Regional Development

Center (Hearing Room)

2880 International Circle

City of Colorado Springs

Meeting Minutes - Final

Planning Commission

Wednesday, August 14, 2024

9:00 AM

2880 International Cir., 2nd Floor, Hearing Room

1. Call to Order and Roll Call

8 -

Present:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Excused:

2. Changes to Agenda/Postponements

Brass-Oliver Additions No. 1-2

2.A.

ANEX-23-00 The annexation of property known as Brass-Oliver Addition No. 1

located at 7830 Black Forest Road Annexation has been withdrawn.

(Legislative)

Presenter:

Tamara Baxter, Planning Supervisor, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Attachments: Staff Report_Brass-Oliver

Attachment 1 - Petition for Annexation No. 1

Attachment 2 - Project Statement Addition No. 1

Attachment 3 - Land Use Statement Project Statement

Attachment 4 - Public Comments

Attachment 5 - Public Comment Response

Attachment 6 - Annexation Plat Addition No. 1

Attachment 7 - Legal Descriptions Addition No. 1-2

Attachment 8 - Draft Annexation Agreement_6.23.24

Attachment 9 - FIA Memo

Attachment 10 - Zone Change Exhibit A

Attachment 10a - Zone Change Exhibit B

Attachment 11 - Mineral Rights Notification

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Vice Chair Foos, to withdraw

the Brass-Oliver Addition No. 1 annexation. The motion passed by a vote of

7-0. Commissioner Sipilovic was late arriving to the meeting and not present

for this vote.

7 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins and Commissioner Casey

2 - Commissioner Hensler and Commissioner Sipilovic

Absent:

2.B.

ANEX-23-00 The annexation of property known as Brass-Oliver Addition No. 2

Annexation located at 7830 Black Forest Road has been withdrawn.

(Legislative)

Presenter:

Tamara Baxter, Planning Supervisor, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Attachments: Attachment 1a - Petitions for Annexation No. 2

Attachment 2a - Project Statement Addition No. 2

Attachment 6a - Annexation Plat Addition No. 2

Attachment 7 - Legal Descriptions Addition No. 1-2

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Vice Chair Foos, to withdraw

the Brass-Oliver Addition No. 2 annexation. The motion passed by a vote of

7-0. Commissioner Sipilovic was late arriving to the meeting and not present

for this vote.

7 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins and Commissioner Casey

2 - Commissioner Hensler and Commissioner Sipilovic

Absent:

2.C

ZONE-24-00 The establishment of an MX-N/AP-O (Mixed-Use Neighborhood

Scale with Airport Overlay) zone district in association with the

Brass-Oliver Addition No. 2 Annexation located at 7830 Black Forest

Road has been withdrawn.

(Legislative)

Presenter:

Tamara Baxter, Planning Supervisor, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Vice Chair Foos, to withdraw

the Brass-Oliver Addition No. 2 zone district. The motion passed by a vote of

7-0. Commissioner Sipilovic was late arriving to the meeting and not present

for this vote.

7 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins and Commissioner Casey

2 - Commissioner Hensler and Commissioner Sipilovic

Absent:

Humble Paws

2.D.

CUDP-24-00 A Conditional Use to allow an Animal Care Facility use in the LI (Light

Industrial) zone district consisting of 20,800 square feet located at

1516 Dustry Drive.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Presenter:

William Gray, Senior Planner, Planning and Neighborhood Services

Attachments: Staff Report_Humble Paws

Attachment 1-Zoning Map

Attachment 2- Context Map

Attachment 3-Project Statement

Attachment 4-Vicinity Map

7.5.601 CONDITIONAL USE

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Briggs, to

postpone to the September 11, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting. The

motion passed by a vote of 8-0.

8 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Excused:

2.E.

NVAR-24-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.303.A.1.a to allow an

Animal Care Facility to be zero feet (existing conditions) to any

property line where 55 feet is required located at 1516 Dustry Drive.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Presenter:

William Gray, Senior Planner, Planning and Neighborhood Services

Attachments: 7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

7.3.303 COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL USES

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Briggs, to

postpone to the September 11, 2024 Planning Commission Meeting. The

motion passed by a vote of 8-0.

