The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
No dates set for hearing(s) yet
by Katherine Nettles
In the three weeks since Gunnison County commissioners approved the major impact sketch plan application for the Lower Verzuh development in a split vote, a second appeal has come to the county requesting the decision be reversed. The second appeal came from neighboring homeowner associations Hidden Mine Ranches and East River Ranches. No hearing date for that appeal, or the one that came in the day prior, has yet been scheduled.
Gunnison County commissioners approved the major impact sketch plan application with conditions on August 18, moving the project into preliminary plan. The project proposes to subdivide 450 acres to create space for 419 new homes. 179 would be deed-restricted for-sale homes, constructed by local builder High Mountain Concepts. The others would be free market lots.
After approving the plan 2-1, commissioners approved the accompanying conditions in another split vote (commissioner Laura Puckett Daniels voted against each resolution) last Tuesday, September 1. That same day, an appeal was filed by Buckhorn Ranch homeowner Marc David Sarnoff, challenging the approval’s validity.
The second appeal was filed with the county on September 2. Brandi Caswell, with Davis Graham legal firm, requested on their behalf that the county board of adjustment (BOA) review and reverse or remand the approval decision.
Hidden River Ranches includes 17 platted lots and 10 residences on about 270 acres to the southeast of the Lower Verzuh parcel. East River Ranches consists of eight platted lots with seven residences on about 280 acres to the south of the Lower Verzuh parcel.
The associations claim their basis for appeal is that the decision “imposes a substantial burden on property and personal rights held by the associations themselves and their individual members,” including four specific issues.
The first is the “loss of the rural agricultural character that defines the area,” which they argue was a factor in members’ decisions to acquire property and also correlates to the value of their properties; the second is “direct and permanent impacts on adjoining land from the density and scale of the approved development; the third is increased traffic on Highway 135 and demand on shared infrastructure such as water, wastewater treatment and emergency services; the fourth is “diminution of property values resulting from the fundamental alteration of the character of the community and surrounding landscape” through loss of open spaces, wildlife, increased noise and traffic.
The associations allege that there were three criteria in the county’s sketch plan approval that serve as grounds for appeal: that there was no credible evidence to support the decision; the decision was inconsistent with applicable requirements; and the decision-making body exceeded its jurisdiction or abused its discretion. The document goes into detail regarding various standards in the county’s Land Use Resolution, and how the associations believe the county commissioners’ decision to approve the application failed to ensure various requirements. This included deferring mitigation of wildlife impacts and failure of the commissioners to address that the project meets a precedent trigger for significantly different future land use than currently exists. It also included incompatibility with the surrounding areas, which are significantly less dense.
The associations requested reversal on the grounds that “no credible evidence supports the required findings,” “the decision is inconsistent with the resolution,” and “the board of county commissioners abused its discretion.” Alternatively, the associations requested the BOA remand the decision to commissioners to “make an independent compatibility find,” and “a sketch plan-level wildlife finding.”
The associations further requested that the county conduct a public hearing on the appeal.
The Crested Butte News reached out to Gunnison County representatives for comment on this second appeal, however had not received a response as of press time. Last week Gunnison County assistant county manager for community and economic planning April Kroner outlined that when an appeal is made, the BOA must consider the matter at a meeting within 30 days. Kroner said previously that planning staff was working to get that scheduled, but it is not yet known if the two appeals will be addressed in a combined meeting or two separate meetings. However, as Kroner stated previously, the BOA will consider the appeals and determine if the commissioners’ decision is affirmed, reversed, modified or remanded to the original decision-making body for further action or correction.
No upcoming meetings or agendas are currently posted on the county’s BOA website. The BOA is made up of the three county commissioners, with two additional appointed members, Andy Tocke and Drew Brookhart, and John O’Neal as the alternate.
