Board of County Commissioners Business Meeting - public_hearing

All right, everyone. Welcome to the Board of County Commissioners land use meeting and public hearing. It is Tuesday, September 8th, 2026. And we are a little late starting up. We did have an extended period in our business meeting. But let us all come to order, please. If everyone will please stand and join me with the Pledge of Allegiance.

allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

All right, turning to the county attorney for certification of the agenda.

Commissioner, you have jurisdiction over the matter. And if I'm not mistaken, I believe we're in the Woodmoor Mountain meeting first.

The clerk told me otherwise. I do what Haley says to do because I don't want to get hurt.

Absolutely wise. You have jurisdiction over the land use matters and the Woodmoor Mountain matters as well.

Excellent. Thank you, Counselor. Commissioners, any disclosures for items on this agenda?

No.

No, sir. Nor I. Thank you. All right, let's get into our land use meeting agenda items. First up is Gillies Pumpkin Patch, a major agritourism activity permit. Project file is MI2026-016, Trevor Bedford, Senior Planner, Department of Community Development. And you are not Trevor.

I am not. Good afternoon, Commissioners. Brett Thomas for Community Development filling in for Trevor. The application before you is MI-2026-016, a major agritourism activity. This is the first one that we've had come through since the new regulations have been adopted. Krista and Brent Sheffield are the property owners. The applicant is requesting approval of a major agritourism activity known as Gilly's Pumpkin Patch. The applicant's requesting approval to operate the activity for five years through 2030. The applicant operated Gilly's Pumpkin Patch in 2023 and 2024 as a minor entertainment event, and in 2025 as a major entertainment event. The applicant initially expects approximately 500 guests per day, but based on past success, anticipates growing to 1,000 guests per day, which will be monitored with ticket sales. In 2026, the dates are September 24th to 26th, October 1st through the 3rd, and October 8th through the 10th. At the time of writing the staff report, the applicant had requested to operate the activity in future years on Thursdays through Saturdays over three weekends in late September through mid-October. The applicant has since asked to revise this to a total of nine days in September or October for future years to allow for more flexibility based on school and personal calendars. The applicant would be required to confirm the dates each year ahead of commencing the activity. The intent of the major agritourism activity process is to provide the orderly control of agritourism activities. Major activities are defined as a one-day event in excess of 500 persons or a multi-day event in excess of seven days and 300 persons per day. These are allowed in the large rural residential zoning district subject to board approval on properties with an established principal use. Major activities are reviewed by referral agencies. Curse notices of the application in process are mailed to abutting property owners and included notice of public hearing. Following the board's decision on the activity, additional work may be required by the applicant to obtain permits, approvals, licenses, and other inspections set forth in the conditions of approval. The activity cannot commence until all of the items are finalized. No public comment was received. Referral agency comments were standard in nature. Public Works Engineering noted if any traffic issues arise, they may evaluate the need for traffic control or other permit modifications. The project is located on the west side of Lake Gulch Road, approximately 500 feet north of its intersection with Crystal Valley Parkway. This is within the Castle Rock Municipal Planning Area of the 2040 Comprehensive Master Plan. This map shows the zoning in the area. Directly to the west is Crystal Valley subdivision within town of Castle Rock. Other abutting properties are agricultural or large rural residential. And then this is an aerial depicting the site. This exhibit shows the entrance, parking, and loading areas on the site. The event will be accessed via an existing driveway off Lake Gulch Road. Parking will be accomplished on site in mowed areas. In 2025, the applicant placed right turn only signage at the end of the driveway for exiting traffic to address concerns from the sheriff's office. The signage will continue to be placed at the end of the driveway. This exhibit shows the event layout. The event will include children's activities, such as pumpkin painting, face painting, corn pit, pumpkin toss, playground, and pedal cars. Food, including cotton candy, jam, caramel apples, cookies, popcorn, and other concessions will be available for sale by the property owner. The property owner may use additional food vendor on site. All food vendors will be required to provide proof of appropriate licensing. The pumpkin patch will be primarily operated by members of the household. If necessary, part-time employees may be hired. No construction or grading is proposed. No lighting or amplified sound will be used. This slide lists the approval standards for a major activity. Staff's assessment of these standards are discussed in detail within the staff report. Should the board find that the application complies with the approval standards, staff proposes the following conditions for inclusion in the motion. The first condition has been modified since the staff report was written at the request of the applicant to provide more flexibility in future years. The applicant had requested approval for three weekends, Thursday through Saturday and late September through mid-October. It's been revised to provide more flexibility and is proposed as a major agritourism activity is approved for September 24th to 26th, October 1st through 3rd, and October 8th through 10th in 2026 and nine days in September and October in 2027, 2028, 2029, and 2030, as described in the staff report and attached narrative. Condition number two, if any traffic issues arise, Douglas County Public Works Engineering may evaluate the need for additional traffic control requirements or other modifications to the terms of the permit. Condition number three, prior to permit issuance each year, the applicant shall meet all Castle Rock Fire and Rescue Department requirements and shall pass any necessary on-site inspections prior to commencement of the activity. Condition number four, prior to permit issuance each year, the applicant shall pass any necessary on-site inspections required by Douglas County Building Division. Condition number five, prior to permit issuance each year, copies of valid retail food establishment licenses for all vendors shall be provided to Douglas County Health Department. And condition number six, all commitments and promises made by the applicant or the applicant's representative during the public meeting and or agreed to in writing and included in the public record have been relied upon by the Board of County Commissioners in approving the application. Therefore, such approval is conditioned upon the applicant's full satisfaction of all such commitments and promises. This concludes staff's presentation. I'm available to take questions on the staff report at this time. The applicant does not have a formal presentation, but is available to answer questions.

