On Sept. 8, the Pagosa Springs Planning Commission approved a sketch plan application for a major subdivision development.
The commission also recommended to the town council, with amendments, that a planned development agreement (PDA) be forged between the town and the developers.
The proposed subdivision is called Ponderosa Mountain, with the main access point off of U.S 160 and Great West Avenue, west of downtown.
The developer, listed as Modern Community Builders LLC, is “proposing to fully develop the [70-acre] site, in phases, with a mix of residential and commercial uses, seeking Planned Development entitlements,” states an agenda document on the matter.
During public comment, several members of the public expressed concern that entitlements in the PDA would allow the developer to have too much flexibility in terms of zoning and density requirements.
Several public comments expressed that this PDA, if allowed, would enable the developers to build higher-density residential areas that butt up against lower-density neighborhoods, which, they claimed, runs contrary to the town’s comprehensive plan.
One commenter suggested that the agreement sounds like “a rubber stamp” for the developers to do whatever they want.
Planning commissioner Chris Pitcher sought clarification on any potential zoning change that the developer was looking for and asked if this would come later if the sketch plan was approved.
Development Director James Dickhoff responded, “No. The planned development agreement is that zoning change.”
Planning Manager Owen O’Dell explained during a phone interview that the PDA with the town would need town council’s approval to go forward and make it binding.
The potential agreement will be before the town council at its Oct. 6 public meeting, O’Dell noted.
For its part, the town’s planning commission could only make a recommendation for the council’s approval of the PDA, Dickhoff explained, which it did at the meeting, with a few amendments.
The planning commission recommended that language in the PDA about public open space be removed, while also requesting that the developer show a “larger commitment to workforce housing in the first phase of the development,” O’Dell said in the interview.
The planning commission asked to see a commitment of 30 rental units in the PDA dedicated to workforce housing in phase one, rather than the 12 percent of units dedicated for workforce housing in the original language of the PDA, he added.
The other phases of the project could continue down the path of the 12 percent of any housing being built dedicated to workforce housing.
O’Dell also explained, at the meeting, that the developer sought to change some of the zoning tracks to Mixed-Use Residential (MU-R) in the agreement, but that town staff thought this would not be appropriate according to the town’s comprehensive plan.
O’Dell explained that staff recommended that the planning commission amend the PDA to make those tracts R-22, which is a high-density residential zone that allows 22 dwelling units per acre.
At the meeting, planning commissioner Brian Reid asked, “So, there’s a difference between what they [the developers] are asking for and what you’re recommending?”
“Correct,” O’Dell answered.
The planning commission also recommended amending the PDA to make those tracts R-22 instead of the developer’s request to make them Mixed-Use Residential (MU-R).
Dickhoff explained that the PDA was an important step, binding any future owners of the property to all the deed restrictions and commitments to public infrastructure within the agreement, ensuring, for example, that workforce housing elements remain workforce housing “in perpetuity.”
Ultimately, the planning commission recommended to the council the approval of the agreement, with the amendments outlined above.
As far as the major subdivision sketch plan, which the planning commission would make a decision on at the meeting, the sketch application only detailed phase one of the development.
The application states that the entire project would take place in seven phases.
“This is a phased project and it will happen over many years, and, as phases are completed, they’ll start staging and designing their next phase,” Dickhoff said.
He added, “We all know that developers are eager to make things happen quickly, but in the end it’s dictated by the demand and the market for more housing or more lodging units, whatever the case might be.”
The application also states that 12 percent of the housing in the development would be dedicated to workforce housing for the community.
Some of the public commenters were concerned that the developer was using “workforce housing” as a sort of “magic word to immediately get their foot in the door.”
“I’ve seen other developments around there where the workforce housing never materialized,” one resident said.
A representative of the developers said to look around, “all other resorts in this state don’t have enough workers and I know that’s a problem here, too, so we don’t want to add to that problem, and that’s our goal.”
After phase one’s 30 units, “12 percent of the total homes that are built will be workforce qualified,” he explained, adding, “The 30 is for phase one only, and then 12 percent from then on out.”
During public comment at the end of the meeting, one resident expressed they are concerned about the traffic on the roads.
“We are considered an agricultural community, and we have horses and we ride and we walk our dogs and children ride their bikes, and I don’t understand why you keep saying you can take Great West and make it a highway to Walmart,” she said, adding, “I think it’s unfair to take a quiet community and put another byway through it.”
Another resident said, “I really think there needs to be a road study. I don’t think there’s enough exits in this situation … I’m also very concerned it will become the Great West highway to Walmart.”
Another suggested he “was surprised” that zoning could be changed so easily through a PDA, adding that he expected there would be “a lot more of a process, with steps having to be taken, public input.”
He said, “I don’t know how you can go from a rural transition property to the other extreme and have a high-density zoning just because a developer comes in and says we want to build this.”
He added, “It seems like an end-around the zoning laws.”
Ultimately, the planning commission approved the sketch plan.
derek@pagosasun.com
>