Tinker Tiffany: Standing firm

Advertisement

— Boy, I couldn't agree more with Rob Douglas' "Dear Jon Letter." As a community, we need to stand firm on enforcing height restrictions for projects. It is a slap in the face for council members or the Planning Commission to consider variances for these developers who probably ask for such a big discrepancy initially so that when a "compromise" is reached they still get their way of going well over current height limitations and make an obscene profit at our skyline's expense.

Whatever happened to modesty? These developers see only dollar signs and don't care about preservation of anything except their own pocketbook. I think some of our council members see themselves as the new "movers and shakers" of our community, but it is our community values that are getting the shakedown. It makes you wonder what they may be getting out of supporting these type of requests and just whose pocket they are in.

Stop having a personal agenda of greed and start enforcing our existing codes and restrictions. Stop selling our community values down the river. Get a backbone of integrity and start serving the greater good.

Tinker Tiffany

Steamboat Springs

Comments

SilverSpoon 6 years, 8 months ago

It is naieve to think that city council doesn't have their hand in real estate, who in the valley doesn't? Countless people have cashed out, so community values leave with them. I say, lets build sky high, make a base comperable to whistler, a metropolis, high density, prosperous for business and loaded with entertainment. Or Copper for that matter, I guess their skyline is a freeway, so building big was more a sound barrier.

Also, developers do not have bottomless pockets, high construction costs and low local income may make it hard to sell new developments for inflated prices. Flood the market with 2bd, 2bth condos for $475 and the market will decide the success of a develpment. If they fail, develpers will pull the plug faster than jack kevorkian. Let forclosures offer affordable housing again, it is a tanking economy in america, and it will infiltrate the "bubble" that the realtors talk about on TV17.

0

424now 6 years, 8 months ago

I think your very close on the predictions you made in the second half of that post.

The first half, not so much.

It is naieve to consider the skyline an expendable assett. Unfortunately we will have considerable development that will have little regard for the asthetic of good ol' Steamboat.

Silver,

Do we as a town want to mimmick Whistler or Copper? Perhaps we can do better. We can spread out instead of up.

0

Aspengold 6 years, 7 months ago

That is beautifully said, Tinker Tiffany. Thank you.

0

SilverSpoon 6 years, 7 months ago

we are spreading out(steamboat 700, craig, stage coach, oak creek, milner, hayden, and clark), that leads us back to the traffic problem of taking 15 mins to get through town, when it used to take 10 and the full meadows parking lot, because people won't hang up the skis when the move out of town. I am just saying, building up promotes foot traffic in a small area like ST^2, building out requires that parking structures be built, which will never get approved, and also clips your views of See Me. As long as they don't block the view from slope side, I am happy; but the shade from the grand always ends the drinking by 3, or at least the outside drinking.

0

skiday11 6 years, 7 months ago

I don't want up or out, but I would definitely prefer up. Steamboat already looks like a jumbled sprawl of development.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.