1
00:01:58,630 --> 00:02:02,757
Good morning and welcome to the Board of
County Commissioners Land Use meeting.

2
00:02:02,757 --> 00:02:04,534
Today is Thursday, September 24th.

3
00:02:04,534 --> 00:02:07,250
We do begin each of our meetings with an
invocation,

4
00:02:07,250 --> 00:02:10,437
and this morning that will be given by
Commissioner Williams.

5
00:02:10,437 --> 00:02:12,326
We invite you to stand and join us.

6
00:02:15,326 --> 00:02:19,470
Our Father in heaven, we're thankful for
this beautiful day.

7
00:02:19,470 --> 00:02:24,651
We're thankful for the rain we've had, and
we're thankful for the moisture.

8
00:02:24,651 --> 00:02:27,413
We are thankful for our free government,

9
00:02:27,413 --> 00:02:32,663
for the opportunity we have to meet here
and to consider the matters of our,

10
00:02:32,663 --> 00:02:36,738
of our county and to participate in our
government process.

11
00:02:36,738 --> 00:02:42,126
We ask thee to Please bless our law
enforcement officers and our military that

12
00:02:42,126 --> 00:02:42,402
enforcement officers and our military that
they

13
00:02:42,402 --> 00:02:46,339
may be safe. And this we say in the name
of Jesus Christ.

14
00:02:48,000 --> 00:02:48,161
Amen.

15
00:02:48,161 --> 00:03:07,206
Commissioner Wysong, if you lead us in the
Pledge of Allegiance.

16
00:03:12,068 --> 00:03:12,550
Item 3.

17
00:03:12,550 --> 00:03:15,263
Item number 3 is staff emergency items,

18
00:03:15,263 --> 00:03:18,810
and I'm unaware of any staff emergency
items today.

19
00:03:18,810 --> 00:03:19,966
Item 4.

20
00:03:19,966 --> 00:03:24,151
Item number 4 is changes, postponements,
and notice of the next meeting.

21
00:03:24,151 --> 00:03:27,755
I'm unaware of any changes or
postponements to today's agenda,

22
00:03:27,755 --> 00:03:31,475
and the next meeting will be Tuesday,
September 29th at 9:00 AM.

23
00:03:32,698 --> 00:03:33,197
Item 5.

24
00:03:33,197 --> 00:03:40,064
Item number 5 is the land use consent
calendar, including item 5A.

25
00:03:40,064 --> 00:03:46,724
Okay, is there anyone here who wishes to
speak on an item on the

26
00:03:46,724 --> 00:03:50,678
consent calendar? Please come forward.

27
00:03:50,678 --> 00:03:55,048
You'll need to introduce yourself and, um,

28
00:03:55,048 --> 00:04:01,499
Make sure that you do sign in, and then
you'll have 3 minutes.

29
00:04:01,499 --> 00:04:07,231
Good morning. My name is

30
00:04:07,231 --> 00:04:12,963
Dean Couture. Um, I just

31
00:04:12,963 --> 00:04:18,218
want to make sure I'm—

32
00:04:18,218 --> 00:04:23,711
this is in reference to

33
00:04:23,711 --> 00:04:27,055
Needles Drive?

34
00:04:27,055 --> 00:04:31,294
No, sir, this is the consent calendar item

35
00:04:31,294 --> 00:04:35,028
5A, so you can come back up in just a

36
00:04:35,028 --> 00:04:35,735
minute.

37
00:04:35,735 --> 00:04:38,592
Okay, sorry, sorry. Yeah, I'll wait.

38
00:04:38,801 --> 00:04:39,043
All right.

39
00:04:39,043 --> 00:04:42,465
Okay, okay.

40
00:04:42,691 --> 00:04:49,151
So, uh, just, uh, another quick ask if we
have anyone who wants to speak on an item

41
00:04:49,151 --> 00:04:52,420
on the consent calendar. That would be 5A.

42
00:04:52,420 --> 00:04:58,413
Okay, seeing none, I will bring that up
here for a motion from commissioners.

43
00:04:58,413 --> 00:04:59,730
Move to approve.

44
00:04:59,730 --> 00:05:00,854
Second.

45
00:05:00,854 --> 00:05:02,816
Okay, that's been moved and seconded.

46
00:05:02,816 --> 00:05:06,105
I'm going to call the roll beginning with
Commissioner Wysong.

47
00:05:06,105 --> 00:05:07,373
Aye.

48
00:05:07,373 --> 00:05:08,641
Vice Chair Nelson.

49
00:05:08,641 --> 00:05:08,947
Aye.

50
00:05:08,947 --> 00:05:10,408
Commissioner Williams.

51
00:05:10,408 --> 00:05:10,552
Aye.

52
00:05:10,552 --> 00:05:14,510
And the chair votes aye. That passes 4-0.
Item 6.

53
00:05:14,510 --> 00:05:20,244
Item number 6 is a map amendment rezoning,
Needles Highway 83 rezoning,

54
00:05:20,244 --> 00:05:26,301
RR-5 to RR-2.5. A request by North Ranch
LLC for approval of a rezoning map

55
00:05:26,301 --> 00:05:32,359
amendment of one property totaling 47.55
acres in size from RR-5 to RR-2.5.

56
00:05:32,359 --> 00:05:38,982
The property is located along the Colorado
State Highway 83 and is 0.7 miles south

57
00:05:38,982 --> 00:05:45,443
of the intersection of Colorado State
Highway 83 and Colorado State Highway 105.

58
00:05:45,443 --> 00:05:50,128
The item was heard as a regular item at
the September 3rd,

59
00:05:50,128 --> 00:05:56,831
2026 Planning Commission meeting and was
recommended for approval with a split vote

60
00:05:56,831 --> 00:06:02,889
of 6-3. Planning Commissioners Brew,
Casagrande, and Wolf voted against the

61
00:06:02,889 --> 00:06:03,454
Casagrande, and Wolf voted against the
motion.

62
00:06:03,454 --> 00:06:09,108
Parcel number 6100000369, Commissioner
District Number 1, file P26008.

63
00:06:09,108 --> 00:06:14,923
Joseph Letke, planner, Planning and
Community Development. Good morning.

64
00:06:14,923 --> 00:06:19,440
Good morning, Madam Chair and Board of
County Commissioners.

65
00:06:19,440 --> 00:06:25,388
My name is Joseph Letke, and I'll be
presenting to you today the Project P-268,

66
00:06:25,388 --> 00:06:28,851
the Needles Highway 83 rezoning, R-5 to
R-2.5.

67
00:06:28,851 --> 00:06:34,423
Brett Dilts was the staff engineer who
reviewed this rezoning application.

68
00:06:34,423 --> 00:06:39,994
I'm going to begin my presentation just to
go over the hearing procedures.

69
00:06:39,994 --> 00:06:44,737
We begin with presentation from staff as
well as the applicant.

70
00:06:44,737 --> 00:06:48,125
We then turn it to the public comment
period,

71
00:06:48,125 --> 00:06:52,944
so citizens in favor or against can come
to the podium to speak,

72
00:06:52,944 --> 00:06:57,311
after which we turn to a rebuttal period
by the applicant,

73
00:06:57,311 --> 00:07:01,301
and then we close out with final questions
for staff,

74
00:07:01,301 --> 00:07:05,291
and then a decision is made by our elected
officials,

75
00:07:05,291 --> 00:07:11,164
the Board of County Commissioners, to vote
to approve or deny the application.

76
00:07:11,164 --> 00:07:17,413
So Planning Commission, they did vote to
recommend for approval, split with 6 to 3.

77
00:07:17,413 --> 00:07:22,231
There was some brief discussion regarding
the change in traffic.

78
00:07:22,231 --> 00:07:27,502
The 3 dissenting Planning Commission
members were silent on reasoning,

79
00:07:27,502 --> 00:07:32,094
so unfortunately I do not have too much
for you on the slide.

80
00:07:32,094 --> 00:07:37,515
It's to kind of explain themselves as what
their decision was made upon,

81
00:07:37,515 --> 00:07:40,226
but it was recommended for approval.

82
00:07:40,226 --> 00:07:46,023
And that request before you today is by
the North Ranch LLC for approval of a

83
00:07:46,023 --> 00:07:50,691
rezoning and map amendment, one property
totaling 47.55 acres,

84
00:07:50,691 --> 00:07:55,359
from the RR-5 to the RR-2.5 residential
rural zoning district.

85
00:07:55,359 --> 00:07:58,897
The property is located along State
Highway 83,

86
00:07:58,897 --> 00:08:04,318
and it is a little bit south of the
intersection of State Highway 83 and

87
00:08:04,318 --> 00:08:04,845
intersection of State Highway 83 and
Highway

88
00:08:04,845 --> 00:08:08,534
105. This next slide is the criteria of
approval,

89
00:08:08,534 --> 00:08:14,256
and I do appreciate that this board is
very familiar with this slide and the

90
00:08:14,256 --> 00:08:17,795
criteria, but for anyone in the audience
today,

91
00:08:17,795 --> 00:08:23,065
I do ask you read through this section
briefly to understand how these

92
00:08:23,065 --> 00:08:23,969
briefly to understand how these
applications

93
00:08:23,969 --> 00:08:29,841
are reviewed by staff staff and how a
final determination is made by the Board

94
00:08:29,841 --> 00:08:29,992
final determination is made by the Board
of

95
00:08:29,992 --> 00:08:35,337
County Commissioners. Next is the
dimensional standards of the 2 zoning

96
00:08:35,337 --> 00:08:36,090
dimensional standards of the 2 zoning
districts.

97
00:08:36,090 --> 00:08:39,102
I made bold the ones that were changing.

98
00:08:39,102 --> 00:08:44,824
So we're seeing, of course, with the R-5,
there's a 5-acre lot size minimum,

99
00:08:44,824 --> 00:08:49,943
and then with the 2.5 reduces to the
smaller zoning requirement for—

100
00:08:49,943 --> 00:08:55,590
that would permit for additional lots on
the property that are 2.5 acres or

101
00:08:55,590 --> 00:08:56,192
the property that are 2.5 acres or
greater.

102
00:08:56,192 --> 00:09:02,291
As we move down, we see that side setback
is slightly different from the 25 feet,

103
00:09:02,291 --> 00:09:08,314
and then the smaller zoning district, 15
feet, as well as that max lot coverage.

104
00:09:08,314 --> 00:09:10,723
With the larger zoning district,

105
00:09:10,723 --> 00:09:16,897
it does have that 25% as opposed to We're
getting to that smaller zoning district.

106
00:09:16,897 --> 00:09:20,435
There's a none. We move on to a zoning
map, um,

107
00:09:20,435 --> 00:09:26,007
to give some context to general
development trend— trends in the area, um,

108
00:09:26,007 --> 00:09:30,524
when certain other subdivisions and
rezonings were approved,

109
00:09:30,524 --> 00:09:33,234
and to give context to this project.

110
00:09:33,234 --> 00:09:39,408
So I want to start from the north at the
top of the page and then go down south to

111
00:09:39,408 --> 00:09:44,904
the bottom. We see the Moss subdivision
that was denied recently in 2026.

112
00:09:44,904 --> 00:09:48,744
As we move to the east or to the right of
the page,

113
00:09:48,744 --> 00:09:54,918
we see the Walden subdivision as our 0.5
half-acre lots that was approved in 1968.

114
00:09:54,918 --> 00:09:58,080
As we move closer to the subject property,

115
00:09:58,080 --> 00:10:03,124
there are a mixture of R-5 planned unit
development and then R-2.5.

