A. No building or structure shall be erected, converted, enlarged, reconstructed, or altered for use, nor shall any land, building, or structure be used or changed, except in accordance with all of the applicable regulations established by this Land Use Code.
— from the Land Use and Development Code, Town of Pagosa Springs
Which would you rather see developed in Pagosa Springs’ uptown area?
Another struggling subdivision like the Aspen Village development, still half-vacant after 15 years, and mostly devoid of mature trees and landscaping…?
Perhaps you’d prefer a well-planned uptown park that celebrates the beauty of nature — stately, mature trees, wetlands, deer, elk, squirrels, foxes…?
This is the basic question posed to readers of the weekly Pagosa Springs SUN last week, by a paid display ad that asks, “Which would you rather see?”
It takes hundreds of years for our native pines to grow to full maturity and only days to destroy the natural beauty we know and love here in Pagosa.
This, I believe, is a true statement. Given our high desert climate, our native pines do indeed take hundreds of years to reach maturity.
And also, it’s true that we know and love the natural beauty in Pagosa Springs.
It’s also true that the Town of Pagosa Springs has created numerous municipal parks situated within one mile of Hot Springs Boulevard, and zero municipal parks within three miles of the uptown City Market.
But there are actually more than 8 downtown parks. The total is 9 municipal parks in the downtown area, according to my count.
The SUN advertisement ends with an invitation to sign a petition at https://c.org/sgsVK7MLz9. The headline on the petition page asks, “Doesn’t Uptown Pagosa deserve a nature park?”
The ad seems to assume that SUN readers are at least casually familiar with the proposed ‘Pagosa West’ subdivision, proposed for a 100-acre parcel facing the City Market shopping center across Highway 160, and facing the Pagosa Springs Medical Center across South Pagosa Boulevard.
The 100-acre parcel is within the incorporated municipal limits of Pagosa Springs — as is the Medical Center and the City Market shopping center, and like the Vista San Juan neighborhood immediately to the south of the proposed development.
Some of the residents who are proposing a municipal park live nearby the proposed subdivision.
Land use and development in Colorado is generally under the jurisdiction of local governments, but those governments are limited in how much they can control private development by state and federal laws and court cases. Generally speaking, a local government can limit the uses and development of private property in order to promote of the “public health, safety, and welfare.” Outside of those purposes, a local government may be treading on thin ice if it tries to limit the uses of private property.
But “welfare” has been generously interpreted by governments and by the courts, to allow cities, towns and counties to implement — for example — zoning regulations that prohibit certain types of development in certain neighborhoods. The most obvious reason for zoning relates to noxious industrial operations. No one wants to live next to a chemical plant, a paper mill, or an industrial feed lot — as three examples.
Much less obvious are the reasons why a corner grocery store should not be located in a residential neighborhood… except when the commercial use will generate an annoying or unsafe amount of truck and vehicle traffic — in which case, this could be seen as a threat to public safety.
Alternatively, there are very good reasons to locate a grocery store within easy walking distance to residential homes, if you consider a community’s “walkability” to be an asset related to health, safety and welfare.
In order to codify its health, safety and welfare protections, the Town of Pagosa Springs implemented a Land Use and Development Code, so that the Planning Commission and Town Council have fairly clear guidelines to follow, when approving a new development — house, shopping center, subdivision — to ensure that all developers are treated reasonably, fairly and equitably.
We don’t want certain developers to be granted special favors, nor do we want anyone to be unfairly discriminated against.
As I peruse the application for a Major Subdivision Sketch Plan provided to the Town Planning Commission for tomorrow’s October 28 meeting at 5:30pm at Town Hall, it appears to me, as an outside observer, that the developer — Arena Labs LLC AKA Pagosa West AKA the Dragoo family — have been granted special favors by the Town planning department, to make their application appear sufficient… when it is, in fact, insufficient.
You can download the application summary here.
The possible actions the Town Planning Commission might choose, after hearing presentations from the developer, the planning staff and the public:
ALTERNATIVE MOTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION
I move to APPROVE of the Arena Labs LLC, Major Subdivision, Sketch Plan at 3800 West US Hwy 160, 80 South Pagosa Blvd, and 100 S Pagosa Blvd with findings a and b, and with conditions 1-17, as presented by Staff.
I move to CONTINUE the consideration of the Arena Labs LLC, Major Subdivision Sketch Plan until (Date to be determined)
I move to DENY the Arena Labs LLC, Major Subdivision Sketch Plan
In my experience, the planning staff and the developer will be allowed to present for an unlimited amount of time.
Members of the public will be limited to three minutes each.
Back in August, local architect Brad Ash gave a public presentation of a “Sketch Plan”. The people in the audience were instructed to submit written questions, and were promised that the developers would provide answers.
No answers — none — have yet been provided to the people who submitted questions.
I left Mr. Ash’s presentation quite disturbed by his claim that Arena Labs LLC was presenting a valid “Sketch Plan” — and in particular, his attempts to blame Pagosa Area Water and Sanitation District (PAWSD) for the almost complete lack of subdivision detail in the presentation map and in the presentation itself. (Disclosure: I serve on the PAWSD Board of Directors.)
Several of the “Sketch Plan” requirements in the LUDC have likewise been ignored, according to a close reading of the LUDC.
You can download a larger version of the map submitted with the “Sketch Plan” by clicking the map below:
In my humble opinion, this “Sketch Plan” is improper for several reasons, and fails to meet the high standards generally upheld by the Town of Pagosa Springs.