July 14, 2026: Coyote Ridge goes to construction — $5.01 million
The Annexation Policy
Stopped the city from saying “residents want” when 614 people answered — On the record Staff presented the annexation survey results slide after slide as what “residents” want. Salazar interrupted to say that is misleading: 614 people responded out of a city of roughly 16,000, and the findings should be described as what the residents who took the survey said, not what the city wants. She made the point explicitly for people watching the recording later. Staff agreed to change how the results are characterized. The survey ran May 18 to June 14 and drew 614 responses with a margin of error of plus or minus 3.86 percent, plus about 40 more comments at the two open houses. Seventy-eight percent of respondents live west of I-25.
“It’s a little misleading to say ‘residents want’ when 614 people responded — that’s about five percent of the city. Just for semantics’ sake, say the residents that responded to the survey want this. Just for people listening later.”
— Council Member Kori Salazar, July 14, 2026
Asked whether the new rules would give applicants a path or a dead end — On the record Reviewing the draft annexation policy, Salazar asked whether the criteria would leave all four groups — an applicant, city staff, residents and council — with a reasonable sense of what the standards actually are, and whether meeting them would put an applicant on a path rather than into a process where the rules arrive and the door then closes. Staff said yes, while noting annexation is legislative and council can still say no. Colleagues immediately restated that they want to be able to reject a request even when it meets every criterion, and staff pointed to the draft language saying nothing in the policy creates a right to annexation. Four residents spoke during public comment: several called the draft too vague to constrain anyone, one asked council to define terms like community character and public benefit, and one told council she is gathering signatures for a ballot measure that would require a public vote on future annexations.
Parks & Streets
Voted to build Coyote Ridge Park, eighteen months after starting on it — Approved Voted to award the first phase of the Coyote Ridge Park renovation to Colorado Designscapes at a cost not to exceed $5,010,728 — new playground equipment built around a rock structure with coyotes in it, shade for the parents watching, a full-size ball field with dugouts and a warning track, replacement restrooms, regraded trails that meet accessibility standards, stormwater work along the creek and all-new irrigation. Nine firms bid; staff scored seven responsive bids against a rubric and checked references on the top three. Staff planned to start construction August 1; on August 25 the start was reported as just after Labor Day. Salazar has carried this project through the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board since council approved the design contract in January. She asked staff to confirm the ball field would be fenced on the creek side so balls stop ending up in the water, and noted the retaining wall will be screened with shrubs so it reads as landscape rather than as a wall — something residents asked for.
Voted to tear out the failing concrete on Castle Pines Parkway instead of patching it — Approved Voted to change the westbound Castle Pines Parkway contract from concrete repair to full replacement with asphalt between Forest Park and the Buffalo Trail roundabout. Crews found the concrete panels shifting so badly they bound up the saw blades and cracked neighboring panels that were never scheduled for repair, which meant the repair list would keep growing. Staff judged a new asphalt road both cheaper and better to drive on, and it removes one of the noisiest stretches of pavement in the city. Doing it now keeps the contractor's equipment on site rather than remobilizing later. The city's share of the project rises to about $1.2 million against a $1.75 million budget, so no new appropriation was needed, and the metro district covers a quarter of the roadway work.
Added $436,864 of paving to this year's street program — Approved Approved, on consent, a change order adding paving and surface treatment locations to the 2026 pavement maintenance contract with Schmidt Construction, raising it from $2,539,865.60 to $2,976,729.65. Unit prices came in favorable enough that the city could buy more road out of the same $4 million program budget, which leaves $1,023,270.35 still unspent. More surface treated now means less reconstruction later.
Named six more trails, this time on the east side — Ongoing Reported that the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board met June 18 and named six trails in the Canyons, carrying the naming work across I-25 to the east side of the city after finishing the west. Also reported that staff are looking at software that would let residents join a waiting list when a ball field reservation is cancelled, so a field nobody shows up for does not sit empty.
The Comprehensive Plan & Outreach
Moved the contract to rebuild the city's comprehensive plan from scratch — Approved Made the motion to hire Logan Simpson Design for the 2026 comprehensive plan update, at $129,744. The plan was last written in 2021, when almost nobody lived in the Canyons, so staff scrapped the idea of a light refresh in favor of rebuilding it from the ground up with the east side included. That decision is why the contract costs more than the $60,000 budgeted and needs about $69,744 more appropriated. Five firms proposed and three were interviewed. Salazar spoke to why this firm: roughly thirty percent of the contract is public outreach, including sessions in schools and a panel event, which is the part that decides whether the plan reflects the city or the consultant.
Showed up at the open house and answered the charge that the city had not publicized it — On the record Attended the June 29 open house on the annexation policy, where the Douglas County Sheriff's Office also ran a table pushing fraud awareness for older residents. When a resident told council the survey had not been advertised well enough, Salazar answered directly: it went out by text, by email, on social media more than once, on the city website and in the local paper. She also attended the Colorado Municipal League conference, including a session on how small cities stretch limited budgets.
Watch the recap
About this record
Every entry comes from a public Castle Pines City Council meeting; video and official minutes are available through the city clerk’s office. Ordinances take two council votes — an entry marked first reading still needed a second, confirming vote before it became law. Resolutions, emergency ordinances and contract awards take a single vote. Matters still in process are described as such rather than claimed as outcomes. Dollar figures come from the staff memo or the record; none are estimated.
Comments