Code Compliance File No. 24-CCC0305

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]



Mr. Gray:

We received your letter dated November 26, 2024.  

We have not removed the sheds.  Before doing so, I want to emphasize two points.

1.  The Derksen sheds are portable.  We are not violating Code Section 1.9.3.A, which you included in your letter.  These sheds are not improvements on our rural property zoned Open.  They are temporary display models.  

2.  I disagree that what you label an "accessory rural occupation" should be categorized "general retail sales" in violation of Code Section 3.4.7.C.3.4.  The Derksen portable sheds are displayed on our property but we are not employees of Derksen.  As "dealers," we merely take orders on the company's website.  We do not own the sheds as inventory.  I contrast this arrangement with having a store, such as Karen's Bait Shop (when the new reservoir is open).  For another distinction, Derksen pays sales taxes, not us.  

Therefore, I do not believe that we are in violation of the Larimer County Land Use Code.  I doubt the drafters of the code had our situation in mind when deciding what to ban as a use on property like ours.  This is not an interpretation of the code that we agree on.  

I also have a question.  Who complained about the display of sheds?  In my opinion, they are very attractive.  As you are aware in your position, there are many rural properties that look junky.  I welcome a conversation with the person who brought this matter to your attention.  I suspect it is a passive aggressive neighbor using your office to attempt to control land they do not own.  

Respectfully,

Alan Carlson

970 219 1569

[Chad Gray]

Morning Commissioner,

Sorry, I didn't notice that Alan copied you on the email he sent me on Friday or I would have hit reply all. Please see the reply below that I sent Alan on Friday. I have been dealing with Alan and his wife over the last couple of years for the illegal campground they have been advertising. She has removed the advertising a couple of times now but I just realized she put up the advertising again for the four sites with the firepits set up in their grass field. Please let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Chad 

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Chad Gray <gray...@co.larimer.co.us>
Date: Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: Code Compliance File No. 24-CCC0305
To: crosscre...@yahoo.com <crosscre...@yahoo.com>

Hi Alan,

No one complained about the sheds. I noticed them one day driving by and the Code Compliance priority rating directs me to be proactive regarding illegal businesses. Your property is not a commercial property which would allow an outdoor display and sales use. Since the residential use on your property is considered the principal use, you can only have accessory uses like home or rural occupations. I have had to deal with this exact use you were doing, on other properties, and had to explain to those owners the same thing I am explaining to you. These two code sections are what you are in violation of in the Larimer County Land Use Code. Please remove the sheds and let me know if you have any other questions.

Thanks,

Chad Gray

[Chad Gray]

Morning John,

Please see the other forwarded email I sent you and let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks,

Chad 

On Sat, Dec 14, 2024 at 12:38 PM John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us> wrote:

Hello Al,

Thank you for including me in this exchange with Chad Gray, one of our code compliance officers and for sharing the photos of the portable display sheds. While I do not know all the details, I am confident that Chad will work with you folks to work out some kind of reasonable resolution to the matter at hand. Hope you folks are well; wishing you and Karen a Merry Christmas.

	John Kefalas (he/him) County Commissioner, District 1
	Commissioners' Office 200 W Oak St | 2nd Floor PO Box 1190, Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 W: (970) 498-7001 Cell:  (720) 254-7598 jkef...@larimer.org | www.larimer.org

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 9:52 AM crosscre...@yahoo.com <crosscre...@yahoo.com> wrote:



[Chad Gray]

Sounds good! Thanks! Apologies for using your name instead of Commissioner in the second email. 

On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 2:38 PM John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us> wrote:

Thanks Chad, and I saw the two emails - one that you sent to me (ccing Rebecca and and Amy) and the response you provided to the Carlsons. I do not have any questions at this time, and I know that I met with these folks a couple of years back to see how they could provide these temporary spaces for RVers to camp on their land. 

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Thanks for writing back, John.

