City Council - Regular Meeting

In Colorado Springs, we shoot for the moon. We train the defenders of air and space. We secure American freedom. We compete on the world stage. We launch balloons, rockets, careers. We conquer America's mountain and spend time in a garden fit for the gods. We power the future and protect the past. There is greatness within each of us and all around us. We are Colorado Springs, Olympic City, USA.

If you ever want to know a little bit more about Colorado Springs, listen to the podcast Behind the Springs. You'll know all about the fun, cool stuff going on in Colorado Springs. Enjoy.

I'm Ellie Kim.

And I'm Danny O'Shea.

And you're watching Springs TV in Olympic City, USA.

city map, you'll find Matt. He uses geographic information systems, or GIS, to track local properties required to pay the city's stormwater fee.

So meeting for Tuesday, September 8th, 2025, will the clerk please call the roll?

Council Member Casey.

Here.

Council Member Crowe-Everson. Here. Council Member Donaldson.

Here. Council Member Gold.

Here I am. Council Member Hengem. Present. Council Member Leinweber.

Here.

Council Member Rainey. Here. Council Member Risley.

Here.

Council Member Williams. Here. All nine present.

Please stand for the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance. And today we are honored by Pastor Tracy Hiltz for offering the invocation from Living Hope Creekside Church.

There we go. Good afternoon, council members and staff of this tremendous city. I acknowledge that the God to whom I am praying is the God revealed in the Christian Bible. And if that is your faith, I invite you to join me in prayer. And if your faith expression is different, I invite you to use this moment in a way that is consistent with your own convictions. So let us pray. Almighty God, who is graciously present, we acknowledge our need for you in the work here before us. Your word in Micah reminds us that you have shown us, oh mortal man, what is good and what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your God. So today, Lord, we ask for wisdom to walk this way. Give these leaders discernment for the decisions that they make and may they embrace the humility that is needed to carry the authority that they have been given. Help them to listen well to one another and to these people that they have been entrusted to serve. Where, God, there are competing needs, may they hold fast to the wisdom you are willing to offer. And where there is disagreement, may they also hold fast to the humanity of one another in respect. Where difficult choices must be made, may they embrace the courage and compassion you are so willing to supply. May justice and mercy be pursued without losing that humility. and may the well-being of this entire city, every neighborhood, every family, every business, and especially those whose needs can be too easily overlooked remain before those who serve. We give thanks for those willing to carry this responsibility of public leadership and ask your blessing, every needed blessing, Lord, upon the work of this council and upon this great city. And I pray this in the name of Jesus Christ, whom I serve and follow, amen.

Amen.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Moving on to the consent calendar, we will now consider the consent calendar. These items may be acted on as a whole unless a specific item is called off for discussion by a council member or a citizen wishing to address council. Is there anyone wishing to pull an item off of consent?

Yes, Madam President. Can I pull off 4BB, please? Okay, that is pulled off.

Council Risley's made a motion. Councilman Casey has made the second. Please vote for the consent pulling off the one item. All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Moving on to item 5A, will the clerk please read item 5A into the record?

A resolution honoring September 11, 2026 is Day of Remembrance. Councilman Casey?

Thank you, Madam President. As we approach the 25th anniversary of the attacks in the United States on September 11, 2001, I thought it'd be appropriate that we recognize a day of remembrance. I'll go ahead and read the resolution. Whereas the United States of America was viciously attacked on home ground at the World Trade Center in New York City, at the Pentagon, and in the air over Pennsylvania on September 11, 2001. And whereas nearly 3,000 American children, women, and men lost their lives that day. And we shall never forget the devastation and loss we suffered as individuals and as a nation. And whereas with gratitude, we honor the brave first responders, firefighters, police, emergency medical staff, the resolute members of our military, and ordinary Americans who showed extraordinary courage to save the lives of others on that fateful day. Whereas all men and women on duty that day serving in the armed forces, including here at Colorado Springs at the North American Aerospace Defense Command, or NORAD, played a critical role in ensuring the safety of all Americans. And whereas we mourn on this most solemn anniversary, let us also reflect on the bravery and selfless service that define this great nation, and let us reaffirm our commitment to preserving those fundamental values for each generation of Americans to come. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Colorado Springs that City Council hereby honor September 11th 2026 as a day of remembrance and urges residents to live up to the selfless example of the heroes who gave of themselves in the face of such great evil dated colorado springs colorado this 8th day of september 2026 signed lynette crowe iverson council president thank you so we don't have anybody here um for this particular resolution so i'll bring it back to the dice if there are any council member comments

Councilman Donaldson.

Yeah, Madam President, I would like to just state I think it's 100% appropriate that we recognize the 25th anniversary of September 11th. Probably everybody in this room, except for the really young ones, remember where you were and how your family was affected by that day and then the combat that our country saw in the years after that. I spent three years in Iraq directly as a result of that attack, and I know men who died over there. I put guys in body bags over there. and it was a result of that attack. And it had a huge impact on even kids in America because their fathers and some of their mothers were gone for years at a time as a direct result of that, so. you know there's lessons to be learned uh after pearl harbor you know there was there was kind of forgotten this saying but the idea is always be prepared uh never take it for granted that we won't be attacked or can't be attacked and and that we were reminded of that 25 years ago. 911 happens to be my wife and my wedding anniversary, so it'll be our 36th anniversary this year, so I won't be here in Colorado Springs to attend the ceremonies. There are multiple ceremonies, but I would encourage, even if you don't have a military background or anything, go to one of these ceremonies, and they're very touching, It makes you proud to be an American to see your fellow citizens kind of focused on one significant date in our past. And it really does make sense for us to always be vigilant and aware something like that could happen in the future. Thank you.

We have a motion from Councilman Gold and a second from Councilman Rainey. Let's vote.

And the motion passes 9 to 0.

Moving on to item 5B. Will the clerk please read item 5B into the record.

A joint proclamation recognizing September 2026 is suicide prevention month.

Councilman Lineweber.

Yes, I'm excited to bring this forward again. This is an area, it's actually one of the main reasons I chose to even be a city council member. Nine years ago, I had two of my fishing guides commit suicide within a six month period. as a business owner it deeply affected me and the resources and awareness around suicides was there just wasn't a lot out there and so um since then we've really improved we've gotten more stuff but we still have a ways to go and um There's some challenges with that and I like to kind of sometimes point out some of the obvious things. 82% of suicides is men. And I believe that the number one issue with that is through isolation. And so there can't be anything better if you are in this audience and really care about that or you're watching today Think about the men in your lives and ask the question, are they isolated? Just ask that question. If you feel like they are, then you need to encourage them to get connected to community. Community is, I think, is really the solution. Because through community, you can get support. Through community, you can kind of let off the steam of whatever brought you to that point. And so I think that's just my... my key principle today. Anyway, I'm really excited to bring this forward. We've done this a lot of different ways. Me and Yemi Mobilotti, our mayor, we've done it jointly and have read it off together. Today, I'm kind of announcing it as something that I'm bringing forward with Mayor Yemi, and he is going to make some remarks and read the proclamation.

Good afternoon, Council President Pro Tem, Council Member Lineweber, and all my colleagues here. Before we begin today's proclamation recognizing Suicide Prevention Month, I want to take a moment to talk about why this matters. And Council Member Lineweber, truly, I'm sorry for your loss. And I know this is, this month, this issue is near and dear to your story and your leadership, so thank you. But to all our Colorado Springs residents, I just wanna remind us that behind every statistic is a person, a son or daughter, a parent, a friend, a coworker, and a neighbor, and a person who's struggling and a life that matters. Suicide prevention is not just responding to a crisis. It truly is about creating a community where people know that they are seen, they're valued, and they're not alone. As a city, and when I say as a city, there is our responsibility, but I know there's so many partners and advocates in the house. We have a joint responsibility to help build the kind of community that we want, to talk openly about mental health, where we look out for one another and we're asking for help as seen as a sign of strength and not as weakness. So today, City Council and I are proud to recognize September as Suicide Prevention Month and reaffirm our joint commitment to building a community where every person knows your life matters, your story matters, and you're not alone. So with that, I'd like to read the City of Colorado Springs, Colorado Joint Proclamation between City Council and the Mayor's Office proclaiming Suicide Prevention Month, September 2026. Whereas, Suicide is a serious and complex public health issue that affects individuals, families, workplaces, schools, and communities across our nation, including here in Colorado Springs and El Paso County, and every life lost leaves a lasting impact on family members, friends, colleagues, neighbors, and loved ones. And whereas preventing suicide requires sustained community commitment and a comprehensive approach that includes prevention, early intervention, crisis response, treatment, recovery, and postvention support for those grieving a loss. And whereas known suicide risk factors and areas of concern underscore the importance of focused prevention efforts, particularly among working-age men, those employed in high-risk industries, and our youth, while recognizing that suicide can affect people of every age and walk of life, and whereas effective suicide prevention is rooted not only in access to care, but also in connection, belonging, hope, and the willingness to reach out to one another and reducing stigma around mental health and encouraging people to seek help are essential to building a community where no one feels that they must struggle alone. And whereas secure firearm storage, suicide prevention and mental health training Recognizing warning signs, checking in with those we care about and strengthen social connections and connecting with people to appropriate resources of practical actions. That can help save lives and whereas. The City of Colorado Springs remains committed to preventing suicide and promoting mental health and well-being by serving as a community partner and championing efforts to strengthen mental health resources, expand prevention and resiliency training, and elevate the power of person-to-person connection as an essential part of a healthy and flourishing community and, whereas, Help and hope are available. And 988 provides free confidential crisis support 24 hours a day, seven days a week. connecting people experiencing mental health, substance abuse, substance use, or suicidal crisis with trained crisis professionals. And whereas Suicide Prevention Month is an opportunity to remember and honor those whose lives have been lost to suicide and support those who are struggling. And whereas Suicide Prevention Month is a responsibility we all share. Every resident can play a role in creating a safer, healthier, and a more connected Colorado Springs. Now therefore, Mayor Blessing Yemi-Moblade and City Council President Lynette Crowe-Iverson hereby proclaim September 2026 as Suicide Prevention Month in the City of Colorado Springs and call upon all residents to promote mental wellness, support those who are in need, strengthen community connections, and work together to prevent suicide, save lives, and build a community where every person has hope and a reason to stay. Signed, President Criveson and myself.

Bring it back up to the, is there any other people in the audience that you have?

Well, I'd like to, I have a few people I'd like to call out. Nicole Johnston, if you could come forward. Now this is kind of mixed because Nicole has been working hard at this effort for many, many years. Could you go ahead and introduce it like you're full?

Hi, I'm Nicole Johnston.

With?

I'm with Changeline.

Okay. And she's been instrumental in a lot of coordination and stuff to really bring more awareness to this whole point. But she is transitioning and we're going to lose her and she's gonna go help Black Energy, I believe. So, right, is that right?

Yes, so I get to coordinate the Suicide Prevention Collaborative of El Paso County. I've been doing that for five and a half years, but today is my last day. I'm gonna be the new Energy Services Program Manager, helping people with utility assistance in 119 communities throughout the state with Black Hills Energy.

which is another great avenue because our utilities definitely have that. But I wanna recognize all the work that you've kind of put in all these years. And really thank you for that. So I really appreciate it.

Thank you, it was definitely a collaborative experience. I wanna give a shout out to the members of the Suicide Prevention Collaborative and Council Member Leinweber, Mayor Yemi, when you both took office prioritizing behavioral health and knowing that's a link to our community health and quality of life. I know I've met with most of you all up here who have championed it as well. So really appreciate that partnership and elevating this work, thank you.

So we also have, David is here with Suicide Prevention. Do you wanna make some comments? And then also Nami, maybe following up.

Hello, thank you so much for the time and the recognition of this work here in Colorado Springs. My name is David Galvan, I'm with Soul Shop Movement. We primarily work within faith communities and having this conversation within those places and those facilities. But as Maryam and I have worked together and David Lineweber in this process, I've seen just the work that can happen in this community and what's happening. The story that I just wanna leave you with is a story that I've been telling lately of a Zimbabwe psychiatrist In Zimbabwe, there are 14 million people and there are only 12 psychiatrists. For their entire community, we think we have a mental health problem. What I do know is this, is that this particular psychiatrist had a client that couldn't make it to him one day. And because of that, that client ended up taking their own life. And he said, it can't be this way. Can't happen this way. What can we do that's different? And he asked himself, in every town, in every town, what do we have an abundance of? And they said, grandmothers. He said, what if we just like train grandmothers with some like gatekeeping skills and like how to have this conversation and just listening skills. And through clinical trials, they found that the grandmothers were having greater success than clinicians were. They call it grandmothers on a bench. It's a book, it's a resource, you can read it and check it out yourself on Amazon. But what I think about this for us here in Colorado Springs is what would it look like? What would it look like if we were to get everybody some type of gatekeeper training to be able to ensure that we have the resources available to each one of us to provide help, healing, and hope? So thank you for your time.

I didn't see you, so that's why I didn't ask you to come up. But you wanna come forward? I was.

I was hiding behind Steve.

Yeah, I know. I was like, well, Dave's here, and so I'm... Thomas told me if I sit there that I'm on camera, so I sat down.

My name is Cass Walton. I serve as the Executive Director of Suicide Prevention Partnership, and I work with the Steering Committee on the Suicide Prevention Collaborative of El Paso County. I want to say thank you to the mayor and to City Council Today is an important opportunity to recognize how far our community has come in making suicide prevention a shared priority. Through the collaboration of the city, community organizations, healthcare providers, schools, businesses, first responders, and most importantly, people with lived experience, we have built a greater awareness, strengthened resources, and created more opportunities for people to connect to help. On behalf of the Suicide Prevention Partnership and the Collaborative of El Paso County, thank you to the City of Colorado Springs for your continued leadership and support. Your partnership sends a powerful message that suicide prevention is a community responsibility and that every life matters. And while we are here today to celebrate progress, we also have to acknowledge the reality of what is happening in our community. We have seen very recent heartbreaking examples of desperation leading to death by suicide. These losses remind us that the need is urgent and that our work is far from finished. But I also see something else every single day. And I see people experiencing that same desperation and choosing to stay. I see people reach out, accept help, connect with another person, find a resource, begin therapy, lean on their community and discover that a moment of crisis does not have to become the end of their story. The difference is often the help that is accessed. And that is where every one of us has a role. So today I ask our entire community to take action. Learn the warning signs, know how to reach 988, check in on one person, someone that you care about. Ask the question, are you thinking about suicide? And be willing to listen to the answer. And if someone is struggling, help them to connect to support rather than facing that moment alone. Suicide prevention isn't something any one organization can accomplish alone. It takes all of us creating a community where people know they are not alone, know where to turn, and have access to the help they need to choose to stay. Thank you for standing with us and continuing to make suicide prevention a priority in our community.

And lastly, if Emily wants to come forward, Brady from NAMI.

Thank you all so much for just elevating the conversation around Suicide Prevention Month. I think all to what has already been said, I'll just echo the importance of collaboration. That collaboration term was used more often than not in the last speakers that were able to share our work. We have to keep showing up collaborative. We have to continue not working in silos. We need to continue having conversations. I think in the spirit of suicide prevention, being able to have simple conversations like, how are you? And truly taking the time to be able to have that person respond in whatever way they do respond. So I think for us to be able to continue the conversations and recognize the good work that is being done, but this work is not complete. And so for us to move forward together, ensure that folks know the support that's available. 988 was elevated in the proclamation. I'm very grateful that we continue having that support. So for us to keep having these conversations, keep honoring that importance of talking about mental health, and make sure that we never feel like we are alone in our difficulties. Thank you.

great and mary i mean any final words before i turn it back to the president i just want to say nami has their event next month they didn't ask me to say that but please come out and support them back to you council president councilman hanjum thank you madam president i'm actually going to give another plug for an event on september 20th and cass walton's uh organization which by the way has the educational materials to give to those grandmas on the bench that is a big part of what they do And so thank you for that, Cass. And on September 20th, they have their Race Against Suicide. It's a 5K run and a 3K walk. So go out and join that as well. And then lastly, I also want to give my personal thank you to Nicole Johnston, who is not only moving on to other great things and serving people, which is what she does. Thank you, Nicole, for your five years in this role. And she also shows us that there's life after being a city council member. She's a former study council member for Aurora. And thank you for your service in that role, too, as well. Thank you, Nicole.

I don't see any other comments. This is a proclamation, so we'll join you up front for a celebratory picture. Moving on to item 5C, will the clerk please read item 5C into the record?

City Council appointments to boards, commissions, and committees.

On the Audit Committee, Council Liaisons Dave Donaldson and myself recommended the reappointment of Jim Godfrey, who I believe was here. I don't see him now. Councilman Donaldson, do you have any comments?

No, I can just reassure citizens that Mr. Gottfried, he's a great asset on the audit committee. He's really thorough and has a background that helps. And we're well served by him. And also, he lives in District 1, so that's always a plus.

i would agree moving on to the historic preservation board a vacancy occurred on the historic preservation board due to a resignation of a current member council liaisons kimberly gold and nancy hingem recommended elevating john went who has served as an alternate member since may of 2026 to a voting member position council members gold or hinge do you have any comments

Thank you, Madam President. I just really want to congratulate Dr. Wendt. And I want to circle back to when we did our interviews, where there were so many amazing candidates. And we really had a hard time selecting. And I just really want to congratulate and also point out that you can go from how quickly you can go from being an alternate to being on a board. And I really want to encourage folks to get involved with our boards, commissions, and committees. And also, I want to say that it's really cool that Dr. Wendt is a military historian.

uh considering the city that we live in thank you if there are no additional comments um council councilman donaldson yeah thanks madam president i just want to point out he also lives in district one that's all if there are no additional comments council member gold has made a motion we have a second by councilman rainey let's vote

And the motion passes nine to zero.

Moving into item seven, will the clerk please read, which is items called off consent calendar, will the clerk please read item 4BB into the record? Do you have a comment before this item?

Did you want to do item six or you?

Oh, I'm so sorry, I missed it. It's on the very top of my page. Yes, we will go back to item six, mayor's business.

Thank you, Madam President. There are a number of things I wanted to mention. First, thank you for the 9-11 proclamation. For those who do want to participate, I think at least the partial list, 8 o'clock at Mount Carmel, 945 at Mitchell High School, where the part of that celebration is this. is in commemoration of one of the head flight attendants, who's a graduate of Mitchell High School, Catherine Yancey-Laborie, and then at 11 o'clock at UCCS, and then the large one, I think, at three o'clock at the Fallen Firefighters Memorial. I'd like to welcome everyone to come to that, who wishes. I've got a few transportation-related things. First, USA Today has named Colorado Springs Airport as a nominee for best small airport in the nation. and voting is open, and so we'd like to encourage people to support our local airport. More importantly, fly out of it. I made some reservations for it this weekend. Near the flying course area, we've been working with Shane Ferguson at CDOT to obtain a dedicated pair of left turns to address some safety issues, and we very much appreciate CDOT and Mr. Ferguson's quick response on addressing these issues. And then also on the transportation side, you may have seen the 2019 settlement agreement with respect to ADA accessibility. We have five more years to meet the requirement and we are meeting it this year. So thank you to everybody in Public Works and our contractors that has helped make that happen ahead of time. A couple other things to note, the park systems master plan is available for public comment. It is on the city's main website and for ease, there's all 137 pages. there's a 14-page executive summary or there's a two-page, one-pager for folks to review. We welcome public comments. This is an important part of our process. Parks play a key role in our community and we would very much appreciate public comment on that. I would note last week was the Mayor's Cup. We raised $40,000 for the place to address youth homelessness. This Thursday from 4.15 to 5.15 at Pioneer's Museum will be a reception and community celebration for our new presiding judge, Kristen Hoffaker. And finally, I know a number of people, including the Mayor and Congressman Jeff Crank and Senator John Hickenlooper, plan to be at the groundbreaking for the Temple for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Flying Course at 10 o'clock this Saturday. And you can also view that online. So those are a few things to just cover. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Now moving on to item seven, items called off consent calendar. Will the Clerk please read item 4BB into the record?

City Council Regular Meeting, minutes August 25th, 2026.

Councilman Williams. Thank you, President Kar-Iverson. I just want to reference page 14 of the packet. It says Council Member Williams clarified that the board was not in existence prior to the election. While that statement is true, during the meeting I said the opposite, so I was just going to summarize that with with the passage of the old colorado city downtown development authority in november twenty twenty four the establishing ordinance appointed the initial five o c c d d a board members and i can work with the clerk on that but that's the gist of it so i need a motion to amend

I'm stuck. I have a motion from Councilman Williams whose name is stuck. Can I get a second? I am stuck. Councilman Rainey, let's vote on amending these minutes.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

Moving on to item 8A, will the clerk please read item 8A into the record?

An ordinance submitting section 113, collection of charges and remedies of article 1, general provisions of chapter 12, utilities of the code of the city of Colorado Springs, 2001 is amended pertaining to liens.

The green button, there you go.

Clicker. Good afternoon, Madam President Criberson, Pro Tem Risley, members of the Council. Okay, my name is Patrick Malone. With me is Renee Congdon, Utilities Division Chief. I'm the Revenue and Billing Manager of Colorado Springs Utilities. We're gonna talk about property liens and the expansion from just water and wastewater to electric and gas as well. Let's get into it. So here's a quick definition, and we will not be discussing or changing the way that liens work today. We're just going to discuss the expansion of the use of them. So basically what a lien does for us in this case is gives us a higher priority. As a utility, we are considered an unsecured creditor, and what it would do is make us a secured creditor, giving us higher priority in situations to collect revenue that is owed. So this is not new. We have the ability to do liens today for water and wastewater. We have done exactly one of them in my eight year tenure here. In that scenario, the company owed about $90,000 in water and the lien was successful. The building sold and we were able to fully collect our 90,000 in water revenue. So the proposed change today is to change it from water to utility system, thus expanding it to electric and gas. And a brief legal slide.

Renee Congdon, City Attorney's Office, Utilities Division Chief. So legally you are allowed or the utility is allowed to place liens for unpaid utility services under case law and current law in Colorado. Our city code only allows it for water and wastewater and so this change would allow for all four services. We were looked at, we looked into why the city code only allows water and wastewater and the best that we could think of is it was following the state and what the state law has regarding the state model. But that doesn't actually apply to us as a home rule. And there are other home rule cities that allow liens for all 4 services. And so we'd just like to change our code so that it matches these other home rule cities.

Additional rationale here. So we are not intending on changing our collection practices. And so we still utilize what we have in place currently for the bulk of our collection methods. And so a little bit of data. So the average residential customer who is disconnected for non-pay It's $580 on average. The average commercial customer is around $1,300. And so we will leave that in place for the bulk of our customers. These are for the extreme and unique circumstances. And up here on the slide is based on actual current data, there are only two commercial customers this would actually apply to. and they both owe us well over $100,000 and are well over 90 plus days past due each. And so that is the type of situation we would use this for. And kind of the moral here is that disconnect does not always mean revenue recovery. In certain cases, disconnecting service could actually mean the opposite, and that's where liens come into play to help us kind of protect that revenue. So that's why the change to city ordinance. I will take questions.

Councilman Donelson.

