County planning officials are refining proposed updates to the land use code while a new code is being written.

"This is a significant amendment that we're reviewing with you based on comments we've received," Development Director Damian Peduto told county planning commissioners on Jan. 5. The intent is "to streamline and simplify the process for simple things like boundary adjustments and lot consolidations, and some final plats, to save time and money for applicants and the county," he said.

These are "the most common processes that we deal with," added Jason Meininger, a county planning staffer.

County attorney Adam Smith said the current code has these going to the planning commission and the county commissioners. The revision would change that to one hearing before the planning commission, unless the decision is "called up."

Meininger said one of the things being addressed is whether applications go through the class 1 or class 2 land use review. All class 1s would have the single hearing before the planning commission. Temporary uses would be class 1.

A lot of the discussion involved the meaning of code terms "determination" versus "call-up."

Determinations are formal administrative actions, including how a code section is being interpreted, Meininger said. Peduto said they can include the type of process an applicant will have to go through. Determinations can be appealed to the County Board of Adjustment (BOA).

Smith said all code interpretations by staff can be appealed to the BOA.

Meininger said staff wants to keep a 60-day deadline for a BOA hearing. "A lot of these end up in court," he said. "We need time for documentation."

Call-ups go to the county commissioners for a hearing. A call-up of a decision on a land use application by planning staff, planning commissioners, or the joint Durango-county planning commission can be requested by any of those entities, the applicant, adjacent landowners, or the county commissioners, Meininger said. There is a 20-day deadline to seek a call-up.

Under the proposed change, planning commission decisions on class 1 projects would be subject to call-ups. Class 2 projects go to the county commissioners with a recommendation from the planning commission.

Meininger and Peduto noted the current land use code reliance on neighborhood compatibility. "That's a significant component of your role," Peduto told planning commissioners.

Adverse impacts need to be considered at different levels to determine which process an applicant must go through, Peduto said.

Planning commissioner Tom Gorton questioned a requirement "that the applicant shall make changes to the application before it's submitted if someone submits comments. The comment may not make sense."

He also questioned whether simple site plans need a surveyor.

Planning commissioner Gabe Candelaria countered, "A surveyor helps start with the right information."

Gorton also objected, "I know the intention is to make it potentially a one-step process. As someone who has gone through the process many times, it's daunting that you get approval and then you have to mail out these letters" notifying interested parties that they can seek a call-up. "A lot can happen, if issues come up all of a sudden," he said.

People need the opportunity to respond, Peduto said.

Smith said that with administrative permits, that's the only opportunity for neighbors to get notice.

Planning commission chair Jim Tencza raised the prospect that someone could request a call-up as a delaying tactic.

"They can take it to the wall in the existing process to hold something up," Peduto said. He added that the applicant can minimize that risk by holding a neighborhood meeting at the start of the process. "They can always reach out to minimize objections," he said.

Audience member Brian Kimmell from Southwest Land Services commented, "Call-ups usually are mad neighbors who use it to hold someone off. One of the first things I ask clients is, 'Have you discussed this with your neighbors?' Find out who might object."

He questioned some definitions in the draft changes. "One is the definition of agriculture. Keeping fields green doesn't pay. We can't just say you have to stay in ag," he said.

He continued, "Define character of the neighborhood or rural character. I grew up in Colorado. I've used it either way on projects. Good luck."

Gorton quipped, "Don't most people think it's right when their house is done?"

Kimmell and another private planner, Dan Burkhart, want applicants to start with a conceptual development plan on larger proposals before they spend a lot of money on it. Burkhart said, "The worst part of the code now is the applicant has to spend tens of thousands of dollars before they get to where there's a determination that it's compatible. ... This is different from any other place I've worked. The way I'm reading it, an applicant can't even get before the planning commission before submitting everything. If you aren't going to get approved, why should you spend $12,000 on a hydrologic study? Have those after the planning commission has determined it's compatible. Put it on the planning director, things to be done before the director issues a permit."

Tencza said planning commissioners need enough information to make a decision.

Audience member Dick Norton from County Road 221 said he appreciates the current efforts, "but this performance zoning that we've lived with for way too long has never been based on zoning." He suggested land use decisions should be based on public health, safety, and welfare, but that isn't defined. "We don't have a good definition of compatibility. Does the neighbor's sense of compatibility rise to the level of welfare?"

Welfare of the community needs to be defined because of the county's affordable housing issues, Norton said. "There's no one in this community that can say we've done a good job with affordable housing. We say affordable isn't compatible. ... It's what's good for the community, not the neighbor, the view."

Planning commissioners continued the discussion to their Jan. 26 meeting. Meininger said if the changes are approved, around 23 percent of applications would be subject to administrative approval.

The county also has hired the Kendig-Keast consultants from Texas to do a total re-write of the land use code. Representatives were scheduled to have a day-long meeting with county officials on Thursday.