We will resume our monthly trail work days as soon as conditions and weather permit.

You can also check the SMT website http://salidamountaintrails.org/ for updates.

PT Wood

Now, on to the fun stuff. You can read details here, (the PDF document loads slow btw) but here’s a brief hit list that got us excited, please keep in mind this expansion will be a 10-15 year roll out; Mirkwood remains the same, area expansion would occur in No Name Basin, allowing skiers access to both sides of the Continental Divide.  If you have ever skied back there, you know just how good it is. Freezeway, the oldest chair installed in 1968, becomes a triple. The main lodge will see a much needed expansion, and numerous outbuildings will allow for easier flow by guests and employees. We will see a new parking lot above the maintenance buildings, tubing runs and tree thinning on the resort (see map below). Monarch’s goal is to maintain their position in the market with family-friendly skiing, all natural snow, easy parking and diverse terrain. Public comments may be sent to: comments@skimonarch.com.

We saw Ericka at the event and she did a good job of covering some more details in the Mountain Mail.

Let us know your thoughts!

Remember, The Citizen is based on a Citizen Journalism model. If you would like to post an article or letter to the editor, let us know (Salidacitizen@gmail.com). You are not limited to the comment stream. Articles and content come from the community. The Citizen is most effective as a tool for dialog when a variety of views are expressed about important issues that affect our community. -bd

by Forrest Whitman

I’ve just viewed the controversial so called “mountain of a house” on Sackett St. in Salida. The distress over this big new box of a duplex is typical of what’s being felt in older neighborhoods across the state. Many of the Sackett St. neighbors resent the fact that their mountains and their sunlight have just disappeared behind a monolithic building. Maybe the builders could paint a mural of the Collegiate Peaks on the walls where the local mountain view once existed. There are much more serious solutions being developed of course. A look at the history of Sackett St. helps understanding.

What Sackett St. Used To Be

Salida is a “T town.” A “T town” was literally laid out as a T with the railroad and depot at the middle of the top of the T and everything else radiating out in parallel. The “working class” bars, shops, houses of male pleasure (female houses of pleasure are a new invention) and thrift shops were centered at the crossing of the Main Street (F St. in Salida) and the Front St. Typically any Colorado front street was made up of very small homes providing housing for low income and minority groups. Sackett St. (probably re-named from “front” when the town became a bit more up scale) was no exception. It was mainly for Italian and Mexican railroad workers. The Mexican part of that group were more likely to live across the river in “Hollywood,” but many lived on Sackett too. Recently the somewhat funky little houses have been spruced up along Sackett. Lawns are well tended, flower beds and decorative local arts flourish. Today Sackett St. is directly in line for upscale housing. The duplexes and “big houses” have begun to arrive. Typically these new constructions employ every square inch of allowable space on the lot. Gone are lawns, sun, and gardens and, yes, the mountain views. Here to stay appear to be the big boxes.

The predictable protest has erupted in Salida as older residents watch their once relaxed neighborhood being converted into a tidy and boring urban scene. Colorado cities and counties have employed a number of means to respond to such protests. In general the solution has been “over lay districts,” zoning rules about “view sheds” or both. In a few cases neighborhood have been “down zoned” back to single family. That is not the trend, however. No one I talked to thinks that is likely in the Sackett St. neighborhood either.

View shed rules have been adopted not just to preserve views, but also to save at least some sunlight for neighbor’s gardens, and solar installations. This allows some of the older small homes to remain even as “front streets” change. Predictably some home builders and lot owners have fiercely opposed any such view shed rules. They fear such zoning and building rules are likely to limit the amount of square feet that can be developed for profit. That’s not necessarily a justified fear, but the fight is on. The “mountain of a house” has become a symbol of the fight in Salida.

Making cities more dense

Nearly every city likes the idea of urban density. Counties like urban density too. If our cities can become more dense the surrounding countryside is less likely to be split up into a maze of “hard to service” two acre lots. The Colorado County Commissioners have a strong agriculture committee. That committee recently passed a resolution urging counties to fight “urban sprawl” which too often spells the end for traditional western dry land and part year irrigated farming and ranching. Traditional western agriculture can only continue at a high level if cities become more densely populated.

