Board of County Commissioners Business Meeting - public_hearing

Please come to order. Welcome to the land use meeting and public hearing for the Douglas County Board of County Commissioners. It is Tuesday, May 26, 2026. If everyone will please stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands,

and justice for all.

All right, turn to the county attorney for certification of the agenda. Yes, sir. The county attorney's office has reviewed the item on the agenda and appropriate posting has been made. Thank you, counselor. Commissioners, are there any disclosures for any items on this agenda?

I have none.

No. And nor do I. All right, usually our first item up is land use, but we have no items for our land use agenda today, so we'll be going right into the public hearing agenda. We have one item, it is the Pinery Meadows Plan Development First Amendment, Major Plan Development Amendment, project file is ZR2026-003, and this is continued from May 12th, 2026. Eric Pavlenek for staff. You know, Eric, actually, thank you for being there because nobody else that was on my piece of paper was there in the podium in the business meeting.

So thank you for being here. Good afternoon, Commissioners. Eric Pavlenek representing Community Development. The request is a major PD amendment for the Pinery Meadows plan development. The product number is ZR2026-003. The applicant is Integrity Land Ventures. The applicant requests approval of a major amendment to the Pinery Meadows PD to establish setbacks specific to single family detached cluster lots. These development standards apply to 68 lots within the Pinery Meadows subdivision. The intent of a major PD amendment is noted on the slide. The major PD amendment process begins with the submittal of application following a review period by referral agencies and public. Notice is given for public hearings before the planning commission and then the board of county commissioners. No comments have been received from residents through the review process. The Planning Commission heard the proposal at a public hearing on May 18th, 2026 in recommended approval by a vote of five to zero. Commissioners asked questions regarding the feasibility of the project without approval of this amendment and whether the amendment would increase density. The applicant responded and indicated that the project is dependent on this amendment and the proposed changes to setbacks is for the cluster residential product for a builder. The applicant also noted that no increase in density is proposed with this amendment. and no members of the public or budding property owners spoke at the hearing. As background, the Pinery Meadows PD was approved by the board in February of 2023. This is the first amendment to the original PD document. The subdivision was approved by the board in February of this year for a total of 136 residential lots, 11 tracks, and associated public and private roads. The subdivision provides a variety of housing types, including 40 single-family attached or duplex, 28 single-family detached, and 68 clustered lots. The PD indicated by the red star is generally located in the northeast portion of the county. The PD outlined in red is generally located approximately 800 feet north west of the intersection of State Highway 83 and Scott Avenue. The 68 cluster lots are internal to the site and are shown in blue. This is an aerial view showing the subdivision. This slide depicts the proposed red lines of sheet two of the PD document. The amendment proposes a setback specific to the 68 single-family detached cluster lots. The setbacks for these lots will be five feet from the lot lines. The amendment will also modify setbacks for single-family attached, the duplex lots, and replace the term private alley with private road, which is to be consistent with the road as shown on the approved final plat. The request will also add language within the PD document to allow encroachment into utility easements with an encroachment agreement from a utility provider. This slide depicts a lot of standards table for the three housing types for this development. The highlighted area shows the proposed changes. Before you are the approval standards applicable to a major PD amendment, which is described within the staff report. Staff has evaluated the major PD amendment request in accordance with section 15 of the zoning resolution. Should the board find that the approval standards have been met, staff proposes the following two conditions to be included in the motion. Condition number one, prior to recordation, all technical corrections will be made to the plan development document to the satisfaction of Douglas County. And commitment number two, all commitments and promises made by the applicant or the applicant's representative during the public hearing and or agreed to in writing and including the public record have been relied upon the Board of County Commissioners in approving the application. Therefore, such approval is conditioned upon the applicant's full satisfaction of all such commitments and promises. Section 1522.08 of the zoning resolution sets forth the parameters for the board's determination on major PD amendments, which is noted on the slide. This concludes my presentation. The applicant is here with the presentation for you.

All right, thank you, Eric. Board, questions for staff?

I'll reserve my questions following the applicant's presentation.

