Commission forwards Moriah Trail waiver to BOCC after contentious exchange over neighboring easement

The Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of a waiver request (WV251) from the county's land-dedication rule (section 8.5.1.c of the El Paso County Land Development Code) for a short segment of right-of-way necessary to extend Mariah Trail to serve a newly approved subdivision. The waiver was approved by the commission and will be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners.

Planning staff (Kylie Bagley) explained the narrow issue: a 350-square-foot portion of a planned county right-of-way crosses an existing private ingress/egress easement held by an adjacent property owner. Under the county land development code, land dedicated to the county for public right-of-way should be free and clear of encumbrances. The applicant requests a waiver because the easement-holder would not agree to vacate that limited portion and staff advised that a waiver process is the remaining administrative path to allow final plat recording.

Applicant counsel James Tilton and developer representatives said the waiver will allow the developer's six-lot final plat to record; they also presented revised plat language and tracts (Tract B and Tract C) intended to provide future right-of-way if the adjacent landowner develops. Supporters included an adjacent property owner (Colt Haugen / DKSS) who had agreed to vacate his easement interest; he told the commission he supported the plat and waiver.

Opposing testimony came from easement-holder Arvanna Donahue and her attorney Deborah Fortenberry. Fortenberry argued the waiver would improperly allow public dedication over an outstanding private easement without acquisition, and said the developer had already obstructed the driveway while negotiations continued. Donahue said the obstruction impeded access for farm equipment and emergency vehicles and asked the county to require acquisition rather than allow a waiver. The county attorney reminded commissioners that county staff cannot unilaterally require inclusion of third-party property into a district or force a property owner to be included; here the legal question was whether the waiver criteria were met.

After discussion and split views on hardship evidence, the commission approved the waiver motion (roll call: four or more ayes recorded; one recorded opposing vote) and forwarded the item to the BOCC with conditions and notations. Staff and the applicant said they will continue negotiations with the easement holder.