NEWS

COUNTY

County developing nuisance ordinance

Archuleta County staff and the county planning commission are working to hammer out a draft version of a nuisance ordinance, with staff anticipating adoption occurring as early as July.

Commonly referred to as a “junk ordinance,” the legislation — still in the draft stages — may ultimately regulate junk cars, rubbish, refuse and other items on people’s property that, Archuleta County Administrator Greg Schulte said, may threaten the community’s health, safety and welfare.

Some of those health, safety and welfare issues include: environmental hazards created when fluids leak from abandoned automobiles and appliances; standing water held in discarded tires which creates habitat for mosquitoes carrying West Nile Virus; abandoned cars creating habitat for snakes and certain rodents known to carry Bubonic Plague and Hantavirus; and general safety concerns such as a child becoming trapped inside an abandoned appliance or junk car.

“The goal of the ordinance is not to penalize or criminalize people. It’s really to identify the sources,” Schulte said. “The goal is to help ensure the health, safety and welfare of the community, while asking, ‘how can we help people succeed.’”

That success, said Schulte, may rely, in part, on the kinds of programs the county creates to facilitate compliance. Schulte said the county is exploring a variety of options and details will be provided as soon as they are available and as the adoption date nears.

Schulte said the ordinance has been a priority for the county and the Board of County Commissioners for some time, and added that it will go through a “very public process,” including work sessions and public hearings prior to adoption.

The Archuleta County Planning Commission hosted a work session on the draft ordinance April 16, and will revisit the draft again April 23 — the public is invited to attend.

On May 14, Schulte said he anticipated the planning commission will make a recommendation on the draft to the Board of County Commissioners for their final approval.

Before formal board adoption, however, Schulte said the Board of County Commissioners would host one or two public work sessions to solicit public comments. Adoption could occur July 1.

Schulte said a draft of the ordinance will be made available on the county’s Web site, and hard copies will be available at the planning office and the courthouse.

Beyond health, safety and welfare issues, Schulte said a secondary aim of the ordinance is to make Archuleta County more attractive to residents and visitors alike, and doing so would help economic development in the community.

“Archuleta County, given the economic times, will face increased competition for new residents and businesses. This (the ordinance) puts us in a position to better compete. We have the natural beauty let’s build on it,” said Schulte.

County planning commission to consider wildlife overlays

The Archuleta County Planning Commission will hold a public workshop at 6 p.m. Wednesday, April 30 to discuss wildlife overlays. The session will include a presentation by the Colorado Division of Wildlife followed by general discussion.

The purpose of a wildlife overlay is to help identify and conserve critical habitat areas within the county. Preliminary discussions of wildlife, scenic and watershed overlays took place in 2006 when the county was developing its current land use code. In order to provide more opportunity for public input, the adoption of overlays was tabled with the intent of re-opening the process at a later time. This workshop will be the first in a series of workshops and public meetings to address the topic.

The overlays are intended to create incentives for landowners and developers to conserve critical habitat areas. They will also help the county implement existing programs including the rural land use process and conservation planned unit developments (PUDs), establish conservation priorities for open space acquisition and help promote grant funding. The overlays will not restrict the development of any property within the property’s current zoning designation. Instead, the overlays will provide the opportunity for density bonuses, participation in a transfer of development rights (TDR) program and a higher priority for purchased easements to those landowners willing to help protect critical habitat areas.

Transfer of development rights programs allow landowners to transfer the right to develop one parcel of land to a different parcel of land. Generally, TDR programs are established by local zoning ordinances and are used to shift development from an area the local government entity would like to protect — such as a critical wildlife habitat area — to growth zones with higher densities and greater proximity to municipal services.

Areas designated as a high priority for conservation are called “sending” areas. Areas designated as appropriate for increased density are called “receiving” areas. When the rights are transferred from a sending parcel, the land is restricted with a permanent conservation easement. Typically, the landowner in the sending area sells his development rights to a purchaser seeking greater density within a designated receiving area. Buying these rights generally allows the purchaser to build at a higher density than ordinarily permitted by the base zoning.

TDR programs enable landowners to separate and sell the right to develop land from their other property rights. Much like a conservation easement, this allows landowners to benefit from the sale of the development rights while still retaining ownership and other uses of their property.

Although Archuleta County’s TDR program is still in the conceptual stage, the discussion of wildlife overlays is a critical part of the county’s long term planning process.

County selects new airport manager

Following an unanticipated three-month vacancy, Archuleta County will soon have a new airport manager at Stevens Field.

County Administrator Greg Schulte formally announced the decision to hire Clarence (Bill) McKown to fill the post, at a monthly Archuleta County Airport Advisory Commission (AAC) meeting held last Thursday. Schulte said McKown was the top choice among four qualified candidates seeking the position.

The unexpected opening developed Jan. 10, as former airport manager George Barter suddenly resigned. At the time of his departure, Barter also oversaw the county public transportation department and information services. His tenure lasted just 17 months.

In the wake of Barter’s exit, acting assistant manager Chris Torres took over the airport reins until Schulte — himself a new hire — assumed the county administrator position in early February. Once on the job, Schulte added guidance of day-to-day airport operations to his list of duties, until a new airport manager could be found.