All right, thank you, Brett. Board, any questions for Brett? And by the way, I'll just tell you, I probably won't have many questions since I drive by this location once a week, twice a week sometimes. Questions for Brett?

Well, Mr. Chair, thank you, and thank you, Brett, for that presentation, and thank you to the applicant. You know, review the packet, and honestly, based upon the criteria in 12202C, I mean, this really reflects the focus that I think the board has placed on agritourism and the value that it brings to our community, not only economically, but just for the way of life and the quality of life that they experience through these agritourism activities. I don't have any additional questions and certainly feel comfortable with this criteria. I'll reserve my determination following public comment, but feel pretty strongly about the criteria as it stands.

All right, thank you, Commissioner. Commissioner, any questions for Brett?

No questions for me. This is one I'm quite familiar with as well, Mr. Chair, so thank you.

And you didn't drop in to say hello. I'm like a mile away, man.

Maybe in a few weeks here with the kids.

All right, very good. All right, I have no questions. Thank you, Brett. I was gonna make a joke about you forgot about the yellow flag that usually flies, but that's okay. Happy to hear from the application for any comments or presentation at this time. And ma'am, go ahead and give us your name and tell us your role with the application.

Yeah, I'm Krista Sheffield. I am the owner of the Pumpkin Patch. And I just wanted to say thank you for giving us the opportunity to hold this. It has been a really fun thing, I think, for our community. We've had a lot of feedback and a positive response positive feedback from members of our community that they love coming and it's something I never thought we'd do but we just keep doing it every year somehow. So thank you for that. I did have a question. Is it okay to ask a question?

Go ahead and direct your question to the board and we will see if we can get it answered.

So we had talked about doing the nine days within that. We talked about in future years trying to have a little more flexibility about the days we do it. Say there was a, we got snowed out one weekend to be able to hold it on a different day if something like that were to happen. would what we just talked about, would that cover us for subsequent years for changing the days and I guess, yeah. Does that make sense?

It does. Based on what I heard, it sounds okay, but let's go ahead and turn it back to Brett. Brett, I mean, it sounded to me like your presentation established there would be flexibility going into future years.

Correct, the condition that had been in the staff report I think was more specific. This one is the proposed revised condition which has nine days within September, October to provide flexibility if that's what you're looking for.

Yes, we had also talked about possibly adding more days to that. Is that something that we would just need to do this again if we were to add additional days? in the future do more than the nine days proposed, is that?

So Brett, I mean it sounds to me, but let's make sure, this is the applicant, let's make sure she understands the nature of it, but it sounded like there is that flexibility with it, but you need to address that each year with staff if you do have a change in dates. Brett, correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounded like you said, but let's make sure it's in there.

So the way it's written in subsequent years, she would be limited to nine days. If you wanted to increase that from nine days in the future, typically that would come back to the board for an amendment to the activity. Unless the board wanted to increase that now, I guess that could be an option as well.

Okay, so board, that's something for us to discuss. And of course, we haven't even asked our questions of the applicant yet. This is still the applicant's presentation time. So that's the nature of it. If you're gonna go beyond the nine days, you're gonna have to come back in for an amendment each year. If you stick with the nine days, it sounds like you're okay. Sounds good. Questions from the board for the applicant?

Well, maybe consistent with Commissioner Van Winkle's initiative around cutting red tape, I like to avoid duplication and avoiding bureaucracy if there's any way to streamline the process for not only this applicant, but for all applicants, if that's what we're being asked to consider, I'm certainly open to that.

So I guess maybe give us an idea of what those nine days entail. Is that Saturday, Sunday, is it Friday, Saturday, Sunday, three times?

Currently we have Thursday, Friday, Saturday, I did propose to the planning department that we increase that. However, I was too late in the planning to get that put on here and to speak with you guys about that. So that's why I brought that up. In the future, I think we would like to maybe add another weekend to that, kind of spread out our openings over a little bit longer time, or like I said, maybe open it up for another day of the week, do something like that.

Okay.

That's where my thought process is on that.

I think I would have a favorable opinion of that. So what are you looking for? And also, I know a lot of kids are in school Monday through Friday, and then Saturday, Sunday are the big days. Sunday, why no Sundays?

I have religious responsibilities on Sundays, so we take Sundays off.

Okay, very good. Let me just ask staff, is there any reason from your perspective why we would not wanna expand the request?

if they were comfortable with that.

Certainly our discretion, but any specific impediments from a planning standpoint?

Not from planning. I don't know if engineering has any concerns.

I do know that our food, our temporary retail food license has a max of 14 days, so I know we wouldn't be able to expand beyond those 14 days unless we did a total change of what we're doing also, so.

So would you be looking for, you know, if we did 12 days instead of nine, that would offer flexibility either to add a weekend at the end of the season or at the beginning of the season? Yeah. Okay, and that's, are you asking for?

Or to add another day within the week also.

Okay, but 12 days would be, provide the flexibility you're looking for. Perfect, yeah. Okay, thank you.

So what we're talking about then is amending condition one to read and I'm looking at the second line that's on the board before us all. 10 in 2026 and 12 days in September and October in 2027, 28, 29 and 30. So substituting the nine days for 12 days. So that sounds like the applicant is okay with that. Board, what do you guys think? That sound okay by you?

That's fine with me. I think we have a member of engineering here prepared to answer that previous question.

Jacob Gable with engineering. As long as the attendees don't go past 1,000 people per day, engineering doesn't have any issues.

And I do think increasing those days would help to actually spread it out so there's less per day. I would imagine there'd be a similar amount of attendees, but it would give people more opportunities to do it on different days.

Okay.

Maybe this is a question for legal. Any issue with binding future boards?

No, and the approval as a whole is always subject to any kind of future. If there was some reason that she wasn't being a good citizen or something like that, we could always revisit. I wouldn't expect that, but. Okay.