116
00:10:03,124 --> 00:10:09,072
So you see to the west the Cherry Creek
Crossing PUD that was approved in 1997.

117
00:10:09,072 --> 00:10:12,611
that does have a minimum lot size of 2.5
acres.

118
00:10:12,611 --> 00:10:18,558
And we move to the west or to the right,
Majestic Pines, R-2.5, and above that,

119
00:10:18,558 --> 00:10:23,001
that was the Walden subdivision, uh, R-5,
approved in 1965.

120
00:10:23,001 --> 00:10:28,948
Next, I, I provide my analysis of the
master plan and how this project fits and

121
00:10:28,948 --> 00:10:29,174
master plan and how this project fits and
is,

122
00:10:29,174 --> 00:10:35,122
um, striving for general conformance with
the large lot residential place type.

123
00:10:35,122 --> 00:10:41,070
That large lot residential place type
provides recommendation for lots that are

124
00:10:41,070 --> 00:10:41,296
provides recommendation for lots that are
2.5

125
00:10:41,296 --> 00:10:46,566
acres or larger, reflecting the area's
intent and existing low-density

126
00:10:46,566 --> 00:10:47,394
intent and existing low-density
residential

127
00:10:47,394 --> 00:10:53,041
character. So the application's request to
rezone the property is generally

128
00:10:53,041 --> 00:10:56,278
consistent with the master plan place
type,

129
00:10:56,278 --> 00:11:01,323
as the proposed R2.5 zoning district
continues to support large lot

130
00:11:01,323 --> 00:11:02,301
continues to support large lot
single-family

131
00:11:02,301 --> 00:11:06,819
residential development in conformance
with this place type.

132
00:11:06,819 --> 00:11:12,993
And for the record, the Board of County
Commissioners makes that final decision if

133
00:11:12,993 --> 00:11:16,155
the application is in general conformance.

134
00:11:16,155 --> 00:11:21,500
But as far as my analysis of how this
project fits with that 2.5 acres,

135
00:11:21,500 --> 00:11:26,093
that is what is recommended for this area
in this place type.

136
00:11:26,093 --> 00:11:31,739
The master plan area of change is
developed The master plan recommends that

137
00:11:31,739 --> 00:11:31,890
developed The master plan recommends that
if

138
00:11:31,890 --> 00:11:37,838
development is to occur in this area, that
the general character is maintained.

139
00:11:37,838 --> 00:11:44,162
My next bullet point discusses some other
relevant zoning districts that are 2.5 and

140
00:11:44,162 --> 00:11:49,282
have that lot size of— that we're seeing
here with this application.

141
00:11:49,282 --> 00:11:52,595
Key area of influence is the Tri-Lakes
area.

142
00:11:52,595 --> 00:11:54,477
This area, in my opinion,

143
00:11:54,477 --> 00:11:59,145
is a bit of a mixture between that
Tri-Lakes area to the west,

144
00:11:59,145 --> 00:12:04,791
where we see the towns of Monument, town
of Palmer Lake, and then Woodmore,

145
00:12:04,791 --> 00:12:08,179
the census-designated area within the
county.

146
00:12:08,179 --> 00:12:11,040
And then if we look down to the south,

147
00:12:11,040 --> 00:12:15,859
we see more of that traditional Black
Forest area of the county.

148
00:12:15,859 --> 00:12:20,602
And then And then if we go just a bit
east, we see Eastonville,

149
00:12:20,602 --> 00:12:25,872
a much more rural area. So it is kind of a
combination of those areas.

150
00:12:25,872 --> 00:12:31,444
However, the master plan defines this
property within that Tri-Lakes area.

151
00:12:31,444 --> 00:12:37,015
The proposed rezoning is generally
consistent with this key area and goal,

152
00:12:37,015 --> 00:12:42,587
as the surrounding area is characterized
again with that rural residential

153
00:12:42,587 --> 00:12:43,490
development.

154
00:12:43,490 --> 00:12:44,824
Thank you.

155
00:12:47,824 --> 00:12:51,826
Next, uh, handful of slides are regarding
traffic and engineering,

156
00:12:51,826 --> 00:12:53,523
so I'll turn it over to, um,

157
00:12:53,523 --> 00:12:56,009
your staff member to discuss those items.

158
00:12:56,009 --> 00:13:01,122
Good morning, Brett Diltz, El Paso County
Department of Public Works.

159
00:13:01,122 --> 00:13:06,236
A transportation impact study was
submitted with this rezone request.

160
00:13:06,236 --> 00:13:12,090
Uh, in that study, they anticipate this
development to generate about 127 daily

161
00:13:12,090 --> 00:13:18,018
trips. Those trips will be served by an
extension of existing Needles Drive that

162
00:13:18,018 --> 00:13:19,797
would turn to the north.

163
00:13:19,797 --> 00:13:24,688
An emergency access has been granted by
CDOT to access Highway 83.

164
00:13:24,688 --> 00:13:28,097
That will be on the north end of the
property.

165
00:13:28,097 --> 00:13:31,728
Road impact fees are applicable for this
project.

166
00:13:31,728 --> 00:13:37,212
There was a slight discretion— slight
issue with the traffic impact study.

167
00:13:37,212 --> 00:13:40,250
They had 125 trips identified versus 127.

168
00:13:40,250 --> 00:13:40,371
Okay.

169
00:13:40,518 --> 00:13:43,146
So it does show 200 trips versus 202
trips.

170
00:13:43,146 --> 00:13:46,264
200 trips is our threshold for paving the
roadways.

171
00:13:46,264 --> 00:13:48,526
When we get this in for a final plat,

172
00:13:48,526 --> 00:13:53,171
we will have a chance to re-review the
traffic study submitted at that time.

173
00:13:53,171 --> 00:13:58,062
We will know their final number of lots
and their actual number of trips at that

174
00:13:58,062 --> 00:14:02,585
time. If paving is required, we will
determine it at the final plat stage.

175
00:14:02,585 --> 00:14:08,876
Any other questions for traffic for this
project? Yes.

176
00:14:11,876 --> 00:14:12,181
Drainage.

177
00:14:12,936 --> 00:14:16,323
The project is located in the West Cherry
Creek Drainage Basin.

178
00:14:16,323 --> 00:14:19,011
That basin is not part of the bridge fee
programs.

179
00:14:19,011 --> 00:14:21,914
There are no bridge or drainage basin fees
applicable.

180
00:14:21,914 --> 00:14:25,838
With the rezoning, we do not get a
drainage report or grading and erosion

181
00:14:25,838 --> 00:14:26,268
drainage report or grading and erosion
control.

182
00:14:26,268 --> 00:14:28,848
Those will be reviewed at the final plat
period.

183
00:14:28,848 --> 00:14:38,169
Any questions on drainage for this
project?

184
00:14:41,169 --> 00:14:45,436
My next slide is on the public input
portion of this project.

185
00:14:45,436 --> 00:14:46,835
Just for the record,

186
00:14:46,835 --> 00:14:52,150
I believe we received 24 public comments
of opposition located within EDARP.

187
00:14:52,150 --> 00:14:57,886
2 of those came in in the last few days,
and they have been provided to the clerk.

188
00:14:57,886 --> 00:15:00,684
Some key phrases and items I recognized—

189
00:15:00,684 --> 00:15:05,300
some of those concerns over challenges
over the roads and traffic,

190
00:15:05,300 --> 00:15:11,175
increased density, removal of trees, fire
protection, water supply, light pollution,

191
00:15:11,175 --> 00:15:12,924
and the general location.

192
00:15:12,924 --> 00:15:15,232
Madam Chair, just for the record,

193
00:15:15,232 --> 00:15:18,939
I want to let you know that a handful of
these items,

194
00:15:18,939 --> 00:15:21,807
such as water supply and fire protection,

195
00:15:21,807 --> 00:15:26,633
are looked at more in depth during an
actual subdivision application.

196
00:15:26,633 --> 00:15:31,320
So that's not what's before you today.
Again, it's just the rezone.

197
00:15:31,320 --> 00:15:36,565
So those items will be reviewed to code
and reviewed more thoroughly by the

198
00:15:36,565 --> 00:15:37,125
and reviewed more thoroughly by the
Monument

199
00:15:37,125 --> 00:15:39,993
Fire Protection District at a later time.

200
00:15:39,993 --> 00:15:43,700
During the September 3rd Planning
Commission hearing,

201
00:15:43,700 --> 00:15:47,617
several citizens spoke in opposition to
the application.

202
00:15:47,617 --> 00:15:51,464
And then, um, small change with this last
bullet point.

203
00:15:51,464 --> 00:15:54,681
The subdivision application has been
received.

204
00:15:54,681 --> 00:15:59,927
It's currently pending payment of review,
um, which I would anticipate, um,

205
00:15:59,927 --> 00:16:03,844
would come further down if this
application is approved.

206
00:16:03,844 --> 00:16:06,152
Lastly, the hearing notification.

207
00:16:06,152 --> 00:16:08,251
On August 19th, 2026, the, um,

208
00:16:08,251 --> 00:16:13,426
Planning Community Development Department
mailed out hearing notices to 36

209
00:16:13,426 --> 00:16:15,385
neighboring property owners,

210
00:16:15,385 --> 00:16:20,701
and then the property was posted with
those notices of public hearing dates,

211
00:16:20,701 --> 00:16:23,499
as well as it was posted in the Gazette.

212
00:16:23,499 --> 00:16:28,325
Are there any questions for me before I
turn it over to the applicant

213
00:16:28,325 --> 00:16:29,234
turn it over to the applicant
presentation?

214
00:16:29,234 --> 00:16:51,393
Okay, no questions at this time, so we'll
bring up the applicant.

215
00:17:05,245 --> 00:17:11,491
Nina— sorry, Nina Dossi with Vertex
Consulting for the Needles Highway 83

216
00:17:11,491 --> 00:17:12,090
Consulting for the Needles Highway 83
rezone.

217
00:17:12,090 --> 00:17:17,309
Oh, my mouse doesn't work, but let me see
if the arrow works.

218
00:17:17,309 --> 00:17:23,555
Nope, that doesn't work either. Okay, now
it's working. Sorry about that.

219
00:17:23,555 --> 00:17:25,780
Okay, so Joe covered this.

220
00:17:25,780 --> 00:17:32,283
The item was heard at the Planning
Commission on September 3rd. The vote was

221
00:17:32,283 --> 00:17:32,882
Commission on September 3rd. The vote was
6 to 3.

222
00:17:32,882 --> 00:17:38,871
Those that voted no actually did not speak
at all during that hearing,

223
00:17:38,871 --> 00:17:45,031
so it has every appearance of being a
capricious decision on their part.

224
00:17:45,031 --> 00:17:50,336
When the chair asked them to speak and
explain their no votes,

225
00:17:50,336 --> 00:17:54,529
they had no words at that time either.
Thank you.

226
00:17:54,529 --> 00:17:58,892
As Joe identified, there were some public
comments.

227
00:17:58,892 --> 00:18:05,652
Those public comments were primarily based
on issues that will be discussed and

228
00:18:05,652 --> 00:18:08,903
analyzed during the subdivision stage,

229
00:18:08,903 --> 00:18:15,577
so they're not part of the rezoning
criteria or rezoning considerations today.

230
00:18:15,577 --> 00:18:22,422
The only one that was brought up that is
really a part of the rezone is traffic,

231
00:18:22,422 --> 00:18:28,497
and the traffic study has been approved
and accepted by El Paso County.

232
00:18:28,497 --> 00:18:35,171
So for the purposes of the rezone hearing,
that issue has been closed as well.

