OCN

Volunteers reporting on community issues in Monument, Palmer Lake, and the surrounding Tri-Lakes area

OCN > epcpc

epcpc

El Paso County Planning Commission, Nov. 7 and 21 – Housing density, compatibility concerns raised with proposed Monument Ridge development

By Helen Walklett

During November, the commissioners heard requests relating to the proposed Monument Ridge development south of County Line Road and directly east of I-25. They also recommended for approval a final plat in Black Forest that would create six single-family lots.

Monument Ridge

At their Nov. 21 meeting, the commissioners heard requests for two rezones and a preliminary plan for the proposed Monument Ridge development. The property is just under 60 acres and is directly southeast of the intersection of Interstate 25 and County Line Road, southwest of the intersection of County Line Road and Doewood Drive, and a half-mile north of the intersection of Monument Hill Road and Misty Acres Boulevard. It is currently zoned a mixture of Planned Unit Development (PUD), RS-20000 (residential suburban) and various commercial zonings. Before the applications to county, the property was twice the subject of unsuccessful attempts to annex it into the Town of Monument.

The property would be bisected by the planned extension north of Misty Acres Boulevard. The first rezone concerns almost 19 acres east of this extension and would be rezoned to RS-6000 (residential suburban). The applicant plans to create 37 single-family lots on this portion and has committed to 15,000-square-foot lots against the existing 20,000-square-foot lots on the property’s eastern boundary.

The second rezone relates to the 40.51-acre portion west of the Misty Acres Boulevard extension which is bordered to the west by I-25. This rezone would be to the higher density zoning of RM-12 (residential, multi-dwelling). The preliminary plan shows 21 multi-family lots with 305 family units on this portion. The applicant’s letter of intent states that these units will be attached single-family rental units or condo units.

The applicant held a neighborhood meeting in June with over 100 residents in attendance. Kylie Bagley, principal planner, Planning and Community Development Department, said neighbors raised concerns about traffic, landscaping, usable open space, water availability, and housing density. She said 98 adjacent neighbors had been notified ahead of the public hearings and the county had received opposition to the applications.

Craig Dossey of Vertex Consulting Services LLC and representing the applicant said they were bringing up a preliminary plan concurrent with a rezoning so everyone could see the detail of what is being proposed. He stated that the current zoning would allow a lot of different commercial uses on parts of the property. Referring to the northern portion, he said, “A developer could come in today, buy this property, and go build commercial without any approval from the Planning Commission or the Board of County Commissioners.”

During the public comment section of the hearing, six neighbors spoke in support, preferring to see residential developed rather than commercial.

Harold Larson, a Doewood Drive resident, said, “What I’m asking is for you to not back the developer into a corner where he has to go back to the original zoning, where he has to go back to putting commercial there.” He added, “Residential is what I want.”

Bruce Sidebotham, who owns property immediately to the south, said, “This plan brings it all together there in a way that I can live with and that I think supports the Gateway to Monument idea.”

Former Monument Town Council member Darcy Schoening described the proposals as “the best possible solution for this land.”

Twelve people spoke in opposition. While agreeing with those in favor that they did not want to see commercial development, some voiced concerns about the higher density RM-12 rezoning. Doewood Drive resident Robin Wright said his opposition was to the RM-12 rezoning and asked if the rezoning could be RS-6000 throughout.

The Town of Monument has submitted a resolution protesting the rezoning. It states that the development has minimal to no passive or active open space, would put a strain on the town’s Police Department, is detrimental to the preservation of the natural environment, and urges the Planning Commission and the El Paso Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) to reconsider the proposal as a PUD.

Steve King, Monument mayor pro tem, spoke at the hearing to say a PUD application would have ensured community input. Monument Mayor Mitch LaKind voiced concerns about the town’s ability to adequately police the development and said the density was too much. Monument Town Councilmember Kenneth Kimple spoke by phone and said he was not against development but felt the RM-12 high density was not a necessity or need.

