County considers revisiting comprehensive corridor plan

Push comes from strategic update and lacking definitions

What started out as a look at one strategic goal in the county’s Strategic Plan by the Gunnison Board of County Commissioners turned into a whole lot more on Tuesday, March 9. Now the commissioners are considering an overhaul and greater incorporation of two major documents that map out a vision for the future

The work session was billed as a chance to update the county’s strategic goal of bringing 90 percent of new lot approvals in the county close to population centers and areas served by central services.
An analysis presented by Planning Director Joanne Williams showed that although the county isn’t quite meeting its goal, it’s close, with nearly 80 percent of new lots approved since 2004.
“Based on the information, the goal of 90 percent is about 10 percent more than what we’re currently doing,” County Manager Matthew Birnie (who has spearheaded the strategic planning effort) told the commissioners. “We probably don’t need to change the result at this point.”
But that was only the beginning of the discussion. Almost as soon as Commissioner Hap Channell read the text of the strategic goal, he started to have questions.
“We have a definition for population centers,” Channell said, “but we don’t really have a definition for ‘close,’ do we?”
Williams answered Channell, saying, “No we don’t, and that’s an interesting point.” She pointed out that there were ways to define close, either through the three-mile or area plans adopted by the municipalities, or as areas that are serviceable by a wastewater treatment system or central services.
“Do we have a definition of what ‘central services’ are?” Channell asked. “That’s kind of the point I’m leading up to . . . in order for this to be some kind of measurable metric, we have to give those kinds of things definitions. What does close mean? What do central services and utilities mean?”
Channel said his goal is to encourage growth “away from the hinterlands,” but noted there is a lot of gray area in the definitions guiding that goal. Before the county sets a goal, Channell wants to make sure he knows when that goal has been reached.
He also pointed out that the Ranchland Initiative—a proposed county program to conserve open space while allowing subdivisions for landowners to generate income—is “potentially diametrically opposed” to the strategic goal of focusing development around the municipalities.
Until late last year, the Planning Commission had the mandate to steer growth to certain areas without much direction from the commissioners about achieving their mission. As those lines of communication are opening up, the commissioners are asking if county planners have all the tools they need to follow through.
“You’ve got to decide what you want before we can talk about how you’re going to get it, and that’s why we’re having this conversation now,” Birnie said, adding that now is a good time to have the discussions because there were no new lots approved in the county in 2009.
Williams pointed out that one way to deal with the uncertainty in the definitions is to start with a fresh look at the Comprehensive Corridor Plan that the county already has.
“[The Corridor Plan] does not, in my opinion, take a holistic view of what community means in this valley,” Williams said. “Take another look at that plan, but not just in the sense of where people live, but truly how they move between communities and the roles these three communities, in particular, play in working with each other and the services they provide to each other.”
The Corridor Plan, which is almost a decade old now, Williams noted, is a tool to look at what the commissioners want to accomplish in the future.
Channell said, “I concur 100 percent. In the conversations we’ve had with the municipalities, these kinds of things keep coming up, and I’ve been thinking for some time that [the Corridor Plan] needs to be updated.”
Commissioner Paula Swenson thought that going through the process of revising the Corridor Plan would teach the commissioners—whoever they are when the process unfolds—a lot about “where our communities are and where our communities want to live.”
It took the county almost three years to develop the first comprehensive Corridor Plan and another round will likely take as long. Birnie told the commissioners that a consultant would have to be hired, since the staff is already stretched thin, but not until the next budget cycle.
“Part of this is the money. How much of the taxpayers’ money are we willing to put into this and to what end? Before we get too excited I think we need to look at those things,” Birnie said.
The commissioners also signaled to the Planning Commission they would be called upon to tighten the locational standards in the Land Use Resolution as a result of the new effort.
Commissioner Jim Starr said, “I want to assure that we take the next step, and that is whatever we end up with as an amended and updated [strategic] plan is subsequently folded into the regulations.”
The commissioners will discuss the idea more with the Planning Commission at their joint meeting on Friday, March 26.