mitigation of EVPAC dissolution

[Hooper, Joan]

Dear Commissioner McNally and Director Everette,

I am sad to see the end of EVPAC- it was an important pipeline for Estes Valley residents to have a voice in our land use decisions. On the other hand, I am reassured by the menu put out by Community Development for options to keep EV residents informed and involved in county-level land use decisions that directly affect us.

I have a few comment of the proposed engagement strategies:

1a. Neighborhood meetings are terrific, but getting the word out is tricky. Our print media, EP News and the Trail Gazette, only reach a very limited audience. You will reach many more residents online, both through the Valley Voice or social media like NextDoor, Facebook (JibberJabber, EVRA) or by word-of-mouth.

1b. Neighborhood meeting need to have hybrid option to accommodate our MANY part-time residents. At least a third of EV homes are seasonally occupied; their owners are often highly engaged and deserve an opportunity to participate in these meetings. A bonus of hybrid meetings is that planning staff could attend remotely, saving 3h of commute time for every meeting.

1c. Neighborhood meetings can be like a cold shower to residents- they hear about complex proposals for the first time, with no opportunity to digest the proposal and its implications, to formulate informed opinions. Posting a “packet” ahead of time would allow neighbors to come to the meeting informed and ready to provide useful feedback.

3. Town Hall informational/Q&A events are very valuable at many levels. Biannual might be good. Important topics (besides fire risk/mitigation/insurance) include LC progress towards implementing the EPCompPlan, progress towards open space conservation and  how TODR plays into that.

4. An EV page on larimerEngage would be useful, if demanding for staff time to interpret input. Almost as useful would be a more static page that just posts all the relevant events, projects, meetings, decision timelines, etc.

6. Dedicated Planning Commission seats for mountain community representatives is a MUST!!!!! With separate seats for LaPorte, Red Feather and EV. The point is to have a “local” voice on the Commission, so each community needs their own. The issues of over-representation of mountain voices, the burden of many irrelevant cases and associated difficulty with recruiting might be mitigated if the mountain members feel free to abstain on decisions outside of/with no impact on their locales.

7. Dedicated representation on Conty working Groups is very important when the topic is locally relevant (e.g. TDR program) or where mountain needs may differ from more urban needs (e.g. development code).

 

I am making these previous comments in my role as an engaged community member.

 

This last comment is in my role as Board member for the Estes Valley Watershed Coalition.

A suggestion for how to facilitate homeowners removing trees that threaten powerlines here in EV. Our local power company is thrilled to remove trees near power lines, even when they are outside their easement. The challenge is to get landowner permission. EVWC has a long history of working with landowners on mitigation efforts and on community outreach and engagement. If our local power company were to approach EVWC with a proposed partnership, this could go a long way towards solving this problem.

 

Respectfully yours,

Joan hooper

1270 Range View Road

Ests Park, CO 80517