Documents obtained by the Pikes Peak Bulletin via a Colorado Open Records Act request now provide a complete timeline of the proposal from David and Chris Jenkins to donate 15 acres of privately owned land in order to create a Ruxton Avenue access road and a parking lot. Emails show that Mayor John Graham was in conversation with the Jenkins and David Walton, the owner of a tract of undeveloped land on Manitou’s west side, as early as February.
February 2024
On Feb. 5, Chris Jenkins emailed Graham, “Mayor, my dad indicated you had a great visit today. As I’ve been thinking about this I’d like to brainstorm some strategy with you.”
On Feb. 12, Walton emailed Graham:
“RE: Western Bypass – access to COG and top of Ruxton
Bypass route from Serpentine Roundabout to Jenkin’s property line-(south of intersection of Mesa Ave and Midland ROW), has (2) sections.
Serpentine Roundabout to Midland Railroad ROW [right of way]
Welcome Lane – (across from Bottling Works) shown on Master Plan. The first several hundred yards of 50’ ROW was dedicated to City when property was subdivided. Manitou Ave intersection curb & gutter already installed for 1 lane uphill and 2 lanes downhill traffic. CDOT permit currently allows turns towards town, or left towards Serpentine Roundabout. If City built road as per Master Plan – owners would dedicate 50’ ROW to City.
Difficulties constructing Welcome Lane as City street include placement of utilities in ROW, and sidewalks requirement.
Midland ROW past Mesa Ave to Jenkins gate
Herald Walton ownership – City would need to purchase or attain access agreement. (Bypass is Herald Walton’s brainchild – likely able to come to terms)
Always willing to discuss Open Space possibilities.”
On Feb. 26, Graham emailed Chris Jenkins, “Just a quick heads up. Following our visit to the site several weeks ago, I’ve hiked the hillside between Manitou Avenue and the Midland ROW a couple of times, largely to be perplexed at the proposed roadway. Last week David Walton sent me some drawings, which I am musing over.”
March 2024
On March 5, Graham emailed Walton, “I would like to walk over your property, mainly between the Midland ROW and Manitou Avenue to get a better sense of where the roadway would be. We could also discuss your thoughts on the future land use. The materials you sent me were helpful, but it would be good to meet in person. I’m not sure if you are back yet, but I was thinking that maybe next Monday, or the following would be good for you. I have not brought this up with City Council, owing to various concerns and I would like to have a better grasp on a few things before doing so. I would like to bring Alan [Delwiche, Planning Commission Chair] and Tim [Beeson, Open Space Advisory Committee Chair] with me.”
Following his email to Walton, Graham then emailed David Jenkins.
“I have concerns about the cost,” wrote Graham. “Everything the city has looked at recently has gotten more expensive, a thought that you voiced also. That’s not necessarily a showstopper, but being able to pay for things is important, obviously.
“I had mentioned to Chris several weeks ago about using some of the flat terrain on your property for affordable housing, with the thought that increasing our inventory would appeal to some Councilors and help solve another city problem, meanwhile using revenue from that for building the road. Chris did mention that ‘affordable housing’ is a very challenging topic. Manitou has applied for Proposition 123 participation; Chris recognized that but I don’t know how feasible that might be. As a side note, the two gents who accompanied me at our meeting by the radio tower, Alan Delwiche and Tim Beeson, are our Planning Commission and Open Space chairs, respectively. They are exercising confidentiality on this proposal and they can reach into their specialty areas to consider financial strategies, legalities, etc. If there is a way to begin piggybacking grant opportunities, etc., they are good people to ask.”
On March 12, Graham provided the Jenkins an update. “ I had a chance to walk the Walton property between Manitou Avenue and the Midland ROW yesterday with David Walton and it helped clear up some questions,” wrote Graham. “He showed me his plan for the roadway, which had perplexed me a bit previously. I must admit that I have reservations about the cost and how we might pay for it. (We lost our City Engineer a few weeks ago, and I was going to get his take on costs. That may be largely premature, as Council needs to be interested enough to continue.) I will present this proposal to City Council on April 2 in Executive Session. I may have a few questions between now and then, but I think they would be relatively routine and not require much research.”
On March 21, Graham emailed David Jenkins:
“I am putting together a presentation for the April 2 meeting. One of my concerns is with the roadway. For the stretch in your parcels, the matter seems easier than the Walton land. Developing a two-lane roadway along portions of that would be a bit challenging, for instance where Herald’s homesite is. It looks to me that the lower hillside would have to be built up for another lane. And all this tends to look more expensive, although I have no good idea of what we might be talking about.
“I walked the hillside from Manitou Avenue to the Midland ROW with David and Herald Walton and Tim Beeson (Manitou Open Space). I guess there are a couple of options to consider for the route. You are probably aware that Daivd tried to develop 11 1-acre homesites there about 2011 but was denied by the City. I’m not sure what the objections were, although David doesn’t seem to have much appetite to try again, not that I blame him. He seems open to many suggestions. One alternative might be to have a road built there and the rest of the land used as Open Space.
“Also worthy of note is that the City (finally) finished redoing west Manitou Avenue, and the Westend has some opportunities for redevelopment. I thought that might be an incentive for David, but it doesn’t seem to be.
“Whereas you and Chris are pretty clear with your intentions, David is somewhat more vague.
“I should say that my understanding in your proposal is that the roadway would be of sufficient caliber to provide routine access to upper Ruxton, sufficient to handle a significant portion of the Cog and Incline volume and thereby reduce the strain on Ruxton. Correct me if I’m wrong. The Walton tract is somewhat challenging, but makes this an interesting problem.”
