Regional Development

Center (Hearing Room)

2880 International Circle

City of Colorado Springs

Meeting Minutes - Final

Planning Commission

Wednesday, November 12, 2025

9:00 AM

2880 International Cir., 2nd Floor, Hearing Room

1. Call to Order and Roll Call

5 -

6 -

Present:

Absent:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements, Commissioner

Case and Commissioner Engel

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

2. Changes to Agenda/Postponements

3. Communications

Kenneth Casey - Planning Commission Chair

Kevin Walker - Planning Director

Kevin Walker said Commissioners can expect an email requesting a

meeting to check in with them.

Mr. Walker said the budget was recently adopted on first reading and there

are no changes proposed for second reading that will be heard at the end

of the month.

Mr. Walker welcomed the new members of the Commission.

Mr. Walker shared that City Council approved Peach Ranch Annexation

and Miller Downs Annexation and denied the appeal of Old Ranch Road

storage facility.

4. Approval of the Minutes

CPC 2716

4.A.

Minutes for the September 10, 2025, Planning Commission Meeting.

Presenter:

Kenneth Casey, City Planning Commission Chair

Attachments: CPC_Minutes_9.10.25 Draft

CPC 2719

4.B.

Minutes for the October 8, 2025, City Planning Commission meeting.

Presenter:

Kenneth Casey, City Planning Commission Chair

Attachments: CPC_Minutes_10.8.25 Draft

5. Consent Calendar

Motion by Commissioner Hensler, seconded by Commissioner Clements,

to approve the Consent Calendar.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0-0-6.

5 -

Aye:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements, Commissioner

Case and Commissioner Engel

6 -

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

Christian Brothers Automotive

5.A.

CUDP-25-00 A Conditional Use to allow automobile and light vehicle repair, minor

in the MX-M (Mixed-Use Medium Scale) zone district, consisting of

1.18 acres located at 2080 Southgate Road.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Located in Council District 3

Presenter:

Matthew Ambuul, Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Letter of Intent - Christian Brothers Automotive

Attachment 2 - CBA Services Offered

Attachment 3 - Site Plan

Attachment 4 - Project Statement

Attachment 5 - Land Use Statement

Automotive Presentation

7.5.601 CONDITIONAL USE

2826 Beacon Street - Lot Size Non-Use Variance

5.B.

NVAR-25-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.2.205.B and 7.4.201.A

to allow for subdivision of a lot with a minimum lot size of 4,375

square feet where 5,000 square feet is required in the R-2: Two

Family zone district. This site is currently 9,375 square feet in size

and is located at 2826 Beacon Street.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Located in Council District 5

Presenter:

Ethan Shafer, Urban Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report for NVAR-25-0004

Attachment 1 - Public Comment (Amanda Demarco)

Attachment 2 - Response to Public Comment

Attachment 3 - Proposed Plan

Attachment 4 - Project Statement

7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

Staff Presentation for 2826 Beacon St (NVAR-25-0004)_ES

Dorado Transport - Zoning Map Amendment

5.C.

ZONE-25-00 An Ordinance to amend the zoning map of the City of Colorado

Springs pertaining to approximately 7.03 acres located at 3875

Aerospace Boulevard from BP/cr/AP-O/SS-O (Business Park with

Conditions of Record, Airport and Streamside Overlays) to

BP/cr/AP-O/SS-O (Business Park with Conditions of Record, Airport

and Streamside Overlays). (1st Reading and setting the public

hearing date for January 13, 2025.)

(Quasi-Judicial)

Related Files: ZONE-25-0005

Council District 4

Presenter:

Ethan Shafer, Urban Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

(Quasi-Judicial)

Located in Council District 4

Presenter:

Ethan Shafer, Urban Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report for CUDP-25-0005

Attachment 1 - Project Statement

Attachment 2 - Land Use Statement

7.5.601 CONDITIONAL USE

Staff Presentation for 1590 N Newport Rd - Conditional Use

(CUDP-25-0005)_ES

Franklin Residence Addition

5.F.

NVAR-25-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Sections 7.2.204.B & 7.4.201.A to

allow for a 10 foot and 6 inch Corner Lot - Side Street setback where

15 feet is usually required in the R-1 6: Single-Family Medium zone

district. This property is 4,165 square feet in size and is located at

1916 North Franklin Street.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Located in Council District 5

Presenter:

Ethan Shafer, Urban Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: 7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

5.G.

NVAR-25-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Sections 7.2.204.B & 7.4.201.A to

allow for a 5 foot and 7 inch Front Yard setback where 15 feet is

usually required in the R-1 6: Single-Family Medium zone district.

This property is 4,165 square feet in size and is located at 1916

North Franklin Street.

(Quasi-Judicial)

Located in Council District 5

Presenter:

Ethan Shafer, Urban Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report for NVAR-25-0009 & NVAR-25-0017

Attachment 1 - Site Plan & Elevations

Attachment 2 - Project Statement

Attachment 3 - Renderings

Staff Presentation for Franklin Residence Nonuse Variances

(NVAR-25-0009 & NVAR-25-0017)_ES

7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

6. Items Called Off Consent Calendar

7. Unfinished Business

8. New Business

4880 Airport Road Rezone

8.A.

ZONE-24-00 An Ordinance to amend the zoning map of the City of Colorado

Springs pertaining to approximately 2.17 acres located at 4880

Airport Road from R1-6/AP-O (Single Family - Medium with Airport

Overlay) to R-5/AP-O (Multi-Family - High with Airport Overlay) (1st

Reading only to set the public hearing date for January 13, 2025)

(Quasi-Judicial)

Related Files: ZONE-24-0020

Located in Council District 4

Presenter:

Chris Sullivan, Senior Planner, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Zone Ord_ZONE_24-0020

Staff Report - ZONE-24-0020

Attachment 1_Project Statement

Attachment 2_Land Use Statement

Attachment 3_Rezone Exhibit A_B

Attachment 4_Public Comment Response

7.5.704 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING)

Staff PP - ZONE-24-0020

CPC Minutes Excerpt - 4880 Airport Rd Rezone - 11.12.2025

Chris Sullivan, Senior Planner, presented the application for the currently

vacant site to rezone the property from single-family residential detached

with a 6,000 sq. ft. minimum lot size with an Airport Overlay to multi-family

high, that allows a maximum density up to 25 dwelling units per acre.

Dimensional standards include a 20-foot front setback, 5-foot side

setback, 15-foot rear setback, and a maximum building height of 50 feet.

The surrounding zoning includes R-1-6 to the south, west, and north, and

R-5 to the east. Nearby uses include detached single-family homes,

potential ancillary commercial uses, and a religious institution. He said as a

condition for approval they have to dedicate approximately 20 feet of

right-of-way along Airport Road to the City. Standard notice was made;

approximately 10 comments were received through all the reviews about

quality of life, potential intensity, traffic and losing the open space. Agency

review was made and comments were if CDI fees will be applicable. The

application is compliant with PlanCOS and meets the review criteria for the

zone change.

Applicant’s Presentation

Ann Odom, NES, representing the applicant, presented the application for

this rezoning. She said the zone change criteria require alignment with

PlanCOS, assurance that the change will not negatively impact public

health, safety, or welfare, and that the location is appropriate for the

proposed zoning. She said a land use statement is permitted for smaller

rezoning requests, typically under 10 acres, where there is an established

development pattern and no major infrastructure needs. Ms. Odom said

during the boundary survey, it was discovered that a 20-foot strip on the

southern portion of the parcel had not been formally dedicated to the city for

Airport Road widening, and the property owner has agreed to that

condition of approval. Ms. Odom said the rezoning aligns with surrounding

development patterns, highlighting nearby multifamily and commercial

uses, particularly along Airport Road, where single-family detached homes

are less compatible with the high-traffic, four-lane arterial.

Ms. Odom said their request is for a maximum density of 25 units per acre

resulting in 50 units, given the size of the lot. She said specific

development plans are not yet under review, but any proposal will be

subject to the Unified Development Code (UDC), which includes standards

for land-use transitions, buffers, parking, height, and water quality, and if

future development raises concerns about traffic impacts, additional traffic

analysis will be required. She said the project aligns with the “Vibrant

Neighborhoods” and “Thriving Economy” frameworks of PlanCOS.

Public Comments

Tao Thai, resident of a Buddhist Temple in the area, spoke in opposition.

He said the road is very narrow and it is very difficult for traffic to go in or

out of that street. He said he would prefer to see a park. Mr. Thai said

people do not pick up after their dogs and this would worsen with that many

people coming in the area. He said in the temple they practice meditation,

and more people mean more noise that would affect their meditation.

Barbara Overgaard, Sand Creek Commons resident of 20 years, said she

agrees with the previous speaker. She said there are also significant traffic

and safety concerns, Karr Road being the only exit for the nearby 487-unit

condo complex and surrounding homes, which already experiences

congestion during peak hours. She said the presence of other R-5 zones

nearby does not justify introducing another high-density development in an

area originally intended for lower-density living. Ms. Overgaard said there

is an opposing contrast between the proposed multifamily housing and the

existing character of the neighborhood, which includes open space, a

nearby ranch with horses, and proximity to Sand Creek.

Applicant’s Rebuttal

Ms. Odom said they hear and understand the concerns raised by

neighboring residents. She said, given the surrounding development and

the classification of Airport Road as a principal arterial, the current R-1-6

zoning may no longer be appropriate for the area. She said the rezoning

process requires a broader perspective, as specific development details,

such as access points and site impacts, are not yet available, but will be

thoroughly evaluated during a future development application phase, where

more detailed analysis and scrutiny will occur.

Commissioners’ Questions

Vice Chair Hensler asked what some of the future impacts of the

development are and if they are aware of any surrounding parcels that

would be interested in increasing density. Ms. Odom said the Unified

Development Code (UDC) includes protections to address compatibility

between differing land uses, such as buffering and screening requirements.

She said future development will also involve a public notice process,

giving neighbors another opportunity to provide input and potentially

influence the design. She said no development application is currently

under review, allowing time to consider community concerns and

incorporate them into future planning. Ms. Odom said regarding nearby

properties, she is not aware of any current redevelopment plans for the

larger, rural-style lots surrounding the site; however, a nearby business and

commercial park to the east is expanding north and west, and high-intensity

multifamily development is occurring just north of Karr Road, indicating

broader redevelopment activity in the area.

Alternate Commissioner Engel asked if there was any anticipation of

increased traffic on Airport Road that would challenge the development.

Ms. Odom said that traffic impacts from a potential 50-unit development on

the site would need to be closely analyzed if a formal proposal is

submitted. She said that while no current traffic issues are known, any

future development would be subject to traffic impact analysis. She said the

ongoing construction of a nearby interchange is expected to improve

overall mobility in the area.

Chair Casey asked why they chose R-5 versus a less dense option. Ms.

Odom said the R-5 zoning directly east of the site, along with nearby

nonconforming R-1-6 single-family properties, supports the proposed

rezoning as a logical transition. She said there are no plans to redevelop or

alter existing single-family residences in the area and given the site's

limited size of approximately 2 acres, the potential development intensity is

relatively modest. Ms. Odom said the R-5 zoning aligns with existing

development patterns with another R-5 district within 500 feet to the west.

Chair Casey asked the applicant to elaborate on that around criteria

number four, since this would be proposing 25 units instead of the current 9

and the height would be 50 feet instead of 35. Ms. Odom said the when the

R-5 zones to the east and west were established, they had similar 50-foot

height limits but no density caps, so developers at the time assessed what

was appropriate for the area, which guided the resulting development.

Ms. Odom said even on larger, less constrained sites, developers rarely

reach the maximum density due to factors like construction costs, parking

requirements, and the need for on-site water quality infrastructure, as well

as its own stormwater management. She said the current proposal

includes a 25-dwelling unit per acre cap, providing a clear upper limit of

approximately 50 units on the site, which gives certainty to the

neighborhood about the scale of future development.

Chair Casey said he thinks choosing zoning with the most density area has

a significant impact, even with the constraints of the construction

requirements. Ms. Odom said the current zoning is not very practical, as

there are not many R1-6 developments happening throughout the city and

the property owner saw no future in developing the property as such, and

instead considered surrounding areas. Mr. Sullivan said the surrounding

R-5 areas were not originally zoned like, but rezoned into R-5, and the

current proposal for a multifamily could have been proposed by any of

those other R-5 parcels. He said there is a multifamily proposed northeast

of the site and commercial development nearby and traffic studies were

made already considering those developments.

Chair Casey said, according to the UDC, this is intended to be used in

areas adjacent to specific zones, with similar or higher densities or

intensities, and he understands surrounding properties might be R-5, but

the adjacent ones do not have that high density. Mr. Sullivan said they could

have gone denser based on the code at that time. He said that building and

landscape parameters and codes should be taken into consideration for

the final design of the development. Chair Casey asked if that would be

approved administratively. Mr. Sullivan said that is correct.

Chai Casey asked why the applicant considers R1-5 and R1-6 is

inappropriate for the area. Ms. Odom said much of the surrounding

development likely occurred before Airport Road was widened into a

principal arterial and before South Powers Boulevard experienced

significant traffic growth. She said this part of Colorado Springs is evolving,

with increasing industrial presence and ongoing change. She said the

proposed rezoning represents a relatively small infill project, which she

believes will have limited impact on the surrounding neighborhood.

Vice Chair Hensler said she is concerned about approving a zoning

change without a corresponding development plan, and while she is not

opposed to the R-5 designation she is uneasy about deciding without

clarity on the site’s future use and potential impacts, and just assuming that

appropriate decisions will be made later in the process. Ms. Odom said

the land use statement was introduced in the UDC to support smaller

projects where development intensity can be reasonably anticipated. She

said the concerns that 25 dwelling units per acre may seem high for the

site, but the process is being approached step by step, with community

feedback helping to shape future development. She said it is unlikely the

subject site would reach the maximum 25 units per acre, given its smaller

size and construction limitations.

Chair Casey said he will not be in support of the application as he

considers it does not meet criteria number four.

Alternate Commissioner Engel said there are too many unknowns of traffic

impact and to other properties.

Alternate Commissioner Case said he will be in support of the application

as it meets adjacent properties zoning, and it is also subject to the criteria

in future development plans.

A motion was made by Commissioner Engel, seconded by

Commissioner Clements, to recommend denial to City Council of the

zone change of 2.17 acres from R1-6/AP-O (Single Family – Medium

with Airport Overlay) to R-5/AP-O (Multi-Family – High with Airport

Overlay) based upon the findings that the request does not comply

with the criteria for a Zoning Map Amendment as set forth in City

Unified Development Code Section 7.5.704.

The motion passed by a vote of 3-2-0-6.

3 - Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements and Commissioner Engel

2 - Vice Chair Hensler and Commissioner Case

Aye:

No:

6 -

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

Colorado Springs Recovery Center

DEPN-25-00 The Colorado Springs Recovery Center Development Plan Major

Modification establishing a Human Service Establishment, Large

consisting of 3.11 acres located at 1855 Aeroplaza Drive.

Located in Council District 4

Presenter:

Austin Cooper, Senior Planner, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Project Statement

Attachment 2 - Public Comments

Attachment 3 - Response to Public Comments

Attachment 4 - Development Plan

Presentation

7.5.516 MODIFICATION OF APPROVED APPLICATIONS

Austin Cooper, Senior Planner, presented the application for the recovery

center located in a 3.1 acres site. The proposed use under consideration is

for a Human Services facility, specifically a drug and alcohol treatment

center, a use permitted by right within the annexed and mixed-use

medium-scale zoning district, which also falls under the airport overlay. The

application is being reviewed as a development plan major modification.

Standard public notice was issued; 42 public comments were received

with concerns raised primarily on resident safety, proximity to schools and

Panorama Park, and alignment with the Southeast Strong Neighborhood

Plan draft. Agency review was made, and comments have been

addressed. Mr. Cooper said although a representative from the Colorado

Springs Police Department (CSPD) could not attend, a 2016 study from

the Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs was provided. The study,

based in Baltimore, found that violent crime rates near treatment facilities

were significantly lower than those near liquor and convenience stores. The

application is compliant and meets the review criteria.

Applicant’s presentation

Christopher Foster, CEO of Aspen BHC, presented the project and

introduced the team, Anthony Angerillo and Robert Wolf. He said this is a

request for a change of use for the property at 1855 Aeroplaza, seeking to

convert the existing commercial hotel/motel into a Human Services Large

facility, specifically a drug and alcohol treatment center. He said the

property spans approximately 3.1 acres and includes a

73,500-square-foot, four-story building, and no structural changes are

planned, as the facility will utilize the existing layout. Mr. Foster said the

proposed facility will be organized as follows: the first floor will serve

administrative functions and include a dining room, kitchen, large lobby,

conference room for multipurpose activities, and an existing pool area; the

second through fourth floors will house resident rooms, clinical offices,

lounges, community rooms, and fitness centers. He said everything was

done considering the safety component.

Mr. Foster, said Aspen BHC is the parent company of the future Colorado

Springs Recovery Center, which is a smaller national brand with three

existing facilities located in Virginia, Indiana, and Massachusetts, all are

accredited by the Joint Commission and regulated by SAMHSA, the DEA,

and respective state agencies. He said that Aspen BHC supplies the

infrastructure, resources, and management for the local facility, which will

be led by Anthony, the regional executive director. Mr. Foster said the

organizational chart places Anthony at the top, followed by a structured

leadership team including a clinical director, medical director, HR director,

director of operations, director of outreach, and director of nursing, each

with their own teams. He said staffing levels will increase with census

growth, and the project is expected to generate significant employment

opportunities in the area.

Mr. Foster said the facility’s classification is under the Human Services

Large category, that qualifies as a residential dwelling facility where

individuals live together under care, treatment and supervision. He said this

will be a drug and alcohol treatment center which is a protected

classification under the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988,

and the designation of “large” applies due to the facility housing more than

16 residents.

Mr. Foster mentioned the criteria for establishing a Human Services facility

within the designated zoning district and said that the proposed use meets

all applicable requirements. He said there are no other detox centers or

assisted living establishments within 1,000 feet of the site, making

separation standards non-applicable. He said the development plan

submitted to the Planning Department reflects full compliance with the

district’s standards. He said the project represents a $350,000 investment

focused on site enhancements, including irrigation, fencing, landscaping,

and the creation of active outdoor spaces. He said while no structural

changes will be made to the building itself, the landscaping and any

signage will be designed to align with the character of the surrounding

neighborhood.

Mr. Foster said the organization’s commitment is to maintain a safe,

therapeutic, and visually appealing environment for both clients and staff.

He said they are confident that the facility would become one of the most

attractive properties in the area. He said any signage would be minimal

and tasteful, possibly limited to a bulletin board, to preserve the therapeutic

atmosphere. Mr. Foster said security and neighborhood compatibility are

important.

Mr. Foster said the landscaping plan for the proposed facility highlights key

features and improvements, like the fencing that will begin on the west side

of the property and wrap around to the southeast side of the building. He

said discussions have been initiated with the Colorado Springs Police

Department regarding site safety, and the team remains open and willing

to implement any additional recommendations. Mr. Foster said the site

includes newly designed active green space, though the detention pond

area will remain unused due to restrictions, and additional outdoor

amenities include a wraparound porch and designated outdoor seating

areas. He said the building’s structure will remain unchanged, with only

minor interior modifications planned. He said the existing pool area will not

be used until a final plan is determined, though it may serve as a space for

out-patient programs, separate from residential areas.

Mr. Foster said the project is compliant with various sections of the Unified

Development Code (UDC). He said they coordinated with SWENT and the

City Engineer to review existing infrastructure such as curbs, gutters,

sidewalks, ramps, crosswalks, and drive aprons. He said all necessary

upgrades will be completed and signed off by the City prior to the issuance

of a certificate of occupancy. He said security measures include the

installation of cameras and a fully integrated security system. Mr. Foster

said outdoor activity and recreation areas have been labeled in the plans

and said all major utilities and systems will be replaced before occupancy,

as well as the flood damage from a recent event will be repaired to meet

current operational standards. He said interior upgrades include replacing

all flooring with more suitable materials, installing a master key system

coordinated with local fire and police departments, and repurposing the

dining area by removing the bar and beverage equipment. Mr. Foster said

this space will be converted into a hot and cold food serving line. He said

the lobby will be remodeled to enhance privacy, and general interior

updates such as painting, wallpaper, and branding will reflect local culture

and align with the Southeast Colorado Strong Plan and Colorado culture.

Mr. Foster said several local contractors from Southeast Colorado Springs

were invited to bid on the project, and the team is actively reviewing

proposals with a preference for hiring local firms. He said the project meets

all major modification standards, particularly the requirement that the

proposed use does not create a greater adverse impact on surrounding

properties than the current permitted use. Mr. Foster said the Colorado

Springs Recovery Center will have fewer negative effects and more

long-term benefits than the existing hotel use. He said the facility will

introduce structured operations, professional oversight, and continuous

supervision, which will reduce transient activity and traffic impacts typically

associated with hotels. Mr. Foster said the project aligns with the

Southeast Strong Plan by promoting responsible redevelopment,

expanding access to services, creating sustainable employment, and

contributing to a safer, healthier community; not only avoiding harm to the

neighborhood but actively enhancing community safety and stability.

Mr. Foster said the team began exploring the property in February 2025,

executed a letter of intent in March, and initiated development planning

shortly thereafter. He said community outreach began following the

pre-application meeting, including partnerships with local agencies. He

said Mr. Angerillo was hired to lead community engagement and facility

planning. He said a neighborhood meeting was held, and a consolidated

response, as well as a personalized one, were sent to all public

commenters. Mr. Foster said in his 10 years as an executive position, he

has never received a complaint about a patient in any aspect.

Anthony Angerillo, Regional Executive Director, said the proposed

Colorado Springs Recovery Center aligns with both the City’s PlanCOS

and the Southeast Strong initiative. He said the facility supports PlanCOS

Goal TE-1 by contributing to a thriving economy through the creation of

medium- and high-wage jobs, meeting workforce and business

development needs in underserved areas, particularly those with limited

access to employment opportunities. He said the revitalization of the

underutilized site at Aeroplaza Drive will generate tax revenue to support

infrastructure, parks, and community facilities.

Mr. Angerillo said the facility supports the Southeast Strong initiative as

they will be expanding access to mental health and addiction treatment

services, aligning with Well-Being Goal H-5, which calls for affordable

healthcare access, including Medicaid-accepting clinics. He said the

center will provide Medicaid-contracted behavioral health services directly

in Southeast Colorado Springs. He said the project also supports job

creation under Goal E-4 by generating an estimated 75 to 100 new jobs,

between clinical, administrative, and support roles. He said the facility will

also offer educational opportunities through internship programs in

partnership with local institutions, helping residents expand their skills and

employment prospects. Mr. Angerillo said they are committed to supporting

local nonprofits through volunteer work, collaboration, and financial

contributions.

Mr. Angerillo said the proposed program also addresses key findings from

the 2023 El Paso County Community Health Assessment, which identified

a shortage of healthcare providers and high rates of untreated conditions.

He said since relocating to Southeast Colorado Springs, he has actively

engaged with residents and community partners to explore collaborative

opportunities that best serve the area. Mr. Angerillo said he has connected

with several organizations and individuals, has participated in numerous

community events and initiatives, and has also attended multiple City

Council and Planning Commission meetings to better understand how local

government functions and supports community needs. He said the

Southeast community meeting held in August helped clarify misinformation

and misunderstandings about the facility’s purpose and operations.

Mr. Angerillo said some frequently asked questions were about the nature

of the facility and the services it will provide. He said the facility is classified

as a Human Services Large establishment, that will offer multiple levels of

care based on the American Society of Addiction Medicine (ASAM)

criteria, which include Level 3.1, a clinically managed low-intensity

residential program with approximately 86 beds, and mental health

transitional living programs (Levels 1 and 2) with around 44 beds. He said

residential stays will typically range from three to six months, though longer

durations may be accommodated based on individual needs. Mr. Angerillo

said by late 2026, the facility plans to expand into outpatient services,

including partial hospitalization (Level 2.5), intensive outpatient (Level 2.1),

and general outpatient services.

Mr. Angerillo said safety is a top priority across all facilities operated by the

organization, and the center will be subject to oversight by the Colorado

Behavioral Health Administration, Medicaid, and CARF (Commission on

Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities). He said the facility will be staffed

24/7 with a high staff-to-client ratio, and all employees, regardless of prior

experience, will undergo a comprehensive orientation that includes safety

training. He said Colorado Springs Police Department (CSPD) has offered

to provide additional safety training for staff if needed.

Mr. Angerillo said a thorough screening process will be in place for all

incoming clients, including public records checks; individuals with violent

criminal histories or who are registered sex offenders will not be admitted.

He said the facility will feature delayed-exit alarm systems on doors (15-20

seconds delay) to allow staff time to intervene if a client attempts to leave, if

a client does choose to leave, safe transportation will be provided to their

destination.

Mr. Angerillo said additional safety measures include security cameras

inside and outside the building, perimeter fencing, and security personnel

as needed. He said the facility will maintain ongoing collaboration with local

law enforcement and community stakeholders. He said CSPD also

confirmed they routinely conduct welfare checks at similar facilities in

Southeast Colorado Springs and is willing to do the same for their clients.

Mr. Angerillo said clients entering the program will have already completed

30 to 45 days of prior treatment, ensuring they are stabilized before

admission.

Mr. Angerillo said the facility will be a treatment facility for individuals

struggling with addiction, with a primary focus on the Medicaid population,

it will not be a homeless shelter. He said individuals who are both

unhoused and experiencing addiction or mental health challenges will be

eligible for services. He said the primary service area will be Southeast

Colorado Springs, where research indicates that approximately 50% of

residents are Medicaid recipients. Mr. Angerillo said similar treatment

centers operate safely near schools and parks throughout Colorado

Springs and the state, without incidents involving nearby residents.

Mr. Angerillo said regular community meetings will be held, open to all for

feedback and questions. He said as a resident of Southeast Colorado

Springs himself he is committed to making his phone number and email

publicly available so that community members can reach him directly with

any concerns. He said Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser shared a

story at an event in early October about a man residing in Colorado

Springs, whose wife, a successful professional, became addicted to

opioids following an injury, which led to the loss of her career, family, and

ultimately her life; the man also lost his eldest son to an overdose. Mr.

Angerillo said this story underscores the urgency of expanding addiction

and mental health treatment services and expressed alignment with the

Attorney General’s commitment to addressing the opioid crisis in

Colorado.

Staff Comment

Trevor Gloss, City Attorney’s Office, said the federal Fair Housing Act and

its Colorado counterpart prohibit discrimination based on disability. He

said, under the law, addiction is recognized as a disability, as such, the

nature of the facility as a treatment center for individuals with addiction,

cannot be used as a basis for opposition or denial. Mr. Gloss said zoning

and land use decisions must be based on standard residential criteria, how

one would evaluate a hotel or apartment building. He said the specific

population being served or the type of services provided cannot be

considered in determining the facility’s appropriateness under fair housing

laws.

Public Comments

Derrek Villagran, spoke in favor of the application, said he is now serving

as a peer coach, but he once was the very person the proposed facility

aims to help, someone caught in the cycle of substance use, anger,

depression and survival, causing harm to himself and his community. Mr.

Villagran said it is of high importance to have a recovery center located in

Southeast Colorado Springs, a community that has been deeply affected

by substance abuse, mental health challenges, and a lack of accessible

resources. He said many residents want help but do not know where to

turn, and too many families are suffering in silence. He said the facility

would be a place of hope, structure, and second chances; along with

therapy and clinical services, the center would offer peer support, job

readiness programs, mentorship, and a sense of community. Mr. Villagran

said recovery is possible, using his own life as proof, and now he is proud

to be part of the solution by helping others take their first steps toward

change. He asked support for the recovery center, not just as a building, but

as a beacon of hope for Southeast Colorado Springs.

Robert Struckus, CPFS QBHA, said he is a person in long-term recovery

from substance use disorder. He said the need for the proposed facility is

critical to the Southeast Colorado Springs community, where he both lives

and works. He said he has seen the harm that substance use has caused

in the area and said a facility like this would bring far more positive change

than negative. Mr. Struckus said he had previously used the same place

when it operated as a hotel, for illegal activities. He said the building’s

conversion into a recovery center will serve a much greater and more

constructive purpose for the community.

Zachariah Garcia, Colorado Peer Family Specialist (CPFS) and Qualified

Behavioral Health Assistant (QBHA) with HopeCOS, said he started

working by supporting individuals experiencing homelessness through

warming shelters and has since expanded to include life skills

programming. He said facilities like the proposed recovery center are of

significant help when addressing the gaps in care for people struggling with

addiction and homelessness. Mr. Garcia said he was released from prison

just 21 months ago and credited his transformation to the support he

received in a sober living facility. He said being given an opportunity, a

place to stay, access to services, and someone to talk to, was the turning

point in his life. He said he believes that many people in similar situations

are simply missing that one chance to change. Mr. Garcia said recovery

centers provide more than treatment; they offer stability, dignity, and a path

forward. He said the proposed facility is a vital resource for the community,

one that can help bridge the gap for individuals who are ready to change

but lack the support to do so. He said even if the center helps just one

person, it will be worth it, because he is living proof that recovery is

possible when people are given the opportunity.

Mitchell Newman said he is a person in recovery and spoke about the

stigma surrounding addiction, and that it usually has negative associations

in society. He said he is concerned about recent media coverage of the

proposed recovery center focusing more on neighborhood fears than on

the center’s mission. Mr. Newman said the facility’s purpose is not only to

help people recover but also to dismantle the stigma that prevents

individuals from seeking help. He said the goal is to create a treatment

center that people feel proud to attend, free from judgment and shame. He

said the community concerns about crime are often rooted in harmful

stereotypes that equate addiction with criminality. Mr. Newman said the

facility will reduce crime by providing real treatment, not just housing or

court-mandated stays, but voluntary, self-directed recovery. He envisioned

the center as a hub for positive community engagement, including cleanup

programs, food pantries, and other services run by staff and patients alike.

He asked the community to see people in recovery as “normal people” who

are capable of change.

Tommy Coughlin, part of the ownership group of the Holiday Inn Express

located directly adjacent to the proposed recovery center, spoke in support

of the project. He said, as the closest neighboring property, his team had

carefully evaluated whether the facility would have any adverse impact, and

they concluded it would not. He said key factors that addressed their initial

concerns include the installation of controlled exit fencing and the facility’s

coordination with the Colorado Springs Police Department. He said there

is a high level of regulation and oversight that the facility would be subject

to, including random and regular inspections. He said another important

consideration was the stage at which clients enter the program, as they will

have already completed 34 to 40 days of recovery and will be voluntarily

seeking treatment, distinguishing this from court-mandated placements. He

said based on these assurances, his team views the proposed use as

comparable to any other medical or quasi-medical facility and therefore

supports the request.

Sara Potter, on behalf of the Non-Profit sector in Colorado Springs, said

there is an urgent need for expanded addiction and mental health services.

She said there was a recent appeal by the mayor for $950,000 to support

additional beds at Springs Rescue Mission; however, the mission does not

provide mental health or addiction treatment, meaning many individuals in

crisis will not benefit from that funding. Ms. Potter cited the 2025

Point-in-Time Count and said there is a dramatic increase in the unhoused

population, from 1,250 to 1,750 individuals; of those, 44% were identified

as experiencing homelessness due to addiction or mental health issues,

based on vulnerability assessments. Ms. Potter said there are successful

local programs like Homeward Pikes Peak and The Place’s Launch Pad,

which offer wraparound services and have demonstrated positive

outcomes. She said she believes that Aspen’s proposed recovery center

would provide similar safety, stability, and support, contributing to long-term

recovery success. She said she understands the concerns of neighboring

residents, however, there is no statistical evidence linking facilities like this

to increased crime or negative community impacts.

Chris Kilcullen, commercial real estate broker and member of the

community, said he lives near a rehabilitation facility and has had only

positive experiences with it. He said as the listing broker for the hotel

property in question, he explained that if the proposed recovery center is

not approved, the hotel will likely return to the market and would likely be

down-branded to an economy or extended-stay hotel. He said this shift

could attract weekly or monthly tenants and further erode the area’s

stability. Mr. Kilcullen said, from personal experience being sober for nine

years, this could be the “missing link”, because one of the biggest gaps in

the system is the lack of transitional support after 30-day treatment

programs. He said the proposed facility would provide individuals with a

longer runway toward lasting sobriety and success.

Renee Gonzalez, resident of Southeast Colorado Springs, spoke in

opposition. She said her opposition is not to recovery services themselves,

but to the location of the facility, which she believes is incompatible with the

community’s vision, land use, and the Southeast Strong Community Plan.

She said the proposed site is within walking distance of Panorama Middle

School, Bicker Elementary School, and Panorama Park, a

multi-million-dollar public investment that serves as a central gathering

space for families and children. Ms. Gonzalez said placing an adult

treatment facility so close to these community assets undermines years of

work to create a safe, family-centered environment. She said the Southeast

Strong Plan calls for investments that promote youth development, family

safety, and business vitality, and the proposed facility does not align with

these goals and could disrupt nearby businesses, discourage future

development, and strain the local economy. Ms. Gonzalez said the facility’s

financial model relies heavily on government funding sources such as

Medicaid and Medicare. She said the recent government shutdown is a

reminder of the instability of such funding and the project might not be

sustainable. She asked the decision-makers to respect the community’s

vision and investments, and to vote against the proposal. She said

Southeast residents deserve development that enhances safety, supports

families, and strengthens the local economy, goals she believes this project

does not fulfill.

Joyce Salazar, Executive Director of RISE Southeast, Mr. Salazar, said

RISE is a community-based nonprofit focused on resident-led change in

Southeast Colorado Springs. She said her opposition is not to recovery

services themselves, but to the lack of data and compatibility surrounding

this proposal and the location. She said the applicant’s recent community

response letter made several claims, such as no impact on property

values, no safety risks near schools and parks, the residents being

clinically stable, and alignment with the Southeast Strong Plan and

PlanCOS, but did not provide independent citations or verifiable data. Ms.

Salazar asked the Planning Commission to require the applicant to submit

evidence from other Aspen BHC facilities across the U.S., including police

call records, code enforcement data, and property value trends within a

half-mile radius of each site. She also asked for peer-reviewed research to

support the applicant’s claims and said a site-specific impact analysis

should be conducted. Ms. Salazar said Aeroplaza Drive is not an abstract

corridor but a lived community space adjacent to Panorama Park,

Panorama Middle School, and Bicker Elementary School, and converting a

130-bed hotel into an institutional treatment facility in the heart of a

youth-focused area contradicts both the Southeast Strong Plan and

PlanCOS, which prioritize family safety, youth opportunity, and economic

vitality. She said if the applicant truly believes the project will benefit the

community, transparency should not be a burden. She said a decision

should not be made until all this information is presented.

Jennaya Colons, founder and Executive Director of High Roots Wellness

and Consulting, where they work to align health initiatives with data,

research, resources and community voice. She said she has a background

as a Certified Health Education Specialist and Chair of the Navigating

Barriers to Accessing Healthcare committee within El Paso County Public

Health. She said the applicant referenced the El Paso County Community

Health Assessment; however, they failed to connect it to the Community

Health Improvement Plan (CHIP), which is guided by the Healthy

Community Collaborative, a partnership between the county and the city.

She said this omission was significant, because two of the CHIP’s top

priorities are suicide prevention and drug overdose. Ms. Colons said she

lost close family members to alcoholism, witnessing the ongoing struggles

of a loved one with mental illness and homelessness. She said there is a

need to take a broader public health view, especially in Southeast

Colorado Springs, where community resources have been diminished,

such as the closure of the local Safeway and the loss of a community

center. She said there are 30 community centers in Denver, whereas

Colorado Springs has two. She said upstream investments, like community

centers and preventative services, are essential to addressing the root

causes of addiction. She said recovery services are important, but also

looking at the location, especially given the lack of community trust and the

perception that the applicant may not be fully invested in the local context.

