At a Larimer County land‑use hearing, the Board of County Commissioners unanimously denied a short‑term rental application and the applicant’s appeal to relax local roadway standards for a property on Goblins Castle Road in the Estes Park area.

Staff told the board the application for a 2‑bedroom plus one sleeping area short‑term rental to host up to six guests (file 25Zone3753) failed to meet multiple review criteria and that the applicant’s appeal to Appendix G roadway width and longitudinal grade standards did not satisfy the county’s appeal criteria. The development services team recommended denial.

The review focused on two technical roadway standards. County staff and referral engineering review noted the Appendix G minimum roadway width is 20 feet; survey data presented by the applicant’s engineer showed a narrow location about 14 feet wide and an average width around 18 feet for the route. Appendix G’s normal maximum longitudinal grade is 10 percent, with limited allowances up to 12 percent; the applicant’s engineering evaluation identified multiple steep stretches, including a roughly 500‑foot segment near 14 percent, another stretch at 12 percent, and a steep spot measured near 19 percent just below the proposed driveway.

Applicant Lonnie Sheldon of Van Horn Engineering and owner Kevin Kavan said the road has served parcels on the mountain for decades and proposed mitigation measures, including construction of two pullouts, placement of three gravel barrels at steep segments, limiting rentals in December, January and February, and contributing to road maintenance. "We would be limiting the availability to not include December, January, and February," the applicant said. He also told the board he would "pay for the construction" of pullouts and contribute to maintenance and dumpster use.

Several nearby property owners and residents opposed the request in public comment. Will Smythe, a neighbor who lives below the property, said the road is "very difficult in the wintertime," described recent washboarding and speeding that tears up the surface, and said vehicles sometimes must pull into ditches to pass. Kim Kochner, who said she is a long‑time resident and the area’s snowplow driver, said private mountain roads above 9,000 feet behave differently in winter and warned that additional winter traffic can strand vehicles and create safety risks. Charles Hubbling, who identified himself as a PhD engineer and property owner, and Bob Lefelman, another adjacent owner, opposed added short‑term rental density and said widening would require voluntary agreement from multiple private landowners because portions of the road cross private property and are managed by a voluntary road association.

Commissioners discussed safety, wildfire egress and neighborhood impacts. Commissioner Jody Shannock McNally said the county’s roadway and short‑term rental standards were adopted for public‑safety reasons, citing ingress/egress and fire‑response access, and that the application did not meet the specified review criteria. "They have not met the review criteria," she said, noting staff found the application met only 1 of 5 required criteria for the administrative special review and 2 of 5 for the appeal. Commissioner John Kefalas moved to deny both the short‑term rental application and the appeal; the motion passed 3‑0.

Actions recorded in the hearing: the board voted to deny the short‑term rental application and the related roadway appeal (file 25Zone3753) by a 3‑0 vote. The motion was made and seconded on the hearing record and the tally recorded as "aye" by all three commissioners present.

Why it matters: the decision enforces the county’s recently adopted short‑term rental roadway standards, emphasizes public‑safety considerations on private mountain roads where steep grades and narrow widths can limit emergency access, and shows the board will require applicants to meet the county’s engineering thresholds or provide conclusive evidence that mitigation will produce equivalent safety. The applicant may pursue other remedies allowed by the code, but the board’s action denied both the administrative special review and the appeal on the record.

Ending: The denial was final on the hearing record; commissioners closed that agenda item and moved to the next hearing on the agenda.