La Plata County Planning Commissioners have certified several chapters in an updated comprehensive plan to the county commissioners for comments. However, it is the planning commission that has the official say.
At their Nov. 5 comp plan meeting, planning commissioners certified the introduction and growth trends, and the sections on agriculture, infrastructure, and extractive resources. Work started back in February to update the 2001 comp plan and is scheduled to continue into 2017.
"This is kind of a historic thing," planning commission chair Jim Tencza said. "We've updated something that's 14 years old and added things that weren't there before."
The infrastructure section was expanded substantially from what the 2001 plan had, especially the addition of telecommunications.
County Planning Director Damian Peduto told planning commissioners the county commissioners have requested a change of when future topics will be considered. "They want housing moved up. They recognize we are doing land use in January. Then the airport. They want housing before public safety because it could inform some of the issues they are looking at now."
Tencza commented, "The airport (terminal plan) still seems to be in flux." He suggested starting on housing in May 2016, and moving the airport back to next December.
Peduto responded, "The commissioners didn't want the airport at the end of the year. They like it when it's scheduled," May and June 2016. Land use is scheduled for January into April. The original schedule has public safety in July and August, environmental resources for September to November, and housing next December. Parks, recreation, and trails are scheduled for 2017.
"Land use is the biggest one," Peduto said. "It includes all the district plans. It gets into how we deal with those."
Planning Commissioner Lucy Baizel suggested doing housing in January and move everything else back. Peduto said he wants to get through land use first. Tencza said, "The public has expressed a lot of interest in the land use element."
Peduto said, "For each element (chapter), we need the time that we know it will take for that element. ... Once we complete land use, the other elements can be done in various order. ... The commissioners' minds are on housing."
The schedule lists this November and December for implementation of the approved sections. But Peduto said implementation was part of what was certified on Nov. 5. "It lists actions related to the objectives and policies throughout the document," he said.
Before the certification vote, some planning commissioners wanted to make last minute tweaks. Frank Lockwood pointed out some typos and wanted some stronger wording in the ag section, including sustainability. He objected to "mealy-mouthed puffy language" about strengthening ag.
There was concern about "right-to-farm" protections from nuisance complaints for new farm operations, as well as existing operations.
Policy 5.1.B4 says, "The county should explore the possibility of strengthening the local protections for agricultural operations that would protect smaller or newly established operations from nuisance claims."
Planning staffer Jason Meininger said, "What drove this was that right-to-farm protections are for established farms. This is how to encourage new farms that have right to farm protections. Staff is fully in support and understands the difficulty of operators, farm to stand, trying to make a living."
Baizel wanted the language "stronger than someday somebody should look at this."
Planning commissioner Tom Gorton objected, "I didn't come to this meeting thinking we were going to re-open all these things. I don't necessarily disagree with the additional (ag) protection." His disagreement was "that this was the last chance to make a bunch of changes."
Tencza said these things could go on a list for review in the future.
The Nov. 5 certification included the parts of the 2001 plan that haven't been addressed yet, so that the whole thing is now the 2015 plan. There is a 120-day period where the certification can be challenged in District Court. But the process since February has drawn little controversy, especially compared to the heated meetings in 2011 over a proposed new code that was heavily modified by planning commissioners and then scrapped.