233
00:18:35,171 --> 00:18:41,759
So again, this is a request to rezone the
property to RR2.5 from the RR5 zone

234
00:18:41,759 --> 00:18:45,609
district. The property is 19.4 acres in
size.

235
00:18:45,609 --> 00:18:48,861
If you look at the surrounding zoning,

236
00:18:48,861 --> 00:18:54,936
you'll notice that it's surrounded by
2.5-acre lots within the PUD zone

237
00:18:54,936 --> 00:18:55,706
2.5-acre lots within the PUD zone
district,

238
00:18:55,706 --> 00:19:01,695
to the west, and then to the east and
north is the RR-5 zone district,

239
00:19:01,695 --> 00:19:05,203
and then to the south is the RR-2.5 zone.

240
00:19:05,203 --> 00:19:07,684
If you look even further out,

241
00:19:07,684 --> 00:19:12,390
you'll notice that within Walden there are
1-acre lots,

242
00:19:12,390 --> 00:19:17,096
and then there's also even 5-acre lots
within the area.

243
00:19:17,096 --> 00:19:24,112
So a 2.5-acre lot size and overall density
is absolutely within character for this

244
00:19:24,112 --> 00:19:24,540
Area.

245
00:19:24,605 --> 00:19:25,173
Commissioner Williams.

246
00:19:25,173 --> 00:19:31,370
I'm sorry, is that one by Ray Kilmer, is
that a 0.5 or is that a point—

247
00:19:31,370 --> 00:19:33,863
It's 0.5, so that, um, so a half an acre.

248
00:19:33,863 --> 00:19:38,486
Yeah, so the— I don't know, it's— they,
they both look yellow on that screen

249
00:19:38,486 --> 00:19:38,850
they both look yellow on that screen
there,

250
00:19:38,850 --> 00:19:43,290
but the one that looks more yellow. All
right, thank you. Half-acre lots.

251
00:19:43,633 --> 00:19:46,680
Okay.

252
00:19:49,680 --> 00:19:51,539
So for the first criteria,

253
00:19:51,539 --> 00:19:55,757
I do want to read this just because
there's an or in there,

254
00:19:55,757 --> 00:20:01,120
and I saw in some of the letters from the
opposition there seems to be some

255
00:20:01,120 --> 00:20:05,481
confusion about this criteria. So just
give me a second here.

256
00:20:05,481 --> 00:20:10,844
So the application is in general
conformance with the El Paso County Master

257
00:20:10,844 --> 00:20:11,201
conformance with the El Paso County Master
Plan,

258
00:20:11,201 --> 00:20:13,918
including applicable small area plans,

259
00:20:13,918 --> 00:20:19,209
or there has been a substantial
Substantial change in the character of the

260
00:20:19,209 --> 00:20:22,999
neighborhood since the last— the land was
last zoned.

261
00:20:22,999 --> 00:20:28,004
So the or means that you don't necessarily
have to meet both of those,

262
00:20:28,004 --> 00:20:30,363
but only one of them is required.

263
00:20:30,363 --> 00:20:31,865
With that being said,

264
00:20:31,865 --> 00:20:37,084
I actually think that they do meet both of
these aspects of the criteria,

265
00:20:37,084 --> 00:20:38,586
and I'll explain why.

266
00:20:38,586 --> 00:20:41,374
So Joe already covered the master plan,

267
00:20:41,374 --> 00:20:45,879
so I'll very briefly go through unless
there are any questions.

268
00:20:45,879 --> 00:20:49,883
So as he identified, it's within the Tri
Lakes Key Area,

269
00:20:49,883 --> 00:20:55,316
which recognizes that there's a great need
for housing within this key area.

270
00:20:55,316 --> 00:20:58,891
It also just outlines that if there's
development,

271
00:20:58,891 --> 00:21:02,037
it should align with the existing
character.

272
00:21:02,037 --> 00:21:04,540
And as you can see on the map here,

273
00:21:04,540 --> 00:21:10,260
the existing character does include lot
sizes all the way from half an acre to 5

274
00:21:10,260 --> 00:21:13,906
acres. So 2.5 acres is definitely within
character.

275
00:21:13,906 --> 00:21:17,124
The area of change, minimal change
developed,

276
00:21:17,124 --> 00:21:22,343
and it identifies that isolated vacant
properties may develop at a higher

277
00:21:22,343 --> 00:21:23,058
properties may develop at a higher
intensity.

278
00:21:23,058 --> 00:21:26,419
That's actually not what's being proposed
here.

279
00:21:26,419 --> 00:21:31,138
So even though the master plan would allow
for a higher intensity,

280
00:21:31,138 --> 00:21:36,357
what's being proposed is an equivalent to
what's already within the area.

281
00:21:36,357 --> 00:21:39,003
On the map off to the left-hand side,

282
00:21:39,003 --> 00:21:43,722
you'll see that this is an underutilized
vacant piece of property.

283
00:21:43,722 --> 00:21:48,012
When you look at it compared to the
surrounding development,

284
00:21:48,012 --> 00:21:52,516
you'll see that it's much larger in size
than what's around it.

285
00:21:52,516 --> 00:21:56,806
There are a few vacant parcels within the
area, but this is,

286
00:21:56,806 --> 00:21:59,880
is one of the few that are within the
area.

287
00:21:59,880 --> 00:22:04,313
You'll see up along Highway 83 on both the
east and west side,

288
00:22:04,313 --> 00:22:07,173
there are some remaining vacant parcels.

289
00:22:07,173 --> 00:22:10,033
The place type is large lot residential,

290
00:22:10,033 --> 00:22:14,323
which specifically recommends lot sizes of
and a half acres,

291
00:22:14,323 --> 00:22:17,112
so they're in compliance there as well.

292
00:22:17,112 --> 00:22:22,117
So I want to go back to this slide here
just for that second criteria.

293
00:22:22,117 --> 00:22:27,122
So the second criteria, which is not a
requirement because it's an or,

294
00:22:27,122 --> 00:22:32,413
states that there hasn't been a
substantial change since the area was last

295
00:22:32,413 --> 00:22:32,842
substantial change since the area was last
zoned.

296
00:22:32,842 --> 00:22:37,847
So this piece of property was zoned in
1955 to the RR-5 zone district.

297
00:22:37,847 --> 00:22:43,495
You can see that all of these existing
developments, the Cherry Creek Crossing,

298
00:22:43,495 --> 00:22:48,786
Settlers, Dancing Wolf, and Walden, so
both the older Walden and the newer

299
00:22:48,786 --> 00:22:49,287
both the older Walden and the newer
Walden,

300
00:22:49,287 --> 00:22:51,432
were all developed after 1955.

301
00:22:51,432 --> 00:22:57,223
So there actually has been a change in
their character since it was last zoned in

302
00:22:57,223 --> 00:23:01,799
1955. So even though it's not a
requirement that they meet both,

303
00:23:01,799 --> 00:23:06,017
in this instance they actually do. Oh, I
skipped over this.

304
00:23:06,017 --> 00:23:09,592
So it's also within the priority
development area,

305
00:23:09,592 --> 00:23:12,452
which specifically recommends 2.5 acres.

306
00:23:12,452 --> 00:23:15,384
Um, the priority development area is, uh,

307
00:23:15,384 --> 00:23:21,104
within the master plan because these are
areas that the county fully anticipates

308
00:23:21,104 --> 00:23:23,678
developing sooner rather than later.

309
00:23:23,678 --> 00:23:27,896
So the second criteria is regarding
statutory requirements.

310
00:23:27,896 --> 00:23:32,973
As you heard Joe state, all statutory
requirements have been satisfied.

311
00:23:32,973 --> 00:23:38,907
The third, the proposed land use or zoning
district is compatible with existing and

312
00:23:38,907 --> 00:23:42,983
permitted land uses and zone districts in
all directions.

313
00:23:42,983 --> 00:23:48,202
So if you look at the existing and
permitted land uses in all directions,

314
00:23:48,202 --> 00:23:53,136
you'll see that they include rural
residential development as well as

315
00:23:53,136 --> 00:23:54,065
residential development as well as
single-family

316
00:23:54,065 --> 00:23:55,781
residential development.

317
00:23:55,781 --> 00:24:00,071
And with our 2.5 zone district, it's going
to stay the same.

318
00:24:00,071 --> 00:24:03,932
So not only are they compatible, but in
this instance,

319
00:24:03,932 --> 00:24:08,651
they are actually exactly the same when
you look at the land uses.

320
00:24:08,651 --> 00:24:11,225
The only difference is the lot size.

321
00:24:11,225 --> 00:24:14,228
The site is suitable for the intended use,

322
00:24:14,228 --> 00:24:18,303
including the ability to meet the Chapter
5 requirements.

323
00:24:18,303 --> 00:24:24,023
So these will really be further analyzed
with the subdivision at the next stage.

324
00:24:24,023 --> 00:24:25,525
So at the next stage,

325
00:24:25,525 --> 00:24:31,388
staff will review to make sure that each
lot is 2.5 acres in size, each lot meets—

326
00:24:31,388 --> 00:24:35,749
not listed here, but there's a 200-foot
frontage requirement.

327
00:24:35,749 --> 00:24:39,682
And then even later on at the stage of
building permit,

328
00:24:39,682 --> 00:24:44,973
it'll be determined if the proposed
structures meet the setback and height

329
00:24:44,973 --> 00:24:50,478
requirements. But there's no reason to
believe that This proposed development

330
00:24:50,478 --> 00:24:50,836
believe that This proposed development
won't

331
00:24:50,836 --> 00:24:54,768
be able to meet the standards. Are there
any questions?

332
00:24:54,768 --> 00:24:59,785
Questions from commissioners at

333
00:24:59,785 --> 00:25:04,801
this time? Commissioner Wysong.

334
00:25:04,801 --> 00:25:10,183
Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, just kind of
an interesting point.

335
00:25:10,183 --> 00:25:12,440
I've got a few. Questions.

336
00:25:12,440 --> 00:25:17,995
Um, everything is labeled a RR whatever
except for what's to the

337
00:25:17,995 --> 00:25:22,162
immediate north and to the east, um, on
the map,

338
00:25:22,162 --> 00:25:28,238
which I just kind of felt that that was
interesting that that was, uh,

339
00:25:28,238 --> 00:25:29,193
overlooked.

340
00:25:29,193 --> 00:25:34,477
Commissioner, I actually did state that to
the north and to the east is RR 5.

341
00:25:34,477 --> 00:25:40,037
It stated, but it's not on the map. On any
of your maps.

342
00:25:40,037 --> 00:25:45,100
Okay, um, question, and this may or may
not be, um,

343
00:25:45,100 --> 00:25:50,759
it could be part of the, the, um,
transportation element,

344
00:25:50,759 --> 00:25:55,326
but there is the, um, easement, AT&T
easement,

345
00:25:55,326 --> 00:25:59,893
running all the way through, uh, the
property.

346
00:25:59,893 --> 00:26:03,169
How is that being, um, addressed?

347
00:26:03,169 --> 00:26:06,661
So that'll be addressed as part of the
subdivision.

348
00:26:06,661 --> 00:26:12,276
It's not a part of the criteria related to
the rezone, but during the subdivision,

349
00:26:12,276 --> 00:26:16,864
that easement would need to either remain
in place or be relocated.

350
00:26:16,864 --> 00:26:19,945
It's pretty unlikely that it'll be
relocated.

351
00:26:19,945 --> 00:26:24,738
AT&T is— has not historically been a fan
of moving all of their lines,

352
00:26:24,738 --> 00:26:26,587
and that's expensive to do.