Unlike you, I am not confident that we will reach a voluntary resolution with Chad.  Therefore, I wonder what are the next steps.  

Does Chad impose some fine?  Does the County Attorney get involved?  Do we have a hearing before a judge?  

Of course, I don't want to spend money fighting this, but neither do I want to say "uncle" because I sincerely believe that Chad is over-reaching here.  I do not interpret the code as he does.  These portable buildings are definitely not improvement on our real property, nor are we engaged in retail sales such as having a store, which I believe is what the drafters intended to limit to commercial zoning.  We live in the country where sheds are not blights on the landscape.  We are harming no one.  There is no public interest to protect.  

I do not believe that Chad drove down our road.  I am quite sure that he is protecting a tattletale neighbor.  

I will listen to you.  At this point, I do not accept what Chad is saying.

Best regards,

Al

On Saturday, December 14, 2024, 12:38:34 PM MST, John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us> wrote:

Hello Al,

Thank you for including me in this exchange with Chad Gray, one of our code compliance officers and for sharing the photos of the portable display sheds. While I do not know all the details, I am confident that Chad will work with you folks to work out some kind of reasonable resolution to the matter at hand. Hope you folks are well; wishing you and Karen a Merry Christmas.

	John Kefalas (he/him) County Commissioner, District 1
	Commissioners' Office 200 W Oak St | 2nd Floor PO Box 1190, Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 W: (970) 498-7001 Cell:  (720) 254-7598 jkef...@larimer.org | www.larimer.org

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 9:52 AM crosscre...@yahoo.com <crosscre...@yahoo.com> wrote:



[Alan Carlson]

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: Chad Gray <gray...@co.larimer.co.us>
Date: December 13, 2024 at 10:19:05 AM MST
To: crosscre...@yahoo.com
Subject: Re: Code Compliance File No. 24-CCC0305



Hi Alan,

No one complained about the sheds. I noticed them one day driving by and the Code Compliance priority rating directs me to be proactive regarding illegal businesses. Your property is not a commercial property which would allow an outdoor display and sales use. Since the residential use on your property is considered the principal use, you can only have accessory uses like home or rural occupations. I have had to deal with this exact use you were doing, on other properties, and had to explain to those owners the same thing I am explaining to you. These two code sections are what you are in violation of in the Larimer County Land Use Code. Please remove the sheds and let me know if you have any other questions.

Thanks,

Chad Gray

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Thanks, John.  I do not intend to put you in a difficult position.  I wanted you to see what is going on and inform me about the process.  

Merry Christmas to you and Beth!

On Wednesday, December 18, 2024, 02:48:54 PM MST, John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us> wrote:

Thank you for this continued dialogue and for your trust, Al. I will follow up with staff and see if we can find an appropriate path forward in this matter. 

	John Kefalas (he/him) County Commissioner, District 1
	Commissioners' Office 200 W Oak St | 2nd Floor PO Box 1190, Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 W: (970) 498-7001 Cell:  (720) 254-7598 jkef...@larimer.org | www.larimer.org

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Hi John,

Here is the latest from Chad Gray.  Apparently the next step is a hearing before the Commissioners.  At least you have a head-start on seeing pictures and being copied in on my response to the compliance department

below..  

The legal points that I made about the wrong application of the two code sections have been ignored (i.e., the portable buildings are not improvements; there is not a retail sales office on our property).  Surely, using a computer is not an accessory use that the county wants to control.  

Best regards,

Al

----- Forwarded Message -----

From: crosscre...@yahoo.com <crosscre...@yahoo.com>

To: John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us>

Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2024, 02:59:32 PM MST

Subject: Re: Code Compliance File No. 24-CCC0305

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Ms. White,

While you were away for the holidays, I received the letter below.

It appears that the next step is a hearing before the county commissioners.  I am copying in my commissioner, John Kefalas.

It occurs to me that if Chad Gray did not receive a complaint from a neighbor, this is a "no harm, no foul" situation.  No one is being harmed even if there is a violation, which I do not concede.

