Vote YES for 300 and 301
For the sake of our wildlife and future quality of life, please vote YES for ballot
questions 300 and 301.
Every survey of visitors or town residents shows that a major reason for coming here or living here is the wildlife, particularly the elk and deer. Yet, there is in fact no one on the town staff responsible for saying whether new development will adversely affect elk and deer or not.
Most of us would assume that as open spaces are replaced by roads and increasingly dense development, wildlife populations are forced into smaller and more isolated spaces – until they are simply forced out, as has happened in other towns. Yet, currently in Estes Park, building in a wildlife corridor simply requires minor adjustments to plans that focus on growth and ignore the needs of the wildlife.
Recently, the town voted to build a high-density development in the middle of a major
pathway for deer and elk along Peak View Drive. The neighbors know this is hurtful and
turned out against it, but the vote passed anyway. When consulted, the Colorado
Wildlife Division said “no comment.”
In other words, no one took responsibility for saying that more concrete, walls, and barriers are safe for a major feature of life here that we all love. What happens when all you see when you look around Estes Park is something you can also see in north Denver?
Please, people who live in neighborhoods know about the wildlife that shares space with them. Allow them a meaningful voice in developmental changes to their areas. Vote YES on 300 and 301.
Steve Wende, Estes Park
Local builders and developers are not the problem
We are productive members of the community. We put in subdivisions where people live.
We also build the homes that people live in, and we renovate them and put additions on
homes when the owners want them.
We employ a lot of local carpenters, plumbers, electricians, roofers, masons, excavators, and paving contractors, as well as local attorneys, accountants, engineers, and architects. Many of those folks wouldn’t be able to live in Estes Park and provide their services to others in the community if not for the work developers and builders provide for them.
We also patronize local businesses like Park Supply, Estes Park Lumber, Ace Hardware, and local banks for our business needs, and we patronize the local grocery stores, gas stations, shops, restaurants, and bars.
We are real people, we are your neighbors, and we enjoy living in this beautiful place just
like everyone else. We have families and friends, and we send our kids to the local schools.
We are not rich, greedy monsters trying to destroy the character of Estes Park, as some
would have you believe.
Like most businesses, the construction business is hard in Estes Park. The seasonality, the
extra cost of getting materials up the hill, and the small workforce that is available makes things extremely difficult at times.
Staying on schedule and within budget is virtually impossible up here. Those of us who survive in this business in Estes Park — and many don’t — have stories to tell of hard times and losing money, friends, and good employees along the way.
I, personally, have lived in and run my business in Estes Park for over 25 years, and I’m
now at the point in my life where I want to give back to the community. Over those 25
years here, I’ve employed and become friends with so many good people who, through no
desire or fault of their own, had to move away simply because they couldn’t find a place to
live and raise their family.
So, I’m now focusing my efforts on trying to build housing that is affordable to the young
families who choose to live and work here, despite the many obstacles. It’s not easy.
Nobody likes change, and we live in a community where we all love the natural beauty of
the place, so change is resisted more than in other places. Developers and builders, we are agents of change. We build new things. However, we are not horrible people. We are members of the community and your neighbors, and we also love this beautiful mountain valley.
Frank Theis, CMS Planning & Development, Estes Park
Local builder and long-time resident says Vote NO on 300 and 301
Before starting to read this letter to the editor, please remember that I’m a simple carpenter who, together with my lovely bride, has lived and worked in Estes Park for 32 years. I raised three children, have been involved with several small businesses, provided construction services for over 600 customers, and have successfully run and operated a small
construction company, Darling Enterprise, Inc., the last seven years with my son, Adam.
A friend called me to help explain what Ballot Issues 300 and 301 really meant, so after realizing this was confusing to some intelligent folk, it’s probably confusing to many.
From the perspective of a 32-year resident of the Estes Valley and someone with experience in the building industry, this is what I shared.
I recall that in 2000, the planning commission introduced a new development code that reduced the number of possible units in the valley from 6,000 to 1,400 by imposing minimum lot sizes and other requirements.
At the time, I didn’t really get involved, figuring things would work out, and besides, I was just “one vote.”
After the larger lots became the standard for our community, we saw a need for more housing and an increasing problem of workforce housing to support the workers in our little town.
I believe that what took place after 2000 was an increase in larger and more expensive homes being built on those few remaining and precious lots. The demand drove the cost of land up, making it no longer sensible to pay a substantial amount of money for a lot to build a small starter home.
So now what?
I believe these two Ballot Issues aim to restrict development. The first requires a two-thirds approval from neighbors within 500 feet of a proposed project. The other would remove parts of the comprehensive plan that was adopted in 2022 to provide additional workforce housing by allowing a building height of 40’ and the top floor as an option for that housing.
If these Issues are voted on and approved, they will have an impact on our town. For some, the opportunity to shut the door for new folks to live and work here. It will help reduce the precious remaining lots to build on even further. It will have an impact on the cost of a home, making it more difficult for the average family to live in our town and raise a family. The rental opportunities will disappear for workers employed at our police department, fire department, hospital, grocery stores, gas stations, and many construction-related companies.