In rebuttal, Dossey said those who had spoken in favor were “immediate, adjacent owners telling you this is what’s right for the property.”

The vote to recommend the rezone to RS-6000 was 8-0. The vote to approve the higher density RM-12 zoning was tied 4-4 with Commissioners Jim Byers, Christopher Whitney, Tim Trowbridge, and Eric Moraes the nay votes due to compatibility concerns.

Byers said, “I didn’t hear a compelling justification for the density. I don’t believe it’s compatible with the existing condition.” Trowbridge commented that “the density doesn’t feel quite right.” Chair Tom Bailey said, “I think this would have been an improvement over what’s currently authorized by right.” The tied vote means this rezoning application goes to the BOCC with no recommendation.

The commissioners voted 5-3 to recommend the preliminary plan for approval. The nay votes were Moraes, Trowbridge, and Whitney. Whitney stated, “I’m not smart enough to get my mind around approving a plan that contains a major element with which I disagree.” Moraes and Trowbridge agreed.

The applications are now scheduled to be heard at the BOCC land use meeting on Dec. 12. If the preliminary plan is approved, final plats may be approved administratively.

At the Nov. 7 meeting, the commissioners heard a request by Wayne-Anthony Custom Homes for approval of a 35-acre final plat to create six single-family lots. The property is zoned RR-5 (residential rural) and is on Mariah Trail, about a mile south of Highway 404 and a mile west of Black Forest Road.

Two Elk Creek Ranch residents, whose property adjoins the proposed development, phoned into the meeting to comment on access and voice concerns that residents of the new development would have to use Elk Creek Ranch’s roads for access but would do so without having to abide by their covenants.

Commissioner Jeffrey Markewich asked for clarification on the ownership of the roads and was told they are public and maintained by the county. Commissioner Becky Fuller pointed out that covenants are not part of the review criteria.

The vote to recommend approval was unanimous. This is now scheduled to be heard at the BOCC land use meeting on Dec. 12.

**********

The El Paso County Planning Commission normally meets the first and (as required) the third Thursday of each month at the Regional Development Center, 2880 International Circle, Colo. Springs. Meetings are live-streamed on the El Paso County News and Information Channel at www.elpasoco.com/news-information-channel. Information is available at 719-520-6300 and https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/planning-community-development/2024-hearings-schedule/.

Helen Walklett can be reached at helenwalklett@ocn.me.

Other El Paso County Planning Commission articles

El Paso County Planning Commission, Oct. 17 – Two Tri-Lakes developments recommended for approval

By Helen Walklett

During October, the El Paso County Planning Commission recommended for approval development requests for the final portion of the Settlers Ranch development north of Hodgen Road and the Waterside at Lake Woodmoor development off Woodmoor Drive.

Settlers Ranch

At their Oct. 17 meeting, the commissioners heard requests for a rezone and final plat for the final portion of the Settlers Ranch development. A total of 24 single-family residential lots would be created.

The 78.71-acre property is situated north of Hodgen Road, west of Steppler Road and east of the currently developed part of Settlers Ranch, which consists of single-family detached lots varying between 2.5 and 5 acres. The development adjoins the Abert Ranch and Settlers View subdivisions to the north. The property is in two separated areas that are joined and served by Settlers Ranch Road.

The El Paso Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved the Settlers Ranch development in January 2005 for a total of 86 single-family lots. The current application to rezone from planned unit development (PUD) to RR-2.5 (residential rural), concerns only the 53.53-acre part of the property to the north and west. It would add six lots to this part of the development, which was originally planned to have 10, therefore increasing the total number of lots to 92.

In their letter of intent, the applicant states that the character of the area has changed and an RR-2.5 zoning would now provide consistency with the surrounding area. Under the original PUD zoning, lots in this portion would have ranged from 3 to 5.5 acres.

The 22.51-acre portion of the property to the south and west would remain as a PUD with eight lots varying from 2.5 to 2.74 acres.

