Why doesn't the City and City council stop wasting its time on issues such as the discussions on changing the Vacation Home Rental ordinance and put its people to work on identifying ways to attract suitable businesses to the city. TIC and Smart Wool (amongst others) are great businesses that have a positive impact on our economy. Unfortunately, the great folks from TIC are leaving because the new owners are devolving the company to regional operations – no more head office in Steamboat. Surely the City Council and City Managers can find ways to attract similar businesses to fill the void and provide great jobs. Wake up and do the right thing!
Many Vacation Homes are in breach of the covenants on their property. Most covenants state “lots can be used solely for residential purposes”. Residential purposes are defined as being “used as a place to live for the long term”. It is time the City stopped issuing permits to those who are in breach of these covenants – it just gives the person renting out their property the inclination that they are doing nothing illegal. Neighbors have a right to sue under their covenants and place a lien on the offending property. Jhr2000 – you are right – the City should chase enforcement and levy fines. 2007 – the Police usually say it is a Civil matter when a complaint is made. So again, the City causes a burden on a true resident by enabling a breach of their covenants and not ensuring that the property manager manages the behavior of tourists in their residential properties.
Steamboat Residents who are concerned with increased traffic congestion at the downtown Post Office location should contact CDOT who control Hwy 40 and access to it. If any access increases by 20% or more CDOT must make a review. So far CDOT claim the Post Office states that there will NOT be a 20% or more increase from Hwy 40 and therefore have concluded NOT to make a review.
BE AWARE that if the traffic load on 3rd and Oak intersection increases the City have a plan to make 3rd to Pine from Oak 1 way. This means no one can access 3rd and Hwy 40 stop light directly from Pine – the High School Students will have to detour to 4th (that has no stop light) or 5th to get onto Hwy 40.
Here are some facts: - the number of PO Boxes in Sundance Plaza is 2,584. These people use Sundance Counter for their postal services. - the number of boxes downtown is 5,200. These people use the Downtown Post Office counter for their services. - the number of counter stations in Sundance Plaza is 3. - the number of counter stations in the Downtown Post Office is 4.
So lets do some mathematics: - customers for 2,584 boxes must do their counter business downtown after Sundance Closes on January 15 2010. Downtown currently has customers from 5,200 boxes which means an increase of 50% when Sundance counter service closes. Of course, we must add to the downtown and the Sundance office those customers use have home delivery who use the counters in each location. Since the Sundance covers the Mountain area, and this is as large as downtown, plus major rural communities live to the south making Sundance an easier option, Sundance will have a similar counter service from home delivery customers as downtown. I see no logic to change the ratios. So, de facto, you have an access increase of 50% that is well above the CDOT 20% threshold. - There are 3 counter stations in Sundance and 4 counter stations in downtown. Shut the Sundance counters and you need to add the load of 3 to the load of 4 downtown. That is a 75% increase. This is also significantly above the CDOT threshold of 20% for access approval from Hwy 40.
Sure, Postnet and UPS offer some of the Postal services but at an increased price over the Post Office. Stamps etc are marked up. Don't get me wrong, I use their services for shipping UPS, Fedex etc and find them to be excellent. What about insured mail, certified mail, delivery confirmation with return card and passports!!!
I have been present at the hearings for the 2 acre parcel application. I concur with your support to Walter. He took time and effort to consider the issue. I think that Cari Hermacinski’s comment (“I think this sets terrible precedent for any developer trying to work in our community,”) was totally and utterly inappropriate – especially as President of the Council. The process proved that the citizens have a voice which is what public process is all about. Furthermore, the developer was overly ambitious from the start by designing and producing detailed drawings of a 137 foot tall 11 story building with reduced set backs including resort and commercial uses on a lot zoned for a single family dwelling. How could they be so presumptuous to believe that their request for rezoning would be automatically approved and thus their investment in the design be allowed to proceed? They should be upset at themselves and not at the process. They should be upset at Planning Department for supporting their applications that were rejected. I think the precedent that President Hermacinski should be setting is that developers must get zone upgrade approval before spending money on designs of buildings that are far beyond the zoning of the lot they purchased.