I really don’t understand the thinking of those individuals who prefer this kind of impact on our town, but here it is.
Please consider the negative impact of these Issues and vote NO on Ballot Issues 300 and 301.
Don Darling, Darling Enterprise, Inc., Estes Valley Partners LLC., Highland Coffee, Co., and
Board Member, Association for the Recovery of Children
Vote YES on Ballot Issues 300 & 301
In reply to Frank Theis’ recent editorial, I say: “Be careful what the spider says to the fly.”
Mr. Theis, of CMS Planning & Development, claims that “local builders and developers are not the problem.” No one disputes that builders and developers are vital members of the Estes Park community. But when individuals use public committee positions to influence the very rules that govern local growth, especially in ways that align with their own financial interests, they erode public trust. Our community has every right to ask whose interests are truly being served.
Mr. Theis served as a non-voting member of ComPAC (Comprehensive Plan Advisory Committee), as his county residency status at the time rendered him ineligible for voting privileges. Despite this non-voting designation, Mr. Theis actively participated in committee discussions and policy deliberations. However, he did not recuse himself from matters in which he maintained clear monetary interests.
During his tenure on ComPAC, Mr. Theis publicly advocated reducing minimum lot sizes to 0.25-acre parcels within long well-established Suburban Estate neighborhoods, areas traditionally comprised of one-acre or larger properties. At the same time, Mr. Theis was pursuing future land investments that could directly benefit from such policy changes.
This overlap between public advisory duties and private financial pursuits raises legitimate questions about whose interests were being represented in the planning process. When an individual in a public advisory position influences development policy while maintaining private stakes in its outcomes, the conflict of interest cannot, and should not, be overlooked.
Mr. Theis, you say you and your associates are not “rich, greedy monsters” trying to destroy the character of Estes Park…Yet you’re trying to impose changes that would undermine the ability of long-time property owners, who have worked hard and invested their savings, to maintain the established character, to maintain existing zoning, and to maintain the stability of our larger well-establish neighborhoods as we chose how to live. We too have worked hard for over 40-50 years!
These larger areas provide essential open space for wildlife, the very wildlife that defines Estes Park’s natural beauty and that we all cherish.
Why are you pursuing actions that would destroy highly sensitive wildlife corridors, wintering grounds, and fragile ecosystems? These areas are not just scenic; they are vital to maintaining the balance and spirit of this community.
You say you all love this beautiful mountain Town, as do most citizen…but if we truly love Estes Park, shouldn’t we protect what makes it special?
We as property owners, should have a voice in our neighborhood decisions, it helps ensure that changes reflect the interests, safety, and values of the people most affected.
Estes Park residents are not resisting change out of stubbornness. We resist because we’ve seen what unbalanced development brings: loss of open space, traffic congestion, pressure on infrastructure and wildlife, and the slow erosion of the small-town character that makes our valley special.
Our community deserves transparency, accountability, and policies shaped by residents, not just those who profit from development.
That’s why we urge you to Vote YES on Ballot Questions 300 and 301.
Protect the character, integrity, and future of Estes Park, before it’s too late.
Thank You!
CAJ – Resident-Property Owner
VOTE YES on Ballot Questions 300 and 301.
I am replying to the letter written by Frank Theis.
I would like to remind Frank, and all Citizens, that in the numerous applications that he has submitted to the Community Development Department of the Town of Estes Park over the past 3 years for his property at 685 Peak View Drive, all, except his last one, were denied and NONE of the numerous applications addressed Workforce, Attainable or Affordable housing until the last one.
Frank submitted numerous applications requesting up to 39 homes on 7.62 acres where existing zoning allows for 1 house per acre. That is a huge request, NOT a property. One of his applications requested R-1 zoning which only allows for “attainable” housing. During one of the required Town meetings for this application, he was informed that all of the homes would have to be deed restricted as “attainable” housing. This would require homeowners to be qualified based on a certain percentage of the Larimer County Area Median Income (AMI). It was during this meeting that Frank stated that he could NOT build “attainable” housing on this site, or any other site in Town, so he withdrew his application.
In his letter to the Editor, he states “So, I’m now focusing my efforts on trying to build housing that is affordable to the young families who choose to live and work here, despite the many obstacles.” Frank, if, in 2022, you could NOT build “attainable” housing in the requested R-1 zoning, how can you do so now?”
The Supporters of Ballot Questions 300 and 301 are in no way interested in decreasing the total volume of dollars of construction in Town. We just want to maintain existing zoning as opposed to re-zoning existing properties potentially into 3 and 4-story high density units. These developments change the quality and appearance of our Town, affect our wildlife, add fuel to our potential wildfire situation, and are detrimental to our existing infrastructure. Focus should be on utilizing existing properties not building more, more, more.
CITIZENS, VOTE YES on 300 and 301. It’s your time to be heard.
Thank you for reading,
Kristine Poppitz
Full time Estes Park Resident
Correction please: “That is a huge request, NOT a property right.”
Thank you.