Waterside at Lake Woodmoor

Also at the Oct. 17 meeting, the commissioners heard rezone and preliminary plan requests for the proposed 44-single family townhome development, Waterside at Lake Woodmoor. The property is east of Woodmoor Drive and south of Deer Creek Road and borders the lake to its east.

The property is part of a development plan for the Waterside Condominiums, which were approved by the BOCC in 1983. This would have seen 83 condominiums built, but the development never moved forward. In 2023, the current owner proposed a rezone and preliminary plan that would have seen 52 single-family town homes developed. The application was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission by a vote of 6-1 but was withdrawn by the applicant before the BOCC hearing. This new application proposes eight fewer units. See https://ocn.me/v23n6.htm#epcpc.

The rezone application requests that the 7.53-acre property be rezoned from R-4 (planned development) to PUD. Approval of the preliminary plan would mean that subsequent final plats and other agreements could be approved administratively.

The proposed units would be attached and each would have a two-car garage. The density would be significantly lower than the 1980s plan at 5.84 dwelling units per acre. Just over an acre of land would be donated to the Woodmoor Improvement Association to provide a buffer to the existing single-family residential neighborhood to the south.

The commissioners voted unanimously to recommend the applications for approval, and they are now due to be heard at the BOCC land use meeting on Nov. 14.

**********

The El Paso County Planning Commission normally meets the first and (as required) the third Thursday of each month at the Regional Development Center, 2880 International Circle, Colo. Springs. Meetings are live-streamed on the El Paso County News and Information Channel at www.elpasoco.com/news-information-channel. Information is available at 719-520-6300 and https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/planning-community-development/2024-hearings-schedule/.

Helen Walklett can be reached at helenwalklett@ocn.me.

Other EPC Planning Commission articles

El Paso County Planning Commission, Aug. 1 and 15 – Extension to Cathedral Pines development recommended for approval

By Helen Walklett

During August, the El Paso County Planning Commission recommended for approval a request which would extend the Cathedral Pines subdivision, adding eight residential lots in a gated community to be known as The Estates at Cathedral Pines. They also heard requests that would see two Black Forest properties each divided into two separate lots.

The Estates at Cathedral Pines

At their Aug. 15 meeting, the commissioners heard a request by Villagree Development LLC for approval of a rezoning of 35.09 acres from RR-5 (residential rural) to PUD (planned unit development) and approval of a preliminary plan for eight single-family residential lots with open space provision. The currently vacant property is on the west side of Winslow Drive, about 1 mile northwest of the intersection of Shoup and Milam Roads.

The applicant is also seeking a finding of water sufficiency with regards to water quality, quantity, and dependability. Approval of the preliminary plan with such a finding would mean subsequent final plats could be approved administratively, i.e. without public hearings.

The proposed development would be an extension of the Cathedral Pines subdivision, which surrounds the property to the north and east. The proposed lots would range from 2.93 to 4.23 acres and are considered consistent with those in the Cathedral Pines subdivision where the minimum lot size is 2.5 acres. Falcon Forest, the subdivision to the south, has a minimum lot size of 5 acres. The 132-acre property to the west is zoned RR-5 and is undeveloped.

The commissioners voted to recommend the request for approval. It was heard as a consent item, meaning there was no discussion. It is now scheduled to be considered at the Sept. 12 El Paso Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) land use meeting.

Hodgen Road and Snowmass Drive properties

At their Aug. 1 meeting, the commissioners heard a request to subdivide a Hodgen Road property into two residential lots. The 38.68-acre property is zoned RR-5 and is south of Hodgen Road just east of the intersection of Roller Coaster Road and Baptist Road. The proposed lots would be 20.25 and 18.41 acres.

At the same meeting, the commissioners considered a request to replat a 10.36-acre property on Snow Mass Drive east of Black Forest Road to create two residential lots. The two lots would be just over 5 acres each in conformity with the zoning. The property is zoned RR-5.

