The application is in general conformance with the El Paso County Master Plan including applicable Small Area Plans or there has been a substantial change in the character of the neighborhood since the land was last zoned;The proposed land use or zone district is compatible with the existing and permitted land uses and zone districts in all directions;
Watch News5’s coverage of the decision below:<\/p>\n
Along with Williams, Applegate and Wysong voted to deny the application. Chair Geitner and Vice Chair Nelson voted against the motion to deny, meaning they felt the application met the criteria. <\/p>\n
PREVIOUS:<\/p>\n
The El Paso County Board of County Commissioners is set to decide whether nearly 15.4 acres along Highway 83 should be rezoned for higher-density residential development, following a recommendation from the county’s Planning Commission to deny the request.<\/p>\n
The proposal from MA Infrastructure, LLC<\/a> seeks to rezone two adjacent parcels at the southeast corner of Walker Road and Highway 83 from RR-5 (Residential Rural) to RM-12 and RM-30, allowing multi-dwelling residential development. The area is north of Colorado Springs and just west of Monument Academy – East.<\/p>\n The Planning Commission voted 6-1 on June 18 to recommend denial of both applications after an hours-long public hearing<\/a>. Commissioners cited concerns about compatibility with surrounding large-lot neighborhoods, limited commercial services, walkability, and consistency with the El Paso County Master Plan.<\/p>\n According to the county’s agenda, commissioners also heard opposition from 20 residents who argued the proposal would alter the area’s rural character, create a precedent for additional high-density development along the Highway 83 corridor and increase traffic and safety concerns near Monument Academy.<\/p>\n Neighbors say proposal conflicts with county’s vision<\/p>\n Multiple people reached out to News5 asking that we spotlight the controversy ahead of Thursday morning’s Board of County Commissioners Meeting.<\/p>\n Walden-area residents Kurt Wendt and Brian Gamble said they support growth in El Paso County but believe this development belongs elsewhere.<\/p>\n “This is not about growth in El Paso County,” explained Wendt. “Colorado Springs and the surrounding area is a growing, thriving area, and we support that. What we do not support is deviating significantly from the master plan<\/a>.”<\/p>\n Wendt argued the county’s long-range planning identifies the area as rural residential and agricultural.<\/p>\n “The message for the rest of El Paso County is if it’s approved for here, then why not everywhere else?” questioned Wendt. “We’re not anti-growth. We just want the county and the Board of County Commissioners to uphold the master plan and the land development code and reject this proposal.”<\/p>\n Residents also questioned whether higher-density housing fits an area with few nearby services.<\/p>\n “The reality is this is far from any other development,” stated Wendt. “This area is not walkable. It is not connected. It is very much a rural and agricultural area.”<\/p>\n He noted the neighborhood’s “walkability score” on Zillow is close to zero<\/a> and said the nearest grocery store is more than five miles away.<\/p>\n Gamble said the debate should center on the county’s adopted planning documents rather than personal opinions.<\/p>\n “We’re not against development, we’re not against rezoning, but we should go with the plan that everyone agreed to put in place,” Gamble echoed many of Wendt’s points.<\/p>\n Gamble pointed to the Planning Commission’s recommendation as evidence that the proposal failed to meet established standards.<\/p>\n “They did all their due diligence and they said this is not appropriate six to one,” said Gamble. “What they’re asking to do is go from one of the least dense lot types that we have in that plan to the most dense.”<\/p>\n Gamble also rejected suggestions that opponents simply do not want development nearby.<\/p>\n “This is not an emotional thing,” he said. “When people have a disagreement, you look to the rules to guide you for what you should do and the decisions that you should make.”<\/p>\n Both residents urged county commissioners to follow the Planning Commission’s recommendation.<\/p>\n “I would just ask you to rely on the experts that you deployed to look into the facts,” Gamble included as a message to commissioners. “They returned a 6-to-1 vote that they would not approve the request.”<\/p>\n Wendt reiterated that message.<\/p>\n “We’re asking the Board of County Commissioners to do the same thing \u2014 look at the facts, look at the legal statutes, and look at the recommendation of the planning committee and reject this application,” he said.<\/p>\n Developer says proposal follows master plan<\/p>\n Craig Dossey<\/a>, president of Colorado Springs-based land development consulting firm Vertex, which represents the property owners, said the proposal is consistent with the county’s master plan and responds to housing needs.<\/p>\n Dossey, who previously served as El Paso County planning director, said the property’s location at two major roadways makes traditional large-lot residential development impractical.<\/p>\n “This property is not desirable, frankly, for a single-family detached residential development,” said Dossey in defense of the request. “You don’t see a lot of new single-family developments that occur along major arterial roadways.”<\/p>\n Instead, he said the site’s access to central water and wastewater service makes higher-density housing appropriate. He also believes a project like this is needed to help with the housing crisis<\/a>.<\/p>\n Watch News5’s coverage of housing needs in El Paso County below:<\/p>\n “The county’s own master plan has said multi-family and single-family attached… are supportable,” included Dossey. “I think the master plan not only allows for this, but if you look at the housing chapter of the county’s master plan, it encourages something like this.”<\/p>\n Dossey disputed residents’ interpretation that the proposal conflicts with county planning policies.<\/p>\n “The challenge anytime you apply a master plan, if I’m arguing on either side of the issue, I can always find points that support my argument,” he stated.<\/p>\n He said the Walden area is identified as suburban residential, a designation that contemplates a mix of housing types.<\/p>\n “The groundwork’s already been laid through a very public process where, over the course of two years, the master plan was produced,” said Dossey.<\/p>\n Density and future development<\/p>\n While the requested RM-30 zoning district allows up to 30 dwelling units per acre, Dossey said actual development would likely be significantly less because of terrain, setbacks, parking, landscaping and other design requirements.<\/p>\n “We estimate somewhere around maybe 100, 120 units is the most,” said Dossey. “It’s probably even going to be less than that.”<\/p>\n He said no specific development proposal has been submitted.<\/p>\n If the rezoning is approved, the project would still need to complete the county’s subdivision process, followed by site development review before construction could begin.<\/p>\n If commissioners deny the request, the property would retain its current rural residential zoning unless the owner pursues another land-use application in the future.<\/p>\n
![](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-tx\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/10\/1761855310_511_abc-action-news-640-x-200-peacock.png\"\/)
<\/p>\n