Regional Development  
Center (Hearing Room)  
2880 International Circle  
City of Colorado Springs  
Meeting Minutes - Final  
Downtown Review Board  
Tuesday, February 4, 2025  
9:00 AM  
2880 International Circle, 2nd Floor, Hearing Room  
1. Call to Order and Roll Call  
8 -  
Present:  
Board Member Nolette, Board Member Kuosman, Board Member Coats, Board  
Member Kronstadt, Board Member Hensler, Board Member Lord, Board Member  
Friesema and Board Member Luciano  
1 - Board Member Mikulas  
Absent:  
2. Changes to Agenda/Postponements  
3. Communications  
Ryan Tefertiller - Urban Planning Manager  
Ryan Tefertiller, Urban Planning Manager, announced Johnny Malpica has  
been promoted to a Senior Planner with the Long-Range Planning  
Division. A new planner will move to the vacant position and will be  
announced soon. Mr. Tefertiller said Board members should have  
received an email from Council Staff announcing the 2025 volunteer  
appreciation night. He said there is an RSVP requirement and if there is  
interest, to accept that invitation. Mr. Tefertiller said Council Staff has  
reminded all boards and commissions that there are two work elements  
that they were looking for the end of last year beginning of this year. The  
first was our 2025 work plan, which was finalized a couple months ago.  
They are also looking for a 2024 Annual Report as a summary of all the  
items that the board acted on and participated in during the past year. He  
said he will be creating a draft and sending it to Council Staff in the next  
two weeks and will let the board know. Mr. Tefertiller said there should be  
an item for the next DRB meeting on March 4, 2025, and reminded staff to  
confirm availability.  
4. Approval of the Minutes  
DRB 2296  
4.A.  
Minutes for the November 5, 2024, Downtown Review Board Meeting  
Presenter:  
David Lord, Downtown Review Board Chair  
Attachments: DRB_Minutes_11.5.24 Draft  
Motion by Board Member Friesema, seconded by Board Member Hensler, to  
approve the minutes for the November 5, 2024, Downtown Review Board Meeting  
The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.  
8 -  
Aye:  
Board Member Nolette, Board Member Kuosman, Board Member Coats, Board  
Member Kronstadt, Board Member Hensler, Board Member Lord, Board Member  
Friesema and Board Member Luciano  
1 - Board Member Mikulas  
Absent:  
5. Consent Calendar  
6. Items Called Off Consent Calendar  
7. Unfinished Business  
8. New Business  
Trainwreck  
8.A.  
FBZN-24-001 A Warrant and Minor Improvement Plan to allow the addition of a new  
7
outdoor bar in the FBZ-T2 (Form-Based Zone Transition Sector 2)  
consisting of 1.16 acres located at 812 South Sierra Madre Street.  
(Quasi-Judicial)  
Presenter:  
William Gray, Senior Planner, Urban Planning Division  
Attachments: Staff Report_Trainwreck  
Attachment 1-Trainwreck Minor Development Plan  
Attachment 2-Trainwreck 2022 Minor Amendment  
Attachment 3-Downtown CS Letter  
Attachment 4-Project Statement  
Attachment 5-Site Plan  
Attachment 6-Architectural Plans  
Attachment 7-Renderings  
Attachment 8-Pre-Application Summary  
William Grey, Senior Planner presented a warrant and minor improvement  
plan for Trainwreck. The site is located at 812 south Sierra Madre Street.  
The site is approximately 1.16 acres, and the land use is a restaurant and  
bar with an outdoor entertainment area.  
The application is a minor  
improvement plan for the addition of a bar with a street frontage location  
with the back of the bar being oriented to the street. Mr. Grey said the new  
bar is in between the trash enclosure and transformer in proximity to the  
west entrance into the building for operational needs. Staff review felt there  
was reduced visual interest and openness with the addition of this bar and  
trash enclosure. Mr. Grey said an alternative would be to consider other  
non-street frontage locations, adding a variety to the façade such as a  
mural. Standard public notice was done with two comments received. One  
comment from The Downtown Partnership recommending the bar be  
relocated to avoid the back of the bar facing the street and be moved to the  
southeast corner.  