Aye: 8 - Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cedil,

Commissioner Rickett, Chair Slattery,

Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic and Commissioner Casey

Excused: 1 - Commissioner Hensler

3. Communications

Kevin Walker - Interim Planning Director + Neighborhood Services

Mr. Walker stated that City Council denied the annexation of Amara on a 5-4

vote. He also stated that City Council voted to form the Downtown

Development Authority for the Old Colorado City area, including the Colorado

Avenue corridor. This will move to a second reading and then to a vote from the

property owners to form the Downtown Development Authority.

Mr. Walker spoke about the opening of the Ford Amphitheater last weekend and

the cooperation from the venue operator relative to the parking and noise

requirements. There were complaints and concerns about the noise. Staff was

present and is working with the venue operator to analyze the data.

Mr. Walker spoke about the discussion at City Council regarding the request to

have the referendum placed on the ballot regarding the height of the buildings

downtown. These were citizen comments and not on the agenda and will not

be moving forward.

4. Approval of the Minutes

CPC 2354

Minutes for the July 10, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting

Presenter:

Andrea Slattery, City Planning Commission Chair

Attachments: CPC_minutes_7.10.24_DRAFT revised

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Briggs, to approve

the minutes for the July 10, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. The motion

passed by a vote of 6-0.

6 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Rickett, Commissioner

Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

2 - Vice Chair Foos and Chair Slattery

Recused:

5. Consent Calendar

6. Items Called Off Consent Calendar

7. Unfinished Business

8. New Business

Short Term Rental Appeal 6060 Briarcliff Road

8.A.

APPL-24-00 An appeal of the administrative approval of the Short Term Rental

permit application for 6060 Briarcliff Road.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Presenter:

Carli Hiben, Program Administrator, Planning + Neighborhood

Services

Attachments: Staff Report_6060 Briarcliff Rd_V2

Attachment No. 1 - Public Comments

Attachment No. 2 - Code Enforcement Case

Attachment No. 3 - Appeal Submittal Form

Attachment No. 4 - Appeal Statement

Attachment No. 5 - Easement

Attachment No. 6 - Appeal Response

Attachment No. 7 - 2024 Renewal Application

7.5.415 APPEALS

Public Comments

Carli Hiben, Program Administrator I, presented the appeal. This is a

request to appeal the administrative approval of an owner-occupied

short-term rental renewal application. This property is zoned PDZ and

located in the hillside overlay. The appellant and STR permit holder had

presentations. There are concerns over the safety of the shared driveway

and trespassing. Staff researched the issue with the driveway with Public

Works and there is no permit on file. There are no notes on the plat related

to the shared driveway. The STR permit is in good standing with the city.

Commissioner Casey asked if there were any appeals from prior STR

permit renewals. Ms. Hiben said there have not been any.

Randy Knize, appellant and owner of 6070 Briarcliff Road, gave a

presentation. He stated that the STR does not conform to the language of

Ordinance 18-112, and it also violates Colorado state law. He presented

pictures of the shared driveway showing the boundary lines. Mr. Knize

referenced Ordinance 18-112 stating that it uses the verbiage “property”

and not “properties”. He claimed that the STR is operating on two

properties, which is contrary to the ordinance and that guests should not be

allowed to traverse onto 6070 Briarcliff. However, if the STR occupies both

properties, then he would like a say whether the STR permit should be

approved. Mr. Knize stated that he does not have STR insurance for his

property or driveway. He spoke on various safety concerns with guests and

the driveway. A copy of an easement from 1992 was provided. Mr. Knize

said that police have been called to the property for repeated trespassing.

Donna Robin Gregory, applicant and owner of 6060 Briarcliff Road, gave

her presentation. She discussed her favorable Airbnb status, community

involvement and neighbor interactions. Mrs. Gregory stated a complaint

was issued in October 2023 by the appellant that she was serving

chocolate croissants to guests, there was no outside signage for the

Airbnb and there are blind spots in the driveway. She no longer serves

food and they have added signage in the driveway. She provided pictures

of the driveway and parking spots for their Airbnb. She stated that the

appellant can only see the driveway through their cameras. Mrs. Gregory

gave history on the construction of their home and, in that time, no one had

complained about the blind spots or parking in the driveway. She stated

that the appellant’s wife has confronted some of their guests and visitors.

A video of one of the instances was provided, however, the sound was not

available due to technical difficulties. Mrs. Gregory purchased traffic cones

to help alleviate trespassing issues. Mrs. Gregory responded to Mr.

Knize’s claim about an Airbnb guest shouting at his daughter. Mrs.