Big Fights Over View Sheds

Each time I talk with city and county planners about new view shed rules they tell me that nothing tends to cause so much controversy as view shed rules. Tales of late night planning commission meetings are common. Despite the big fights, these view shed rules are becoming more commonly adopted. Boulder City and Pitkin County were among the first in Colorado to adopt view shed construction rules 30 years ago. These are meant to break up the shear mass of new buildings and allow for at least some openings in structures to allow for sunlight, breezes and views. Those rules have been fine tuned now to the point that builders seldom have to lose any square feet of development. The rules do, of course, increase building cost. Architects have to be much more creative and build something other than low cost boxes like the “mountain of a house” on Sackett St. in Salida The web is replete with architectural firms that specialize in creatively meeting the view shed rules. Costs do increase due to view shed rules. One firm estimates up to 25% increase in costs to build such a “neighborhood friendly building” as opposed to sticking up a big box

Denver has adopted a style of rules becoming more popular, the “A & B” rules. Basically an A& B sets one height and width limit for the front of a lot and another one for the back. The intent is to encourage front porches for a neighborly feeling, porches extending right to the sidewalk. They also encourage dense two (or more) family construction on the lot. The usable square feet are clumped near the back. Often two small apartments (see 600 sq. ft.) are stacked in the back. The back end design rules are meant to encourage a “private” garden space on the small back lawn area. Garages off the back access, sometimes for up to five cars re encouraged so there aren’t three RVs parked out on the sod. The roof lines can be higher on the B portion, but the view space is ample between A and B. Other cities have various view shed rules, but they are all aiming to preserve the older feel of the neighborhood and break up big box construction.

Colorado Springs Opts Out

A recent issue of Governing Magazine talks about a Colorado Springs situation that could become more common. This magazine, by the way, allows for reproduction of content in general terms, as I’ve done here. Colorado Springs has rules in effect, rules much like Salida’s for neighborhoods like Sackett St.. There is a height limit and a building envelope limit, but nothing to stop big boring boxes. Colorado Springs has gone in what’s called a “libertarian direction”. That city has cut the total number of city employees by a huge number. Even if there were tougher rules about view sheds they would very likely languish without field enforcement.

A note about the notion of this “libertarian direction”. My friend, who ran for congress on the Libertarian ticket, clarifies the term. Libertarians would not oppose a view shed rule if all of the neighbors agreed to it. Libertarians would, however, insist that view shed rules be fungible. That is I could buy my neighbors view shed rights. If I decided I wanted enough sun for a garden or to have a view of the Collegiate peaks I’d just pay for it. It will be interesting to see how cities cope if his new ‘goodby government” attitude catches on as it did in the Springs.

Will There Be More “Mountain of A House” Constructions?

Cities and Counties throughout Colorado are wrestling with problems just like Sackett St. in Salida. Gilpin County recently passed a historical overlay ordinance designed to keep quaint little 19th century structures usable. Summit has one developing. Central City passed zoning to keep the 19th century buildings there in their somewhat sunny situations. Boulder and Denver are fine tuning their ordinances. I’d be surprised if Salida weren’t soon looking at some view shed rules.

It is possible to allow for the old front streets of Colorado to develop into multi-family housing and still preserve some of the old neighborhood feeling. But, as one planner, Tony Peterson, said in an interview on Monday, “A goal like that takes one hell of a lot of meetings.” He went on to say, “Little cities in Colorado are going to have to come of age.” “They can’t just depend on small town values to keep their older neighborhoods livable.”

Notes Readers who want to go into more detail on the technicalities of view sheds can download web sites like “Legal Aspects of Architecture” on Google Books or “Negative Easements” by the Gabriel Law office. Details of view shed ordinances are on the web sites of many cities and counties who have them in place.

To learn how a city budget need was quickly filled by the generosity of our friends and neighbors see Bill Donavon’s original story, No drinking fountains at the boat ramp.

We need to raise another $1500 to make it happen. It’s kind of ironic that when we need it the most, millions of gallons of water will be flowing just a few feet away. But, alas, agua potable.

The issue with how this came to be may be another article. Feel free to comment below if you understand the issue’s details.

Our primary interest today is to help make it happen. If you can contribute any amount please drop us a note and we’ll put your people with our people: salidacitizen@gmail.com

Sometimes we come across issues so perfectly timed it makes even our seasoned staff blush with editorial symbiosis.

We are happy to report that many in our community rallied and raised the needed funds to have the drinking fountains installed.  The Chaffee Citizens for Sustainability collected the donations and delivered a check to the City of Salida to make it happen. A big thank you to all that helped.  Man, I love this community.  – ss

A New Model for Community Groups and Investors- Opening March 11

At this event we hope to show some exciting new solar technologies, introduce some of the Solar Panel Hosting team, and unveil our top ten Solar Gardens sites.  Barring schedule conflicts, Sen. Gail Schwartz will be attending.

