Controversial Crowsnest annexation in Colorado deemed eligible by Castle Pines

Neighbors in Castle Pines are watching a proposal advance that could impact the makeup of Douglas County for decades to come.

A developer is asking Castle Pines to annex a huge plot of land south of Parker. The 795-acre property called "Crowsnest" is along Crowfoot Valley Road.

If approved, this open space could be developed into nearly 4,000 residences, with 70 acres of dedicated open space.

It is eligible for what's called a "flagpole annexation" because Crowfoot Valley Road connects the land to Castle Pines. Parker town officials have already told the developer it does not want to annex the land.

Tuesday night, the Castle Pines City Council found the annexation petition was eligible to be considered. While this step of the process was largely procedural, the meeting was standing room only, with only 1 of the 15 public comment speakers in favor of annexation.

"Step by step, they're getting to an end that we don't want to see," said Joshua Rivero, mayor of the town of Parker.

"The more I learned about it, the more I became concerned," said Donna Cook, a Castle Pines resident. "The more I learned about it, the more it didn't make sense. It's so far removed from Castle Pines with a flagpole annexation. It's one road that sort of connects us together, but not really. It borders Parker on three sides."

"I feel like there's a great financial risk to all the residents here, and so that's why I decided to get involved," said Lacy Bradley, a Castle Pines resident.

Castle Pines neighbors Lacy Bradley and Robin Cook are part of an organized group of more than 100 neighbors opposing the Crowsnest annexation.

"We are getting more people involved and willing to understand what's going on," Bradley said.

Many group members wore white and spoke during public comment in the packed Castle Pines City Council meeting, citing concerns including infrastructure, wildlife, water, and taxes.

"It's not connected to Castle Pines in any way. When it comes to open space, water borders, it's just very far away. It's about a three- to five-mile drive," Cook said.

"We are here consistently two times now. We'll be back every step of the way, letting them know that this will harm our citizens, this will harm our roads, this will have a direct detrimental impact on our community," Rivero said.

Parker Mayor Joshua Rivero has urged Castle Pines to deny the annexation, worried about the impact on Parker's roads, stormwater and amenities.

"We are a very well planned community, we plan to grow at a certain rate, or plan to be a certain population, and you smack 4,000 people on top of that, it directly impacts our citizens and heavily," Rivero said.

During the hearing, neighbors disputed the eligibility of the land for annexation based on its distance from Castle Pines, saying the parcel does not meet a state requirement that at least one-sixth of the perimeter of a property must be contiguous with existing municipal boundaries to be annexed.

However, petitioners and Castle Pines city councilors found the annexation eligible based on the flagpole annexation. A legal process of four annexations, building on one another, was described.

The developer, VT Crowfoot Valley Landco LLC, and landowners said in a statement that annexation was explored with Parker previously, but Parker was not interested.

The developer says the project could bring more than $600 million in revenue to Castle Pines in the next 40 years and that, along with up to nearly 4,000 homes, the project proposes 70 acres of open space.

The developer said Crowsnest will pay for itself, and the bill won't fall on taxpayers. The development will also pay for the widening of Crowfoot Valley Road.

Castle Pines city councilors repeatedly reminded the public that Tuesday's vote only concerned whether the land was technically eligible for annexation, not whether the council supported annexation.

Some council members expressed that development was inevitable, and it was just a matter of whether Castle Pines wants to be part of the development.

Castle Pines council members thanked the public for their engagement and urged them to continue making their voices heard as the council considers annexation.

Following a request by the City of Castle Pines, the applicant has agreed to modify the review timeline for the Crowsnest property annexation petition. The following timeline has been submitted by the City of Castle Pines:

    Annexation Petition Timeline:

• January 13: City Council finds the petition in substantial compliance with State law.
• February 24: City Council finds the property eligible for annexation.
• March 26: The Planning Commission considers the applicant's proposed Planned Development zoning in order to make a recommendation for the City Council's consideration.
• This Planned Development zoning item is a quasi-judicial process. The Planning Commission cannot discuss this specific matter outside the public hearing.
• April 7: The City Council considers the following:
• An ordinance to approve the annexation (first reading).
• An ordinance to approve an annexation agreement (first reading).
• An ordinance to approve the Planned Development zoning for the Crowsnest property (first reading).
• This Planned Development zoning item is a quasi-judicial process. The City Council cannot discuss this specific matter outside the public hearing.
• An ordinance on vested property rights (first reading).
• April 28: City Council considers the following: 
• An ordinance to approve the annexation (second reading).
• An ordinance to approve an annexation agreement (second reading).
• An ordinance to approve the Planned Development zoning for the Crowsnest property (second reading).
• This Planned Development zoning item is a quasi-judicial process. The City Council cannot discuss this specific matter outside the public hearing.
• An ordinance on vested property rights (second reading).