After months of spirited debate and vocal community opposition, the Cortez City Council on Tuesday voted unanimously to reject the proposed land-use code.
Hundreds showed up to the public hearing at City Hall. The crowd spilled out of the main meeting room and into side chambers, where the meeting was being video-streamed. Nearly 70 people spoke during the 3½-hour public hearing, with two in favor of the code, and the rest in opposition.
“I thought it was wonderful how we had people from the ages of 18 to 90 there, and all different aspects of life, with all different levels of income, and they all had valid concerns,” Lana Waters, a local developer and one of the leaders in the code’s opposition, told The Journal Wednesday.
Moving forward, she said they hope the city can really work to engage all sectors of the community in the land-use process, comparing the work ahead to collaborative processes in business.
“If we can come together and have an open conversation, most of the time we can come to the middle, and we actually get a better product than either one of us as individuals started out with,” Waters said.
The code update was set for a second reading and possible approval at Tuesday’s meeting, after it had been pushed down the road in October. The update would have included new standards for landscaping, building aesthetics and design standards, and has been in the works for about five years.
The project was initiated to align with the city’s Comprehensive Plan, and to clean up some outdated components from the existing code.
According to The Journal archives, in 2015 the city awarded Texas-based contractor Kendig Keast Collaborative a $186,915 contract for the rewrite. Funding for the contract was provided by a $100,000 Energy Impact and Assistance grant, a $50,000 grant from the Gates Family Foundation and $50,000 in matching funds from the city of Cortez.
A draft of the update, which is more than 400 pages long, was posted at the end of 2018. Since then, it has been revised and discussed at three public input meetings and at several Planning and Zoning Commission and City Council meetings. It was on the table for possible approval in October, but after receiving strong push-back from residents and business owners, councilors decided to delay the vote until late January to allow for more community feedback.
Opponents organized and held a few forums to share their complaints, and written public comments began ramping up in December, according to City Planner Tracie Hughes – leading staff to propose putting the brakes on land-use code actions.
Many concerns presented Tuesday echoed those that have arisen in recent months. Community members worried that the code’s building and landscaping requirements would pose an undue economic burden on business and homeowners, particularly on those living on a fixed income, and that fines for noncompliance were excessive.
“The new land-use code will pose an undue burden on homeowners and business owners,” said Elisabeth Berger, reading aloud from a letter written by the group Cortez Citizens Protecting Property Rights. The letter had been signed by nearly 500 citizens, according to Berger. “Improvements and expansions of existing homes and businesses will result in thousands of dollars of unnecessary expense.”
Residents also were concerned the code could encroach into the county. The new code references a “three-mile extraterritorial area” outside city limits, which could apply to certain street standards and potential developments.
Previously, Hughes has said that the city generally doesn’t have the authority to impose or enforce regulations outside city limits. The three-mile plan allows the city to review subdivisions for compliance with the Master Streets Plan and make sure Cortez has a “logical street pattern” as it grows, she has said.
There were also other big-picture concerns regarding growth and property rights presented at the meeting, with some saying they worried about overregulation creeping into Cortez.
Kelly Belt, who has served on the Montezuma County Planning and Zoning Board, brought a copy of the county’s land-use code as a comparison.
“This is 80 pages,” Belt said. “The county commissioners tasked the planning members to constantly look for ways to revise and get rid of regulations. And I think we’re going in the wrong direction here.”
Mayor Karen Sheek’s recent opinion piece published in The Journal regarding the code also garnered some criticism, as community members felt it didn’t adequately address their specific concerns.
Two locals did speak in favor of the code, though.
“I compared it with other land-use codes in the area, and I don’t think it’s over-strict,” said local arborist Roman Jefferson, emphasizing a community’s need for trees and landscaping. Susan Thomas was the other citizen who spoke positively of the code update.
And Colton Black, who said he had been involved in La Plata County’s land-use process, had mixed feelings. He noted that the heavy opposition was a clear indication that more public outreach was necessary, but criticized the code’s opponents for what he called “fear-mongering” and not fully contextualizing the code in their interpretation of it.
“I don’t think it’s helpful to the process when we’re pointing out stuff that isn’t really true 100% of the way,” Black said. “And you’re creating scenarios that are a little bit in the land of make-believe.”
The council discussion following the hearing was comparatively brief, with all councilors thanking the public for attending.
“Sitting in this chair is humbling,” Councilor Ty Keel said. “And honestly, if we’re doing our job correctly, it should be. And like all the other council people up here, and probably including some of our city staff, we’re gracious to have you guys here.”
Councilor Mike Lavey encouraged attendees to continue their involvement in the city processes.
“We need a land-use code, but maybe not this one,” he said. “I’m going to be on the council for two more years, and I’m looking forward to working with all of you to have a land-use code that works for all of us.”
Councilors voted to reject the code a little before 11:30 p.m.
This article was updated Jan. 31 to clarify the names of the two citizens in favor of the land use code update.
ealvero@the-journal.com