353
00:26:26,587 --> 00:26:31,722
So most likely during the subdivision
stage, it'll be shown as an easement,

354
00:26:31,722 --> 00:26:37,337
which means it's no-build. But that's not
for the rezone, it's for the next stage.

355
00:26:37,337 --> 00:26:43,148
Okay, it, it just may have an impact is
why I was curious.

356
00:26:43,148 --> 00:26:49,560
Um, you make note in your packet that only
14 homes will be, um,

357
00:26:49,560 --> 00:26:54,770
added Or 14 lots, um, with an average of
3.17 acres.

358
00:26:54,770 --> 00:26:59,379
And then if you look at what was provided,
um,

359
00:26:59,379 --> 00:27:07,194
there's only one lot that even exceeds
that. Uh, the rest of them are smaller.

360
00:27:07,194 --> 00:27:14,208
Now that could be taken up because you've—
according to the, the site,

361
00:27:14,208 --> 00:27:17,013
you've got a retention pond.

362
00:27:17,013 --> 00:27:24,127
Um, but I just thought that was
interesting, that how that was written.

363
00:27:24,127 --> 00:27:31,541
It just made it seem like, okay, average
of over 3 acres, when in reality,

364
00:27:31,541 --> 00:27:39,356
based on the supplied plot plan, which may
or may not be permanent, that only—

365
00:27:39,356 --> 00:27:46,570
again, only one of those lots even
exceeded the 3.17. Um, next question.

366
00:27:46,570 --> 00:27:52,596
Commissioner, can I ask, um, we haven't
submitted a subdivision yet.

367
00:27:52,596 --> 00:27:56,141
So, um, what we're proposing is 14 lots,

368
00:27:56,141 --> 00:28:01,281
but this zoning action is not necessarily
tied to 14 lots.

369
00:28:01,281 --> 00:28:01,860
I understand.

370
00:28:01,860 --> 00:28:03,623
I want to be careful, um,

371
00:28:03,623 --> 00:28:08,701
careful to make sure that we're sticking
to the criteria for the rezone,

372
00:28:08,701 --> 00:28:12,862
which the specific number of, of lots
isn't a part of that.

373
00:28:12,862 --> 00:28:17,375
But maybe I'll look to the chair and see
if maybe I'm off there.

374
00:28:18,639 --> 00:28:19,693
No, I would just say,

375
00:28:19,693 --> 00:28:23,609
let's make sure we are sticking to the
criteria and please ask your questions.

376
00:28:23,609 --> 00:28:27,374
If you have comments, there will be time
for comments as we get through the

377
00:28:27,374 --> 00:28:27,776
for comments as we get through the
hearing.

378
00:28:27,776 --> 00:28:31,346
This is traffic study question.

379
00:28:31,346 --> 00:28:35,145
I've got kind of 2 key questions,

380
00:28:35,145 --> 00:28:42,054
so I'm going to assume that you're
familiar with the traffic

381
00:28:42,054 --> 00:28:49,308
study. On page 5, and again on page 4 is
what I was looking at,

382
00:28:49,308 --> 00:28:56,562
but on page 5 it talks that there's
nothing going to be done to

383
00:28:56,562 --> 00:29:02,205
Highway 83 until 2045, so approximately 20
years.

384
00:29:02,205 --> 00:29:08,653
And I, I just wanted to kind of get Your
opinion on, um,

385
00:29:08,653 --> 00:29:11,762
with the traffic study, uh,

386
00:29:11,762 --> 00:29:18,901
stating that it's not going to be really
looked at until 2045.

387
00:29:18,901 --> 00:29:26,040
Is that something that could ultimately
have an impact on the—

388
00:29:26,040 --> 00:29:33,179
basically the doubling of the density of
the proposed piece of

389
00:29:33,179 --> 00:29:34,215
property?

390
00:29:34,215 --> 00:29:39,580
Commissioner, I just pulled up the traffic
study because I don't know every single

391
00:29:39,580 --> 00:29:44,487
page. So let me just make sure that we're
talking about the same paragraph.

392
00:29:44,487 --> 00:29:46,254
You said page— what was it?

393
00:29:46,254 --> 00:29:46,949
You're on it.

394
00:29:46,949 --> 00:29:50,815
Okay. And then you mentioned 2045.

395
00:29:50,815 --> 00:29:57,523
I don't see 2045 on this bottom paragraph.
The very bottom.

396
00:29:57,523 --> 00:30:04,913
Okay, let me look. Okay, so that's a CDOT.
So that's CDOT's plan.

397
00:30:04,913 --> 00:30:08,552
So the traffic study, of course,

398
00:30:08,552 --> 00:30:13,327
has to take a look at CDOT's future plans.

399
00:30:13,327 --> 00:30:19,580
So CDOT's current configuration and their
future plans.

400
00:30:19,580 --> 00:30:26,857
This applicant and nobody in the county
has any control over the

401
00:30:26,857 --> 00:30:30,268
timing of CDOT's improvements.

402
00:30:30,268 --> 00:30:33,792
So just like in El Paso County,

403
00:30:33,792 --> 00:30:40,842
they have long-range plans that the county
hopes to get there.

404
00:30:40,842 --> 00:30:48,004
There's no guarantees in 2045 of if they
will have the widening

405
00:30:48,004 --> 00:30:52,325
completed. Is that what you're asking?

406
00:30:52,325 --> 00:30:56,299
It was just interesting that it's, you
know, You know,

407
00:30:56,299 --> 00:30:59,906
almost 20 years out before it's even on
the plan.

408
00:30:59,906 --> 00:31:02,850
And, and I understand the criteria, but—

409
00:31:02,850 --> 00:31:03,171
Yeah.

410
00:31:03,171 --> 00:31:08,236
It just— looking at the traffic
information provided,

411
00:31:08,236 --> 00:31:11,390
that it was just stuck out at me.

412
00:31:11,390 --> 00:31:18,367
And I was just curious if there was
anything else that potentially was to

413
00:31:18,367 --> 00:31:24,293
go along with that particular date.
Because it's 20 years out.

414
00:31:24,293 --> 00:31:27,191
It's the same as El Paso County's MTCP,

415
00:31:27,191 --> 00:31:33,060
where the MTCP outlines different roadway
widths depending on which year you're

416
00:31:33,060 --> 00:31:37,518
looking at. So the MTCP looks at, you
know, 2045 and beyond.

417
00:31:37,518 --> 00:31:41,531
And so you may have seen subdivisions come
before you,

418
00:31:41,531 --> 00:31:47,400
and I know we're getting outside of the
subdivision— or sorry, rezone criteria,

419
00:31:47,400 --> 00:31:50,447
but I'll just answer this really quickly.

420
00:31:50,447 --> 00:31:56,391
You may have seen subdivisions come before
you where there's right-of-way that's

421
00:31:56,391 --> 00:32:00,551
actually being dedicated, and then there's
preservation,

422
00:32:00,551 --> 00:32:04,712
and that preservation is for a future
state of widening.

423
00:32:04,712 --> 00:32:09,765
So CDOT does the same thing where they
look at, okay, in the future,

424
00:32:09,765 --> 00:32:12,588
what does this road need to look like?

425
00:32:12,588 --> 00:32:17,863
And they've identified that in 2045, they
think it needs to be widened,

426
00:32:17,863 --> 00:32:23,807
but it's the same same situation as El
Paso County has, where it may be widened,

427
00:32:23,807 --> 00:32:26,928
it may not be widened. It's a future plan.

428
00:32:26,928 --> 00:32:32,278
El Paso County and specific applicants
have no control over that timing,

429
00:32:32,278 --> 00:32:38,222
and individual subdivisions such as this
one would have no control over that and

430
00:32:38,222 --> 00:32:44,091
certainly wouldn't be obligated to do a
widening when it's Not required at this

431
00:32:44,091 --> 00:32:44,388
widening when it's Not required at this
time

432
00:32:44,388 --> 00:32:47,732
and may not even be required at a later
date.

433
00:32:47,732 --> 00:32:53,758
Okay, then on, um, I guess existing, if
you just—

434
00:32:53,758 --> 00:32:59,416
whether you need to or not, it doesn't
really—

435
00:32:59,416 --> 00:33:05,196
the next map kind of stops at Walden Way
and it

436
00:33:05,196 --> 00:33:08,762
doesn't go any further north.

437
00:33:08,762 --> 00:33:13,067
But did this take into account, um,

438
00:33:13,067 --> 00:33:19,339
the school as far as class schedules,
timing, etc.,

439
00:33:19,339 --> 00:33:19,954
etc.?

440
00:33:19,954 --> 00:33:23,308
The traffic study, the limits— and you can
ask,

441
00:33:23,308 --> 00:33:28,017
you can confirm with staff because I'm not
a traffic engineer, um,

442
00:33:28,017 --> 00:33:30,800
so I'll just give you my understanding.

443
00:33:30,800 --> 00:33:32,940
Uh, so the, the traffic study,

444
00:33:32,940 --> 00:33:38,863
there's specific criteria within El Paso
County's adopted codes That identifies how

445
00:33:38,863 --> 00:33:43,216
far out you need to study based upon the
anticipated traffic,

446
00:33:43,216 --> 00:33:45,570
and so for this particular study,

447
00:33:45,570 --> 00:33:51,493
it's determined that what you see here was
as far out as they needed to go based on

448
00:33:51,493 --> 00:33:54,918
the anticipated traffic that would be
generated.

449
00:33:54,918 --> 00:33:56,487
So just like you know,

450
00:33:56,487 --> 00:34:01,554
you wouldn't go all the way out to I-25
because then where do you stop?

451
00:34:01,554 --> 00:34:04,051
There's specific criteria in place.

452
00:34:04,051 --> 00:34:08,475
And so the county staff, when they
reviewed the traffic study,

453
00:34:08,475 --> 00:34:14,183
they reviewed the scope of it and they
reviewed to see if the traffic consultant

454
00:34:14,183 --> 00:34:14,397
reviewed to see if the traffic consultant
had

455
00:34:14,397 --> 00:34:15,824
gone far enough out.

456
00:34:15,824 --> 00:34:20,962
And so it's been approved because based on
the county-specific criteria,

457
00:34:20,962 --> 00:34:23,388
they have analyzed far enough out.

458
00:34:23,388 --> 00:34:24,230
Okay.

459
00:34:24,230 --> 00:34:27,062
Check with staff on that. I'm not a
traffic engineer.

460
00:34:27,062 --> 00:34:32,523
I just didn't know where actually to kind
of start on those questions.

461
00:34:33,152 --> 00:34:37,545
And I think we'll have another opportunity
to check in with staff.

462
00:34:37,545 --> 00:34:43,003
And I do think staff already did say that
they would take a closer look at traffic

463
00:34:43,003 --> 00:34:48,062
in a future stage. And so that's not as
specific to the criteria here today.

464
00:34:48,062 --> 00:34:50,791
So let's keep it within the criteria for—

465
00:34:50,791 --> 00:34:55,849
within the legal bounds of what we are
able to consider today, please. Okay.

466
00:34:55,849 --> 00:35:01,174
Do you have any additional questions from
commissioners for the applicant? Okay.

467
00:35:01,174 --> 00:35:02,012
Thank you.

468
00:35:02,012 --> 00:35:08,564
All right. So we will now move to the
public input portion of the hearing.

469
00:35:08,564 --> 00:35:12,814
And we will begin with those who are in
support.