Article from The Denver Post:

The First Working Solar Garden: A New Model for Community Groups and Investors- Opening March 11 Hosted by SolarPanelHosting.com and SolarGardens.or

SolarGardens.org and SolarPanelHosting.com will be unveiling a working Solar Garden in Westminster, Colorado March 11, 2010, the same day the Solar Gardens bill (HB 1342) will be introduced into the Colorado State Assembly. The bill, introduced by Claire-Levy (D-Boulder, Gilpin) will allow people to come together in groups from 10-1,500 to establish community-scale power plants. A Solar Garden can be located on multiple homes, large buildings, or integrated into working agricultural land.

The event, beginning at 11am at 4800 West 80th Ave, Westminster CO, will consist of a press conference and tours of the solar garden and will be free and open to the public. This will be the site of a future Solar Information Center open to the public. It will be followed by a lunch presentation at Los Arcos restaurant featuring several speakers, including Senator Gail Schwartz (D- Southern Colorado) and Joy Hughes, founder of SolarPanelHosting.com.

“The idea of Solar Gardens is beginning to capture the public’s attention and imagination. We are active in at least a dozen Colorado Counties and a dozen U.S. States. The interest is spreading around the globe through SolarGardens.org and the Solar Gardens Facebook group.” says Hughes.

“Imagine getting a check in the mail each month instead of an electric bill. SolarPanelHosting.com pays like a small oil well on your roof, but without the mess.” says Hughes. “Property owners and investors have been asking how they can make money from solar energy. We hope to show how investors can realize a rapid return.”

“Libraries, schools, and churches can benefit by hosting a solar garden on their property. Homeowners can donate roof space to support their favorite charity. Using rooftops instead of industrial solar farms helps protect important landscapes like Colorado’s San Luis Valley. We support independent solar professionals in each area.” The hosting revenue for at least 10% of the panels at the Solar Garden in Westminster, Colorado will be donated to a non-profit organization to be chosen by SolarGardens.org members.

At the Westminster model garden, ten subscribers each will purchase the rights to solar panels providing one kilowatt of solar energy. Some of the subscribers will be tenants in the building, demonstrating how a subscription to a solar garden on the same building can be part of a standard rental contract. Other subscribers will be located in the local neighborhood, around Colorado, and as far away as Seattle. According to Hughes, “Remote panel owners can gain more in sunshine than the cost of their subscription. Owning a share of a solar garden could very well be less expensive than going it alone. People will be able to go solar with just a click.”

About Solar Panel Hosting

Based in the rural community of Saguache, Colorado, SolarPanelHosting.com offers a way for everyone to own solar panels in their community, even if they have a shady roof, rent an apartment, or might move. As a pioneer Hosting Service Provider, SPH is bringing together solar subscribers, property owners, investors, and local solar professionals to build and manage distributed power plants throughout America. This independent company is dedicated to protecting critical landscapes through ten principles of responsible solar development. Website: http://www.solarpanelhosting.com

About Solar Gardens

SolarGardens.org is forming as a non-profit cooperative, organizing communities to pool their resources to go solar. Libraries and schools, churches and non-profit groups can benefit by hosting a distributed power plant where anyone can own solar panels. SolarGardens.org advocates for community based energy development through legislation such as Colorado’s “Solar Gardens” bill, introduced in 2010 (HR 1342). Solar Gardens are self-organizing everywhere, beginning to transform America through solar power and people power.

The board told the water group to choose its primary representative from two members with notably dissimilar backgrounds.

This influential representative will be either a conservationist or a rancher.

The choice is between Buena Vista resident Reed Dils and Frank McMurry of Nathrop. Dils serves on the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservation District and the Arkansas River Basin Roundtable.

Frank McMurry is a fourth-generation rancher who owns water rights, and sold some with property to Nestlé Waters North America. Nestle will draw 65 million gallons a year from an aquifer, pipe it to Johnson Village, then truck it to a Denver bottling facility.

The motion passed 2-1 to accept a slate of focus group representatives to serve on the committee. Commissioner Tim Glenn, District 3, and Commissioner Dennis Giese, District 1, voted in favor and Chairman of the Board Commissioner Frank Holman, District 2, dissented. “I would really like the water committee to make their own decision,” Holman said, as to who should be on the short list of representatives.

The position of primary rep, or spokesperson, carries some weight. A spokesperson and alternate will represent each group, ranging from real estate and development to heritage. Alternates are encouraged to attend meetings but their involvement would be minimal compared to the spokesperson’s.

