Ruining The Rockies

The Colorado Rocky Mountains are a permanent part of America's
romantic lore. They evoke images of pristine, snowcapped peaks
glistening in the sun, an abundance of wildlife from elk to eagles,
clear skies where the stars shine brilliantly in the clean air, a
wholesome way of life. They are a place where you can still work,
raise a family and enjoy the beauty and inspiration of mountain
living.

But the "Colorado Rocky Mountain high" John Denver so eloquently
captured in song is under development siege: 10 acres of land are
lost every hour to development in Colorado, and 78% of the state's
counties have no land-use plan to protect wildlife habitats.

Land is my state's most valuable asset. Open space makes Colorado
what it is. But the land's beauty is its biggest threat to itself.
The beauty of Colorado draws more people here every year, and eager
developers are working hard to accommodate the growth.

But at what cost? What happens when county officials approve a
development despite public outcry?

A small town's struggle

Buena Vista, Colo., is a jewel. Nestled in a mountain valley
surrounded by 14,000-foot peaks, it is a place where the best of
American values can be seen. It is the site of a heated controversy
due to developer Glen Stephens' plans to build the Deytel Glenview
Subdivision, a 144-acre (approximately 81-unit) development three
miles northwest of Buena Vista in what some regard as valuable land.

"It's a whole different world up here," says Dave Wright, a concerned
citizen dedicated to protection of the mountains he loves. "What
we're seeing with Deytel is potentially a loss of 5% of our
spectacular and majestic elk herd, which could represent 50 to 60
head of elk." The elk could be slaughtered if the local Division of
Wildlife cannot afford to relocate them.

In addition, citizens are concerned about water augmentation, septic
drainage and absorption, traffic dangers, impact on both the elk herd
and many other wildlife species, as well as erosion and fire
preparedness.

"It's an overwhelming majority who oppose this subdivision. It's
virtually 9 to 10 in terms of my talking with people who live out
here," explains Butch Butler, the secretary for a local group called
the Chaffee County Citizens for Responsible Land Use.

Butler cites the fact this subdivision plan has been named one of the
10 "worst developments" in Colorado by the environmentalist group,
COPIRG (Colorado Public Interest Research Group). This, he says,
indicates the development would "significant impacts on open space,
traffic congestion, wildlife habitat, scenery and the overall quality
of life in Colorado."

"We're not a no-growth group ... just responsible growth," Butler
says. "It's very fragile ground out there. Every Coloradan has a
stake in this if they enjoy the outdoors and if they enjoy getting
out, driving, and seeing the difference between a rural and a city
setting." Butler says a nonprofit entity needs to purchase and
preserve such land -- which would require financing the citizens
currently do not have.

The case for Deytel

Stephens, on the other hand (who declined to be interviewed)
explained his position in a Jan.14, 1999, full-page newspaper ad (The
Chaffee County Times) that he ended by saying he had no intentions of
responding further.

In that open letter, he said, "If my opposition gets their way, they
will have succeeded in controlling what I do with my property. ...
Socialism is a cancer. It is all about control. ... Room must be made
for what God set in order in the beginning. To oppose population
growth is to oppose God."

The opposition has strengthened his resolve, he said in the open
letter. "In the beginning, this project had a three-fold objective. I
had hoped to clean up the land, offer affordable housing, and provide
an income for my family. ... Now, I must see it through, not only for
these reasons, but also as a responsible American citizen who will
always oppose socialism."

Chaffee County, Colo., is comprised of small business owners and
families -- many who have made their life there for generations.
There is variety of political opinions and ideologies, but land
preservation is a common denominator.

In a community survey, 78% of the respondents said the county should
give high priority to protection of the county's scenic visual
quality; 60% supported prohibiting developments along ridges that
could be seen on the skyline; and 60% support screening development
near road like Highways 285 and 24 so that such developments would
not be visible from major throughways.

Follow the money

But the pro-development forces are strong. "There is a large money
faction in this county, the realtors who help with the election
campaign," Wright says. "During a couple of public meetings,
virtually the entire support entourage that accompanied two of our
commissioners (Glenn Everett and Frank McMurry) were realtors and
developers."

When Stephens requested an exemption to the subdivision regulations,
Wright and many others were appalled that county commissioners did
not require the developer to prove compliance with compatible land-
use requirements.

"The commissioners should be mandated by their constituents to
respect their concerns of high-density growth, water shortages and
wildlife," Wright says. It should not be allowed - "unless you can
demonstrate a really urgent and unique need to be exempted from the
normal subdivision process," he adds.

Wright says he believes most local residents oppose Deytel. "There's
a huge silent majority who try to protect business relationships and
are reluctant to come out and say their opinions," Wright says.

Adding to the controversy, is the recent dismissal of well-respected
County Administrator Tom Hale. Citizen outcry toward Hale's dismissal
is evidenced through numerous letters, e-mails, and faxes to local
media. Speculation expressed in public comment is the possibility
Hale was fired due to his personal opposition to development.

"The biggest need we have," says Wright, "is an effective way of
educating the people in this county. This county has an extremely
powerful and well-funded money machine which is typically able to
continue to position commissioners and other key people that
subscribe to the philosophy of growth, growth, growth. I would deeply
love an organization or group to help us disseminate information to
the people."

Another Viewpoint

Bill Morris, a real estate developer for over 21 years in Colorado
and nationwide, says, "None of us are opposed to development or
growth. The key word is responsible."

"Serious questions and concerns have been repeatedly raised by the
public and several state agencies regarding Deytel. There's been
scathing criticism by the Planning Commission. Deytel is a project
that is just located on the wrong place."

Morris expresses deep concern regarding the precedent as such: "It
would give developers a green light to put up virtually any
subdivision, and the rest of the community can get ready to pick up
the pieces of the broken subdivision when all the direct and indirect
costs later come in. .. Deytel's potential problems go right to the
heart of the county's whole basic health, safety and welfare of the
public."

As Buena Vista citizens fight to save their quality of life, their
struggle is representative of the many land-use battles nationwide.
In Colorado alone, sprawl pollutes the Highway 82 corridor from
Basalt to Glenwood Springs; it threatens the Interstate-70 corridor
in Garfield County; it is found throughout the Front Range of
Colorado and through the mountains. Time will tell if it also takes
the jewel of Buena Vista.