Brittny McDonald, resident of Southeast Colorado Springs and graduate of

Sierra High School, said she is not opposed to addiction treatment, but to

its location and potential impact on a community that has worked hard to

improve its image and resources. She said there is a visible rise in

addiction and homelessness, particularly along the Sand Creek Trail, and

recognized the need for recovery services; however, Southeast Colorado

Springs has already lost key resources, such as its local Safeway grocery

store, and questioned whether the area has the infrastructure to support a

facility of this nature without further strain. Ms. McDonald said the facility

relies on government funding, such as Medicaid and Medicare, and,

considering recent government shutdowns, she wondered what would

happen to the facility and its clients if funding were disrupted. She said she

supports addiction recovery, but she would feel more comfortable with the

proposal if a formal study were conducted to assess its full impact on the

community. She said more evidence is needed about the facility benefiting

the neighborhood rather than reinforcing negative perceptions of Southeast

Colorado Springs.

Pastor Anthony Grier, True Spirit Baptist Church, said he is in opposition to

the placement of the proposed Colorado Springs Recovery Center, while

affirming his support for helping individuals struggling with addiction and

mental health challenges. He said the facility’s location is incompatible with

the surrounding residential and community environment, where residents

have worked hard to build safe, family-oriented communities, with schools,

churches, and businesses. He said he has had encounters with individuals

experiencing mental health crises or homelessness and there has been a

limited responsiveness of law enforcement in such situations. Pastor Grier

stressed that placing a facility of this magnitude in a residential area, where

children walk to school and seniors exercise daily, raises serious safety

concerns. He said the organization is based out of state and the community

lacks clarity on the nature of the services being offered and the origins of

the individuals who would be admitted. He asked the Board to consider the

voices of those in opposition and to consider a different location for this

facility.

Andrea Silva, teacher in Colorado Springs, said she lives close to

Panorama Park and sees daily how inclusive this space is, where families

of all backgrounds gather, and where children play and community bonds

are strengthened. She said placing a drug and alcohol rehabilitation facility

directly adjacent to the park would undermine the park’s positive impact

and the years of investment and planning that went into its development.

Ms. Silva said Panorama Park was intentionally designed as a cornerstone

of community revitalization and celebrated by civic leaders as a symbol of

progress in the area. She said addiction recovery services are important,

however, the proposed location is inappropriate. She said it could alter the

character of the space and introduce risks that could discourage families

from using the park. She said the symbolism of surrounding the facility with

fencing could send the wrong message for that place. Ms. Silva asked to

consider the daily reality of children and students who use the park and

walk to nearby schools.

Applicant’s rebuttal

Mr. Foster said he appreciated the support and opposition voiced during

the hearing. He said he noted two primary concerns raised by the

community: safety and the potential impact of a government shutdown on

funding. He said on the issue of safety, the facility’s operations are

supported by peer-reviewed research and data, including studies from

Johns Hopkins University and the NIH, as well as information provided by

the Colorado Springs Police Department. Mr. Foster said these sources

consistently show that treatment centers do not increase crime and, in

many cases, contribute to reductions in both crime and homelessness. He

said in his 15 years of operating similar facilities, there has never been an

incident involving a patient harming a neighbor, committing a robbery, or

engaging in violent behavior. He said clients entering the program are

typically 45 days into recovery and are stable.

Mr. Foster said regarding funding, most clients are covered by Medicaid

(approximately 85%), with an additional 5% receiving scholarships and

10% covered by commercial insurance or exchange policies. He said

discussions around government shutdowns often focus on exchange-based

policies and represent a small portion of their client base. He said

Medicaid is a benefit tied to the treatment of a recognized disease and is

unlikely to be disrupted in a way that would affect the facility’s operations.

He said the facility would bring economic value to the area, including job

creation and increased city revenue. He said the project would generate

approximately $180,000 in impact fees, which would support services such

as police, parks, and first responders.

Mr. Foster said the narrative that the facility would pose a threat to children

or the community, is not accurate or fact based. He said, on the other hand,

there is already crime in the area, and there are already hundreds of

registered sex offenders within a five-mile radius. He said the individuals

they serve are in treatment, not posing a public safety risk. He said no data

has been presented showing that treatment centers increase crime or

endanger children, and he referenced peer-reviewed studies and local

crime data to support his position. He said his own child uses Panorama

Park and that he has spent significant time in Colorado Springs over the

past five years, building both a family and a community presence. Mr.

Foster said the organization has ongoing community involvement, including

hosting events, holding regular community meetings, and offering

prevention and education services in addition to treatment.

Mr. Foster said he does not live in Colorado but is a highly involved CEO

who responds directly to concerns from local officials and agencies. He

said he has previously addressed issues raised by law enforcement and

fire departments, implementing quality assurance measures, and

maintaining strong relationships with city leaders. He said the facility is in

alignment with the Southeast Strong Plan, particularly in the areas of

access to care, economic and employment opportunity, and cultural

integration. He said his team can adapt branding and services to reflect the

local community’s identity and needs.

Mr. Angerillo said crime data shared by CSPD showed over 100 incidents

at or near the hotel in the past year and 350 within a one-mile radius. He

said CSPD supported the project, believing it would likely reduce crime.

Mr. Angerillo said he is personally committed to the community, and he

regularly walks Panorama Park and has participated in cleanup efforts

alongside local leaders but has not seen any of the people speaking in

opposition participating in those events.

Commissioners’ questions

Vice Chair Hensler asked if along their other facilities across the country

they tend to adapt hotels for this purpose and if it was the need of the area

that drew them to this location. Mr. Foster said there is a widespread and

ongoing need for addiction treatment services, not only in Colorado

Springs but throughout the state and across the country. He said the

addiction crisis is a persistent epidemic, if one drug fades, another takes

its place. He said the proposed facility is part of a larger effort to address

this need and is just the beginning of the organization’s broader plans in

the region. He said about site selection, multiple locations had been

considered, including properties under contract with larger local

organizations but the chosen site was suitable for the type of care being

offered, long-term residential treatment, not detox or acute care. Mr.

Angerillo said it is important to provide a full continuum of care, which

includes not just detox or short-term treatment, but extended residential

programs lasting three months to a year, which are essential for helping

individuals reintegrate into society, access mental health services, receive

case management, and develop life skills such as job readiness. Mr.

Foster said they usually work with hotel or nursing assisted living facilities

to convert them for their projects.

Vice Chair Hensler asked to provide more details about their safety plan,

particularly the fencing. Mr. Foster said safety is deeply embedded in the

organization’s operations, where emergency preparedness plans are

developed based on hazard vulnerability analyses tailored to regional

conditions, population impact, and property risk. He said these plans are

reviewed and approved annually by local authorities, including the County

Fire Marshal and the Department of Fire Prevention and Control. He said

facilities must obtain a certificate of compliance to ensure adherence to life

safety and environmental care standards. Mr. Foster said the purpose of

the fencing is not to confine individuals but to provide privacy and a sense

of security for residents. He said the facility is considered a clinical home

for its residents, and even if fencing were not required, it would still be

implemented to support that environment. He said from the feedback

received from the Colorado Springs Police Department, no additional

access measures were mandated, but the organization remains open to

further discussions and is willing to implement any additional safety

recommendations.

Vice Chair Hensler asked what organization oversees their industry. Mr.

Foster said there are several organizations, starting with the Behavior

Health Authority (BHA), which will deal with any grievances or complaints

such as human rights violations, abuse, neglect or exploitation. He said

these complaints could also go through the Office of Civil Rights or the

Office of Inspector General. Mr. Foster said CARF is their accreditation

body, and SAMSHA and the DEA are involved. He said they are rigorously

regulated. Mr. Angerillo said he is responsible for staff operations, and they

check their clients every 15, 30 or 60 minutes to be aware of their location

and ensure their safety.

Vice Chair Hensler said she is reminding herself of addiction and the Fair

Housing Act and is removing that component from consideration, focusing

only on human services. Vice Chair Hensler said if it were an elderly or

childcare facility, a resident wandering off the property would also be a

concern. Vice Chair Hensler said she is in favor of the project.

Commissioner Engel asked for more details about the scale of services,

where they are starting and what other services they would include. Mr.

Foster said the facility operates at level 3.1, which is the highest level of

care offered at that specific location. He said this level includes clinically

managed, low-intensity residential services, and clients typically arrive after

completing 30 to 45 days at a higher-intensity facility, such as level 3.5 or

3.7, based on clinical and medical necessity. Mr. Foster said they

advocate for early intervention and education, and all their facilities host

monthly community meetings and offer various training courses, like

co-occurring disorder education and de-escalation, aligning with level 0.5.

Mr. Foster said his vision is offering the full spectrum of care by 2026 or

early 2027, once the current model is fully proven and operational systems

are firmly in place.

Commissioner Engel asked where the entrance to the facility would be. Mr.

Foster said there are two entrances that will not be modified, one on

Aeroplaza and one on Aerotech, and both wrap around to the west of the

property to the lobby.

Chair Cassey asked if this was a vacant lot in zone MX-M it would be

administratively approved. Mr. Cooper said that’s correct, this application

would have been an administrative approval, but they decided to elevate it

given the sensitivity of the application and to be mindful of the neighbors.

He said if they decided to move forward with the detoxification center with

24-hour medical supervision, they would have to come to Planning

Commission again, as that is a conditional use.

Commissioner Clements said he worked with the Department of

Corrections few years ago and never knew what happened when people

left until now. He said he is proud of them and hopes they keep doing well.

