Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Annexation Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Checkpoint: Miller Downs annexation petition cleared to proceed after staff finds utilities and connectivity feasible
Summary
City staff told the council the Miller Downs at Wyoming Lane annexation petition meets the checkpoint criteria: 21‑acre enclave property meets contiguity requirements, proposed AR‑Flex Medium zoning (5–7 du/acre) aligns with surrounding land uses, utilities capacity and extensions are feasible and projected water demand falls below the code's de‑
City planning and utilities staff presented an annexation policy checkpoint for the Miller Downs at Wyoming Lane Addition No. 1, a proposed annexation of a 21‑acre enclave in unincorporated El Paso County (77020 Wyoming Lane) to be zoned AR‑Flex Medium (5–7 dwelling units per acre).
Tamara Baxter (planning supervisor) outlined checkpoint guidelines the applicant must address. Brian English (Colorado Springs Utilities development projects manager) said utilities capacity and extension requirements had been evaluated: the city’s reliably met demand (RMD) and available water surplus leave a de‑minimis threshold of 50 acre‑feet/year for outside‑city extensions; Miller Downs’ projected water demand is about 38 acre‑feet/year, which meets the de‑minimis exception and thus does not trigger a water‑supply denial. English said wastewater would outfall to the Las Vegas treatment plant and that capital costs to extend water, sewer, electric and gas to the site are estimated roughly between $1.4M and $2.0M (midpoint ~$1.7M), primarily developer‑paid meter and distribution work.
Applicant representative Noah Bremer (Kinley Horn & Associates) said the site is contiguous on about 46% of its perimeter to city limits (exceeding the one‑sixth contiguity requirement), is designated an annexation priority in City and County master plans and proposes parks, trails and open space maintained by a Metro District open to public use. Traffic analysis showed no off‑site intersection improvements required and access would come from the adjacent Quail Brush subdivision with internal connections dedicated as public right‑of‑way.
Staff said the checkpoint is informational only (no council action) and the application will continue through city planning commission and subsequent hearings. Councilors asked about trail connections to Sand Creek Trail (applicant said the Sand Creek Trail is on the opposite side of the creek and would require a pedestrian bridge to connect), public‑use park ownership (Metro District) and outreach to adjacent landowners (applicant said neighbors had been approached and a December neighborhood meeting occurred). Council members indicated general support for the project proceeding through the regular annexation/rezoning process.
