Prepared for Garfield county commissioners

1
Vezzoso Property

• Prepared for Garfield county commissioners
• Monday, February 5, 2007

2
Good, Caring, and Giving Neighbors

• The Vezzosos have always been willing to help
  out any of the neighbors with help, and several
  have written letters in support of the Vezzosos
  rights

3
Working for a Greater Community

• The Vezzosos have been part of the Garfield
  County for many years and use their time and
  resources from their farm and garden to help
  others
• Letters support the Vezzosos from the Community

4
Use of Property for Garden for Donation
5
Agricultural Property

• The Vezzoso property has historically been and
  continues to be used for agricultural purposes

6
History of Agricultural Use

• Purchased as Agricultural Property and ownership
  of water rights
• Over 10 Years 4-H Participation
• Sold and Continue to Sell Meat, Vegetables,
  Livestock to small group of community members and
  neighbors

7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
(No Transcript)
10
(No Transcript)
11
Use of the Barns

• Barns would have constant wind damage

12
Use of the Barns

• Called Garfield County (Jim) and asked about
  permit to enclose and build barn, was told it was
  agricultural and it did not need a permit

13
Use of the Barns

• Office used for 4-H meeting place and record
  keeping for 4-H books and records
• Storage of Grain, Hay, Feed, and Tack
• Shelter for hurt animals
• Shop to work on vehicles

14
(No Transcript)
15
Extreme Winds and Need for Protection

• The property lies in a valley where micro burst
  winds whip through at high rates of speed causing
  damage
• Winds have caused extensive wind damage and have
  almost resulted in the drop of insurance after so
  many wind-related insurance claims

16
Extreme Winds and Need for Protection
17
Before Wind Damage
18
After Wind Damage
19
Wind Damage to Crop

• High winds have caused damage to our corn stock
• High winds have killed 55 trees planted in the
  western pastures
• High winds have made it almost impossible to use
  our land for gardening

20
Our Solution to the Wind

• Our front wall was constructed solely for wind
  protection
• Our front wind protection wall was built 6 in
  height across the west property line

21
Sharon Washburn
22
(No Transcript)
23
Front Wind Protection Wall
24
Grading for Agricultural Purposes

• We have been in the transition and correction of
  a flood problem on the eastern side of our
  property
• To correct this problem we must fill and grade
  this area
• We use a screening plant to separate and create
  top soil for use in our gardens and for better
  pasture cultivation

25
Eastern Pasture Flooding
26
(No Transcript)
27
Grading for Agricultural Purposes

• Historic Drainage Problems
• New County Road Changed to make the Drainage
  Problem worse and more water was flooding the
  eastern pastures
• Problems for agricultural operations include hoof
  damage to horses, pasture was unusable
• Unaware code is based upon taxation and our
  erroneous tax status would not allow us for
  exemption (J103.2)

28
Grading for Agricultural Purposes

• Unaware that we were being taxed as residential
  and not agricultural as we qualify under Garden,
  Farm, and Ranch
• In the process of changing tax to agricultural
• Willing to apply for a permit in the interim
• Grading will stop until tax status is changed or
  a grading permit is obtained

29
Grading for Agricultural Purposes

• The use of the screen plant is not for commercial
  or industrial use
• We use this to product top soil for our garden
  and to help cultivate healthier pastures
• We do not operate a rock crusher here nor do we
  extract materials from our property

30
Rights Interpreted in 1991

• Storage of heavy equipment was brought up in
  November of 1990 by means of a Uniform Summons
  (5610).
• The county grouped several properties/people with
  the same ticket and appearance date
• Joe Zamora (Old Hwy 82), Clem Hughes (Cotton
  Wood Rd), Ron Troxel (Rd. 100), Frog Excavation
  (Old Hwy 82) Bill Vezzoso (Willow Lane)
• Took place on Jan. 14, 1991

31
Hearing on Jan. 14, 1991

• At hearing, during proceedings against Zamora,
  the judge told parties to discuss resolution of
  matter outside of the courtroom
• Fred Gannett, representing Zamora, met with
  Arbaney, DeFord and Bean. The County interpreted
  the zoning ordinance as to the excavators
  property to allow parking of up to 10 pieces of
  equipment on minimum of 5 acres for use in
  conjunction with excavating business

32
Hearing on Jan. 14, 1991

• Returned to courtroom
• Bill Vezzoso was told that the citation was
  dropped because the County had determined that
  zoning code allowed parking of up to 10 vehicles
  on 5 acres or more
• This was a site specific determination of
  property rights as to the taking clauses of the
  Constitution

33
(No Transcript)
34
Use of Property

• Current use (2007) of property has not changed
  since 1991
• In 1991, we parked up to 10 pieces of heavy
  equipment on our property
• In 1991, we transported equipment from our
  property to job sites throughout the valley, then
  when the job was finished the equipment came back
  to the property for storage
• In 1991, employees would meet at the Vezzosos
  house to carpool to the jobsite together
• In 1991, clients would not visit the property.
  Clients call in and go to offsite jobsites to
  meet the client and perform services