Yeah, thanks, Madam President, and thank you for the presentation, Patrick. I just wanted to be really clear for citizens or reporters who are listening to this. This is intended for very large customers who fall very far behind. I think you mentioned a couple that are, did you say 100,000?

It's well over, yes.

Yeah, well over 100,000 behind and then they are foreclosed on or the property is sold. Currently, typically CSU doesn't get to recover the 100,000 or more that it is owed and that is made up by rate payers. That has to be collected from our utility bills. So the objective here is that a lien is placed on that property. So if it is sold, we are at the front of the line or towards the front of the line to get paid from the proceeds of the sale. And so it is a measure to really protect the small rate payers, the regular citizens. Could you improve that on like what I just said? Could you clarify it or add anything you want to?

Yeah, you said it very well, Councilman Donaldson. Yeah, going back to that first slide, it really does just protect us and makes us a, excuse me, makes us a secured creditor. And that is the biggest deal with this is when it comes to splitting of loss in the case of, say, a bankruptcy, we get very, and we had a recent scenario, we get very low priority as an unsecured creditor. Had we had a lien for electric and gas, that would have prevented that and we would have much higher priority because we are considered secured. And so, you know, water oftentimes is not the highest usage, meaning if we had a lien, it would not protect most of our revenue. So this change will just make it a lot easier for us to protect revenue. And to your point, fairness for rate payers.

Okay, thanks.

Sir.

I don't see any other questions. We have a motion from Councilman Hingem and a second from Councilman Donaldson. Let's vote on 8A.

And the motion passes nine to zero. Thank you.

Thank you. Moving on to item 9A, will the clerk please read item 9A into the record.

Ordinance number 26-38 amending the zoning map of the City of Colorado Springs pertaining to 7.7 million acres located at 4290, 4310, 4320, 4330, 4340 Buckingham Drive from Business Park with conditions of record to Light Industrial with conditions of records.

Sure. I'm looking for Kevin because he's on the paper, but you'll do. That's great. Thank you.

We'll take you.

Perfect.

All right, whenever you're ready. Yeah, Molly O'Brien, Planner 2. I'm just here again filling in for Chris Sullivan, who was the case planner on this project. This item was heard two weeks ago on August 25th, and during that meeting, Council moved to restrict additional use at the site, which included data centers. So again, this is just a rezone of five vacant parcels from business park with conditions of record to light industry with conditions of record restricting those uses that I mentioned. So we're happy to give additional information if requested.

Yeah, I just want to reiterate that this is the third reading because of the amendment to the last regular meeting. So I don't see any Councilmember comments at this time. I do have a motion from Councilman Hingem and a second from Councilman Casey. Let's vote.

Madam President, could I just make a statement before we vote?

You can.

Okay, thank you. And I made the motion last time to add data centers to be restricted from these properties, and that succeeded. The majority, not all, but the majority of council members voted yes on that. But I voted no, and I'll vote no again right now on the overall measure. because it rezones from um business park which is kind of a nicer uh restrictions could be a nicer properties there to light industrial and i think this part of the city off of garden of the gods is really trending in that direction when it was originally zoned it was more kind of out in the boonies over there and rougher. So could be confusing to figure out, well, why is he doing that after he got that amendment? But that's why, thank you.

And the motion passes on a vote of seven to two.

Moving on to item nine B, will the clerk please read item nine B into the record?

Ordinance number 26-48 of the City of Colorado Springs dissolving the old Colorado City Downtown Development Authority.

Emily, you're here as the presenter. Do you have any comments?

Yeah, this would be the second reading of this item. Again, at this time, there is no presentation from legislative services and no additional presentations or comment from staff. Councilman Hanjam.

Thank you, Madam President. My understanding is that as there are no presentations, that a decision was also made not to allow public comment. But I would like to make a motion that we allow public comment. We have some people here who would like to speak to the matter. We've heard from many, many people since the last vote. And I think I would just like to give those folks the opportunity to speak. So if I could have a second.

Councilman Lineweber.

I would agree with that, particularly because this was a ballot initiative that we're reversing here. The people voted for this. So we're actually going against a vote. So I think it's important that the people have a chance to voice themselves since they voted for this. And I think that's important to understand. So this wasn't an action that we did. This is an action that was done at the ballot box. So I would agree with Nancy.

The public comments are during the hearings. This isn't a hearing. However, because it was on the agenda that was put out on Thursday, there was no public comment. There will be people who didn't come because of that. So I'm gonna have a hard time supporting public comment when people probably didn't come or show up for public comment because it was on the agenda that there was not public comment. Councilman Donelson.

Yeah, I'll also support that motion. And I would point out that some things have actually changed since we voted on this two weeks ago. A resolution was passed by the DDA stating that they would seek a mill levy. And if that failed, they would support dissolution. They would voluntarily support us, well, they would support us dissolving them. and also they've committed to not having debt at that point. They would pay anything off so that that wouldn't be a problem. So to me, that's a significant change from where we were two weeks ago when we voted. So I'd certainly wanna hear them address that and give us that information.

Councilman Lineweber.

Could we, because of that, new information, can we just allow at least the chairman of the bid to tell us what the board actually did and hear it firsthand?

Councilman Williams, do you agree to that? Yes, I will agree to that. So if the chair would like to speak, you are... Welcome to just can make sure the green buttons on so we can hear you. Thank you.

Thank you president.

Thank you. President and the rest of council.

Yes, so we've had a great deal of discussion, not only prior to this dissolution ordinance, but. Really, since we started meeting as a board and what our objectives were from the get go, the mill levy. Was part of the plan. And it was understood that that was essential to this organization running. That was never disillusioned to us, unintended. So, since, you know, what council member Donaldson reference, we did pass a resolution on Friday stating that we also drew out a few. I won't call them contingencies, but plans in that ordinance to be drafted. So, 1 is what was previously references that our intention is to go back to the ballot in 20. 27 male levy for 5 mills. Um, in that we will also include redrawing those boundaries and excluding some nodes that were suggested by city planning. Um, that just don't really coincide with the character of what the plan is, uh, in keeping that, you know, along Colorado Avenue corridors specifically. Um, and then I think the final. Thing we stated, um, was that. we would unilaterally dissolve. That can be written into the ordinance or it can be a separate ordinance that was our council still needed to refer to city council to decide how that needed to be written. But that would be agreed on in the ordinance that we put forward for the mill livery. So there wouldn't be any disagreement that we're all agreeing that we move forward. And in that context, we agreed to dissolve if it does not pass. And the final thing was return any tip funds that are collected resolve any debt. There is no intention to be in debt. The only debt that we've considered is the previously mentioned. Forgivable loan for running the middle of the election. That forgiveness is stated specifically that if the. mail levy does not pass, the debt is automatically forgiven. So we would be able to move forward with dissolution at that time.

Can you clarify in 27, is it April or November election that year?

I think the hope originally was April, given that we are now two months behind because we've been focused on the dissolution effort, I would advocate for November.

And were you planning on having council refer that to the ballot or are you gonna petition on? Council. Councilman Lineweber.

I think that was my question because there's some clarification with that, because I think that April's easier for us than November is, but I have to kind of refer to Sarah to kind of give us some explanation about what's the, I mean, when we want to add something to the ballot, I mean, in April, we're sending ballots to every individual in Colorado Springs. So you're already doing that. How, what's the cost or whatever if we were to say we wanna add this to that? Give me some understanding.

So for clarification, no matter what election, April or November, they are a DDA, they pay the costs. So the city would not be paying the cost for the election regardless of April or November. It's the DDA has to pay the costs of the election. So if it's a cost issue, if they want to add it to April, they have to move fairly quickly, get organized. I'm guessing, and again, I'm guessing because I do not know how many registered voters, I don't know how many properties are in the DDA at this point. I mean, I know what it was in the past election, but I have no idea. And I'd have to modify our election management system because it does not allow people. to vote that are not in the city limits, because businesses can designate anyone in the state of Colorado to vote on their behalf. I'm saying 20,000. Again, I don't know for sure, but I would say that. But just for real clarification, the DDA is paying the cost of the election, regardless of when it is.

Thank you.

And may I clarify, is that... Are you insinuating that that's a moot point on behalf of the city? Shouldn't matter whether it's April or November necessarily.

Well, I mean, yes, it is work on my staff's part to add it to April. That is a given point. But I'm just saying if it's a cost consideration, just know that the DDA pays the cost no matter which election you're putting it on. That was my point for clarification.

Understood. And I guess I need some clarity because November is run by the county, correct? So how is that going to be? How does that affect you? Or do you just work with the county on it for November?

Right, it would be like we coordinate with the county, provide our questions, et cetera. In this case, instead of us coordinating, I guess it would be that working with the DDA board to work directly with the county clerk. So in April, they're working with me. In November, my understanding, I don't do coordinated elections. You would be working with them, is my understanding. I know the chief of staff is a former county clerk, may know a little bit more about that with special districts, but special districts add on to November all the time. That is not uncommon for districts to choose to coordinate, so to speak, with the county clerk and recorder.

Okay, so there's 20,000. You guys don't currently have debt. Well, you do have debt, but you've explained it's gonna be forgiven, but we're gonna need an additional 20,000. So help me understand that piece.

So the debt is not executed. So I've been sitting on the note for over a couple months based on this conversation about concern of us having debt and to allow this conversation to be collaborative and not trying to get my foothold in the door by signing a document. That document says $35,000. So that has the coverage for this $20,000 reference plus an excess to cover all the additional costs for community engagement, voter awareness.

That's what I needed to know, thank you.

Yes. Councilman Risley.

Thanks, Madam President. So I was going to ask some similar kinds of questions. I think you just explained where the funds would come from should you move forward with an election. If the election is unsuccessful, can you explain the plan to repay the debt? Or as I understand it, it's just supposed to be forgiven? Is that the?

It is. It is written in the note that it is automatically forgiven post-election results of that mill levy.

Regardless of the outcome?

Regardless. Okay. Well, sir, That it goes negative, that the mill levy does not pass.

So if the mill levy does not pass, the debt is forgiven.

It will automatically be forgiven. It's written into the note that way. So that way there will be no debt on the books, and we will be able to have this council dissolve us.

Okay.

Two other questions that I had. One, it's been suggested that the five mills that I think was indicated in your letter would not be sufficient to complete the things that the DDA intends to do. Can you talk a little bit about that?

I need a little clarity to that question, sorry.

If I understood the letter that we received over the weekend or on Friday, if I understood that letter correctly, it stated that you would pursue a five mill. Increase or election is that correct? 5 mills?

Sure. That's the original question on the ballot that did not pass.

And so it was suggested that 5 mills is not enough funding to accomplish the things that the DDA would want to accomplish.

I'm not this came from Robert Gardner. The email came from yeah, from not aware of that contextually. I, I think that. Maybe it's misunderstood that the five mills, that we can't move forward as an organization without those five mills, I think is what the intent is. That is why we're saying we have to go back to the ballot to be a sustainable financial organization. If in turn it does not pass, we all agree that we will dissolve because that is not enough funds. Does that make sense?

I think it does.

That was the intent of that. I'm sorry if it got... skewed, but that is the intent of that statement.

So the other question I had for you specifically, can you describe your financial relationship or your investment with the DDA?

Sure. Thank you. So I have never invested any money. I have been involved in philanthropy for quite some time. I would say I'm running on about 20 years now. I learned very young that I never mix my advocacy voice and my financial empowerment. It produces a conflict of interest that can be brought up whether I have one or not. And so I chose my advocacy voice for this. I have been a resident of OCC. I'm a commercial building owner and I am a business owner. And my voice and my understanding of the community is more powerful than a financial donation. So no loan. No donations. It can be provided records of that with who ran this, you know, Old Carter City Partnership who collected donations to run the original formation. Okay.