Okay, any further questions for the applicant guys? I have a question for the applicant. We've made an amendment to condition number one here. Do you accept condition number one as amended as well as the other five conditions? Yes. Okay, very good. Thank you very much, ma'am. Let's go to public comment. All right. I did not have anyone signed up for public comment at this time. Is there anyone who would like to make public comment on this matter? Seeing none, bringing it back to the board. Board, we do have a item and I will remind you, it is with six conditions. Condition one that has been amended. How would we like to take action on this permit for Gillies Pumpkin Patch?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I don't see any reason to deny it. I do like the addition of the days. When I first was going through this, I was much more concerned about the traffic flow, and that is just becoming so popular that it would need a little traffic support, but that had nothing to do with the number of days it was open, and I think... Making that amendment is a wise choice. So I move to approve Gilley's pumpkin patch major agritourism activity permit because it does meet all the approval criterias with six conditions as presented and also amended. Project file MI2026-016. Love agritourism. I think this is a good move.

Agreed. I'll second that motion.

All right. There is a motion and a second. Discussion?

Ms. Sheffield, thank you. Thank you so much for doing this. I know you said you never imagined in your life you'd run a pumpkin patch, but we need more of them here in Douglas County.

It's been really fun, so we're glad we're doing it.

You have no idea how many people ask me for details about this because they're like, they still think I'm on the town council and they think because I live in the neighborhood of Crystal Valley, I must know everything about it. Now I finally do.

Well, we hope to see you there.

It may be, may be. Who knows? Board, that does not sound like there's any discussion. All in favor of approving the permit for Gilley's Pumpkin Patch, say aye.

Aye. Aye.

Aye. And congratulations, permit is approved. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Gentlemen, our next two items are going to, I'm gonna introduce them together, and we will receive a presentation together, and then we're going to need to kind of monkey around with how we approve them. First item is Maribel Village, filing one, 10th Amendment, replat, project files SB2026-024, Mike Pasica, principal planner, presenting for staff, as well as Sageport filing for second amendment, replat project file is SB2026-034. Mike, when you are ready, please begin.