Steamvent, good note on Julie's comment. I thought the same.
Pity she did not state clearly that it is illegal for City employees to spend City money or their City time to support the Rec center proponents committee. That is the one to watch since one senior member of the Parks Recs management team is a member of the original Recs Proponent Committee.
Hammurabi - great comment. The average is quite fictitious as it is not based on what everyone will have to pay. The average is an average of what precisely?
Your cost per $100,000 is way more meaningful BUT unfortunately for the advocates of the indoor Rec Center such a cost will look a lot more expensive to us "average" residents than the "average" they quote. This is just another method the City employees are using to "sell" the deal. Be aware that in the end City employees are legally not allowed to support the referendum and if they do we should all report then for doing so! They already have their hands in this pot will they be able to stop before their actions are undeniably illegal under Colorado and Federal law??
By the way, we have recently agreed to a number of multi million dollar projects to fund within the City and County. I recall a new school and a new library; both extremely valuable causes for a large cross section of the community and with untold benefits in terms of helping our community members grow and achieve their dreams especially the young members of our community. So now, the "give-away-folks" want to add further tax burdens that provide for the few.
I also recall that the new high school was turned down by the vote of the residents and was resurrected in a much improved format and at a much improved cost that was approved for construction. The residents of this City have proven once before that they can tell government how to plan and spend wisely lets do it again!!
I do not believe anyone in the City has given any thought to how much our size of community can reasonably afford either in terms of funding captal cost or in terms of funding operating cost. Watch out, it won't stop at $34 million given the history of project underestimations and cost over runs (remember the tennis bubble, it overran by 50% on a much smaller project, the City department that managed that fiasco is the same one managing the Rec center) - be prepared to fund more than $40 million in capital cost then be prepared for the City to increase taxes to cover operating cost shortfalls since many of the people who want a rec center are looking for a government subsidized facility (if they wanted to pay they would have joined Health and recs)! Vote NO!
I did attend many of the City council meetings on this issue and, along with others, pointed out to the Consultants that they presented significant mathematical errors in their presentations. So please do not lecture me on "being there done that" and go check their maths yourself.
If you knew the history and if you had attended the City Council sessions you would understand that the Parks and Recs organization over ran their approved cost on the Tennis Bubble by 50%. So you may want to ask the question "How certain are they that they will deliver on their promises to spend your $30 million tax dollars or will they over run again and come back for more?". Also, they chose a tent color that did not match the recommendation of City Council (had you been there you would have heard that discussion).
Members of the committee formed by City Council are not happy that they were bypassed. Check that one out.
I would still like you to explain to ignorant old me how this City of Steamboat Springs can afford a $30 million Rec center. Crank your calculator and tell me HOW? Looking forward to seeing your maths!
Grateful if you can explain how a town of 9000 (11,000 unofficially) citizens can afford a $30 million plus facility with all the other services required to maintain our current infrastructure?? Show me the sound economics.
Also, grateful if you can explain why the tennis Bubble over ran by 50% in flat market???? Maybe poor project management was a cause. This was only a small project so how can you guarantee the same people will successfully deliver a $30 million plus project?? Did the architect take this kind of over run history into account???
There is a special committee formed by the City Council with a mix of proponents and non proponents of the rec center. this committee was bypassed when Chris Wilson told City Council he was ready to put it on the ballot and they agreed. You should probably ask some of the members of this committee and check the City council minutes.
Grateful if you can explain how a City that receives all its income from taxes can possible spend $30 million without adding taxes - sounds like alchemy to me!
Down economy, election could create empty seats for Steamboat Planning Commission
Why doesn't the City and City council stop wasting its time on issues such as the discussions on changing the Vacation Home Rental ordinance and put its people to work on identifying ways to attract suitable businesses to the city.
TIC and Smart Wool (amongst others) are great businesses that have a positive impact on our economy. Unfortunately, the great folks from TIC are leaving because the new owners are devolving the company to regional operations – no more head office in Steamboat. Surely the City Council and City Managers can find ways to attract similar businesses to fill the void and provide great jobs. Wake up and do the right thing!
