There is already too much growth in the valley. Wait a few years and see how Basalt and the valley deals with the traffic.
P
Pamela L True
2 years ago
STOP!!
G
Gregory Pickrell
2 years ago
We must value open space.
W
Wade Luplow
2 years ago
I disagree with the comments below, I think a further discussion should happen....if you look at the image above...you can see that private and government development goes down to the river on both sides...if you were to float the roaring fork...you would see that there are mansions feet from the water the majority of the way down the river from Aspen all the way to Glenwood....
I find it super ironic that it is fine for the rich and the government to use wetlands/riverfront property, but as soon as there are some affordable housing units...it negatively affects home values and home owners make petitions like this.
Like most people in the valley, I am all for saving wildlife habitat... but I have a hard time thinking that small lot, which is surrounded by development and highways on every side is a notable sanctuary (note that it is also already partially developed).
Has there been any studies showing the wildlife use of the property?... Or is the petitioner just making that claim since it is only partially developed at this point (2 existing residences in the image above)? (not saying there is no wildlife, but I would put my money on it not being huge or housing any endangered species)...
If you look on Zillow right now... there are only 2 rentals/apartments in all of basalt for less than $4000.....one of which is $3,300 (700sqft, studio) and the other at $3,900 (1040sqft, 2 bedroom).... Even if only 35% of the rentals ( as claimed in the application) are affordable house...thats way better than putting yet another mansion right next to the water...only to be empty 11 months of the year).
Does anyone know if there have been any studies done on what percentage of the traffic moving through the valley are working here and living outside of the valley because they cannot afford to live here? I would rather see a petition that requires all of the units (besides cabin rentals) to go to people living here full time.
A
Andrea Luplow
2 years ago
Terrible plan for the entrance to Basalt! Hwy. 82 is too busy now.
T
Tobias Munk
2 years ago
Featured
Too dense, too high a traffic impact. Too close to the water, not a benefit to the community, not in line with the 2050 Basalt Energy Master Plan of having 80% reduction in energy use. These if built will be around in 2050.
There is already too much growth in the valley. Wait a few years and see how Basalt and the valley deals with the traffic.
STOP!!
We must value open space.
I disagree with the comments below, I think a further discussion should happen....if you look at the image above...you can see that private and government development goes down to the river on both sides...if you were to float the roaring fork...you would see that there are mansions feet from the water the majority of the way down the river from Aspen all the way to Glenwood.... I find it super ironic that it is fine for the rich and the government to use wetlands/riverfront property, but as soon as there are some affordable housing units...it negatively affects home values and home owners make petitions like this. Like most people in the valley, I am all for saving wildlife habitat... but I have a hard time thinking that small lot, which is surrounded by development and highways on every side is a notable sanctuary (note that it is also already partially developed). Has there been any studies showing the wildlife use of the property?... Or is the petitioner just making that claim since it is only partially developed at this point (2 existing residences in the image above)? (not saying there is no wildlife, but I would put my money on it not being huge or housing any endangered species)... If you look on Zillow right now... there are only 2 rentals/apartments in all of basalt for less than $4000.....one of which is $3,300 (700sqft, studio) and the other at $3,900 (1040sqft, 2 bedroom).... Even if only 35% of the rentals ( as claimed in the application) are affordable house...thats way better than putting yet another mansion right next to the water...only to be empty 11 months of the year). Does anyone know if there have been any studies done on what percentage of the traffic moving through the valley are working here and living outside of the valley because they cannot afford to live here? I would rather see a petition that requires all of the units (besides cabin rentals) to go to people living here full time.
Terrible plan for the entrance to Basalt! Hwy. 82 is too busy now.
Too dense, too high a traffic impact. Too close to the water, not a benefit to the community, not in line with the 2050 Basalt Energy Master Plan of having 80% reduction in energy use. These if built will be around in 2050.
A terrible proposal for the entrance to Basalt.