The Last Stand
Comments by Ilike2dv8
Page 1 of 5 | Next
On Omar. M. Campbell: Vote on 700
(anonymous)
June 30, 2008 at 7:07 p.m.
› Suggest removal
elkeye - Why. This plan has been in the works for over 10 years and the ridicules delays have created enormous pent up demand for locals housing. Why do we need to delay the process further with a vote. The public has had countless opportunities to voice their opinion in support or lack thereof with regards to the plan… It was decided long ago the growth should be kept out of the South Valley and Strawberry Park. Although there was not a formal vote I would challenge anyone to make the argument that the community did not support the growth going west versus anywhere else.
So that being the case, again why is a vote needed? The delays are driving the cost of locals housing through the roof. Do you really want to debate where the housing goes… or do you just prefer no additional housing or growth at all. It's fine if that's your position; just state it instead of hiding behind a vote. It's not a secret that there are many in this valley who feel they have been let in so let's lock the gates (mostly folks new to the area since long time residents have the respect to know the community welcomed them or their ancestors at some point in time).
If the issue makes it to the ballot it WILL pass, it will just delay the inevitable but then again that's your idea of a solution right? Doesn't anyone plan past this weekend anymore… We HAVE to start taking the growth of the next twenty years into account at some point… we have waited long enough!
Let’s face it, we wouldn’t be here in the first place if we had planned ahead 20 years ago… instead the decision makers at the time were clinging to the hope no one else was going to move here.
Yep, that worked out real well…
On Jack Trautman: Not about stripes
(anonymous)
June 29, 2008 at 2:13 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Ditto!
On Daniel H. Smilkstein, MD: Time to pedal
(anonymous)
June 29, 2008 at 2:03 p.m.
› Suggest removal
I don't know how it could be said any better.
On Omar. M. Campbell: Vote on 700
(anonymous)
June 29, 2008 at 1:44 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Omar, you are making some very strong assertions about some very good people.
“The developer has the fast-growth oriented City Council majority in his pocket — and has had it there from the start.” You would be wise not to compare your personal experience (“when I was pretty sure the growth-oriented City Council of that time was in my pocket. And they were.”) to the current city council or county commissioners.
Since you’re willing to publicly slander them I would ask you to provide some proof. You are clearly inferring that they are taking bribes or in some other way receiving benefit by supporting the west of Steamboat annexation, which by the way IS a community plan. Back it up, chump! I'm tired of people like you who made your money from development lashing out at others who are simply providing housing whether it is for locals or second homeowners. It doesn't get any more hypocritical.
There is no question that the West of Steamboat Plan implementation carries many important decisions but I also have a great deal of faith in those who are in the position to make those decisions. They are smart, well informed and show the strength to actually lead instead of sail through our waters with no rudder.
The fact that the stakes are as high as they are is because of the total lack of leadership and actions taken by former councils and commissioners. There have been no significant annexations or preparations for growth in over twenty years so don't condemn good people who were elected to step up and address the situation. The community HAS spoken, they voted at the ballot box for those who were prepared to LEAD.
On Our View: Ride a bike; obey the laws
(anonymous)
June 29, 2008 at 1:02 p.m.
› Suggest removal
There are some seriously angry people here. You all live in an amazing place with a wonderful 4 season climate and a beautiful valley. RELAX and try to enjoy where you live…
The rising gas prices are causing more folks to choose alternative forms of transportation (which is a great thing) and the influx of people who desire to share in our wonderful part of the world are putting pressures on our roadways, schools, restaurants, etc… This is not going to change so why not simply slow down a little and show some tolerance.
I've lately been frustrated with both drivers and bicyclers, who have been waiting to make a left hand turn at a red light, jump at the green to cut in front of oncoming traffic. This is truly taking your life as well as others into your own hands… I realize these people may have been waiting for a while because of the amount of traffic but don't cause an accident over a minute or two wait… are you kidding me???
In the end, we live in a GREAT place that attracts many types of people from those who seek a rural lifestyle to those who love to recreate (often one in the same). In my mind that's one of the things that makes the Yampa Valley so special. It's not that hard to resolve the issue… slow down a little, relax and lose the overly righteous attitudes on both sides.
On Losing Triple Crown risky
(anonymous)
May 11, 2008 at 11:39 p.m.
› Suggest removal
Insert families, skiers, college students, concert goers, tourists, motorcycle and car race attendee's, mtn bikers or kayaker's in place of TC'ers. Face it folks you don't want visitors, you just want them to send their checks in the mail… and when you don't have jobs or an economy you will blame city council and beg for affordable housing.
On Steamboat 700: Transfer fee ‘unfair’
(anonymous)
May 8, 2008 at 7:58 p.m.
› Suggest removal
All though some of the comments above may be true, folks need to remember these costs are not all to be borne by the developer. Many of these costs including a transfer tax will be born by the homeowners, meaning anyone living in the WSSAP. The cost to existing residents for a new home built downtown or anywhere else in the city limits are nearly identical to those that may be built in the WSSAP. Given that, everyone who is building a new home should contribute if the system is to be fair. I would think most of us would reject the idea that if you lived in riverside you were singled out to pay more taxes than anyone else in the community. You gotta love those people who want it all and want everyone else to pay for thirty plus years of the city's mistakes…
On Omar M. Campbell: Bias in support
(anonymous)
May 3, 2008 at 12:59 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Skiday - I appreciate the sacrifice part as I like many other folks around Steamboat worked three jobs the first several years I lived here in order to stay here. Despite not growing up here, I understand the fear of loss. Growing up on a farm near a small town, I also have the same appreciation for our valley and it's staggering beauty as you do.
Our differences revolve around finding the right solution. It's true that several other ski towns (mostly due to topography) share many of the same issues that face Steamboat, yet I don't know of any that I would model our town after. Creating sprawl buy pushing the growth way down the valley doesn't seem like the answer to me. As for doubling the size of Steamboat overnight… that's just not realistic nor does the West of Steamboat Springs Area Plan (WSSAP) provide for or promote that. The annexation of the lands west of town that has been identified in the WSSAP is simply that… an annexation. The annexation only allows for development to occur, it does not make it happen nor does it create a market. If there is no market, the land will not be built on until there is. I think it's logical to expect a few hundred homes going in over the next 5-10 years due to the pent up demand. The city has not annexed a significant parcel of land into the city limits since the early 80’s. How can we possibly expect not find ourselves so far behind the eight ball with this type of shortsightedness? The expected time frame to build out those areas identified in the WSSAP is between 25 and 30 years. It is anyone’s guess as to how long it will actually take to build out but I do know it took over a hundred years for the city to reach a size of 10,000 so the likely hood of it doubling in even 30 to 50 years is remote.
Growth is difficult, it's hard to see a meadow or a hillside scared with a new home or several for that matter but remember we are surrounded by hundreds of thousands of acres of National Forest, BLM and private lands protected by trusts. I feel blessed that we live in such a beautiful area and I take solace in knowing that within a couple minutes of drive time or a quick bike ride I can find myself on a trail with no one around except maybe a good neighbor walking their dog.
Have a great weekend skiday. I hope we can both appreciate each other’s views today and in the future.
On Omar M. Campbell: Bias in support
(anonymous)
May 2, 2008 at 1:13 a.m.
› Suggest removal
Skiday, unfortunatly growth will not magically stop until people in this country and around the globe decide to quite pro-creating. I'm not going to hold my breath… as for commuting down valley, I couldn't disagree more. Do you really think that is the answer… let's see, double the size of Hayden, Oak Creek and Clark putting more cars on the rode for longer periods of time verses a 2.5 mile drive allowing for affordable public trasportation. I respect your thoughts but can't agree to your solution. Rich people wanted to make more money… what does that have to do with anything?
Page 1 of 5 | Next
RSS
On Lynne Paschal: Out of whack (anonymous)
July 15, 2008 at 4:50 p.m.
› Suggest removal
I'm curious… what is an acceptable size home?