July 12, 2010 at 5:36 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Steamboat City Council to consider relaxing aspects of vacation home rental policy
Many Vacation Homes are in breach of the covenants on their property. Most covenants state “lots can be used solely for residential purposes”. Residential purposes are defined as being “used as a place to live for the long term”. It is time the City stopped issuing permits to those who are in breach of these covenants – it just gives the person renting out their property the inclination that they are doing nothing illegal. Neighbors have a right to sue under their covenants and place a lien on the offending property.
Jhr2000 – you are right – the City should chase enforcement and levy fines.
2007 – the Police usually say it is a Civil matter when a complaint is made. So again, the City causes a burden on a true resident by enabling a breach of their covenants and not ensuring that the property manager manages the behavior of tourists in their residential properties.
July 7, 2010 at 8:06 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Senators step up for Sundance post office
Steamboat Residents who are concerned with increased traffic congestion at the downtown Post Office location should contact CDOT who control Hwy 40 and access to it. If any access increases by 20% or more CDOT must make a review. So far CDOT claim the Post Office states that there will NOT be a 20% or more increase from Hwy 40 and therefore have concluded NOT to make a review.
Go online to http://www.cotrip.org/contactUs.htm
State your case.
BE AWARE that if the traffic load on 3rd and Oak intersection increases the City have a plan to make 3rd to Pine from Oak 1 way. This means no one can access 3rd and Hwy 40 stop light directly from Pine – the High School Students will have to detour to 4th (that has no stop light) or 5th to get onto Hwy 40.
January 14, 2010 at 10 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
CDOT: Traffic changes at post office correct
Here are some facts:
- the number of PO Boxes in Sundance Plaza is 2,584. These people use Sundance Counter for their postal services.
- the number of boxes downtown is 5,200. These people use the Downtown Post Office counter for their services.
- the number of counter stations in Sundance Plaza is 3.
- the number of counter stations in the Downtown Post Office is 4.
So lets do some mathematics:
- customers for 2,584 boxes must do their counter business downtown after Sundance Closes on January 15 2010. Downtown currently has customers from 5,200 boxes which means an increase of 50% when Sundance counter service closes. Of course, we must add to the downtown and the Sundance office those customers use have home delivery who use the counters in each location. Since the Sundance covers the Mountain area, and this is as large as downtown, plus major rural communities live to the south making Sundance an easier option, Sundance will have a similar counter service from home delivery customers as downtown. I see no logic to change the ratios. So, de facto, you have an access increase of 50% that is well above the CDOT 20% threshold.
- There are 3 counter stations in Sundance and 4 counter stations in downtown. Shut the Sundance counters and you need to add the load of 3 to the load of 4 downtown. That is a 75% increase. This is also significantly above the CDOT threshold of 20% for access approval from Hwy 40.
Sure, Postnet and UPS offer some of the Postal services but at an increased price over the Post Office. Stamps etc are marked up. Don't get me wrong, I use their services for shipping UPS, Fedex etc and find them to be excellent. What about insured mail, certified mail, delivery confirmation with return card and passports!!!
January 11, 2010 at 10:51 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
City OKs medical marijuana dispensary regulations amid ongoing debate
I have been present at the hearings for the 2 acre parcel application.
I concur with your support to Walter. He took time and effort to consider the issue.
I think that Cari Hermacinski’s comment (“I think this sets terrible precedent for any developer trying to work in our community,”) was totally and utterly inappropriate – especially as President of the Council.
The process proved that the citizens have a voice which is what public process is all about.
Furthermore, the developer was overly ambitious from the start by designing and producing detailed drawings of a 137 foot tall 11 story building with reduced set backs including resort and commercial uses on a lot zoned for a single family dwelling. How could they be so presumptuous to believe that their request for rezoning would be automatically approved and thus their investment in the design be allowed to proceed? They should be upset at themselves and not at the process. They should be upset at Planning Department for supporting their applications that were rejected.
I think the precedent that President Hermacinski should be setting is that developers must get zone upgrade approval before spending money on designs of buildings that are far beyond the zoning of the lot they purchased.
