Approved - 6 to 0.

Cimarron Mesa II Rezone

Case: RZN-2021-861
Consider a request by Applewood South LLC to rezone two (2) properties (Lot 1, Carville Simple Subdivision & Lot 7, Block 5, Cimarron Mesa Subdivision - 23.47-acres total) from R-4 (Residential - 4 du/ac) to R-8 (Residential – 8 du/ac) located south of Hwy. 50 and west of B ½ Road.
Register for the meeting using the link below:

After registering,  you will receive a  confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar. 


Staff Presentation


Maps and Locations ( 1.05 MB )
Staff Report ( 0.14 MB )
Draft Ordinance ( 0.09 MB )
Decision Making Criteria
Per Section 21.01.140 of the Zoning and Development Code, the Planning Commission and City Council shall base their decisions in consideration of the extent to which the applicant demonstrates the following criteria have been met:
(1)    Subsequent events have invalidated the original premises and findings; and/or
(2)    The character and/or condition of the area has changed such that the amendment is consistent with the Plan; and/or
(3)    Public and community facilities are adequate to serve the type and scope of land use proposed; and/or
(4)    An inadequate supply of suitably designated land is available in the community, as defined by the presiding body, to accommodate the proposed land use; and/or
(5)    The community or area, as defined by the presiding body, will derive benefits from the proposed amendment.

Comments & Feedback

This case is closed, online commenting is no longer available.
Online comments closed at 5:30 PM MST 1/24/22.
Hello, I am concerned that this new zoning density will basically degrade the rural feeling of our neighborhood, With both subdivisions to the east and west zoned R4 and considering the Spyglass subdivision's density, this increase to R8 density will be out of character for this area. Along with it will be even more traffic and noise on B 1/2 Rd through my subdivision, which appears to be the proposed main access point. Does the city understand what the traffic is like on Linden and B 1/2 Rd during school operations? Especially the intersection of those two roads? I understand the willingness of the City of GJ management to adopt higher density to prevent increased urban sprawl however I certainly don't like the "packed in like sardines" effect of rezoning for increased density that changes the existing character of an area. Although it is "consistent" with the Land Use codes, those same codes should be applied with care and consideration of all factors, especially the existing character of a neighborhood and uniformity . Who made the rediculous and inconsiderate decision to send notices only to people within 500 ft of the proposed site? The entire subdivisions of Cimarron Mesa and Antietam as well as other landowners in the area should have received the notices. Everyone that is going to be affected by the increased traffic and noise should have been informed. 500 ft is basically nothing considering the impact this construction will have on people living in this area. There is already very heavy traffic on US 50 in the mornings and afternoons when people transit to work and back. It is also the main route for people coming in to do business or shopping from the neighboring communities to the south east of us. Increasing density is also contributing to increased traffic on this main thoroughfare in addition to what R4 zoning would have contributed. My thought is that if there is going to be a traffic signal and controlled intersection at Palmer and US Hwy 50 then it would provide an excellent and safer access point for the proposed subdivision. There are many children in this area and more traffic due to this new subdivision will make it less safe for them as well as others who walk for their health. I Do hope the planning commision and decision making people will listen to the public and have consideration for our input. Thank you.
January 23, 2022, 9:37 AM
James Morris
6 / 9 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
As a residnet of the antitum subdivision traffic is a real concern. I understand the need for growth and the need for a more affordable housing model is need in the area. Knowing that more density would be a key aspect in accomplishing this goal. However with out the developer connecting aspen street to the main body of the subdivison the traffic on 26 1/4 rd will become an issue. The road is in very poor shape and is barely wide enough to accomidate two way traffic. Combine this with the citys desire to keep this a peaceful quite area with slow speed limits and signs stating local traffic only after 10 pm because of the cemetery. The fact is that 26 1/4 road is the only road that has a truning light at highway 50 that can be accessed without back tracking. This will account for an addidtion once develped of 600-800 or more vehicles using this road. With funeral parties reducing the road to a one lane street at times there can be no doubt that accidents and or confrontations are going to happen for all of the reasons stated above. Personally I would like to have the larger parcel left as it is currenty zoned. However the realities of the housing issues that are pervasive nation wide mean that this change will most likely take place. In conclusion at the very least a conection that bridges the drainage canal on aspen street is a nessecity for the main developement area of the two lots. this will enable use to the new Palmer street interchange to access west bound lanes of highway 50. With addressing the sub standard condition of 26 1/4 road and parking for funerals being dealt with in a thoughtful and timely manner as well.
January 23, 2022, 9:10 AM
Richard Toolson
6 / 9 Planning Commissioners have viewed this comment
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Your Question has been submitted.