Then I guess my last question, should the measure to resolve the DDA be successful today? Can you talk a little bit about what a bid might look like from your perspective?

So there has been a lot of talk about BID. I was involved in not so much the engagement process of forming the DDA and deciding, but I did attend stakeholder meetings where they were doing community feedback and that sort of thing. And so I got the dissertation as to what the three, the DDA, the BID and the JID. I won't pretend to say that I understood everything about them at that time, but I understood what conceptually why the DDA was chosen because my intimate knowledge is that this avenue, this district needs dedicated paid support. They need an executive director to lead them, much like the role that I'm filling, but I'm trying to run five businesses, raise a family, be a good husband, and find some time for myself, and that's, I can't give what OCC deserves. It was clear to me that during that engagement that BID, JID even less than that, did not supply enough financial revenue recurring for them to have that option. It was very similar to what we have now where it's a board of volunteers and similar budget to work with and really a bid also struck me as I mean it's very stated clearly that it's about sort of events and marketing and facades which is what OCCA has been doing for quite some time, and it has not changed. Since my tenure there and since everyone else's tenure there, OCCA hasn't changed. So what we do need is development and very creative development with infill projects and yes, facade and these placemaking things as well as outlined in the plan of development, But a bid is not designed to redevelop and revitalize by ordinance, by the state ordinance, the way the DDA ordinance is written. It specifically talks about revitalization of a business corridor. And that's what we need. Now that I've spent a great deal of time investigating this, my biggest concern is that we have framed this as there is this easy pivot to go to a bid. And that is incredibly false. A bid is always a tighter boundary. Right now we're going from Manitou Line to the Freeway Line. We're talking almost $50 million of assessed value. We're gonna reduce that similar to what the Special Maintenance Improvement District covers right now, which is about four blocks. So we're gonna take $50 million worth of real estate, shrink it down to 15. Where does that go with the mill? It's not five mills. It's 20, it's 30. As Dariah stated, we could go up to 50. Who in their right mind after city council dissolves a voter approved district would vote for a 50 mil? How could they trust that? Even if they wanted to be taxed out the wazoo, which to my opinion, my taxes have doubled in six years and my rents have flatlined. Does that answer your question?

It does, but I guess I'm still confused because if one of the things that you're proposing to do is to redraw the boundaries of the DDA as part of this mill levy campaign, doesn't that effectively do what you just described?

No, I appreciate that. So the redraw is very minimal comparatively. It still would go to Manitou to the freeway line. It's just removing those nodes, which again, we did not plan, that's all future revenue that would come from TIF redevelopment. And as you know, like along there on Bijou by City Glass and wrap around Cosgrove Metals, that's not developed. It's light industrial at best or raw land. So our current assessed value and our current financial data modeling is based off of current, not future, right? There was no, absolutely no modeling done for what future TIF redevelopment revenue would look like. Right, that's out of the current projections.

Okay, thank you.

You're welcome.

Councilman Donaldson, does... Oh, Councilman Hingen's motion is... Are you satisfied with that? Okay. So I don't see any further comments. That motion that she made is no longer...

I'm not sure what, I guess you meant by are you satisfied. I still would like, they're still public to comment. I thought this was clarification.

That's why Councilman Lineweber said that he would agree if the board chair could speak, and he did, and he can speak as much as he wants. So I do have a motion from you, but I don't have a second.

Okay, then I would like to make a motion again and see if there's a second. for public comment.

I'll second that.

Okay. So we have a motion from Councilman Hingen and a second from Councilman Donaldson. And again, most of the residents that read this didn't come because there was no comment. So that leaves out half the public comment and we'll vote.

And this is a motion to allow public comment.

Correct.

And the motion fails six to three.

It passes.

Sorry, it's been a long day. I need more caffeine. I apologize. The motion passes six to three.

So I'm going to take a 10 minute break. We are back in session.

Councilman Williams. Thank you President Kerr-Iverson. This is City Council live in action. I will put a motion on the table to postpone for two weeks because It was stated on the agenda that there would be no public comments. City Council does have the ability to change that, as we have just seen. But several people have called asking if they could come and speak on this item. They were told by staff and other individuals that there wouldn't be any public comment today. So I will put a motion out that we postpone this two weeks. And as with every motion, we'll see if it passes. Councilman Donaldson.

Yeah, thanks, Madam President, and I see it already has a second, so I'll just say, you know, I'll vote yes on that, but I would just point out, while some may have decided not to come down here, the citizens that are here today, they had the same expectation. They wouldn't even get to speak, but it's important enough for them to have been here today, and I think Council should consider that when we do finally vote, how important it is to the business owners in front of us.

And I agree with that. The reason I said what I said twice was because citizens were turned away and were told not to come and were told they couldn't speak. Councilman Gold?

Thank you, Madam President. I will support moving it to two weeks so that we can possibly get potential I do though want to acknowledge those who came out today, closed your businesses, made that sacrifice again. And I realize that many of you will do that a third time. So I just really want to acknowledge those sacrifices that you're making.

We have a motion from Councilman Williams and a second from Councilman Casey to postpone for two weeks.

Let's vote.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

Moving on to item 10A. Will the clerk please read item 10A into the record?

A resolution to repeal resolution 30-14, thereby dissolving the Colorado Springs City Council Engagement Program.

Good afternoon, Blancha. Good afternoon, Madam President. I'm Bloksha Lindsey. I'm the Boards and Commission Program Administrator with Legislative Service, and we are working today to repeal Resolution 3014, dissolving the Colorado Springs City Council Engagement Program. I do not have any further information from our presentation two weeks ago, but if there are any Council questions, I'm here to answer them.

Councilman Gold? I just wanted to state for the record, I did want this pulled off of consent because at the time, the citizen volunteer, Mr. Phillips, was under the impression that he was going to be able to speak today to make some remarks to Council. Unfortunately, he was unable to attend, so I just wanted to give that quick update.

All right, and that is all I have for you all.

I don't see any more questions or comments from Council Members. I have a motion from Councilman Williams and a second from Councilman Risley.

The motion passes nine to zero.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Moving on to item 10 B. Will the clerk please read item 10 B to 10 D into the record.

10 be an ordinance repealing article 1 general business license provisions chapter 2 business licensing liquor regulation and taxation and reordering article 1 business license provisions of chapter 2 business licensing liquor regulation and taxation of the code of the city of Colorado. So he's 2001 is a minute pertaining to business licensing and providing penalties and violations thereof. 10c an ordinance repealing and reordaining article 3 sales of goods and services chapter 2 business licensing liquor regulation and taxation of the code of the city of colorado springs 2001 is amended pertaining to business licensing and providing penalties and violations thereof and 10d an ordinance repealing article 4 sexually oriented business of chapter 2 business licensing liquor regulation and taxation in reordaining article for adult use businesses of the code of the city of colorado springs 2001 is amended pertaining to business licensing and providing penalties and violations thereof

Greetings Honorable Council Members, Lee McCray, City Clerk's Office, License Enforcement Officer. Coach Greb for the business licensing section of chapter two. The updated ordinances are in your packet and with the changes that we discussed last time, which I'd be happy to go into more detail on, they're also in your cover memo. Or I can go into the full presentation. What's your pleasure?

Does anybody want them to go into full detail?

Here, okay.

If there are no questions on 10b, Councilman Hingem?

I just simply want to say that I had myself a very thorough explanation of this and am fine with going forward with voting.

I need a motion for 10B. I have a motion from Councilman Hingem and a second from Councilman Rainey. Let's vote on item 10B.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

I need a motion for 10C. I have a motion from Councilman Hingem and a second from Councilman Gould. Let's vote on 10C.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

And I need a motion. I have a motion from Councilman Hingham and a second from Councilman Rainey. Let's vote on 10D.

And the motion passes nine to zero. Thank you all.

Thank you. 11A, will the clerk please read item 11A into the record?

A use of errands to allow establishment of a restaurant use coffee shop within the multifamily high zone district consisting of approximately 0.91 acres located at 16 East Platt Avenue.

Today's hearing will proceed as the follow. We'll have a presentation from city staff, applicant presentation, public comment in support, public comment in opposition, applicant rebuttal, closing staff comments and back to the dais for questions, deliberation and decisions. Hi, Ryan.

Hello, Council President, members of City Council, Ryan Teefer-Tiller, Urban Planning Manager with the City's Planning Department. I'm actually filling in today for one of our planners, Ethan Schaffer, who staffed this project from submittal through the Planning Commission hearing. Ethan is out of town today and is not available. That being said, I'm gonna run through some slides very quickly and do my best to answer any additional questions that council may have. I will also note that this item might have been justified to put on your consent calendar, but there was one no vote at city's planning commission and based on our general practices, we try to put those on new business for council. The site in question is located at 16 East Platte, that's the northeast corner of Cascade and Platte Ave on the edge of downtown. It's just under an acre in size, and as was read into the record, the application is a use variance to allow a portion of the building to be used for a coffee shop, which is actually pretty consistent with the Woodman Valley Chapel and how they operate at many of their other campuses. This image shows that the portion of the building, I believe it's roughly 1,600 square feet, the wing fronts cascade and has been vacant for some time. I think historically it was used for educational purposes, some religious classroom space. The... property owner and their design team will come back with a future application to make some minor physical improvements including a new front door, an ADA ramp, those types of things to improve that portion of the building and make it look a lot more like a coffee shop should this be approved by City Council. The coffee shop will serve both public as well as the church community. You don't need to be a member of the church to use the coffee If you're walking or riding your bike down Cascade, you're welcome into their coffee shop. The key element here, and I probably should have stated this earlier, is the site is zoned R5. That's a multifamily residential zone district that does not typically permit commercial uses, non-residential uses, with a few exceptions, including schools and religious institutions and those types of things. There was some discussion early on about the possibility of rezoning the site, either to form-based zone or a different commercial zone, but ultimately the decision was made with the support of staff to pursue the use variance as that would really limit the future development opportunities and perhaps prevent a full-scale redevelopment of this historic property. And you can see here the zone map shows the context of the site with form-based zone to the east and south, as well as a mix of residential and kind of transitional zones with the OR zone to the west. The use variance is narrowly tailored to allow just the proposed coffee shop or restaurant use. It would not allow a full range of other commercial zones or uses that might be enabled through a zone change. Staff believes that the proposal is low impact, it serves the community, and it's very much context appropriate. The application went through two review cycles. We notified nearly 200 property owners in the area of the application. We received no comment from those adjacent stakeholders. The application was reviewed by a range of internal agencies. Really the only notable comments were from landscaping that would require some minor landscape improvements as part of the future development plan application. The proposal is highly consistent with Plan CUS, the city's comprehensive plan in establishing a mix of walkable uses in the context of the edge of downtown. This slide lists the six review criteria that were analyzed for use variance. staff provided analysis of those criteria in more detail in the staff report. Ultimately, we found that the application meets the review criteria and have provided a couple of motions for council's consideration. As I mentioned at city's planning commission, there was one commissioner that felt the criteria weren't met, but the other eight did support the application. I'd be happy to answer any questions or you're obviously welcome to hear from the applicant.

Councilman Leinweber.

So I first need to kind of disclose that this is actually my church, but I do not receive any financial benefit. There is nothing, the only benefit I will get is a better coffee. And so I may be a little bit biased because of that, but I will still look at this with clear intent. I can get coffee down the street also. Although it's a little ways. There's actually quite a ways to get a good coffee. But my other question was, And again, I don't know if this is pertinent, but I know that they I know the future plan of the church is possibly to develop some residents up above this coffee shop. And so does this open the door for that? Or how does that work? Or is that a separate thing or what?

um it's a great question council member um the r5 zone district which permits the religious institution would also permit some uh supportive residential uses or accessories they're already covered for that so they're already covered with that um and they would not need this application and this application does not relate at all to future residential uses and is it

To my recollection in visiting a lot of different churches, having coffee shops at a church is kind of like a thing. Would you agree that there's a fair amount?

