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

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.