The other comment was from We Fortify voicing  
concerns with noise levels and suggested moving the bar to the back of the  
property near the rail line. Mr. Grey said the application complies with  
PlanCOS.  
The plan does not comply with the Experience Downtown  
Master Plan due to the placement of the bar. Staff finds the application  
does not meet the review criteria for a warrant.  
Applicant Presentation  
Bobby Hill, Bobby Hill Designs representing Altitude Hospitality, owner of  
Trainwreck, Dad’s Donuts, Garden of the Gods Gourmet, Till, Pinery on the  
Hill, and Hill Pinery North. Mr. Hill said they are deeply embedded in the  
downtown community. Mr. Hill said if the bar is moved to any other location  
on the site, it will take up yard and viewing space were the patrons are. He  
said this is a service bar with a variety of drinks that are in an open well to  
ease the service staff.  
He said there is investment being added for  
weather protection for staff and seating for the bar. The mural on the bar  
was a good idea and suggested by Planning. Mr. Hill said there are many  
activities near the location of the bar and if it is moved it out front it will  
disrupt services. He said if it is moved towards the back it will be an  
inconvenience for staff to go back and forth. Mr. Hill provided images of  
the proposed bar and mural.  
Board member questions  
Board member Hensler asked if the trash enclosure will be corrugated  
metal. Mr. Hill said yes and that is the overall look of Trainwreck.  
Board member Luciano asked if there has been any discussion of moving  
the trash enclosure. Mr. Hill said if the trash enclosure is moved, it will still  
be along Las Animas as there is no other place to put it. Board member  
Luciano asked if it had to be in the area. Mr. Hill said yes it needs to be  
near the kitchen and it is the closest proximity and the existing city wires  
are already blocking views.  
Chair Lord asked Mr. Gray to explain the makes the transformer, bar and  
trash area a violation of the form-based code. Mr. Grey said it is not  
consistent with the design standards of the form-based code as it asks the  
street walls to open and have visual interest. The new proposed bar, trash  
enclosure and existing structure are a cumulative effect that hinder the view  
of the openness and visual interest along Las Animas. Chair Lord said  
their choice is to approve and deny a warrant for the application. Mr. Grey  
said yes.  
Mr. Tefertiller said the board has the authority to continue an item to the  
next meeting and guide the applicant on changes to the application.  
Board member Nolette asked how many liner feet are open along the  
property lines and said there is a lot of open area. Mr. Grey gave the  
various lengths of combined structures that are opaque and open views  
into the property along the street.  
Board member Hensler said the Google Earth map calculation is 272 feet  
from the building to the corner and said she understands the request for the  
warrant and the request. Board member Hensler said she will be in favor of  
the application due to the openness and the site and said the fencing  
around the trash enclosure is a problem and it should be updated. Mr. Hill  
said they kept the height of the backbar at the same height of the fence to  
not block visuals.  
Public Comment  
None  
Board Member Comment  
Board member Kronstadt said he understands trying to provide street  
interest, but Las Animas in not walkable due to the active freight rail line,  
sidewalk disrepair,  
widen roads and people driving too fast.  
Board  
member Kronstadt said as an arm of City Government it feels dishonest for  
us to tell Trainwreck to put the bar somewhere that is inconvenient for the  
business, when other arms of City Government are not taking care of the  
streets and sidewalks in this area. Mr. Hill said the developer through the  
City has put a huge amount of money into new sidewalks all along Sierra  
Madre and Las Animas and new drain pans.  
Motion by Board Member Hensler, seconded by Board Member Luciano, to  
approve the Warrant and Minor Improvement Plan for the TrainwreckOutdoor  
Bar, based upon the findings that the application meets the approval criteria  
as set forth in Form-Based Code Section 5.4 and Form-Based Code Section  
5.6  
The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.  
8 -  
Aye:  
Board Member Nolette, Board Member Kuosman, Board Member Coats, Board  
Member Kronstadt, Board Member Hensler, Board Member Lord, Board  
Member Friesema and Board Member Luciano  
1 - Board Member Mikulas  
1 - Alternate Pence  
Absent:  
Abstain:  
OneVeLa  
8.B.  
FBZN-24-001 A Form-Based Zone Development Plan for the ONE Vela Mixed Use  
6
Building on a 1.09 acre, FBZ-CEN (Form-Based Zone - Central  
Sector) zoned property located on the northeast corner of Sahwatch  
St. and W. Costilla St. (Quasi-Judicial)  
Presenter:  
Ryan Tefertiller, Planning Manager, Urban Planning Division  
Attachments: DRB Staff Report_ONE Vela_RT  
Attachment 1 - ONE Vela Zoning Exhibit  
Attachment 2 - Stakeholder Comments  
Attachment 3 - ONE Vela Project Statement  
Attachment 4 - ONE Vela Development Plan  
Attachment 5 - Experience Downtown Plan on a Page  
Attachment 6 - PlanCOS Vision Map  
Prior to the item being discussed Board member Hensler stated that she  
has no personal connections or inability to weigh in on the plan in an  
unbiased manner. She said that her previous company, which she is no  
longer with, provided pricing on the project over a year ago.  
Board  
member Hensler said she has no connection to the project and her other  
community roles would not make her biased in any way towards this project  
and can weigh in impartially and fairly.  
Ryan Tefertiller, Urban Planning Manager, presented the OneVeLa FBZ  
Development Plan. Mr. Tefertiller provided slides to show the background  
of the project. The four parcels are located northeast of Sahwatch St. and  
W. Costilla St and is 1.1 acres. The proposed project is primarily  
multi-family residential with 400 units and 8,000 square feet of street-level  
commercial and significant internal structure parking and amenity space for  
the residents.  
Mr. Tefertiller said the site currently has light industrial warehouse buildings  
and some single-family homes that have been used for both residential and  
office related uses. Mr. Tefertiller said this application is reviewed under  
the Downtown Colorado Springs Form Based Code. This review can be  
done administratively, however, due to this project having significant  
stakeholder interest, staff decided it would be beneficial to the project and  
the community to refer it to the Downtown Review Board for a public  
hearing and give the public an additional opportunity to participate. Mr.  
Tefertiller said there are technical items that the applicant is still working  
with staff on such as drainage, stormwater, utility and general plan items.  
Staff is confident that they can continue to work with the applicants after the  
hearing to clean up the remaining technical items and make sure that the  
action of the Downtown Review board is successfully fulfilled. Mr. Tefertiller  
said any decision today from the Downtown Review board is appealable  
by a stakeholder with formal standing according to Code. If an appeal is  
filed within the required appeal window, which is 10 days from today, then  
the project and the appeal would be referred to City Council next month.  
City Council would have the ability to hear the project understand the  
Downtown Review Boards input and either approve or deny the appeal and  
the overall project. Mr. Tefertiller said the site is within an Urban Renewal  
District established in 2001 and the One Vela URA was established by  
City Council on December 10, 2024.  
He said there have been some  
improvements made in the surrounding area. The Olympic Museum west  
of the site and streetscape improvements have been made along Sierra  
Madre. Standard public notifications were done at the time of submittal  
and throughout 2024. He said roughly 18 stakeholders reached out from  
the community expressing concern with tall buildings and asked for staff  
support to encourage City Council to put a ballot initiative on the ballot to  
vote on building heights. Mr. Tefertiller said over the last 48 hours, staff has  
received significant public input and were distributed digitally, and hard  
copies were also provided. There was also  
a
spreadsheet with  
approximately 450 comments and just before 7:00am prior to the meeting  
another two dozen comments were sent to the board. Mr. Tefertiller said  
the vast majority of the comments received were in opposition to building  
height and 90% are identical. An email template was put together by one  
of the stakeholder groups. Emails of support were received as well.  
Mr.  
Tefertiller said the proposed building is 27 stories, mixed use units and  
10% of the units are restricted to 100% AMI for 25 years. There are 460  
structured parking stalls and significant resident amenities. Mr. Tefertiller  
said the staff report has significant details on all the required standards for  
the form-based zone and provides an analysis on how each of those  
standards are met. He said this building, around 310 feet tall, will be the  
tallest building in the city, roughly 50 feet taller than the Wells Fargo Tower.  
