Elbert County planning panel recommends rezone of 35-acre Cheyenne Trail parcel amid neighbor concerns

The Elbert County Planning Commission on June 17 recommended approval of a rezone request for a 35-acre parcel at 35501 Cheyenne Trail, voting 7–1 to send the case to the Board of County Commissioners with conditions.

The county’s staff presentation identified RZ2024-3550 as a request to change zoning from Agriculture to Residential Agriculture (RA) for a property approximately two miles northwest of Elizabeth. Staff said the parcel has been historically used as ranch land, has no structures, contains no wetlands or mapped floodplain and will be accessed from Cheyenne Trail, an unpaved local county road.

The applicant’s representative, Matt Prowett, told commissioners the proposal follows an augmentation plan approved by the Colorado Division of Water Resources and that the rezone exhibit mirrors lot lines shown on a minor plat the applicants will pursue later. Prowett said the applicants plan three residential lots, with by-right entitlement for one home already available on the existing 35-acre parcel. “Danny pretty much covered all the bases,” Prowett said during the hearing.

Neighbors raised objections during public comment. Kyle Schultz of Pawnee Hills said most traffic accessing the subject property would pass through the Pawnee Hills subdivision and that the unpaved road there is in poor condition. Schultz also said the property’s proposed access would cross a bridle easement commonly used by the equestrian community and asked the commission to deny the rezone. Sarah Bergey, who said she recently purchased a nearby 35‑acre parcel, said dividing adjacent large parcels into smaller lots would reduce the rural character and could harm property values.

Staff told the commission the application met the six criteria set out in the county zoning regulations, noting referrals from the Division of Water Resources, Elizabeth Fire Protection District and Emergency Management raised no objections once the applicants submitted an augmentation plan and other required materials. Staff recommended standard conditions including removal of signs within two weeks of final decisions, completion of fees and recordation of required documents within 180 days of BOCC approval.

Commissioners focused questions and conditions on three issues: legal access and whether the bridle easement would be affected, the status and completeness of application exhibits and supporting documents (including notarizations), and road construction/inspection standards. Staff and applicants said the bridle path runs along the sides of the county road and does not cross private property; staff and applicants recommended adding horse/pedestrian crossing signage and noted Road & Bridge would inspect any new private road built to county standards before driveway permits or building permits would be issued.

Commissioner Kyle DiNardo moved the recommendation for approval to the BOCC with conditions in the staff report plus: requiring horse/pedestrian crossing signage where the bridle path meets the road, a Road & Bridge inspection prior to driveway permits, a condition that the applicants move well permitting from the Lower Dawson designation to the Arapahoe designation as needed, and confirmation of a notarized authorization letter for the applicant’s representative. The motion passed on roll call 7–1 (ayes 7, nay 1).

The commission recorded a number of administrative requests that staff said must be corrected or completed before the BOCC packet is finalized: corrected owner and representative names on the rezone exhibit, a dated and signed proof-of-posting affidavit, complete proof of access documentation, and properly completed notarizations for the authorization letter.

The planning commission’s recommendation now goes to the Board of County Commissioners, which is scheduled to consider the case in late July. The commission left several items as conditions to be completed before the BOCC hearing; staff said those materials would be appended to the BOCC packet and that public notices met the county’s mailed- and posted-notice rules.

The commission recessed after the vote and continued other business on the agenda.