Woodland Park staff, commissioners refine local rules for natural medicine healing centers and related businesses

Woodland Park planning staff and commissioners spent the work session refining a draft ordinance to regulate "natural medicine" healing centers and related businesses, focusing on where those uses may locate, how distance limits from schools will be measured, and hours and operating conditions.

The commission directed staff to: keep the draft separation between ‘‘healing centers’’ and other natural-medicine businesses in the use table; clarify and renumber code definitions and the ordinance’s purpose and intent; revise the map and zoning table to reflect heavy-service/light-industrial parcels; measure school-buffer distances as a linear property-to-building distance rather than a pedestrian route; and broaden operating hours to 7 a.m.–8 p.m. any day of the week.

Why it matters: the draft implements time, place and manner regulations municipalities may adopt under Colorado law and responds to the Department of Regulatory Agencies rulemaking. The ordinance will determine which parts of Woodland Park can host facilitation centers (places that provide supervised, in‑person administration or facilitation) and which can host other businesses such as cultivation or processing operations. The rules also affect how staff and future applicants evaluate whether a proposed use complies with required separation from schools, day cares and residential childcare facilities.

Most substantive edits discussed during the session involved location, measurement and hours. Staff presented an updated zoning map that adds the city’s heavy-service/light-industrial (HS/LI) district; commissioners asked staff to confirm which HS/LI parcels are already developed and whether combining cultivation/processing and facilitation on the same parcel would effectively zone administration uses into industrial areas. Planning staff said the draft separates healing centers from production/processing businesses and that most healing centers would be expected in neighborhood, community and service commercial zones, while production and testing activities would be allowed in HS/LI. After discussion, the commission accepted staff’s approach as the starting point for the ordinance but asked staff to confirm the map and to return with any necessary refinements.

Commissioners focused on three technical areas:

- Buffer measurement. The draft followed state language referencing a "route of direct pedestrian access" when calculating the 1,000-foot buffer from schools and licensed childcare. Commissioners said that phrase is difficult to implement and inconsistent with how the city measures other separations. The commission asked staff to change the measurement to a straight-line method measured from property line to building, consistent with the city's ADU and other separations, and to provide a clearer map showing how that method might affect specific parcels.

- Hours of operation. The draft initially limited facility activities to daytime hours that some commissioners found too restrictive for variable treatment journeys. After discussion the group agreed on extending operating hours to 7 a.m.–8 p.m. and to permit weekend hours; staff will clarify whether the ordinance imposes a limit on the time of administration versus building opening/closing and will refine the draft language (for example, whether the ordinance should require an administrative cutoff or define when the facility is considered "open").

- Indoor/outdoor activities and security. Commissioners asked whether enclosed courtyards or screened outdoor spaces could be permitted. The commission directed staff to draft language allowing experiences to occur indoors or in an enclosed courtyard or similarly screened outdoor area that restricts public visibility and access, and to tighten requirements on secure on‑site storage and lighting for security. Staff will check whether state licensing already requires safes/lockboxes for products and will align ordinance language with state requirements where appropriate.

Other changes requested: add a short "Purpose and Intent" section before definitions; move key use definitions (healing center vs. business) into the main code definitions because the terms will appear in the use table; correct typos and legacy references (for example, replace "PD" with "Planned Unit Development" where needed); and confirm that references to the Department of Regulatory Agencies and Colorado statutes are clear and, where helpful, include the statutory citation in draft language.

What the commission did not adopt: commissioners debated allowing a healing center and a production facility to colocate in the HS/LI zone. Staff and several commissioners said operators typically prefer a medical/clinic-like location for facilitation, not an industrial site, and the draft retains the separation (healing centers in commercial districts; production/testing in HS/LI). Commissioners asked staff to double-check whether a conditional‑use approach would be appropriate if operators request a different configuration in the future.

Next steps: staff will revise the ordinance and the zoning map, add the requested clarifications and renumbering, and bring the revised draft forward for the noticed public hearing process and the Planning Commission’s and City Council’s readings. Planning staff said they expect the hearings to be scheduled to meet the moratorium timeline the city currently has in place for these uses.

Speakers in the discussion included planning staff identified in the record as Betsy (staff member), the city attorney (Nina), Utilities Director Kip (water availability discussion, see separate article), and several commissioners and council members who spoke by first name (Larry, Don, Karen, Ken, Pauline). Planning staff and the commission repeatedly referenced following state law’s time, place and manner authority for local regulation.