Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Comment Property Access topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pueblo resident says property remains inaccessible after two decades; cites public‑health letter over AstroTurf sales
Summary
A resident used the advisory board’s public comment period to complain that decades of planning and denials have left a commercial parcel inaccessible and that a recent public‑health notice over selling artificial turf remains unresolved.
During public comment, an area property owner described long‑running access problems to a parcel identified in the meeting as part of a tract of properties (referred to in the meeting as Track 240). The speaker said they purchased multiple adjacent lots more than 20 years ago but have repeatedly been denied development approvals because of access and setback constraints.
The commenter described efforts starting in 2003 and a follow‑up group effort in 2018 with planning staff and Metro District representatives to resolve access by creating two industrial access points and a parking easement; the commenter said the parties had informally agreed on a design but that staff turnover and the pandemic left the plan in limbo.
The speaker said the parcel currently hosts stored artificial turf (AstroTurf) for sale and that the county public‑health department sent a letter alleging litter, rodents and mold concerns. The commenter told the board they had responded that visible material was limited to twine used in turf bales, that turf does not mold, and that no structures exist on the property; the commenter requested a one‑year, renewable permission to operate a turf resale use while formal access and development issues remain unresolved.
No formal county action was taken during the meeting; county staff cut the public‑comment speaker off after the allotted three minutes as the speaker went beyond the time limit. Board members and staff acknowledged receipt of the complaint and the public‑health letter and invited further contact so staff could follow up on the enforcement or permit questions.
Ending: The advisory board did not act on the complaint during the meeting; staff said they would record the concern and follow up through appropriate county channels after the meeting.
