[{"_1":2,"_110":-5,"_111":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,74,86,98],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":44,"_46":47,"_48":49,"_50":51,"_52":53,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},"mediaId",6110671,"mediaKeyId","2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c","parentId",2757163,"title","Planning Commission recommends City Council approve Southern Colorado Rail Park annexation, PDZ and land‑use plan","audioSeconds",0,"startMs",10134000,"endMs","viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c&start=10134&end=10134","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c/thumbnail_10134000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6110671/Colorado-Springs-City/El-Paso-County/Colorado/Planning-Commission-recommends-City-Council-approve-Southern-Colorado-Rail-Park-annexation-PDZ-and-landuse-plan","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6110671-ae0300abf425df3aec341493136079a5/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182444&Signature=IzmgL5x9I5b1ubcgahHI0nqG22RHjw0Z3eCFPKtm4XKWsAcqScz1elu1owl6rCtFx38LCPel4HBZ7xn8oAGZdpfsVmt4ZklK-8OJlIsPYhNaQamXgDH9suUFa1ox1m7ONJaEsJ0PnQVAYMpxcgkVTR9U62jj7h8UbnrsG4vqTHvjTh7WvonxbRUoW0wO~PzlJjH7ndIzA5oMdwT0oDlfKECtpuwUVgzQHO3UMY4ihvSx-OCPed9fAkZMXoHK4Hn-~UiGMz0ogAMBo8ZEVRqWbxKIWGn6N0i7f~oFqhMc1QEuIw07bMhv5A~jeheMEXfX5autWe-N4adjzjGsu~gu3A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City Council of Colorado Springs CO","date","2025-02-12T00:00:00Z","article","The City of Colorado Springs Planning Commission unanimously recommended City Council approve the annexation, Planned Development Zone (PDZ) and land‑use plan for the 3,107.11‑acre Southern Colorado Rail Park on Feb. 12.

The project — proposed immediately west and south of the intersection of I‑25 and South Santa Fe and adjacent to Fort Carson — is intended as a rail‑served employment park with heavy and light industrial, rail spur and aerospace/defense‑support uses. Planning supervisor Gabe Savigny told commissioners the petition seeks annexation of the El Paso County parcels, establishment of a non‑residential PDZ with a 7,000,000‑square‑foot maximum building cap (a planning cap, not a current entitlement for specific buildings) and an associated land‑use plan. Savigny noted the property is within an enterprise zone and that state statute allows annexation contiguity determinations given the adjacent federal property.

Planning Director Kevin Walker summarized the city’s fiscal review work and said the city engaged a fiscal consultant (Tishler Bice) paid by the applicant to conduct a fiscal impact analysis. Walker said a draft fiscal analysis indicates, over a 20‑year buildout horizon, a net positive fiscal impact to the city in the order of about $6 million (revenues roughly offset capital and service costs across that period) and that staff had requested additional detail, including a 10‑year scenario.

Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) staff explained service considerations. Brian English, CSU development‑projects manager, told the commission the city’s water‑extension ordinance requires review of available supply. CSU said its 5‑year rolling average of existing demand was updated to include 2020–2024 usage and that available surplus under the city code test would be sufficient to meet the proposal’s projected industrial demand (staff estimated roughly 1,281 acre‑feet per year under the land‑use assumptions presented). English cautioned that electricity, wastewater and gas service would require significant coordination and likely capital investments — for example potentially new substations, gas blending or a new city gate, and wastewater treatment capacity discussions with the Fountain Sanitation District — and that many infrastructure costs would be addressed in annexation and service agreements.

Applicant representatives told the commission the project has been developed collaboratively with regional partners since 2018, that a recorded trackage agreement enables rail spur development, and that the site is attractive for manufacturing because it offers dual class‑I railroad service and proximity to Fort Carson, which produces a sizable, trained labor pool. The applicant said it plans an initial phase that will establish the rail connection and make early buildable pads available; later phases would include a larger rail‑served industrial buildout and reclamation of current aggregate‑mining areas.

Economic analyst Tatiana Bailey (Ph.D.) summarized broader economic benefits, arguing manufacturing jobs pay above‑average wages and have a larger multiplier effect: “Manufacturing wages are higher than the regional average and the sector creates more indirect jobs,” she said. Applicant representatives and staff said the project had support in the region and that an annexation‑phase fiscal impact analysis was underway and being refined.

