Comments by Hammurabi

Page 1 of 8 | Next

On Volunteers needed to build playgrounds (anonymous)
July 18, 2008 at 2:07 p.m.
Suggest removal

In order to save money, the playground group decided that building it with community help would allow the playground to become a reality. According to the Steamboat Pilot/Today, the Steamboat Springs Rotary Club adopted this project and is coordinating the volunteer sign up.

It seems that many posters must find something negative about a community effort that will allow all children, able bodied or not, to have a safe year-round accessible place to play. Have any of you wondered what it might be like to attempt to play on a snow packed rutted play area if you had any sort of disability? In this day and age of concern about children’s lack of activity, I would think that this project would be something that all of us would gladly embrace and contribute to.

Building the old playground was a wonderful community event and those who participated have fond memories of their participation. Today’s community members now have the opportunity to build their own memories along with a playground that will last for the next generation. It’s time to put our community spirit on display!

On Lanning’s future up in the air (anonymous)
July 9, 2008 at 9:28 a.m.
Suggest removal

Did it occur to anyone that it wasn't the fact that the sign code was being violated, but how Lanning went about noticing the offenders? Usually, in the past, violators are noticed that they are in violation and that the problem needs to be remedied by a certain date and after that tickets will be issued. We’re supposed to be a small community that acts in a civil manner and this problem could have been easily taken care of without all this drama. One would think that the manager would be aware of how to handle the problem without creating more drama than the situation called for. This is yet another example of the manager doing the elected officials no favors and pitting the elected council against their constituents unnecessarily. It’s more a question of how out of tune the manager is with the community and how he conducts the city’s business.

On Iron Horse to be redeveloped (anonymous)
July 9, 2008 at 8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal

Still attempting to correct the toxic decisions that the previous council made!

On Brenner, White in funds race (anonymous)
May 29, 2008 at 5:17 p.m.
Suggest removal

I'm a loyal democrat who will never vote for Brenner. White is a “middle-of-the-roader' who is ethical and has gotten my vote in the past.

On 360 to ask for annexation (anonymous)
May 14, 2008 at 2:30 p.m.
Suggest removal

I seem to remember that when the city extended and enlarged the water line out to Stmt. II, all the residents had to sign pre-annexation agreements. Are they still valid?

On Rob Douglas: Downtown parking redux (anonymous)
May 5, 2008 at 9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal

I wonder why there is never a mention of parking meters? It would accomplish several things: First, it would keep business owners and employees from parking in front of establishments where they work and second, it would become a revenue source that could support the cost of a parking structure.

On Rob Douglas: Put an Emerald on this Crown (anonymous)
April 4, 2008 at 12:54 p.m.
Suggest removal

The comments on this thread have been very enlightening. However, as usual, many have either ignored history or weren’t here when the park originally came into being. It is my recollection that all the land around the Pamela Lane residences was plotted for a massive, high-density development of small patio homes and/or mobile homes. When the community voted to bond for the trail system negotiations began with the adjacent landowners to acquire the park property. Then as the land was acquired for both Emerald Park and the Botanic Park access to those sites became an issue. First I recall that the city built all the fencing behind those houses that faced the trail to ensure their privacy. The city, as the park was developed also put on the table a secondary access to the park that would run behind those houses, between the housing and the trail. The negotiations fell apart because the only access that the residents would agree to was the one south of Pamela Land and across the train tracks. This access has presented numerous problems through the years: two being, difficulty with adding a yet another access point on Lincoln and safety and negotiations with the owner of the train tracks. A light was later added to assist both park visitors and residents in entering and leaving the Pamela Lane area. It seems that this neighborhood has boxed themselves in over the years and don’t want anyone else to play in “their” park. P.S. I also seem to recall that the ball fields were originally meant for local use only, but time changes everything.

On Builders want to acquire garage (anonymous)
March 9, 2008 at 9:59 p.m.
Suggest removal

One, as my fading memory recalls, sometime in the late 80’s or early 90’s the ski corp. “gave” the parking garage to the city, along with $100k to forestall any further discussion regarding a tax on the sale of lift tickets. It appears that this agreement had many interesting parts to it as the ski corp. must have retained ownership of the land. The agreement stated that $25k would be used to maintain the garage and the remaining $75k was part of the city’s beautification grants. Since then we have had several different “owners” of the ski corp., all with very divergent interest, but each has honored that agreement until now. This agreement was cancelled last year without any comment from either the former council nor reported in depth in the newspaper. I’m not sure how the agreement between the city the ski corp. and the grand was structured regarding excess parking, but all this raises more questions than the answers that have been supplied so far.

On No snow, no go: Ski area postpones opening day (anonymous)
November 15, 2007 at 2:46 p.m.
Suggest removal

Just a reminder that there have been several years when November was dry and January was nothing but powder. There were also many years in the “old days” when we waited until there was a good base for the mountain to open, and several years when the Ski Area asked locals not to ski to be able to “bank” snow for the Christmas holidays..guess what, we willingly complied because we all thought, at the time, that we were all in this together….my how times have changed. Now the resort “owes” us every day on the mountain and they better get the weather to cooperate or ELSE!!!

On Rec center may have led to council losses (anonymous)
November 8, 2007 at 12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal

While the outgoing council dug their own grave, they allowed Brenner to run amok without any opposition. As an aside, I loved the comments from them in yesterday’s paper. I guess their defeat was really our fault since our community wasn’t as smart as they were and we’re still behind the learning curve as far as they’re concerned. Talk about taking responsibility and hubris!

Should Brenner continue to seek higher office, he’s going to find it a tough hill to climb. First, he will loose his own county and in order to win any higher office he will therefore have to win a clear majority in other counties that are dominated by the oil, gas and energy industries. Since when has he ever been considered a friend to those entities?

Additionally, he will have to have the backing of the Democratic party and I strongly believe that they will take a hands off approach as his reputation has spread far a wide.

Page 1 of 8 | Next

Explore Steamboat

Find local businesses:

Advertisement

Happenings

Today's events

Search events

Advertisement

Advertisement