Thank you, Commissioners, for hearing the two items together. And they will require separate motions, and when you get to that stage, we ask that the Sageport application motion be made first, followed by the Maribel motion. The applications before you are the Maribel village filing one 10th amendment replat project number SB 2026 dash zero two four in the Sageport filing for second amendment replat project number SB 2026 dash zero three four and Marion Woodward is here the ad at this afternoon and she is the consultant on both applications. The Mirabeau Village request is for a replat to vacate lot lines and easements between four residential lots, creating one new lot and vacate Yellow Bells Court and portions of Clematis Drive and Wood Surrell Road, all unbuilt county right of ways. The vacated right of ways will be included in the new residential lot. The Sageport filing for second amendment request is also for a replat to vacate lot lines and easements between three residential lots, creating one new lot and vacate portions of Clematis drive and Wood Surrell road, both unbuilt County right of ways. The vacated right-of-ways will be included in the new residential lot. Two of the lots, lot seven and eight, block 25, are within Merrillville Village filing one and will be merged into lot 62, Sageport filing four, First Amendment, creating the one new residential lot. And all those lots are under the same ownership. There is an associated zone map change to rezone the lots from suburban residential to agricultural one in the Maribel Village filing one 10th amendment and from suburban residential to a state residential in the Sageport filing for a second amendment that will come before the board at a future date. The intent of the replat process is to provide a review process for the replatting of an existing subdivision plat or super block final plat. The replat process begins with the submittal of an application. Following a 21-day referral period, the request is considered by the Board of County Commissioners. Staff received no responses from the public on either application, and all referral comments have been addressed for both applications. Referral responses are included as an attachment to these staff reports. This is the CMP vicinity map. The sites are located in the south central portion of the county within the West Plum Creek sub area of the CMP denoted by the red star on the map. They're located approximately two miles west of Interstate 25, one mile south of Tomah Road, and one mile east of South Perry Park Road. This is the zoning of both project sites. The Maribel Village Filing 110th Amendment project site is outlined in red. and is 21.01 acres in size. And the Sageport Filing One Second Amendment site is outlined in yellow and is 3.896 acres in size. The Maribor Village site is zoned suburban residential. The site cannot be developed under the SR zoning as central water and sewer service are required. And the minimum lot size in the SR zone district is half an acre. The Sageport site is zoned suburban residential and estate residential. The estate residential zone district requires central water and allows for individual septic systems. And lot 62, Sageport, filing one First Amendment, has those existing services. Take a look at an area of the site. The Maribel Village filing one Tenth Amendment area is outlined in red and lies entirely within Maribel Village filing one. The Sageport filing for second amendment site is outlined in yellow and includes lot 62 Sageport filing for first amendment and lot seven and eight block 25 Maribel village filing one. Uh, the sites have small areas of grasses, but are mostly a tree covered and there is no floodplain on either side. Maribor Village was zoned in 1971 and platted as Maribor Village filing one into half acre lots. There are no paved roads or central water and sewer services available which are required for development on half acre lots. Sageport filing for First Amendment was replatted in 1995 which created 81 residential lots with a minimum lot size of 2.3 acres and is zoned to stay residential. This is sheet two from the Marabou Village filing one 10th amendment replat exhibit, which was included with the staff report. The proposed right away vacations are the hatched areas. There is a 20 foot emergency access easement right here that will be dedicated for lot 20 block 28 Marabou Village filing one to maintain access to a public right away for this lot. This is sheet two from the Sageport replat exhibit, which was included with the staff report. The proposed right-of-way vacations, again, are the hatched areas. Lots seven and eight, block 25, Maryville, file age one, will be merged into lot 62, Sageport filing for First Amendment. These are the approval standards for a replat, which are discussed in detail on pages five through seven of the staff report. Staff has evaluated the replats in accordance with part seven of the subdivision regulations. Should the board find that the approval standards for both replat applications are met, the following proposed conditions should be considered for inclusion in its motion for each application with a Sageport application being considered first. Condition number one, prior to recordation of the replat, technical corrections to the plat exhibit shall be made to the satisfaction of Douglas County. Condition number two, all commitments and promises made by the applicant or the applicant's representative during the public meeting and or agreed to in writing and included in the public record have been relied upon by the Board of County Commissioners in approving the applications. Therefore, such approval is conditioned upon the applicant's full satisfaction of all such commitments and promises. Part 2-7066 of the subdivision regulations sets forth the parameters for the board's determination on replat requests as noted on this slide. And that concludes my presentation. The applicant doesn't have a formal presentation this afternoon, but is here to answer any questions you might have.

All right, thank you, sir. Board, questions for Mike? I have none, great presentation. I've got no questions, Mike. Happy to hear from the applicant at this time. Sir, please come forward, give us your name, tell us your role with this application.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. My name is Walter Kowalski. I own the property that we're talking about, and that's part of the old Mirabelle I've been in for you before, and what we're doing is consolidating, and what we're doing here with the elimination of the roads, we've taken all those lots and broke them, and we've reduced the lot lines, and now with the roads going out of there, we can close off that property because we've had people come, because the roads were public, and I couldn't say to people they couldn't be on them, and we've had tires thrown on. We have trees taken out. So this really is about a five and a half year venture on our part from when we started, when we moved there and built a house in 1970, excuse me, 1997. We started accumulating lots like Monopoly and then finally was able to get rid of all the lot lines. So this is sort of a momentous moment for us to be able to get this finally done and reduce those three, four plots into one large one of 20 acres. And so appreciate all the work you've done in the past, particularly the planning department. He's been incredible in terms of working with, and we appreciate it.

All right. Well, thank you, Walt. Appreciate that. Board, any questions for the applicant?

No. Good to see you again, sir. You've been before us many times. Certainly appreciate the presentation.

Just one other comment. This property is now under Colorado State Forestry. We submitted the application. It's under that. Every year they come in and they check. They've helped us with the mitigation efforts we've done, both from the county and from the state. So we've been ongoing process of cleaning it, maintaining it, making sure it's a sanctuary for all of the animals.