I don't know that I can speak to it as a trend or a pattern, but I do know for a fact that Woodman Valley Chapel at multiple of their other campuses do have similar coffee shops.

So this isn't out of the ordinary or anything like that. This is, hey, our people want coffee.

And I think it is very consistent with an urban land use pattern where we see mixed use buildings that provide a range of commercial office institutional uses all within one space.

And I will make one last comment as another part of this building, they do have a full kitchen. So they have the ability to do full meals and everything. I mean, the kitchen's pretty complete as a commercial kitchen. So they do have that there, but it's not going to be where this coffee shop is going to be. So, all right, thank you.

Councilman Hingham. Thank you, Madam President. It really isn't a question. It's more just some commentary. I think not only is this perhaps becoming more of a trend in churches, but I just think generally speaking, in a residential neighborhood, having places for people to gather and connect is very positive for the neighborhood. It's a very, very positive thing. And I will tell a little story on myself. I live about a block and a half from an establishment called Good Neighbors Meeting House. which when it was originally established was dog tooth coffee and this was many years ago and I just thought it was the most horrible thing ever that we were going to like what was that going to do to the traffic on my street and blah blah blah blah blah and I now look back at myself and I think what an idiot I was because it is probably the best thing that happened to that neighborhood it's on a trail it's where The students who go to North gather every morning to go walk together to North. They grab a coffee. It's just a good thing, and it's certainly clearly good for this church that has quite a fine reputation building community, building relationships. We talked this morning about the importance of building community in terms of mental health and suicide prevention, et cetera. So I have no problems with this. I do have a question. In fact, I've made the motion, but I do have a question. Does this use variance transfer? Should this church ever leave this building with the variance transfer with ownership?

Again, Ryan Tiefertiller, and that's a great question. Use variances, conditional use, similar relief from code does run with the land, not with the owner. So should Woodman Valley Church sell the property to a different institution, that institution would be able to continue the use. If the use is terminated for 12 months, then you lose that right, but ownership does not affect the rights granted by this application.

Councillor Osanic. Councillor Osanic. Councillor Osanic. Councillor Osanic. Councillor Osanic. Great. Councillor Osanic. Great. Councillor Osanic. Great. Doesn't change my motion, but Great. Doesn't change my motion, but Great. Doesn't change my motion, but thanks for that clarification.

Thank you, Madam President. Yeah, I'm fine with the coffee shop. I just had a question, Brian, as far as this is in the Downtown Development Authority. Did it not go through the Downtown Review Board? It went through Planning Commission instead. Can you refresh my memory why that would be?

Councilman, I believe you're referring to the Downtown Review Board, which has authority over anything within the form-based zone. This is our five zone just outside the form-based zone, so the Downtown Review Board did not have authority over it. Got it. Thank you.

We will now hear from the applicant to provide an overview of the variants.

Good afternoon, President and Council, men and women. I'm Mike Malin. I'm here on behalf of Woodman Valley Chapel. I'm our CFO for our multi-site campus. And I'll be brief. We've had a long morning already and into the afternoon. And we are just excited that you guys are hearing this application this morning. We believe it's an opportunity to add a small welcoming coffee shop. really good coffee to the downtown area. But for Woodman Valley Chapel, this is more than just providing a place for good coffee. It is a place to provide a natural setting for people to gather, connect, and build relationships throughout the week. At the same time, we believe that this coffee shop can be a meaningful amenity for the broader downtown community. With a dedicated entrance alongside Cascade Avenue, it will serve people who live, work, play, study, and visit downtown Colorado Springs. It will bring activity to an existing street frontage and create a walkable neighborhood serving place for conversation and connection. This is a focused request as Ryan let us know earlier and for a very modest use within an existing historic church building. One that is compatible with the downtown context and supports a more active welcoming community space. So we appreciate your time, consideration and welcome to answer any questions you might have.

Councilman Gold. Thank you, Madam President. Should this get approved today when it's expected date that the coffee shop would open?

We anticipate that through our construction phase, we have some abatement that would need to be done, but we anticipate early spring, 2027.

Okay, so no pumpkin spice lattes then, huh?

No, not this year.

Thank you.

Yes.

Councilman Risley.

Thank you, Madam President. No questions necessarily, but just a couple of comments that I wanted to make while you, as representing the applicant, were there. As a fellow downtown business owner, I just want to thank you for the investment in the downtown area, for activating a building and a site that has not really been very active for many years prior to you acquiring the property. It is a great indication of your commitment to the community and thank you for that. Even though, as Ryan T. Fertiller said, this could have been on our consent calendar, I'm actually glad that we are taking the time to talk about it because I do believe there's going to be support to approve this. And I think, if nothing else, it represents some free advertising for you. And I think it just allows us to highlight and underscore the importance of faith-based organizations investing in our community. I WANT TO SAY THANKS FOR ALL THAT. I'M CERTAINLY NO EXPERT BUT SOMEONE WHO HAS DESIGNED MANY CHURCHES ACROSS ACTUALLY A NUMBER OF STATES. I WOULD OFFER TO COUNCIL MEMBER LINE MEMBER'S QUESTION THAT COFFEE SHOPS ARE ACTUALLY A PRETTY BIG COMPONENT OF SOME OF THE PROGRAMMING THAT GOES INTO CERTAINLY REDEVELOPMENTS OR NEW RELIGIOUS FACILITIES BECAUSE IT'S ALL ABOUT fellowship. It's all about gathering and being together. And so I think you guys are obviously going to have great success through that. So congratulations. Thank you.

That is it for the applicant. Moving on to public comment. We have no one signed up for public comment in support. We have no one signed up for public comment in opposition. So public comment is now closed. Moving on to staff comments. If there are no other, you're good. We have a motion from Councilman Hengim and a second from Councilman Donelson. Let's vote.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

Okay, moving on to 11B. Will the clerk please read 11B to 11G into the record?

So 11B through 11G are dealing with Banning Lewis Ranch Village B2 land use. They contain zoning changes, one vacation of public rights away, and concept plan.

Today's hearing process will be as follows. City staff presentation, applicant presentation, public comment and support, public comment and opposition, applicant rebuttal, closing staff comments, and back to the dais for council members' questions, deliberation, and decision. We will now hear from city planning staff.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Council Members. Tamara Baxter, Planning Supervisor for the record. The last two items on your agenda are kind of similar in regards to they're in the same area. These are the last holdings of Oakwood Homes, and they have a full presentation as well. So this one before you is Banning Lewis Ranch Village B2. This is located north of Dublin and east of Banning Lewis Parkway. Proposed zoning, I'm not gonna go over the current zoning, but the proposed zoning on the site is PDZ with airport overlay and streamside overlay, as well as MXM with airport overlay and streamside overlay. Total acreage is 511 acres, and what is being proposed is residential and commercial. Applications before you is a master plan, excuse me, major modification PDZ concept plan, PDZ zone change, concept plan and a zone change, and actually there's a road vacation. So these applications were reviewed under previous chapter seven. And so the master plan amendment is to revise the previous land use designations to establish primarily residential development with some commercial opportunities, as well as a concept plan for both the commercial and residential and zone changes. In front of you is the master plan amendment, so to, I guess to the left, is the existing master plan for Banning Lewis, and then what is being proposed to the right with the master plan amendment. As you'll see, there's kind of a reconfiguration of the park, school site, residential densities, from the existing master plan to what is being proposed. So for the zone change in the concept plan, it is 9.3 acres. As you can see on the screen, it's the area that is circled in red. What is being proposed as a zone is MXM, and this would allow for the commercial uses in this corner. Just to note that this area will become one of the three commercially zoned properties along Dublin Boulevard, east of Mark Shuffle Road. For the PDZ zoning and the PDZ concept plan, it's the remaining 500 acres. It is proposed to be zoned PDZ. Primarily will be single family residential, detached and attached, with a density of 3.5 to 7.99 acres. dwelling units per acre. There is one school site located, it's kind of that purple area in the middle, it's 25 acres, and also being proposed are two future neighborhood park sites. Those are in green, so 7.5 acres and 7.4. In conjunction with these applications is a right-of-way vacation, and that is about 36 acres. This will include Vista del Oro Boulevard and portions of public right-of-way along Dublin and Banning Lewis Parkway. Future subdivision plats will dedicate the right-of-ways within this village once those are known with the development plans as well. Timeline of review, this was submitted to the city in 2023. It did go through six reviews. It was ready for agenda on June 15th. Just to give you a little history on this one, it was actually geared up to go to Planning Commission, and then Oakwood put a halt on that until they could bring in Village C, and they're gonna cover that in their presentation. But I more than happen to answer any questions on timeline. There were two neighborhood meetings for this project. One was on December 20th of 2023. It was very well attended. We did send out notifications as well. Posters and postcards were posted and sent out. Concerns at the neighborhood meeting and public comments that are in your packet had to do with roads, traffic, safety, wildfire, amenities, density, parks and open space, schools. There is a summary of that meeting in your packet as well. There was a second neighborhood meeting when Village C came in and at that meeting on September 16th, Oakwood did provide a status on Village B2. So there was discussion about this project at that neighborhood meeting. With regards to agencies review, this went out to the standard review agencies. All outstanding comments were addressed prior to this being scheduled, the Planning Commission With regards to plan COS, this does meet the big ideas, visions, strategies. It does provide diversity of housing and price point, also provides some opportunity with commercial. These, so just a reminder that these criteria are out of the previous chapter seven code. So these are for the master plan amendment for a zone change concept plan, PDZ zone change, and a PDZ concept plan, as well as road vacations. Staff did evaluate all these criteria when reviewing the application, and the applications, all applications did meet the review criteria. And then these are all the motions. So you have approval or deny for the master plan amendment, concept plan, zone change, PDZ concept plan, PDZ zone change, and right away vacation. That is all I have.

Councilman Casey.

Thank you, Madam President. Just a quick question on the vacation of the road or the right-of-ways. Those aren't established roads, right? Those are just planned roads that were on the original master plan? Correct. Correct, okay. And I could see why we did the retool COS and move from Chapter 7 to the current code. No, I can see why you did that. It's much more complex, it seems like. Thanks.

All right.

Next up, we'll hear from the applicant.

Thank you, Madam President and Council Members. I'm Don Ryan with LAA Design Group. We are the planners and landscape architects for Bading Lewis Ranch. So just as a summary of what we are requesting, B2 in Bannon-Willis Ranch is 511 acres. The rezoning is for 501 of that acres, as well as the 9.2 MXM zoning. As stated, we have a requested density range of 3.5 to 7.99 units per acre. 15 acres of parks are being provided and a 25-acre school site. The goals for B2 are to develop the 511 acres of the original Benning Lewis Ranch annexation and to deliver up to 2,547 new homes and all the accompanying community infrastructure services and amenities that would go along with that community.

I do have a question from Councilman Hingem. Thank you, Madam President. I'm sorry, if you could go to the previous slide. I just didn't push my button quickly enough. On the park acreage, I don't recall the PLDO requirements, but is this like the minimum per PLDO? Is it over the minimum? Is some of it land and some of it other contribution?

It's slightly over the requirement. And we actually have a more detailed slide.

Oh, OK, perfect. OK, thanks.