January 6, 2010 at 4:49 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Rec center committee begins campaign
Steamvent,
good note on Julie's comment.
I thought the same.
Pity she did not state clearly that it is illegal for City employees to spend City money or their City time to support the Rec center proponents committee. That is the one to watch since one senior member of the Parks Recs management team is a member of the original Recs Proponent Committee.
September 9, 2007 at 8:08 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Rec center up to voters
Hammurabi - great comment.
The average is quite fictitious as it is not based on what everyone will have to pay.
The average is an average of what precisely?
Your cost per $100,000 is way more meaningful BUT unfortunately for the advocates of the indoor Rec Center such a cost will look a lot more expensive to us "average" residents than the "average" they quote. This is just another method the City employees are using to "sell" the deal. Be aware that in the end City employees are legally not allowed to support the referendum and if they do we should all report then for doing so! They already have their hands in this pot will they be able to stop before their actions are undeniably illegal under Colorado and Federal law??
By the way, we have recently agreed to a number of multi million dollar projects to fund within the City and County. I recall a new school and a new library; both extremely valuable causes for a large cross section of the community and with untold benefits in terms of helping our community members grow and achieve their dreams especially the young members of our community. So now, the "give-away-folks" want to add further tax burdens that provide for the few.
I also recall that the new high school was turned down by the vote of the residents and was resurrected in a much improved format and at a much improved cost that was approved for construction. The residents of this City have proven once before that they can tell government how to plan and spend wisely lets do it again!!
September 5, 2007 at 8:02 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Rec center up to voters
I do not believe anyone in the City has given any thought to how much our size of community can reasonably afford either in terms of funding captal cost or in terms of funding operating cost. Watch out, it won't stop at $34 million given the history of project underestimations and cost over runs (remember the tennis bubble, it overran by 50% on a much smaller project, the City department that managed that fiasco is the same one managing the Rec center) - be prepared to fund more than $40 million in capital cost then be prepared for the City to increase taxes to cover operating cost shortfalls since many of the people who want a rec center are looking for a government subsidized facility (if they wanted to pay they would have joined Health and recs)!
Vote NO!
September 5, 2007 at 7:42 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Council to debate ballot language
Just_10
I find your comments way off track.
I did attend many of the City council meetings on this issue and, along with others, pointed out to the Consultants that they presented significant mathematical errors in their presentations.
So please do not lecture me on "being there done that" and go check their maths yourself.
If you knew the history and if you had attended the City Council sessions you would understand that the Parks and Recs organization over ran their approved cost on the Tennis Bubble by 50%. So you may want to ask the question "How certain are they that they will deliver on their promises to spend your $30 million tax dollars or will they over run again and come back for more?". Also, they chose a tent color that did not match the recommendation of City Council (had you been there you would have heard that discussion).
Members of the committee formed by City Council are not happy that they were bypassed. Check that one out.
I would still like you to explain to ignorant old me how this City of Steamboat Springs can afford a $30 million Rec center.
Crank your calculator and tell me HOW?
Looking forward to seeing your maths!
August 29, 2007 at 5:56 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Council to debate ballot language
Just_10....
Name is WZ007 - not W2007... thanks.
Grateful if you can explain how a town of 9000 (11,000 unofficially) citizens can afford a $30 million plus facility with all the other services required to maintain our current infrastructure?? Show me the sound economics.
Also, grateful if you can explain why the tennis Bubble over ran by 50% in flat market???? Maybe poor project management was a cause. This was only a small project so how can you guarantee the same people will successfully deliver a $30 million plus project?? Did the architect take this kind of over run history into account???
There is a special committee formed by the City Council with a mix of proponents and non proponents of the rec center. this committee was bypassed when Chris Wilson told City Council he was ready to put it on the ballot and they agreed. You should probably ask some of the members of this committee and check the City council minutes.
Grateful if you can explain how a City that receives all its income from taxes can possible spend $30 million without adding taxes - sounds like alchemy to me!
August 28, 2007 at 9:25 p.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )