A new, powerful Citizen Portal experience is ready. Switch now

Larimer County approves 10‑foot increase to Hearth Fire monopine to secure Verizon colocation; landscaping, compliance conditions required

February 09, 2026 | Larimer County, Colorado


This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »

Larimer County approves 10‑foot increase to Hearth Fire monopine to secure Verizon colocation; landscaping, compliance conditions required
Larimer County commissioners on Feb. 9 approved a request to raise an existing monopine wireless tower in the Hearth Fire subdivision by 10 feet to allow an additional cellular carrier to colocate. The board voted 3–0 to approve the administrative special review and appeal for plan case referenced in the record as 25‑WCF‑0193, adopting staff‑recommended conditions intended to address visual impacts, landscaping and site maintenance.

The applicant, Michael Powers of Atlas Tower 1 LLC, told the commissioners the extra vertical space is required for Verizon’s engineered design. "Without the extra space, Verizon will not colocate on‑site," Powers said during his presentation, adding that DISH is currently installed at the site and T‑Mobile has signed a contract in September 2025. Powers also said Atlas will replace failed trees and shrubs and will work with landscapers to install new plantings in late March or April.

Staff planner Jared Sey described the parcel as roughly 18.4 acres with a 45‑by‑45 lease area for the tower and noted public notice had been sent to properties within 500 feet. At the time staff wrote its report, it had received 16 neighborhood comments (and additional comments afterward) raising primarily visual‑impact and property‑value concerns; comments in favor cited limited local cellular coverage and public‑safety concerns.

Commissioners pressed staff and the applicant on three linked issues: whether prior approvals had produced measurable coverage gains, who is responsible for the site’s prior landscaping failures, and whether allowing additional height would set a precedent for later increases. Staff explained the oil‑and‑gas features on or near the parcel are outside this ASR and that some wells at the site have been decommissioned and are part of the state's orphan well program. The applicant said AT&T had used an eligible facilities request under the existing permit and that Verizon’s engineers had determined lower mounting positions would not meet coverage goals.

Several nearby residents spoke during public comment. John Riley, who lives across the street from the tower, said the structure has stood for two years with little improvement in coverage and urged the county to require penalties or remove the tower if promised service does not materialize. Jim Miles, who said he lives within a few hundred yards of the facility, urged approval on public‑safety grounds and cited federal statistics about 911 calls placed by cellphone. David Haase, another Hearth Fire resident, urged firm accountability for landscape maintenance and warned against incremental future height increases.

The commission added conditions of approval recommended by staff—11 separate conditions included in the record—that require compliance with the land‑use code, replacement and maintenance standards for landscaping (including a suggested mix and maturity standard), measures to reduce impacts on nesting birds, and continued code‑compliance oversight. Staff said code compliance will be the pathway for enforcement and that residents may report failures through county code compliance resources.

Commissioner Kefalas made the motion to approve the application "subject to the conditions as outlined in the report." The motion passed 3–0. The applicant will proceed to obtain required building permits and to meet the conditions attached to the approval; the county said it will monitor compliance and inspect the site according to the conditions.

Why this matters: commissioners framed the decision around public safety and service gaps in a growing area while balancing visual‑impact and maintenance concerns raised by neighbors. The conditions of approval are the county’s principal tool to hold the applicant accountable for landscaping and other mitigation commitments.

Next steps: Atlas Tower must secure building permits and complete landscaping and other site modifications per the conditions; residents can report noncompliance to Larimer County code compliance as specified in the approval documents.

Don't Miss a Word: See the Full Meeting!

Go beyond summaries. Unlock every video, transcript, and key insight with a Founder Membership.

Get instant access to full meeting videos
Search and clip any phrase from complete transcripts
Receive AI-powered summaries & custom alerts
Enjoy lifetime, unrestricted access to government data
Access Full Meeting

30-day money-back guarantee