Residents say DSR 1 "confusing" on grandfathering and notification; county cites statutory notice steps

Margaret Lohman, a Park County resident, told the commissioners she had read part of the DSR draft and found the grandfathering language confusing. "Nobody can even figure out what's going on with grandfathering," Lohman said during public comment, describing the rules as "completely confusing to us."

Kaye Anderson, another rural property owner, asked whether the county would directly contact all rural landowners. The chair replied that the county had met statutory requirements for notifying the public, saying: "We did postcards to ask people to monitor this process. We've done the newspaper notifications, and we've done the email blast for people that signed up that wanted the information. That's the requirement that we had." When asked for the statutory citation, the chair identified the Administrative Procedures Act as the governing notification law.

The chair also clarified how grandfathering works under the proposed language: a use in existence before a regulatory change may continue as a grandfathered, nonconforming use "as long as the use does not stop for over a 1 year period of time." That explanation was offered as an overview of the draft wording and the chair said staff would review the wording to provide clearer language.

Why it matters: Grandfathering rules determine whether an existing use may continue after rule changes and can affect property rights, business operations and permitting requirements. Several speakers asked the commission to clarify who is covered and how the one-year nonuse rule would be applied.

Next steps: The chair said staff would look at the wording and provide clarifications, and residents were invited to submit written comments to be added to the public record.