Commissioner Case asked where signage would be. Mr. Foster said they

do not do much marketing, but they will probably have just one pylon sign

that will be reviewed by the building department. Mr. Cooper said signs are

not part of this application, but of the development plan that will be

reviewed separately.

Vice Chair Hensler asked if that would be clear enough for people not to

mistake the facility with a hotel. Mr. Foster said they would not, because

they could clearly see the fence from the street. He said they will be placing

some signs that the Police Department has required, such as no

trespassing, no loitering, no weapons, no drugs.

Commissioners’ comments

Vice Chair Hensler said she understands the significant investment made

in the southeast area of the city, particularly around Panorama Park, as well

as the ongoing challenges the community continues to face. Vice Chair

Hensler said this project might initially appear to be another hurdle, but she

considers the evidence presented supports it as a positive development.

Vice Chair Hensler said there is a critical shortage of mental health beds in

the state and, although this facility is not designed for acute inpatient crisis

care, expanding access to supportive programs helps reduce pressure

across the broader mental health system. Vice Chair Hensler said she

hears the concerns and fears from the neighborhood, but they have seen

similar projects have had a positive rather than negative impact. Vice Chair

Hensler said she supports the project and will make a motion to approve it.

Chair Casey said he agrees with Vice Chair Hensler regarding the

neighbors’ concerns; however, he felt those concerns had been adequately

addressed through the applicant’s proposed plans. Chair Casey said this

project is different from more operational or acute care facilities, it aligns

with the zoning regulations and is a permitted use within the mixed-use,

medium-scale neighborhood, which intends to support adaptive reuse and

redevelopment, particularly of currently vacant properties, which he

believes makes this project appropriate for the area. Chair Casey said the

project meets the standards and legal considerations of the Fair Housing

Act, so he will be voting in favor.

Commissioner Case said that the commission makes decisions based on

data and the review criteria, and he feels this application meets that, so he

will be voting in favor.

Commissioner Engel said he was hesitant at the beginning, but he is

impressed by their ability to protect their neighborhood. Commissioner

Engel said there is a clear need for such a facility in Colorado Springs, so

he will be in support.

Motion by Commissioner Hensler, seconded by Commissioner

Clements, to approve the Colorado Springs Recovery Center - Major

Modification of a Development Plan based upon the findings that the

request complies with the criteria as set forth in City Code Section

7.5.516.D.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0-0-6.

5 -

6 -

Aye:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements,

Commissioner Case and Commissioner Engel

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

Percheron

8.C.

ZONE-25-00 An Ordinance to amend the zoning map of the City of Colorado

Springs pertaining to approximately 156.18 acres located north and

south of East Woodmen Road and east and west of Banning Lewis

Parkway from PDZ/AP-O (Planned Development Zone with Airport

Overlay) to MX-L/AP-O (Mixed-Use Large Scale with Airport

Overlay). (1st Reading only to set the public hearing for January 13,

2026)

(Quasi-Judicial)

Related Files: ZONE-25-0025, PDZL-25-0004

Council District #6

Presenter:

Molly O’Brien, Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Ordinance - Percheron Zone Change

Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Project Statement

Attachment 2 - Land Use Plan

Attachment 3 - Exhibits A and B

Attachment 4 - Public Comment

Attachment 5 - Traffic Impact Study_Oct2025

Attachment 6 - D49 Correspondence

7.5.704 ZONING MAP AMENDMENT (REZONING)

CPC Minutes Excerpt - Percheron - 11.12.2025

Commissioner Case recused himself for these items.

Molly O’Brien, Planner II, presented the application of the site located in

northeast Colorado Springs, north and south of East Woodmen Road, and

east and west of Banning Lewis Parkway. The area, originally part of the

Banning Lewis Ranch North Master Plan, was annexed and zoned in 2021.

The proposal includes rezoning approximately 156 acres from Planned

Development with Airport Overlay (PDC/AP) to Mixed-Use Large Scale

with the same overlay and the Land Use Plan modification affecting about

350 acres of the 800-acre land use plan. Key changes include the

elimination of 39.4 acres of residential land use south of Woodmen Road

and an increase in commercial land use. Additionally, circulation changes

are proposed north of Woodmen to accommodate a consolidated school

site, replacing two previously planned smaller school sites with one larger

campus on the eastern edge of the area. Ms. O’Brien said the overall

residential land use would decrease from 438 acres previously approved

to 402 acres under the amended plan, while the non-residential area,

particularly commercial, will increase from 81.9 acres to 136 acres,

primarily south of Woodmen Road. She said there will also be minor

adjustments to the school site, open space, trails, drainage, and parks; and

internal circulation changes are being proposed. Standard notice was

made; five initial comments were received with concerns about the impacts

on wildlife, increased traffic volume and potential crime; additional

comments were received from neighbors on the south with concerns about

the potential intensity that chat commercial use could bring. Agency review

was conducted and comments were addressed, including Traffic

Engineering’s that requested and approved with suggestions a traffic

impact study. The application is compliant with PlanCOS and meets the

review criteria.

Applicant’s presentation

Andrea Barlow, NES, said their request involves approximately 350 acres.

She said the original annexation and Planned Development (PD) zoning

was approved by City Council in 2021. She said in January 2022 a major

modification was approved, adding 125 acres to the southeast portion of

the property, introducing additional commercial uses and a regional sports

complex south of Woodmen Road, along with medium- and high-density

residential areas. She said additional minor and major modifications to

the Master and Land Use Plans have been also approved in previous

years. Ms. Barlow said as part of the annexation, one of the requirements

was to continue the Golden Jubilee collector from east to west of the site.

She said the Park land dedication is being reduced due to the decrease in

residential area, allowing the commercial area to increase.

Ms. Barlow said commercial development typically follows residential

growth, but in this case, both are progressing simultaneously, which is

expected to benefit the city through increased sales tax revenue. She said

the expansion is also driven by anticipated demand from the proposed

sports complex. She said the proposed zoning allows a broad range of

uses, including commercial, residential, religious institutions, and office

space. She said while the land use plan identifies the area as commercial,

the MX-L zoning provides flexibility and is not limited to high-intensity retail.

Ms. Barlow said that overall traffic would increase due to the shift from

residential to commercial, however, a traffic analysis showed a reduction in

morning peak-hour trips, with a slight increase in evening peak-hour traffic.

She said the original traffic study anticipated necessary improvements at

key intersections, including East Woodmen Road, Mohawk, Banning Lewis

Parkway, and Golden Sage. She said some improvements have been

recommended due to the level of service that they are trying to provide

during peak hours, which include added through-lanes, turn lanes, and

deceleration lanes at various intersections within the master plan. She said

future development at this scale will require further road improvements, but

with the planned mitigation measures, traffic is expected to remain within

acceptable operational capacity.

Ms. Barlow said the application meets the review criteria for major land use

plan modifications and for a zone change, it complies with the UDC and

PlanCOS; it is consistent with prior approvals, there is no adverse impact

to surrounding area, it is not detrimental to public health, safety or welfare

and the location is appropriate for the proposed zone. She said the

proposed zoning and land use changes align with PlanCOS goals by

promoting integrated mixed-use development, leveraging corridor

capacity, and creating a potential focal point for the community including

parks and trail access to support livability.

Ms. Barlow said the main public concerns are primarily focused on

increased traffic, the proximity of commercial uses to existing residential

areas and the preservation of open space adjacent to those

neighborhoods. She said it is important to view traffic impacts in the

context of ongoing and future regional infrastructure projects that will

significantly enhance east-west and north-south connectivity in the area,

which include the extension of Woodmen Road to Black Forest Road and

eventually to I-25, as well as the planned extension of Banning Lewis

Parkway into Barnes Road and later in the future, south to Highway 94.

Ms. Barlow stated that the proposed commercial zoning is appropriate

given the site’s location at the intersection of two major arterials, and the

MX-L zoning allows for a range of uses, including office, retail, and

institutional, with more intense commercial uses likely concentrated near

major roads and less intense uses closer to residential areas to the south.

She said, regarding the compatibility with adjacent residential

neighborhoods, a 30-foot open space tract and a 100-foot buffer will

separate the commercial development from homes to the south, with

additional building setbacks due to site grading of approximately 20 feet.

She said the originally proposed 10 acres of open space in the area have

been increased to wrap around the western edge of the commercial area,

extending along the southern boundary up to Banning Lewis Parkway,

enhancing the buffer rather than reducing it.

Ms. Barlow said, in response to concerns about placing commercial uses

next to medium-density residential, the commercial uses planned for this

location are expected to be lower intensity, given the surrounding

commercial development and evolving land use, the previously designated

6.4 acres of residential may no longer be appropriate. She said there is a

utility easement in the area, an overhead electric line, which limits

residential development due to building restrictions, so it will remain open

and be used more efficiently for commercial purposes, such as parking.

Public Comment

Alison Colvin, Banning Lewis resident, said she is disappointed and

concerned about the proposed expansion of commercial zoning adjacent

to her neighborhood, because she bought her property thinking the land

behind her was designated for residential use. She said additional

concerns are related to increased noise, light pollution, and potential

negative impacts on property values. Ms. Colvin also noted that several

neighbors did not receive notice of the hearing, and the postcard she

received did not clearly outline the full extent of the proposed changes,

leading to confusion and limited community participation. She questioned

why commercial development is concentrated directly against existing

single-family homes, while there appears to be less commercial use

planned for the north. She said even though the 150-foot buffer was

mentioned, she felt it would not be sufficient to mitigate the visual and

environmental impacts, especially given the height of nearby homes. She

said she wishes the developers would work more collaboratively with

residents.