The commissioners voted unanimously to recommend both applications for approval. They were heard as consent items, meaning there was no discussion. They went on to be approved at the BOCC land use meeting on Aug. 22, again as consent items.

**********

The El Paso County Planning Commission normally meets the first and (as required) the third Thursday of each month at the Regional Development Center, 2880 International Circle, Colo. Springs. Meetings are live-streamed on the El Paso County News and Information Channel at www.elpasoco.com/news-information-channel. Information is available at 719-520-6300 and https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/planning-community-development/2024-hearings-schedule/.

Helen Walklett can be reached at helenwalklett@ocn.me.

Other El Paso County Planning Commission articles

El Paso County Planning Commission, June 6 and 20 – Planning commission recommend denial of Monument glamping site expansion

By Helen Walklett

At the El Paso County Planning Commission meeting on June 6, the commissioners heard a request to expand a glamping site near Monument. Also during June, the commissioners heard a final plat application for a Black Forest property.

Monument glamping site expansion

At their June 6 meeting, the commissioners heard a request by owner Chris Jeub for approval of an amendment to an existing special use to allow four extra sites at his glamping business on his 6.44-acre property at Rickenbacker Avenue, west of Interstate 25 and bordering the Town of Monument. The property is zoned RR-5 (rural residential).

Note: Glamping is a term combining “glamor” and “camping,” meaning camping with certain amenities. Jeub is a volunteer for OCN.

The commissioners heard that Jeub successfully applied for a special use permit for the business in 2022 following a 2021 code enforcement complaint that there were multiple structures on the property, besides the primary residence, such as tents and outdoor bathroom facilities. The special use permitted eight tent or yurt sites with four shared bathrooms and was granted administratively (meaning there were no public hearings) after opposition was withdrawn.

The current application follows complaints about a recreational vehicle (RV) and shipping container at the property. Its approval would modify the special use to increase the number of sites to 12 and allow for a variety of hard-sided camping structures to include RVs and shipping containers. Should approval be granted, the next step would see a site development plan submitted for county’s approval.

Ashlyn Mathy, planner II, Planning and Community Development Department, said the modification would permit various structures such as RVs and shipping containers, which are not normally something you would expect to see in a rural residential area. She continued, “The applicant has not identified the number of glamping sites that will utilize specifically shipping containers and RVs. Therefore, it’s going to be a little more difficult to determine the impact to the surrounding neighbors. With the utilization of the shipping containers and recreational vehicles, we do see that it may not be compatible with the surrounding rural residential neighborhood.”

Mathy said 29 neighbors had been notified and opposition received focused on safety and traffic concerns, a lack of compatibility with the surrounding area, and concerns about the applicant continually doing things on the property without approvals from county. Support for the application noted that it would be a boost to tourism and that it would not have a negative effect on the community. Staff had suggested conditions of approval based on the mitigation of negative impacts to neighbors using landscaping, fence buffering, and other measures to reduce visual impacts, noise, and lighting pollution.

Craig Dossey, president, Vertex Consulting Services, representing the applicant, said stays at the site are intended to be temporary, not exceeding 30 days at a time and no more than 90 in total in one year and stated that the Jeubs are very committed to operating a good business. Describing the proposal as a low-impact development, he said, “We think this is a great transition between a pretty urban area in the town, which is frankly a traditional subdivision just to the east, and that more rural area transitioning up to the National Forest.”

Jeub explained, “Container homes do very well as far as the way the market of glamping goes. Glamping changes very quickly as far as structures and how well the structures do in the market of glamping.” He explained that the additional sites would enable him to pay for some of the required improvements and said, “I want to have beautiful structures here. I don’t want to have junky structures and I think the RV is a step up from the tent that we had.” Dossey added, “There needs to be some flexibility because it is such a developing market right now.”

