Planning commission pauses variance vote for Nevada/Utah Lane RV and mini-storage amid access dispute; moves to executive session for legal advice

The El Paso County Planning Commission took up application VA 244, a variance of use request to allow recreational vehicle storage and a mini-warehouse facility on three parcels totaling about 16.22 acres near Woodman Road and Adventure Way. Rather than voting on the land-use request, the commission voted to enter an executive session to receive legal advice about public access and easement rights for Nevada Lane and related private roads; no final decision on the variance was made at the hearing.

The applicant’s representative, Anne Odom of NES Inc., described a conceptual site layout that includes six climate-controlled storage buildings plus a mix of enclosed, covered and uncovered RV and boat storage. Odom said the site plan shows approximately 433 RV/boat storage stalls and, when aggregated with self-storage units, a total of 1,152 rentable units; the applicant’s traffic memo estimated roughly 207 average daily trips (about 16 AM-peak and 13 PM-peak trips).

The hearing’s central dispute concerned access along Nevada Lane, a narrow right-of-way that runs north–south through the project area and connects to City-maintained Adventure Way. The applicant’s attorney, Sarah Frere, said the applicant brought a quiet-title action and obtained court judgment recorded in May 2022 that confirmed its ownership of a portion of Nevada Lane; she said one recorded access easement holder (identified in staff review) remains unaffected and would retain its recorded rights.

Multiple neighbors disputed the applicant’s characterization of the lane. Kirby Thompson and other residents said Nevada, Utah and California lanes have been used continuously by residents, service vehicles and the public for decades and argued that long-term, uninterrupted use has created prescriptive easements or a public-road status under Colorado law. Thompson said private closures would cut off businesses that rely on those routes. “If Nevada can be closed, who says Utah can’t be closed and the trickle down effect goes beyond that and pretty soon we’re cut off as residents,” he said.

County legal counsel Lori Segal summarized staff’s record review for the commission: the applicant obtained a quiet-title judgment for part of the lane and recorded that judgment; staff did not find additional recorded dedications that would show public ownership of the roadway. Segal said staff did not have sufficient evidence to determine whether prescriptive easements existed for other users and noted staff included a notation in the staff recommendation that any court-established rights would control over any permit or variance approval.

Neighbors asked the commission to resolve the access question before action on the variance; several said the county had historically maintained signage and public use of the lanes. The applicant said it will gate Nevada Lane for customers and provide gate access to recorded easement holders; applicant counsel also said the application record includes an offer to accommodate existing, deeded access rights.

After questions from commissioners and additional explanation from staff about drainage requirements (Sand Creek drainage basin; grading and a drainage report required at site-development plan stage) and traffic (Adventure Way is a City roadway; Nevada Lane access would need coordination with the City if an access permit is required), Commissioner Marais moved that the planning commission go into executive session for legal advice under C.R.S. 24-6-402(4)(b). The motion passed on a roll call vote; commissioners then recessed to obtain legal counsel before continuing deliberations. No final action on VA 244 was taken at the public hearing.

The record shows the application remains under review; if the commission reconvenes and determines a recommendation, any decision will need to acknowledge (and may be constrained by) court-determined access rights or prescriptive-easement claims.