Gregory stated that it was highly unlikely. She gave history about three

other owner-occupied Airbnb’s on their street with no incidents along with

letters of support from neighbors. Their neighborhood does not have an

active HOA.

Public Comment in Support: None

Public Comment in Opposition:

Kevin Gregory, property owner, spoke on his interactions with Mr. Knize.

They have had friendly interactions while shoveling snow and Mr. Knize

never complained about the Airbnb. Mr. Gregory has taken proactive

measures to address Mr. Knize’s concerns with signage and parking. Mr.

Gregory feels that they have been good neighbors but have not felt the

same reciprocity.

Rick Peine, neighbor located at 6050 Briarcliff, stated that he was not

aware of the Gregory’s Airbnb and he has had no issues with guests. He

has had issues with Mr. Knize’s children and dog. Mr. Peine would like to

know how often the Knize’s live at their residence. He feels that his is a

one-sided issue.

Sandy Anderson, neighbor of 25 years, said she agrees with Mr. and Mrs.

Gregory that she does not have interactions with the Knize’s. She stated

that there has been no noise, parking or safety issues with the Airbnb. Ms.

Anderson has had positive relations with the other neighbors. She believes

that Mr. Knize is trying to sell his house and that is why there are now

issues.

Brenda Pina, neighbor, said she has had no issues with Mr. and Mrs.

Gregory’s Airbnb guests.

Viola Horn, joint community Airbnb leader with Mrs. Gregory, stated that the

Gregory’s Airbnb is exemplary. When she visits, she receives text

messages on the driveway and parking instructions.

Appellant Rebuttal:

Mr. Knize referred to the picture of the driveway with the traffic cones and a

truck had driven over them. He said the property was not designed for a

short-term rental. Commissioner Slattery asked that the 1992 easement

language be shown and put into the record. Mr. Knize stated that there

were no STR’s in 1992. Commissioner Slattery asked if there was an

agreement about maintaining the easement. Commissioner Casey said

there is a version of it in the presentation, but it is missing the second

page.

Commissioner Comments:

Commissioner Cecil asked if any citations or arrests have been made on

the property. Mr. Knize said no. Commissioner Cecil said both the prior

version of Chapter 7 and the current UDC 7.6.17 states that the singular

shall include the plural in the code language. She finds the argument that

the two properties are contrary to the singular limiting against guidance the

code posseses for its own interpretation. Commissioner Cecil added that

there may be a larger question regarding insurance requirements, the

language in code 7.5.1704 allows property owners not to posses their own

insurance but to default to the insurance of the platform through which they

are renting. There is not sufficient criteria to require insurance on both

properties. Impacts on property value, where the appellant cites 7.5.1705

referring to safety and value but not individual property, but of the entire

neighborhood. She finds that police department has found no evidence of

trespassing across the easement. Commissioner Cecil recommended

that this be resolved in civil court. She will be voting to deny the appeal.

Commissioner Rickett stated that he agrees on the code related items as

well as the easement. He thinks the easement runs through the entire

property, but unrelated to Chapter 7. He will be voting to deny the appeal.

Commissioner Briggs asked City Attorney Gloss if the parking issue would

apply with the new UDC. Mr. Gloss said it would not. Commissioner

Briggs then asked, regarding the easement, if both entities could have

100% ownership. Mr. Gloss said it is complicated but yes, depending on

the language of the easement. Commissioner Briggs asked if this still

applies, even though the two current owners are not on the original

easement. Mr. Gloss said that assuming the transfer documents are all

good, that is correct. Mr. Gloss stated that he didn’t have access to all the

documents so he can’t speak to that. Commissioner Briggs asked Mrs.

Gregory if Airbnb has a standard policy on easements. Mrs. Gregory said

no, not that she is aware.

Commissioner Foos stated that this matter is more of a neighborhood

dispute and isn’t under their purview. The permit meets all the criteria and

the Gregorys have been good neighbors and he will be voting to deny the

appeal.

Commissioner Slattery asked Mr. Gloss if there needed to be an additional

insurer to cover the easement for the shared properties. Mr. Gloss stated

that it depends on what their policy says and the insurance company will

only give them insurance for land they control. The policy would need to be

reviewed to check that.

Commissioner Robbins asked Mr. Gloss about the insurance on the

properties. Mr. Gloss said they would need to review the policy.

Commissioner Robbins asked Mrs. Gregory if the STR was their only

source of income. Mrs. Gregory stated that her husband works full time

and that this was her source of income. Commissioner Robbins stated

safety was still an issue, but it meets code. He agrees with the other

commissioners. He also stated that this was a waste of police time and

city dollars. Mrs. Gregory said the police did not make an incident report.