470
00:35:12,814 --> 00:35:19,986
So if you are here to speak in support,
I'd ask you to come forward at this time.

471
00:35:19,986 --> 00:35:26,538
Okay. Seeing none, I will ask if there are
those that are here to speak in

472
00:35:26,538 --> 00:35:30,080
opposition to come forward at this time.

473
00:35:30,080 --> 00:35:34,595
And as, um, is typical here, we do need to
sign in.

474
00:35:34,595 --> 00:35:41,236
We need you to state your name for the
record, and you will have 3 minutes.

475
00:35:41,236 --> 00:35:43,197
My name is Dean Couture.

476
00:35:43,197 --> 00:35:49,406
My wife and I have lived at the end— in
the west end of Needles Drive for 33

477
00:35:49,406 --> 00:35:49,896
the west end of Needles Drive for 33
years,

478
00:35:49,896 --> 00:35:55,371
so we're probably one of the closest
neighbors to this subdivision.

479
00:35:55,371 --> 00:36:01,580
Um, I did want to clarify something
because it sounds like the traffic study

480
00:36:01,580 --> 00:36:01,825
because it sounds like the traffic study
has

481
00:36:01,825 --> 00:36:04,276
already been kind of accepted,

482
00:36:04,276 --> 00:36:09,423
and you're talking about later that it'll
be looked at further.

483
00:36:09,423 --> 00:36:14,571
In reference to what Bill was bringing up
about Highway 83, um,

484
00:36:14,571 --> 00:36:20,780
we'd have to go back and look at the
records, but I also subdivided Majestic

485
00:36:20,780 --> 00:36:21,270
records, but I also subdivided Majestic
Pines,

486
00:36:21,270 --> 00:36:24,620
which is a property to the south of this.

487
00:36:24,620 --> 00:36:28,950
Um, I was required to give an easement to
Highway 83.

488
00:36:28,950 --> 00:36:33,199
So that if and when they did widen it, it
was there.

489
00:36:33,199 --> 00:36:38,101
So maybe that same thing should be
happening here. Um, okay.

490
00:36:38,101 --> 00:36:42,431
Um, so like I said, my wife and I did
Majestic Pines,

491
00:36:42,431 --> 00:36:45,291
so we're familiar with the process.

492
00:36:45,291 --> 00:36:51,092
This new development is about 200 or 300
yards north of Majestic Pines.

493
00:36:51,092 --> 00:36:54,033
Majestic Pines was 21 2.5-acre lots.

494
00:36:54,033 --> 00:36:58,935
Um, I don't know if I can have Nia or
somebody put up a map,

495
00:36:58,935 --> 00:37:05,144
but I can probably just explain just as
well. Um, Needles Drive comes off of

496
00:37:05,144 --> 00:37:05,716
well. Um, Needles Drive comes off of
Walden.

497
00:37:05,716 --> 00:37:11,762
Blue Heron Springs, which is the
subdivision that we attached our road to—

498
00:37:11,762 --> 00:37:16,256
or actually the road that we attached to
Yeah, I don't—

499
00:37:16,256 --> 00:37:19,279
I'll probably just explain it easier.

500
00:37:19,279 --> 00:37:26,060
Um, so Walden Way and Timber Meadows are
basically the same street that has changed

501
00:37:26,060 --> 00:37:31,371
names. So that road goes north and south,
and Blue Heron Springs,

502
00:37:31,371 --> 00:37:37,499
which is Majestic Pines, goes straight
west and dead ends. So does Needles.

503
00:37:37,499 --> 00:37:42,891
There's a couple swigs and swags, but
otherwise they're identical.

504
00:37:42,891 --> 00:37:49,754
So So though it's been nice to live at the
end of a dead-end street with very little

505
00:37:49,754 --> 00:37:52,613
traffic for the last several years,

506
00:37:52,613 --> 00:37:58,741
I don't have anything against the
development except the amount of homes on

507
00:37:58,741 --> 00:37:58,986
development except the amount of homes on
the

508
00:37:58,986 --> 00:38:02,254
dead-end street that's going to be dirt.

509
00:38:02,254 --> 00:38:06,830
I also have an issue with the requirements
not the same.

510
00:38:06,830 --> 00:38:12,059
Please keep in mind that Needles Drive is
currently a dirt road.

511
00:38:12,059 --> 00:38:18,677
And I believe this new project would add
14 additional homes plus the 13 that are

512
00:38:18,677 --> 00:38:22,517
already there, totaling 27, all on a dirt
road.

513
00:38:22,517 --> 00:38:27,092
Also consider this proposal is asking for
2.5-acre lots.

514
00:38:27,092 --> 00:38:30,278
Like it was mentioned earlier, uh, the,

515
00:38:30,278 --> 00:38:34,200
the surrounding lots are 5-acre lots on 3
sides.

516
00:38:34,200 --> 00:38:37,468
And only Highway 83 is on the west side.

517
00:38:37,468 --> 00:38:43,677
To the north, east, and south are 5-acre
lots. So do with that what we will.

518
00:38:43,677 --> 00:38:48,743
But across Highway 83, it is 2.5-acre
lots. I understand that.

519
00:38:48,743 --> 00:38:50,949
When we did Majestic Pines—

520
00:38:50,949 --> 00:38:55,460
Thank you, sir. Your time has expired.

521
00:38:58,460 --> 00:38:59,267
That was 3 minutes?

522
00:38:59,267 --> 00:39:06,266
Yes, sir. Thank you. Is there anyone else
who wishes to speak in opposition?

523
00:39:06,266 --> 00:39:08,134
Hi, I'm John Boydston.

524
00:39:08,134 --> 00:39:14,416
Um, I've lived in this area for
40-some-odd years and in Walden for almost

525
00:39:14,416 --> 00:39:14,671
40-some-odd years and in Walden for almost
20.

526
00:39:14,671 --> 00:39:21,548
Since we moved in, the amount of traffic
and the reason I'm late here today on 83

527
00:39:21,548 --> 00:39:27,830
between Hodgdon and 105 is is crazy. The
amount of of increase of traffic.

528
00:39:27,830 --> 00:39:34,792
Worse, those two intersections have had
more accidents in the last five years than

529
00:39:34,792 --> 00:39:40,820
the whole time I've been here for almost a
half of. You know, a decade.

530
00:39:40,820 --> 00:39:47,951
Why are you guys allowing more congestion
in an area that's having so many problems?

531
00:39:47,951 --> 00:39:54,149
I mean, people are dying at those
intersections because you guys are just

532
00:39:54,149 --> 00:39:54,743
intersections because you guys are just
letting

533
00:39:54,743 --> 00:39:58,054
more and more and more houses in there.

534
00:39:58,054 --> 00:40:02,384
You know, they put that school in there
originally.

535
00:40:02,384 --> 00:40:08,836
The school wasn't even supposed to be
there because they were having so many

536
00:40:08,836 --> 00:40:14,185
problems with, like, congestion and the
fact 83 wasn't widened.

537
00:40:14,185 --> 00:40:16,732
When they put in Flying Horse,

538
00:40:16,732 --> 00:40:22,420
they made the developers widen it because
of problems with traffic,

539
00:40:22,420 --> 00:40:27,684
because of death. You know, we almost got
burned up with fire,

540
00:40:27,684 --> 00:40:31,504
and now you guys are allowing this to
happen.

541
00:40:31,504 --> 00:40:38,126
I'm disappointed because you guys are
elected officials and you're supposed to

542
00:40:38,126 --> 00:40:39,230
represent us.

543
00:40:39,230 --> 00:40:41,268
Bill Wysong.

544
00:40:44,106 --> 00:40:47,355
You're doing a good job. We appreciate
what you do.

545
00:40:47,840 --> 00:40:48,324
We really do.

546
00:40:49,456 --> 00:40:53,506
The rest of you guys, I wish you would
just kind of look at what's happening

547
00:40:53,506 --> 00:40:53,773
just kind of look at what's happening
here.

548
00:40:53,773 --> 00:40:58,142
You're, you're siding with developers and
people that are turning our neighborhood

549
00:40:58,142 --> 00:41:00,807
into something terrible. That's all I have
to say.

550
00:41:00,807 --> 00:41:04,257
Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes
to speak in opposition?

551
00:41:04,257 --> 00:41:08,178
I'm just going to ask, please direct your
comments to the criteria, please.

552
00:41:08,178 --> 00:41:12,255
That is what is helpful for us since
that's what we need to make our decision.

553
00:41:12,750 --> 00:41:15,960
Thank you. My name is Tom Tijerina.

554
00:41:15,960 --> 00:41:23,296
The conceptual site plan shows the 47
acres divided into every shape to maximize

555
00:41:23,296 --> 00:41:26,231
the number of 2.5-acre lots, 14.

556
00:41:26,231 --> 00:41:32,834
This approach is to maximize profits as
part of the real estate process.

557
00:41:32,834 --> 00:41:36,043
I think we can all agree upon that.

558
00:41:36,043 --> 00:41:39,712
As a result of the conceptual site plan,

559
00:41:39,712 --> 00:41:45,489
the first reason I'm opposed to this
rezoning is due to safety.

560
00:41:45,489 --> 00:41:51,817
First, the gravel road closely parallels
Highway 83 with no barriers.

561
00:41:51,817 --> 00:41:58,786
It's just a matter of time until an
accident on the gravel road and the yard

562
00:41:58,786 --> 00:41:58,970
accident on the gravel road and the yard
of

563
00:41:58,970 --> 00:42:03,280
lots 7 to 14 due to a vehicle from the
highway.

564
00:42:03,280 --> 00:42:03,649
Thank you.

565
00:42:04,660 --> 00:42:10,247
Second, the Needles gravel road extension
is not likely to be plowed during the

566
00:42:10,247 --> 00:42:14,420
winter months and therefore not receive
emergency services.

567
00:42:14,420 --> 00:42:19,583
Third, part of the Needles extension
appears to be in the detention pond.

568
00:42:19,583 --> 00:42:25,312
The second reason I'm opposed is because
the rezoning is not coordinated with the

569
00:42:25,312 --> 00:42:27,505
future expansion of Highway 83.

570
00:42:27,505 --> 00:42:33,234
For the BOCC to continue approving these
individual rezoning applications without

571
00:42:33,234 --> 00:42:38,043
coordination with public infrastructure is
irresponsible. Thank you.

572
00:42:38,043 --> 00:42:42,717
And if there's anyone else who would like
to speak,

573
00:42:42,717 --> 00:42:50,233
I'd ask you if you could move forward so
that we can just minimize transition time

574
00:42:50,233 --> 00:43:09,899
and maximize everyone's time here today.

575
00:43:25,633 --> 00:43:28,172
I oppose the Needles rezoning P-268.

576
00:43:28,172 --> 00:43:33,392
The applicant cites the master plan's
direction to use and extend existing

577
00:43:33,392 --> 00:43:37,342
infrastructure and strengthen established
neighborhoods.

578
00:43:37,342 --> 00:43:41,926
Those words should have consequences for
the decision before you.

579
00:43:41,926 --> 00:43:46,370
The limit for leaving Needles Drive
unpaved is 200 trips a day.

580
00:43:46,370 --> 00:43:49,685
That is exactly what the traffic memo
projects.

581
00:43:49,685 --> 00:43:53,141
But other figures in the same memo add up
to 202.

582
00:43:53,141 --> 00:43:56,527
Staff said corrected studies had been
requested,

583
00:43:56,527 --> 00:44:01,464
and this may have been addressed in the
staff report I could not hear,

584
00:44:01,464 --> 00:44:07,036
but nonetheless, that discrepancy must be
resolved before the board accepts the

585
00:44:07,036 --> 00:44:09,787
conclusions that paving is unnecessary.