Further, if compliance department staff are driving around looking for violations, then I suggest that the budget be reduced since there is apparently not enough to do.  

For reasons that I have set forth in my initial response to Mr. Gray, I do not agree that there have been violations.

Sincerely,

Alan Carlson

970 219 1569

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Mr. Gray,

I received your letter dated December 27th.   Thank you for informing me of the next step of a hearing before the county commissioners.  

You wrote below, on Dec. 13th, that you had the same situation on other properties.   Did any of those property owners contest your claim of a violation?  Have the commissioners or a judge heard the issue?

At this point, for reasons previously set forth, I do not intend to remove the buildings.  According to you, no one has complained except you.

I wouldl like to resolve this amicably.  Is there an option to mediate the matter?  

Respectfully,

Al Carlson

On Friday, December 13, 2024, 10:19:05 AM MST, Chad Gray <gray...@co.larimer.co.us> wrote:

Hi Alan,

No one complained about the sheds. I noticed them one day driving by and the Code Compliance priority rating directs me to be proactive regarding illegal businesses. Your property is not a commercial property which would allow an outdoor display and sales use. Since the residential use on your property is considered the principal use, you can only have accessory uses like home or rural occupations. I have had to deal with this exact use you were doing, on other properties, and had to explain to those owners the same thing I am explaining to you. These two code sections are what you are in violation of in the Larimer County Land Use Code. Please remove the sheds and let me know if you have any other questions.

Thanks,

Chad Gray

On Fri, Dec 13, 2024 at 9:52 AM crosscre...@yahoo.com <crosscre...@yahoo.com> wrote:



[Chad Gray]

Hi Al,

The other property owners that were selling sheds from their properties voluntarily complied and removed the sheds. In order to keep the sheds on your property, you would need to try and gain approval through a rezoning to Rural Commercial. If the rezoning was approved by the County Commissioners, an Administrative Special Review zoning application would need to be submitted for an Outdoor Display and Sales use which would need to be approved by either the Community Development Director or the County Commissioners. A Site Plan Review may be required after that or just a Development Construction Permit to develop your site for retail sales of buildings.

You did have this same rezoning opportunity for the illegal campground you are still advertising for on Hipcamp starting back up in April:

https://www.hipcamp.com/en-US/land/colorado-redstone-ridge-rv-ranch-6p0hrwx6?adults=1&children=0&srid=5ca854b6-4b51-4a6f-99e3-4b6eeaf4b274

You did not want to submit the rezoning application since you didn't want to do a mineral rights notification. Rezoning to Rural Commercial would require the same notification. Please let me know if you would like to speak with a Planner about starting the rezoning process or if you are going to remove the sheds?

Thanks,

Chad Gray

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Hi Chad,

Re-zoning is foolish because the cost far exceeds any possible benefit.  It is a way for the county to make money without benefiting or protecting anyone else.  For example, the mineral rights O&E alone would cost $600 and serve no purpose because mineral owners don't know or care if portable sheds or RVs are in a pasture.  So, no, we will not apply to re-zone.  If we wanted to put in a shopping mall, I would understand the need to re-zone, but to place portable buildings on our ranch it would be economically absurd.   

Since you brought up what is called primitive camping or boon-docking, I direct your attention to a more sensible plan than re-zoning.  I am glad you copied in Rebecca Everette and John Kefalas so they might consider the alternative below in order to accommodate HipCamp and Harvest Host as promoting agri-tourism.  Re-zoning a pasture that remains a pasture is silly.  A permit is reasonable.   

Colorado county’s new camping ordinance opens doors for private landowners

Colorado county’s new camping ordinance opens doors for private landowners

Let us widen the discussion beyond code compliance to involve land use and the commissioners.

