Letters to the Editor | VailDaily.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Letters to the Editor

Compiled by Daily staff

Dog cases seriousWhat is wrong with the DA’s office? What are they thinking? I just signed a petition to keep a dog that ripped the face off a 2-year-old child from being returned to its owner. Why should a petition even be necessary? This is a no-brainer. The dog needs to be quarantined, and the owners need to be competently prosecuted. The DA that was assigned to this case was out of town the day of the trial, so they sent an unprepared replacement. Even the judge reprimanded this replacement for not being properly prepared for the case.Unfortunately, I know first hand how poorly the DA’s office deals with dog cases. I was attacked by a dog, the owners were cited and given a court date. The DA assigned to my case was on vacation and would not return until the day before the trial. I was understandably concerned whether there would be enough time to prepare an adequate prosecution. I called the DA’s office to voice my concern and was told “not to worry,” that this is (and I am quoting them exactly) “only a dog case.”Since then I have been trying to understand why the DA’s office belittles the importance of dog-attack cases. I know that it is not the most appealing type of legal work. However, it does deserve some respect. I looked into the teeth of the dog that attacked me and know that if it had been a small child rather than myself, that dog would have made road-kill of a child in less than a minute. I remind the DA’s office what happened to the city of Aurora. They ignored their pit bull problem until a child was killed. The DA’s office needs to take all cases seriously, not just the ones they find appealing. They might just be saving the life of a child!Andrew DukeThat’s a box When is a big box not a big box?I feel I must reply to the misinformation in Frances and Rick Rolater’s letter to the editor Nov. 20 regarding the proposed massive development of Eagle River Station east of Eagle. The Rolaters are “astounded” that the Vail Daily has called a component of this development “big box.” And yet that is exactly what is proposed. Two stores sized in the 100,000-square-foot vicinity will anchor Eagle River Station.The Rolaters claim the developer is proposing a lifestyle center, and that “a lifestyle project is neither a mall nor a big-box center.” Then why did the developer’s representative say to the Eagle Planning and Zoning Commission that ERS “would be a mall with its roof removed”? Why does the developer’s own trade area analysis say, “One or more big boxes may also be included in the mix of a lifestyle center”?Red Trinity, the developer, also states in its trade area analysis that Glenwood Meadows is “the competitor that would serve as the most direct competition for ERS.” And that “Glenwood Meadows is anchored by Lowe’s and Target” (two big boxes). According to your letter, a lifestyle center “would typically not include large-scale stores such as Target.” Well, Frances and Dick, that’s not how the developer who you are backing sees it. You then go on to say that ERS could be have a Whole Foods Market in it, as if this pie in the sky would make the 567,000 square feet of ERS retail space worth it. And yet Whole Foods considered opening a store in Avon’s Traer Creek development but decided, after a doing a demographic study of the area, that it could not support one of their stores. Do you think Whole Foods is going to come to Eagle when the demand in Avon isn’t big enough for them?In your shock that the Eagle P&Z denied the project, you state that at the meeting “thoughtful and well-considered comments were made both pro and con” about the development proposal. You neglect to mention that the comments ran four to one against the proposal as either being untimely or downright outrageous. To jog your memory, let’s go over some of these comments: The fact that Eagle River Station will generate 27,000 car trips a day, and yet the developer doesn’t see this as a traffic problem. The fact that Red Trinity has no plans to handle the polluted rain runoff into the Eagle River from the acres of asphalt that will be its 3,000-plus parking spaces. The fact that the developer asks the P&Z to allow him only 4 percent open space where town ordinances call for 20 percent. The fact that Eagle River Station will create 2,000 new jobs for a community that has no unemployment, so that in essence the developer is bringing in 2,000 more people into the community and yet there is no employee-housing component to his plan. But to be fair, let’s look at the positive comments made that night, “Whole Foods is coming.” Frances and Rick, you say that the Eagle P&Z “has done the town and its residents a disservice by taking this incomprehensible action.” You publicly denigrate good men of long local standing. I say it is you, by your misleading and biased writings, that does the town a disservice. So the answer to the question, “When is a big box not a big box?” – when it is two big boxes. And PS: I like my lifestyle just fine the way it is, thank you.Lori RussellEagleVail Daily, Vail Colorado CO


Support Local Journalism