Some unincorporated county residents want the best of both worlds
“Have your cake and eat it too.”
“Have it both ways.”
“Best of both worlds.”
Regardless of which phrase you choose, they all seem to describe some residents of unincorporated Laramie County — those who live outside Cheyenne city limits and the smaller towns.
They don’t want county commissioners to tell them what they can’t do with their land, but they do want these same five elected officials to keep someone else from doing something on their land that they don’t like.
The latest example is a group of more than 50 people who live near the Bit-O-Wyo Ranch off Happy Jack Road west of Cheyenne. We don’t fault them for fighting to preserve their quality of life in the rolling hills northeast of Curt Gowdy State Park. It’s a beautiful location, and well worth preserving.
That’s why they attended a March 27 Laramie County Planning Commission meeting, many wearing matching yellow T-shirts with “Safety first! Vote NO to Bit-O-Wyo” on the front and “Protect BLM Land, Public Land and our Community” on the back. They were there to ask Planning Commission members not to recommend approval of a conditional use permit for an events venue on part of the historic horse ranch to the Board of County Commissioners.
Tania Riedel of Riedel Ventures testified that she bought 39.97 acres of the historic property after it was dormant for more than a year with the intention of reimagining it as not just an outdoor recreation location, but a venue to hold events like reunions, concerts, weddings and others. She said she has a “deep appreciation of the shared western culture, and a desire to share the experience of our land with others.” She also expressed a willingness to work with neighbors to address their concerns.
Those include potential increased traffic through the Table Mountain Ranches and Cheyenne Pass neighborhoods that could impact safety for children in the area. They include concerns over evacuation in the event of a wildfire. Opponents even objected to a plan to build a road through federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land for environmental reasons — something county officials have no control over.
Again, we don’t blame these folks for being concerned about the project (even though Bit-O-Wyo had been a commercial horseback riding ranch for 40 years before it shut down in 2023). If we were in their shoes, we’d probably feel the same way. And it’s great that our county officials offer the opportunity for residents to voice their concerns at public meetings like these, and then work hard to address those concerns within their existing processes.
But last August, hundreds of concerned county residents gathered at the Historic County Courthouse downtown to voice their opposition to revised county land-use regulations. Some called the changes a “land grab,” while others accused commissioners of creating too many permits, and many said they moved into the unincorporated part of the county so they didn’t have to live by homeowner association rules.
Most of those in attendance at this meeting and several others before the final decision was made admitted they hadn’t actually read the revised Laramie County Land-Use Regulations before objecting to them. Many were running off of rumors that county leaders were trying to shutter existing businesses or make it too difficult for new ones to open.
Commissioners said the updates were intended to keep high-impact businesses out of rural residential neighborhoods. But in the face of so much opposition, they voted not to adopt the changes.
Commissioner Ty Zwonitzer seemed to sum up the situation at a May 7 meeting when he said, “We’re trying to find common ground, and (it) seems like we’re darned if we do, darned if we don’t. So how do we do that?” No one seemed to have an answer.
On April 21, commissioners will surely be confronted by the same group of residents opposed to the Bit-O-Wyo event center’s application. They’ll ask commissioners to do what the Planning Commission didn’t — oppose the project completely. But as Commission Chair Gunnar Malm told the Wyoming Tribune Eagle, because the project is only adjacent to a subdivision, not in one, there’s likely no reason for them to deny this permit.
That doesn’t mean concerned neighbors can’t have an impact, though, Mr. Malm said. The next step at the county level will be the site planning process, which is where specific requirements can be placed on the developers, such as noise limits, landscaping, access points, etc. Residents also can offer public comment to BLM against the request for an easement to build a road across public land.
We understand these conversations about the extent to which the county government should play a role in the development of business while maintaining neighborhood aesthetics and values will never be easy. There will always be competing priorities to navigate. We encourage transparency through the entire process by all parties.
But unincorporated residents need to remember that they can’t “have their cake and eat it too.” They can’t expect county officials to take a hands-off approach to what they do on their land but prevent those living next to them from doing something that might bother or inconvenience them.
Yes, there are benefits to living outside city limits. As with anywhere we choose to call home, there also are drawbacks.
Unincorporated county residents who expect county officials to block projects they oppose should remember a common real-estate phrase: “If you want to preserve the view, you have to buy the view.”