Castle Pines council sets Dec. 9 eligibility hearing for Crow's Nest annexation after debate over expedited timeline

The Castle Pines City Council voted Nov. 3 to set an eligibility hearing for the Crow's Nest annexation petition for Dec. 9, 2025, at 6:30 p.m., after staff said the paperwork met statutory form requirements and council members questioned an expedited schedule.

Donna Ferguson, the city's community development director, told the council the petition covers about 7.95 acres east of The Canyons planned development and includes portions of Crowfoot Valley Road. She said staff found the petition in substantial compliance with the Municipal Annexation Act of 1965 and recommended the council set an eligibility hearing on Dec. 9; she added that if the property is later annexed it would need to be zoned within 90 days.

The recommendation prompted detailed procedural and timing questions from council members. Council member Salazar asked whether "five weeks is sufficient time to do the research, to make sure staff has the appropriate time to do a thorough evaluation of the land, the water"; Ferguson answered that while annexation-plus-zoning often takes around nine months, in this case zoning will follow annexation and the applicant requested an expedited timeline. City Attorney Michelle emphasized the limited scope of the current decision: "This is really a ministerial administrative decision. It does not mean you support the annexation," she said, explaining that a finding of substantial compliance confirms the petition's form and allows the city to schedule the eligibility hearing required by statute.

Council members pressed several practical questions during the roughly 90-minute discussion: staff and counsel explained the petition is a serial annexation submitted as one petition with four maps attached as exhibits to achieve contiguity. Counsel said those exhibits involve nine property owners and that the first two maps largely concern the Crowfoot Valley Road right-of-way, which is owned by Douglas County; that configuration is commonly called a flagpole annexation. Staff also noted statutory notice requirements: the eligibility hearing must be published five times in the Douglas County News Press and the hearing must allow at least one hour of public testimony, after which the council may continue the hearing to a later date if necessary.

Council members debated whether to keep the Dec. 9 date or pursue alternate days and times to avoid conflicting meetings (county library event-hall availability and a scheduled budget hearing were cited). Council member Mulvey proposed setting the eligibility hearing for Dec. 18 at 10 a.m.; that motion failed on a roll-call vote (Yes: Council member Cole, Council member Mulvey; No: Mayor Pro Tem Eubanks, Council member Hudson, Mayor Engerman, Council member Salazar, Council member Blue). After further discussion, Council member Blue moved to approve the staff-recommended schedule—Dec. 9 at 6:30 p.m.—the motion was seconded and passed on a unanimous roll call of the seven council members present.

City staff and counsel told the council that if the Dec. 9 hearing produces insufficient information, the council can open the eligibility hearing, hear available evidence, and continue it to a time and date certain; any decision on annexation itself would be a separate legislative action (the annexation ordinance requires two readings and further council action). The council recorded its decision to set the eligibility hearing; the ordinance to annex, and any subsequent zoning, would be scheduled and noticed separately.

The resolution adopted by the council at the Nov. 3 meeting (Resolution 2549) accepts the annexation petition for form and sets the eligibility hearing. The council adjourned at 7:46 p.m.