Mrs. Gregory stated that the photograph Mr. Knize showed was not

accurate.

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Cecil, to deny

the appeal and affirm the administrative approval of the Short Term Rental

renewal application based on City Code Section 7.5.510(C)(1) and 7.3.301(C)

(3), and on the findings that the appellant has not substantiated that the

appeal satisfies the review criteria outlined in City Code Section 7.5.415.A(2).

The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.

8 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

Colorado Ave Tire Sales

8.B.

CUDP-24-00 A Conditional Use to allow a Minor Automotive and Light Vehicle

Repair and Accessory Outdoor Display of Goods use in the MX-M

(Mixed-Use Medium Scale) zone district consisting of 13,100 square

feet located at 822 West Colorado Avenue.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Presenter:

William Gray, Senior Planner, Planning + Neighborhood Services

Attachments: Staff Report_Colorado Ave Tire Shop

Attachment 1-Violation Notice

Attachment 2-7.3 Written Interpretation

Attachment 3-Notice and Order

Attachment 4-Zoning Map

Attachment 5-Context Map

Attachment 6-Project Statment

Attachment 7-Review Criteria Statement

Attachment 8-Vicinity Map

Attachment 9-Site Plan

7.5.601 CONDITIONAL USE

Public Comment_CPC Review

Bill Gray, Senior Planner, gave a presentation on the applications located

at 822 W. Colorado Ave. The tire shop sells and services used tires, and

the zoning is Mixed-Use Medium Scale. A code enforcement case was

received in the fall of 2023, citing parking of commercial vehicles in the

street. This was due to a U-haul rental business being run by the applicant.

The U-haul business has been stopped by the owner; however, they would

like to continue operating the tire shop outside. Both applications must

operate under use-specific standards. Staff made recommendations that

could allow the use to meet the criteria for the outdoor display. Postcards

and notifications were sent out and no neighborhood meetings were

conducted. Five letters of opposition were received citing noise, parking

and hours of operation. One letter of support was received stating that they

have helped the neighborhood stay operational. Fire department found the

Conditional Use would be acceptable. Staff finds the approval criteria for

the Conditional Use are not met. Staff finds the application does not meet

the Non-Use Variance criteria.

Commissioner Rickett asked if the business was open during the use of

Chapter 7. Mr. Gray said yes. Commissioner Rickett then asked if it was a

permitted use and not a conditional use and asked what changed between

Chapter 7 and the UDC. Mr. Gray did not have an answer for that.

Commissioner Rickett asked why they are here today if they were

permitted. Mr. Gray answered that they were permitted, however, it did not

meet use specific standards under Chapter 7. It can not be considered a

legal, non-conforming use of the property. Commissioner Rickett asked for

the standard that they didn’t meet. Mr. Gray stated that the previous code

and the current code both required that the area of the building where the

service activity occurs must be 100 feet from any residential zone district.

Commissioner Rickett said that through the duration of this business, it has

never actually met the zoning code, whether it was Chapter 7 or UDC. Mr.

Gray said that was correct.

Applicants Johnny Nolan, property owner, and Jared Ikola, business owner,

gave a presentation. Mr. Nolan stated that the business is a positive

aspect of the neighborhood and he takes the complaints seriously. He

believes the parking has been rectified with the U-haul business stopped.

Parking is open on the west side of the business for residents. The back

alley is not used for the business. Mr. Nolan is working on reducing

weekend hours and speaking with neighbors for special events. He will

adhere to the code with any new tenants of no light automotive uses and

stay in compliance with zoning regulations. Mr. Nolan would like Mr. Ikola to

finish his lease. Mr. Ikola stated that, since the U-haul situation, he has

reached out to neighbors to continue positive relationships. Mr. Nolan

stated that the business is not as busy as a commercialized business.

Commissioner Briggs asked if there were plans to restart the U-haul

business. Mr. Ikola said no. Commissioner Briggs asked Mr. Gray if the

100-foot rule applies to both inside and outside use. Mr. Gray said it is

wherever the service activity is taking place. Commissioner Briggs asked

if the conditional requirement was no external storage of the tires. Mr. Gray

said yes, that is a use-specific standard that applies to the use, but

displays are allowed within the outlined area on the map provided.