586
00:44:09,787 --> 00:44:11,832
At Highway 83 and Walden Way,

587
00:44:11,832 --> 00:44:17,687
the memo says a southbound left turn lane
may be required because projected Turning

588
00:44:17,687 --> 00:44:20,438
traffic exceeds the threshold at sites,

589
00:44:20,438 --> 00:44:23,823
yet no public road improvements are
recommended.

590
00:44:23,823 --> 00:44:29,325
Planning Commissioner Eric Moraes raised a
broader concern even as he voted to

591
00:44:29,325 --> 00:44:34,826
recommend approval. When do repeated
reductions in lot size stop maintaining a

592
00:44:34,826 --> 00:44:38,212
neighborhood's character and begin
replacing it?

593
00:44:38,212 --> 00:44:43,290
Here, land zoned for 5-acre lots adjoins
the site to the north and east.

594
00:44:43,290 --> 00:44:47,522
Smaller lots would allow more homes
besides those neighbors.

595
00:44:47,522 --> 00:44:52,460
The applicant says the neighbors' letters
do not address the criteria.

596
00:44:52,460 --> 00:44:57,679
The letter of intent itself quotes the
code's definition of compatibility.

597
00:44:57,679 --> 00:44:59,866
It names noise and landscaping,

598
00:44:59,866 --> 00:45:05,438
and it ties compatibility to maintaining
the character of existing development.

599
00:45:05,438 --> 00:45:10,023
Neighbors wrote about highway noise and
the trees that buffer it.

600
00:45:10,023 --> 00:45:12,350
Those are compatibility concerns.

601
00:45:12,350 --> 00:45:17,781
The county can gradually replace a
neighborhood's character while claiming to

602
00:45:17,781 --> 00:45:22,860
preserve it. Each rezoning points to the
one before it as justification.

603
00:45:22,860 --> 00:45:28,361
The draft resolution is already written to
declare that this change serves the

604
00:45:28,361 --> 00:45:31,958
health, safety, and welfare of community
residents.

605
00:45:31,958 --> 00:45:36,120
The board must show how the evidence
supports that finding.

606
00:45:36,120 --> 00:45:41,622
Approving now would decide the density
before the road questions are answered.

607
00:45:41,622 --> 00:45:41,833
before the road questions are answered.
Mr.

608
00:45:41,833 --> 00:45:45,642
Moraes's question reaches beyond this one
application.

609
00:45:45,642 --> 00:45:49,098
I would have raised it in general public
comment,

610
00:45:49,098 --> 00:45:53,542
but today's meeting offers no time for
items not on the agenda,

611
00:45:53,542 --> 00:45:55,869
though some land use meetings do.

612
00:45:55,869 --> 00:46:01,583
Last week, the county's Constitution Day
post said We the People includes you and

613
00:46:01,583 --> 00:46:06,308
invites us and invites residents to learn
how they can participate.

614
00:46:06,308 --> 00:46:10,470
With the Land Development Code rewrite
under public review,

615
00:46:10,470 --> 00:46:15,830
please include that time at every land use
meeting. I ask you to deny P-268.

616
00:46:15,830 --> 00:46:20,274
You are not prepared to— and if you're not
prepared to deny it,

617
00:46:20,274 --> 00:46:26,058
please continue this hearing until those
concerns are addressed and the supporting

618
00:46:26,058 --> 00:46:28,879
evidence Is available for public review.

619
00:46:30,930 --> 00:46:36,876
Thank you. Is there anyone else who wishes
to speak in opposition to this

620
00:46:36,876 --> 00:46:42,008
application today? Okay, seeing none, I
will— sorry about that.

621
00:46:42,008 --> 00:46:45,754
We will move on from the public input
portion,

622
00:46:45,754 --> 00:46:50,886
and we will proceed to the rebuttal
portion from the applicant.

623
00:46:50,886 --> 00:46:52,808
Nina Dossi with Vertex.

624
00:46:52,808 --> 00:46:59,328
So many of the comments provided were
again related to the subdivision and not

625
00:46:59,328 --> 00:46:59,579
again related to the subdivision and not
the

626
00:46:59,579 --> 00:47:06,516
rezone. So the specific layout, the need
for dedicating or preserving right-of-way.

627
00:47:06,516 --> 00:47:13,287
Fire-related concerns, things like that
will all be handled with the subdivision.

628
00:47:13,287 --> 00:47:20,224
That's not something that we can discuss
today because county staff hasn't reviewed

629
00:47:20,224 --> 00:47:25,323
it to see if I were to respond if we're in
compliance or not.

630
00:47:25,323 --> 00:47:27,580
That'll be at a later date.

631
00:47:27,580 --> 00:47:33,765
There were concerns regarding the
compatibility of 5-acre lots adjacent to

632
00:47:33,765 --> 00:47:34,434
compatibility of 5-acre lots adjacent to
2.5-acre

633
00:47:34,434 --> 00:47:39,783
lots. A 5-acre lot is absolutely
compatible with a 2.5-acre lot.

634
00:47:39,783 --> 00:47:46,720
If you look at the uses permitted within
the RR 2.5 zone district and the RR 5 zone

635
00:47:46,720 --> 00:47:50,064
district, they are essentially the same.

636
00:47:50,064 --> 00:47:54,243
So typically when you're looking at
compatibility,

637
00:47:54,243 --> 00:48:01,013
you look at the use to use and you look at
the potential impacts and the bulk and

638
00:48:01,013 --> 00:48:07,282
scale standards. And in this instance, the
only difference is the lot size,

639
00:48:07,282 --> 00:48:14,053
so 5 acres versus 2.5 acres, and then the
side setback of 25 feet versus 15 feet.

640
00:48:14,053 --> 00:48:16,727
Those are absolutely compatible.

641
00:48:16,727 --> 00:48:21,408
So the 2 zone districts are compatible
with one another.

642
00:48:21,408 --> 00:48:24,751
Not necessarily related to the criteria,

643
00:48:24,751 --> 00:48:28,680
but I do just feel the need to respond to
this.

644
00:48:28,680 --> 00:48:34,531
Somebody had identified that they were
disappointed in that you're not

645
00:48:34,531 --> 00:48:35,534
disappointed in that you're not
representing

646
00:48:35,534 --> 00:48:42,388
the county. I would just like to remind
everyone that there's specific criteria in

647
00:48:42,388 --> 00:48:49,325
place that you are obligated to follow and
to make all of your decisions based upon

648
00:48:49,325 --> 00:48:56,346
that specific criteria so that you're not
making arbitrary and capricious decisions,

649
00:48:56,346 --> 00:49:01,863
and so that everyone is judged based upon
the exact same criteria.

650
00:49:01,863 --> 00:49:04,872
And you know what you're going into.

651
00:49:04,872 --> 00:49:09,302
So I just— I know that's not related to
the criteria,

652
00:49:09,302 --> 00:49:16,156
but that's something that keeps on coming
up. So I just felt the need to say that.

653
00:49:16,156 --> 00:49:22,425
There were also comments regarding
maintenance of Needles and that it's not

654
00:49:22,425 --> 00:49:23,010
maintenance of Needles and that it's not
perhaps

655
00:49:23,010 --> 00:49:27,691
not being properly maintained. This is a
county roadway.

656
00:49:27,691 --> 00:49:33,207
So the county has accepted this road and
is maintaining this road.

657
00:49:33,207 --> 00:49:38,306
So the road is being maintained per El
Paso County standards.

658
00:49:38,306 --> 00:49:41,983
That shouldn't be a consideration for
today.

659
00:49:41,983 --> 00:49:47,416
Any future road for the subdivision would
be reviewed for design,

660
00:49:47,416 --> 00:49:54,187
and then it would be determined at that
time if it's going to be a public road or

661
00:49:54,187 --> 00:49:54,270
time if it's going to be a public road or
a

662
00:49:54,270 --> 00:49:57,697
private road through that review process.

663
00:49:57,697 --> 00:50:00,038
If it becomes a public road,

664
00:50:00,038 --> 00:50:06,724
then it would be maintained just like
Needles Drive under the same criteria that

665
00:50:06,724 --> 00:50:06,975
Needles Drive under the same criteria that
the

666
00:50:06,975 --> 00:50:12,074
county's outlined. I wanted to just— this
keeps on coming up,

667
00:50:12,074 --> 00:50:17,507
and it is somewhat related to the
criteria, so just bear with me.

668
00:50:17,507 --> 00:50:21,101
I'm just going to go into eDERP real
quick.

669
00:50:21,101 --> 00:50:28,039
Okay, so what you see here is the comment
response from our traffic engineer to the

670
00:50:28,039 --> 00:50:33,137
county. So this is publicly available.
It's already on eDERP.

671
00:50:33,137 --> 00:50:38,654
The issue keeps on coming up of having 202
trips versus 200 trips,

672
00:50:38,654 --> 00:50:44,755
and the traffic engineer actually did
address that in a comment response.

673
00:50:44,755 --> 00:50:50,356
So let me just get to the page. I'm sorry,
it's going so slow here.

674
00:50:50,356 --> 00:50:57,377
Oh, it was— let me see. These page numbers
are not the same. Oops. Here we go. Okay.

675
00:50:57,377 --> 00:51:01,639
There we go. Okay. So this is the comment
provided.

676
00:51:01,639 --> 00:51:06,822
We're still Staff has identified 127, and
what you see is 125.

677
00:51:06,822 --> 00:51:12,840
And the traffic engineer responded by
saying trip generation volumes are

678
00:51:12,840 --> 00:51:13,676
saying trip generation volumes are
estimates,

679
00:51:13,676 --> 00:51:17,353
therefore ADTs are rounded to the nearest
5.

680
00:51:17,353 --> 00:51:21,616
So you've heard many comments about 127
versus 125.

681
00:51:21,616 --> 00:51:24,960
The reason for that is it's an estimate.

682
00:51:24,960 --> 00:51:31,730
You'll notice that every single number on
this sheet is rounded to the nearest 5.

683
00:51:31,730 --> 00:51:38,082
So it's not in fact an error, it's the way
that this study has been drafted,

684
00:51:38,082 --> 00:51:44,518
and it would not have been approved by
county staff if it were an outstanding

685
00:51:44,518 --> 00:51:45,020
county staff if it were an outstanding
error.

686
00:51:45,020 --> 00:51:50,369
Again, on— this is page 23 of that, which
is publicly available.

687
00:51:50,369 --> 00:51:52,793
This is our comment response.

688
00:51:52,793 --> 00:51:57,557
The same comment you'll see here: 75 plus
127 equals 202.

689
00:51:57,557 --> 00:52:01,319
The traffic engineer has provided a
response,

690
00:52:01,319 --> 00:52:07,922
which again is identifying that there's
existing ADT 70 background because they

691
00:52:07,922 --> 00:52:14,943
always increase for anticipated background
73 and the actual trip generation for the

692
00:52:14,943 --> 00:52:21,463
proposed development 127, which equals
200. So there actually is not an error.

693
00:52:21,463 --> 00:52:26,060
There's no conflict either. The numbers
are consistent.

694
00:52:26,060 --> 00:52:28,066
Throughout the document,

695
00:52:28,066 --> 00:52:34,502
and it's it's general practice to provide
an estimate on this specific sheet.

696
00:52:34,502 --> 00:52:41,189
You'll look at many traffic studies and
see that they're rounding to the nearest

697
00:52:41,189 --> 00:52:47,374
five for this specific sheet, but in the
actual data of the traffic study,

698
00:52:47,374 --> 00:52:52,807
they provide more specific numbers. I
think I covered everything.

