In a unanimous vote on Wednesday, the Garfield County Planning Commission recommended that the county deny rezoning requests made by Nutrient Farm.

Nutrient Farm, an organic, biodynamic farm and ranch southeast of New Castle, sought rezoning to create an extensive planned unit development (PUD). It requested that Garfield County revoke the existing Coal Ridge planned unit development zoning and amend the Riverbend planned unit development area to create a Nutrient Farm PUD. 

The PUD could include commercial and recreational facilities ranging from a water park, restaurant and music venue, to residential lots and agricultural processing facilities. The project has been in the works since Nutrient Farm owner Andy Bruno acquired the property in 2018. 

Prior to Wednesday’s meeting, Nutrient Farm submitted a revised PUD Guide and Land Use Table in an attempt to meet over 50 conditions for approval proposed by county staff on March 12. 

Wednesday’s meeting was the third multi-hour long public hearing regarding the proposal this year. Like the previous meetings, Wednesday’s public hearing featured a number of local residents commenting on the proposed PUD, citing concerns about weed mitigation, water usage, increased fire danger and more. 

Bruno and his team hit a snag on Wednesday when all seven planning commissioners present at the meeting voted to recommend denial of the PUD. The Garfield County Board of County Commissioners will vote whether to accept the recommendation of denial when the PUD application is presented to them on a future date. 

The planning commission’s recommendation was based on multiple factors laid out in a report created by Garfield County Planning Department staff prior to the meeting. Issues listed in the report include the PUD’s proposed water supply, compliance to Land Use and Development Code standards and conformance to the Garfield County Comprehensive Plan.

The PUD proposes using the Vulcan Ditch to divert water from Canyon Creek. The diversion has been a point of major contention for many community members, including local advocacy group Friends of Canyon Creek, who believe the additional draw would harm the creek’s riparian ecosystem. 

County staff received revised referral comments regarding the PUD application from the Division of Water Resources (DWR) on May 21. The comments stated the division did not have enough information to determine if the proposed water supply is adequate and “will not cause material injury to existing water rights,” the planning department staff report states. 

DWR requested an updated letter of commitment from the Riverbend Water and Sanitation Company, as well as evidence that Nutrient Farm can legally divert the proposed amount of water from Canyon Creek using the Vulcan Ditch. 

Based on these comments, county staff determined the application does not show a sufficient long term water supply, according to the report. 

“The PUD application is still moving forward to the BOCC for decision, the Planning Commission is just providing a recommendation,” Bruno told the Post Independent over email on Thursday. “Nutrient is confident that it will provide DWR with any additional remaining evidence needed to confirm that Nutrient does in fact possess the adequate legal and physical water supply required for the development.”

Staff also found that other issues remained with the revised application, including a lack of fire and wildlife mitigation plans, issues with trail considerations, and general compliance with “PUD review criteria proposed to be addressed by conditions of approval,” the report states.

“We’re here for a PUD so that we can go through this process, as imperfect as it may be, where we can have these conversations, see what other people think, and try to come up with the best possible products,” said attorney Danny Teodoru who represents Nutrient Farm, while explaining that the farm’s existing zoning already allows most of the proposed developments after the public comment period closed. “What I said is that we’re not going anywhere. We’re not running away from this. 

“There’s a lot of different ways we can go about establishing the different uses on that property that are proposed,” he added. “Certainly agriculture is already a fundamental aspect of that property to begin with.” 

“We appreciate the hard work and time of the planning department staff and commissioners to analyze this complex PUD and consider the feedback and public comments received across the three meetings,” attorney Ryan Jarvis, a representative of several Canyon Creek property owners, said in a Thursday news release from FOCC. “As planning department staff stated, the PUD is not in the best interest of Garfield County citizens’ health, safety and welfare.”