Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Land Use Subdivision topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Planning commission recommends subdivision to enable battery storage on Lowry Trust parcel

5956343 · April 15, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Arapahoe County Planning Commission on April 15 voted 4 to 2 to recommend approval of a minor subdivision creating a 19.1‑acre lot intended for a battery storage facility on Lowry Trust property and an 83.65‑acre tract for future development.

The Arapahoe County Planning Commission on April 15 voted 4 to 2 to recommend approval of case PM23‑1, the Lowry Environmental Protection Cleanup Trust Fund Subdivision (filing no. 1), a minor subdivision that would split a 102.75‑acre parcel into a 19.1‑acre lot intended for a battery energy storage facility and an 83.65‑acre tract for future development.

Staffer Molly Orkin Larson, principal planner with the public works division, told commissioners the application complies with the Land Development Code, has adequate access from East Quincy Avenue and South Harvest Road, and can be served by sheriff and fire services. Larson said 3.59 acres of the proposed tract would be dedicated as right of way, and that staff received no written public comments on the application; a neighborhood meeting in February 2023 drew one attendee who expressed support.

"The application complies with the land development code," Molly Orkin Larson said during her presentation. "It has adequate access with Quincy and South Harvest Road being there adjacent to it. Development can be served by the Sheriff and Fire District, and it is compatible with the surrounding area."

Todd Messenger, attorney for the applicant, said the applicant is Front Range Energy Storage LLC (parent company Plus Power) and that the proposed lot would connect to Xcel Energy’s Harvest Mile Substation. Messenger asked the commission to modify a staff condition that would otherwise require conveyance of all encumbrances, explaining that two existing major gas‑line easements cross the site and are effectively impossible to vacate. He also said the proposed facility would be unmanned most of the time but would have employees on site occasionally, and that water and sewer could be provided later if required during permitting.

"There are two easements that are major gas line easements ... the county wasn't going to require vacation of these two easements because they would be essentially impossible to vacate," Todd Messenger said. "If there are any changes, Plus Power will comply with applicable law during those permitting stages."

Commissioners adopted an amended condition to the staff recommendation that allows the two existing 50‑foot gas easements to remain in place. The motion, made by Commissioner Latsis and seconded by Commissioner Morehouse, recommended approval of the subdivision "based on the findings in the staff report subject to the following conditions: 1) as stated in the staff report; and 2) no permit shall be issued grading or otherwise until the applicant has conveyed all necessary right of way to the county, free and clear of any encumbrances, with the exception of the 50 foot gas easement, recordation number BAsInBoy2144430, and the 50 foot gas easement recorded at book 1929, page 237 and recorded at BAsInBoy4064205." The motion passed 4 to 2 on roll call (Latsis, Saul, Morehouse, Sauve — yes; Howe, Miller — no).

Steve Richter, a trustee for the Lowry Environmental Trust who called into the hearing, voiced support for the project and clarified that the Trust’s master plan is a Trust planning document and not a county adoption.

"It is a very important project, and it is very much in keeping with why we acquired buffer properties surrounding the Superfund site," Steve Richter said.

Commissioner Miller again voiced concern about fire safety and the facility’s proximity to the Arapahoe County Fairgrounds, saying those issues had not been fully addressed since the commission’s prior review in December. "I still don't think the fire department has properly addressed their ability to fight any fires in the banks," Miller said.

The commission record shows that Sable Altura (the referenced fire district) is working with the applicant and "is on board thus far," and that the City of Aurora declined to require a sidewalk along Harvest Road. Staff attached two recommended conditions: (1) the applicant must address all public works and development staff comments prior to final plan signature; and (2) no grading permit shall issue until necessary right of way is conveyed to the county, with the amendment noted above to preserve the two gas easements.

This action by the Planning Commission is a recommendation; the development agreement and final approvals are under the jurisdiction of the Arapahoe County Board of County Commissioners. The remaining 83.65‑acre tract is described in staff materials as "for future development."