Just to continue on the goals, some of the goals are to provide housing for the missing middle market, to create housing diversity, and to expand the population base in the east part of Colorado Springs. We also have a goal to create developments with greater density that allow for lower home prices, making them more attainable for first-time homebuyers. This slide is included to show context as to the location of Village B2 compared to the other existing villages in Benning Lewis Ranch. Village 1, 2, and 3 are to the east and east of Benning Lewis Parkway. Village A is to the south of Village B2, and that is currently under construction. And Village B2, as you can see, is to the east of Benning Lewis Parkway and north of Dublin. Gonna move along to this slide, which shows the comparison of the existing 1988 master plan to what we are proposing. And in the existing plan, the land uses were more fragmented and it actually had a plan that was a higher density model with more multifamily and more commercial As a result, in 1988, the original homes were for 4,574 versus 2,547. Now the 4,574 number includes multifamily. So this is the total number of units. Whereas with the 2,547, we are providing single family and duplex homes primarily with some allowance for multifamily. But the focus would be on single family homes and duplex homes. Also related to density comes the price points for these homes. These are the duplex models that are called the Arrival Collection Duets. As you can see, in terms of home prices, these are some of the lowest that are possible these days.

Councilman Gold. Thank you. Could you go back to the previous slide, please? So on these duplex models, what's the estimated HOA for this price point? Because it's a wonderful price point, but notice there can be a stiff HOA on a lot of townhouses, or duplexes rather.

I don't have that information myself, but we do have representatives from Oakwood Homes who might be able to answer that.

Thank you.

Good afternoon. I'm Tyler Jones with Oakwood Homes. So these are not townhomes, they are duplex, so they are fee simple. But to answer your question specifically, typically this product line ranges about $85 per month. for the kind of operation maintenance monthly fee. It is not an HOA, it's a Metro District. Additionally, there is a mill that is for the debt portion of it, but for continual service that is paid to the Metro District, it's approximately $85 a month. That includes trash service and maintenance. These are kind of, they live, And kind of that communal feel. So there's kind of the front paseos or a streetscape. So that landscaping maintenance is taken care of by the Metro District as well.

Great. Thank you. So doing some just rough math here, that means that you could look at a mortgage plus a monthly maintenance fee of around $1,600 to $1,800 a month.

That's right. I mean, one of our goals for this was to target people that live in apartments and give them a path to homeownership within a price point, a monthly payment that was comparable to what they're paying for an apartment. And so developing this product line, that was one of our main focuses, was how do we help people build wealth through homeownership? And this was our solution, was to try to drive that home at a competitive monthly rate.

Thank you so much.

You're welcome.

Again, in comparison to the existing 1988 master plan, this shows the current zoning that's in place in Village B2. As you can see, the yellow R16 is typical of single family development, but there are some large areas of R5 which were planned for multifamily. And there were some fragmented areas of NXM that were mixed use or also multifamily or commercial. By comparison, we're looking at more of a master plan community type of development, again, with single family and paired homes with a centrally located 25 acre school site, two parks, and the 9.2 acre commercial corner. Regarding parkland dedication, as the question was asked, this shows the exact calculations for parkland dedication. So the required acres based on the calculation are 12.87. We are proposing 15 plus acres in two parks. So we're at a surplus of 2.18 acres on the parkland dedication. in addition the community park obligation for b2 alone is 15.59 acres we are proposing 35 acres for a community park which will be in village c just to the south of b2 which will be the next presentation So what this shows is that we're exceeding the parkland dedication, and in addition, we'll be providing a 35-acre community park to serve the entire community. I think we covered these items, but.

Councilman Hinch, I'm looking at a couple of them.

No worries. Thanks. So if you could just remind me, going back to the previous slide, I really don't remember on the community park within a metro district, what for ongoing maintenance is the metro districts and what becomes the city's responsibilities?

Right, for this specific park, it will be a little bit different. There will be an agreement put in place between the Metro District or the developer and Parks and Recreation. So there will be some specific development guidelines and specifics as to who's going to pay for what and what's going to be done. We've discussed with parks that the developer might Provide the land and build the park, and then it would be maintained by the city. But all of these things would be determined once that park is. Identified and an agreement would be put in place.

So that has yet to be negotiated, but you are at this point, you're dedicating that amount to community park.

Yes.

And is that. That is the obligation is 15.59, but you're proposing. Upwards of 35, right?

So, in that last bar in 1 spot, sorry. Yeah, that's right. So, in that last bar to the far right of the slide, what that shows is the obligation in blue. And. In addition, we're also adding to that the Village C obligation. So when you add the Village C obligation and the Village B2 obligation together, you get a 35-acre park. And so that's what we're providing for both B2 and C combined. And the 35 acres will be combined in Village C to the south of B2.

Okay. And I do recognize we're only at the rezoning part, so I don't want to go too far down a rabbit hole, but can you just speculate for me I don't know if I need Kevin's help here. But what happens if, for whatever reason, the city can't find the revenue necessary to support the maintenance of a park that size? I know I'm getting ahead of myself a little bit. And you can just tell me. You're getting ahead of yourself a little bit too much, council member. But I am curious.

Kevin Walker, City Planning Director. Can't speak for the Parks Department specifically, but generally that kind of thing is subject to budget issues as are all parks and all maintenance responsibilities for the city. So I think it's a, obviously they wouldn't take on the construction if they didn't think they had the ability to maintain.

Okay, and then so given that, which I understand, I mean, you don't want to build something you can't, What is what we're voting on? What's the obligation of these numbers going into the future? Could the developer change their mind and say, you know what, we're going to go back to the 15? I'm just trying to understand what's the obligation now versus the future.

Yeah, I think this has been the result of a lot of work along those lines to try and get the developer to figure out how, and the city together, how to figure out how to get a larger community park in one place rather than two moderately sized ones. And so I think that the likelihood of this unraveling, once you've adopted the master plan, that's what the master plan is, and they'd have to come back to change that.

Okay, well, I love it. I mean, don't get me wrong. I think this is awesome. I just want to make sure like recognizing our revenue challenges. It looks like Scott wanted to say something as well. Hey, Scott.

Thank you very much, Scott Smith. I work with Oakwood Homes, and thank you, President, Basically where we're at is we're working with the Parks Department because they really wanna have a desire to do, have more control over how we meet some of the park events and programming. And without any of that going on, what would happen is that Banting Lewis Ranch would include this within the Metro District. It would be developed and then maintained by the Metro District. but we're very willing to work with the Parks Department to try to help them expand their services and operations, and so that's where the agreement's gonna go at some point, but without that, we'll go on autopilot, and this would be more like the Vista Park right now.

Okay, thank you, Scott. I appreciate it. Thank you very much. Councilman Donaldson?

Yeah, I have a question. I think either Scott or Kevin could answer it.

Let's see if Scott's here.

Scott, so I see we've discussed this Village B and we have Village C. Would you call the homeowners the village people?

I would not go that far, no. Okay, thank you. I plead to fifth.

Thank you, Scott.

Okay. okay so that that concludes our presentation for village b2 councilman rainey

Thank you, Madam President. Just a couple of questions. Earlier in the presentation, there was mention about responses to residents' concerns about congestion and traffic and so forth. And since that timeframe, there's been a lot of efforts and a lot that's already been accomplished in that area. Can any one of you talk to some of those responses or maybe you've already responded to those residents based on some of the like the Banning Lewis Parkway that's been built out, the intersection of Mark Shufflewood and Woodman that's also been built out. Can you speak to that?

Yeah. Tyler Jones, Oakwood Homes. There's been a number of roadway improvements in and around Banning Lewis Parkway that has helped alleviate, I would say, those concerns globally. Probably the first and most notable one is the connection of Banning Lewis Parkway north to Woodman. That connection really alleviated a lot of the concern around accessing Mark Shuffle off Dublin. There is additionally improvements happening to Mark Shuffle and Dublin, that intersection. And as that progresses, that will continue to help kind of mitigate the traffic concerns exiting the neighborhood towards the west. So kind of those have been the two primary traffic improvements in terms of arterials and major roadway improvements. Additionally, some of the, you know, not necessarily traffic related, but kind of local street concerns that we got were parking within the site and how kind of congestion is felt on that local street level. And since we've gotten those comments, we have shifted our enforcement company. So we have a covenant control company that's in Batting Lewis Parkway, and they have increased kind of their traffic focus or parking focus to try to mitigate those concerns. And I think that has been generally well-perceived if you're not one of the people leaving cars out on the streets. And so, I'd say globally, I think those three areas have generally, I mean, there's always going to be traffic concerns, I believe, and especially with a developing community where you kind of build out your additional neighborhood and then you have some additional roadway connections around it. So you're kind of building and then catching up after the fact. So I think inherently with a developing neighborhood, you're going to have those. But as we kind of solve some of those connection issues, especially on the arterial and major connection points, that kind of alleviates. So I'd say globally, from our perspective, a lot of those traffic concerns have been mitigated to the best that we can do that.

Well, I would agree with that also. And I know you only mentioned three, but there's like also two other points that construction is being finalized on, which is really alleviating a lot of traffic flow, which I love it a lot in my district because I've now clearly seen free flow of traffic. So I think those things that have been completed and are getting ready to complete will allow folks to really enjoy where they live. The other question I have is you mentioned about, and I think it was in the earlier slide about targeting the missing middle market. And that's a hot topic around, you know, this dies over in the mayor's office and other areas. where housing is a major topic. Of course, it was a major topic earlier this morning. But when you look at the price point that you all are targeting, and I know you've already spoken to this a little bit earlier, but I want you to expand a little bit more on that because that is a price point that you normally don't see for that type of home in this type of neighborhood. So can you expand on that just a tad bit more?

Yeah. Coincidentally, I got an email this morning on... kind of prop 123 and how we've helped contribute towards that. So we've, since 2023, we've had 295 naturally occurring attainable housing homes. And that would be kind of what we had showcased there. But one component kind of, globally stepping back from just the arrival product that we showcased there, which is our most attainable product line. You know, we've tried to have a mentality of kind of multiple segmentations within our master plan community. So we want to, and in that neighborhood where we have our $265,000 home, it sits across the street from a 2,700 square foot traditional front load home. That's kind of on the higher price band. And so we have, and try to build towards a integrated neighborhood that covers that spectrum of home options. So your smaller duplex product, your smaller single family detached alley load where you have very low maintenance, your more traditional home with a backyard, some motor court options where you kind of straddle that line and get a lot of home for less money, a little backyard and some things like that. So ultimately, We've tried to make it where we have a product offering for anybody in the home buying market. if you're in most spectrums of a salary, if you can afford an apartment, our goal is to be able to put down roots here in Banding Lewis Ranch and build that wealth through home ownership. And so I think I probably danced around kind of some specifics of your question, but ultimately our goal is to provide those offerings where If you can afford an apartment, you can afford a house. And that's for us so impactful and helps drive that home ownership. And so it's creative design elements that we're able to do some of these things and some wonderful things that Colorado Springs offers, Colorado Springs Utilities offers that we can kind of bring all this together and really drive that price point and open up these housing options to more and more people.

Thank you.

You're welcome.

I don't see any more questions on the presentation. We have no one signed up for public comment and support. We have no one signed up for public comment in opposition, so that does close our public comment for this hearing. We move on to closing staff, bring it back to the dais, and we will be voting on Six items. So I have a motion from Councilman Hingham and a second from Councilman Rainey to vote on 11b.

Let's vote.

The motion passes nine to zero.

On to 11c. I have a motion from Councilman Rainey, a second from Councilman Hingham. Let's vote.

The motion passes nine to zero.

11D. I have a motion from Councilman Hingen, a second from Councilman Rainey. Let's vote.

The motion passes nine to zero.

11E. I have a motion from Councilman Hingen, a second from Councilman Rainey. Let's vote.

Motion passes 9-0.

11f. I have a motion from Councillor Rainey, second from Councillor Hincham. Let's vote.

The motion passes 9-0.

And 11g. I have a motion from Councillor Hincham and a second from Councillor Rainey. Let's vote.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

Moving on to item 11 H. Will the clerk please read 11 H to 11 Q into the record.

