News
Opinion
Eagle is special. Many of us moved here, or have stayed here, because it is not a city and it offers an opportunity for a small-town lifestyle.
Eagle River Station and its 552,000 square feet, two to three big- box stores, east-to-west oriented main street that is shaded, 62-foot-tall buildings, 581 units, 2,800 asphalt spaces and huge traffic implications (27,000 daily trips) would have huge negative impacts on our town.
Our Planning and Zoning Commission voted “no,” stating that ERS would be “a new town of Eagle River Station.” Our two trustees who are respected, professional planners, Scot Hunn and Yuri Kostick, also voted “no.”
This is a typical David and Goliath situation. We're simply citizens defending Eagle from a foreign aggressor that is proposing a project that is just too big and too expensive.
ERS is in direct conflict with Eagle's selfimage of a small town.
We already have an original, unique, redeveloped downtown. We do not need nor want an artificial one.
For three years, the developers, Trinity/RED (with headquarters in Kansas City, Mo.), have talked about an “original, unique tenant mix.” Yet all of their projects are in cities and are just like any other urban shopping center, with the same tenants found anywhere.
Target has been named ERS' anchor — nothing special or unique at all. But there are no signed leases, just “promises.” Dozens of other tenants are needed to make ERS work. The latest is the announcement of a green grocer. We could all buy into this concept, but we have an expanding farmers' market and City Market has been adding organic items. Eagle Ranch is planning the same concept at the new building on Capitol Street. Why would a small, Missouri- based store want to come to ERS? And why was this announced two weeks before the vote?
Some of our town leaders seem to have forgotten about all the comments from citizens about preserving small-town character, concentrating infill in existing areas and protecting wildlife, the Eagle River and the night sky, and most said, “No big-box retail in east Eagle.” The last town survey states “ large- format retail” is a low priority.
In addition, the Colorado Department of Transportation's open house summary results in 2006 concluded that most don't want an east Eagle interchange. We spent big taxpayer dollars on these various surveys. So why did our mayor and four trustees ignore the results?
On the economic front, we submitted hundreds of national articles to the trustees citing numerous store closings, bankruptcies, mall and lifestyle-center vacancies and the cancellation of development plans all over the country.
Anchor stores at hundreds of shopping centers have closed, even some at RED's own centers. More than 200,000 stores have closed this year! As many as 1,000 malls will close. Commercial loans are at a standstill, and that market has not even hit bottom. How can we, as taxpayers, ignore all of this? RED still contends (despite the biggest downturn in the economy in more than 70 years) that it will have 95 percent occupancy at opening and that its sales projections will be unaffected by the economy.
Their own market study proclaims that people will drive 45 minutes to shop at ERS and spend 40 percent of their income there. Will you spend 40 percent of your income there?
A Target will undoubtedly affect our highest sales tax producers, City Market and The Eagle Pharmacy. Sales tax will just shift sides of town but will create a net tax decrease to the town from the 4 percent received at City Market and Pharmacy to only 1.3 percent PIF being received at the proposed Target. A point-of-sale tax on all goods at ERS will be 9.7 percent to 9.9 percent. However, most of this tax is not going to the town coffers — it is just a higher tax for shoppers. Glenwood Meadows fears they can't pay their PIF back; it does happen. The promise of jobs is very elusive. The truth is ERS will have real difficulty attracting employees (especially long term) to low-paying retail positions — positions that do not support home ownership in Eagle or in the ERS development.
Also, the people who need jobs right now will be long gone and/or will be looking for something more sustainable with higher pay. ERS could be three to six years away — 2013 to 2016. All the “yes” vote does is give RED vested rights. We still feel they will never build it, but in the meantime, it would create a “de facto moratorium” on future entrepreneurial investment and future jobs. Local businesses are already taking a “wait and see” approach until ERS is decided, which leaves our store fronts empty and job creation at a standstill. We know RED uses the “cheapest” labor, so ERS shouldn't be an attraction for construction workers.
Eagle should capitalize on our strengths — access to incredible backcountry and parks, the Eagle River, proximity to world-class ski resorts, our small-town Western charm, the pedestrian- friendly downtown core and the numerous things that make this town special and unique.
ERS is way too risky to gamble our quality of life on. For what? The promise of money? Development should be our choice, not the choice of some outof- state developer.
We ask you to ask yourselves what you love about Eagle, and then we ask you to help save it. Do the right thing for your town and your children's futures. Please vote “no” to ERS Jan. 5 at Town Hall. Log on to www.votenoers.com.
Members of Smart Growth — Not Urban Sprawl — Vote No on ERS, a grassroots organization of Eagle citizens: Mike Trujillo, Jamie Walker, Pat Mulvey, Andrew Slaugh, Cici Frankin, Colleen and Cody Downard, Liz Spetnagel, Terresa and Scott Schlosser, Julia and Richard Parker, Annie Egan, Brandi Resa and Markus Mueller, Charlie and Teresa Hauser, Sheryl and Michael DeGenring, Donna Meyer, Rosie Shearwood, Larry Grossman, Dave Berg, Morrie and Suzie Shepard, Jan Rosenthal Townsend and Jay Townsend, Kathryn Rose.