Jason Bandle, Banning Lewis resident, said his concerns are about traffic

congestion, home values, and inadequate community engagement related

to the proposed zoning changes. He said the outreach was limited

because the postcard notifications that were sent were not enough for the

over 8,000 residents impacted in Banning Lewis Ranch. He said there

have been past issues with traffic during events like the Fourth of July

parade and warned that the addition of commercial development next to a

large sports complex would worsen congestion, especially since the area

has limited access points. He said during peak times, it can already take

residents 45-50 minutes to exit the neighborhood. Mr. Bandle said his

neighborhood contains the lowest-density and most expensive homes in

Banning Lewis Ranch, and placing commercial development directly

behind these homes, would significantly reduce property values and

potentially make homes unsellable. He asked the commission to refrain

from voting until the developer works with residents on a compromise,

probably revisiting the previous plan that preserved the utility easement

area for commercial use, to use it as a buffer between homes and

businesses. He said a medical plaza is being marketed within the 150-foot

buffer zone, further raising concerns about the intensity of future

development.

Mark Harmon, Banning Lewis resident, said he is concerned about the

proximity of commercial development to residential areas, even though his

property does not directly border the proposed buffer zone. He said he did

not receive any notification despite living in the area and only learned about

the proposal the day before. He said this lack of awareness contributed to

the low community turnout. Mr. Harmon said they can probably work on a

compromise that would preserve a meaningful buffer between residential

and commercial zones. He said another issue is increased vehicle and

pedestrian traffic, particularly regarding safety for residents crossing busy

intersections. He asked whether pedestrian infrastructure, such as bridges,

would be considered to ensure safe crossings considering the anticipated

traffic increase.

Applicant’s Rebuttal

Ms. Barlow said the area south of Golden Jubilee Drive being modified is

about 10 acres, and that the open space buffer in that area is being

retained and even expanded. She said because this portion is set back

from major arterials like Woodmen Road and Banning Lewis Parkway, it is

not expected to attract high-intensity commercial uses, but low-intensity

uses instead such as offices. She said more intense commercial

development is planned for other areas with better visibility, specifically, the

49 acres north of the site and an equally sized area east of Banning Lewis

Ranch, as these locations are better suited for retail and high traffic uses.

Ms. Barlow said the developer will continue to consider neighborhood

concerns during the next phase, which includes a development plan. She

said at that stage, detailed studies will address lighting, noise, and other

impacts, and neighbors will again be notified and invited to comment.

She said, regarding public notification, approximately 240 postcards were

sent to properties within 1,000 feet of the site, with the majority going to

Banning Lewis Ranch residents to the south. She said the traffic concerns

will be addressed by planned infrastructure improvements, including the

extension of Banning Lewis Parkway, that will improve circulation and

provide alternative access routes for the neighborhood. She said the

proposed commercial development is unlikely to generate cut-through

traffic in residential areas, as more direct routes exist. Ms. Barlow said,

while concerns about home values were raised, property values are not a

consideration in the city’s planning criteria. She said only five public

comments were received in response to the 200+ notifications, which did

not meet the threshold to require a neighborhood meeting.

City Staff Comments

Todd Frisbee, City Traffic Engineering, Public Works Department, said this

development is part of a 20-year projection for improvements in the area,

certain intersections along Woodmen Road are expected to operate at a

Level of Service F, which is below the city’s typical standard of Level D. He

said the traffic impact study recommends mitigation measures such as

additional turn lanes and free right-turn movements to address these future

conditions. Mr. Frisbee said the City of Colorado Springs is preparing to

launch a comprehensive Woodmen Road Corridor Study as part of a Pikes

Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA) project, that will evaluate the

entire corridor, including access points, development patterns, and

intersection performance, to identify necessary upgrades and safety

improvements. He said this broader analysis will help address not only the

current development’s impacts, but also similar traffic challenges expected

across the corridor in the coming decades.

Ms. O’Brien said 265 postcards were mailed out within 1000 feet of the

property boundary. She said there will be another opportunity for public

notice prior to City Council meeting, and she will verify all properties within

the boundaries are notified.

Commissioners’ Questions

Chair Casey asked if Golden Jubilee is a developed road and where the

less intensive use will be located. Ms. Barlow said a roadway connection

from Mohawk Road was originally proposed in a concept plan dating back

to the 1990s and has been carried forward through the current

development plans. She said this connection is part of the approved

master plan and is intended to support future development, including

commercial uses. She said although the road may require improvements to

accommodate commercial traffic, specifically, the road segment from the

western boundary of the site to Banning Lewis Parkway. She said any

future road construction to the east would follow typical development

processes.

Alternate Commissioner Engel asked where Golden Jubilee is in relation

to the power line on Banning Lewis running east to west. Ms. Barlow said

the 300-foot utility easement containing a power line runs parallel to the

road and then cross it at a point that avoids existing utility poles. She said

the alignment has been reviewed and approved by Colorado Springs

Utilities.

Alternate Commissioner Engel asked how much development is expected

to occur around the power line. Ms. Barlow said there is an area of 8.1

acres south of Golden Jubilee Drive with the utility easement. She

explained that while the power lines in this section may be located north of

Golden Jubilee, the easement still limits development options. However,

commercial zoning allows for more flexible use of the space, such as

parking, compared to residential development, which typically requires

more buildable land and is less compatible with utility easements. She said

while the site may not be ideal for high-visibility commercial uses like retail

or restaurants, it remains viable for lower-intensity uses permitted under the

MX-L (mixed-use) zoning.

Vice Chair Hensler asked if there are specific distance requirements from

the power lines or they just considered commercial to be more desirable

than residential. Ms. Barlow said the 300-foot-wide easement includes a

180-foot and an additional 120-foot section, originally intended to

accommodate potential underground of power lines, though this can be

costly. She said while the power lines themselves occupy a narrower

corridor, the full easement restricts the construction of permanent

structures; however, uses such as parking and detention ponds are

typically allowed, as they maintain utility access. Ms. Barlow said Colorado

Springs Utilities enforces strict clearance requirements, including setbacks

and grading between poles. She said utilizing the easement for parking is

an efficient solution, especially in areas like the sports complex where such

use aligns with the overall site plan.

Chair Casey said he agrees that high-intensity businesses would want to

be closer to the main road. Ms. Barlow said there are plenty of areas of

bigger size to the north to accommodate those larger scale uses.

Vice Chair Hensler said the 6.4 and the 21-acres parcels could bring

around 220 houses compared to the commercial aspect and asked about

a site nearby that might be of more concern to the residents. Ms. Barlow

said that site is not part of this development, however it is just open

because development is not feasible there. She said to the north of that

multifamily apartments are proposed as well as commercial.

Vice Chair Hensler asked about the expected timeline. Ms. Barlow said

they are expecting it to advance fast, especially the area to the west of

Banning Lewis Parkway and north of Golden Jubilee, as well as the

northeast area.

Commissioners’ Comments

Chair Casey said he thinks the application is consistent with the review

criteria for the rezoning and the land use plan major modification, with

enough mitigation close to the residential area, and he will be in support.

Vice Chair Hensler said she concurs and appreciates the timeline between

stages and will be in support of the application.

Alternate Commissioner Engel said he also thinks it meets the criteria and

will support the application and suggested looking further into the proposal

of commercial uses south of the road that it is not even there yet.

Motion by Commissioner Hensler, seconded by Commissioner

Clements, to recommend approval to City Council the zone change of

156.18 acres from PDZ/AP-O (Planned Development Zone with Airport

Overlay) to MX-L/AP-O (Mixed-Use Large Scale with Airport Overlay)

based upon the findings that the request complies with the criteria

for a Zoning Map Amendment as set forth in City Code Section

7.5.704.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0-0-6.

4 -

Aye:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements and

Commissioner Engel

6 -

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

1 - Commissioner Case

Recused:

8.D.

PDZL-25-000 A Major Modification to the Percheron Land Use Plan changing the

size and location of proposed land uses for 350 acres zoned

PDZ/AP-O (Planned Development Zone with Airport Overlay) located

north and south of East Woodmen Road and east of Banning Lewis

Parkway. (Quasi-Judicial)

Located in Council District 6

Presenter:

Molly O’Brien, Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Percheron Staff Report

Attachment 1 - Project Statement

Attachment 2 - Land Use Plan

Attachment 3 - Zone Change Exhibit

Attachment 4 - Public Comment

Attachment 5 - Traffic Impact Study_Oct2025

Attachment 6 - D49 Correspondence

Staff Presentation - Percheron

7.5.516 MODIFICATION OF APPROVED APPLICATIONS

Motion by Commissioner Hensler, seconded by Commissioner Engel,

to recommend approval to City Council the Major Modification of the

Percheron Land Use Plan based upon the findings that the proposal

complies with the review criteria for Land Use Plans as set forth in

City Code Section 7.5.516.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0-0-6.

