Clear Creek hears Bellevue Mountain Resort sketch plan; staff recommends approval while neighbors and Gilpin County flag road, water and wildfire concerns

Clear Creek County commissioners on Dec. 16 heard a multi-hour sketch-plan presentation for the proposed Bellevue Mountain Resort, a plan to rezone roughly 227 acres north of Idaho Springs to a Planned Development for a lodge, event space, parking deck, dispersed cabins and about 7 miles of recreational trails.

Staff planning manager Garrett McAllister told the board the application met the zoning standards for a sketch-plan review and that planning staff and the planning commission (which recommended approval 2–1) had identified a set of conditions to address remaining issues. McAllister said the applicant proposes an overall development footprint restriction of 20% of total acreage, but the current sketch-plan development is roughly 4 acres (well under county thresholds), and staff judged the project to be low-impact if the outstanding technical items are resolved.

The applicant team described the proposal as low-density and conservation-focused while generating local spending. Lead developer Chad Holmes said the project is a long-term, locally invested effort intended to “preserve the natural landscape” while producing economic benefits. The applicants emphasized an on-site cistern water system with hauled potable water and an on-site wastewater treatment system designed to CDPHE standards; they said they had an agreement in principle with Idaho Springs for water hauling and that final permitting would be required before construction.

Neighbors and several residents urged the board to scrutinize access and safety. Multiple in-person speakers said Bellevue Mountain Drive and parts of Virginia Canyon/2 Brothers Road are narrow, primitive, and not suitable for frequent event traffic. One resident said the proposed upgrades would split a property and eliminate quiet and wildlife values; another raised concerns about nighttime noise, lighting and increased wildfire risk.

Gilpin County officials asked to be meaningfully involved because project traffic is modeled to route substantial event traffic through Gilpin County road segments, increasing maintenance and emergency-response burdens there while Clear Creek County would capture most tax revenues. Gilpin’s community-development director requested additional intergovernmental coordination or a short continuance to allow staff-to-staff work on mitigation and cost allocation for road impacts.

Staff and commissioners flagged a list of outstanding items to be handled at final plan review or by condition: ensuring legal access and 50-foot easement/right‑of‑way where required, plans for road improvements and maintenance agreements (including possible improvements and an improvements/maintenance agreement for Bellevue Mountain Drive), a documented legal water supply and coordination with DNR, a geologic-hazards analysis, wildfire-mitigation planning, on-site wastewater design and permits, trail and easement agreements for trails across adjacent properties, traffic-count monitoring and a fiscal/maintenance plan for roads that may require upgrades.

The board did not make a final decision on rezoning at the end of the hearing; commissioners said they would use the sketch-plan hearing and public comments to refine conditions and questions for the applicant during subsequent proceedings.

What’s next: The sketch-plan hearing identifies issues for the final-plan phase; staff and the applicant will refine easements, technical studies and agreements. Several speakers asked the board to secure written intergovernmental commitments addressing maintenance and emergency-response costs before final approvals.

Quotes "This started two years ago…This is a passion project to create a legacy asset for the area and become an important contributor to the county as well as a good neighbor," Chad Holmes, lead developer.

"We are asking to be meaningfully involved when our infrastructure is being relied upon by design," JB (Jamie) Boyle, director of community development, Gilpin County (spoken during public comment).

Ending The board left the hearing record open for written materials submitted late and indicated follow-up questions. Staff recommended approval with conditions; commissioners signaled they would press for binding easements, engineering reports, water-right documentation and intergovernmental coordination before any final-plan approval.