Tim Reidy: Lowe’s OK’d without much interest in public opinion
Basically “basically” was used to death. The “final nail” meeting of the Silverthorne government was an exercise in futility by the citizens.
There was a horrible display of pouting angst to determine the number of voting members. With such a derisive vote, the full elected body of the council should have voted, and they did. An hour was devoted to this nothingness.
One would have thought that there should be some new stuff to be presented. There had been many relevant points made by those concerned, omissions of fact, scant data and whitewash were liberally spread. What was presented was even less than I had seen and heard in two planning meetings.
The architecture was the same, No mention of acres of roof to be mitigated or put to good use with solar panels or, as Peggy Long suggested (and I agreed), some grass up there. No mention of the elevated final grade of the site, nor of the signage, lighting regulations, all were glossed over during the presentation. The drawing showed the parking lot to be many feet above the roadway – does Lowe’s have to be taller than the Ford dealer?
In the 356 page handout, “Staff finds that the Final Site Plan proposal meets several of the goals and policies set forth in the Comprehensive Plan …” Several? Is that really what was required, just several of the goals?
The 50-foot tall retaining wall presentation was expertly pared back to non-controversial topics. Traffic was relegated to a, hey we did our job.
All the positive financial projections were from Lowe’s. All the negative projections were presented by those pesky citizens. Many of those were included in the big handout. I suspect few on the council were able to recall, if they read them, the dire reports and facts of numerous studies from across the country, as they registered their votes. I didn’t read them all either, but then I only got that handout during the meeting.
We should all be thankful to the Summit Daily’s Julie Sutor who sat through all this. She reported that two of the council members had independent thoughts, one asked for more time to think through this momentous county wide change.
That is my take on the old one-two of the past few weeks of, ahem, public meetings. Correct me of I’m wrong, but I can not recall one public comment that was addressed or added to the mix.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.