Fremont County commissioners table Penrose RV and boat storage development after staff recommends denial; applicant to redesign

Fremont County commissioners on Tuesday tabled a decision on CDP 24-001, the Penrose RV and Boat Storage commercial development plan, to the board’s May 13 meeting so the applicant can revise the proposal to meet county regulations.

Planning staff had recommended denial, saying the applicant had created an unnecessary hardship and that the proposal failed to meet multiple provisions of the Fremont County Zoning Resolution, including setback and procedural requirements. The Planning Commission, by contrast, had recommended unanimous approval but noted questions about its authority to act on certain variances.

Planning and zoning staff told the commissioners the property, at 17225 State Highway 115, covers 1.36 acres and is currently zoned business. The application proposes pre‑engineered metal storage units for recreational vehicles and boats, with 24/7 self‑storage access via personal gate codes. The department’s written report cited Fremont County Zoning Resolution section 7.4 (BOSA powers) and section 8.14.0.4.1 as reasons for recommending denial. Planning staff said a hazardous‑spill cleanup procedure was missing from the hazardous‑spill plan submitted, and the department recommended denial of a sanitation waiver request.

Penny Johnson of Beaver Park Water, speaking during public comment, said the ditch easement adjacent to the site includes a 60‑foot easement (30 feet from centerline both ways) and expressed concern about permanent structures and trash entering the water: “Our main concern was that we have a 60 foot easement on the canal, 30 feet from center, both ways, and we just, no permanent structures can be put on that, we need to have access at that, you know, 365 days a year in case we have any problems.”

Applicant representatives and civil engineers said earlier designs had encroached on the ditch easement and that subsequent plans removed that encroachment. The applicant team told the board they will provide a porta‑potty plan to satisfy the sanitation contingency and add a noxious‑weed control plan; staff noted a fire hydrant is shown on the plan but a hazardous‑spill cleanup procedure is still required.

Commissioners discussed safety concerns tied to the property’s access on State Highway 115. One commissioner said he had a verbal discussion with Colorado Department of Transportation staff indicating access might be changed from restricted to full movement, but added that he did not have that in writing and that the current plan — a gated entrance requiring users to stop — could create safety risks for customers with large trailers if left‑out movements are prohibited.

Commissioners also expressed concern about the use of variances. Planning staff concluded that the proposed front‑yard variance — BOZA granted a reduction of the required 40‑foot setback down to 10 feet adjacent to State Highway 115 — did not meet the zoning resolution’s criteria because the owner had created the hardship. Several commissioners said the lot could be redeveloped to meet setbacks, even if that reduced the number of rentable units.

After an extended discussion, a motion to table CDP 24‑001 to the May 13 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 9 a.m. passed unanimously. Commissioners voted: Dwayne Bell, aye; Commissioner McFaul, aye; Commissioner Grantham, aye. The board specified the public hearing would not reopen at that meeting; the application will return on the old‑business agenda after the applicant submits revised plans and staff has time to review them.

What’s next: planning staff listed contingencies they would require if the board ultimately approves the project, including a hazardous‑spill cleanup procedure, an approved noxious‑weed control plan, CDOT access permit documentation, and denial of the sanitation waiver unless a porta‑potty/approved sanitation plan is filed and accepted by Public Health. The applicant said it would work with the county and return with revised plans for the May 13 meeting.

Ending: The board’s decision to table gives the applicant roughly 30 days to redesign the plan and provide the outstanding contingency items. Planning staff will review the revised submission and include it in the May 13 packet if received in time.