He said the measurement varies depending on average grade as the site  
is not flat. He said this site sits roughly 15 feet lower than the Wells Fargo  
Building, so while it is 60 to 65 feet taller from average finished floor to the  
top, it would appear roughly 50 feet taller given the fact that the site is lower  
in elevation to start. Mr. Tefertiller said 60% glazing is required along the  
public frontages and the intent is to create transparency and activation and  
pestering interest along the public-facing edges of the building.  
Mr.  
Tefertiller discussed the subjective guidelines that are encouraged for all  
projects. He said staff worked very closely with the design team to ensure  
that the podium of this building, tower and top, all use a diverse range of  
materials with textures and details in interest and depth articulation to make  
sure that this building, which will be visible from all parts of downtown and  
other parts of the community, is attractive and is consistent with the design  
guidelines. Mr. Tefertiller said this is highly compliant with the Downtown  
Master Plan and PlanCOS.  
Applicant Presentation  
Andy Merit, Chief Strategy Officer, O’Neill Group, representing Kevin  
O'Neill, provided a background of the project. Mr. Merit said that CEO  
Kevin O’Neill has been a strong believer in the value of downtown for a long  
time and it has taken the form of investing in commercial buildings  
downtown. Building the Catalyst Campus for Technology and Innovation on  
the eastern edge of downtown and putting over 30 million dollars of his own  
money into renovating the old original train station for the City as the  
anchor for that location. Mr. Merit said the campus has resulted in over  
2600 jobs in the defense tech industry being created in the community. He  
said they invest in defense technology companies, and they compete for  
workforce all over the country. He said there is a missing product in our  
downtown area and there is nothing like this product and it will fill a gap in  
the community.  
Nick Benjamin, Principal with VeLa Development Partners spoke on the  
project. He said their goal as developers is to build beautiful apartment  
buildings and to grow the supply of attainable housing across the country.  
Mr. Benjamin said the combination of growth in the Colorado Springs  
market and the natural beauty of location, views from the apartments in the  
building and amenity space has the potential to attract new residents to  
market. Mr. Benjamin said they have built almost 1,000 units in Kansas  
City and St. Louis and are widely recognized as some of the best designed  
apartment buildings in the country.  
Frank Andre, Lead Architect, Ford Copland, presented other parallel  
projects that he was worked on with the VeLa Development Partners in  
Kansas City and St. Louis.  
organizational principles, design approach and some of the same design  
cues as the OneVeLa project. He showed various slides of other  
Mr. Andre said they follow the same  
developments highlighting the levels of the development. Mr. Adre said the  
site location is in proximity vibrant public locations, and it will be beneficial  
to the assets already in place. Mr. Adre also provided the residential units  
that will be available. He said it was easy to align with PlanCOS and said it  
was a natural fit. Mr. Andre showed various images showing the various  
points of the building. He said the same materials and the same design  
approach was used on all faces of the building. There is an opportunity for  
art murals on the east and north sides of the building and there is openness  
which adds depth. Mr. Andre showed pictures that illustrate the street level  
and base of the building. He said along West Castillo the site rises about  
seven feet. They will use planters and site walls to help maintain the  
consistency of the public sidewalk and carve out flatter spots to allow the  
retail to spill out for outdoor seating and other activities happening outside.  
He highlighted the amenities along the terrace and showed images of the  
lobby, amenities and residential units. Mr. Andre showed an animation of  
projected building plans showing the retail frontage, entrance, and terrace.  
Board member questions  
Chair Lord asked Mr. Merit to share the need for housing for perspective  
employees and why the building made financial sense.  
Mr. Merit said  
technology companies pay well, and it is not an ussie of general  
affordability for those kind of employees. Mr. Merit said they are trying to  
attract talent into those companies from all over the country. The are  
employees that want to live in a downtown environment and there are folks  
that live, work, and play that a true downtown environment can offer. Others  
will buy single-family homes and live in other parts of the city. Mr. Merit  
said there is not a product in town that delivers that kind of experience with  
the level of amenities that are going to be provided. The product creates a  
mini community.  
