Now is the time for all interested parties to take a holistic look at the future of Four Mile Road. Four Mile Road has historically been the gateway to much local recreation and, in itself, a scenic and pleasurable route for riding, running, walking and biking. Without a concerted effort to preserve these amenities, I fear the road’s future will hold none of these values.There are five major developments, either current or proposed, that will use Four Mile as their sole access road. These are: (1) the buildout of Springridge, (2) the buildout of Oak Meadows, (3) the buildout of Four Mile Ranch, (4) the proposed Bershenyi and Martino ranch development, and (5) the proposed Sunlight Ski Area development. In total, more than 1,000 new residences are envisioned, as well as a tripling of day skiers at Sunlight. This, plus associated domestic service workers and Sunlight employees, will impose an overwhelming burden on Four Mile Road.Garfield County is responsible for Four Mile, but I submit that the city of Glenwood Springs has a vested interest as well. Four Mile serves city residents who access the ski area and the national forest, and the city stands to benefit directly from growth along Four Mile. Clearly, the various developers also have an interest and a responsibility, and they have already shown a willingness to participate in improvements.However, lacking a joint and coordinated effort, I find it difficult to believe that a satisfactory outcome is likely. Consequently, I call upon our Garfield County officials to spearhead and organize a joint planning process that will (1) establish the extent of road improvements necessary to mitigate the foreseeable impacts, (2) define the responsibilities of the various interested parties in upgrading the road and (3) proactively convey to the public the results of the planning process.Michael LarimeGlenwood Springs
This letter is in regards to an incident involving four Wamsley Elementary students.On May 21, Wamsley fourth-graders went on a field trip to Lions Pond. During that time, four kids threw a few wads of wet toilet paper on the wall. Their parents were called and informed, “Your child vandalized the bathroom.”My 10-year-old was involved. For the first time in all her five years at Wamsley, she’d gotten in trouble. Until then, she was considered an excellent student, with great behavior.The consequences were suspension for the remainder of the year, then we were informed she couldn’t graduate with her class. Apparently she deserves no recognition for five year’s worth of hard work and otherwise excellent behavior, due to her first-time offense.Feeling this to be a bit harsh, I asked her principal why the kids were unsupervised. Her response: “They were sent to the bathroom in pairs.” Nine- and 10-year-olds are safe in pairs? Lions Pond is a great place for outdoor fun, but it’s also a glorified roadside park, with hundreds of strangers in and out. Those kids could have been snatched easily.I then asked why such drastic consequences for what amounts to a mess, not vandalism, which is defined as needless damage or destruction of another’s property. There was no damage, there was a mess. Her response was, “We have a no-tolerance policy.”My concerns fell on deaf ears, and left me wondering a few things. Wamsley hasn’t passed the national standards for the past two years. This means someone is making mistakes. Should the staff be suspended without pay, since the kids’ mistakes cost them suspension without graduation? Shouldn’t a no-tolerance policy pertain to bullying, weapons or alcohol when we are dealing with young children? If we show them no tolerance for anything, we should prep them early on about perfect behavior (and the dangers of wet toilet paper).These kids were in the wrong, but the punishment should fit the crime. It’s sad when our schools can mess up but our kids can’t!Dawn DoyleRifle
At a time when this “great nation” is drowning in an unwinnable and unnecessary war, a housing crisis, a busted economy, a broken health care system, a threatened environment, gas higher than $4 per gallon, and a host of other real problems, it is beyond ludicrous that anyone would cast their vote for president based on whether a candidate wears a flag lapel pin or puts their hand over their heart during the playing of the national anthem. It is time to elect a president using intelligence and critical thinking, not unreasonable blind patriotism.And just so you know, Mr. Whitcomb, according to Emily Post’s Book of Etiquette, ninth edition, page 17, every American citizen should stand and remove his hat at the passing of the flag and the playing of the national anthem. The placing of the hand over the heart is reserved for the Pledge of Allegiance.Ella AllenGlenwood Springs
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
Rifle police are investigating a one-vehicle crash that killed a pedestrian Wednesday morning.