Elbert County planning panel withholds recommendation on Sundance Solar, citing screening, cultural and information gaps

The Elbert County Planning Commission on April 22, 2025 declined to recommend approval of a major 1041 permit for the proposed Sundance Solar project and voted to recommend denial of the project's special use by review after an extended hearing in which commissioners and county staff pressed the applicant for more information on screening, cultural-resource overlays, firefighting coordination and financial sureties.

The planning commission's action is advisory: it forwards the commission's recommendation to the Elbert County Board of County Commissioners, which will make the final decision.

Why it matters: The Sundance Solar proposals would allow a utility-scale solar facility and associated battery storage on land in Elbert County. The project developer, Cypress Creek Renewables (operating as Sundance Solar, LLC), has said the installation would generate property taxes and construction-fee revenue and provide local scholarships and community benefits. Commissioners said they could not recommend approval based on the application and supporting materials as submitted and discussed a set of conditions and additional materials they want the board to weigh before any final approval.

What the commission decided and why

During the meeting the commission debated two related items: the major 1041 permit for areas and activities of state interest and a Special Use by Review (SUR) for the Sundance Solar facility. A motion to recommend approval of the 1041 permit with conditions failed (two commissioners voted for the recommendation; seven opposed). The commission then moved to recommend denial of the SUR; that motion carried on a 7-2 vote. Commissioners who opposed approval repeatedly cited concerns about (1) visual impacts and the sufficiency of proposed landscaping and berming, (2) clarity about cultural-resource boundaries and an overlay showing the site's relationship to archaeological sites, (3) fire response and site-specific firefighting measures, and (4) financial assurances for decommissioning.

Applicants' responses and commitments

Representatives for Cypress Creek Renewables and Sundance Solar answered commissioners' questions and provided additional materials during the hearing. Peter Moritzburg, vice president of development for the company's Western Region, said audited financial statements for 2022 and 2023 and an entity org chart were provided and described the project's financing structure as typical for large renewable projects, involving sponsor equity, tax equity and debt. An applicant representative, Zach (applicant representative, Cypress Creek Renewables), said the applicant had spent about $3,500,000 on the project to date and would post the decommissioning surety required by the county.

On screening and aesthetics, Cypress Creek said it extended setbacks well beyond the minimums contained in the county permit application: the team described roughly 1,000-foot setbacks from the primary road (the October permit required 150 feet) and about 200-foot setbacks from another road or neighboring parcel. The applicant told the commission it would coordinate with Colorado Parks and Wildlife (CPW) about fencing color, height and wildlife-escape measures; CPW had recommended an 8-foot fence, sliding gates and wildlife-monitoring measures in a March 18, 2025 letter that the application team said it had incorporated into the site plan.

Cultural resources and overlays

Commissioners pressed the applicant to provide an overlay (KMZ/shape file) showing the relationship between the developer's site plan and the cultural/archaeological areas identified by the consultant Metcalfe. The applicant said the final, broader KMZ from Metcalfe was expected shortly and offered to provide a one-on-one review of the confidential cultural KMZ and an overlay once it was available; the applicant and its construction contractor, McCarthy Building Companies, said they would not place panels on identified cultural-resource areas and supported a condition of approval maintaining a 50-foot buffer around the five avoidance areas identified in the cultural survey.

Fire and emergency response

Captain Chris Gay of Kiowa Fire told the commission the station that would respond to the area had about a 7.5-minute turnout/response time from the staffed south station and that an unstaffed north station near the project would have longer response times (he estimated roughly 12'14 minutes depending on volunteer availability). The applicant described 24/7 AI camera monitoring, four full-time on-site operations personnel and coordination with Kiowa and Elizabeth fire districts. The applicant also proposed making Pano AI wildfire-detection camera alerts available to the county and fire responders.

Financial guarantees, decommissioning and community benefits

Staff and several commissioners asked for firm, reviewable financial guarantees. Planning staff suggested the decommissioning financial security be sufficient for the life of the project and reviewed at intervals; the commission discussed a staff-noted possible condition (a $6,000,000 decommissioning guarantee with a 2.5% annual escalator, reviewed every five years) but left the exact figure to BOCC consideration. Applicants said they had provided a Kimley Horn decommissioning estimate and that an experienced estimator had prepared it. Cypress Creek said the project would pay an estimated $9,800,000 in property taxes over its life and a $3,400,000 construction fee to Elbert County; the applicant also described an ongoing scholarship program and offered to maintain community-benefit funding through the project life and to form a community committee to allocate funds.

Design stage and next steps

The applicant said the project design is at roughly 30% complete and will progress through 60% and 90% design stages before final construction documents. Commissioners repeatedly told the applicant and staff that the degree of remaining design flexibility affects how they vote and that outstanding materials and commitments should be resolved before final BOCC action. The planning commission's votes are advisory; the Board of County Commissioners will receive the planning commission record and staff recommendations and make the final determination.

Votes at a glance

- Sundance Solar Major 1041 permit (10-41-2024-1310): Motion to recommend approval with conditions failed (2 in favor, 7 opposed). The commission did not forward a positive recommendation for BOCC approval. - Sundance Solar Special Use by Review (SUR 2024-0028): The commission voted to recommend denial to the BOCC (7 in favor of denial, 2 opposed).

What commissioners asked for

Commissioners asked staff and the applicant to ensure the record going to the BOCC contains: the updated cultural KMZ overlay and an assurance that panels will not overlap avoidance areas; a decommissioning financial-security calculation and schedule for review; a clear plan or condition for improved landscaping and screening (including discussion of berms and fence treatment); documentation of coordination with Colorado Parks and Wildlife and the fire districts; and a final site plan or clear mechanism for handling changes between 30% and final design.

Who spoke (selection)

Kevin Kirkwood, Chairman, Elbert County Planning Commission. Peter Moritzburg, Vice President of Development, Western Region, Cypress Creek Renewables. Zach (applicant representative), Cypress Creek Renewables (applicant). Jennifer Hyer, Environmental Affairs Director, Cypress Creek Renewables. Nick Parton, McCarthy Building Companies (EPC/constructor). Captain Chris Gay, Kiowa Fire (fire response). Kimberly Horn, decommissioning estimator (Kimley Horn). Kyle Denardo, Diana Edstrom, Nicole Hunt, Dan McCollum, John Gresham, Didi Schott Grama, Van Sands, Dan Sands, Robert Politek (planning commissioners).