Chair Lord asked what are some things that can be done to address views  
being blocked. Mr. Andre said it is addressed in the form-based code  
through setbacks, and they have incorporated a number of setbacks into  
the project. He said the site is large and the tower was setback quite a bit.  
Public Comment  
Jill Gaebler, Executive Director, Pikes Peak Housing Network spoke in  
support of the project.  
Ms. Gaebler said the project will bring 400  
apartment units to the community, 40 of which will be considered attainable  
or 100% of the area median income, which is desperately needed in our  
community. She said Colorado Springs does not require developers to  
include affordable or attainable housing within their individual projects and  
it is great to see this developer proactively ensure that this property is more  
accessible to the lower income community members.  
Ms. Gaebler said  
the form-based zone allows unlimited building heights in one quarter of one  
square mile of over 200 square mile City. She said it is important to have  
unique development options that provide both residential and commercial  
opportunities that are not available elsewhere in the City. Ms. Gaebler said  
downtown residential development has grown significantly since Blue Dot  
place opened in 2016 being the first apartment property developed  
downtown and over 50 years. Since then, downtown has or is in  
construction of over 5,000 residential units. She said those units continue  
to be rapidly absorbed or let showing an unmet need for more housing  
downtown.  
Ms. Gaebler said they are confident that this project will provide a unique  
housing opportunity for those who want a very modern urban and walkable  
living experience. She said to ensure they attract and keep the skilled tech  
and space workers; Colorado Springs must continue to become more  
vibrant, exciting, trendy and maybe even a bit hip.  
Chelsea Gondeck, Director of Planning and Mobility, Colorado Springs  
Downtown Partnership, spoke in support of the project. Ms. Gondeck said  
the Downtown Partnership strongly supports the application.  
She said  
there are a multitude of diverse places people can live in Colorado Springs  
and this area of downtown has long been viewed as an area of opportunity  
and this project is what is needed to support the business environment.  
She said the design strongly aligns with the Downtown Master Plan which  
includes creating an iconic skyline. Ms. Gondeck said their residents want  
to live close and can reduce the traffic and congestion in the City. She said  
projects like this makes the most fiscal and environmental sense.  
Diane Bridges, representative of Historic Neighborhoods Partnership,  
spoke in opposition to the project.  
Ms. Bridges said she represents  
elected leaders of over 20,000 people in the community and  
communicates with other groups and neighbors in the community of  
upwards to 150,000. She said they are passionate about the City and the  
surrounding natural beauty and believes the skyline is a shared community  
value.  
O’Neill Group and VeLa and the structural quality of what they do.  
said the issue is how tall the development is. Ms. Bridges said City  
Ms. Bridges said they support development and appreciate the  
She  
Council agreed to have stakeholder engagement about building heights in  
the downtown area and it has not occurred, and to approve it without robust  
stakeholder engagement is inappropriate. Ms. Bridges said it makes them  
feel like their voice doesn’t matter. She said there was a petition that  
naturally occurred with over 6,000 signatures saying to wait.  
Dutch Schultz, President of the Old North End Neighborhood spoke in  
opposition to the project. Mr. Schultz said the Old North End Board voted  
not to pick a position on this project but voted that the citizens of Colorado  
Springs have the right to vote on the height restrictions in the downtown  
area.  
He said the desired attributes that this project would bring the  
downtown can be achieved without going higher than the existing 250 feet.  
He said height has not been properly reviewed by the Planning Department  
stating the building would not be more than 50 feet higher than the Wells  
Fargo building, however in the presentation the building is 68 feet higher.  
Mr. Schultz said they need to wait for the public input and the application is  
premature.  
He said they already have Pikes Peak as their view, and they  
do not need something to look at.  
Tim Howels, Maverick Observer spoke in opposition to the project. Mr.  
Howels said they are going to start a new project called all the facts. He  
said they do not get all the facts from the bureaucrats. He asked what the  
specific rental fee per month for the apartments in the building. He said  
there is not fire comments and the building has to provide fire protection as  
they live the in second largest Wildland Urban Interface in the United  
States. He said there is no traffic plan. Mr. Howels said the facts will show  
projects that defers to developers at the expense of long-term tax income  
and taxpayers to fund what is going on.  
Greg Thorton, Parks Recreation and Cultural Services Advisory Board  
spoke in opposition to the project.  
Mr. Thorton said General Palmer  
envisioned creating a resort town promoting health and wellness in  
Colorado Springs and believed that people needed access to nature and  
parks for their physical, spiritual and mental health and that they have a  
view of Pikes Peak. Mr. Thorton said the mountain range was the reason  
to build a City here. He said there are many cities in the world have  
building height restrictions with attracting businesses and residents.  
Mr.  
Thorton said the board is deciding whether to alter the skyline of the City  
that Palmer and the residents love and a decision like this should be made  
by all the citizens. He said building height restrictions, preserve views,  
protect historical character, ensure safety and help the City manage  
growth.  
Lisa Bigelow concerned citizen spoke in opposition to the project.  
Ms.  
Bigelow requested a no vote or at minimum a postponement of the  
decision until all technical and other issues can be resolved. She said the  
City skyline and unique character will forever be changed and the citizens  
of Colorado Springs have been denied a voice on the issue. Ms. Bigelow  
said that street canyon effect will occur as other adjoining properties  
develop with taller buildings. She said as noted by the applicants from the  
examples of the models, that is what the City will look like and will forever  
change the unique character.  
Ms. Bigelow said this project is not  
affordable and it is disingenuous of the supporters to insist that 10% of the  
units that will be at 100% AMI is affordable. She said density does not  
equal vibrancy.  
Kat Gayle, Chief Legal Counsil, Integrity Matters, spoke in opposition of the  
project. Ms. Gayle said OneVeLa is the ultimate example of the hubris of  
the development community. She said over 6,000 people signed a petition  
to limit building heights in the last unrestricted square mile of Colorado  
Springs and more than 450 people wrote comments. Ms. Gayle said the  
citizens have spoke and they want a robust, friendly, western town that  
orients on America’s Mountain, Pikes Peak. She said while the residents  
of the apartment will have wonderful mountain views, they will block the  
views of the majority of the people downtown. She said there is a 34.7%  
vacancy rate, and it is significantly higher than what is expected in other  
major cities. Ms. Gayle said they are displacing  
inappropriate erection of a skyscraper downtown.  
residents for an  
She said this is a  
skyscraper and is 11 stories higher than the Wells Fargo Building. Ms.  
Gayle asked about glare for aviation traffic, bird strikes and glazing. She  
said there is a lawsuit against City Council for blighting the property. Ms.  
Gayle said the money for the project should be used for properties along  
Nevada and the Mill Street neighborhood where the Urban Renewal  
Authority was supposed to benefit.  
Dana Duggan, President of Integrity Matters, spoke in opposition to the  
project. Ms. Duggan said they strongly oppose the project as it ignores the  
will of the people and prioritizes developer profits over the long-term  
well-being of Colorado Springs.  
She said  
residents have spoken out  
about overdevelopment, blocked views and the misuse of taxpayer funds.  
Ms. Duggan said if the board approves OneVeLa it sends a clear  
message that public input does not matter. She said they do not want their  
voices ignored and OneVeLa will permanently alter the skyline, blocking  
the views of Pikes Peak. Ms. Duggan said the views are an economic and  
cultural aspect of the City. She said it is a prime downtown location and  
there is nothing blighted about it and the City should wait for the courts to  
decide on the issue. Ms. Duggan said they urge the board to listen to the  
citizens and reject OneVeLa.  
Board member Questions  
Chair Lord said he will be speaking in favor of moving forward with this  
project. Chair Lord said he has been in the community a long time and has  
spent a lot of time trying to figure out how to make a successful downtown  
both for appearance, recognizing the area and looking at the economic  
success of the community. Chair Lord said there was a great deal of  
feedback provided for people to react to the form-based code and the  
developer has very clearly brought forward a project that fully meets all the  
criteria. Chair Lord said it is their job to evaluate the project against the  
current criteria.  