4 -

Aye:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements and

Commissioner Engel

6 -

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

1 - Commissioner Case

Recused:

65 Cheyenne Mountain Boulevard

8.E.

NVAR-25-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.304.C.1.b to allow for

a height of 29 feet with a roof pitch of less than 6:12 where 16 feet is

required for a detached garage in the R-E/WUI-O (Residential Estate

with Wildland Urban Interface Overlay) zone district consisting of 3.16

acres and located at 65 Cheyenne Mountain Boulevard.

Located in Council District 3

Presenter:

Matthew Ambuul, Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report

Attachment 1 - HOA approval letter

Attachment 2 - Site Plan

Attachment 3 - Project Statement for Height

Attachment 4 - Project Statement for Size

Staff Presentation _ Cheyenne Mountain

7.3.304 ACCESSORY USES

7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

Matthew Ambuul, Planner II, presented the application for the site located

near the Broadmoor area, southeast of the Cheyenne Mountain Boulevard

and Marland Road intersection. It is a single-family detached residence

that includes a lounge, private indoor basketball court, and other

recreational amenities. The project requires two non-use variances, one for

exceeding the maximum building of 16 feet at 29 feet height, and another

for the size of the structure, surpassing the 1,650-square-foot maximum,

the garage space being 3,582 square feet. He said the lot spans 3.16

acres with important setbacks and easements: 99 feet to the north, 242

feet in front, and over 150 feet on the sides. The property is surrounded by

mature trees and bordered by open space on the north and east, with only

one adjacent residential lot to the south. Standard notice was made; five

public comments were received concerning the size and height of the

structure, and approval from HOA. Mr. Ambuul informed them that the home

is located on a large, secluded lot and the addition would not be seen from

outside the property, and that the project received HOA approval on July

16, 2025. Agency review was conducted, and almost all comments have

been addressed, a final drainage letter must be submitted and approved

by Stormwater Enterprise before a building permit is issued. The

application is compliant with PlanCOS and meets the review criteria for

both non-use variances.

Chair Casey asked if there was a specific reason for the maximum

allowable size to be 1,650 square feet. Daniel Sexton, Planning Manager,

said this was the result of a negotiation between Planning and community

stakeholders during the adoption of the UDC, that changed from the

previous Chapter 7 where the storage component was removed from the

allowable size. Mr. Sexton said the number would still apply for detached or

attached structures.

Applicant’s Presentation

Ross Fletcher, the applicant, said the right side of the building is

designated as an RV garage, while the left side will house a basketball

court and batting cage. He said to enhance the building’s appearance, the

design includes a front and side entry feature for architectural appeal. Mr.

Fletcher said they are surrounded by open space, mature trees, and only

one neighboring residence to the south. He said the proposed garage

location is approximately 10 feet lower in elevation than the main house,

which helps reduce its visual impact despite its height. He said the

structure complies with all setbacks, easement, and lot coverage

requirements and fits within the character of the neighborhood. Mr. Fletcher

said several nearby properties have received similar non-use variances for

large garages or accessory structures.

Ryan Macallister, the owner, said they just need more room in their garage,

but it is only intended to be used by the family. He said the HOA approved

the concept and they are providing larger setbacks than the 50 feet

required by the HOA, therefore the structure cannot be seen from outside

the property.

Commissioners’ Comments

Vice Chair Hensler said she does not have any issues with the proposal

and appreciated the thorough application.

Chair Casey said he considers it meets the criteria for the non-use

variance for the height and the size and will be in support of the application.

Commissioner Case said the application meets the criteria and looks like

a fun project.

Commissioner Engel said he agrees that it will be a fun project and asked

if additional trees will be provided for the ones they are removing for the

facility. Mr. Macallister said the facility is still surrounded by trees.

Motion by Commissioner Hensler, seconded by Commissioner Engel,

to approve the Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.304.C.1.b

allowing a height of 29 feet for a detached garage based upon the

findings that the request complies with the criteria set forth in City

Code Section 7.5.526.E with the following conditions of approval:

a. A Final Drainage Letter must be submitted and approved by the

Stormwater Enterprise prior to Building Permit issuance.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0-0-6.

5 -

Aye:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements,

Commissioner Case and Commissioner Engel

6 -

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

8.F.

NVAR-25-00 A Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.304.C.1.a to allow for

3,582 square feet of garage space where 1,650 square feet is

required in the R-E/WUI-O (Residential Estate with Wildland Urban

Interface Overlay) zone district consisting of 3.16 acres and located

at 65 Cheyenne Mountain Boulevard.

Located in Council District 3

Presenter:

Matthew Ambuul, Planner II, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: 7.5.526 NON-USE VARIANCE

Motion by Commissioner Hensler, seconded by Commissioner Engel,

to approve the Non-Use Variance to City Code Section 7.3.304.C.1.a

allowing 3,582 square feet of total garage space based upon the

findings that the request complies with the criteria set forth in City

Code Section 7.5.526.E with the following condition of approval:

a. A Final Drainage Letter must be submitted and approved by the

Stormwater Enterprise prior to Building Permit issuance.

The motion passed by a vote of 5-0-0-6.

5 -

Aye:

Vice Chair Hensler, Chair Casey, Commissioner Clements,

Commissioner Case and Commissioner Engel

6 -

Absent:

Commissioner Cecil, Commissioner Slattery, Commissioner Robbins,

Commissioner Sipilovic, Commissioner Gigiano and Commissioner

Willoughby

9. Presentations

9.A.

CODE-25-00 An Ordinance amending Chapter 7 (the “Unified Development Code” or

“UDC”) of the Code of the City of Colorado Springs 2001, as amended,

as related to Signs.

(Legislative)

Presenter:

Kurt Schmitt, Program Administrator II, City Planning Department

Daniel Sexton, LUR/DRE Planning Manager, City Planning Department

Kevin Walker, Planning Director, City Planning Department

Attachments: Staff Report_Sign Ordinance CODE-25-0005_KS_final

Attachment 1 - Chapter 7 Sign Ordinance Draft

Attachment 2 - Chapter 3 Draft Revocable Permits Signs Ordinance

Attachment 3 - Chapter 7 Current Sign Regulations

7.5.702 AMENDMENT TO UDC TEXT

CITY PLANNING COMMISSION - CODE-25-0005 _final

Kurt Schmitt, Program Administrator, presented an informational overview

of the proposed sign ordinance update to Chapter 7 of the Unified

Development Code (UDC), which will be brought forward for formal action

in December for a recommendation to City Council. The update is initiated

by City Planning Department and would be a citywide change to modernize

and streamline sign regulations. It includes revisions to use tables, specific

standards, administrative processes, rules of measurement, and

definitions. The changes apply to on-premises and private property

signage and do not affect right-of-way signage, which will be addressed

separately. He said it is a complete change of the existing ordinance, last

comprehensively updated in 2012. It reflects advancements in technology,

industry practices, and federal requirements for content-neutral regulations.

The goal is to balance effective communication, public safety, community

aesthetics, and economic development.

Mr. Schmitt provided background on the evolution of the city’s sign

regulations, that are currently established by property use type. Key past

changes included the introduction of electronic message center (EMC)

signs and the coordinated sign plan (CSP) program, which allows flexibility

for developments with unique characteristics. Minor updates were made in

the 2023 UDC update, including expanded eligibility for CSPs and revised

criteria for roof-mounted signs.

Mr. Schmitt said the proposed update includes several major components:

reformatting and reorganization to align with current UDC structure and

improve usability; enhanced CSP criteria, expanding eligibility to include

commercial and civic uses, and allowing greater flexibility for properties

with unique site constraints or multiple access points, and greater heights;

updated sign classifications, consolidating use categories and revising

major, minor, and temporary sign types to ensure federal compliance,

differentiating single family use, combining commercial and industrial;

refinements to EMC regulations, including allowances for more than one

EMC sign in larger developments; clarified rules of measurement and

updated diagrams to improve understanding of sign height, placement, and

property orientation; updated definitions and maintenance standards,

including provisions for nonconforming and abandoned signs.

Mr. Schmitt said updates were made to freestanding signs, temporary

banners, and short-term signs, accompanied by new diagrams to improve

clarity. Two new sign types, short-term signs and fence screening (or fence

wraps), were introduced to ensure legal compliance with content-neutral

regulations. Currently limited to commercial uses and only allowed as part

of freestanding signs, the proposed changes would expand EMC eligibility

to industrial, office, and civic uses. Additionally, EMCs would be permitted

as wall signs under strict criteria, including placement, orientation,

separation from residential areas, and time-of-operation restrictions for

office and civic zones.

Mr. Schmitt said updates are also related to nonconforming, abandoned,

nuisance, and poorly maintained signs. The ordinance now includes clearer

compliance requirements and stronger enforcement content. A new section

on sign maintenance prohibits unsafe or dilapidated structures, missing

panels, and exposed electrical components, supporting more effective

code enforcement. As part of public engagement, the city issued a press

release and created a dedicated project webpage with access to both the

proposed and current ordinances. A stakeholder and public meeting were

held on October 29, with approximately 24 attendees. Additional outreach

included meetings with the Home Builders Association, economic

development groups, the International Sign Association, and other

stakeholders. A presentation to the Development Review Enterprise

Advisory Committee is scheduled for November 20th.

10. Adjourn