|  |
 |
|
EDITORIAL: Reservoir Hill Community Meeting: First Impression |
Cynda Green | 1/26/12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 The first Reservoir Hill Community Meeting took place yesterday evening. A more thorough article that will include quotes from the transcribed audio recording will be forthcoming, but both Daily Post editor Bill Hudson and I thought it was important to get something to our readers NOW about this proposed project.
Here are some first impressions straight from my mind to my keyboard.
There was an excellent turnout for the meeting, that billed itself as the information meeting for the proposed (and conceptually approved by Town Council) Reservoir Hill Development project. There was plenty of information available, as well as plenty of information missing. I was delighted to see many Pagosans at this meeting that I’ve never seen at any other political meeting. The discussion following the PowerPoint presentation was civil and thought-provoking.
The development proposal includes a chairlift, alpine coaster, zipline, amphitheater, observation tower, tethered balloon ride, food concession and restrooms. All for $4.3 million.
And a paved road up the hill. And 300 parking spaces on the bottom of the hill. Another estimated $1.5 million or so? That would total maybe $5.8 million to make the Reservoir Hill Task Force’s dreams come true.
To repeat, the plan includes 300 parking spaces on the bottom of Reservoir Hill between the San Juan Street trail head and the street that goes up the hill next to the post office. Because, you see, the business plan states that during our peak season in July, there will be — per hour — 100 Alpine Coaster Riders, 8 Zipline Riders, and 20 Tethered Balloon Riders, plus possibly hundreds of money-strapped people who will travel to Reservoir Hill to ride the free chairlift, just for fun. (The peak season chairlift capacity per hour is missing from the business plan, so I’m estimating.)
There was something unsettling about Reservoir Hill Task Force chair and Town Council member Bob Hart, owner of the largest construction company in town who already has a number of sizable local government contracts, standing there in front of our community and advocating for 300 expensive parking spaces that will need to be created with fill dirt at the bottom of Reservoir Hill. Incidentally, Hart Construction was contracted to transport the used chairlift from the Cuchara Ski Area in Walsenberg CO to its current resting place next to the Town’s sewer lagoons. That chairlift cost the town $41,000.
We also heard about a petition that was circulated by TTC members at their places of business and at the Visitor Center. I never saw or knew about the petition, but supposedly 300 signatures were gathered from residents and visitors stating they would like to see the above additions to Reservoir Hill.
Period. No explanation of the impact, no mention of the price to use these additions or the cost to install these additions, or who would pay that price. It seems to me that the petition was designed with an end result in mind — to promote a questionable proposal. Pretty worthless.
There was a model of Reservoir Hill in the far corner of the room. I was the only person who went over to it after the meeting, and had the opportunity to ask Town manager David Mitchem about it. I was curious because one of the selling points of the development espoused by its proponents was that the new amenities will take up only 10 acres of our 110-acre Reservoir Hill Park.
The model didn’t show much other than the chair lift, so I asked Mr. Mitchem where exactly these other rides would be located. I was not surprised to learn that the Chairlift and the Alpine Coaster are to be located in the same area where our current hiking trails are. I’m unclear as to whether or not the Zipline — supposedly a two-hour ride — will also be located over our current hiking trails. And it’s unclear if one of our current hiking trails would become the footprint for the Alpine Coaster.
What was crystal clear, however, is that we can kiss our current peaceful Reservoir Hill wilderness hiking trails goodbye, because there will be a Chairlift carrying hundreds of people overhead, and an Alpine Coaster switch-backing its way down the hill in our midst. And perhaps a Zipline as well. Yet, in the PowerPoint presentation narrated by Thad McKain, we were shown and told the following:
Environmental Impact
- Limited visual impact to Reservoir Hill
- Small footprint of less than 3.5 acres (of 110 town-owned acres) of Reservoir Hill
- Noise will be no louder, or different, than currently experienced from the increased river traffic
- Amenities added on section of Reservoir Hill where existing noise heard is traffic from Hwy 160 below, especially truck (jake) brakes and motorcycles.
(I copied this from the October PowerPoint presentation because — although we were told by Mr. McKain that last night's PowerPoint presentation is and has been available on the Town website — I could not find it there.)
I find the above environmental impact statement to be disingenuous. Call me deaf, but I don’t recall hearing any highway or other noise as I hike up Reservoir Hill, other than the breeze making its way through the trees.
And call me overly sensitive, but it seems to me that sharing our hiking trail space with a whizzing chairlift full of riders, and a switch-backing Alpine Coaster and Zipline is a major auditory and visual assault on our hiking experience. Why even bother? As many community members of the audience commented, we don’t want our beloved Reservoir Hill to become a tacky, honky-tonk amusement park. But it will, if this plan comes to fruition.
Which brings me to the audience participation portion of the evening. There were those who asked to keep the hill just as it is. There were those who questioned the appropriateness of this public park development right in the middle of town. (A supposed selling-point in the presentation was that these money-making rides would be "in town" as opposed to other similar amusement parks in Colorado that are remotely located from town. But, should something that requires 300 parking spaces be located within our town's only wilderness park? Is that a good thing? Is there in fact a good reason the other, similar amusement parks are located a distance from town?)
There were two audience members who advocated for anything that will bring more tourism to Pagosa, including the addition of noisy rides to Reservoir Hill. These people had implicit faith in the PowerPoint financial impact portion of the presentation. Unfortunately, I find the financials highly questionable. That makes it scary.
And there were those who advocated for some of the improvements, but specifically NOT the Chairlift, the Alpine Coaster, or the Zipline. However, Mr. Hart nipped that in the bud, saying that we needed those rides to finance the other improvements. It’s an all or nothing proposition, we were told, when members of the community asked about starting with some of the lower impact improvements.
There were many comments in favor of the Amphitheater. I am too, if it is privately funded. Furthermore, the Chairlift would be of little use to the Amphitheater because the Chairlift would not operate after dark or in certain weather conditions. We don’t need a $500,000 (price installed) Chairlift for us to have an Amphitheater.
When Mr. McKain was asked "who would take the hit” if their financial numbers were off, he responded that he didn’t have an answer to that question. There is currently no funding available for this project, but it appears that the TTC will be asking the Town to finance it, at least in part.
In conclusion, (and Ed Morlan, executive director of Region 9 Economic Development, would probably verify this) using tax dollars or town-collateralized debt to fund and support a project is NOT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. Economic development only occurs when private enterprise contributes to the economy. Thus far, no private enterprise has stepped up the Reservoir Hill Development plate. Perhaps they don’t see it as a money-making venture?
And what would the Town put up as collateral for a loan to fund the Reservoir Hill project? Would it be Reservoir Hill itself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|