The neighbors might be seeing new plans, but they’re still in fight mode when it comes to efforts to rezone 4.47 acres of undeveloped land bordering 685 Peak View Dr.
Nearly 50 people living in the area of what is legally known as Lot 4 of the Coyote Run Subdivision, filled the Hondius Room at the Estes Valley Library to capacity Saturday afternoon, Jan. 11, to hear about a plan submitted to the town community development department by developer Frank Theis, the current owner of the property.
This time Theis is partnering with Habitat for Humanity of the St. Vrain Valley who ultimately is slated to own eight affordable housing lots being proposed in the plan that calls for rezoning the property from E-1, which allows one-acre minimum single family residential lots, to R zoning, which allows for quarter-acre lots.
That Theis is partnering with Habitat didn’t assuage the concerns voiced by area residents during the meeting which was required by the Town of Estes Park’s Community Development Department.
David Emerson, executive director of the local Habitat affiliate, presented information about how the organization fills needs and its emphasis on providing home ownership opportunities.
“More and more of what I do is land acquisition,” Emerson told the group. “The hardest thing that we do is find land, and it’s harder and harder all the time. For us, our laser focus on this is those eight households that can get a homeownership opportunity” he said. At the very least, he said the organization wants the development to be zoned to allow for attainable housing.
The Estes Park Development Code defines attainable housing as, “Housing units that are attainable to households earning one hundred fifty percent (150%) of the Larimer County Area Median Income or below, adjusted for household size.”
At the heart of the project, Emerson said, is affordability for those who purchase a Habitat property. “The main way is we have a binding agreement that Habitat will buy those lots, and we, per our charter, have to develop them affordably. If we can’t do it affordably, we don’t build that. That’s pure and simple.”
When it came time for community questions, one community member asserted that the only difference between this proposal and the one defeated last spring is in the request for the type of zoning proposed.
Other concerns raised by the group dealt with issues about the number of homes that could be constructed, noting that if the property is rezoned, the amount of traffic in the neighborhood would increase.
Many in the audience wanted to project the total number of houses that could be constructed on the property, including the calculation of primary residences and the potential for accessory dwelling unit for each primary residence.
“There’s no changing conditions in this neighborhood, but the change is in what you’re applying for,” Emerson said.
From that point on during the two-hour session audience members were quite clear in their opposition to the proposed rezoning of the property. When one person’s angry comment ended with, “You’re pulling the wool over our eyes,” murmured approval swept through the room.
Now in the initial stage of development, the community meeting is the first step toward rezoning the property from E-Estate to R-Zoning which allows single family homes, duplexes, and multifamily units.
A date for the next public meeting dealing with the proposal has not been determined.
Do any of the people in opposition have a better use for this privately owned property or any suggestion of where affordable housing could be developed anywhere in the Estes Valley that will actually be welcomed? I don’t think there’s been a planning meeting for such a development anywhere in that valley that hasn’t met with opposition. You all seem to use and even demand the services provided by the employees of the town and its businesses, but you don’t want them living there. Is this the case?