Jump to content
Have I read the whole document, NO, Has the ole palms been greased, NO. I will tell you that my review of the plan and my understanding of the agreement/plan is that it will specifically be beneficial to agriculture and specifically to the West slope of Colorado. Agriculture since WWII has been the sacrificial lamb in trading logistics for the benefit of what seems all other industries in America to all other trading partners. Agriculture since the industrial revolution has been the belle cow in trading and America has used the Ag in negotiating beneficial deals in other realms of America's prosperity while leaving agriculture to struggle to survive. Ag has continued to be the belle cow as we continue to produce more on less while our production costs have ratcheted up as fast or faster than inflation. We can't even get a Country of Origin to survive in our trade negotiations. We know where our shoes are made, but we are not allowed to know where our food comes from. I understand that the TPP will open up non-existent markets for AG products thereby hopefully increasing demand and prices for America's Ag products. It continues to amaze me in what little % of each of our individual income goes to feeding our own families. I'm looking out for the AG Industry some, still interested in the other down side, as was said in other blogs, Labor will be a much harder to bring back in relation to our world wide economies.
Yes nice article, and good research and bringing it home to the Yampa Valley.
Steve, here is the web site for the BCC packet, the packet for the Secondary Units start at page 87, Planning Commission minutes are at the front of the packet.
Thanks Doug Monger
Also, Jeff and Tracy, the city does not allow manufactured homes, the manufactured homes are allowed in the county they just have to be on 35 acres. No development other than 1unit/35 acres is allowed in the county.
Steve, bypassing the county plan? You be the judge, how an 800sf secondary unit bypasses the plan. Most of the answers are inmaterial or not applicable.
Routt County Master Plan
The following are Master Plan policies that may be applicable:
• 3.3.A: New residential, commercial and industrial developments and uses should occur within the vicinity of designated growth centers and in compliance with the adopted comprehensive plans of those areas. • 3.3.D: Residential densities should generally decrease as the distance from Growth Centers increase. • 4.3.D: Rural developments and uses should be limited to areas that have adequate access to accommodate the projected traffic. • 9.3.G: Minimize the cumulative impacts of development on wildlife and wildlife habitat. • 10.3.A: Rural residential developments are discouraged in areas that are significant agricultural protection lands. • 10.3.B: Prime agricultural areas should be protected from the impacts of developments and commercial recreation. • 10.3.C: Approval of development should be kept in or near growth centers. • 10.3.I: Discourage development that changes the rural character or historic agricultural uses and/or practices. • 10.3.J: The County strongly discourages scattered development and 35-acre subdivision. • 11.3.P: Discourage new use permits and zone changes that increase density that will exceed acceptable traffic levels. • 12.3.F: The County encourages consistency regarding Steamboat Springs, and other incorporated towns on secondary units and other housing policies. Staff comment: Oak Creek allows secondary dwelling units, limited to 650 square feet, in most zone districts. Steamboat Springs requires SDUs be no more than 650 square feet and either attached or detached (by at least 6 feet when detached); allowed in most zone districts. Hayden
3 of 16
requires SDUs to be less than 800 square feet and allows them in some zone districts. Yampa does not allow them in single-family residential zone districts, but might allow them in multiple family residential zoning.
On top of that note that the first two trials were in Fort Collins where the citizens of our fine county and the system had to pay extra for an unbiased trial because the discussion was that Routt County could not seat an unbiased jury. At least we hear that this jury will be in Good Ole Routt, I doubt I will be called for Jury.
Wow, this is just great, how much money do we need to waste on this loser. Convicted twice and we need to retry him again cause he can't figure out 1) if it is better for a retrial if he inadequately represents himself and then say I didn't know what I was doing, then 2) I'm crazy, even though that argument was discussed when it was relevant. The Court system while I believe in innocent until proven guilty--- this is crazy, and while he is chilling out in our jail cell, we are working our buts off paying for his room and board. I believe that we already went through the crazy argument once before, but oh well. It's only dollars!!!!
I agree totally with Scott Ford, we're keeping an eye on the exchange. I said on the last related blog that government (at least through subsidies) is not going to solve the problem. Regarding Fred's comment to start off the blog, I personally hope that the community "Leads" the conversation. If the YVHA leads the conversation we already have lost the battle. There are numerous issues that need to be addressed. At the YVHA we hope that people come to the session WITHOUT a personal preferred solution. The community needs to agree on the problems and look at all of the alternatives and partial alternatives to reduce the problem. There is no silver bullet, and there will probably never be a place to have total success. If we have total success, the community is making it to easy on the situation. I believe that everyone should have a part in the solution and we can't ever have a total solution. Being part of the solution includes both City and County Planning and Land Use Rules, our community needs to discuss all of the issues. Not just subsidies, not govt solving the problem, and citizens need to realize that the city will grow. Commissioner Corrigan presented some numbers the other day, 2% growth on our population at 2.3 people per house means that we need to come up with over 333 additional units every year. During 2014 and 2105 we averaged 116. Ford the analyst will tell those numbers will only get worse unless we address something and a lot of things.
Thanks so much for your service. I'm sure you will be missed.
I guess this is a good step forward if we really think we need sidewalks on the sidestreets. I don't have a problem paying for some of our infrastructure. I guess my problem is how is the city now going to snow plow Oak Street. Presently Public Works plows the street on to the area that is going to be where the sidewalks are going to be and it is like the last area that the city removes snow from. So the property owners will be required to keep the sidewalks clear of snow while the city will be plowing snow onto the sidewalk from the street. Going to be very interesting. Seems like an opportunity for the downtown district to be done by the city as well to take over the sidewalks so we aren't pitching snow from the street onto the sidewalks and then from the sidewalk back to the street.
Last login: Wednesday, May 25, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |