Jump to content
ISIS aspires to be a worldwide threat. On a small scale they have acomplished it by prompting lone wolves to commit terrorisim. If they can obtain powerful WMD the lone wolves may kill thousands in an attack. Such weapons are not entierly beyond their reach, with enough money and members willing to die for the cause.
So not yet able to achieve their stated goal of killing us all makes them not an existential threat?
The mixing of uses obviously has particular challenges. Witness the conflict about live music and street sweeping in the Yampa St. district.
I have submitted an application to serve on the City Planning Commission. Persons who feel strongly about the positions put forth here, favorable or otherwise, may wish to make that known to the Council members prior to my interview with them Tuesday evening.
But there is much that still regulates by the Euclidean model, and the two are not fully reconciled, leaving far more open to differing interpretations. Perhaps it is as well that there be substantial flexibility, to allow entrepreneurs, residents and developers to respond as needs evolve. But the same flexibility can also be used to make such adjustments more difficult. The Alpiner is a classic example of that.
It is time to make thoroughgoing revisions to the CDC, beginning with a close examination of the basic philosophy of zoning. The very specific differentiation of variations in classes of use, between a hotel and a hostel for example, are beyond what ought to be subject to regulation. Enforcement policies that attempt to drive out or exclude uses that are not patently incompatible with other existing activities in a zone should be discontinued. Interpretations should be generous in favor of allowing activity as opposed to prohibiting it.
And numerous examples of regulations that seem to have been crafted to favor or prevent a very specific situation in the past need to be revised. A good example in the lodging venue is that one which stipulates that a large old home, the kind typically considered most suitable for a B&B, may not be approved for that use if a very small home is in proximity. That would appear to have been crafted based on a specific situation, but has the effect of generally curtailing that activity.
I reiterate my call for a citizens commission to be impaneled for a complete revision of the CDC.
"The Alpiner, located in Steamboat’s historic retail and restaurant district on Lincoln Avenue,,,,
From a historic perspective, the description should include "Lodging" district as well. There have been lodging businesses of various kinds there for over a century, there still are several.
The town planners are operating within a policy that seeks to change that historic use, to exclude short and long term residential uses unless they are confined to the upper floors of the buildings. Eventually that would close most of the operations of the Rabbit Ears, The Nordic, The Western, and impact the Bristol.
There is a perceptible logic if course, that of making more space available for restaurant and retail, concentrating this activity into a compact and defined area. It also is presumably the intent to keep such activity out of other areas. That fits the old school concept of zoning regulation, keep things rigidly segregated by hard lines, advancing a master plan for the city conceived by urban planners following the Euclidean concept (similar to Euclidean geometry, parallel lines never meet).
But there has been a significant shift over the past decades in the school of thought in urban planning. Now zones are considered to be "transects", or transitional areas between higher concentrations of different activities.
"New Urbanisim" promotes decentralizing activities, keeping often frequented businesses within walking distance of most residences, ideally a pub, grocer, cafe, etc, every few blocks, a sprinkling of other light commercial uses throughout mostly residential zones and a mix of residences in mostly commercial zones. There is much in our CDC that reflects these trends.
Hotel, motel, lodge, dorm, B&B, vacation rental, part time residence. Most resembles one thing, somewhat resembles something else. Some pretty fine shades of grey here. First floor, second floor, long term, short term, encourage, prohibit. How precisely should these activities be controlled?
The drugs as a substitute for social interactions theory may explain why the AA model for recovery is so effective, restoring the addict to an intense, almost familial level of intercourse.
Rhys my friend, I may have to apologize. Please do not think this is about you. For me it is about those who do not have the advantages you do. You are The Highwaystar, unusually gifted in intelligence, long accustomed to surfing amongst life's shoals, picking yourself up after a fall and laughing it off. You have had decades of experience to adjust dosages and combinations, to develop tolerance, to practice remedys.
No it is the novice, initiating themself to mood altering substances who stands at risk, such as my young friend. It is the young person who can find in drugs a substitute for constructive human interaction and activity. It is the potential for ingestion of large dosages so quickly that psychotic reactions or serious accidents become more likely. It is about the two young men who I have the commitment to mentor, who because of past trauma are that much more likely to have adverse reactions to canned happiness.
You my friend have found, as you told me once, that you fit in the universe, as much as a star in the heavens. Shine on!
And again, it should not be illegal, just well regulated.
With the big banks it was willful deceit, promoting the myth (prevailing wisdom) of endless value increase (it's worth what you can get for it) while they packaged, mislabled and sold the junk they knowingly created.
To quote Rhys: "As near as I can tell, the price for NON-use is endless tedium, a tendency to pontificate ad infinitum, and no other meaningful activity".
Now pontificating aside, (I resemble that remark), Rhys is onto something.
The study cited in the article below offered heroin/cocaine to lab rats, as much as they wanted, in their water, or plain water, their choice.
The rats that were isolated partook more and more till they overdosed and died.
(Thus relieving the tedium and lack of meaningful activity)
The rats that had social interaction and a stimulating environment consumed little of the drug.
Perhaps that explains the sad demise of my young friend. displaced from his social life he used drugs to compensate, more and more till the crisis ensued.
Last login: Thursday, February 19, 2015
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2015 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.