These concern Ben Lewis Ranch Village C. They consist of vacation of public right of way, major modifications to the master plan, land use plan, concept plan, and development standards.

Today's hearing will preside as the following. City staff presentation, applicant presentation, public comment and support, public comment and opposition, applicant rebuttal, closing of staff comments, and back to the dais. And we'll start with Tamara again. Okay.

Good afternoon. Tamara Baxter, planning supervisor for the record. Before you is Banning Lewis Village C. Oops. So this area is actually south of the item that we just heard. So it's south of Dublin, north of Stetson Hills. It is east of Banning Lewis Village A and then west of State Highway 24. The applications before you are land use plan, two zone map amendments requests, and six development standards adjustments. The area is 658 acres, and what is being proposed is residential and commercial. So the land use plan is, as you're aware, similar to our old concept plan, so a bubble map that kind of envisions what is proposed. So they're proposing residential and commercial. There is a zone change to a conventional RFlex medium zone. And with that zoning are the six accompanying development standards adjustment, and I'll go more into detail on that. And then also conventional zone two MXM for commercial and some residential, long 24. And these applications were reviewed under the current UDC. So as mentioned before, this is 658 acres. There is a 35-acre community park and four neighbourhood parks proposed in this development. Also, there is a 50-foot-wide rock remnant trail corridor, and that is that dotted red line that kind of goes diagonally on the south end of the property. There are two school sites proposed. Those are kind of in that lavender color, the 25-acre PK through eight and a 45-acre high school site. And also in the pink on the lower left-hand corner is a future fire station location, 5.8 acres. So the zone change for the RFLACs, they originally came in for PDZ zoning, but with the UDC, there is a section of code with regards to the eligibility of rezone, so we had requested that they come forward with the the RFlex medium zone district, and as a result of that, with their current product type, they needed to modify some of the development standards, so that's the development standards adjustments that are being requested, and I'll go through those. For the MXM zoning, that is the area along State Highway 24. It's 111 acres. Being proposed will be future commercial and residential. There are no development standards adjustments being requested for this area. So for the first development standards adjustment, they're looking to modify the density. I know the applicant will have a presentation on all these proposed development standards adjustments, so what they're requesting is that the range be changed to three to 16 dwelling units per acre. The next development standards adjustment has to do with the lot area, so reducing the minimum lot area from 1,500 to 1,000 square feet per dwelling unit. And this would allow the developer to have some flexibility to build smaller footprint homes and help reduce costs and create more affordability. The next development standards adjustment has to do with providing the second and third floor encroachment of the principal structure into the front setback up to two feet, or setback that's up to two feet. So they're asking to reduce the two feet to 30 inches. And that's currently what occurs with their architectural product right now in the other PDZ zone districts. Development standard, I can't remember which one, but this has to do with corner lots, so reducing the 15 feet to 10 feet to allow for the product type. Um, the next development standard is to provide a 5 foot yard setback for all sides of lots that have no street frontage. So, as you can see, they have the street is on the bottom and then they have a driveway that goes up to serve the, um, 4 units. And the last one is to provide covered porches to encroach in the front yard setback. So this is similar to what is occurring in other villages. So it'll allow that same product type to occur in this RFlex zoning. In addition, they are requesting road vacations, and as noted before, these are not current roads. They will be replatting those, or they will be, through subdivision plats, they will be identifying future right-of-ways as the road networks are known. With regards to timeline of review, this came in in June of last year, went through five reviews, and it was ready for planning commission on June 15th. We did, as noted previously, we did have a neighborhood meeting on September 16th. Also addressed both of the villages. Similar concerns were raised. And then you do have written comments in your packet as well. These applications were reviewed by city agencies. All issues were resolved prior to getting scheduled for Planning Commission. Similar to Village B2, this project meets Plan COS visions, ideas, and strategies. And then these are the review criteria for the land use plan in the UDC. zone map amendment for both of them, development standards adjustment, and road vacation. And staff reviewed all of these criteria for all the applications and felt that the applications met the review criteria. These are the proposed motions for the development standards adjustments and then for the right of way. That's all I have.

I don't see any questions at this time, so we'll move on to the applicant presentation.

Thank you. Don Ryan with LAI Design Group. So Village C, which is to the south of Village B2 that we just heard, again, 658 acres total, 244 acres is for residential uses, 111 for mixed use. We have over 60 acres of parks and trails, 72 acres for schools for two school sites, the 5.8 acres for a public safety site, which is planned for a fire station. And additionally, we have 164 acres for public open space and rights of way that add up to the 658 total. Again, the goals for Village C, very similar to B2 admittedly, but in this case, we plan to deliver up to 2,558 homes and all the accompanying community infrastructure services and amenities. Again, providing housing for the missing middle market, create housing diversity, expand the population base, and create developments with higher density to allow for lower home prices, as was mentioned. To provide context with the rest of Benning Lewis Ranch, Village C is shown here to the south of Dublin and to the east of Stetson, I'm sorry, east of Benning Lewis Parkway and north of Stetson. It is directly east of Village A, which is currently under construction, and directly south of Village B2, which we just heard.

I'm gonna keep going here.

The current master plan for the 1988 master plan is shown on the left. On the right is our proposed master plan, which shows the 35-acre community park just to the south of Dublin, which is at the top middle of the Village C map. The orange areas are planned for residential communities. We have a number of parks. As mentioned over 60 acres of parks and open space and trails that actually does not include include the. The stream side and other open space that shown that's the dedicated areas. And then, as mentioned to the furthest eastern portion along highway, twenty four is the hundred eleven acres of that only part of it is developable. There are existing easements and wetlands and open spaces in that zone as well. As a direct comparison, in terms of the number of units, the nineteen eighty eight. Master Plan proposed 3825. We are proposing 2558. Again, the reason for that difference is the 1988 plan included much more multifamily in that number. In addition, the 1988 plan sort of proposed a boundary-to-boundary development of these areas without considering some of the environmental impacts and some of the constraints that we have in place in terms of the existing drainages and things that are now open space and parks. We're not in the 1988 plan, but they are in our plan.

Councilman Hinchum. Thank you, Madam President. Could you speak just a little bit more about this? Some of this, if I'm reading it correctly, is Highway 24 is on the furthest edge of this, correct?

Yes.

And I recently, I don't know, in the last six months, was out at, I'm blanking on the name of the open space in Banning Lewis Ranch. Not Corral Bluffs, the other one. Jimmy Camp Creek. I remember hearing there being some significant concerns about drainage and encroaching stormwater concerns. And I don't know how far this is. This might still be very far from Jimmy Camp. But I do recall hearing that there were some concerns about development from a stormwater perspective and the impact on that particular open space, given how porous and, I mean, it's a gold mine for artifacts and so forth. But if you could speak to that, but also just more broadly, the change from 1988 to now. in how you're planning and developing with this kind of, what I'm hearing you say is a bigger, well, I don't know what the right way to put it is, but things have changed in terms of the environment and how we develop.

You could speak more to that, please. Yeah, certainly. Of course, 1988, things look very different than they do now. Policies have changed. How we plan neighborhoods has changed. How this city operates has changed and the policies of the city have changed. And the goals of the development have changed. There were different ideas being floated in 1988. Today, this plan is focused around what we've been talking about as a master plan community to provide a variety of densities, a variety of home types for sale, for home ownership. That is sort of the core of how it's changed. The other way it's changed is providing more amenities and providing more area for these additional uses, which include the 35 acre community park, which include the 2 school sites, a site for a fire station. In addition, the open space areas are much larger than what were proposed in 1988. so we are. honoring the existing wetlands by staying away from them essentially and not developing in them or near them and giving plenty of buffer around existing wetlands existing drainage ways to provide open space that actually in some ways will also be usable we expect there to be a trail network but also just to be left alone as open space to provide wildlife corridors and other aspects that we all know open space provides. So those are the differences between 1980 and now, primarily.

I think that's great and deserves to be called out. I mean, these are very positive changes. you know, those people who kind of complain about how we've developed over time, I think it's important that you be recognized for adapting and changing in a way that, whether it's addressing home prices and availability or in the environment and wetlands, and it's just good. So I'm very appreciative. Thank you. Councilman Rainey.

Thank you, just to answer the Council Member Hingem's question, in reference to distance in regards to the drainage concern, from my understanding, because I've been out to that same area that you're referring to, this area is several miles north of where that concern is at, so you're talking almost well over five plus miles north of that.

Years away from having to address it, okay. Very much so.

Okay. Again, just a brief comparison to the 1988 plan. As shown, the areas within Village C are the dark yellow, the brown, and the very light yellow to the east. So in 1988, they had planned some residential areas in the brown areas, some higher density, including multifamily. And then the area to the east was actually planned for estate homes. So we're actually seeing a much different pattern of development than that was expected in 1988. Again, this summarizes the parks, schools, and public safety, which I've mentioned. and this is the detail of the park's dedication for Village C. So the obligation is 16 acres. We're providing slightly more than 16 acres and four parks, four neighborhood parks of approximately four acres each. The community park is combined with the Village B2 community to the north to create the total 35-acre proposed community park, which will be within this Village C. again the total acres for zoning are 547 for essentially for homes and the 111 acres of mxm zoning to the east is primarily to provide flexibility we don't actually know what's going to go into those 111 acres the development of that parcel to the east is much further off in terms of the the horizon of development that's uh future development so we're just allowing for maximum flexibility to the east. The density adjustment, we wanted to address that because the requested range is three to 16, whereas the RFlex medium range is five to 16. We have 2,426 estimated units, but our net density is actually 9.94 units per acre. So essentially what the three to 16, where that comes from, Mainly has to do with how Benning Lewis branch has developed in the previous villages. There are areas that allow that flexibility. Sometimes it has to do with the boundary you draw, let's say, for a particular filing for 50 homes. If that filing also includes storm drainage, a pond as well as a park. Those 50 homes, which might cover eight acres, all of a sudden cover 16 acres when you add in the park and the pond. So we're just allowing ourselves flexibility with that lower number of three units per acre. We aren't planning to develop neighborhoods with three homes to the acre. We're much higher density. Typically we're closer to seven units per acre on the average. All-inclusive, the 9.94 includes the opportunity for some multifamily, which we see further to the east along Highway 24. Again, we wanted to provide this slide in this presentation in case it is a repeat from the Village B-2 presentation. And there's more specifics about the development standard adjustments we are requesting, including the thousand square foot minimum lot size, I'll just summarize these, up to two feet for the upper floor front encroachment, a 10 foot corner lot setback compared to 15 feet, and the five foot side setbacks and up to five foot covered porch encroachment on the streets. The diagram that's shown here is the product that we call the American Dream, which are six homes that share an alley, but these are single family homes. And again, in order to achieve some of the densities that we're able to achieve, we need the smaller setbacks on the side of these homes to allow that density to be developed.

Councilman Casey.

Thank you, Madam President. Yeah, I do have a question on that first one, the development standards adjustment from 1,500 to 1,000. So overall, your density, you're building fewer homes overall in this overall development. So why do we need to reduce the development? Why do we need to reduce the lot size from 1,500 square feet to 1,000? It seems like we're jamming stuff in more and tighter, but then overall, is that because we have parks or what's the rationale?

Yeah, the comparison, I think, in terms of the fewer homes is the comparison between single family and the clustered homes that we're developing versus single family and multifamily. What we are doing is reducing the multifamily number of units within this village and taking that land, putting higher density single family homes. So it's single family homes that are detached and for sale, but they're not a large lot. It's not a, you know, it's not a... 8,000 or 10,000 square foot lot, we do have lots that are 1,000 square feet for one single family home that is for sale. So we're reducing the total number of units allowed, but it's because we're transferring the density from multifamily to this higher density single family.

