Home Correction letter Friday Letters: Wednesday Letter Correction, 480 Donegan, Faulty Process, City Exhausted, 5B...

Friday Letters: Wednesday Letter Correction, 480 Donegan, Faulty Process, City Exhausted, 5B Thank You, Fix Streets, and Tax Vote Proposals


Editor’s Note

A letter to the editor published on Wednesday contained both incorrect information and quoted someone who was not a public official without giving notice or asking permission. In response to the letter, the City of Glenwood Springs released the following statement from City Manager Debra Figueroa:

“The South Canyon Landfill is a valuable community asset to the Town of Glenwood Springs. A recent letter to the editor incorrectly implied that the landfill was dangerously close to full. While this is not the case, we also want to stress that waste diversion is and should be taken seriously.

The city is in the process of preparing for a future conversation with the city council on how to manage and deal with construction waste more efficiently. Part of this conversation revolves around waste pricing and charges, potential regulations for acceptable construction waste, and requirements for how buildings are deconstructed. Expect to see more information on this discussion in 2022.

To be clear, the city has not received any plans for the demolition of the West Glenwood Mall. If West Glenwood Mall were hypothetically demolished, unsorted debris would not completely fill the landfill.

The life expectancy of the currently licensed South Canyon landfill area is estimated to be six years based on current service levels and regulations. The city of Glenwood Springs recently submitted an application to the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment (CDPHE) to expand the landfill onto city-owned land surrounding the existing operating area in South Canyon.

The goal of considering changes in pricing and waste policies is to equip staff with tools to better manage incoming waste, including ways to accept and handle waste in a more sustainable manner. An example of this could be working with building permit holders on how to properly sort deconstructed materials for efficient landfill use and reuse of all available materials.

We are very fortunate to have our own municipal landfill as a resource, and we as a community need to be aware that this is a finite resource and exercise stewardship over how we use this space. Waste diversion is a priority for staff and we look forward to working with City Council on the way forward for our landfill.

Slap in the face

What a slap in the face that city council gave the citizens of West Glenwood and Glenwood Springs in reference to the 480 Donegan project you voted to annex on October 21st.

Why you would add units to the requested developer approval is beyond me. You were continually reminded of all the security issues involved, the most important being the threat of wildfire and evacuation, and you chose to add units?

What has happened to city council since Mayor Jonathan Godes quoted CNN with CNN last year, “If a wildfire occurs in our hallway, we are talking about 1,000 lives lost.”

How much public park did you get for this big bargain that seemed so important – I read up to 1 acre? Truly? Looks like green space on the render; non-usable public park space.

What about safety and cost to the city as a baseline instead of the excuse of “affordable housing,” which in the case of this particular developer turned into low-cost housing? ” middle class “.

I applaud the board members who had the foresight to deny this – you listen. To those of you who voted for approval, read the articles in the Post Independent from the Coal Seam Fire, then drive back to any incident. You might have a clue! Oh wait, we already have traffic jams right in front of the existing Center Drive business park during the return and pick up from Two Rivers school!

Susie straus

Glenwood Springs

Faulty process

The “process” of the major annexation and development proposal at West Glenwood Springs has been very disturbing and convoluted – following the actions of the developer, city council and city staff. The basis for my research is taken from the Glenwood Springs Municipal Code, the regulatory framework that guides the city. This development alone on 12.28 acres could represent an increase of almost 10% of the population of Glenwood Springs (9,963, US Census 2020).

Using Title 070 development code, 480 Donegan / R2 would house 890 residents. Combine that with the many other residential units recently built, approved and under construction in the city and the increase will be huge – projected to 3,379 more people in the city, a 34% increase in population! What will the 2030 census total be? This is the trail that our city leaders and staff strive to follow.

The “process” followed by the city has been very questionable and negligent. Why was the Housing Commission asked to comment on the proposal and not the Parks and Recreation Commission and Director P&R? There is a real shortage of parks in West Glenwood. The number of residents here by code requires a 6.23-acre park (offset by exclusive resident-only space and off-site improvements like sidewalks and bike paths).