Commissioner Briggs asked Mr. Nolan if he has storage for the storage

tires versus the displayed tires. Mr. Nolan stated the majority of them are

display tires. Mr. Ikola disposes of the tires not in use. He also maintains

the fenced area. Commissioner Briggs asked if the County Board of

Health has checked the stacked tires. Mr. Nolan said he was unsure.

Commissioner Robbins asked if the applicant had spoken to the neighbors

about the complaints. Mr. Nolan said no, but they intend to. They would be

changing the types of tools used to help with the noise complaints. Mr.

Robbins asked if the same types of tenants would be on the property once

the lease is up. Mr. Nolan said he would find a new tenant with work that

falls under compliance with the code.

Commissioner Cecil asked the legal name of the business and asked if the

business was registered with the State Health Department. Mr. Ikola said

the business name is South Co Tire LLC and he was registered with the

State Health Department. Commissioner Cecil stated that the registration

does not show on the website. Commissioner Cecil then asked Mr. Ikola

how many tires are stored on the lot and how many of those were waste

tires. Mr. Ikola stated that roughly between 400-600 tires could be on the lot

and roughly 75 of those are waste tires which are removed. Commissioner

Cecil asked if they have had any issues with enforcement around their

disposal user manifests and they said no. She then asked what they are

doing to mitigate the accumulation of water in the tires with the recent rains.

Mr. Ikola said the tires are barrel stacked and they will shake the tires and

that removes most of the water.

Commissioner Cecil asked Mr. Gray if the total display area in the map

would not exceed the area of the built structure. Mr. Gray said that is

correct. Commissioner Cecil asked how many bays there are and is the

work done inside the bay. Mr. Ikola said currently they have one bay,

however the work is done outside the bay. He also stated that they are

considering adding a covered structure for the work. Commissioner Cecil

then asked if it would be a permanent structure or a temporary structure.

Mr. Nolan said both, then elaborated stating they would make it solid

enough to block noise and meet criteria to reduce noise. Commissioner

Cecil asked if they are aware that the structure would need a building

permit. She asked if there was a traffic plan. Mr. Ikola stated he would

ensure customers would wait in their cars and stated that only the tire is

removed outside the building and the work was done inside the building

done with a pneumatic gun, but they will be changing to a battery powered

drill. Mr. Nolan stated that there is ample parking.

Commissioner Foos asked if the tire stacking meets the fire code. Steven

Smith, Fire Protection Engineer II, stated when the plans were reviewed, he

looked at access, not existing conditions, but he could have the site

inspected for the tire stacking.

Commissioner Rickett asked if the waste tires would be stored outside.

He asked Mr. Smith if the number of tires falls within the fire code. Mr.

Smith said he would need to refer to the fire code. Commissioner Rickett

asked Mr. Gray if there is a definition between display tires and stored

tires. Mr. Gray said there is not a definition of those products. He pointed

to the site plan to show where the tires could be located as display tires.

All others would need to be stored inside. Commissioner Slattery asked if

there was enough space to store the tires in the displayed area given the

number of tires. Mr. Ikola said yes.

Commissioner Rickett and Commissioner Slattery both said they struggle

with the issue of the existing business in operation that has not been

operating legally from possible lack of knowledge.

Commissioner Briggs stated the path to make it legal would be to approve

the conditional use. He is in favor of approval.

Commissioner Robbins stated that he is concerned with the safety of the

neighborhood regarding a possible fire with the tires. He would like to

know if a condition could be added that the fire department could find a

recourse for safety. City Attorney Gloss stated that the packet states that it

is required to comply with the fire code. Acting Planning Director Katie

Carleo said the motion on item number six was adjusted to read inside and

outside.

Commissioner Slattery asked if a condition could be made to adjust all

work be done inside the building. Mr. Ikola said yes. She also asked

about the business hours and Mr. Ikola said those could be adjusted.

Commissioner Foos stated he agrees that it is a needed business but

can’t get past the 16-foot variance and can not support the item.

Commissioner Slattery stated the business practices have not been in line

with the code and will be voting no.