Board Member Friesema said he agrees with Chair Lord that the project  
meets all requirements in the form-based code.  
The said the glazing  
requirements have been met and commercial space on the street level has  
been provided.  
Board member Friesema said he would have liked to see  
apartments on the frontage levels instead of a visible parking garage.  
Board member Friesema said he is on the board of the Hillside  
neighborhood, which is directly east of downtown and that his  
neighborhood has the most impact because they look through downtown to  
the mountains. Board member Friesema said he built a 3D model of the  
project and imported it into Google Earth and spent hours trying to identify  
how many houses in the neighborhood would have their view blocked.  
Board member Friesema said not a single house has their view of Pikes  
Peak blocked and does not see that anyone else can claim that their views  
from a residential standpoint are blocked.  
Board member Kuosman asked if staff could address what the Fire  
Departments role would be and the level of standard that is used for fire  
safety. Mr. Tefertiller said the Fire Department did review the development  
plan as they do all development plans in the City of Colorado Springs. Mr.  
Tefertiller said the comment in the staff report is that Fire did not have any  
concerns or required changes to the plan as submitted. He said one of the  
items they look at is access to the perimeter of the building. He said there  
will absolutely be significant life safety type requirements in the construction  
of this building which is determined and reviewed at the building permit  
level when it is submitted to Pikes Peak Regional Building.  
Board member Coats asked to have the technical items that are not  
completed addressed. Mr. Tefertiller said there are five broad categories  
of technical modifications that need to be resolved. He said the first couple  
are just notations and plan clarifications regarding PLDO and CDI fees and  
public space improvements, including ADA accessibility standards. Mr.  
Tefertiller said item 3 and 5 are civil items within storm-water and utilities  
issues regarding water, waste-water, gas and electric. He said he has  
coordinated with the reviewers from both those entities, and they are  
confident that the technical items can and will be resolved with staff. Mr.  
Tefertiller said should the Downtown Review Board and potentially City  
Council on appeal decide that the project should be approved,  
the  
technical reviewers are confident that those issues can be resolved  
working with staff and the applicants to make sure all standards for their  
issues are documented on the development plan as well. He said item 4 is  
planning related notating appropriate dimensions where necessary for  
public space improvements.  
Mr. Tefertiller said this project could be  
reviewed and approved administratively however in this case, they have  
referred the application to the Downtown Review Board. He said there  
should be some leeway granted to staff to continue to work on those  
technical modifications and clean the plan up before the final approval.  
Board member Kronstadt said he agrees and the question they are being  
asked to consider is does the development meet the intent of the  
form-based code and the answer is yes. Board Member Kronstadt said it  
is unfortunate that in the City there are only two options when it comes to  
development downtown and those are developments with significant public  
financing and pretty minimal public benefits or no development at all.  
Board member Kronstadt said the benefits for the community is a parking  
garage, however that was stated about the Wiener Apartments as part of  
their application for Urban Renewal and now that the building is  
constructed, there is nothing that indicates that it is a public parking  
garage. Board member Kronstadt said affordable housing in context of this  
project are 40 studio units that are 390 square feet and rent for over $1700  
a month and said he is not convinced that they could get much more than  
$1700 a month for 390 square foot unit downtown. He said the Urban  
Renewal website says any residential development of at least 10 units  
within the Urban Renewal zone will be required to include at least 10% of  
the units as affordable housing unless otherwise negotiated with the  
approval of the Colorado Springs Urban Renewal Authority.  
member Kronstadt said the affordable housing that is being promised  
does not meet the authorities definition of affordable housing. Board  
Board  
member Kronstadt said he is the President of the Mill Street Neighborhood  
Association, and they have been working to win meaningful community  
benefits through development. He said it is unfortunate as a City that they  
do not use the levers such as Urban Renewal and Land Use Review to win  
meaningful benefits from developers who are ultimately going to make a lot  
of money providing luxury amenities to people who can afford and not to  
people that cannot.  