After questions from commissioners on utilities, timing, phasing and neighborhood impacts, commissioners voted to recommend City Council approve the annexation (item 8e), the PDZ zone establishment (8f) and the Southern Colorado Rail Park land‑use plan (8g). The items were scheduled for City Council consideration on March 11.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Colorado Springs Planning Commission 02/12/2025","oneSentenceSummary","The Planning Commission voted unanimously to recommend City Council approve an annexation, planned development zone (non‑residential) and land‑use plan for the 3,107‑acre Southern Colorado Rail Park adjacent to Fort Carson. Developers say the rail‑served project is designed to attract large‑scale manufacturing and logistics employers.","taxTitle","Colorado Springs City, El Paso County, Colorado","taxId",5791,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":75,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":76,"_41":77,"_43":78,"_45":79,"_46":80,"_48":81,"_50":82,"_52":83,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":84,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":85,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6110676,"Planning Commission upholds staff denial of short‑term rental permit at 5539 Cody Mesa Court",973,5254000,6227000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c&start=5254&end=6227","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c/thumbnail_5254000.jpg","/articles/6110676/Colorado-Springs-City/El-Paso-County/Colorado/Planning-Commission-upholds-staff-denial-of-shortterm-rental-permit-at-5539-Cody-Mesa-Court","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6110676-4491118161a35d20181a60a9d208a350/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182444&Signature=d8MHRV9ig96dQkm8TrkdvWtyowUXcE6ISbaJ3gjq7eGc17aBoXG7LCIOdWGg89mqQvfjJyGyeayu4gPiquxy2VvsUyHh~JGS2tGTiW~S5HY8shpL0X-GihfDfzRjmxM7NukgZHPS0YErU7onCZm8DfgMkvbcilQdPaaWZfEUnoQm9GF2SYsGKHK1gIE3X8PXMYBCHuOg9aLMJLIwA9iLR1KZzJXnQXuDaXQpPGCYCUpcMJc5qhLSNuLUTyR76-RYXuGaWz2MYXCyOYQ2o54G6nSp7z8arGrO2r-hrrHZ-7qmw1lU366K-pNDU4RbREuiUXFHuUp6ruR5ny4acH8YYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Colorado Springs Planning Commission unanimously affirmed the administrative denial of an owner‑occupied short‑term rental permit for 5539 Cody Mesa Court on Feb. 12, effectively denying the property owner’s appeal.

City planning staffer Carly Hibbins summarized the department’s review. Hibbins told commissioners the property’s original owner‑occupied permit had been issued in February 2022. Staff said it received multiple neighborhood complaints beginning in 2023 alleging the owner did not live at the address and describing noise, parking and party activity; code enforcement inspected the property multiple times. Hibbins said the owner submitted a late renewal application and that city staff denied the permit on Jan. 10, 2025 citing the late renewal and an affidavit from the homeowners association alleging the owner did not occupy the property.

The property owner, who identified himself as Stefanos, said the house is his primary residence and that he and his wife live there part of the year and use a second home for part of the year. “This is my primary residence,” he said, adding that he and his family travel for work and family reasons. The owner’s property manager, Lloyd Hawes of Nostalgo Property Management, said his company manages about 60 properties and that their records show reservations and housekeeping processes; he said he had received few complaints and that property rules and quiet-hours notices were provided to guests.

Representatives of the Austin Heights Homeowners Association and several neighbors testified they had seen repeated late-night activity, guests trespass onto private property, parking issues in the cul‑de‑sac and police responses. HOA counsel Jonah Hunt told the commission the applicant bears the burden to show staff’s denial was in error and said the record shows the property has functioned as a short‑term rental with regular absentee occupancy: “There is no evidence that they live there for a hundred and 85 days, let alone 1 day,” Hunt said.

