Just stick to settlement
In a number of recent articles and editorials, the Vail Daily has taken the position that the town of Avon should just settle with Traer Creek, under their terms and demands. The reasoning, apparently, being that it is just too financially risky to not give in.
You have also stated that the only opposition to this strategy is coming from a few Eaglebend residents who are just a bunch of NIMBY whiners, whose only concern is their own self interest.
I would like to offer some refutation. We own a condo in Canyon Run, on Hurd Lane, but live in Houston, so admittedly don't have as much skin in the game. But here are some of my observations and opinions:
The Eaglebend residents I know are not antidevelopment. They are for good, responsible development. They are for the Avon Town Council making decisions that are in the best long-term interests of the town.
The fact that there has been so little comment from other areas of town should not be surprising to anyone.
As I've discussed more than once with various members of the council, the level of apathy in Avon is appalling (pardon the unintended alliteration). I would urge you, and the council, to not confuse apathy with acquiescence.
You seem to have adopted the position that most of the fault in this mess is attributable to this, and previous, councils who have just been unreasonable in dealing with poor, little Magnus.
I don't get a chance to read every Vail Daily, so may have missed it, but I think it would serve your Avon readers well if you were to write an article listing all the changes Traer Creek has requested (well, maybe not all - there's not enough space in your paper) in their PUD applications (versions 1 to 16, I believe) that were not in the original agreement and are not in the Settlement Term Agreement.
It sure looks to me that all of these additional and, in my opinion, unreasonable demands are the cause of the failure to resolve this dispute. If Traer Creek would just stick to the settlement agreement, this could be solved.
President, Canyon Run Condominium Association
Keep Avon out of court
The lawsuit between Traer Creek and the town of Avon has gone on long enough.
Both parties have spent millions of dollars in legal fees, and neither has anything to show for it.
At this point, it doesn't matter who started things or who's right and who's wrong. If it is not settled, the only ones who win are the lawyers representing both sides, and the big losers will be the residents of Avon.
The settlement, agreed to in principle by both sides, gives a bit to each and nothing completely to either party. In my experience, that is a sign of a fair agreement. If both sides are a little bit unhappy, that is probably as it should be.
Many of the more detailed portions of the settlement, specifically those that are opposed primarily by nearby residents, are already in the town's comprehensive plan.
Thus, extending those same limits to the Villages at Avon seems to make sense. Most of those who object to the settlement already live with a railroad track in their back yards and bought their land with a big vacant lot behind them that anyone should have known would be developed.
It is time to put their very parochial self-interest aside and make a decision in the best interest of the rest of us.
I urge the Town Council to pass the necessary measures to implement the agreement and keep us out of the courthouse.
Romney sounds rash
The editorial in the New York Times said it well - "For all his talk about U.S. power and sovereignty, Mitt Romney seems willing to let Benjamin Netanyahu decide whether to start a regional war." And there can be little doubt that an Israeli decision to bomb Iran, coupled with the irrational behavior that we see right now in many Muslim countries, would cause that to happen. And with our commitments to Israel - here we go again!
Let's stay with our president's program. Let's continue the sanctions of Iran and not set a date for them to expire. Let's hope that they cause Iran to curtail the program that would provide them with a nuclear device. Let's remember, too, that we have 1,500 nuclear warheads - and they know that. Let's allow the considerable pressure of the many Israelis who are opposed to bombing Iran to have an effect on Mr. Netanyahu. And let's hope that cooler heads than those of Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Ahmadinejad will prevail. But let's not get dragged into another war because we elected the totally inexperienced Mitt Romney.
David Le Vine