Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Solar topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Weld County approves recording extension for one Cloudbreak solar project, rescinds another after interconnection issues
Summary
The Weld County Board of County Commissioners on Jan. 14 approved an extension for USR23-0034 to allow final design and recording and rescinded USR23-0033 after the applicant said utility interconnection upgrades made that 1.5 MW project infeasible.
The Weld County Board of County Commissioners on Jan. 14 approved an extension to record the final map for USR23-0034, a roughly 28.5-acre solar energy facility, and moved to rescind a separate, previously approved permit, USR23-0033, after the applicant said interconnection studies showed the smaller project was not feasible.
Lindsay Oliver of the Department of Planning Services told the board the USR for the larger site was originally approved on Nov. 22, 2023, and that the applicant requested an extension to Feb. 28, 2026, while engineers complete final design work and compile materials for county review. Oliver said the planning department recommended approval of the extension.
Applicant representative Bridal Dutton said the company had progressed in the utility interconnection queue and ‘‘we have received an interconnection agreement’’ but needed time to ensure updated equipment and designs complied with county code. ‘‘We are excited to get this project moving forward and begin construction this year,’’ Dutton said.
Commissioner Jason Maxey moved to approve the extension and Commissioner Kevin Ross seconded; the board voted by voice and the motion carried.
On the second solar item, Oliver said the board had approved USR23-0033 on Nov. 8, 2023, for a 1.5-megawatt facility but that a final map had not been recorded. The applicant submitted a letter on Dec. 17, 2025, explaining that utility interconnection studies showed the project was not feasible because required transmission and distribution upgrades were cost-prohibitive.
Dutton told the board that substantial upgrades identified in the utility study ‘‘were well beyond what we could afford for this project’’ and that low local load in the area meant long feeders with insufficient capacity. The company requested withdrawal of the permit; Commissioner Kevin Ross moved to rescind USR23-0033 and Commissioner Perry Buck seconded. The motion carried on a voice vote.
The board did not record a detailed roll-call vote for either land-use motion at the time of the voice votes. The extension allows the applicant until Feb. 28, 2026 to record a final map for USR23-0034; rescission removes the previously approved entitlement for USR23-0033. Planning staff said they would follow up with the applicant on next steps for the extended project and update county records for the rescinded permit.
The meeting then moved to public comment and adjourned.