Commissioners asked staff about the evidentiary standard and whether the department could compel Airbnb/VRBO reservation logs (staff said those platforms do not provide host records to the city). Hibbins said the city requires two government forms of address‑verified ID as proof of residency at initial permitting; for ongoing renewal staff relies on affidavits, code enforcement visits and written complaints. Commissioners expressed sympathy for the owner’s personal circumstances but said the renewal was late and the record — including the HOA affidavit and neighborhood testimony — did not meet the standard for renewal. One commissioner noted an owner‑occupied permit can be re‑applied for as a new application.

A motion to deny the appeal and affirm the administrative denial carried 8–0. Planning staff advised the appellant of the 10‑day appeal window to City Council and that the applicant may also submit a new short‑term rental application going forward.","The Planning Commission unanimously denied an appeal by the owner of 5539 Cody Mesa Court and affirmed staff’s administrative denial of an owner‑occupied short‑term rental permit renewal, citing insufficient evidence that the property owner occupies the house the required 185 days per year and procedural renewal deficiencies.",{"_33":87,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":88,"_41":89,"_43":90,"_45":91,"_46":92,"_48":93,"_50":94,"_52":95,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":96,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":97,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6110682,"Planning Commission approves two nonuse variances for Delago Subdivision at 1609 West Kiowa Street",2560,1873000,4433000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c&start=1873&end=4433","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c/thumbnail_1873000.jpg","/articles/6110682/Colorado-Springs-City/El-Paso-County/Colorado/Planning-Commission-approves-two-nonuse-variances-for-Delago-Subdivision-at-1609-West-Kiowa-Street","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6110682-02f74214172a0e5f8f67128c40002020/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182444&Signature=PaZzClMhaSBjNgOsbw-R-WrW7rWM5LHxJiR24hiSSMIDsrpMeJTQ4buoNPVOjnHzINEuRATL8tRajIxME5JLYMj21eeukS-KX7H6TlaPreiIhpmt~H6bfs0n~g3oFteL1t1nRVn7xB1QNlJOyYfLR6cciMW09LQoDgnib2hh6qC9JJwebhPeoE7saDqafdgpTlA9I2hOD4SjnMAkFHCytBn~Cg15vW91tm8laY0TRLmSWwj77k1HL5s8cysq-2n3tx066TdGo9T3n452cfQR5GmdJXcSoXYAqCTpp5aRuqrrQ598NNCx8w7gBipjfVpLGVMs6k19LDOF99c7eVXYwQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Colorado Springs Planning Commission voted 7–2 on Feb. 12 to approve two nonuse variances that will allow the subdivision and replat of 1609 West Kiowa Street into two lots.

Johnny Malpica, a planning staff presenter, described the proposal as a minor subdivision to create a rear flag lot using the existing access portion along West Kiowa Street. The two variance requests were necessary because the existing access stem is 12 feet wide (where 25 feet is required by code) and the existing location of the home leaves a 0.9-foot side-yard setback where five feet is required. Malpica said the lot is 11,234 square feet and that both resulting lots would meet minimum area (5,000 square feet) and width (50 feet) requirements.

Charles Ferrell, speaking for property owner John Delago, told the commission the proposal preserves the existing front house and allows a new rear lot while maintaining off-street parking for both properties. “We’re seeking the city support for 2 non use variances,” Ferrell said, and he noted the proposed configuration provides wayfinding, utility access, and off-street parking intended to reduce on‑street parking pressure.

Staff reported 4 written comments were received from the public during notice, citing concerns about additional density, parking, drainage and neighborhood context; staff said agency comments had been addressed and that the proposal complies with Plan COS and the review criteria for the variances. Several commissioners pressed the applicant on neighborhood character and whether the application could set a precedent for parcel splits in older blocks. Planning staff noted the commission’s decision on this application would not automatically set a citywide precedent and emphasized that each future application would be judged on its own criteria.

