I hadn’t attended an Archuleta County Planning Commission meeting for maybe two years — definitely, not since the County commissioners fired the entire board 18 months ago, in some kind of apparent effort to make someone happy.
One result of that mass firing was, of course, to make unhappy all the former members of the planning commission — volunteers, who had spent years, in some cases, becoming familiar with the complex planning issues facing Archuleta County during the first part of the 21st century.
Those planning issues were something of a moving target during this century’s first decade, as our local land development economy slowly climbed to its peak in about 2006 — like a roller coaster chugging its way up, up, up, to the peak... to that first... dramatic... drop...
We seemed to be on top of the world, up there at the top of that roller coaster ride. We could see the future stretching out for miles on all directions.
 Then we hit 2007, and the roller coaster slipped over its peak and — hesitating for just a few seconds... teasing us with that expansive view — suddenly swooped down, down, down, taking everyone’s breath away. And we found ourselves back down in the bowels of the amusement ride, heading down toward ground level — where the view was maybe not so pleasant. We were rushing down, down... past the rusted, unpainted framework of the roller coaster ride... noticing below us the empty pop cans and popcorn boxes littering the ground, and the children throwing tantrums over cotton candy.
And we wondered: How much farther can we fall?
A year and a half ago, the previous County planning commission was on the verge of making some significant changes — improvements, some would say — to the outdated Land Use Code and zoning map. Needless to say, as a result of the BoCC asking the entire commission to step down, nothing much has been accomplished in that regard in the ensuing 18 months. Nearly the entire county is still zoned “agricultural” and — because almost nobody developing in the county is aiming for agricultural uses on their property — nearly every development decision entails Conditional Use Permits, Planned Unit Developments, and variance requests.
An update to the Land Use Code and zoning map would grease the wheels of development, some seem to think.
On the evening of July 8, I sat in the audience observing a joint meeting between the planning commission and the Board of County Commissioners. The planning commission had just been reduced in size, as a result of recent BoCC actions, from seven down to five members. Two of the commissioners were brand new appointees that evening, and two were missing.
The Land Use Code and the zoning map were a big, rusty can of worms — in front of a planning commission that is collectively still green around the edges.
I had come to hear the conversation between the BoCC and the planning commissioners about the proposed Eagle Mountain Gravel Pit — a subject about which I’d written a couple of recent Daily Post articles. The BoCC had sent the gravel pit application back to the planning commission, for further review, after both sides of the issue brought in their attorneys.
It seemed pretty obvious that, whether the gravel pit application was approved or denied, the County was headed for the courtroom — so I was curious how the discussion between the BoCC and planning commission would play out.
As I walked in — a few minutes late — Chair Kirk England was reading a letter from one of the missing commissioners, urging the planning commission and BoCC to strategically utilize the current lull in county-wide construction and development, and use it as an opportunity to update the County’s zoning map.
Outgoing County commissioner Bob Moomaw agreed with the letter, and summarized some of the issues he thought could be addressed during this lull.
“There’s a really big gap, for example, between the 35-acres and up, and the next rung down. And it causes problems, particularly in the ranching community, where someone wants to divide off five acres for their kids. But it has to be done very carefully, so you don’t end up subdividing [35-acre parcels] without due process. So there’s some touchy issues that need to be dealt with.
“I think it’s a process that can be done within a year. Hopefully, if a year from now the number of applications is up dramatically, we will have this process done — and it will make it much easier on you guys, as well as us, and the people who are trying to go through the process.
“So in case you were feeling bored, there’s a little bit to do over the next year.” Moomaw was implying that the 2010 construction season is nearing its end, and the next construction season was still almost a year away.
When Bob Moomaw made these comments on July 8, he was still a candidate for re-election, so his comments seemingly reflected his intention to help out with this process. But as of July 19, Moomaw has withdrawn his name from the commissioner’s race. His baton will be handed off to either Michael Whiting or Bob Hart in 2011, it appears.
Is it possible that, as Moomaw hopes, the number of development and building permit applications will be “up dramatically” a year from now? The construction industry here in Archuleta County — just ten years ago, one of the fastest growing counties in the U.S. — is at a virtual standstill at the moment. In a county that was seeing an average of over 200 new homes permitted each year from 2003 through 2007, the number of building permits for new homes has fallen to 19 during the first half of 2010 (up slightly from 18 during the first half of 2009.) Only one commercial building permit has been applied for so far this year — compared with an average of 13 per year from 2003 through 2007.
Nationwide, the statistics from the Department of Housing and Urban Development show May 2010 sales of newly built homes down 32 percent from the previous month, and down 18 percent from a year ago.
If Moomaw’s hopes are fulfilled and Pagosa Springs sees a revival of its construction industry in 2011, we must ask ourselves: Who are the people who will be building these new homes? Surely, with 72 foreclosure properties listed in the Pagosa Springs Multiple Listing Service — and a total of 711 homes on the market — a person thinking about building a new home in Archuleta County would first have to ignore a lot of existing bargains.
And the recent realtor association statistics show that only 47 undeveloped lots changed hands so far this year — compared with, for example, 261 during the first half of 2006. So not a lot of people are buying vacant land at the moment. You might think, if the construction industry were going to revive in 2011, maybe we would see a lot of people buying land in 2010?
In terms of real estate values, the nation’s most stable region is the great state of Texas, a state that didn’t see the embarrassing housing bubble inflation experienced by the rest of the nation during the decade prior to 2007. In Dallas and Austin and Houston, housing price increases remained fairly modest — and that put Texans in perhaps the best position to take advantage of declining housing and land prices here in Pagosa. (I believe, for example, that the new owner of the bargain-priced $47 million Bootjack Ranch is a Texan?)
But here’s the problem: to a Texan, Pagosa home prices are still comparatively high — as are our construction costs as well, in spite of the floundering housing market here.
It’s all very well and good to hope for a “dramatic” revival of Pagosa’s construction industry, but a suggestion — made in a public meeting — that such a revival is only a year away, might be hard to support with rational, authentic statistics.
Nevertheless, we surely want to proceed with all possible speed, to modify our Land Use Code and zoning map, don't we? And we also want to make it easier for a rancher to deed a slice of his ranch over to his children.
That, as it turns out, is not such a simple matter.
Read Part Two... |