Commission tables West Cliff golf/retreat proposal, requests water, septic, turf and plat details
June 03, 2026 | Custer County, Colorado
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The Custer County Planning Commission voted to table a special-use/variance application for a proposed private retreat and artificial-turf golf concept on Highway 69 in West Cliff, saying commissioners lacked essential technical information on water, sewage and turf composition.
Applicant Deon Tilly described plans for a ‘‘wolf’’-style course using limited artificial-turf greens, a caretaker unit, cabins and hospitality amenities intended as a private retreat and revenue source. Tilly said he purchased adjacent land and envisioned limited, low-water maintenance turf and perimeter fencing along Highway 69.
Residents and nearby landowners urged caution and asked commissioners to deny or continue the application. ‘‘This project has been in the works for almost three years,’’ said resident Chris Araber, who asked for a continuance or denial. Araber raised multiple technical objections: he said artificial turf can degrade under high-UV, high-elevation conditions and release microplastics (and potentially PFAS-type chemicals); he said prairie dogs and burrowing animals will damage turf surfaces; and he questioned whether the applicant has commercial water rights for a hospitality program rather than only a domestic well.
Planning staff and commissioners reported site visits and extensive unanswered technical questions about platting, commercial water availability, septic and effluent handling for multiple overnight units, highway access and the turf product’s composition and long-term maintenance. Commissioners noted the application lacked a prepared plat showing building footprints and hole layouts and had no documented commercial-water plan or septic design.
The commission voted to table the application and requested the applicant submit: a formal plat/layout, a commercial-water plan or documentation of water rights, a septic/sewage plan (or information showing how wastewater will be handled), a specification or sample for the proposed artificial turf (composition and any PFAS/PFOS content), and a highway-access review with Road & Bridge or state highway authority as required. The motion carried; the item will return when the requested materials are provided.
Next steps: the applicant must submit the requested technical documentation for staff review; the commission indicated additional site visits and consultation with water resources and highway authorities may be required before scheduling further hearings.
Applicant Deon Tilly described plans for a ‘‘wolf’’-style course using limited artificial-turf greens, a caretaker unit, cabins and hospitality amenities intended as a private retreat and revenue source. Tilly said he purchased adjacent land and envisioned limited, low-water maintenance turf and perimeter fencing along Highway 69.
Residents and nearby landowners urged caution and asked commissioners to deny or continue the application. ‘‘This project has been in the works for almost three years,’’ said resident Chris Araber, who asked for a continuance or denial. Araber raised multiple technical objections: he said artificial turf can degrade under high-UV, high-elevation conditions and release microplastics (and potentially PFAS-type chemicals); he said prairie dogs and burrowing animals will damage turf surfaces; and he questioned whether the applicant has commercial water rights for a hospitality program rather than only a domestic well.
Planning staff and commissioners reported site visits and extensive unanswered technical questions about platting, commercial water availability, septic and effluent handling for multiple overnight units, highway access and the turf product’s composition and long-term maintenance. Commissioners noted the application lacked a prepared plat showing building footprints and hole layouts and had no documented commercial-water plan or septic design.
The commission voted to table the application and requested the applicant submit: a formal plat/layout, a commercial-water plan or documentation of water rights, a septic/sewage plan (or information showing how wastewater will be handled), a specification or sample for the proposed artificial turf (composition and any PFAS/PFOS content), and a highway-access review with Road & Bridge or state highway authority as required. The motion carried; the item will return when the requested materials are provided.
Next steps: the applicant must submit the requested technical documentation for staff review; the commission indicated additional site visits and consultation with water resources and highway authorities may be required before scheduling further hearings.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
