ATTENTION!! Sorry Pilot Staff, there is something extremely wrong with this article. WHERE THE HECK is Scott Wedel's comment rant?! Surely he can find something wrong with beautifying our base area. I can't read an online pilot article without his negative viewpoint, honestly. Please rectify immediately. Thank you.
CONGRATS Wedel, your arrogant and condescending posts are the reason I now skip the comments section in the Pilot. We can always count on you and your negative, chicken-little analysis to shed a depressing light on a story. I'm just glad I don't live in your sad/angry world. The rest of us out here are making the best of a really tough situation and try to see the good times that surely lie ahead (however far off that might be). Go ahead and write one of your vitriolic responses, I'll be out enjoying life.
The people have spoken, I totally respect that. I just hope that we can see real solutions come to the table and that in a couple years we don't feel like we missed an opportunity. I also hope int he upcoming votes that more people in the county have a voice. You have to wonder what the outcome would have been if folks from Stagecoach and Hayden would have had a say......
@TWill: I never said decline. I think the increase in property values with 700 will be at a lower rate, keeping pace with increases in wages and therefore making a better market for everyone. But if you restrict the city boundaries you are going to restrict supply right? How can we ever get affordable if we don't expand the city limits? It sounds to me like you've given up on affordable housing. I'm sorry but I'm not ready to do that.
@housepoor: yes, the market is addressing it now. But how long with this last? Is your plan just to wait for the Great Recession every 5 years so you can buy a house? The greatest housing collapse in history is not a plan to make housing more affordable. And don't you think the Echo Boom or Millennials (the boomers kids) want to buy houses too? You really believe the demand for housing will decline over the next 20 years? It's just not rational.
One thing that bothers me about the growth haters is that they seem to think that Danny and his boys forced the whole proposition on us. The area plan developed by the members of this community said we want smart growth, and we want it on the west side. Did 700 force us into that decision? I dont remember those guys being around back then. Are they evil because the community said 'we want the growth here' and they said 'ok we'll buy the land and develop it'. What am I missing?
You're right insbsdeep, we should just revisit this in another couple years. Just like we did in 97, and 03, and 06. Yeah, eventually the problem will just fix itself.
'This is not the only road to affordable, attainable housing. There are opportunities for “new urbanization” design within our existing limits, or without all the baggage that comes with 700. ' -- Please expand on this, as I've yet to see anyone offer a viable solution that seems to make sense. Infill has been around for decades and hasn't seemed to do anything but exacerbate the problem, how is it the solution now?
So the argument of this article seems to be 'The affordable housing isn't affordable enough.' So shooting down the only viable plan for creating affordable housing on the table is going to fix that? All of the 'vote no' folks can talk about is 'we'll find another way'. Well how about you enlighten us on what that way is? All of the ways that have been explored before now haven't gotten us anywhere. And don't tell me infill because that way has been around the longest and its not exactly fixing our situation.
The fact of the matter is that injecting 2000 new homes over 20 years, regardless of their price point, into the Steamboat housing market will make EVERYTHING more affordable. That's just supply and demand.
And this statement defies logic: 'Steamboat 700 will possibly benefit a handful of people in the future, while burdening the rest of us with an increasingly overcrowded small town.' Uhh, so our increasingly overcrowded town should keep its city limits smaller? How does adding 500 acres to the town limits plus the retail and roads that we pretty much already need make our town MORE overcrowded? This is just another 'no growth is good growth' article with no real solutions and no real logic.
"How does a 1.2% transfer fee generate 8 million dollars in the next 15 years in this economy."
It doesn't. Because this economy won't last. If you believe this economy will last 15 years, then you're one of the people that believe Steamboat doesn't have to grow. You know that is wrong, right?
"We can come up with better affordable housing options."
Like......? I have yet to see a viable plan that doesn't involve free land, and transfer taxes. Which is what this plan proposes. If you've got another plan, now would probably be a good time to speak up.
Say what you want about the city's ineptitude with housing options before, but the staff at the city and county have been working on West of Steamboat expansion for decades, with public comment all along the way. It has to happen, do we really want to delay the process by another year or two, or even blow the chance altogether now?
I only wish it had been opened up to the entire county to vote. After all a large percentage of the people that would like to buy and live in 700 right now live in Hayden, Stagecoach, etc.
So what's up with the $75 tickets Strings?! I guess you thought the wine and cheese crowd wanted to get down to some Nawlin's funk? Good luck with that. I guess us po folk will have to get our New Orleans music fix from Tab at the Ghost...
Steamboat base area construction heats up
ATTENTION!! Sorry Pilot Staff, there is something extremely wrong with this article. WHERE THE HECK is Scott Wedel's comment rant?! Surely he can find something wrong with beautifying our base area. I can't read an online pilot article without his negative viewpoint, honestly. Please rectify immediately. Thank you.
September 2, 2011 at 2:11 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
2 exposure cases involving Steamboat restaurant owner assigned trial dates
Thanks Pilot, now I have the image of an old naked guy cooking French food in my head for the rest of the day...