All right, thanks, sir. Board, any further questions?

Thank you for being here.

Yeah, I got no questions, Walt. Thank you, sir, appreciate it. We'll open up for public comment. Is there any public comment on this matter at this time? Seeing none. Board, let's bring it back for action. Again, if we'd like to start making motions in order to approve these requests, we do need to do item C before item B, please.

Mr. Chair, if it does please the board, I'll be happy to make a motion to approve Sageport filing for second amendment replat because it does meet all of the approval criteria with two conditions as presented. Project file SB 2026-034. I second the motion.

All right, there's a motion and a second. Any discussion on this matter? All in favor say aye.

Aye.

And that is the second amendment. Sageport filing for second amendment is approved. Let's turn our attention to item B, which is the Merrillville Village filing one 10th amendment replat.

Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. I move to approve Maribel Village, filing 1, 10th Amendment, re-plat because it does meet all the approved criteria with two conditions as presented. This is Project File SB2026-024.

And I'll second that motion.

All right, motion is second heard. Discussion, gentlemen? Go ahead, Commissioner.

No, I'll just speak in favor of this motion and the previous one. I think it's a good plan. It makes sense. The new bigger lot, one single bigger lot versus the smaller ones, you know, just makes a lot of sense. I think it'll be good.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner. Any further discussion, gentlemen? Walt, I've said it to you before. Thanks for doing this work. I mean, you're taking responsibility into your own hands. You're doing what other people kind of come to us and say, hey, can't you guys do this? And sometimes we can, sometimes we can't. Sometimes it's not ours to do anything with. You know, you're taking ownership yourself and you're working it all the way through the process to have the full responsibility. And I think it's great. I mean, we all know, well, maybe not everybody knows about Mirabella Village and how, yeah, great, great development back in the 1970s that didn't amount to anything. And you're taking action to go ahead and, you know, take responsibility for the land that's around you. So I commend you once again. Gentlemen, there is a motion and a second to approve. All in favor, say aye. Aye. And Mirabelle Village filing one 10th Amendment replat is approved. Congratulations, sir. Well done. Our next, our last item for the land use meeting agenda is pits exemption. Exemption is EX2026-007 and Eric Pavlenik, Chief Planner, Department of Community Development.

Good afternoon, Commissioners. Eric Pavlenek representing Community Development. Before you is the Pitts exemption. Product number is EX2026-007. Duke Pitts is here as the applicant representative. The request is for approval of an exemption from the subdivision land use regulations to legalize one residential parcel on two acres. The applicant has also requested a fee waiver in the amount of $1,000 for the planning review fee for this exemption request. The intent of the exemption process is establish a review process for divisions of land that the board determines are outside of the purpose of subdivision. The exemption process includes the middle of an application. Referral period for this project was not needed as the parcel has existing services needed for a single family residence. As indicated by the red star, the property is located within the northern portion of the county. Parcel is zoned agricultural one. The property abuts single-family development to the west, north, and east. Rock Canyon High School is located south of the site across MacArthur Ranch Road. This is an aerial view of the property. As background, the property currently has an existing residence built in 1973. The Pitts family originally owned the 10-acre parcel and in 2008 conveyed via deed approximately 8.1 acres to the Diocese of Colorado Springs, which is the owner of the adjacent parcel to the west. On the left is an aerial view of the 10-acre parcel originally owned by the Pitts family, and the area on the right depicts the approximate two-acre parcel after the deed conveys to the church. This is the exemption exhibit, which shows the boundaries of the two-acre lot. The board has broad authority to approve subdivision exemption requests. Should the board approve the exemption request, the following proposed conditions should be considered for inclusion of the motion. Condition number one, prior to recordation of the exemption exhibit, technical corrections to the exhibit should be made to the satisfaction of Douglas County. Condition number two, all commitments and promises made by the applicant or the applicant's representative during the public meeting and agreed to in writing and including the public record have been replied upon the Board of County Commissioners in approving the application. Therefore, such approval is conditioned upon the applicant's full satisfaction of all such commitments and promises. There are no formal approval standards for exemption requests. Rather, the subdivision regulation set forth exemption criteria. Specifically, section 2-903.5 authorizes the subdivision exemption for division of land affected by deed recorded in the office of Douglas County Clerk and Recorder if it's determined that the division is not within the purpose of subdivision regulations. In this case, a two-acre parcel was created by deed in 2008. Section 2-904.4 of the Subvision Regulations sets forth parameters for the Board's action on exemption requests, which is noted on the slide. This concludes my presentation. I'm available for any questions at the time. Otherwise, Duke Pitts is here as the applicant.

