EDITOR’S DESK: Cathedral Ridge’s example
Many readers may not care about the Cathedral Ridge development, in and of itself. After all, what will it consist of? Some ridge-top homes with insane views that will
undoubtedly be priced far beyond the means of most of us (barring a Cripple Creek mega-jackpot). And what's been the biggest complaint of Cathedral Ridge's
neighbors? Pretty much that the new houses will block the insane views they used to have.
OK, we could play the envy game here forever. My main reason for bringing up Cathedral Ridge is the good example that neighbors and developer set in sorting out their differences before the issue hit Planning Commission. Were it not for almost literally an 11th-hour agreement, the matter might have become a donneybrook at the commission meeting May 21, with members asked to sort it all out to the dismay of one side or the other. And then, if recent experience followed, the neighbors, if they lost, would have appealed it to City Council, and gone through all that again. Sometimes this adversarial method works, as with the recent Horizon View proposal; sometimes it doesn't, as with Sentinel Ridge. The wry result seems to be that invariably the existing residents are never happy to have new neighbors - in large part because it's doggone hard for developers to build next to a neighborhood in a way that preserves everything nice it had before. Well, they could do that, but they'd end up too broke to stay in business.
What's easy to proclaim is that the non-strident style of the folks near Cathedral Ridge should be a model for everyone. But also needed is a developer willing to listen and put in the extra time, as the Sunrise Company did. As so often is the case, a fair resolution comes down to individuals, not laws; not just what people say, but how much meaning they ascribe to the words.