County Council Adds Road Safeguards to Lionstone Plan, and Questions Fire Access
Development traffic, neighborhood access and preparations for the next county budget dominated the October 26 meeting.
By The Jefferson Review
The Jefferson County Council advanced the proposed Lionstone residential development with additional traffic and floodplain requirements during its October 26 meeting, while a separate subdivision proposal prompted a broader discussion about keeping neighborhood streets accessible to emergency vehicles.
Council members also delayed consideration of a Peaceful Village disincorporation ballot measure, approved road funding for the village and discussed changes to the documents they will receive for the upcoming county budget review.
The Lionstone proposal, located in Council District 2, would rezone property to planned residential and approve a development plan. The council voted 5–1 to advance the amended bill toward final passage, but did not give it final approval that night.
Before that vote, the council approved two amendments focused on parking, flooding and road safety.
The first clarified the importance of adequate driveway parking to keep streets accessible for emergency vehicles. It also strengthened the floodplain language, requiring buildings to be outside the unregulated 500-year floodplain rather than simply encouraging it.
The second would require the developer to widen the Lions Den Road approach to Old Highway 21 to provide separate left- and right-turn lanes. It also added requirements to improve driver visibility, adjust the shoulder and guardrail, and obtain county approval of the construction plans before work begins.
Both amendments passed 6–0. The amended Lionstone bill then advanced 5–1, with final approval deferred to a later meeting.
Another development proposal, the revised plan for Bella Terra Addition in Council District 3, advanced on its first reading by a 6–0 vote following an extended discussion about emergency access and responsibility for keeping connecting streets open.
Councilman Groeteke raised concerns about a fire district letter requesting county cooperation in recognizing and enforcing fire-lane restrictions. The discussion focused on what could happen if access points connecting subdivisions were blocked by parked vehicles, gates or other barriers.
Councilman Brown questioned whether the county would be accepting an enforcement obligation by approving a plan supported by that letter. County legal counsel said the request was not included in the conditions being approved and that passage of the bill would not, by itself, obligate the county to provide that enforcement.
County Executive Dennis Gannon said developers and homeowners associations would need to meet their responsibilities, while noting that the sheriff operates as a separately elected official.
Councilman Brown also questioned the change from an earlier approved access plan and whether traffic studies adequately examine intersections within existing subdivisions when a new development connects through them. Councilman Groeteke urged the council to address subdivision connections and emergency access during the county’s Unified Development Order rewrite.
The Bella Terra vote moved the revised plan to the next legislative stage; it was not final approval.
Peaceful Village generated two separate debates: whether to advance a proposed disincorporation election and whether to release road-improvement funding under an existing agreement.
Councilman Bob Tullock asked to remove the election bill from the evening’s agenda, saying he needed additional time to research questions after receiving the agenda later than usual because of internet issues.
County legal counsel told members that the petition had been reviewed by the county clerk and the counselor’s office and met the required signature threshold. Counsel described placing the question on the ballot as a ministerial duty once the requirements were satisfied.
Councilman Brown argued that introducing the bill would allow members to discuss their questions publicly while the measure moved through the process.
The council voted 4–2 to remove the bill from that night’s agenda. Gannon said he would place it on the next agenda. The proposal concerns an April 2027 election on whether Peaceful Village should disincorporate.
Separately, the council unanimously approved road funding for the village under its existing agreement involving the county’s half-cent road-improvement sales tax.
Councilman Crow had requested that the funding bill be removed from the consent agenda for discussion. He and Councilman Tim Bennett questioned what would happen if the village received the money but disincorporated before the project was completed.
County legal counsel said the current revenue-sharing agreement remained binding and that the village had submitted the required documentation. Counsel explained that, if disincorporation occurred, a trustee would be appointed to wind up the municipality’s affairs, including reviewing outstanding obligations and remaining funds.
Public works staff described the proposed work as an extension of a road within the village to serve three homes. The funding bill passed 6–0.
Looking ahead to the county budget, Gannon said problems with the financial management system would change the format of the materials council members receive.
Instead of the customary large budget binders, he said members would receive a financial summary expected to run about 20 pages, with additional columns and page headings. Information about certificates of participation and their balances would also be provided.
Councilman Brown said members could use the summary to identify significant differences and request detailed line-item information. Councilman Tullock asked whether the budget and appropriations legislation could be presented as separate bills, and Gannon said the issue could be discussed with legal counsel and the auditor.
Budget work sessions were announced for November 16 and 17. Gannon also said the December council meetings would move one week earlier, allowing time for budget amendments and approval before Christmas.
During public comments, residents raised concerns about nuisance properties and a sewer project. One homeowner described unresolved yard restoration, sewer odors and difficulty obtaining responses from the Jefferson County Public Sewer District. Councilman Groeteke clarified that the sewer district is a separate entity with its own board and is not administered by county government.
Other business included unanimous final approval of a rezoning from large-lot residential to non-planned industrial in Council District 5, first-reading advancement of a revised plan for Arch RV and Boat Storage in District 1, and appointments and reappointments to several community improvement district boards. A public hearing on proposed traffic-code changes drew no testimony.
Stay connected to what’s happening in Jefferson County
The Jefferson Review delivers the local government decisions, development updates, and community stories shaping our county every Thursday and Sunday.
Don’t miss what your neighbors are talking about.
Stay connected to what’s happening in Jefferson County.
The Jefferson Review delivers the local government decisions, development updates, and community stories shaping our county every Thursday and Sunday.
Don’t miss what your neighbors are talking about.