All right. Thank you, Eric. Board, questions for Eric?

I'll reserve my questions following the applicant's presentation, Mr. Chair.

Ditto. Very well then, let's hear it from the applicant. Come on forward, sir. Give us your name and please do explain your relationship to the application.

Sure, my name is actually Kevin Pitts, but I go by Duke, so I do want to thank the board as well as the planning department for moving this as quickly as they have. I got to be blessed and grow up in that house starting in 1973. My dad built it and mom, and the only thing between us and Arapahoe High School was Arapahoe High School, so the county we've seen grow. I still am a Douglas County resident. I went to Douglas County High School. My dad passed about 18 months ago and my mom was in assisted living so we are selling the property. In 2008 it looks like the I's weren't all dotted and the T's weren't all crossed. The church bought the property and then it got subdivided and they built 53 homes in there and the plot was never legalized I guess at that point in time. So we're in a position where that plot needs to get approved and the county I think has presented that case so our goal is to sell the property which we have under contract and if it's not approved then we will lose a sale and and the ability to have my mom taking care of an assisted living so not to throw the emotional side on it but there is emotions attached this but but like I said I just don't think the paperwork was done properly from what we understand it was the church at the time but now we're trying to pick up the pieces on that

All right, thank you, sir. Board, questions for the applicant?

Well, Duke, I'm sorry for your loss. I'm trying to get my microphone on here.

Oops. Not standing up.

Duke, I'm sorry for your loss. I've lost a parent as well, and that's not easy, and obviously you're picking up a lot of pieces for your family, and that's to be commended. Certainly, I'm very familiar with the... actions that occurred with Pax Christi and what happened with that development over there. Give me a little bit more flavor around what's currently happening with, what do you need in terms of the exemption?

Well, the lot's just gotta be considered a legal plot right now. It's kind of in limbo. It isn't legal and it's not illegal, so, and then we got done, which is kind of mind-boggling still at this point in time, so. Yeah. But we just need it approved to be a legal plot.

So, and that's the part I'm confused about. How is it never a legal plot?

Well, I think based on all the research that I did, and again, with the planning commission or the department, tanning department, the church had filed some paperwork and then they just didn't do it. And then it just slipped through the cracks. I don't know why. And really no one at the county can find records on why either. It's just it.

So the church was the fee simple owner of that property and they conveyed that to your parents and that was never recorded or am I not understanding that?

My parents sold 8.1 acres to the church with the agreement they would not subdivide, but of course they went ahead and subdivide later and they got the 53 home plots approved in that area and they approved all those plots, but they did not ever legalize the 1.9 acres again.

Yeah, I remember that and I remember that deed restriction that allowed for that subdivision. I actually voted against it because of your family. I think it was really important to preserve their interests and creating a development in a really dense suburban area in my mind didn't make a whole lot of sense. Of course they did that. I mean is the whole thought that that property you own would continue to be subdivided and then

No, as a matter of fact, just the opposite. We want to have it preserved to someone who wants the property, and we do have it under contract, which is supposed to close in a couple days. Without approval, we can't. And I really appreciate that. Hopefully my dad did not raise too much hell down here. Excuse the French.

