Residents urge El Paso County to narrow administrative land‑use authority created by 2017 code change

Laurel Skow, a resident who spoke during public comment, urged the Board of County Commissioners to prevent the county's current land development code update from recodifying provisions she says favor developers.

"Allow additional administrative authority" was, she said, the clause buried in LDC 17‑003 that expanded the Planning and Community Development (PCD) director’s power to classify unlisted uses and approve certain applications administratively. Skow asked the board to "ensure that the updated LDC narrows administrative authority for contested projects, requires public hearings when formal objections have been filed, and closes the loophole that allows a project denied in one jurisdiction to restart from zero in another."

Paula Gordon presented a timeline of personnel and code changes tied to LDC 17‑003, saying the amendment was heard by the planning commission in November 2017 and finalized by the board on Nov. 28, 2017. She told commissioners the county is undertaking a comprehensive update with Clarion Associates and that adoption had been scheduled for spring 2026. "The 2017 administrative authority provisions authored by Mr. Dossie remain unchanged," Gordon said, summarizing her concern that the same framework persists nearly nine years later.

Terry Christensen and other commenters pressed specific code provisions they said create the risk: unlisted use classification by the director; expansion of administrative relief that bypasses public hearings on dimensional standards; and a resubmittal rule they described as permitting jurisdiction‑hopping when a project denied in a municipality is refiled with the county. "The discretion of comparison and classification is currently that of one person," Christensen said, and "that is very much counter to the mission statement and purpose of the code."

Joey Grubisich tied those code concerns to local development, saying a boundary line adjustment connected to the proposed Bucky's travel center was processed administratively despite formal objections from municipalities and residents. He said the effect has been fast administrative approvals: "They got a well, two well permits and a boundary adjustment quicker than it would take me to get a permit to put a shed on my property."

Speakers asked the board to ensure the Clarion Associates update does not simply recodify the same administrative authorities and to adopt clearer safeguards so contested projects trigger public hearings. Commissioners acknowledged the public comments during the meeting; no formal staff report or board directive on revisions to LDC 17‑003 was recorded in the transcript.

Next steps: residents requested the board require public hearings for projects with formal objections and close what commenters called the jurisdiction‑hopping loophole. The transcript records the public comments but does not show any vote or formal board action on those requests during this meeting.