County presses on with home size reduction

It would lead to construction industry layoffs. It would put an undue burden on property owners. It would overwhelm county staff. It would infringe on constitutional property rights. It would be a not-in-my-backyard approach at its worst. 

These arguments and more were voiced Tuesday before Gunnison County Commissioners as they considered a proposal to drop the allowed maximum square footage for new homes in unincorporated Gunnison County from 10,000 square feet to 4,200 square feet.

After an hour of public comments — including one song in support, several speeches and many references to climate change — commissioners quickly reached a consensus among themselves: to go with 5,000 square feet as the new allowed home size and to allow an additional 2,000 square feet for accessory buildings. 

Commission Chair Jonathan Houck directed county staff to bring back multiple versions of a resolution with different square footages for consideration at the commissioners next regular meeting, which is scheduled for Sept. 21. Houck said he would “like the ability to absorb part of today’s discussion” before he made a decision. It was noted that staff might need more time to draft the amendment language, which could push a vote by commissioners to their Oct. 5 meeting.

Despite the request for amendment options, all three commissioners said they were amenable to a 5,000 square foot maximum cap for the primary residential structure and a 7,000 square foot limit for the total size of buildings on a property. 

Should commissioners approve an amendment to the Land Use Resolution with those limits, an application for a building permit for a home that exceeds those thresholds would need to go through a minor impact review process. That process includes many opportunities for public input. 

As the resolution is currently written, an application for a home 10,000 square feet or smaller, or with an aggregate total for all structures at 12,500 square feet or less, would need only go through an administrative review by county staff.

While the home size limits in the LUR do not amount to a ban on homes in excess of the bounds, the minor impact review process entails more time between an application submission and a county decision. An administrative review may take a couple weeks. A minor impact review may take more than a month.

Commissioners on Tuesday said they wanted to aim for a square footage above that proposed by the Gunnison County Planning Commission. Having received community requests to lower the allowed home size, commissioners went to the planning commission in early July with a request for a recommendation. The commission voted 3-2 on July 23 to recommend the 4,200 square foot cap for a primary residential structure and a 5,700 square foot aggregate total.

That planning commission recommendation, however, was based on data presented by the County Community and Economic Development Department that showed the average new home size to be 2,100 square feet. Planning Commission Chair Laura Puckett Daniels put forward the 4,200 square feet limit because it was double that average.

But Community and Economic Development Director Cathie Pagano on Tuesday showed new data that put the average closer to 2,700 square feet. This new data took into account attached garages, whereas the previous data did not. Pagano credited Crested Butte architect Dan Murphy for alerting her department to the error.

Commissioner Roland Mason, who has owned a construction business in Crested Butte for 20 years, said the 5,000 square foot home size limit would give property owners “flexibility” as to whether they would build an attached garage, a more energy efficient option compared to a detached structure.

“I’m just asking for that flexibility, but I don't think it compromises the intent of what we’re trying to do,” Mason said.

Commissioner Liz Smith said she was “hoping to land lower” on the allowed building sizes but that she was “good” with Mason’s idea.

Mason said he believed that lowering the cap to 5,000 square feet would allow the community to address the “core” issue of houses that are outliers in terms of their large size.

“For me it is looking at other communities, and we can pick Vail or Aspen if we want to because it’s about 18 miles from Crested Butte. We see massive homes. We see 20,000 square foot homes. I really don't see that as a good fit in Crested Butte.

“In the Gunnison Valley we can come up with something that really targets these outlying projects …. but that also does not limit the ability for folks that can build a little bit bigger for their needs.”

Smith said she saw “legitimate concerns all around” in the discussion, but she said that the proposal to lower the cap was “data driven” and that it was up to the commissioners to guide future development.

Houck offered a rebuttal to arguments that the amendment would harm the valley’s economy. He cited the original passage of the LUR in 2001, which set the maximum house size at 5,000 square feet and the aggregate at 7,500. A 2007 amendment moved those limits to their current, larger levels.

“The economic impacts of construction in this community have continued through the highs and the lows. There have been times when it’s been more robust. And there have been times when the bottom has seemed like it is falling out. But in the 30 years I have lived here, development, building and related trades have never completely dried up and definitely not from policy decisions,” he said.

“If you go back to the original 2001 LUR, that was going to be the end of the world. And Fred Field, Jim Starr and (Perry Anderson) approved the LUR with a lot of public opposition. And if you look at development, what has happened in the 20 years since the passing of the LUR, even with the amendments to it, we continue to see robust growth in construction, development and related services. That’s factual. It’s not really for debate.”

Houck said the valley’s communities have been discussing over the last couple years “what it’s going to take for us, the folks who call the Gunnison Valley home, to be able to have a long-term and sustainable future here. And that future isn’t just economic. It's environmental. It’s cultural, and it's really tied to the landscape and the place where we live.”

(Sam Liebl can be contacted at 970.641.1414 or editor@gunnisontimes.com.)