The eventual committee will be composed of Chaffee County Citizen’s Land Use Roundtable focus group representatives. The committee’s purpose is to implement the roundtable’s recommendations and revise the code, creating workable planning and zoning regulations. The roundtable’s work took more than two years to come to consensus.

County planner Kim Antonucci urged the board on Tuesday to formalize code-advisory committee members. “There is some urgency here,” Antonucci said. “From a planning perspective, our code is horrendous. I’ve been here two years and I still have questions that I cannot answer with 100 percent confidence.”

Water group leader changes multiple times

Jeanne Foster, a member of the water group, said that there wasn’t a clear consensus as to who should be representatives, and that she, McMurry and Dils were all interested.

Glenn spoke in favor of Dils, noting that Dils was the only member who applied by the Aug. 12, 2009 deadline to be a representative. Dils brings a useful perspective with his conservation work and involvement on a state water conservation board, Glenn said. Other members of the commission, specifically Nancy Roberts and Bruce Cogan, could adequately represent agricultural interests, he said.

The water protection group has seen some flip-flopping as to who will be spokesperson. The name listed first on the county’s website is the spokesperson expected to be confirmed. In the fall Dils was listed first as spokesperson on the website. Then McMurry was listed first in early December. Now Dils is listed again. At this point, it’s unclear who will eventually speak for the water protection group.

Seven months, so far, to form committee

Commissioners have been criticized for taking too long to formalize this committee, seven months so far, with the decision tabled at the December board meeting.

Keith Baker, primary representative for the sustainable growth focus group, said: “Mr. Dils met the application deadline and has unrivaled credentials on water issues. It isn’t as if the only applicant was unqualified and the deadline needed to be extended. Under my personal value system, Mr. Dils should be chosen for the water position. Mr. McMurry, who is indeed well-qualified on water topics, should be appointed if he was the only applicant who had applied on time.”

County planners will write an initial land-use code draft based on the Colorado Department of Local Affairs model template and incorporate their interpretations of the roundtable results. This work is expected to be completed in mid-February. The land-use advisory commission will then weigh in, and the hope is the work will wrap up by June.

Forming the committee is the last step in an almost 10-year process to revise the land-use code. Currently, the land-use code is unclear, conflicting and hinders smart development. The committee will work with the Planning Commission and county staffers.

Until a decisive land-use code is finalized, the subdivision review process presents the greatest challenge. There are conflicts going back to previous zoning and subdivision regulations that stood alone but referred to each other. Basically, the two were treated separately and as subdivision requirements evolved and changed, the zoning did not.

County land use Articles 3 and 7, zoning and standards, are the most controversial. “Those two articles are the ones that we want the committee to review carefully,” she said.

Much of the land-use code is self-referential as language in one section cites language elsewhere. The entire code needs to be examined as part of the same process, Antonucci said.

Code Advisory Committee

Real Estate & Dev: Karin Adams, Mike Allen
Production Agriculture: Bruce Cogan, Nancy Roberts
Water Protection: Reed Dils, Frank McMurry
Sustainable Growth: Keith Baker, Kathy McCoy
Commercial & Industrial: Rick Shovald, Tom Eve
Heritage: Cheryl Brown-Kovacic, Melanie Roth
Government: Dara MacDonald, Dee Miller

The Villages at Cottonwood Meadows is a subdivision proposed by John Cogswell northwest of Buena Vista along Cottonwood Creek. An annexation of Cottonwood Meadows last year was narrowly defeated by voters after critics forced a referendum on the issue. Cogswell reapplied for annexation again this year after a mandatory 12-month waiting period.

Opponents of the annexation are critical of the way in which water is allocated for the development. Advocates point to a unanimous conditional approval of the project by the board of trustees, broad support within the community, changes which to respond to criticisms of earlier plans and a phased approach which gives the Town the ability to “disconnect” the annexation if certain conditions aren’t met by the developers.

According to statute, any registered Buena Vista voter may file a protest against the petition within the next 40 days if they believe the petition was flawed. Grounds for protest include improper collection of signatures or incorrect language on the petition.

If the petition survives the protest period, Town trustees must either repeal their decision or submit it to a vote of the people. Because no special election may be held within 90 days of a regular election, it’s likely that the matter would be included on the mail-in ballot for the regularly-scheduled April election, according to Spomer.

But no one’s position is certain on the Code Advisory Committee until at least Jan. 5, as commissioners tabled the move on Tuesday to formalize and define the committee’s role.