David Jenkins responded, “We are working on a full set of benefits and options that may be beneficial for your meeting with others. We are out of town next week is there any time we could me Monday April 1st?”
On March 26, Graham emailed Delwiche and Beeson, “Hi Gents, David and Chris Jenkins, and Chris Leibert of NES, will meet with us next Monday at 1:30 p.m. at the Norwood offices. I can pick you guys up if you want to ride with me. I’ve put together a first draft slide show for briefing Council. Would you be willing to look it over for me?”
April 2024
On April 3, following Graham’s presentation to Council in executive session, Graham emailed Beeson and Delwiche:
“[Redacted paragraph]
“Anyway, I need a couple of good hikes to reframe this before further considerations. [Redacted sentence] I did feel that it was appropriate to let Council know about this, so having done so is a bit of a relief. I think for the present that it makes sense to not discuss this publicly. No point in exciting people about something that doesn’t appear to be getting any traction. [Redacted sentence]
“I didn’t sleep much last night as I was wondering about what, if anything, to do next. Again, a couple of days and some hiking are probably needed. I am not inclined to throw in the towel, as I think the proposal has a lot of merit, especially for public safety and long-term quality of life. Obviously, there are many things to attend to, so this can’t absorb extreme amounts of time or energy, and the risk of generating more heat than light is a measure to forever consider.
Many thanks for your interest, suggestions, and letting me bounce ideas off of you. I suspect the next discussion will require supplemental portions of wine or beer. Coffee does not seem to lead to sufficient progress.”
Beeson replied, “Very sorry to hear that. I thought the idea had a lot of merit, especially in light of the fact (I assume it’s a fact) that the Ruxton corridor enhancements are going to happen regardless. If my knee improves I’d be glad to join you on one of those hikes. A hill to die on.”
Delwiche responded, “[Redacted sentences] Maybe there’s a compromise out there to allow it to happen.”
On April 4, Graham responded, “Yes, I had hoped to see a little more curiosity on Council’s part, although I am not really surprised by the members’ reactions. [Redacted sentence]. I suppose that thinking was not unique to them. It was a lot for everyone to have to process and [Redacted], although she has generally been suspicious of, or negative relative to anything I’ve suggested of late. Natalie was out. [Redacted sentence] I do value compromise and think this is important enough to take a bit further… Continuing to think about this.”
May 2024
On May 9, Graham emailed Beeson:
“Just following up on the Jenkins-Walton Land proposal. I haven’t done much with this since I presented it to Council back in early April. Attached are the slides I presented to Council (A proposal to the City of Manitou Springs_v3.pptx) and also the one created by Chris Liebert of NES per the Jenkinses, (Ruxton_Presentation.pdf). Council has not seen this latter one, so it remains a card to be played if it comes to that. This is what we saw at the Norwood offices; I thought you might be curious.
“I guess OSAC meets on the fourth Monday of the month. That would coincide with Memorial Day this month. We had talked briefly about me presenting this at an OSAC meeting since one of the main benefits would be to increase our Open Space holdings.
“However, Sue and I will be out of town from May 22 until probably the 20th or 30th. We will also be gone in late June, so neither month lines up well for presenting this at a regular OSAC meeting. I might be able to do it at another time, or maybe you would be willing to discuss it with OSAC as you see fit. I still need to mention this to Council, I suppose, as a courtesy, and I can do that this coming Tuesday.”
View the presentation here:
ManitouPresentation
June 2024
On June 7, the Pikes Peak Bulletin reported that Manitou Springs residents turned out to speak to the Manitou Springs City Council at the June 4 meeting during Public Comment on Non-Agenda Items about a survey they received via text that, to some recipients, appeared to have come from the city – though the city quickly clarified it had not.
“I think we’re as bewildered as you are,” Graham says of the survey. “We can understand your concerns and we’re concerned, too, but I’m afraid we don’t have an answer.”
At the end of the meeting, Graham admitted, “Having sat through this, I know who’s responsible for the survey. It was David and Chris Jenkins, Norwood Development.”
On June 28, the Pikes Peak Bulletin reports that Chris and David Jenkins of the development group Norwood will give a presentation to the Manitou City Council at the regular meeting on July 16.
July 2024
On July 10, David and Chris Jenkins submited a letter to Graham and City Council to request the removal of their presentation item from the Manitou Springs City Council meeting agenda on July 16th.
Reached for comment on his emails, Graham said the June survey caught him off guard. “I could hear people start exploring some of the questions,” Graham recalls. “I realized that that probably went back to the Jenkins, and I think my initial reaction was I should contact them to verify that it was them, and they made some sort of a premature mistake. I hadn’t expected them to move that quickly either. I thought we’d have at least until Wednesday, until after the City Council meeting because I had entertained the idea of talking to some council members to see if they had any interest in bringing this back from the council side.”
Graham said that his meetings and emails with the Jenkins and Walton were simply weighing options for the future of the city. “Is this worth pursuing?” he asked. “It doesn’t cost you anything to ask questions. And in fact, up to this point, the city has spent no money. We haven’t used staff time, we haven’t hired a consultant, we haven’t done anything like that.”
Graham notes that the Jenkins proposal is simply one of many possible options for the undeveloped parcels of land. “The proposal is to the end of year, and after that the property can be sold to somebody else,” he said. “That changes the complexion of the problem. That same neighborhood then might be dealing with a different developer who would want to put in luxury homes. At one point, David [Jenkins] did say that the most sensible thing, from a business standpoint, for that property would be luxury homes. A year from now, that neighborhood may be finding themselves talking to a developer who wants to put something up there. I don’t know if that would be better. I think probably the neighborhood would just like to leave it the way it is and also never have a fire.”
