BOCC approves rezoning of 35‑acre Cheyenne Trail parcel to residential‑agriculture with road and signage conditions

The Elbert County Board of County Commissioners approved a rezoning request (RZ20243550) to change a 35‑acre parcel at 35501 Cheyenne Trail from agricultural zoning to residential‑agriculture (RA). The board adopted planning‑commission recommended conditions that require pedestrian and horse crossing signage where the Bridle Path meets the extended Cheyenne Trail and that the county road and bridge department inspect and improve the road extension before individual driveway permits are issued.

County land‑use planner Danny Cabanar told commissioners the parcel is roughly 35 acres, has no existing structures and will be accessed by an extension of Cheyenne Trail; the property lies northwest of Elizabeth and adjacent to the Pawnee Hills subdivision. The proposal went through earlier referrals, a pre‑application and a community meeting; notices met county requirements. The Planning Commission recommended approval with additional conditions; commissioners voted to adopt the rezoning and included two of the planning commission’s conditions in the motion.

The Division of Water Resources reviewed the applicant’s water supply plan and deemed the proposed water supply adequate for the proposed lot configuration, the staff report said. The applicant, real‑estate broker Matt Prowett speaking for the property owners, told the board the adjudication process produced an allocation of about 2.55 acre‑feet of water per year “for the 3 sites,” a figure he said would support household use, irrigation of up to 4,000 square feet and a small number of large animals per lot. Prowett said the applicants originally explored a higher‑density plan requiring a central well but revised the proposal to three separate wells/three sites during the pre‑application process.

Water and aquifer issues drew sustained attention at the hearing. Planning commission members had recommended a condition that wells bypass the Upper and Lower Dawson aquifers and tap the deeper Arapahoe aquifer; the county planner said that recommendation was made by the planning commission but was not included in the draft resolution before the board. Several commissioners said they were reluctant to impose that specific aquifer requirement because the Division of Water Resources and groundwater management districts have permitting authority and technical jurisdiction over well approvals. John Hill of Ranchland News spoke during public comment and reminded the board that any well drilled in the county must comply with the rules of the relevant groundwater management district.

Other review findings included no floodplain or wetlands on the parcel; public works had no objection to the proposed private road provided it meets county standards and is inspected by county road and bridge. The planning commission discussed concerns from nearby residents, who had cited traffic, effects on a bridle easement, water use and potential impacts to property values; planning staff said referral comments had been addressed and the Division of Water Resources required water adjudication that took additional time and review.

Commission discussion touched on the road extension, whether the road would become publicly maintained if upgraded to county standards, and the applicant’s willingness to install the requested signage. The motion to approve the rezoning specifically referenced planning commission recommended conditions 4 and 5 (pedestrian/horse crossing signage and road inspection/improvement); the motion carried with all votes recorded as “aye.”

The board’s approval requires the applicant to meet the stated conditions, pay fees and record required exhibits within the county’s specified timeframe. Road and bridge will inspect the road extension and must confirm standards are met before driveway permits will be issued; well permits and final well location will be subject to state and groundwater‑district permitting and any applicable adjudication requirements.