Summary of the Central Mountains meeting (by Sid Platt)
Introduction: We all arrived at Boettcher Mansion on February 26, 2013, and refreshments were provided. This was a chance to get to know the Planners.
The meeting then began with an introduction by Russell Clark who chaired the meeting with Dennis Dempsey’s participation. This meeting was to present the results from the questionnaire and address the Historical aspects of the plan.
Results of the questions Russell said that they had sent out questioners and that the top four issues easily outweighed the rest of the results taken together. The main topics of interest were:
Purpose of the Plan change: The purpose of the changes is to combine the Central Mountain Community Plan (CMCP) into the Jefferson County Comprehensive Master Plan (CMP). As they state on the planning website:
“The Jefferson County Comprehensive Master Plan Amendment 2 was approved on December 12, 2012. Staff is still in the process of revising three of the mountain area community plans, incorporating them into the CMP. These plans are the North Mountains, Central Mountains, and Indian Hills Community Plans”
Discussion of the planned changes: We then discussed the proposed changes between the two documents.
One change was to combine a long list of historical resources into a document that defined these terms instead of listing them in each document. The CMP repeated lists such items as geological, paleontological, archaeological and historical resources. This list is to be replaced with the words “Historical Resources” and a document was passed out that defined this term.
One of the planner’s main goals is to remove what they consider redundant language to harmonize the CMCP plan with the CMP and this presented the main issue of the meeting. Many of the attendees felt that the language that was replacing the CMCP language was not as strong as the existing language. The word “encourage” for example, was used quite a bit in the new document instead of stronger language that would make the statements more mandatory. Margo Zolan objected to this wording in particular, but others also had issues with this usage. The planners stated that the think that a more conciliatory language will make the acceptance of the plan greater and more usable.
Historical We were supposed to break up into small groups to discuss the Historical aspects. We did not do this because of the small number of attendees. We did discuss the historical resources that are missing though.
Most of the issues about non-included resources could be traced to the fact that the planners didn’t show the existing plan along with the draft. They did state though, that the information on the existing plan will be included in the new (draft) plan. We did raise some specific historical issues and discussed the following missing resources:
Lariat Loop rest stop
The McFarland towers (these are actually shown on page 9 of the CMCP)
Wilber Mosier’s house (Rilliet Park)
Columbus Hamilton’s house (a private residence that may not be noted)
Summary of the meeting: I would say that the planners seemed to genuinely want to reach out to the community, and to obtain both the feelings of the community as well as discover any missing Historical resources.
Next steps The next meeting will probably be about the Towers or Wildlife.