Citizen Portal
Sign In

Council amends code to remove public-art commission references, sets staff criteria for art as design offset

5585821 · July 22, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The City Council on July 22 approved amendments to Chapter 7 of the Unified Development Code to remove references to the disbanded Public Art Commission and to set staff criteria for considering public art as a design benefit.

Colorado Springs City Council on July 22 approved an ordinance amending Chapter 7 of the Unified Development Code to remove references to the dissolved Public Art Commission and to add criteria city staff will use when reviewing requests to use public art as an offset to certain nonresidential design requirements.

The changes follow the council’s earlier decision to disband the Public Art Commission and transfer oversight of public-art policy to the mayor’s administration. The adopted ordinance strikes references to the Public Art Master Plan and the commission in sections of the code that address community amenities and mixed-use/nonresidential design. The ordinance also includes criteria staff must apply when evaluating whether an art installation provides a community benefit and may be counted as an equivalency for certain design standards.

Council debate focused on the frequency and appropriateness of using public art as a substitute for required facade articulation. Several council members said they worry a small art piece could be used to circumvent architectural standards; others argued the PDZ (planned development zone) process is intentionally flexible and that council retains final authority for PDZ approvals. Councilman Donaldson moved to remove the specific sentence allowing public art to substitute for facade articulation; that amendment failed for lack of a second. The main ordinance then passed 9–0.

Planning staff said the criteria they added prioritize durability, public safety and visibility from public rights of way, and require that art installations demonstrate community benefit and accessibility. For projects in which administrative staff make development-plan approvals, staff decisions can be appealed to the Planning Commission and ultimately to City Council. By contrast, PDZ approvals remain a council-level decision; community-amenity negotiations for PDZs come to council for final action.

Council members who supported keeping the language said retaining the possibility of art as a design offset gives negotiators additional tools to extract community benefits without tying council hands; those opposed favored a stricter standard to protect architectural quality. Planning staff noted that developers rarely seek to use art as a substitute in practice because large public-art pieces are costly and pose long-term maintenance demands.

The ordinance was introduced by the planning department and will take effect following standard publication and codification procedures.