699
00:52:52,807 --> 00:52:59,159
Oh, there's one last thing here, which is
regarding replacing the character.

700
00:52:59,159 --> 00:53:00,831
There were comments.

701
00:53:00,831 --> 00:53:06,682
That the county may eventually be
replacing the character through each

702
00:53:06,682 --> 00:53:07,183
replacing the character through each
zoning

703
00:53:07,183 --> 00:53:11,613
action. Let me just go back to my
presentation. Okay.

704
00:53:11,613 --> 00:53:18,300
I'm going to just go to this sheet here.
So the master plan was adopted in 2021.

705
00:53:18,300 --> 00:53:23,232
And so that's what this application is
reviewed based upon.

706
00:53:23,232 --> 00:53:29,417
In 2021, All of the subdivisions that you
see there were already in place.

707
00:53:29,417 --> 00:53:35,769
So Cherry Creek Crossing already in place,
Walden Preserve already in place,

708
00:53:35,769 --> 00:53:38,026
the R-0.5 already in place.

709
00:53:38,026 --> 00:53:44,713
This is actually the first zoning action
in this particular area that the county

710
00:53:44,713 --> 00:53:44,964
in this particular area that the county
and

711
00:53:44,964 --> 00:53:48,474
board is reviewing since that master plan.

712
00:53:48,474 --> 00:53:50,982
So it's not the case of, sure,

713
00:53:50,982 --> 00:53:57,501
it's in character because the county has
changed things over and over and over

714
00:53:57,501 --> 00:54:04,355
again. This is the first one that's being
reviewed and potentially approved by the

715
00:54:04,355 --> 00:54:07,699
county with— under this new master plan.

716
00:54:07,699 --> 00:54:13,549
So I don't think that that's a fair
statement either. So are there any

717
00:54:13,549 --> 00:54:14,385
statement either. So are there any
questions?

718
00:54:14,385 --> 00:54:16,057
Did I miss anything?

719
00:54:16,057 --> 00:54:21,599
Any questions from commissioners? Okay,
thank you so much.

720
00:54:21,599 --> 00:54:27,427
I will now see if we have any additional
questions for staff.

721
00:54:27,427 --> 00:54:32,683
Okay, so if we can have staff come up to
answer traffic

722
00:54:32,683 --> 00:54:33,638
questions.

723
00:54:33,638 --> 00:54:37,858
Thank

724
00:54:37,858 --> 00:54:41,234
you,

725
00:54:41,234 --> 00:54:45,453
Madam

726
00:54:45,453 --> 00:54:50,517
Chair.

727
00:54:50,728 --> 00:54:54,204
Uh, just a couple of clarifying questions.

728
00:54:54,204 --> 00:55:00,244
On page 2 of the traffic, where it said
access comments 3, um, they said,

729
00:55:00,244 --> 00:55:06,451
please clarify these 3 access permits are
needed as the development is only

730
00:55:06,451 --> 00:55:10,671
proposing changing 1 existing access to
Highway 83.

731
00:55:10,671 --> 00:55:16,960
I didn't see any kind of an answer to that
statement, so I was just curious.

732
00:55:16,960 --> 00:55:19,334
So the access permits there are for CDOT.

733
00:55:19,334 --> 00:55:23,329
Uh, they did indicate in their response
letter, their comment letter,

734
00:55:23,329 --> 00:55:25,587
that 3 access permits will be required.

735
00:55:25,587 --> 00:55:30,334
Um, one of them will be for the emergency
access at the current driveway location.

736
00:55:30,334 --> 00:55:34,619
One of those will be to close an existing
field access, as they called it,

737
00:55:34,619 --> 00:55:37,224
which is just north of the existing
driveway.

738
00:55:37,224 --> 00:55:41,509
And then the 3rd access permit would be
for the access, I believe, at, um,

739
00:55:41,509 --> 00:55:44,751
Hodgdon and Highway 83 on the south side
of the project.

740
00:55:44,751 --> 00:55:51,361
Okay, I just didn't see a response, and so
that's why I was just curious.

741
00:55:51,361 --> 00:55:54,440
Because it was kind of open-ended.

742
00:55:54,440 --> 00:55:57,066
And then I guess back to the—

743
00:55:57,066 --> 00:56:02,046
I think it was page either 5 or 7 of the
traffic study.

744
00:56:02,046 --> 00:56:04,582
It listed the hours, AM, PM.

745
00:56:04,582 --> 00:56:10,196
And I— this is just, I guess, kind of a
general question that—

746
00:56:10,196 --> 00:56:13,184
Are traffic studies typically Um,

747
00:56:13,184 --> 00:56:20,247
incorporate when you have school in a
close proximity and look at the hours of

748
00:56:20,247 --> 00:56:20,610
close proximity and look at the hours of
the,

749
00:56:20,610 --> 00:56:23,960
the school when they, they, you know,

750
00:56:23,960 --> 00:56:29,031
students are supposed to be there and when
they get out.

751
00:56:29,031 --> 00:56:33,377
And is that something that we typically
look at?

752
00:56:33,377 --> 00:56:39,535
So, you know, we— this traffic study
stated started at 4 for the PM.

753
00:56:39,535 --> 00:56:42,885
Um, Um, when does the school get out?

754
00:56:42,885 --> 00:56:49,586
Because are you missing potentially
traffic that has a daily impact during

755
00:56:49,586 --> 00:56:50,130
traffic that has a daily impact during
school

756
00:56:50,130 --> 00:56:50,854
session?

757
00:56:50,854 --> 00:56:54,819
Sure, we do have a lot of projects that do
analyze at the school release,

758
00:56:54,819 --> 00:56:59,219
so they'll start analyzing at 3 to 5 or
from 2 to 4, something along those lines.

759
00:56:59,219 --> 00:57:03,129
This project did not do that with the
school not in immediate proximity.

760
00:57:03,129 --> 00:57:05,954
I do realize the school is to the north
some degree,

761
00:57:05,954 --> 00:57:08,833
but this is not directly adjacent to the
school site.

762
00:57:08,833 --> 00:57:12,309
So we do have some projects where they
will, and we ask them to,

763
00:57:12,309 --> 00:57:14,916
but it is not required by our criteria for
that.

764
00:57:14,916 --> 00:57:19,210
And when you ask, or it's further to the
north,

765
00:57:19,210 --> 00:57:24,875
what is your typical, uh, boundary? Um,
you go a quarter mile?

766
00:57:24,875 --> 00:57:28,530
Do you go that just one intersection up,

767
00:57:28,530 --> 00:57:31,454
not including that intersection?

768
00:57:31,534 --> 00:57:36,832
It's just kind of a curiosity question as
So part of our criteria does state that

769
00:57:36,832 --> 00:57:41,019
any pedestrian routes within 2 miles of a
school to be included.

770
00:57:41,019 --> 00:57:44,093
Overland route— I'm trying to see the
criteria.

771
00:57:44,093 --> 00:57:50,910
Morning,

772
00:57:50,910 --> 00:58:02,841
Commissioners.

773
00:58:02,905 --> 00:58:07,563
Dan Torres with Department of Public
Works. Chime in a little bit on the

774
00:58:07,563 --> 00:58:08,016
Works. Chime in a little bit on the
school.

775
00:58:08,016 --> 00:58:13,321
Primarily, we will look at when there's
direct impacts from the development to the

776
00:58:13,321 --> 00:58:16,167
school where they would add to that
traffic.

777
00:58:16,167 --> 00:58:21,213
A good example would be the previous
zoning application just north next to the

778
00:58:21,213 --> 00:58:26,389
Monument Academy School that came in where
their direct traffic would impact the

779
00:58:26,389 --> 00:58:27,359
school traffic.

780
00:58:27,359 --> 00:58:27,471
Okay.

781
00:58:27,792 --> 00:58:32,509
And that's where that traffic study would
analyze both the peak hour of the

782
00:58:32,509 --> 00:58:36,848
development and also the school traffic,
and they would include that.

783
00:58:36,848 --> 00:58:40,873
In this case, as Brett said, there's not
direct impacts to that,

784
00:58:40,873 --> 00:58:45,904
and also the peak hour traffic for these
single-family homes wouldn't align with

785
00:58:45,904 --> 00:58:50,809
that. So you would have less traffic
typically from the development that would

786
00:58:50,809 --> 00:58:54,645
impact during that time of day that the
school is coming out.

787
00:58:54,645 --> 00:59:00,379
Okay, what about coming into the
development though?

788
00:59:00,379 --> 00:59:03,044
From either in or out, that time period,

789
00:59:03,044 --> 00:59:07,442
you're going to have a different peak hour
for that development in

790
00:59:07,442 --> 00:59:09,908
comparison to the school's peak hour.

791
00:59:09,908 --> 00:59:13,830
Okay, um, that, that

792
00:59:13,830 --> 00:59:17,948
is all at this point.

793
00:59:17,948 --> 00:59:21,037
Okay, thank you. Thank you very much.

794
00:59:21,037 --> 00:59:25,128
Okay, any other questions for staff
before— okay,

795
00:59:25,128 --> 00:59:28,885
so we are going to close this public
hearing.

796
00:59:28,885 --> 00:59:32,475
We will bring it up here for
deliberations.

797
00:59:32,475 --> 00:59:36,816
I'll ask, um, for a motion or comments at
this time.

798
00:59:36,816 --> 00:59:41,321
Uh, you know, this is in my district. I do
have a few comments.

799
00:59:41,321 --> 00:59:43,467
Um, I do think it's important.

800
00:59:43,467 --> 00:59:46,113
I know 20 years down the line, um, I,

801
00:59:46,113 --> 00:59:49,975
I believe Highway 83 will have specific
access points,

802
00:59:49,975 --> 00:59:53,837
and I believe that CDOT will come down and
state that,

803
00:59:53,837 --> 00:59:56,983
much like Powers has specific access
points.

804
00:59:56,983 --> 01:00:01,274
I'm not even so sure that Needles, um, in
20 years from now,

805
01:00:01,274 --> 01:00:05,994
they'll probably just have a ride-in,
ride-out, would be my guess.

806
01:00:05,994 --> 01:00:08,068
Um, it's— it is a major road.

807
01:00:08,068 --> 01:00:12,502
It will be a major road, and I suspect
that Um, in the future,

808
01:00:12,502 --> 01:00:18,152
El Paso County will be having to work
closely with CDOT to determine what those

809
01:00:18,152 --> 01:00:22,729
access points are. But more importantly to
this application, um,

810
01:00:22,729 --> 01:00:25,804
my requirements in a quasi-judicial
manner—

811
01:00:25,804 --> 01:00:29,952
and I know that the opposition will
disagree with me here—

812
01:00:29,952 --> 01:00:35,172
is to consider that it meets the master
plan, it meets our land use code.

813
01:00:35,172 --> 01:00:39,320
It meets requirements. I'm sorry, I'm
reading my computer.

814
01:00:39,320 --> 01:00:43,969
It meets the requirements listed in the
resolution, and it meets—

815
01:00:43,969 --> 01:00:49,261
and that the conditions and the notations
are met. I believe that it does.

816
01:00:49,261 --> 01:00:53,695
I believe that with surrounding acreage
around the properties,

817
01:00:53,695 --> 01:00:58,987
I think that the 2.5-acre standard has
been in our master plan listed as a

818
01:00:58,987 --> 01:00:59,559
been in our master plan listed as a
standard

819
01:00:59,559 --> 01:01:01,919
that we will accept in this area.