Commissioner Becky Fuller commented that it was not just four more tent sites that were being requested. She said, “I believe when this [the original application] was approved, the neighbors kind of let it go because it was tents.” She said she thought it was very intentional to approve tents and that this application was a different use variance than that which was already approved. She said she could not see the compatibility of short-term, summer camping versus the longer-term nature of hard-sided structures which could be lived in year-round. She also commented on the code violations which resulted in the special use applications, asking, “Why are we doing something and asking for forgiveness?”

Dossey said he felt the tent-only definition was county staff’s “interpretation” of the wording in the original special use. Mathy said, “it is clearly depicted that it’s all tents” and Meggan Herington, executive director, Planning and Community Development, concurred.

Chris Maciejewski, attorney with Robinson and Henry, P.C. and representing several of the neighbors, said, “It’s clear they’re asking for open-ended approval as to what they can do under that special use permit.” The three sites beside Monument Creek must be tents as no permanent development is permitted on the floodplain. Maciejewski said he thought the expectation is that the other nine would be hard-sided structures and commented, “The expansion to hard-sided structures is going to be a significant change from eight approved tent sites.”

Commissioner Eric Moraes said, “This was approved based on tents. Both the executive director and county attorney confirm that and now we are coming to what’s in my mind a drastically different business to be in the neighborhood with hard-sided, large structures.” Commissioner Christopher Whitney said, “I’m going to be opposed because I think it’s completely incompatible. It’s not really a modification of the earlier special usage but a brand-new application in my mind.”

Commissioner Thomas Bailey took a different view, stating, “Portions of the master plan encourage economic development, encourage this kind of thing, and I see it very much as an entrepreneurial use.” Commissioner Sarah Brittain Jack concurred.

The vote was 7-2 to recommend denial of the application. The nay votes were Bailey and Brittain Jack. The application was then heard at the El Paso Board of County Commissioners’ (BOCC) land use meeting on June 27. See BOCC article on page < 1 >.

Vessey Road rezone

At the June 20 meeting, the commissioners heard a final plat application by Pawel Posorski to create two single-family lots of just over 2.5 acres each on a 6.02-acre Vessey Road property, about one-third of a mile east of the intersection of Vessey Road and Holmes Road. The land was rezoned from RR-5 (rural residential) to RR-2.5 (rural residential) in April. See www.ocn.me/v24n5.htm?zoom_highlight=posorski.

The commissioners voted unanimously to recommend the application for approval. It was heard as a consent item, meaning there was no discussion, and is now due to be heard at the BOCC land use meeting on July 25.

**********

The El Paso County Planning Commission normally meets the first and (as required) the third Thursday of each month at the Regional Development Center, 2880 International Circle, Colo. Springs. Meetings are live-streamed on the El Paso County News and Information Channel at www.elpasoco.com/news-information-channel. Information is available at 719-520-6300 and planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/planning-community-development/2024-hearings-schedule/.

Helen Walklett can be reached at helenwalklett@ocn.me.

Other El Paso County Planning Commission articles

El Paso County Planning Commission, May 2 – Variance for Black Forest property would allow short-term rental to continue

By Helen Walklett

At the El Paso County Planning Commission meeting on May 2, the commissioners heard a request from owners Drew and Tarah MacAlmon for approval of a variance of use to allow an ancillary building to continue to be used as an occasional short-term rental. The 4.78-acre property is located on South Holmes Road, south of its intersection with Burgess Road, and is zoned RR-5 (residential rural).

The MacAlmons received approval in 2018 for an ancillary building to provide a home office and additional living space. It passed all inspections in 2019, and the bedrooms in the basement of the building have been rented out on a short-term basis since that time with the owners not knowing this was not an allowed use.

In 2022 an anonymous complaint about the rental was made to the county’s code enforcement officers, and a violation notice followed. The MacAlmons then met with county staff and were advised not to submit a variance of use application at that time, which would bring the rental activity into compliance, because the county was exploring code amendments that would allow accessory dwelling units.

