Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Micro Distillery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission backs high‑impact permit for small distillery tied to chocolate operation; neighbors raise water and road concerns
Summary
The commission recommended approval of a high‑impact permit for a micro‑distillery and chocolate operation (applicants listed as W Sanders and Lauren Debate, agent Brian Davis). Commissioners and neighbors discussed private‑road maintenance, water‑tap costs, and traffic; the applicants said production would be "one to two barrels a month" and trips would be kept under 15 per day.
The Montezuma County Planning and Zoning Commission voted unanimously to recommend that the Board of County Commissioners approve a high‑impact permit for a proposed micro‑scale distillery operated in conjunction with an existing chocolate business on Road H.
Planning staff said the proposal is for a small, non‑public distillery tied to the applicants’ home‑based business; the property sits on a privately maintained section of Road H and Montezuma Water Company confirmed a 4‑inch main in the area and availability for additional taps. Staff noted the request is consistent with AR‑35+ zoning allowances when operated as agricultural processing/agritourism and that a wildfire‑mitigation waiver was recommended because the parcel is irrigated and categorized as low risk.
Applicant Brian (identified in meeting materials and speaking at the hearing) described the operation as intentionally tiny: “one to two barrels a month” of production, intended primarily for guests at the property’s planned bed‑and‑breakfast and visitors to the chocolate tours. He said the distillery would largely ship product out or serve property guests and that the distillery itself would not be open to the general public unless the applicants later sought a license change and returned to the county permitting process.
Public comment showed general neighbor support for the business and tourism benefits; Mesa Verde Country’s tourism director Brian Bartlett told commissioners the project “addresses a notable gap in services for a growing segment of our upscale visitation audience” and submitted a letter of support. At the same time, multiple neighbors raised concerns about private‑road maintenance and a separate dispute over water‑tap costs: several residents who contributed to constructing or upgrading a shared 4‑inch water line said the water company is charging very large tap fees to others rather than sharing the installed line’s cost in the way they expected.
Commissioners questioned whether the county could require maintenance agreements for private roads or control water‑company tap pricing; staff and commissioners said maintenance of a private road is generally a matter for landowners sharing that road and that the county has limited authority over privately maintained utilities. Commissioners noted the applicants stated they would keep total trips under the county threshold of 15 per day by throttling chocolate tours and B&B occupancy. Several commenters asked the county to encourage cooperation among neighbors on road maintenance and water arrangements; commissioners said while they could recommend contributions, enforceable private‑road maintenance agreements are outside the commission’s authority.
A motion recommending approval passed on a unanimous roll‑call vote by Commissioners Hernandez, Armstrong, Nurgard, Lynch and Doyle. The commission’s recommendation will move to the Board of County Commissioners for final action.
