Support swells for annexation
Public hearing draws huge crowd, project to see first vote Dec. 8
Times Staff Writer
Originally published 2009-11-26



Public acceptance of the proposed Gunnison Rising annexation appears to have grown in recent months. Or, at least, more locals have decided to publicly support the proposal.

Previously, concern and opposition to the project has been significant at public meetings. However, overwhelming support was evident last week at the final public hearing over the 633-acre proposed annexation.

It’s taken longtime landowner Dick Bratton 34 years to “assemble the package” which is now the proposed annexation, he told the group last week.

But now, three years after the petition to annex the eastern gateway to town was first submitted, the project’s lengthy and at times arduous review has come to an end. Gunnison City Council is poised to make the final determination on the project in coming weeks.

Last Wednesday, nearly 350 community members turned out at the Fred Field Multi-purpose room in Gunnison for the required public hearing over the annexation itself and its zoning component.

Mayor Stu Ferguson called the hearing “the largest public input for a city issue” that he’s ever seen.

“Even more remarkable is that the large majority supported the annexation,” Ferguson added. “We more commonly see large groups attend when they oppose something.”

Those who spoke against the annexation or who didn’t advocate a position were dwarfed more than two-to-one by those who spoke in favor of Gunnison Rising. Similar support was shown for Gunnison Rising based on written comments received by the city during or prior to the public hearing.

Additionally, two surveys conducted by the Gunnison Country Chamber of Commerce show a shift in support of the project between April 2008 and this month. In the recent survey, 67.4 percent of respondents — which include only chamber members — said that they would support the current proposal to annex Gunnison Rising, compared to 52 percent a year-and-a-half ago.

Four of those who spoke in favor of the project also submitted petitions of their own, signed by others who endorsed the project, in addition to a petition supporting the proposal signed by Gunnison Rising’s surrounding landowners.

Almont resident and former Gunnison County Commissioner Rikki Santarelli was the first member of the public to address the proposal. He noted that the city reached its population “peak” in 1980.

“It seems to me that you’re in a situation where people are urging you to continue your slide into irrelevance,” he added. “I would urge you not to do that.”

Advocates hailed Gunnison Rising for the economic shot in the arm they believe it would offer the area, in addition to its proposed park and open space amenities and a possible regional headquarters for the Colorado Division of Wildlife (DOW), among other factors.

Yet, Gunnison resident Narcissa Channell noted her “grave concern” that the proposed DOW regional office is being used by the applicants as a “bargaining chip” to sway public opinion.

Other concerns were expressed over what has been deemed incompatibility with some of the city’s existing policy statements — like a portion of the city’s Master Plan that seeks to avoid “sprawl.” It was also noted that Gunnison Rising could create greater difficulty in meeting goals set forth in the city’s Energy Action Plan, a document that aims to reduce the “carbon footprint” of the city 20 percent by 2020.

Other concerns were over the demand for affordable housing the project could create; the potential impact to downtown businesses; and what some consider a lack of demand to develop more land in the city.

Additionally, components of the project — like a travel plaza, or what some refer to as a “truck stop” — and an RV resort still set poorly on the palate of many residents.

Valerie Schmalz, however, noted the number of semi-trucks that now linger on streets around town after dark. “I would much prefer a travel center,” she said.

Tuesday, City Council discussed issues and questions they still had over the annexation.

In coming weeks, two ordinances will be drafted: one that, if passed, would set the conditions for the annexation, and another that would enact specific zoning for the property.

City Council is slated to conduct a “first reading” of the ordinances Dec. 8. A second, and final, reading is scheduled for Dec. 22.  

 

(Will Shoemaker can be contacted at 970.641.1414 or will@gunnisontimes.com)