Public Comment: None

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Briggs, to

approve the Conditional Use to allow a Minor Automotive and Light Vehicle

Repair and Accessory Outdoor Display of Goods use in the MX-M (Mixed-Use

Medium Scale) zone district consisting of 13,100 square feet located at 822

West Colorado Avenue, based upon the findings that the request complies

with the criteria for a Conditional Use as set forth in City Code Section

7.5.601.C.2, with the following conditions: A final landscape plan that

addresses landscaping, screening, fencing, and parking improvements as

illustrated in Attachment 9-Site Plan and which are necessary to comply with

City Code Section 7.5.601.C.2 is submitted within 60 days of the Planning

Commission hearing date. The approved final landscape plan is

implemented not later than June 15, 2025, and the improvements will be

guaranteed through a Financial Assurance Agreement. No exterior storage

of automotive parts, tires, equipment and/or materials. All work is required

to be done within the building. All work is limited to tire sales, installation

and repair. No other auto repair services or body and fender work are

allowed. The inside and outside storage of tires is required to comply with

Chapter 34, Tire Rebuilding and Tire Storage, Fire Code of the City of

Colorado Springs. The motion passed by a vote of 5-3.

5 -

Aye:

No:

Commissioner Briggs, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Rickett,

Commissioner Robbins and Commissioner Casey

3 - Vice Chair Foos, Chair Slattery and Commissioner Sipilovic

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

8.C.

NVAR-24-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.303.I.1.c to allow a

16-foot separation between the nearest point of the building in which

the repair activity of an Automobile and Light Vehicle Repair use

occurs to any residential zone district where 100 feet is required

consisting of 13,100 square feet located at 822 West Colorado

Avenue. (Quasi-Judicial)

Presenter:

William Gray, Senior Planner, Planning + Neighborhood Services

Attachments: 7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Briggs, to

approve the Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.303.I.1.c to allow a 16

foot separation between the nearest point of the building in which the repair

activity of an Automobile and Light Vehicle Repair use occurs to any

residential zone district where 100 feet is required located at 822 West

Colorado Avenue based upon the findings that the request complies with the

criteria for a Non-Use Variance as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.526.E,

with the following conditions: A final landscape plan that addresses

landscaping, screening, fencing, and parking improvements as illustrated in

Attachment 9-Site Plan and which are necessary to comply with City Code

Section 7.5.526.E is submitted within 60 days of the Planning Commission

hearing date. The approved final landscape plan is implemented not later

than June 15, 2025, and the improvements will be guaranteed through a

Financial Assurance Agreement.No exterior storage of automotive parts,

tires, and/or materials. All work is required to be done within the building.

All work is limited to tire sales, installation and repair. No other auto repair

services or body and fender work are allowed. The inside and outside

storage of tires is required to comply with Chapter 34, Tire Rebuilding and

Tire Storage, Fire Code of the City of Colorado Springs. The motion failed by

a vote of 5-3.

3 - Commissioner Briggs, Commissioner Rickett and Commissioner Casey

Aye:

No:

5 -

Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins

and Commissioner Sipilovic

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

Optical Engines

8.D.

UVAR-24-00 A Use Variance request to allow a light industrial land use within the

MX-L UV (Mixed-Use Large Scale - with a Use Variance on file) zone

district consisting of 10,916 square feet located at 2732 W. Colorado

Ave.

Presenter:

Johnny Malpica, Planner II, Planning + Neighborhood Services

Kevin Walker, Director, Planning + Neighborhood Services

Attachments: Optical Engines Use Variance - Staff Report - JPM

Attachment 1 - Use Variance Development Plan

Attachment 2 - Project Statement

Optical Engines - Council Staff Presentation - JPM

Optical Engines - CPC Staff Presentation - JPM

7.5.527 USE VARIANCE

Johnny Malpica, Planner II, presented the Use Variance to allow a light

industrial land use located at 2732 W. Colorado Ave. The use more

specifically will be laser and photonic technology manufacturing with a

street-fronting office. This is being used as an expansion, as the applicant

has an existing establishment with the same use. Posters and public

notice were provided. Two comments were received by email asking for

clarification regarding parking, noise impact and traffic impact.

Responses were provided by city staff. One comment was received

through the agency review from Fire Construction Services stating the new

occupancy will need to meet occupancy fire codes. The permit is currently

under review. Staff feels that the application does meet the review criteria.

Work is on a small scale done at a desk. A condition has been added

stating the approval does not permit any other light industrial uses.

Economic Development has issued a Rapid Response certificate for the

project.

Commissioner Questions:

Commissioner Rickett stated the property was purchased under Chapter 7

and the Use Variance is under the current UDC. He asked if there were

limitations from Chapter 7. Mr. Malpica said yes, under Chapter 7, the

property was zone C-6, not Mixed-Use Large Scale. The use would be

considered General Industry Light.

Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification that the work would be done

at a desk. Mr. Malpica said yes, it is similar to jewelry. They are producing

small devices.

Applicant Donald Sipes, president and CEO of Optical Engines and

building owner, gave a short presentation. Mr. Sipes stated they are

producing devices with fiber optics and they use desktop machines to build

fiber lasers. These are sold to the government, Lockheed, Boeing, NASA,

Microsoft and various agencies. Work is done in a clean room and is very

quiet. They have been a good neighbor and have been involved in helping

with the homeless problems in the area.

Public Comments:

Ryan Lloyd, applicant speaking as public commenter. He is the architect

for the project and shares a wall in the building. He stated the use of the

building is appropriate.

Commissioner Questions:

Commissioner Slattery asked if the light industrial use in the back is the

entrance and exit out of that space. Mr. Sipes said the space has two

doors, half is the corporate office, and the other is retail space. It is an open

space.

Commissioner Cecil asked if traffic would be impacted in the alley with

deliveries. Mr. Sipes stated that they have standard Fedex delivery. There

is no impact.

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Vice Chair Foos, to

recommend approval to City Council the Use Variance to establish the Light

Industrial land use based upon the findings that the request complies with the

criteria as set forth in City Code Section 7.5.527 with the following condition:

This approval only allows for the use as discussed in the associated project

statement and depicted on the associated site plan for optical engines, any

future changes or intensification will require a new Use Variance. The motion

passed by a vote of 8-0.

8 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

Park Vista Addition No. 10

8.E.

ANEX-22-00 Park Vista Addition No. 10 Annexation consisting of 2.18 acres

located at 4372 Siferd Boulevard.

(Legislative)

Presenter:

Gabe Sevigny, Planning Supervisor, Planning and Neighborhood

Services

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, Planning and Neighborhood

Services

Attachments: Staff Report_Park Vista Addition No 10_RGS

Attachment 1_Project Statement_Park Vista Addition No 10

Attachment 2_Annexation Agreement-Applicant Executed only_Park

Vista Addition No. 10

Attachment 3_Exhibit A - Legal Description

Attachment 4_Park Vista Addition No 10 - Annexation Plat_3-5-24

Attachment 5_Petition - Park Vista Addition No 10

Park Vista Addition No. 10_Formal Presenation_RGS

7.6.203-Annexation Conditions

Gabe Sevigny, Planning Supervisor, gave a presentation on this

application located at 4372 Siferd Blvd. Mr. Sevigny stated R-5 is the

standard zone in this area. Public notice was given and no comments

were received and no neighborhood meetings were held. Outside agency

comments were addressed. SWENT will need to submit the final approval

of the drainage report. The project is in compliance with PlanCOS. Staff

finds the application does meet requirements.

Commissioner Questions: NONE

Public Comment: NONE

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Casey, to

recommend approval to City Council the annexation of 2.18 acres as the Park

Vista Addition No. 10 Annexation based upon the findings that the annexation

complies with the Conditions for Annexation, as set forth in Chapter 7 Section

7.6.203. The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.

8 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

8.F.

ZONE-22-00 The establishment of R-5 (Multi-Family High) zone district in

association with the Park Vista Addition No. 10 Annexation

consisting of 0.89 acres located at 4372 Siferd Boulevard.

(Legislative)

Presenter:

Gabe Sevigny, Planning Supervisor, Planning and Neighborhood

Services

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, Planning and Neighborhood

Services

Attachments: 7.5.603.B Findings - ZC

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Casey, to

recommend approval to City Council the zone establishment of 0.89 acres as

R-5 (Multi-Family High) based upon the findings that the request complies

with the criteria for zoning establishment as set forth in Chapter 7 Section

7.5.603.B The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.

8 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

8.G.

SUBD-22-00 Park Vista Subdivision No. 10 Preliminary/Final Plat for 0.89 acres

located 4372 Siferd Boulevard.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Presenter:

Gabe Sevigny, Planning Supervisor, Planning and Neighborhood

Services

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, Planning and Neighborhood

Services

Attachments: Attachment 8_Park Vista Addition Subdivision Filing No 10

7.7.204 Preliminary Plat Requirements

7.7.303 Final Plat Req - Subdivision Plats Review Criteria

Motion by Commissioner Rickett, seconded by Commissioner Casey, to

recommend approval to City Council the Park Vista Annexation Subdivision

No. 10 Preliminary/Final Plat based upon the findings that the proposal

complies with the requirements for a preliminary plat as set forth in Chapter 7

Section 7.7.204, and the requirements for a final plat as set forth in Chapter 7

Section 7.7.303 with one (1) Technical Modification. Applicant shall receive

final approval of the Final Drainage Report from Stormwater Enterprise

(SWENT). The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.