None for me. I don't think I have any questions for you, Eric. So let's go to the applicant. And Mr. Black, if you could please give your name, give your role with the application.

mitch black with norris design or 1101 bannock street in denver the land planner on the project actually from the inception of zoning all the way to this platting subdivision stage and i wish we got it perfect in the very beginning on everything we zone but there's a few i would consider these technical details you saw the the staff working with the staff coming up with Solutions to these subtleties that get built in when you're looking at the setbacks and those kinds of details that when the builder comes along, even when this plat was started, we didn't know the exact dimensions of some of the products. So here we are trying to clean that up a little bit in the zoning. So one of the things to... Other way. All right, thank you. Site location, I think everyone knows where this is down on Parker Road, now down near Scott Avenue. You'll have the connection of Pioneer Center Boulevard, which we've been talking about for many years in the area, connecting through here. Am I hitting the wrong button? That's the next slide. All right, so next one, there we go. This is the easy one to talk about. So this is easy to see what Eric had up on the plan was the actual kind of subdivision line, but just to be clear, the area in red is just kind of an interior grouping of lots. They're cluster lots, and these are becoming much more popular just in lifestyle, in types of housing, and applying setbacks sometimes becomes the most challenging thing. They're a little bit, less traditional, trying to determine where front, rear, and sides are. So in this case, there's 68 lots that are outlined here in red. In the plat, we have the dimensions from Ashton Woods, the home builder on this, to take a look at those details, and we need to apply a specific setback that works for those. Those lots in the middle, the rest of those on the edges, there's nothing changed about those. Those all will adhere to the existing standards. We go to the next lot, so you can see the cluster product itself. They all, slide up a little bit more, there's four of them in the cluster. They all have a garage access off of this motor court. And so the fronts, there's a public right-of-way on the right-hand side of this kind of diagram here. So there'd be a typical tract off of that, and they were talking about setbacks of five feet the rest of the way around on those lots. So that's the technicality side of it. Then the next slide is the one that just shows the technical part of it. Corrections, adding a cluster product into the setbacks chart to have that five foot recognized for just those 68 cluster lots. And then at the bottom of this, one of the details that we worked with staff on is I think we get caught up many times in writing language that makes complete sense until you go out in the field and apply it. So with utilities, sometimes there needs to be encroachments and when you say there can't be encroachments and there's details in the field when things are a little bit tighter. So this sentence being added on is a little cleanup that will help that if basically the utility provider agrees that you can have an encroachment and it works out in those easements, then both parties sign off on that and it works out in some of these more detailed areas. So those are the changes in essence. Again, in the beginning in zoning, we wish we knew about all of those details. We would put it in there the very first time, but we're before you. at this point with our first amendment to this to ask for cleaning this up and your approval on these. We do agree with the two conditions of approval and here for any questions you have.

All right, thanks, Mitch. Board, questions for Mr. Black.

So thank you for that presentation, Mr. Black. I noticed that the correspondence from April 14th from CORE was less than supportive. Do you want to walk us through in the public how you resolved that objection?

Do you wanna walk through that? I wasn't involved in that detail, but I had it covered.

Please do give us your name, tell us your role with the application.

Jackson Givens, GIVs, and Victor ENS. I'm with Integrity Land Ventures. The, I guess, question from CORE really had to do with these notes. They were fearful that a change in the notes would automatically allow encroachment into their easements. Clearly working with staff, we've revised the language so that it must be signed by both parties, including CORE and the builder. There's also notes included on the SIP and on the plat that protect CORE's easements. So this is basically aligning with those notes that are on the approved plat and SIP, which will be approved after we hear this PD amendment. Great.

Okay, thank you. No further questions, Mr. Chair.

Thank you. Commissioner. Commissioner.

No questions for me.

All right. You know, Commissioner Layton asked my question. I mean, obviously, CORE saying no way. And then, you know, it sounded like they moderated their stance after further discussion. So I was just concerned to hear your explanation that you did give. And that was my only actual serious question. So thanks. Appreciate it. Thank you. Let's go ahead and go to public comment on this matter. I did not get anyone sign up for public comment on this project. Is there anyone who'd like to speak in public comment? Steve got me excited for a second, but I can see he was just readjusting. Okay, let's go ahead and close public comment and bring it back to the board. Board, how would we like to consider this First Amendment?

Mr. Chair, the application seems fairly straightforward and of course these adjustments sometimes have to occur. I appreciate the applicant's presentation. Sounds like the conditions have been agreed to and I think our questions have been answered. If it does please the board, I will make a motion to approve the Pioneer Meadows Plan Development First Amendment, Major Plan Development Amendment because it does meet all of the approval criteria with two conditions as presented, project file ZR2026-003. Second.

All right, there's a motion and a second. Any discussion? All right, all in favor, say aye.

Aye.

Aye. And the First Amendment to the Major Plan Development is approved. Congratulations, guys. Thanks so much. All right, that was our only item today in our land use and public hearing, and the next land use and public hearing will be held on Tuesday, June 9th, 2026 at 2.30 p.m., and we look forward to seeing everyone then. We are adjourned.

Good job.