R2 is offering only 1 acre of public park land and up to 1 acre to build a new fire hall and “pay for it” by dedicating more park land that is needed and usable. Likewise, the code projects 120 students on this project with a 0.53 acre school land allotment or fee paid instead. Our Re-1 school district was not invited to comment. The district is investing in staff housing. They could have had an opportunity at 480 and maybe the city could have received a piece of land on which to build housing for the employees as well.

For many, the actions of the board and staff are a travesty, the least important being the rescinding of their planning and zoning commission’s unanimous recommendation to deny and not reach out to the parks and recreation commission. and staff. Our community is on the verge of being unmanageable, unsustainable and unattractive with such reckless and intense growth. Can we “afford” such growth? Will the city’s infrastructure, personnel and revenue support such growth? Same with other associated entities such as our schools and healthcare?

Greg Jeung

Glenwood Springs

Who’s municipal council?

My parents moved to Glenwood Springs in 1975. I was 3 years old. The single-lane Eighth Street Bridge forced cars to wait at either end, crossing the Roaring Fork River in one direction at a time.

It is surreal to look back on the changes, growth and development of the past 46 years. Some have improved prosperity and a sense of community. But in recent years, many have brought increasing distress to this magical place and its wonderful inhabitants.

Our current population of around 10,000 (2020 census) is plagued by land prices so high that those who work here cannot afford to buy or rent, even at “affordable” rates. And yet, 1,300 new housing units have been approved by our Municipal Council and are under construction; 1,300 housing units will be built and occupied in the years to come. At a modest two residents per unit, this will be a 26% increase in our population. Has anyone recently driven in and around Glenwood? How is the city absorbing this shocking 26% increase in people, traffic, noise? – our resources are completely strained.

And yet, the city council has justified the 300 additional units (over 600 new residents) in the most vulnerable neighborhood where the forest / urban interface and the history of forest fires threaten current residents, who lack infrastructure. adequate for evacuation. I believed that the city council was responsible and responsive to the citizens who elected them, not to developers, not to tourists, not to these outside interests. To those city council members who aren’t doing their job, honestly, I don’t know how you can sleep at night.

By approving the 480 Donegan project, this city council has once again sold this once very special place that I have always felt blessed to call home. I can no longer afford to live there, and have been for 10 years. I really have a heartache. Glenwood Springs will forever be my home. And I will always mourn this clear and continuing destruction of the soul of my city.

Tracey Yajko

New castle

5B approval thank you

Many thanks to the voters of the Roaring Fork School District for a decisive yes on 5B, which will help pay teachers and staff a living wage, enabling the district to recruit and retain great people. We are deeply grateful to all of the campaign volunteers and generous donors who made the campaign a success.

Basalt Junior Girl Scout Troop # 690 said it best with her campaign signs: “The teachers are worth it and the students are worth it!”

Fall Rivera, Mark Gould,
Ellen freedman

5B Campaign Committee Co-Chairs

Beautiful streets or a beautiful new campsite?

Thank you, Glenwood Springs City Council, for ignoring our streets once again, leaving them in terrible disrepair, and instead setting your sights on another tourist trophy – South Canyon.

Good work! This is what your constituents want – rotten streets and a new campground for people on the outside.

Keep up the good work.

David Heyliger

Glenwood Springs

Beware of tax voting proposals

Over the years, I have become more and more suspicious of ballot proposals that begin with the phrase “Without imposing a new tax”. I find the expression somewhat misleading and misleading.

If a new tax is not imposed, why are we voting on it? Being my pet peeve, I tend to vote against such measures.

What this phrase really means is that your taxes are about to be cut and you are voting not to cut them. The ballot should say something like “By not lowering your current tax liability”. This means that if the measure does not pass, your taxes will be reduced. I think it would be closer to the reality of what is being asked of voters.

Rich Glaser



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here