Meggan Heringtion, executive director, Planning and Community Development, said, “I gave them the ability to hold off. We received the complaint about what we deemed a second dwelling. However, at the time we had been instructed to work on potential code revisions to allow accessory dwelling units and since we were working on that, I did say hold off.” She explained that when the amendment was put on hold waiting for the state Legislature, the applicants were asked to submit a variance of use application. This was done in August 2023.

Ashlyn Mathy, planner II, Planning and Community Development Department, explained that because the 2018 site plan showed no kitchen, the applicants were not required to sign an affidavit acknowledging they could not rent or lease the structure as a separate living unit. Renting the space was never discussed. She said 15 neighbors had been notified and no opposition had been received but a common theme from neighbors was the suggestion that the variance be tied to the owners rather than the property so that it would not be automatically transferred were the property to be sold.

The applicants represented themselves at the hearing. Speaking about the rental activity, Drew MacAlmon said, “We feel this is a way we can recoup some of the cost of rising property taxes as well as the investment we made into the structure.” He said there was no mention of short-term rental in county’s land development code in 2018.

Tarah MacAlmon told the commissioners their primary intent had always been to have a place to work from home and their focus was on completing the office space first. She said that over time they realized there might be a way for the other space in the building to be profitable.

Commissioner Tim Trowbridge commented that the staff report stated a kitchen is present. Drew MacAlmon responded that they had installed an oven without realizing it would be such an issue but had removed it when told it was not allowed. Trowbridge commented, “I’m troubled by what I see as a backdoor attempt at getting this approved.” Commissioner Becky Fuller said, “I would feel better if you said ‘We snook it in and got nailed” because that’s what I feel like happened.’

Drew MacAlmon said, “In our eyes, we went through the process there of inspections, plans, engineering, building that structure and that was all approved.” Tarah MacAlmon commented, “Our willingness and desire is to be fully in compliance and be able to rent this space out that we indeed have invested in.”

Mathy said there had been a unique situation with this project and that there had been some confusion with the process. Justin Kilgore, planning manager, Planning and Community Development, told the commissioners, “This application is the remedy to fix the miscommunications or perceived issues with the project.”

Fuller stated, “To me it’s all about the review criteria. I think the applicant has not shown this in their application. I don’t think that what we have been presented here today meets the appropriate criteria.” She encouraged them to work with department staff and to focus on the criteria to prepare for the El Paso Board of County Commissioners’ (BOCC) land use hearing.

Commissioner Bryce Schuettpelz said, “One of the criteria about the financial hardship is a hard argument to make because if you truly built it to be an office, you weren’t planning on income coming in.”

Trowbridge said, “Short-term rentals are a commercial enterprise. It’s not a guest house and it’s not compatible.”

Chair Tom Bailey stated, “I am in favor of this because I believe the variance is the appropriate vehicle for addressing a shortcoming in our current code and in our current process.”

A motion to approve without further conditions was amended by a vote of 6-2 to include a condition that the variance only apply while the MacAlmons own the property, becoming void upon its sale. The amended motion to recommend approval then succeeded by a vote of 5-3. The nay votes were Fuller, Trowbridge, and Commissioner Christopher Whitney.

Whitney advised the applicants to really look at the approval criteria ahead of the BOCC hearing. To the undue hardship criterium, he suggested the hardship may be that the process is confusing. Speaking to his nay vote, Trowbridge said, “I don’t think this is compatible with the neighborhood. I don’t think short-term rentals belong here.”

The application is now scheduled to be heard at the BOCC land use meeting on June 13.

**********

The El Paso County Planning Commission normally meets the first and (as required) the third Thursday of each month at the Regional Development Center, 2880 International Circle, Colo. Springs. Meetings are live-streamed on the El Paso County News and Information Channel at https://www.elpasoco.com/news-information-channel. Information is available at 719-520-6300 and https://planningdevelopment.elpasoco.com/planning-community-development/2024-hearings-schedule/.

Helen Walklett can be reached at helenwalklett@ocn.me.

Other El Paso County articles