Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Park County approves amended Paradise Valley zoning rules after hours of public comment
Summary
After hours of testimony from property owners and advisory-board members, the Park County Commission voted to adopt an amended Paradise Valley Planning and Zoning District regulation that clarifies how building height is measured; opponents said the late change would limit property rights and raised legal concerns.
The Park County Commission voted Nov. 18 to adopt an amended version of the Paradise Valley Planning and Zoning District regulations after extended public comment and a divided debate.
The amendment modifies how maximum building height is measured in the Mill Creek Ridge area, language commissioners said clarifies a technical ambiguity that has produced repeated disputes. Paul Spitler of the county attorney pparently explained the process and the reason for rereviewing the item so the public could comment before final adoption.
Supporters — including members of the advisory board and homeowners who helped draft the amendment — said the changes provide needed clarity and will help the county avoid future litigation. "We brought forth a language that everybody can live with," Brooks Patterson said during public comment.
Opponents argued the modification made at the Oct. 21 meeting materially changed how height is calculated and would restrict development on certain lots. Brian Garcia, a Mill Creek Ridge landowner, described the issue as an effort that "would have completely restricted several of our neighbors from building within their county approved building envelopes." Attorney Lara Dumond Gercio told commissioners she had reviewed the language with outside counsel and said, in her legal judgment, the modified amendment "is a highly flawed zoning proposal that attempts to illegally and selectively restrict and unduly burden private property rights, including ours." She urged the commission to revert to the version the planning bodies had unanimously approved.
Commissioners described a lengthy local history behind the petition, including prior alternative approaches such as a viewshed test and earlier drafts. Commissioner Wells summarized the background by saying the original intent from landowners who created the district had been to keep houses from being visible from Mill Creek Highway and that the recent clarifications were intended to implement that local goal.
After additional public comment and commissioner discussion about property-rights impacts and enforcement, Commissioner Wells moved to amend the Paradise Valley Planning and Zoning District regulations as modified by the county commission in October 2025; a second was recorded and the motion passed.
The action formally amends the district regulations; the commission also signed the amended regulations during the meeting. Commissioners said the change aims to reduce future ambiguity about how to measure building height, though several speakers warned the change could prompt litigation. The commission did not indicate a plan to rescind the action or reopen the matter for further review.
The commission will publish the adopted regulation language and the county said it would continue to accept concerns through the channels identified in county rules for zoning petitions and amendments.
