On March 25, the Pagosa Springs Planning Commission decided to delay a final decision on a sketch major subdivision application for a development being called Pagosa West, voting to continue the matter for future consideration.
The decision came in the wake of a packed-house audience that mostly voiced its concerns and opposition to the development.
An agenda document on the matter describes Pagosa West as “a residential and mixed-use commercial development located in Pagosa Springs, situated on a +/- 100-acre site along the south frontage of US Highway 160, between South Pagosa Blvd and Pinon Causeway.”
The applicant proposes “a multi-phased subdivision development with full build-out occurring over the next 10 plus years,” according to agenda documentation.
Development Director James Dickhoff explained that development would occur in three phases, with phase one expected to connect the subdivision with the existing development around City Market to the other side of the highway, while also adding sidewalks and long-awaited connections to the Town-to-Lakes Trail.
The 100-acre parcel currently encompasses three different zoning districts — mixed-use residential (MU-R), mixed-use corridor (MU-C) and mixed-use town-center (MU-TC) — and any new development would need to adhere to the codes for those specific districts, unless certain areas of the subdivision were rezoned, Dickhoff explained.
An 88-unit workforce housing apartment complex is being proposed on a section called Lot R, within the MU-R section of the subdivision.
Dickhoff explained that the workforce housing project, being called Pagosa Peaks Apartments, would be part of phase two of developing the proposed subdivision.
On this front, the town received a $1,989,000 Colorado Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) More Housing Now grant award, with this grant aimed toward helping with “the cost of public infrastructure associated with” the workforce housing apartments, the agenda document states.
The applicant for the subdivision, listed as Montrose-based Arena Labs LLC, represented at the meeting by David Dragoo, cited its community partners as the Town of Pagosa Springs, the Pagosa Springs Community Development Corporation, and Reynolds Ash and Associates, an architectural firm.
Dragoo explained that public improvements for the community would include “trail development and open space, a multimodal transit stop, upgrades to Pinon Causeway intersection and a new interior road,” being called Pagosa West Boulevard.
Dickhoff explained that the applicants also have applications out to La Plata Electric Association for electrical utilities and Black Hills Energy for natural gas.
He noted that the project is compatible with many of the town’s goals, including the Access Control Plan’s goal to “create off-highway local road networks,” the Town-to-Lakes nonmotorized trail system and the increase of workforce housing supply.
But many in the audience expressed concern about the amount of “density” being proposed on the 100-acre parcel, and there was also near unanimous opposition to a storage unit and car wash business.
Resident Sharon Carter said that the “high density” would be “out of sync” with the adjacent Vista San Juan neighborhood, where she lives, expressing worry that the higher-density subdivision would be right up against “a lower density, rural neighborhood.”
She recommended that the developers consider a “buffer zone” between the development and her neighborhood to make the transition smoother.
Dickhoff explained later in the meeting that the higher density for this subdivision was intentionally intended to curb urban sprawl and that the development would be concentrated around the highway corridor where all the utilities are accessible.
Resident Bruce Cooper told the audience that the area has been zoned as commercial for about 20 years and that the time to oppose development here was “20 years ago,” when the zoning districts were established.
He added, “You have a town that’s gonna grow. No matter what.”
Another resident, Jane Wetzel, stated that she does not think the subdivision meets the values in the Land Use and Development Code (LUDC), adding that “we don’t need another storage unit when we already have 12 of them.”
She also noted that the “beauty of Pagosa” is “near and dear to my heart” and expressed worry that the subdivision development could jeopardize the aesthetic beauty of the area.
Resident Gary Woods expressed that he thought that “the developer had no conception of the character” of Pagosa, and thought that the name “Pagosa West” was trying to change “the heritage” of the town.
“I’m adamantly opposed to the project in this form,” he said.
Another resident said, “People do not want this in Pagosa. We don’t want this. Why would we want to be like everybody else?”
Resident Bill Hudson expressed that he thought it was “odd” that the town applied for a grant to help the workforce housing component of the subdivision before the town’s planning commission had even approved the sketch subdivision plans.
Dragoo explained that the nature of the businesses within the subdivision are very likely to change, saying that the car wash and storage unit, listed on the plans, only reflect current interest in the parcels.
“This is a sketch plan,” he said. “We can make adjustments, and what types of buildings go in there could change.”
Dickhoff added that each proposed building in the development would need to go through its own public process of the town’s design review approval and that changes were likely on that front, as well.
When opened to discussion among the planning commission, planning commissioner Chad Hodges expressed that he “didn’t understand everything” about the project and that he might need “more time” to think about it.
“I don’t have the ability to make an educated opinion at the moment,” he said.
Planning commissioner David Pribble agreed with Hodges that he was not yet ready to make a decision on the sketch subdivision application, but he added that he wants to see more parks and “community” spaces “for children” within the development.
Planning commissioner Julie Gurule also thought that more parks and preservation of trees would be better than a storage unit.
Brad Ash, of Reynolds Ash and Associates, chimed in, reminding the commissioners that this was only a sketch plan and that the only thing they should really be considering is if the “uses are appropriate for what is being proposed.”
He reiterated that the buildings themselves are all likely to change as both the subdivision and each individual development goes through the public application process.
Planning commissioner Kristen McCollam said, “I feel there’s a lot to consume here,” and agreed with the other commissioners that they should come back for a decision at a later time.
When it appeared that a continuance was the direction that the commission was heading, both Dragoo and Ash sought some direction on how to move forward.
Dickhoff advised them to take into consideration the public comments that they had heard during the meeting, as well as some of his notes in the meeting packet.
He also recommended more details on the workforce housing component of the project for the public to see, saying that a sketch design, even at this early stage, could be useful.
When Hodges made a motion for a continuance on the matter, it was passed unanimously by the board, with Chris Pitcher and Mark Weiler being absent from the meeting.
derek@pagosasun.com
