Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board of Adjustments grants variance for Brown27s Canyon Rossi subdivision with conditions
Summary
After extended testimony from applicants and staff, the Board of Adjustments voted to grant a variance to avoid immediate dedication of County Road 263 while directing staff to draft resolution language that creates triggers and guardrails requiring future dedication if lots sell or develop; the resolution will appear in the Aug. 4 packet.
The Chaffee County Board of Adjustments on July 14 heard more than two hours of testimony on a variance request tied to the Brown27s Canyon (Rossi) minor subdivision and voted to grant the variance with conditions requiring specific future triggers for any needed right-of-way dedication.
Planning staff recommended denial, saying the land-use code limits shared driveways to serving four dwelling units and staff27s review found the private access could potentially serve more than that threshold, which would normally require dedication of the road as county right-of-way. "We recommend denial of the variance request," planning staff said in their report, arguing the county should capture potential future development now to avoid legal conflicts later.
The applicant, Steve Tucker, and nearby resident Tracy Adams argued the private easement better protects a mapped wildlife corridor and agricultural operations, and said extending County Road 263 into the property would fragment habitat, interfere with existing irrigation infrastructure and invite through traffic. "I would invite you. I hope you actually don't make a decision today. I would rather you come out to the property and actually look at it," Tucker told the board.
Commissioners and staff debated alternatives: plat notes, recorded easements, and "trigger" language that would require dedication only if particular conditions (sale, new development, establishment of easement) occurred. Speaker 2 moved to grant the variance with explicit guardrails addressing future dedication and sequencing; the motion was seconded and the board voted in favor. The board asked staff to draft specific language and place a resolution on the Aug. 4 packet for further review; they also agreed not to process the item on any consent agenda.
The decision preserves the applicant27s immediate use of a private access while creating a mechanism for the county to require dedication if future development or transfers make a public right-of-way necessary. Staff noted that even when dedications are required the county typically does not assume maintenance responsibilities; the landowner generally remains responsible for upkeep unless the county chooses otherwise.
