Commissioners approve changes to land use regulations

At its June 4 and June 18 meetings, the Archuleta County Council (BoCC) approved changes to the Land Use Regulations (LUR) regarding outdoor storage, neighborhood meetings, and short-term rental (STR) permits and regulations.

During both meetings, the discussion extended to just under five hours, with commissioners separately analyzing and considering each element of the zoning amendments, from short paragraphs to single sentences or parts of sentences.

On May 21, Interim County Manager Jack Harper proposed creating change lists, polling commissioners individually for their opinions on the changes, and then discussing issues on which commissioners disagreed. At that meeting, the BoCC gave final approval to the sign regulations but was unable to move forward with other LUR changes.

Harper suggested that this approach would allow commissioners to quickly eliminate noncontroversial changes and focus discussion on changes on which commissioners disagree.

However, only a few items from the list of more than 150 changes gained the support of all three commissioners in polls and gained quick approval.

At the June 4 meeting, Commissioner Warren Brown stated that he did not express an opinion on the portions of the outdoor storage provisions discussed at the meeting because he did not expect them to be discussed, while Commissioner Ronnie Maez indicated that he requested further discussion and clarification on all items in certain sections, even those that he later agreed to move forward with further discussion.

At the June 18 meeting, which focused primarily on STR permitting and regulation, Maez expressed no opinion on the items up for consideration, requesting that the BoCC consider and survey the commissioners on each item.

After discussion and informal decisions on each item, the BoCC formally approved the changes by submitting motions at each meeting to approve or reject specific lists of changes.

At both meetings, the BoCC heard four public comments on these items.

Three expressed opposition to STR permits and regulations and questioned why the county was investing in further expanding and reworking STR regulations. One commended the commissioners for carefully considering potential STR-related LUR changes.

At its June 4 meeting, the BoCC considered legislation requiring neighborhood meetings between developers and neighbors of a project prior to submitting a formal application for a permit for certain types of development projects.

Maez and Commissioner Veronica Medina opposed requiring neighborhood meetings, saying it would create unnecessary bureaucracy and that neighbors’ concerns are addressed through the county’s land use review process.

Development Director Pamela Flowers said the intent of requiring neighborhood meetings is to gather neighbors’ concerns earlier and give county staff more time to evaluate them, as well as potentially allow developers to work with neighbors and amend designs to address concerns.

Ultimately, Maez and Medina voted to make neighborhood meetings optional, while Brown voted to make them mandatory.

Following the vote, the BoCC approved guidelines for neighborhood meetings, and commissioners said the guidelines would be useful in determining how to organize such meetings if a developer decides to hold them.

The BoCC then considered changes to the outdoor storage regulations.

After debate and discussion, the council voted to adopt the landfill regulations with amendments that would make them more lenient than those approved by the county planning commission, which were less restrictive than the county’s previous regulations.

Brown generally expressed support for the regulations approved by the Planning Commission, while Maez and Medina favored fewer regulations.

Changes to outdoor storage in the newly approved regulations include removing restrictions on storing private vehicles, such as recreational vehicles, on property and expanding the number and types of commercial equipment that can be stored on property, including residential and agricultural areas.

These changes also reduced the scope of inspections that commercial vehicles must undergo compared to previous regulations.

At its June 18 meeting, the BoCC began considering changes to the STR regulations.

The regulations approved by the commissioners were largely similar to those approved by the Planning Commission at its Jan. 24 meeting, though they included several changes.

Commissioners voted to eliminate the requirement that STRs submit parking plans as part of the application process, as well as to remove regulations regarding the bed sizes allowed in certain-sized bedrooms in STRs.

Maez and Medina also voted to eliminate a proposed requirement that STRs have noise monitors that would help substantiate noise complaints. Brown supported the decision.

The meeting included debate and discussion on a set of regulations designed to define critical and operational STR violations and implement mechanisms that would allow the County to impose fines and potentially revoke STR permits if violations of County ordinances or LURs occur and are not corrected.

The proposed system also introduces periods during which people whose permit has been withdrawn or whose application for a permit has been rejected will not be able to re-apply for a permit.

Flowers explained that the system will prevent county officials from spending staff time repeatedly denying permit applications from STRs that have already had their permit applications denied or revoked.

It also said a three-strike system for operational offences – including noise, illegal smoking or parking – would allow an STR permit to be revoked if three STR breaches occur in a given year and are not addressed by the property owner or manager.

Flowers explained that the system would allow county officials to take action against STR owners and property managers for their poor response to guest misconduct, something that cannot be addressed through other county ordinances or the penal code, which only allow for action against those who violate the ordinance or law.

She stated that it is usually a guest rather than the owner or manager.

The Commissioners have repeatedly expressed concerns about the purpose and intent of these regulations, wondering whether operational violations should be covered by other County ordinances rather than just the Land Use Act and commenting that the STR regulations already contain elements that would allow the County to impose consequences on property owners for the actions of their guests, as well as their response to the consequences of those actions.

Flowers explained that other county ordinances allow fines and other penalties to be imposed only on guests who commit violations, not on property owners or managers.

She added that this part of the law allows the county to impose penalties on property owners and managers and that without this part of the law, this would not be possible.

In an effort to explain how these pieces of the legislation would work, District Attorney Todd Weaver expressed disappointment, commenting that commissioners had been pushing for more regulations and ways to hold property owners and managers accountable, but were now being seen as stripping staff of the tools to carry out their demands.

He added that such actions put staff in a difficult situation.

After further discussion, committee members unanimously agreed to implement the proposed changes to the structure regarding STR violations, penalties and revocations, with minor modifications.

The board then briefly debated the need to include in the LUR definitions of some of the terms used in the new regulations, which Weaver said would be helpful to the county in defending the regulations in court and would also allow the public to understand the general scope of the terms used.

After discussion, the board agreed to approve the definitions presented.

[email protected]