Elbert County commissioners to consider Meadowbrook Ranches rezone Aug. 12
Commissioners will consider a rezone after an 8-0 Planning Commission recommendation, while questions about development, infrastructure and a related three-lot proposal remain unresolved.
The Elbert County Board of County Commissioners is scheduled to consider a proposed rezone Aug. 12 for about 35 acres at 43248 Meadowbrook Circle near Parker, after the Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval. The available record does not establish that the BOCC has approved the rezone or related minor plat.
The application, filed for property owners Jena Vail and Hubert Aguirre Jr. by representative Camille Courtney, would change the parcel from Agriculture to Agriculture Residential. The proposed AR zoning would allow residential lots of at least 10 acres, potentially changing a property in Meadowbrook Ranches, where surrounding lots generally are about 35 acres.
The Planning Commission voted 8-0 on Aug. 4 to recommend approval to the BOCC, according to the county staff report. The recommendation is not final. The BOCC hearing is scheduled for 1 p.m. Aug. 12 at the Elbert County Administration Building in Kiowa.
One neighbor spoke against the rezone at the Planning Commission hearing, saying the change could increase development pressure and that Meadowbrook Ranches lots should remain 35 acres, the staff report says. The agenda packet also included a separate written opposition comment.
Questions raised at a Feb. 3 community meeting included whether Rattlesnake Fire Protection District could serve additional lots, whether existing 35-acre properties could be subdivided, how access would work and what minimum lot sizes would be needed for individual wells and septic systems. Meadowbrook Circle is a privately maintained road serving five lots.
The proposal is for two new lots, not two lots total. County referral materials describe a three-lot configuration consisting of two new 10-acre lots and an existing approximately 15-acre homesite. Earlier application materials use “two lots” to describe the two new lots while retaining the homesite.
Several infrastructure and permitting issues would remain relevant to any later subdivision review. The Colorado Division of Water Resources said existing well permit No. 209382 would have to be re-permitted under Water Court case 03CW0102 or plugged and abandoned before subdivision approval. The two new lots would need separate well and septic permits, with soils reports and engineered designs if required.
Public Works required clarification that the private access provide a 16-foot all-weather driving surface, professionally stamped final plans and private-road maintenance arrangements because Elbert County does not maintain private roads. The referral record says Rattlesnake Fire Protection District raised no stated objection, but residents’ questions were not a finding that service capacity was inadequate.
The staff report lists proposed conditions including removal of public-notice signs, payment of fees and completion of conditions before the rezone becomes effective, as well as recordation of required documents within 180 days of BOCC approval. Those conditions would apply to the rezone and would not establish final approval of the minor plat.
A county-posted draft resolution uses approval language for the rezone, but the available copy has a blank resolution number, blank individual Aye/Nay fields and no clerk attestation or signature. It does not establish the BOCC’s vote, final action or the minor plat’s status. Confirmation would require signed meeting minutes, a completed resolution or other official record of the Aug. 12 hearing, along with final documentation for MP-2026-0002.