Okay, thank you.

And the Planning Commission reminded us that development standard adjustments usually have a benefit. So we wanted to cover each one of these for the 1,000 square foot minimum lot size. The benefit is that it accommodates the smallest lot size for the duplex home. So the 1,000 square feet specifically relates to the paired homes that we showed you with the price points. Those are the smallest lots of 1,000 square feet each. So it's 2,000 square feet for the two homes that are attached. The up to two foot upper floor front encroachment allows for a three-dimensional architecture on the front elevations of the streets. So it simply improves the look of the architecture by allowing some three-dimensional offsets and encroachments on the upper levels. The 10 foot corner setback allows for higher density site plans, whereas specifically for the American Dream product we showed, with the existing 15 foot setback, we could only fit five homes in that cluster. But with the 10 foot corner setback, we can actually fit six homes in the same amount of space. It's that big of a difference. the five foot side set backs provide transfer unusable private open area to shared public open spaces with with these developments what we have are shared open greens between homes that are public. So instead of being in the backyard, that land is transferred to a sidewalk area that the entire community can use. And then for the up to five feet of covered porch encroachment, again, that provides more front porches and stoops facing the streets, allows us to move those buildings closer to the streets to increase the density. Some of the public benefits generally are how these adjustments would include future open spaces, miles of trails and a thirty five acre community park for the residents to enjoy. Additional benefits include expanded housing opportunities, which I'll just summarize these, the economic development, the construction that creates jobs and new residents that can support local businesses. The transportation options. We'll be designing these with sidewalks, bike paths, transit connections, and nearby services to improve the transportation network in this part of Colorado Springs. And then a thoughtfully designed complete community. So it's a master plan community with a mix of housing types and price points, meaningful and accessible open space, high quality parks, connected trail systems, and suitable transportation and utility infrastructure.

access to schools jobs shopping and the ongoing maintenance of public and shared amenities for this master plan community thank you we have no one signed up in support of the project we have no one signed up in opposition of the project so they will we will now close public comment for this hearing and bring it back up to the dais for 10 separate votes. We have a motion from Councilman Hingeman, a second from Councilman Rainey on 11H. Let's vote.

Councilman Donaldson. And the motion passes nine to zero.

Councilman Hingham.

Thank you. I know we have a lot to vote on. And I think Councilmember Rainey and I are gunning for who's going to be first and second. But before we go forward, I just want to say I think these are really beautifully designed communities. And I didn't ask a lot of questions. I am very appreciative of the thoughtfulness that has gone into this master plan and the design that is really supporting creating community. More front porches, more stoops, more trails, et cetera. I just wanted to make a point of saying thank you for such thoughtful design.

I have a motion from Councilman Rainey and a second from Councilman Gould for 11 aye.

Let's vote. And the motion passes nine to zero. All right, now try. What are you seeing on your tablets? I don't know. We're just seeing the vote, green or red.

We can do voice votes if you want to for 11J through.

Yeah, just who made the motion? Let me try one thing, if you'll bear with me.

Councilman Rainey and Councilman Gold.

Right now, what are you seeing now?

Same thing. Now we can vote again. Do you want us to vote?

Can you see it? Vote again. Okay, the motion on 11J passes nine to zero. Let's try this again.

Do we have a motion from Councilman Rainey? That was passed. And a Councilman from Councilman Gould on 11J. Let's vote.

That was J. Okay, this is the vote on 11K.

That was J.

So you're on K. We haven't voted on K. Correct, I'm trying to get it to work for you.

I'm just making sure. I know, it's confusing, okay. You're confusing me.

I'm confused, the system's confused, because nothing's working.

Who makes, can we do the motions out loud? I think I can get the votes to work. Yep, that was Councilman Rainey, and the second was Councilman Gould, and that was on 11J. So we have voted. And are we on to K? Okay, so we have a motion from Councilman Rainey and a second from Councilman Gould on 11K.

We need a vote. There you go. The motion passes nine to zero.

11L? We have a motion from Councilman Rainey, a second from Councilman Gould. Let's vote on 11L.

The motion passes nine to zero.

11 M. A motion from Councilman Rainey, second from Councilman Hinchum.

Let's vote on 11 M. The motion passes nine to zero.

11 N. The motion from Councilman Rainey and a second from Councilman Hengim. Let's vote on 11N.

And motion passes nine to zero.

11O, I have a motion from, well, I saw a motion from Councilman Hengim. I didn't see the second. You're going a little too fast for the system. Slow it down the motions. Councilman Hingem, second from Councilman Gold, 11 O, let's vote.

And the motion passes nine to zero.

11 P. I have a motion from Councilman Rainey and a second from Councilman Gold.

Let's vote on 11 P. And the motion passes nine to zero. 11 Q.

I have a motion from Councilman Leinweber and a second from Councilman Gould on 11Q.

And the motion passes 9-0.

And that concludes our hearing. Moving on to one hour of citizens' discussion for items not on today's agenda per city council rules. Citizens will have three minutes to share their comments. I have a list of you who have signed up. When I call your name, please come forward, introduce yourself, and limit yourself to topics that are relevant and germane to city business. First up, we have Kyle McGuffey.

Good afternoon. My name is Kyle McGuffey. I'm a 14-year-old ninth grade student in Colorado Springs and I'm here today to speak again about Project Taurus. In Radin's April 22nd public comment response, Radin stated that Colorado Springs Utilities had already purchased and contracted the power needed for the data center. I contacted CSU directly. CSU told me, quote, Colorado Springs Utilities has not purchased or contracted any power to supply the Raiden Data Center. Those statements directly conflict. One says the power had directly, sorry, one says the power had already been purchased and contracted. The other says it had not. There's also a question of how much power this project could use. A Raiden power planning document sent to utilities described a possible build out of up to 300 megawatts of critical power and 420 megawatts gross. Jason Green, a co-founder of Raiden and one of the main people representing Project Taurus, He has said that the document was created early in the process, before writing had a detailed proposal, and that later talks with utilities showed the site was limited to around 50 megawatts. But that explanation makes what happened with the recent public records request especially important. News 5 Investigates reported on a complaint sent to the Utilities Board alleging that more than 300 text messages connected to an Integrity Matters Colorado Open Records Act request were withheld. Integrity Matters is one of the groups appealing Project Taurus. Importantly, its core request specifically asked for communications involving Project Taurus figures, power figures, I apologize, including 100 megawatts, 300 megawatts, and 420 megawatts, among other terms. According to News 5, the CSU employee who filed the complaint alleged that more than 300 texts, including discussions about electrical capacity for Project Taurus, The employee also alleged that some messages discussed connecting Raiden with other utilities employees to, quote, indoctrinate them and described outings where drinking was the focus and including luxury meals. That is important because electric capacity was specifically part of what the records request was trying to uncover. The employee says those messages should have been included in the records response. The complainant asks council to look at the communications surrounding the request, decisions about what should have been released, instructions given to employees handling it, and the more than 300 texts that were reviewed. CSU disputes the allegation and told News 5 that to its knowledge, it had released all responsive records for closed court requests. I'm not saying these allegations have been proven. I'm saying that they are serious enough that the Utilities Board and City Council should look into them. Before the September 17th hearing, the public deserves a clear explanation of what Raiden asked for, what utilities understood the project's power needs to be, and why these statements do not match. Thank you.

Thank you. Next up, we have Caleb Miller.

Hi, guys. Caleb Miller, lifelong resident. deciding which things I want to talk about because there's so many things to talk about. Today, I would like to challenge you guys on our stance on homelessness. I know that I bring this up and I know that I mentioned Jesus a lot, but it's important that I speak through that language because every time that I walk into this room and I sit in my chair, this meeting begins with a prayer. Matthew 6 just openly says, when you pray, go into your room and shut the door and pray to your father who is in secret and your father who sees in secret will reward you. Do not be like the hypocrites who go and stand on the street corners. They have already received their reward. Just openly says that. So I struggle with that immediately, but then once we get into it and we're actually talking about homelessness and council members are taking the time to say, well, we just used to call them vagrants and it's not about housing, it's about drugs. Do any of you know how many churches are in Colorado Springs? Just within the metro boundaries. The most conservative number for the amount of churches within the metro boundaries of Colorado Springs is above 400. Could be up to 700, depending on where you're putting the boundaries. That means that literally each church would only have to be responsible for housing four people Four people, and the homelessness issue would go away in our city. But instead, we're sitting up here and we're weaponizing incompetence. We're talking about how state law is more important, and Denver needs to handle the issue, which is fine. The issue needs to be handled everywhere. But we're always talking about how we're a home rule city. We're always talking about how we're a home rule city. We're always talking through the words of Jesus. There are 400 children. In the metro boundaries of the city, they would each have to house four people. The problem goes away, but that's not what happened. On top of that, this body unanimously gave the CEO of CSU a raise to $700,000, and the COPE matching fund has still not been raised. The COPE matching fund is still less than the CEO makes, which is still a fundamental misunderstanding of the beneficiaries of a publicly owned utility company. If we're going to be talking about Jesus and if we're going to be starting these meetings with prayers, when your brother strikes you on the right cheek, what do you do? You turn to him the other also. When he asks you to go with him one mile, you go with him two miles. You give to the one who begs from you and you do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. And yet, my city government begins its meeting with prayers and then doesn't do the thing that Jesus said we were doing. I don't appreciate it. I really urge you all to look at that seriously. Look at how seriously you're taking the words of Christ, because if we're putting them in our public spaces, in our city hall, I want to at least be taking it seriously.

Next up, we have Steve Lightfoot.

Thank you.

steve lightfoot of lennonmurdertruth.com passing around a photograph of the real killer of john lennon stephen king look at that folks he's a sick man isn't he he castrated you he destroyed you took away your self-respect made you bootlicking john lennon killing hypocrites didn't he take a good look this man owns you This man owns you, he has shamed you, he has beaten you, he has destroyed you. This is the man who murdered John Lennon, Stephen King. No, he doesn't sue me. I've stood inches away from him and all he could do was stutter to me. No, I'm right. Last night, CBS aired Stephen King eight times on Jeopardy. And I was waiting for some kind of a clue. I remember when I stood up to Kissinger, he intimated after that, I'll never see the story break in my lifetime. And in a similar vein, Stephen King hinted at the dilemma I'm in. He goes, you know, in my town in Maine, people have a real monster. And he's doing this and he's doing that and scaring the bejesus out of me. And you would think that everyone would boo. But no. What he means is this. Yeah, that Steve Lightfoot guy came to my banger hometown. He did run me all the way to Lewiston, Maine. He did run me all the way to Sarasota, Florida half the year. But he didn't run me completely out of Maine. And the people in Maine all know I killed John Lennon. They know that I'm the most evil man in the world. I should be dropped from an airplane without a chute on simulcast world television to exorcise us. Yeah, they all know here in Lewiston, Maine, that I killed John Lennon. And you'd think they'd boo. But no. I made them all evil. I made them all evil. And they're protecting me. And you're in the same boat. You're in the same boat. You're all evil protecting Stephen King. I know. You're all insane. You don't think so. Oh, how could we all be insane? Stephen King killing John Lennon and you being told Mark Chapman did it is how? This is the biggest story since Christ. If you have a bigger story since Christ, I'll eat the first 10 pages. I really will. There's no story bigger than this since Christ. This is going to change the world. For your sake, you better bring me forward because you either honor me for all my heroism and brains to put this all together or you disgrace yourself because And you disgrace all of the world and America. 9-11 was over our support of Israel. So is this war. So is the Iraq war. We're only in it to steal their oil. No wonder the soldiers are committing suicide. Thank you.

And that does conclude our citizens' comments. The discussion is now closed. And that does close out our meeting today. And we are adjourned.