The purpose of this website is to provide accurate and truthful information for our neighbors, and anyone else that is interested, about the Amendment we have filed to our existing Remuda Ranch Rural Site Plan on property owned by the Wiens Ranch Company, Inc.. (Project #SP2017-067, Submittal #2 dated 01/31/2019)
If you lived here during the Hayman Fire of 2002, you probably already know this, but if you didn’t, the Hayman Fire came very close to Perry Park which was evacuated twice. We cut our fences and to help our neighbors evacuate through our ranch, took in over 80 of our neighbors’ horses, became the headquarters for the heli-base to attack the fire and hosted community meetings for updates on the fire. After the fire, it became a huge priority of Douglas County and other State and Federal agencies, to establish a secondary emergency access out of Perry Park, which was supposed to have been done decades earlier. There were numerous alternatives that could have gone across our neighbor’s properties and alternatives connecting from Tomah Road into Perry Park that would have gone right through the middle of our property. In order to protect our ranch home from such an unwanted possibility, we acquired land on the southwest and north parts of our property that would allow for an emergency access road to connect from Perry Park on the southwest to Dakan Road on the north. We paid approximately $3.4mm to acquire those properties to protect our land. We were ultimately reimbursed $471k from Douglas County for the right to build a secondary emergency access road for our neighbors in Perry Park on the route that was less disruptive than the routes proposed by the Perry Park Access Committee Final Report. Ultimately, the County decided to build the secondary emergency access route across the back part of our ranch which is now called Remuda Ranch Parkway. Click below for a copy of the Court Order.
In 2009 we received approval of the existing Remuda Ranch Rural Site Plan. Click below for a map of the existing 2009 Remuda Ranch RSP.
The Wiens Ranch consists of 1,753.91 acres and is bordered by Perry Park Road/County Road 105 and the Tomah Road intersection to the east, Dakan Road on the north, Perry Park Country Club on the southwest and Dakan Ranch directly to the west. The ranch currently has 7 existing lots on the property that we use as part of the ranch, which includes our headquarters area, a place where our neighbors have joined with us to do many things for the benefit of the community over the years. The property is zoned agricultural along with the existing and fully approved 2009 Remuda Ranch Rural Site Plan (RSP) created when the ranch was somewhat smaller, at 1,620 acres. The existing RSP has 1,090.08 acres of Agricultural Open Space and 358.39 acres of approved residential lots for large homes which would stretch all the way from Perry Park on the south to Dakan Road on the north and would sprawl for miles across what is now ranch pastures. At present, under the 2009 plan, and on additional property we have subsequently acquired, we have the right to 96 lots without amending our existing 2009 Remuda Ranch RSP.
In 2017, we explored the possibility of improving the 2009 RSP by dramatically increasing the amount of Open Space and reducing the number of acres that could be used for residential lots, by consolidating the lots on the north end of our property near Dakan Road. Some neighbors felt that the lots would be too visible in that location and suggested that we cluster the lots to the south near Perry Park in keeping with the letter and spirt of Rural Site Plan rules and regulations.
That’s exactly what we have done. We carefully considered this input from our neighbors and the community and have amended our existing, approved 2009 RSP.
We have substantially improved the plan, which includes additional acreage dedicated to Agricultural Open Space and decreases the acreage used for residential lots.
COMMENT: “After reviewing the latest Remuda Ranch Open Space Agreement with the county I feel the terms and conditions are even more lenient than the original 2009 document.”
ANSWER: This is factually incorrect. The OSA is exactly the same as the OSA that was filed, executed and approved in 2009.
Our OSA, is a public document and has not been changed except to update the Legal Descriptions, Exhibits A & B, to describe the increase in Agricultural Open Space Acreage and the decrease in Residential Acreage. (1,090 Agricultural Open Space Acreage in 2009 to 1,439.26 Agricultural Open Space Acreage in the 2018/19 RSP Amendment, an increase of 32% and 358.39 Residential Acreage under the existing 2009 RSP and 130.95 Residential Acreage in the 2018/19 RSP Amendment, a decrease of 63%.)
COMMENT: “This agreement needs to be aggressively altered to at least resemble the basic of criteria for open space.”
ANSWER: It is interesting to note, that our OSA was modeled after the Dakan Ranch Conservation Easement. The Dakan Ranch (Brooks Ranch) abuts our property to the west and its agreement has only one monitoring and enforcing entity. Our Agreement has two, and includes the power of the County Government. Our OSA, is also similar to Sandstone Ranch Open Space Agreement between the County, Owner and the HOA (we used the Metro District instead of the HOA)
COMMENT: “In addition of the 3 oversight agencies protecting the open space 2 of them are the applicant and applicant family member.”
ANSWER: A review of the actual language of the OSA clearly shows that it is completely impossible for “a vested party” (i.e. an entity controlled by us or our family) to manipulate this Agreement. The parties to the OSA are; 1. Wiens Ranch Company, Inc., and (Rite-A-Way Industries- one of our family companies for which Wiens Ranch Company is its nominee), 2. Remuda Ranch Metropolitan District (which is duly organized under Title 32 of the Laws of the State of Colorado) and 3. Douglas County, each having roles in the Agreement. Wiens Ranch Company, Inc. owns, maintains and operates the OSA property as Agricultural Open Space, Douglas County and the Remuda Ranch Metropolitan District are responsible for the monitoring and the enforcement of the OSA as clearly set forth in Section 21. Enforcement. The County has ultimate enforcement and approval authority, as stated in Section 19, “Where the District’s approval is required, the County’s approval shall also be required.”
Our thinking in including the Remuda Ranch Metro District, as a party to the Agreement, is based on the fact that, “The benefits, burdens and all other provisions of this Agreement shall constitute a servitude running in perpetuity with and binding upon the Tracts.” (See Paragraph 26E). The lot owners will control the Remuda Ranch Metropolitan District over the long-term and will be the most immediately aware of any change that might occur on the Agricultural Open Space because they live right next door.
COMMENT: “The agreement is written in vague and unspecified manner that allows the applicant to perform almost any activity without oversight or restrictions.”
ANSWER: This is also not true. All of the Open Space is governed by A-1 Agricultural Zoning as per the Douglas County Zoning Regulations. The Remuda Ranch Metropolitan District cannot approve or disapprove of any aspect of the Agreement without the approval of Douglas County. The County has the ultimate enforcement power as stated in Section 19 of the OSA, which says, “District and County Approval. Where the District’s approval is required, the County’s approval shall also be required.”
The OSA is not in need of any changes. However, to eliminate any possible confusion and in keeping with our ongoing and clearly demonstrated responsiveness and sensitivity to concerns of our neighbors and others, we are willing to make several changes to the existing OSA in order to help facilitate the smooth, transparent unappealable approval of the Amendment to our existing Remuda Ranch Rural Site Plan, Project #SP2017-067.
As another example of how responsive we’ve been and in order to avoid confusion and to provide clarification in the OSA language, we are agreeing to the following changes:
Some changes that have been suggested we are unable to address as such issues are governed by statute and regulations for which we have no standing to amend.