After discussion, commissioners voted first to approve the variance for the 12-foot access width; that motion passed 7–2. Commissioners then approved the 0.9-foot setback variance by the same margin. The Planning Commission advised the appellant of a 10‑day appeal period to City Council under the Unified Development Code.","The Planning Commission approved two nonuse variances to allow a 12-foot access width for a flag‑lot stem where 25 feet is required and a 0.9-foot setback where five feet is required, permitting a replat that would create two buildable lots at 1609 West Kiowa Street.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_46":104,"_48":105,"_50":106,"_52":107,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":108,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":109,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":67,"_71":72,"_73":72},6110686,"Planning Commission approves reduced front parking setback for 7050 Commerce Center Drive",1422,366000,1788000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c&start=366&end=1788","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/2757163-8bee6dce12e1621c96f2f40187e63d5c/thumbnail_366000.jpg","/articles/6110686/Colorado-Springs-City/El-Paso-County/Colorado/Planning-Commission-approves-reduced-front-parking-setback-for-7050-Commerce-Center-Drive","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6110686-2396a90959362654cbbea561d84c95ea/orig.mp4?Expires=1771182444&Signature=fFzCzfJ2nENhrsPH0mT9oX784hDmruLJ2Gm9NqlGBVEZGf9ZjPVn5e0zMjT0HXGT97od18CQDWj4gCwJ9PQcmD7Q5EM405-l4zIuZk8f0Uek20TIRUOL4kdUGPnU3njoXr78VF1u8dXBhJRnvHliYoWLNP7afxnd88iTpAIVc~J2lulFqpcgxeyKVjnooAtJ7HzwEW0Mul9bvnSxFXxLMAGIUGsmxyIx~gneVBEn571HwhztFSDFgo6U-PTvgI7DGQopf6Pe~rnBcofY6ZotMwyRH1jTvfOBOSUUJuvVXhthLhGt3WbtbYp5gbcVNt-bztCF0jSyZsz6Lpmr1NPF0A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The City of Colorado Springs Planning Commission unanimously approved a development standards adjustment on Feb. 12 to allow a 10-foot front parking setback instead of the 20-foot setback required by the Unified Development Code for a proposed general and medical office building at 7050 Commerce Center Drive.

The change was requested by the project team to accommodate a narrow, irregularly shaped 1.41-acre infill parcel on the northwest corner of East Woodman Road and Commerce Center Drive. Planning staff presented the application and said the site is zoned MXM (mixed-use medium scale) and is subject to multiple overlays including streamside and hillside. Staff reported they received no public comments during notice and that reviewers from the streamside and hillside overlays worked closely with the applicant during review.

Logan Hupple, a city planning staff member who presented the staff analysis, said the applicant mailed 22 postcards to addresses within 1,000 feet and that “we did not receive any comments on this item.” Hupple told commissioners the request is consistent with Plan COS and that the applicant proposed compensating benefits to meet the UDC’s goals.

Anne Odom, representing the applicant (NES), told the commission the site is narrow and constrained and that the 20-foot setback is a new requirement in the UDC that was not in place when surrounding properties were developed. Odom said the project will include a rain garden, an outdoor patio, enhanced architecture and additional rear building setback to protect steep slopes and mature trees. “It’s a pretty challenging site,” Odom said, and added the design “will achieve [the streetscape] through adequate screening from the right of way for the parking, with all the required plantings within that landscape setback.”

Commissioners questioned alternatives such as retaining walls and moving access points to achieve a 20-foot setback. The applicant said the hillside grading, retaining wall limits and existing topography constrained where the parking and access could be located and that traffic engineering had recommended a right‑in/right‑out movement to address turning conflicts. A nearby resident raised traffic‑flow concerns during public comment; the applicant and staff said the development plan calls for a right‑in/right‑out access and that traffic engineering and the applicant were exploring design refinements, including median or island treatments, to limit left turns.

After discussion, a commissioner moved to approve the adjustment “as read into the record.” The motion passed unanimously.

The commission’s action made the development standards adjustment a Planning Commission approval subject to the 10‑day appeal window to City Council under the Unified Development Code.","The City of Colorado Springs Planning Commission unanimously approved a development standards adjustment allowing a 10-foot front parking setback — instead of the 20-foot setback required by the new Unified Development Code — for a proposed general and medical office project at 7050 Commerce Center Drive.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Planning Commission recommends City Council approve Southern Colorado Rail Park annexation, PDZ and land‑use plan

Planning Commission upholds staff denial of short‑term rental permit at 5539 Cody Mesa Court

Planning Commission approves two nonuse variances for Delago Subdivision at 1609 West Kiowa Street

Planning Commission approves reduced front parking setback for 7050 Commerce Center Drive