Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Space Camping topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Douglas County pauses Sandstone Ranch camping plan pending countywide survey after public opposition
Summary
Following multiple public comments opposing camping at Sandstone Ranch, the commissioners said implementation of any camping plan is suspended and that the county will survey residents before moving forward.
The Douglas County Board of County Commissioners told members of the public on April 1 that staff have suspended implementation of any camping plan at Sandstone Ranch and that the issue will be placed on a countywide survey for further public input.
Several residents spoke during the citizen-comment period to oppose camping at Sandstone Ranch and to urge the board to preserve the property92s conservation purpose. Kim Greer of Larkspur recommended preserving existing developed areas for low-impact activities and encouraged better public information about other nearby camping options. Alan Sedmack of Perry Park said he believed staff had tried to minimize public notice and urged the board to consider that the proposal affects rural residents more directly than those in Highlands Ranch or Parker. Gary Wood, a longtime resident and veteran, warned of wildfire danger and said there are many other camping options along the Front Range and in federal or state-managed lands.
Chair response and next steps: The chair told the audience that implementation is "on hold" and said the county will include the topic on an upcoming scientifically administered citizen survey to solicit broader countywide input. Commissioner Teal said the county might still consider recreational amenities but warned that location could be the issue and recommended exploring other open-space properties if the public supports camping in principle. Commissioner Van Winkle thanked residents for attending and said the proposal was effectively paused.
Why it matters: Sandstone Ranch is an open-space property that residents and the advisory board had discussed as a possible location for limited recreational amenities. Public commenters cited wildfire risk, conservation easement constraints and limited transparency in prior outreach; the commissioners responded by pausing implementation and promising wider public input before any policy action.
No formal regulatory change occurred; the board92s statement placed implementation on hold pending additional public input and a county survey.
