Facts don't support new zone

Dear Editor,
Having attended the BOCC public meeting on the proposed new high country development regulations on the Alpine zone above 9,500 feet in elevation on patented lode mining claims on July 13, three items appeared to dominate the entire hearing. Density, five acre up to a 35 acre building site. Maximum floor space 1,000 square feet or less up to 2500 square feet.
The third item was all about private property rights and taking of lands and uses without due process and compensation that was brought out by only a very few people in comparison to the ones that agreed or had issues with the BOCC proposal.
The over 200 page website on the OCPC public hearing was very long on emotional, very restrictive regulations, but very short on facts to support these positions. Example, how many residential year around residences have been built in the entire patented mining claims area of over 10,000 acres since the land use codes were adopted? The six buildings on the tax roll from 2002 through 2016 cannot be called runaway residential growth.
Patented mining claims are the only legal definitions of these parcels and were created by the 1872 mining act, where 10.33 acre parcels or less are the maximum size created on almost all claims in this area. It is impossible to create a 35 acre parcel from a 10.33 acre or a 20.66 acre parcel, of which there are very few. The facts will not support the need for a new sub zone in the existing zone.


David A. Calhoon
Ouray