Sincerely,

Al

[Chad Gray]

Hi Al and Commissioner Kefalas,

Larimer County did adopt Primitive Campground regulations in 2021 when the Land Use Code went through that major update. A Primitive Campground is defined:

A parcel of land on which two or more camping sites are located, established, or maintained for occupancy by camping units for the general public as temporary living quarters for vacation or recreation purposes. Primitive campgrounds are characterized by limited or no sanitary facilities and campsites are typically accessible only by walk-in, pack-in and pack-out, equestrian, or motorized trail vehicles.

Primitive Campgrounds only go through Administrative Special Review which could be approved by the Director or by the County Commissioner if the Director thought a public hearing was necessary. This process doesn't involve the Planning Commission and costs a lot less than a full Special Review. This process costs around $1330. 

Unfortunately, the Open zoning district doesn't allow campgrounds anymore so that is why the rezoning is needed. This property is eligible for an incentivized rezoning to Forestry which only costs, I believe, $310, and campgrounds are allowed in that zoning district. Outdoor Display and Sales is not an allowed use in the Forestry zoning district fyi. 

Please let me know if anyone has any questions. 

Thanks,

Chad Gray

On Mon, Jan 6, 2025 at 10:56 AM John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us> wrote:

The primitive camping option in private land has come up before, and I would be interested in exploring this type of ordinance for Larimer County. Thank you.

	John Kefalas (he/him) County Commissioner, District 1
	Commissioners' Office 200 W Oak St | 2nd Floor PO Box 1190, Fort Collins, CO 80522-1190 W: (970) 498-7001 Cell:  (720) 254-7598 jkef...@larimer.org | www.larimer.org

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Hi Chad,

Thanks for explaining the 2021 Larimer County regulations pertaining to primitive campgrounds.   Someone went to a lot of work writing those regulations.  

However, what I am complaining about is the impracticality of those regulations, new or old, because of the re-zoning requirements, which are unduly expensive.  I am advocating for something like the Chaffee County model for private landowners with rural properties .  The key word is RURAL  Open, Agricultural, or Forestry should not matter.  They are artificial categories.  Anyone driving by our place can't tell whether it is Agricultural or Open, but it sure isn't Forestry, Re-zoning to Forestry would not make it a forest.  Our land is labeled Agricultural -- Grazing by the Assessor.  That fits.  

Code regulations can't fit all foreseeable situations.  There need to be common sense applications for differing situations.  

 If our land was in Chaffee County, we could get a permit for a primitive campground just so people could park RVs in our pasture.  When they drive away, it is pasture without that RV.  Check out the Harvest Host website.  

I realize that your job is to enforce the regulations as they exist.  I encourage the County Commissioners to change those regulations along the lines of the Chaffee County model for agri-tourism.  It woud not hurt anyone and it would help citizens find a place to dry-dock RVs by allowing rural property owners to charge a few bucks for sharing the beauty of our land.

Sincerely,

Al Carlson

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

To the above-named Larimer County officials:

I had a good conversation with Commissioner Kefalas about the alleged violations, which I strongly deny for the reasons set forth in my Dec. 13 email below.  No one has addressed my interpretation of the code sections noted therein for your convenient reference.  As a courtesy to me, please explain the application of those code sections to portable buildings.  Perhaps I can be convinced, but presently I remain resentful of being bullied, especially since I have been told that no neighbor complained.    

Further, it would be economically foolish to apply to have our very rural property re-zoned to Commercial.  

Nevertheless, out of respect for Commissioner Kefalas, my wife and I have decided to remove the sheds before the battle escalates.  My wife is a much nicer person than me.  Thank her.

Another reason for removing the sheds is that the regional rep for Derksen Portable Buildings is willing to have the sheds removed.  I do not want to make his job harder by fighting this fight over code compliance.

I expect the sheds to be removed when the weather improves, no later than the end of February.  

Very truly yours,

Al Carlson

[Alan Carlson]

No one responded to the email below. 

The weather has delayed removal of the sheds.  

