Title
An appeal of the City Planning Commission decision to deny the appeal approving a development plan consisting of 6.94 acres located at the northeast corner of N Carefree Circle and Peterson Road. (Quasi-Judicial)
Related Files: APPL-25-0004 (Council), APPL-25-0003 (CPC), DEPN-24-0133
Located in Council District 6
Presenter:
Austin Cooper, Senior Planner, Planning Department
Kevin Walker, Director, Planning Department
Body
Summary:
Owner: Lincoln Capital Acquisition LLC
Developer: Lincoln Capital Acquisition LLC
Representative: NES Inc
Location: Northeast of Peterson Road and N Carefree Circle
City Planning Commission, at a regularly scheduled public hearing on April 9, 2025, denied an Appeal of an administratively approved for the Flats at Sand Creek Development Plan application for a 144-unit multi-family residential development at the Northeast corner of Peterson Road and N Carefree Circle.
On April 18, 2025, the same Appellant filed an appeal of the City Planning Commission’s decision to approve the above-referenced project within the 10-day appeal window (see “Attachment 1 - Appeal of CPC Decision”).
Background:
Please see the attached City Planning Commission Staff Report for a complete analysis of the proposed application(s).
Review Criteria:
The application being considered is an appeal of City Planning Commission’s decision on the Flats at Sand Creek Development Plan. In determining the decision on this appeal both review criteria for an appeal and development plan are to be considered.
An application for an appeal may be reversed or modified if it is determined that one (1) or more of the applicable review criteria have been met. The review criteria for this decision are set forth in City Code Section (UDC) 7.5.415.A.2, as follows (refer to the underlined criteria in subsection (2)):
2. Notice of Appeal
a. The notice of appeal shall state:
(1) The specific provision(s) of this UDC that is the basis of the appeal; and
(2) Which of the following criteria for reversal or modification of the decision is applicable to the appeal:
(a) The decision is contrary to the express language of this UDC; or
(b) The decision is erroneous; or
(c) The decision is clearly contrary to law; and
(3) Describe how the criteria for the relevant application have or have not been met.
An application for a development plan may be approved if it is determined that the applicable review criteria have been met as they relate to the area of the development plan. The review criteria for deciding on a development plan, as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.515.D.1, are as follows
a. The decision-making criteria in Section 7.5.409 (General Criteria for Approval) apply unless modified by this Subsection 4;
b. The application complies with all applicable Use-specific standards in Part 7.3.3 related to the proposed use(s);
c. The details of the site design, building location, orientation, and exterior building materials are compatible and harmonious with the surrounding neighborhood, buildings, and uses, including not-yet-developed uses identified in approved Development Plans;
d. Significant off-site impacts reasonably anticipated as a result of the project are mitigated or offset to the extent proportional and practicable;
e. The Development Plan substantially complies with any City-adopted plans that are applicable to the site, such as Land Use Plans, approved master plans for a specific development, neighborhood plans, corridor plans, facilities plans, urban renewal plans, or design manuals;
f. The project meets dimensional standards applicable to the zone district, or any applicable requirement in an FBZ or PDZ district;
g. The project grading, drainage, flood protection, stormwater quality, and stormwater mitigation comply with the City’s Engineering Criteria, the drainage report prepared for the project on file with the Stormwater Enterprise Manager, and other federal, state, and City regulations;
h. The project complies with all the development standards of Article 7.4 (Development Standards and Incentives), including access and connectivity requirements in Part 7.4.4 (Access and Connectivity), the landscaping and green space requirements in Part 7.4.9 (Landscaping and Green Space), and the parking and loading requirements in Part 7.4.10 (Parking and Loading);
i. The project complies with all applicable requirements of any Overlay District in which the property is located, as listed in Part 7.2.6 (Overlay Districts);
j. The project preserves, protects, integrates, or mitigates impacts to any identified sensitive or hazardous natural features associated with the site;
k. The project connects to or extends adequate public utilities to the site. As required by Colorado Springs Utilities, the project will extend the utilities to connect to surrounding properties; and
l. If necessary to address increased impacts on existing roadways and intersections, the project includes roadway and intersection improvements to provide for safe and efficient movement of multi-modal traffic, pedestrians, and emergency vehicles in accordance with the Engineering Criteria, public safety needs for ingress and egress, and a City accepted traffic impact study, if required, prepared for the project.
It was determined by City Planning Commission that the proposed development plan application met the review criteria for development plan.
Previous Council Action:
On October 12, 2021, City Council approved a rezoning of the site from R-5/cr/AP-O (Multi-Family Residential with Conditions of Record and Airport Overlay) to R-5/AP-O (Multi-Family Residential with Airport Overlay) to remove the conditions of record in order to develop the site as a multi-family residential property outlined in the Concept Plan that accompanied that rezoning application.
Financial Implications:
N/A
Planning Commission Action:
This application was presented to City Planning Commission at the April 9, 2025, meeting on the regular agenda. Testimony, discussion, and deliberation was extensive for the application. The appellant expressed concerns centered around traffic impacts, parking, and safety to the surrounding residents. City Planning Commission voted 6-2 to deny the appeal and affirm that administrative approval of the development plan application, based on the provisions of the City Code (UDC), and that the appellant did not substantiate that the appeal satisfied the review criteria outline in City Code (UDC) Section 7.5.415.A.2 (Commissioners Robbins and Gigiano voted to approve the appeal; Commissioners Foos, Hensler, Cecil, Rickett, Slattery, and Casey voted to deny the appeal; with Commissioner Sipilovic absent). (See “CPC_Minutes_4.9.25_Final”” attachment for a more detailed review of the project discussion).
Recommended Action
Proposed Motions:
1. Affirm the decision of the Planning Commission and deny the appeal; or
2. Reverse the decision of the Planning Commission and approve the appeal; or
3. Modify the decision of the Planning Commission and approve the appeal; or
4. Remand the matter back to the Planning Commission for further consideration.
Should the City Council wish to affirm the City Planning Commission decision on the development plan application, the following motion is suggested:
Deny the appeal and uphold the City Planning Commission decision on the Flats at Sand Creek Development Plan, based upon the findings that the review criteria for deciding on the development plan as set forth in City Code (UDC) Section 7.5.515.D.1 are met as decided by Planning Commission, and that the appellant did not substantiate that the appeal satisfies the review criteria outlined in City Code (UDC) Section 7.5.415.A(2).
Should the City Council wish to reverse the Planning Commission decision for the development plan application, the following motion is suggested.
Approve the appeal and reverse the City Planning Commission decision on the Flats at Sand Creek Development Plan, based upon the finding that the appeal criteria found in City Code (UDC) Section 7.5.415.A.2 have been met, and that application does not comply with the review criteria for granting a development plan set forth in City Code Section 7.5.515.D.1.
Should the City Council wish to modify the appeal application, the following motion is suggested.
Approve the appeal and modify the Planning Commission decision on the Flats at Sand Creek Development Plan, based upon the finding that the review criteria for deciding on a development plan set forth in City Code (UDC) Section 7.5.515.D.1, with revisions to the development plan [as determined by City Council].
Should the City Council wish to remand the matter back to the City Planning Commission for further consideration, the following motion is suggested.
Remand the matter back to the City Planning Commission for further consideration of the development plan to the applicable review criteria for deciding on a major modification as set forth in City Code (UDC) Section 7.5.515.D.1.