Eagle River Station and its 552,000 square feet, two to three big- box stores, east-to-west oriented main street that is shaded, 62-foot-tall buildings, 581 units, 2,800 asphalt spaces and huge traffic implications (27,000 daily trips) would have huge negative impacts on our town.
Our Planning and Zoning Commission voted “no,” stating that ERS would be “a new town of Eagle River Station.” Our two trustees who are respected, professional planners, Scot Hunn and Yuri Kostick, also voted “no.”
This is a typical David and Goliath situation. We're simply citizens defending Eagle from a foreign aggressor that is proposing a project that is just too big and too expensive.
ERS is in direct conflict with Eagle's selfimage of a small town.
We already have an original, unique, redeveloped downtown. We do not need nor want an artificial one.
For three years, the developers, Trinity/RED (with headquarters in Kansas City, Mo.), have talked about an “original, unique tenant mix.” Yet all of their projects are in cities and are just like any other urban shopping center, with the same tenants found anywhere.
Target has been named ERS' anchor — nothing special or unique at all. But there are no signed leases, just “promises.” Dozens of other tenants are needed to make ERS work. The latest is the announcement of a green grocer. We could all buy into this concept, but we have an expanding farmers' market and City Market has been adding organic items. Eagle Ranch is planning the same concept at the new building on Capitol Street. Why would a small, Missouri- based store want to come to ERS? And why was this announced two weeks before the vote?
Some of our town leaders seem to have forgotten about all the comments from citizens about preserving small-town character, concentrating infill in existing areas and protecting wildlife, the Eagle River and the night sky, and most said, “No big-box retail in east Eagle.” The last town survey states “ large- format retail” is a low priority.
In addition, the Colorado Department of Transportation's open house summary results in 2006 concluded that most don't want an east Eagle interchange. We spent big taxpayer dollars on these various surveys. So why did our mayor and four trustees ignore the results?
On the economic front, we submitted hundreds of national articles to the trustees citing numerous store closings, bankruptcies, mall and lifestyle-center vacancies and the cancellation of development plans all over the country.
Anchor stores at hundreds of shopping centers have closed, even some at RED's own centers. More than 200,000 stores have closed this year! As many as 1,000 malls will close. Commercial loans are at a standstill, and that market has not even hit bottom. How can we, as taxpayers, ignore all of this? RED still contends (despite the biggest downturn in the economy in more than 70 years) that it will have 95 percent occupancy at opening and that its sales projections will be unaffected by the economy.
Their own market study proclaims that people will drive 45 minutes to shop at ERS and spend 40 percent of their income there. Will you spend 40 percent of your income there?
A Target will undoubtedly affect our highest sales tax producers, City Market and The Eagle Pharmacy. Sales tax will just shift sides of town but will create a net tax decrease to the town from the 4 percent received at City Market and Pharmacy to only 1.3 percent PIF being received at the proposed Target. A point-of-sale tax on all goods at ERS will be 9.7 percent to 9.9 percent. However, most of this tax is not going to the town coffers — it is just a higher tax for shoppers. Glenwood Meadows fears they can't pay their PIF back; it does happen. The promise of jobs is very elusive. The truth is ERS will have real difficulty attracting employees (especially long term) to low-paying retail positions — positions that do not support home ownership in Eagle or in the ERS development.
Also, the people who need jobs right now will be long gone and/or will be looking for something more sustainable with higher pay. ERS could be three to six years away — 2013 to 2016. All the “yes” vote does is give RED vested rights. We still feel they will never build it, but in the meantime, it would create a “de facto moratorium” on future entrepreneurial investment and future jobs. Local businesses are already taking a “wait and see” approach until ERS is decided, which leaves our store fronts empty and job creation at a standstill. We know RED uses the “cheapest” labor, so ERS shouldn't be an attraction for construction workers.
Eagle should capitalize on our strengths — access to incredible backcountry and parks, the Eagle River, proximity to world-class ski resorts, our small-town Western charm, the pedestrian- friendly downtown core and the numerous things that make this town special and unique.
ERS is way too risky to gamble our quality of life on. For what? The promise of money? Development should be our choice, not the choice of some outof- state developer.
We ask you to ask yourselves what you love about Eagle, and then we ask you to help save it. Do the right thing for your town and your children's futures. Please vote “no” to ERS Jan. 5 at Town Hall. Log on to www.votenoers.com.
Members of Smart Growth — Not Urban Sprawl — Vote No on ERS, a grassroots organization of Eagle citizens: Mike Trujillo, Jamie Walker, Pat Mulvey, Andrew Slaugh, Cici Frankin, Colleen and Cody Downard, Liz Spetnagel, Terresa and Scott Schlosser, Julia and Richard Parker, Annie Egan, Brandi Resa and Markus Mueller, Charlie and Teresa Hauser, Sheryl and Michael DeGenring, Donna Meyer, Rosie Shearwood, Larry Grossman, Dave Berg, Morrie and Suzie Shepard, Jan Rosenthal Townsend and Jay Townsend, Kathryn Rose.