I will tell you all when they have been removed so Chad can drive by to confirm. 

Since I have been told that no neighbor complained, only the county is concerned about the sheds.  Save the govt tax money by not spending it on gas to drive out here.  

Sent from my iPhone

Begin forwarded message:

From: crosscre...@yahoo.com
Date: January 26, 2025 at 11:35:30 AM MST
To: Chad Gray <gray...@co.larimer.co.us>, Amy White <awh...@larimer.org>, Rebecca Everette <ever...@co.larimer.co.us>
Cc: John Kefalas <kefa...@co.larimer.co.us>
Subject: Re: Code Compliance File No.  24-CCC0305



[Chad Gray]

Hi Alan,

Thanks for letting me know the removal has been delayed due to the weather. I have attached the current photo I took along with the campground advertising for everyone's information. What are your specific questions so I can get you a reply?

Thanks,

Chad Gray

[Chad Gray]

Hi Alan,

You folks are still advertising your unpermitted campground on Hipcamp. I have attached a review from May 2025. Please remove the advertising and stop renting out the camping sites on your property. Let me know once the advertising has been removed and I will close the code compliance case on your property. 

Thanks,

Chad Gray 

[crosscre...@yahoo.com]

Hi Chad,

Yes, we had an RV camper in May.  Even so, I do not think that we are in violation of the Land Use Code.  Am I correct that one RV site does not constitute a campground?  

We do have a Hipcamp listing, yet we do not book much at all.  I think Lance has been our only Hipcamper so far this summer.  We also had Karen's brother park his RV for two nights.  Hardly a moneymaking enterprise.  

We can limit our bookings to one RV at a time but we do not want to take down the Hipcamp listing totally because there are so many good photos that we would lose -- photos posted by prior visitors.  Some are of our horse, Scamp, who died last October at age 32.  

I intend to speak at a commissioners meeting about this private campground issue.  

Later,

Al Carlson

[Chad Gray]

Hi Al,

You are advertising on HipCamp as the Redstone RV Ranch with multiple sites available for rent. Larimer County defines both Campgrounds and Recreation Vehicle Parks. Here are those definitions:

Campground:

a. Primitive Campground A parcel of land on which two or more camping sites are located, established, or maintained for occupancy by camping units for the general public as temporary living quarters for vacation or recreation purposes. Primitive campgrounds are characterized by limited or no sanitary facilities and campsites are typically accessible only by walk-in, pack-in and pack-out, equestrian, or motorized trail vehicles. 

b. Modern Campground A parcel of land on which two or more recreational vehicle sites and/or camping sites are located, established, or maintained for occupancy by recreational vehicles or camping units of the general public as temporary living quarters for vacation or recreation purposes. Modern campgrounds do not require, but may provide electrical hookups for recreational vehicles on each site. Modern campgrounds are characterized by accessibility by vehicular traffic and substantially developed campsites with tables, refuse containers, flush toilets, bathing facilities, and water provided. 

Recreational Vehicle Park: 

A parcel of land on which two or more recreational vehicle sites and/or camping sites are located, established, or maintained for occupancy by recreational vehicles or camping units of the general public as temporary living quarters for vacation or recreation purposes. Recreational Vehicle Parks require electrical hookups for recreational vehicles on each site.  

Both of these definitions mention two or more sites which is what you are advertising at your RV Ranch which you are not approved for. Here is another section of the Land Use Code that addresses how RVs can be used outside of RV parks:

Recreational Vehicle 

1. Generally The following standards apply to all recreational vehicles and tiny houses on wheels located outside County-approved recreational vehicle parks and campgrounds pursuant to this section of the Code whether a permit is required or not.  

