Castle Pines studies renaming West business zone to 'mixed‑use' and easing housing rules

Community Development Director Donna Ferguson told the Castle Pines City Council at a study session on Aug. 13 that staff proposes renaming the city's West Business District a "mixed‑use district" and making multifamily residential a permitted use rather than a use allowed only by special review.

"If we are wanting to enable a business district that will house people as well as commercial businesses together, I think the name is appropriate," Ferguson said, adding that site design review would remain a check on any redevelopment.

Why it matters: The change would broaden what property owners and developers can propose within the city’s West business area without requiring the extra public review step the current code now requires. That could make redevelopment easier — including the Safeway site, which the council and staff noted could be redeveloped for higher‑density mixed use if a developer proposes such a plan — but it would not force any immediate projects.

Council members pressed staff for specificity about the boundary and exceptions. Ferguson said the change would not apply to planned, customized districts such as Parkway Plaza and that any major redevelopment would still be subject to site design standards and separate approvals. "It doesn't mean they're going to do it," she said, describing the amendment as making the use permitted, not inevitable.

Terminology and definitions drew substantial attention. Ferguson flagged a number of terminology shifts in the draft ULDC — for example, using "place of worship" instead of "church" and "fire protection facility" instead of "fire station" — and recommended that councilers prefer simple, everyday wording with expanded precision in the definitions section. "If we need to expand the definition for any reason, that's fine. We'll do it in the definition section, not in the terminology part," she said.

Council members voiced two recurring concerns: clarity and legal limits. Several members said they favored plain language so residents and applicants can easily understand permitted uses; others urged the staff to avoid unintended consequences that broader phrasing could allow (for example, a storage garage being categorized as a fire facility). Staff noted the draft will include criteria to guide director determinations when a proposed use is not expressly listed and said there will be an appeal path to planning commission and council.

Senior‑housing and care uses drew lengthy discussion. Council members and staff discussed whether the code should use "assisted living facility," "retirement home," "senior living" or a broader "care facility" category to describe a wide continuum of independent living, assisted living and memory care. One council member noted that the community's existing local facilities include independent living, assisted living and memory care under some facility names and urged definitions that reflect those service differences and impacts.

Ferguson also said the draft consolidates similar uses into broader categories (for example, "recreation facility, outdoor" to cover ballfields and courts rather than list each sport) and includes a temporary‑use list for pop‑up shops and seasonal vendors. She said staff will return with more detailed definitions and implementation language after incorporating council direction.

What happens next: Ferguson closed the study session saying the items discussed were observations and not final and that staff will revise the ULDC language and return with more precise definitions and lists of permitted, limited and special‑review uses.

Quotes in context are from the study session presentation and are attributed to Community Development Director Donna Ferguson or to council members as recorded in the meeting transcript. The session focused on clarifying language, preserving council oversight where appropriate and ensuring the code aligns with the city's comprehensive plan and economic development vision.

The council did not take final action on the ULDC at the meeting; staff was directed to return with specific wording and additional detail in a future study session.