CENTRAL CITY — A land use hearing turned tense Tuesday morning as the Gilpin County Board of Adjustment took up a fence variance request tied to an ongoing neighbor dispute.

At one point during the April 14, 2026, meeting, additional law enforcement was called as the hearing grew heated. The parties involved began directing comments at one another and speaking out of turn, and the commissioners had to bring order to the room.

The request, filed by property owner Kristin McFarland, sought after-the-fact approval for a 12-foot-tall section of fence where County code allows a maximum height of 8 feet. The application also asked to extend the taller portion from roughly 52 feet to 64 feet along the southeast property line. 

Dispute spills into hearing

The variance request was due to a long-running conflict between neighboring property owners. McFarland argued that the fence was necessary due to topography and ongoing issues with a neighbor, Michael Price, including ATV activity, dust, and visibility concerns.

Several residents spoke during public comment, many referencing the conflict directly. Price accused McFarland of harassment and other violations, and vice versa. Another nearby resident said the fence did little to block views due to elevation differences.

Allegations were raised during the hearing about Price’s behavior. McFarland and others described him as frequently riding ATVs near the property, kicking up dust, and remaining visible from their yard as a result of elevation differences. 

A renter on the property said Price would stand on a hillside and yell obscenities toward the home, contributing to the ongoing conflict between the neighbors. She said removing the fence would negatively affect her mental and physical well-being. 

Price leveled several accusations against McFarland during public comment and rebuttal. He claimed she had harassed him and his wife, made threats, and operated activities on the property that violated County regulations. He also alleged that she had ignored prior orders related to the fence and was seeking approval after the fact to avoid consequences.

Others urged the Board to focus strictly on the code and not on interpersonal disputes.

Planning and zoning staff said that variance criteria must be based on the property's physical conditions, not personal conflicts. 

The zoning report concluded that the request did not meet the standards for a variance and warned that approval could undermine consistent application of zoning rules. 

Emotions run high

As the hearing continued, testimony was increasingly emotional. During rebuttal, Price told the Board that previous rulings had impacted his mental health. He accused the County of unequal enforcement.

McFarland’s representative countered that she had worked with staff and followed the proper process after initial code enforcement concerns, arguing that the fence was justified and that the application was an attempt to resolve the matter through legal channels.

Board members acknowledged the difficulty of separating the personal conflict from the land use decision.

“Based on the emotional sides we’ve heard… it was hard to sit through,” Commissioner Jeff Aiken said before making a motion.

Unanimous denial

After closing public comment and returning from executive session for legal advice, the Board deliberated on whether the request met the criteria for a variance.

Ultimately, the Board found that the request was not supported by exceptional physical conditions on the property and that granting it could be detrimental to the public good.

The Board voted 3-0 to deny the variance request. The hearing closed at 1:06 p.m. 

Other business

Earlier in the meeting, the Board of Adjustment approved a separate variance request for a triangular lot in the Sunrise Heights subdivision. The applicant was granted reduced setbacks due to the parcel’s unusual shape and road encroachment, with the decision passing 3-0. 

The Board of County Commissioners approved the consent agenda without changes. Items included routine financial reports, March 24 meeting minutes, and multiple resolutions related to grant submissions and appointments.

Several new County employees were introduced, including a communications specialist in the dispatch center and two Public Works operators. The Sheriff’s Office also recognized staff during national appreciation observances, thanking dispatchers, administrative personnel, and evidence technicians for their service.

Deputy Melissa Sternlicht was recognized by the Human Services Child Welfare Team with a “shout out” award for her work with Gilpin County children and families. 

Staff said she exemplifies strong collaboration across departments while showing care and respect in her role. She was commended for going above and beyond in supporting both the Sheriff’s Office and the broader community.

The Commissioners also approved several resolutions during the regular session, including a grant application for court security funding and the creation of a paid internship program within the Human Services Department.

A change order for a generator project at the Justice Center was also approved. Officials said the cost increase would be offset by savings in other capital projects. 

During public comment, resident Allison Baker raised concerns about wildfire mitigation and limited evacuation routes in her neighborhood, urging the County to address forest conditions and improve egress. 

The next meeting of the Gilpin County Board of County Commissioners is scheduled for April 21, 2026, as a work session.