a. Recreational vehicles shall remain fully operable, licensed, and ready for highway use within two hours as determined by the Director or the authorized enforcing official. To be considered fully operable and ready for highway use, the RV must be on its wheels or jacking system, able to be self-propelled or towed quickly from the site, attached to the site only by quick-disconnect utilities, and have no permanently attached additions;  

b. Recreational vehicles shall be placed at least 10 feet from all buildings and other recreational vehicles;  

c. An address shall be assigned to the lot or parcel and the address shall be displayed pursuant to County requirements;  

d. The site of and hook-ups to the recreational vehicle shall be in compliance with all applicable building, fire, electrical, mechanical, healthy and related codes; and  

e. The recreational vehicle shall have a current registration and vehicle license.  

f. Recreational vehicles shall be transported to a sanitary waste station as needed to empty both gray water and toilet waste tanks or connected to a sewage disposal system approved by the County Department of Health and Environment. 

g. All recreational vehicles located in the floodplain shall meet the standards set forth in §12.1.5.F, Recreational Vehicles (RVs) and RV Parks.

2. Temporary Dwelling During Construction A recreational vehicle may be located as a temporary dwelling during the construction of a single-unit dwelling on the same lot or parcel subject to the following conditions: 

a. A valid building permit for the permanent residence on the site shall be in effect during the entire time that the recreational vehicle is located on the site;  

b. The recreational vehicle is connected to the sewage disposal system that will serve the single-unit dwelling, unless other arrangements have been approved by the County Health Department; and  

c. In the wildfire hazard area the recreational vehicle will be located at least 20 feet from continuous vegetation. 

3. Vacation and Recreational Use of Recreational Vehicles on Vacant Lots The use of recreational vehicles for vacation or recreational purposes on vacant lots shall meeting the following standards. 

a. The owner or lessee of the property shall be allowed to occupy one recreational vehicle on a vacant lot. Any family members or guests of the property owner or lessee shall not occupy a recreational vehicle on the lot without the owner being present and shall not exceed a total of 45 days in a calendar year. 

b. Recreational vehicles shall not be located for occupancy outside a recreational vehicle park or campground for a period not to exceed 180 days in any 12-month period. 

c. The total number of additional recreational vehicles allowed for family members or guests shall be based on the total size of the vacant lot as follows: i. 5,000 to 15,000 square feet – one recreational vehicle ii. 15,000 to 100,000 square feet – two recreational vehicles iii. Greater than 100,000 square feet – three recreational vehicles 

4. Recreational Vehicles on Properties with Dwellings 

a. Recreational vehicles that are owned by the occupant of the dwelling may be used by family members for a period not to exceed 30 days in a calendar year. 

b. Recreational vehicles that are not owned by the occupant of the dwelling are allowed to stay on the property for 30 days in a calendar year when visiting the occupants of the dwelling. 

c. Recreational vehicles on any property outside of an approved recreational vehicle park or campground cannot be rented. 

5. Seasonal Worker Housing Housing for seasonal workers is allowed in recreational vehicles in the RR-1 and RR-2, and FO zoning districts under the following conditions: 

a. Seasonal worker housing for up to five recreational vehicles requires approval through the administrative special review process using the standards contained in §3.3.5.D, Recreational Vehicle Park.   

b. Seasonal worker housing for more than five recreational vehicles requires approval through the special review process using the standards in §3.3.5.D, Recreational Vehicle Park. 

6. Storage of Unoccupied Recreational Vehicles The storage of unoccupied recreational vehicles as an accessory use to a single-unit dwelling is addressed in §3.4, Accessory Uses and Structures.  The storage of recreational vehicles as a business is considered Outdoor Storage and is addressed in §3.2.6, Table of Allowed Principal Uses – Rural  and §3.2.7, Table of Allowed Principal Uses – Urban. 

#4 and #6 above explains how you can use an RV on your property. If you want to rent out any number of sites, you need to go through a Planning application process to try and gain approval for that use. If approved you would need to do some improvements to the property for that use. Until then, you need to remove the advertising and quit renting out RV/Campground sites. Please let me know once the advertising has been removed?

Thanks,

Chad Gray