Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Parcel Split topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents urge commissioners to allow small lot split on County Road 253 to create permanently affordable home
Summary
Property owners and neighbors asked the board to allow a one-conforming/one-nonconforming lot split on an 8.8‑acre parcel at 7618 County Road 253, saying the county’s new land‑use code prevents a modest split that would enable a local family to buy below market without subsidy.
Two property owners and nearby residents urged the Chaffee County Board of Commissioners on Aug. 12 to revisit how the county’s new land‑use code treats existing subdivisions, saying it prevents practical, small-lot solutions for local affordability.
Zach Zeissent, who identified himself as the owner of 7618 County Road 253, described an 8.8‑acre parcel surrounded by 1-, 2- and 5‑acre lots. Zeissent said he and his partner expected to divide the property into 2-acre parcels when they purchased it and that the new land‑use code (LUC) prevents that. He proposed splitting the parcel into one conforming lot and one nonconforming lot so a local family could buy a parcel and build an ownership home sold below market without subsidy.
“The ADU model at 60% AMI…burdens families with debt without the chance of equity,” Zeissent said, arguing that loss of right to divide lots under the new code forecloses pathways to generational homeownership. He asked commissioners to show leadership and ask “how can we make this work?”
Neighbor Robin Nijame, who said she has lived in Chaffee County nearly 30 years, asked what rationale the county used to treat the subdivision as appropriate to RR zoning in the CCLUC and comprehensive plan. Nijame noted that under current zoning a dog kennel, a church or a campground could be allowed but a modest lot split to create an affordable home would not. She also said a rezone would be costly (survey and application fees she estimated at $15,000 nonrefundable) and would risk opening the area to more development.
Planning staff told the board that there were no recommended zoning changes for the area during the county’s “glitch” mapping process and that staff concluded the area fit the description of the RR zone in the Chaffee County Land Use Code (CCLUC) and comprehensive plan. Commissioners did not take immediate action; staff and commissioners acknowledged the residents’ concerns and the cost barrier for pursuing a rezone.
Speakers asked the board to either permit the lot split or revisit the LUC process so that modest, in‑place ownership opportunities are allowed. The board did not direct staff to take a specific regulatory change at the meeting, and residents were advised about the formal rezone process and the costs associated with it.