Well, I heard his spirit through the documents and tried to honor that. So thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

All right, thank you. Commissioner, questions?

No questions, this is one I drive by multiple times a day. It's a very unique lot, predates Highlands Ranch, as you said, and really it's kind of, I wanna honor kind of the history of it, history of your family. I think if I was a commissioner at the time, I've always felt that the new, that's not under application today, of course, this is many years ago. the new homes that were put up around there really don't fit the surrounding community at all. It's kind of a very strange, grouping of homes, but that was a long time ago. I'm not sure I would have approved it either as a county commissioner if I had been a commissioner at the time. But I very much admire these homeowners and you and your family keeping that 1.9 acre, that one historic part of Highlands Ranch. I imagine there was probably a time where there was a Highlands Ranch mansion way to the west. Like you said, Arapahoe High School way to the north. And that was it, so I don't see any problem with the exemption being requested today. Thank you.

Duke, you don't have to answer this question, but are you open to sharing with the board who the purchaser is?

You know, actually, right now, I'm not even remembering the name of the people that do it because we keep extending things. But they seem to want to keep the property as if they don't have intention. They actually are saying they're going to move into it. So that was one of the appeals for us. We're really taking a lot less money if we want to go through all the subdivision requests again and sell it to a contractor. But like I said, we really don't have any interest in doing that.

You're selling to a private individual?

yes yeah okay all right well uh uh i don't the only questions i have for you you see the two conditions could we eric could we get the two conditions back up for the applicant duke you got the two conditions there do you agree to those conditions yeah eric can you is that they're done already those two conditions i believe are done are they not

Eric Pavan for staff, I mean, yeah, we've looked at the exhibit. That's just our standard condition. If there are any technical changes, we would request those prior to recording.

Yeah, and the technical exemption exhibit has already been presented, and I think there was no objections on that, so.

Okay, I will take that down as you do agree to those conditions then. Thank you very much, sir. Appreciate it. You can step back from the podium. Appreciate it.

Thank you. Eric Pavlik for staff. I just want to clarify that the exemption request is one motion and then the other motion would be the fee waiver request for the $1,000 planning fee.

Got it. Okay. Thank you, Eric. Okay, with that said, let's go ahead, Board, if there are no further questions for staff, or we can call the applicant back up. Let's go to public comment. Is there anyone who would like to make public comment on this matter? Public comment will be welcome at this time. Seeing none, bring it back to the Board. Board, do we have, how do we wanna take action on the exemption request? Is there a motion?

Yes, Mr. Chair, I'll move to approve the Pitts exemption because it does meet all of the approval criteria with two conditions as presented. Exemption EX2026-007.

Very glad to second the motion, honor some of our history. If anything there is plotted, it should be this one house.

All right, very good. Any discussion, gentlemen? There's a motion and a second. All in favor say aye. Aye.

Aye.

And the exemption is approved. Eric, can you please put up the language for the fee exemption? I'm sure it's either your first or your second slide after the title. All right. Gentlemen, I'm willing to take a motion to approve the fee waiver in the amount of $1,000 for planning review fee.

I move that we approve the fee waiver in the amount of $1,000 for the planning review fee.

And I'll second that motion.

There is a motion and a second. Any discussion, gentlemen?

Just Mr. Chair, I think, thank you Mr. Pitts for being here. Thank you for going through the difficult process of the paperwork. I don't see any reason to charge fees for it. This should have been done years and years ago an oversight on many fronts So I'm very supportive of waving that $1,000 fee Very good very good Commissioner Van Winkle speaking in favor of the motion Any further discussion?

I too will speak in favor of the motion all in favor say aye aye aye and the fee waiver is hereby waived I All right, those are all of our land use meeting agenda items. We do not have any public hearing agenda items today, so we'll go ahead and adjourn. The next land use meeting and public hearing will be held on Tuesday, September 22nd, 2026 at 2.30 p.m. We are adjourned and we will begin the...