8 -

Aye:

Commissioner Briggs, Vice Chair Foos, Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner

Rickett, Chair Slattery, Commissioner Robbins, Commissioner Sipilovic and

Commissioner Casey

1 - Commissioner Hensler

Absent:

UDC Code Amendment

24-397

8.H.

An Ordinance amending City Code Section 7.3.303.F

(Marijuana-Related Services) of the Unified Development Code of

the City of Colorado Springs. (Legislative)

Presenter:

Kevin Walker, Interim Director, Planning and Neighborhood Services

Attachments: Draft Ordinance to City Council CAO Approved

Staff Report - RMS Council Ordinance Referral v3

UDC 7.5.702 Text changes

UDC 7.3.303 Marijuana-Related Uses

Charter Amendment

Statement of Insufficiency

MMC_Facilities_One_Mile_Seperation_Map8_24v2

2024 Presentation_ 8.28.24

City Council Draft Minutes

CPC_Minutes_8.14.24 DRAFT

CPC_Minutes_8.28.24 DRAFT

Letter_Adinoff Opposition CS City Council ban on adult use sales

Public Comments Combined

Kevin Walker, Interim Planning Director, gave an overview of the

ordinance. This request is from City Council from the June 22, 2024 work

session meeting to modify the Unified Development Code to add a section

regarding the distances from potential retail marijuana stores to other land

uses inside the city. Mr. Walker stated that City Council is a body that is

able to refer matters to the Planning Commission and the Planning

Commission is required to hear the matter and make a recommendation to

City Council. A public hearing will be held on August 28, 2024. City

Council referred a charter amendment restricting retail marijuana sales,

which will be going to the ballot in November.

Council Member Brian Risley spoke about the ordinance as well. The

reasons they are proposing this amendment to the UDC are very

methodical and very specific. Mr. Risley said that El Paso County has one

of the highest rates of teenage suicide in the country, as well as one of the

highest rates of marijuana and drug use among high school students. They

are proposing to limit recreation marijuana sales within a certain distance

of schools and other locations.

District Attorney Michael Allen urged this commission to approve this item.

Voters considered the issue of recreational marijuana sales in 2022 and it

was rejected by 57% of voters. He said proponents of recreational

marijuana always point to sales tax revenue going toward public safety,

mental health services and PTSD treatment for veterans. Mr. Allen said

that potency is much higher now, noting that there are no curbs or state

regulations for those levels. Young people under 25 have higher impacts

on their mental health. Mr. Allen stated that he sees marijuana in all

aspects of crime. He stated that this is a commonsense solution that will

protect children and other people that are dealing with mental health and

addiction issues.

President Pro Tem Lynette Crow-Iverson re-iterated Mr. Allen’s comments

and asked if the commissioners had questions.

Commissioner Rickett requested that factual data be provided for the

ordinance prior to the next meeting. President Pro Tem Crow-Iverson

stated that there was no science to the one-mile buffer. Commissioner

Rickett requested a map of the city with the items on the ordinance that

measures the one mile. Mr. Walker stated that will be provided.

Commissioner Foos asked if this pertains to the existing medical facilities

as well and how they fit compliance. President Pro Tem Crow-Iverson

stated that they were only speaking on recreational marijuana.

Commissioner Casey asked if there are any other one-mile restrictions in

city code for other establishments. He also reiterated that the code for

medical marijuana requires 1,000 feet between establishments.

Commissioner Briggs said the proposal is to limit the number of facilities

of the existing medical marijuana providers, which seems exclusionary

when it comes to the free market. He gave his military history on medical

marijuana access to veterans. He spoke in detail on addiction and

marijuana use and that retail marijuana facilities are for profit.

Commissioner Rickett asked what the greatest restriction in distance

related to the code. There is a 1,000-foot distance. City Attorney Trevor

Gloss stated that is the greatest one he knows of for medical marijuana.

Commissioner Rickett stated that this is the standard. Mr. Walker said he

will provide the information.

Chair Slattery closed by saying this was an information only item today and

there will be a special meeting on August 28th at 9 a.m.

9. Presentations

10. Adjourn