root problem.

Meanwhile, another neighbor is trying to fix the world with a credit card.

“Consumer choices are one way to act,” says the second letter writer. They argue voting is hamstrung by money. Politicians owe the worst actors. So we spend. We boycott. We choose.

The writer started yesterday. The day the president threatened to destroy a whole civilization. They’re giving up things they regularly enjoy. They’re calculating what they would have spent. They’re setting up automatic monthly donations to organizations that care, repair, and comfort the injured.

They wrote to Bayer. They wrote to Amazon. They wrote to elected representatives. They’re not on social media. No seeking likes. Just trying to deserve the air they breathe.

“Start by applying your own s…” the letter cuts off. A fragment. But the intent is clear. It’s about personal accountability. It’s about using the wallet as a weapon.

Two letters. Two different ways to handle the same crisis. One wants to tear down the overlay district. The other wants to tear down their own consumption habits.

The short version: We can’t park downtown. And we can’t stop buying. That’s the dilemma. The mayor says build up. The neighbor says spend less. Neither offers a solution to the parking shortage.

The accommodation tax sits at $1.7 million. It’s not going to police. It’s going to housing. That’s the fact. The rest is debate.

Read that again. We’re approving density without parking. We’re calling it growth. We’re calling it development. But if you can’t park, you can’t do business. The shops will close. The apartments will sit empty. Or they’ll sell out to people who live in the valley and drive in.

The GID has been around for four decades. It’s time to update the rules. Or drop them. The revenue isn’t there to justify the current model. That’s what the letter says. It’s worth watching how the council reacts. They approved the building. Now they have to explain the parking.

The consumer letter is quieter. It’s happening in the background. Automatic donations. Monthly. Steady. It’s not a protest. It’s a withdrawal. A refusal to participate in the plunder.

We’re all doing both. We’re all parking in the same spots. We’re all buying from the same stores. The question is whether we notice.

The mayor says parking lots are dead. The writer says spending is dead weight.

Both are waiting for us to catch up.