820
01:01:01,919 --> 01:01:04,207
Um, as some of you may be aware,

821
01:01:04,207 --> 01:01:09,785
a couple weeks ago I was not happy with
the proposal that came in front of us.

822
01:01:09,785 --> 01:01:14,505
And, um, I try to come in with an open
mind, listen to both sides,

823
01:01:14,505 --> 01:01:19,082
but I truly do believe that this
application meets the criteria.

824
01:01:19,082 --> 01:01:24,303
And in my role as commissioner, I do
believe that when I see it meets the

825
01:01:24,303 --> 01:01:24,947
believe that when I see it meets the
criteria,

826
01:01:24,947 --> 01:01:26,663
I will vote yes. So, um,

827
01:01:26,663 --> 01:01:31,669
I didn't know if there were any other
comments before I make a motion.

828
01:01:31,669 --> 01:01:35,154
Commissioner, can anybody— can still make
comments if they want.

829
01:01:35,154 --> 01:01:39,184
If you'd like to make the motion, that's
fine. We can still have comments.

830
01:01:39,184 --> 01:01:40,219
We're not going to—

831
01:01:40,283 --> 01:01:41,166
someone gets comment.

832
01:01:41,390 --> 01:01:44,310
Yeah, did you want to make a motion then?

833
01:01:44,310 --> 01:01:48,174
Sure, I'll move approval of the
application including the, um,

834
01:01:48,174 --> 01:01:51,352
2 conditions, and I believe there were 4
notations,

835
01:01:51,352 --> 01:01:52,411
but let me check.

836
01:01:52,411 --> 01:01:55,388
I, I don't think we have— I think it
automatically includes them,

837
01:01:55,388 --> 01:01:56,533
so I don't think we have—

838
01:01:56,533 --> 01:02:01,496
I'll move approv— approval of the Second.

839
01:02:01,496 --> 01:02:04,061
Okay, it's been moved and seconded. And
any additional comments?

840
01:02:04,061 --> 01:02:04,863
Commissioner Wysong.

841
01:02:04,863 --> 01:02:10,609
Thank you, Madam Chair. Could, could we
get that map back up that was showing?

842
01:02:10,609 --> 01:02:20,774
Maybe—

843
01:02:20,774 --> 01:02:21,032
do you—

844
01:02:21,241 --> 01:02:22,612
which specific map are you referring to?

845
01:02:22,612 --> 01:02:29,924
The one that was up before they put the
agenda back up.

846
01:02:29,924 --> 01:02:32,981
There we go. Thank you.

847
01:02:32,981 --> 01:02:39,362
In, in looking at the map, to be
consistent, um,

848
01:02:39,362 --> 01:02:47,338
with the criteria, we have to come back to
neighborhood, um,

849
01:02:47,338 --> 01:02:55,182
and I, I don't consider a substantial
change change in this

850
01:02:55,182 --> 01:03:02,892
particular neighborhood because if you
look at the subject

851
01:03:02,892 --> 01:03:08,077
property, it is zoned RR-5 surrounding.

852
01:03:08,077 --> 01:03:13,128
It's not there in the white box there.

853
01:03:13,128 --> 01:03:18,047
Walden subdivision RR-5 surrounds it.

854
01:03:18,047 --> 01:03:25,492
It's a triangle, so it only has 3 sides, 2
sides, which,

855
01:03:25,492 --> 01:03:32,537
you know, that really kind of creates a
neighborhood.

856
01:03:32,537 --> 01:03:39,716
And I find it, um, that it— in order to be
consistent,

857
01:03:39,716 --> 01:03:44,635
that that's part of the neighborhood.

858
01:03:44,635 --> 01:03:52,079
Crossing a major highway isn't part of the
neighborhood.

859
01:03:52,079 --> 01:03:59,790
And so I'm looking at this subject
property and the Walden

860
01:03:59,790 --> 01:04:03,778
subdivision as a neighborhood,

861
01:04:03,778 --> 01:04:08,697
and I don't see a substantial change.

862
01:04:08,697 --> 01:04:14,546
Um, and I think it should stay, uh, RR5,
um,

863
01:04:14,546 --> 01:04:20,528
and I'll be voting no on this, um,
amendment.

864
01:04:20,528 --> 01:04:27,157
Any other additional comments?
Commissioner Nelson?

865
01:04:27,157 --> 01:04:31,425
I find that all of the criteria have been
met.

866
01:04:31,425 --> 01:04:38,848
Uh, there's conformance with the El Paso
County Master Plan in stating that, um,

867
01:04:38,848 --> 01:04:43,023
2.5 is expected to be developed in this
area.

868
01:04:43,023 --> 01:04:49,332
Um, there are plenty of 2.5-acre lots
surrounding this, um, request,

869
01:04:49,332 --> 01:04:54,342
this application, and not to mention even
up to 1, uh,

870
01:04:54,342 --> 01:04:58,889
1.5 or half-acre lots within this, um,
community.

871
01:04:58,889 --> 01:05:05,755
Uh, the application is in compliance with
applicable statutory provisions.

872
01:05:05,755 --> 01:05:12,250
The land use and zone district is
compatible with, as I mentioned, the

873
01:05:12,250 --> 01:05:13,363
compatible with, as I mentioned, the
surrounding,

874
01:05:13,363 --> 01:05:18,652
um, acreage that we're seeing in this
community, and, um,

875
01:05:18,652 --> 01:05:24,219
the criteria within our land development
code have been met.

876
01:05:24,219 --> 01:05:29,229
So it's very clear to me that this should
be approved.

877
01:05:29,229 --> 01:05:32,888
I'll just make a few of my own comments as
well.

878
01:05:32,888 --> 01:05:38,834
I appreciate the comments of my colleagues
noting that this is very clearly in

879
01:05:38,834 --> 01:05:42,951
conformance, general conformance with the
master plan.

880
01:05:42,951 --> 01:05:49,126
I think the applicant did a good job of
pointing out it does not have to be both,

881
01:05:49,126 --> 01:05:54,691
that I do think it also meets both.
Compatibility does not mean the same.

882
01:05:54,691 --> 01:05:58,274
All of these things. Um. 2.5 acres and 5
acres.

883
01:05:58,274 --> 01:06:04,449
This is all very clear both in our master
plan and I think common sense that, uh,

884
01:06:04,449 --> 01:06:07,270
those are compatible with each other.

885
01:06:07,270 --> 01:06:10,243
And that, um, that it is clear that it—

886
01:06:10,243 --> 01:06:13,902
our master plan specifically says 2.5-acre
lots.

887
01:06:13,902 --> 01:06:20,153
Um, so it'd be very difficult for me to
say how we could say that's not in general

888
01:06:20,153 --> 01:06:24,422
conformance when it is very explicit in
our master plan.

889
01:06:24,422 --> 01:06:26,938
And it doesn't have to meet both.

890
01:06:26,938 --> 01:06:32,808
I think that some of the questions that
were brought up, and I do understand,

891
01:06:32,808 --> 01:06:36,238
you know, we all have concerns about
traffic.

892
01:06:36,238 --> 01:06:40,508
There is going to be growth, and that's
not a bad thing.

893
01:06:40,508 --> 01:06:46,301
But we do have to make sure that we are
appropriate looking at those things.

894
01:06:46,301 --> 01:06:48,970
We've heard from our traffic folks.

895
01:06:48,970 --> 01:06:54,992
Very specifically that they are meeting
these requirements and that some of the

896
01:06:54,992 --> 01:06:57,279
comments around the dirt road,

897
01:06:57,279 --> 01:07:02,539
that will be decided if it has met when we
get down the road on this.

898
01:07:02,539 --> 01:07:08,638
So it is our legal responsibility and
quite frankly an ethical responsibility to

899
01:07:08,638 --> 01:07:13,898
only apply the criteria that is in front
of us. That is what is fair.

900
01:07:13,898 --> 01:07:17,938
I understand It won't matter, but I'll say
it anyway.

901
01:07:17,938 --> 01:07:24,266
If any commissioner is here representing
anybody, they are not in legal compliance.

902
01:07:24,266 --> 01:07:30,593
The requirement for commissioners here is
to be neutral and not represent any party

903
01:07:30,593 --> 01:07:35,320
on this dais. That is our legal
responsibility and our ethical

904
01:07:35,320 --> 01:07:36,844
responsibility and our ethical
responsibility to be

905
01:07:36,844 --> 01:07:38,750
fair to a property owner.

906
01:07:38,750 --> 01:07:44,696
It is not the government's job to decide
what we like and what we do not like.

907
01:07:44,696 --> 01:07:50,414
It is our job to apply the rules as
written. That's what makes this process

908
01:07:50,414 --> 01:07:50,795
written. That's what makes this process
fair.

909
01:07:50,795 --> 01:07:56,436
That is why it is quasi-judicial, in the
same way that it would be wholly,

910
01:07:56,436 --> 01:08:02,688
wholly inappropriate for a judge across
the street to represent any party in front

911
01:08:02,688 --> 01:08:05,432
of them. And that is the difference.

912
01:08:05,432 --> 01:08:11,454
We wear many hats as commissioners when we
are dealing with legislative issues.

913
01:08:11,454 --> 01:08:17,477
We can have that hat on where we are
representing the people of our district in

914
01:08:17,477 --> 01:08:17,706
representing the people of our district in
the

915
01:08:17,706 --> 01:08:19,840
decision that we are making.

916
01:08:19,840 --> 01:08:26,244
But the law is very clear when it comes to
these quasi-judicial matters that that is

917
01:08:26,244 --> 01:08:30,665
not our role. And you may dislike that,
but it is the law.

918
01:08:30,665 --> 01:08:33,486
And so I find that this has met that.

919
01:08:33,486 --> 01:08:38,441
And I understand that there are
frustrations about what you want.

920
01:08:38,441 --> 01:08:43,320
And what you want to happen. But, but we
have to follow the law.

921
01:08:43,320 --> 01:08:49,266
It's incredibly important, and I think
it's very clear, with zero doubt to me,

922
01:08:49,266 --> 01:08:53,383
that this meets the criteria. So I will be
voting yes.

923
01:08:53,383 --> 01:08:56,432
With that, are there any other comments?

924
01:08:56,432 --> 01:09:00,549
Okay, we will begin the vote with
Commissioner Wysong.

925
01:09:00,549 --> 01:09:02,178
No.

926
01:09:02,178 --> 01:09:03,501
Vice Chair Nelson?

927
01:09:03,501 --> 01:09:03,888
Aye.

928
01:09:03,888 --> 01:09:05,307
Commissioner Williams?

929
01:09:06,027 --> 01:09:06,075
Aye.

930
01:09:06,075 --> 01:09:11,821
And the chair votes aye. That passes 3-1.

931
01:09:11,821 --> 01:09:17,287
Item 7. Item number 7 is department and

932
01:09:17,287 --> 01:09:22,332
committee reports, non-action items,

933
01:09:22,332 --> 01:09:24,995
and there are none.

934
01:09:24,995 --> 01:09:26,184
Item 8.

935
01:09:26,184 --> 01:09:29,355
Item number 8 is the addendum, and there
are no addendums.

936
01:09:29,355 --> 01:09:31,087
Item 9.

937
01:09:31,547 --> 01:09:33,450
Item number 9 is the executive session,

938
01:09:33,450 --> 01:09:35,743
and there is no requests for executive
session.

939
01:09:35,743 --> 01:09:39,695
Okay, with that, we've come to the end of
this agenda. This meeting is adjourned.