Meanwhile, the Archuleta County Board of County Commissioners appointed a three-person Airport Conservancy Team to assist and advise Schulte between AAC meetings.

At Thursday’s AAC get-together, Schulte expressed joy and relief with McKown’s hiring, who was apparently the unanimous choice among members of two panels charged with finding Barter’s replacement. The panels included members of the AAC and county staff. Beginning April 7, Schulte and the panels conducted a series of interviews, before finally settling on McKown. Schulte did not disclose McKown’s starting salary.

McKown is coming out of retirement. He is a senior leadership executive with more than 35 years experience in military and aviation operations, personnel management and multi-million dollar budgets. He served as commanding officer in the U.S. Navy at Yokosuka and Tokyo, Japan between 2004 and 2006. He also served as an Air Officer for the USS Kitty Hawk.

McKown holds a bachelor of science degree in industrial technology from Southern Illinois University and a master’s in national resource strategy from Industrial College of the Armed Forces. He is a life member of Noncommissioned Officers National Association and National Security Management.

He has an FAA Private Pilot’s License, Aircraft Carrier Aviation Command Pilot, Multi-engine Instrument Qualification, Special Instrument Rating and is a Flight Instructor for the Naval Air Training Command.

McKown will reportedly search for Pagosa Springs area housing this weekend and assume airport management duties sometime in early May.

TOWN

Town moves to change fee structure

With the word “recession” as thick in the air as spring pollen, town council addressed the issues of building and impact fees at its April 17 mid-month meeting.

Acting on citizen’s concerns voiced at an open forum March 20, the council entertained the possibility of changing the town’s planning, building and impact fees.

Council member Mark Weiler said, “I want town council to listen to what you heard at that meeting. I want town council to be cautious when it’s time to be cautious, but I also want town council to be bold when it’s time to be bold. And now is the time to be bold.”

Council member Jerry Jackson agreed that the fees were an obstacle to new development.

“It’s a problem when the fees here in Pagosa Springs are higher than they are in Durango or Telluride,” Jackson said.

Jackson may have been referring to figures cited by local business owner Steve Van Horn, who at the March 20 session, claimed development costs in Durango were about $140 per square foot while costs for building in Pagosa Springs were about $200 per square foot.

After some discussion, town council moved swiftly to develop a three-tiered plan for changing the town’s fee structure. The plan that council developed would change the current structure of collecting all fees up front to the following plan:

• Plan review fees would be due only when building plans are submitted.

• Building permit fees would be due only after a certificate of occupancy has been issued.

• Impact fees would be deferred over a 10-year period, with 10 percent of those fees due each year for that time period. To cover interest due on those fees, a 3.5-percent increase would be built into the impact fees. Furthermore, deferment of impact fees would be handled on a case-by-case basis through resolution to town council and contingent upon their approval. There would be no penalty for paying the impact fees up front and impact fees paid up front would not be assessed the 3.5 percent interest fee.

Answering concerns that the deferred collection of impact fees would affect the town’s available cash for capital improvements, county commissioner candidate John Ranson said, “A revenue stream is valuable, more valuable than cash.” Ranson explained that lenders look more to certain incoming revenue rather than available cash when considering project funding.

Former town manager Mark Garcia said he would draft resolutions reflecting council’s desire to change building and impact fee structures and that those resolutions would be ready for the May 6 council meeting.

Responding to town council’s move in changing the fee structure, Mayor Ross Aragon finished the session, declaring, “What we just did is indicative of what leadership is all about.”

Council considers downtown development related plans, requests

Given the prospect of millions of dollars in tax revenues flowing into town coffers within the next few years, town council spent the past week mulling over a proposed expansion of The Springs Resort in Pagosa Springs.

The proposed expansion, detailed in a memorandum presented at a town council work session on April 16, outlined plans for new hotels, timeshare residences, and recreational facilities in the area immediately south of the existing resort. Retail and residential spaces adjacent to Hot Springs Boulevard rounded out the rest of the proposal which, if realized, would cost an estimated $250 million.

Bill Whittington, representing The Springs Resort, told council that the initial phase of the expansion would generate $460,000 in annual sales tax revenue, both directly from the resort and through local restaurants and businesses. According to Whittington, capital improvements funded by those revenues would further drive development and expansion of the resort, creating a potential tax revenue base estimated at well over $10 million, annually. However, Whittington cited no sources, nor provided data to substantiate his tax revenue projections.

The proposal was received enthusiastically by council — with some reservations — the matter of geothermal water rights being the most glaring sticking point. (See bullet items below.) Whittington, under the auspices of the Pagosa Springs Resort Company, has filed for adjudicated water rights on effluent discharged from the town’s PS-5 well. The application requests 440 gallons per minute for summer usage and 370 gallons per minute during the winter for use at The Springs Resort.

In the memo Whittington writes, “PSRC (Pagosa Springs Resort Company) has filed for absolute rights on their water right related to the Town lease.”

Council informed Whittington that, although it was happy to receive the proposal, further discussion was warranted and with an assurance of due diligence, discussions would take place within the week.