October 14, 2010 at 11:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Final May sales tax figures show 7.4% drop
CONGRATS Wedel, your arrogant and condescending posts are the reason I now skip the comments section in the Pilot. We can always count on you and your negative, chicken-little analysis to shed a depressing light on a story. I'm just glad I don't live in your sad/angry world. The rest of us out here are making the best of a really tough situation and try to see the good times that surely lie ahead (however far off that might be). Go ahead and write one of your vitriolic responses, I'll be out enjoying life.
July 15, 2010 at 8:45 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steamboat says ‘no’ to 700
Jeez @aichempty, are you really comparing us to Slovenia?! I'm glad the majority of our community doesn't share your unbridled pessimism.
March 10, 2010 at 3:58 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steamboat says ‘no’ to 700
The people have spoken, I totally respect that. I just hope that we can see real solutions come to the table and that in a couple years we don't feel like we missed an opportunity. I also hope int he upcoming votes that more people in the county have a voice. You have to wonder what the outcome would have been if folks from Stagecoach and Hayden would have had a say......
March 9, 2010 at 10:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Dennis Howard: Vote ‘no’ on 700
@TWill: I never said decline. I think the increase in property values with 700 will be at a lower rate, keeping pace with increases in wages and therefore making a better market for everyone. But if you restrict the city boundaries you are going to restrict supply right? How can we ever get affordable if we don't expand the city limits? It sounds to me like you've given up on affordable housing. I'm sorry but I'm not ready to do that.
@housepoor: yes, the market is addressing it now. But how long with this last? Is your plan just to wait for the Great Recession every 5 years so you can buy a house? The greatest housing collapse in history is not a plan to make housing more affordable. And don't you think the Echo Boom or Millennials (the boomers kids) want to buy houses too? You really believe the demand for housing will decline over the next 20 years? It's just not rational.
One thing that bothers me about the growth haters is that they seem to think that Danny and his boys forced the whole proposition on us. The area plan developed by the members of this community said we want smart growth, and we want it on the west side. Did 700 force us into that decision? I dont remember those guys being around back then. Are they evil because the community said 'we want the growth here' and they said 'ok we'll buy the land and develop it'. What am I missing?
March 3, 2010 at 10:37 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Bud Rogers: Vote ‘yes’ on 700
You're right insbsdeep, we should just revisit this in another couple years. Just like we did in 97, and 03, and 06. Yeah, eventually the problem will just fix itself.
'This is not the only road to affordable, attainable housing. There are opportunities for “new urbanization” design within our existing limits, or without all the baggage that comes with 700. ' -- Please expand on this, as I've yet to see anyone offer a viable solution that seems to make sense. Infill has been around for decades and hasn't seemed to do anything but exacerbate the problem, how is it the solution now?
March 3, 2010 at 12:19 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Dennis Howard: Vote ‘no’ on 700
So the argument of this article seems to be 'The affordable housing isn't affordable enough.' So shooting down the only viable plan for creating affordable housing on the table is going to fix that? All of the 'vote no' folks can talk about is 'we'll find another way'. Well how about you enlighten us on what that way is? All of the ways that have been explored before now haven't gotten us anywhere. And don't tell me infill because that way has been around the longest and its not exactly fixing our situation.
The fact of the matter is that injecting 2000 new homes over 20 years, regardless of their price point, into the Steamboat housing market will make EVERYTHING more affordable. That's just supply and demand.
And this statement defies logic: 'Steamboat 700 will possibly benefit a handful of people in the future, while burdening the rest of us with an increasingly overcrowded small town.' Uhh, so our increasingly overcrowded town should keep its city limits smaller? How does adding 500 acres to the town limits plus the retail and roads that we pretty much already need make our town MORE overcrowded? This is just another 'no growth is good growth' article with no real solutions and no real logic.
March 3, 2010 at 12:09 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Affordable homes could be outside 700
"How does a 1.2% transfer fee generate 8 million dollars in the next 15 years in this economy."
It doesn't. Because this economy won't last. If you believe this economy will last 15 years, then you're one of the people that believe Steamboat doesn't have to grow. You know that is wrong, right?
"We can come up with better affordable housing options."
Like......? I have yet to see a viable plan that doesn't involve free land, and transfer taxes. Which is what this plan proposes. If you've got another plan, now would probably be a good time to speak up.
Say what you want about the city's ineptitude with housing options before, but the staff at the city and county have been working on West of Steamboat expansion for decades, with public comment all along the way. It has to happen, do we really want to delay the process by another year or two, or even blow the chance altogether now?
I only wish it had been opened up to the entire county to vote. After all a large percentage of the people that would like to buy and live in 700 right now live in Hayden, Stagecoach, etc.
February 25, 2010 at 2:27 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
The Neville Brothers get ready for back-to-back Strings shows
So what's up with the $75 tickets Strings?! I guess you thought the wine and cheese crowd wanted to get down to some Nawlin's funk? Good luck with that. I guess us po folk will have to get our New Orleans music fix from Tab at the Ghost...
June 30, 2009 at 7:22 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )