Commissioners table Pinery PD 30 First Amendment (Shire Meadows/Pinery 40) after lengthy public hearing

The Board of County Commissioners voted to table consideration of the Pinery Plan Development (PD) 30 First Amendment, a highly contested major PD amendment (project file ZR2023-2) commonly referred to as Shire Meadows or Pinery 40. The applicant proposed subdividing the 47-acre parcel into residential lots (the most recent proposal was 45 lots with a 0.5-acre minimum), amend PD planning area boundaries, and add specific development standards including a 25-foot minimum open-space buffer along the north property line and a 50-foot buffer along southern, east and west boundaries.

Staff, applicant and public presentations: Planning staff (Mike Paseka) summarized referral-agency responses and county analysis, noting that the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Aug. 19, 2024 and recommended denial by a 6–0 vote. Planning staff also noted that referral agency comments were included in the packet and that engineering reviewed the Phase 1 drainage report and traffic study. The applicant's team (Chris Meeks, James Marine, Russell Hall) described a progression of outreach and design iterations: initial concepts at much higher density were pared back after neighborhood meetings (from earlier proposals of about 63 lots to the reduced 45‑lot scheme presented at the hearing). Applicant materials said utility providers (Pinery Water & Sanitation District) issued a will-serve letter and that the Colorado State Engineer's office provided an opinion that the proposed water supply was adequate per state statute.

Citizens and community organizations spoke at length. Common themes of opposition included: - Preservation of the Pinery's equestrian character and trail connectivity to the Colorado Horse Park and adjoining equestrian neighborhoods (High Prairie Farms, Timbers, Misty Pines). Neighbors and HOA representatives urged maintaining the parcel's existing equestrian-estate zoning (15 lots of roughly 2.5 acres) and cautioned that increased density would sever trail connectivity and erode an equestrian heritage that residents said was core to the area. - Stormwater and drainage concerns, especially impacts to Timbers Creek and downstream Bayou Gulch. Multiple residents, and a county engineer referenced earlier Urban Drainage comments, saying the creek showed signs of severe erosion and that further development without channel remediation could worsen downstream damage. - Traffic and access, including possible use of Sustina Way as a cut-through and the applicant's suggestion of an east-end gate for emergency access only (South Metro Fire preliminarily supported a gated access that meets fire requirements, while county engineering said additional review would be required). The Douglas County School District flagged potential bus-route implications if the gate were used to block public access. - Open-space, wildlife and view-shed protections: residents asked for view protections, larger perimeter buffers, and stronger trail and open-space commitments.

Applicant concessions and commitments: The applicant said it reduced density (from an earlier 63-lot submittal down to 45 lots) and committed to a minimum 0.5-acre lot size, additional open-space buffers (25–50 feet), trail connectivity and pocket parks, and design measures (height caps in northern lots) intended to preserve view lines. The applicant also offered a signed “Good Neighbor pledge” and said it would coordinate with landowners and High Prairie Farms Metro District on trail connections. The applicant reported the Pinery Water & Sanitation District provided water service and the Colorado State Engineer had indicated the proposed supply was adequate; the applicant also cited a Phase 1 drainage report accepted by county staff.

Why it matters: The amendment would replace an existing equestrian-estate zoning pattern with a denser residential layout and change trail and open-space relationships in an area widely used for equestrian activities. The issue prompted extensive neighborhood turnout; the Planning Commission recommended denial and dozens of residents, homeowners associations and the Colorado Horse Park leadership urged denial to protect equestrian uses and open space.

Board action and next steps: After deliberation the board voted to table the request for further study and more public engagement. The applicant consented to the tabling. A motion to table (project ZR2023-2) passed on a voice vote announced as “that motion carries 3.” The chair and commissioners noted the large number of opposing residents and suggested additional neighborhood discussion or a town‑hall style meeting before any future hearing. No final decision on the underlying PD amendment was made; tabling preserves the issue for return to a future meeting subject to further study and possible revisions by the applicant.

Provenance: Staff presentation, applicant materials, extensive public testimony, and the board's motions are recorded in the Jan. 28, 2025 land use hearing packet (Item 3b); the Planning Commission's Aug. 19, 2024 denial (6–0) is cited in the staff report.