The eventual committee will be composed of Chaffee County Citizen’s Land Use Roundtable focus group representatives. A spokesperson and alternate will represent each group, ranging from real estate and development to heritage. Alternates are encouraged to attend meetings but their involvement would be minimal compared to the spokesperson’s. The committee’s purpose is to implement the roundtable’s recommendations and revise the code, creating workable planning and zoning regulations. The roundtable’s work took more than two years to come to consensus.

The water protection group has seen some flip-flopping as to who will be the spokesperson. Buena Vista resident Reed Dils is the only candidate who applied by the Aug. 12, 2009 deadline, and is currently listed as the spokesperson. But earlier in the month it was Frank McMurry of Nathrop.

Dils serves on the Colorado Water Conservation Board, the Southeastern Colorado Water Conservation District and the Arkansas River Basin Roundtable.

McMurry is a fourth-generation rancher who owns water rights, and sold some with property to Nestlé Waters North America. Nestle will draw 65 million gallons a year from an aquifer, pipe it to Johnson Village, then truck it to a Denver bottling facility.

County commissioners decided to accept late-comers McMurry and, later, local geologist Fred Henderson as applicants to be spokesperson and alternate. This was because “Dils was the only applicant,” said Chairman of the Board Commissioner Frank Holman, District 2. “There’s support to make this choice and I honored that.”

The water group was polled and decided McMurry and Henderson would represent the group. Then it was decided Dils should become spokesperson because he was the only rep who made the deadline, starting at the beginning.

But it’s not over. Dils may not necessarily remain the water group’s spokesperson.

“In all fairness I may send it back to committee,” Holman said, meaning the water focus group may have to recommend reps once again.

County government lacks transparency

Chaffee County’s business could be much more transparent. Minutes from meetings are not posted on the county’s website, so it’s challenging to keep up with what’s going on. County attorney Jenny Davis said there’s “not a legal reason” why the minutes aren’t posted for public viewing.

Chaffee County Clerk and Recorder Joyce Reno said citizens are able to receive a copy of “approved minutes with a written request.” But commissioners have not yet approved minutes from August meetings. Holman said this is because of all the time spent on the Nestlé deal.

The new City and County Community Services Complex at the old hospital site will be set up for televised meetings. Commissioner Tim Glenn, District 3, said he’s open to having the meetings filmed but doesn’t want to pay for it. Holman said seeing meetings on TV would be like “watching paint dry.”

Decision tabled over undisclosed concerns

Commissioner Dennis Giese, District 1, made the move to table the agenda of formalizing the committee’s membership. Giese said he “had concerns” and wanted to speak first, privately, with the other commissioners. Holman concurred, saying he didn’t “have an issue with waiting until Jan. 5.”

But Glenn opposed the move, saying he didn’t see “the purpose of prolonging issues.” “We’ve put it off far too long,” Glenn said.

Later, Holman said tabling the code advisory agenda is “not at all” a stall tactic. “I want to get this thing right rather than rush through it,” he said. “When we’re done, I want this to be something we all support.”

When asked about the chance of spokespersons mobilizing against the recommendations, he said, “I won’t let that happen. If so, I will replace them. It has to be successful.”

Existing land-use code hinders smart development

Forming the committee is the last step in an almost 10-year process to revise the land-use code. Currently, the land-use code is unclear, conflicting and hinders smart development. The committee will work with the Planning Commission and county staffers.

Until a decisive land-use code is finalized, the subdivision review process presents the greatest challenge. There are conflicts going back to previous zoning and subdivision regulations that stood alone but referred to each other. Basically, the two were treated separately and as subdivision requirements evolved and changed, the zoning did not.

Melanie Roth, an alternate for the heritage group, said she’s been involved since the first hearings and would like to see the process progress. There’s been a tremendous amount of time put in by staffers, citizens and the Planning Commission, Roth said. There’s “such a foundation for revising county zoning, it would be a terrible shame to waste all of that,” she said. “It’s a workable thing.”

Almost 17,000 residents live in Chaffee County, according to U.S. Census Bureau estimates from 2008, yet only a handful of citizens and a couple of reporters attended the meeting on Tuesday in Buena Vista. This is understandable, as many residents work full-time. Yet, decisions made at these meetings will significantly impact future growth.

At least one citizen at the planning meeting was disappointed the committee work was tabled. Keith Krebs, a licensed architect new to the area, said he’s late getting in on the process. “I plan on participating,” Krebs said.