Jeriah Walker, Executive Director of the Colorado Springs Urban Renewal  
Authority said the key metric in the statement is otherwise negotiated. Mr.  
Walker said when they look at any property, site or plan, they are not all the  
same and the biggest challenge is the cost of the land. He said they built in  
as much affordability into the project as possible and initially the plan did  
not have the obtainable housing piece on it. He said they have a standard  
of they would like to be met, but ultimately it depends on the board's vote of  
moving forward with that project. Mr. Walker said since House Bill 1348,  
the Urban Renewal law has changed dramatically and is no longer what the  
Urban Renewal Authority Board chooses on the project. He said they have  
to go to every single taxing entity through a very robust public process to  
get their buy-in on these projects.  
Board member Kronstadt asked if there has ever been an Urban  
Residential Development within an Urban Renewal Authority zone district  
that has provided 10% of units 80% AMI or below. Mr. Walker said yes, but  
it is getting ready to break down, it is Panorama Heights near Fountain and  
Academy, and they are working on another attainable project in the Nevada  
area to just behind the Police Operation Center. Board member Kronstadt  
said from a residents perspective, it feels like a lot of public financing is  
going to these projects and as citizens, they are not getting much from  
them. Board member Kronstadt said as a City they could be doing a lot  
more to get developers to contribute to the public good through these  
developments said he thinks the citizens believe that too.  
Board member Hensler said she does not disagree with Board member  
Kronstadt and wishes that there were more opportunities and funding and  
support for affordable housing. Board member Hensler said she is in favor  
of densification of the Downtown Urban core and the allowance of the  
height within the Central District. Board member Hensler said the framing  
and glazing really assists in bringing the scale down to the human and  
street element. Board member Hensler said she is the liaison from City  
Planning Commission to this board and has some familiarity with the  
Zoning Code and the UDC. She said the R-Flex High would allow up to 30  
units per acre for a project that is not in the form-base zone. It would take  
over 13 acres to build 400 units instead of just the 1.09 acres of the site.  
The densification has a lot of benefits.  
Board member Hensler said the  
concerns around height are concern for change and change is  
a
challenging, but we are all going to face it and it is hard a will take time to  
accept. She said it is the purview of this body to consider if the application  
meets the code and as the form-based zone is written it does. Board  
member Hensler said they are bound by the code as it is written and said it  
would be inappropriate for them to make decisions based on conjecture or  
possibility of a future vote.  
Board member Friesema said what concerns him about the building height  
is not this project, it is the fact that a metro area of three quarters of a  
million people does not have 20 buildings of this size already and is 100%  
in favor of the project.  
Motion by Board Member Friesema, seconded by Board Member Hensler, to  
approve the Form-Based Zone Development Plan for the ONE Vela Mixed Use  
Building based upon the findings that the application meets the applicable  
development standards and design guidelines as set forth in the Form-Based  
Code Sections 2 and 4 with the following technical modifications:  
a. Revise the plan to clarify PLDO and CDI fee issues are correctly  
implemented at time of plat and/or building permit.  
b. Revise the plan to meet all City requirements for public space  
improvements, including ADA related standards and notations regarding  
alley reconstruction.  
c. Address all utility related issues on the development plan and specifically  
the preliminary utility sheets to document full compliance with local utility  
standards.  
d. Revise the plan to resolve all Planning Staff issues relative to plan notes,  
building details, glazing compliance, parking figures, and others as  
described in the online review reports.  
e. Resolve all stormwater issues as described by SWENT reviewers in the  
online review reports. Know that additional updates to the project's drainage  
report and stormwater system are likely required, as is a variance for use of  
underground detention facilities.  
The motion passed by a vote of 8-0.  
8 -  
Aye:  
Board Member Nolette, Board Member Kuosman, Board Member Coats, Board  
Member Kronstadt, Board Member Hensler, Board Member Lord, Board  
Member Friesema and Board Member Luciano  
2 - Board Member Mikulas and Alternate Pence  
Absent:  
9. Presentations  
10. Adjourn