Special City Council Meeting: Appeal of ONE Vela Mixed-Use Building – April 7, 2025

On Monday, April 7, 2025, the Colorado Springs City Council held a special meeting at 1:00 PM to hear an appeal of the Downtown Review Board’s (DRB) approval of a Form-Based Zone Development Plan for the ONE Vela mixed-use building. The project is located on a 1.09-acre site at the northeast corner of Sahwatch St. and W. Costilla St., within the FBZ-CEN zone. After a public hearing, the Council voted 6-1 to deny the appeal, upholding the DRB’s decision. The meeting also included an executive session on the referendum process.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Support for the project:

  • Jonna Reeder Claymire (President/CEO, Colorado Springs Chamber & EDC) stated that high-quality urban housing is essential for attracting a skilled workforce, citing 28% growth in aerospace/defense (2019–2024) and 30% growth in cybersecurity. She argued that downtown density maximizes infrastructure and that the form-based code was created with significant stakeholder input.
  • Jill Gabler (Executive Director, Pikes Peak Housing Network) emphasized the need for 400 housing units (40 affordable at 100% AMI) and noted the code allows unlimited height in only a quarter-square-mile area.
  • Chelsea Gondek (COO, Downtown Partnership) highlighted that downtown generates $8.25 million in sales tax annually (6.7 times more per acre than citywide average) and that dense housing supports local businesses.
  • Sam Friesma (URA Board member, DRB member, Hillside Neighborhood Association VP) stated the project meets all code requirements and that no home in Hillside (the only neighborhood with potential view blockage) loses its Pikes Peak view.
  • Bob Reefstahl (URA Board member, Hillside resident) said the building would not obstruct his view of Pikes Peak (using a finger-at-arm’s-length demonstration).
  • James Rigdon (Downtown Partnership board member, former small business owner) supported density as key to a vibrant downtown.

• Opposition to the project:

  • Diane Bridges (appellant, also representing Historic Neighborhoods Partnership) argued that citizens have not had a robust stakeholder engagement on building heights and that the project is premature. She asked for a clear process for such engagement.
  • Robert Bruce (attorney for appellant) stated that the 27-story, 315-foot building would be 50–68 feet taller than the Wells Fargo Tower, setting a precedent for unlimited heights. He cited a petition with about 7,000 signatures opposing the height, and argued that the project abuses the lack of a height limit in the form-based code.
  • Lisa Bigelow (concerned citizen) said the project is driven by greed and would forever change the skyline, noting that 40 affordable units at 100% AMI ($80,000) is insufficient.
  • RC Smith (former firefighter, 38+ years) raised safety concerns about high-rise density, citing a 1997 Tri Data report that found an inadequate fire response pattern for downtown.
  • Dutch Schultz (Old North End HOA president) emphasized that the decision sets a precedent for unlimited administrative approvals of tall buildings, and asked for a citizen vote on height limits.
  • Kat Gale argued that the building would obstruct views when traveling east-west, cause glare, bird strikes, and heat islands.
  • Dana Dugan (Integrity Matters) noted that Colorado Springs ranks 20th worst for high ozone days (2024) and that the petition here is larger relative to city size than similar petitions in other cities.
  • Donna Strom pointed to the Broadmoor’s low-profile exhibition hall as an example of preserving views without excessive height.

Discussion Items

• Appeal of DRB Approval for ONE Vela:
  • Staff Presentation (Ryan Tefertiller, Planning Manager): The project is a 27-story building with 400 apartment units (10% affordable at 100% AMI for 25 years), 8,300 sq ft commercial space, and 450 parking stalls. It complies with all quantifiable form-based code standards and aligns with PlanCOS and the 2016 Experience Downtown Master Plan. Staff noted that only minor technical issues remain (e.g., drainage report updates). The appeal was filed by Diane Bridges on four grounds: height, lack of citizen input, precedent, and premature approval.
  • Appellant’s Presentation (Diane Bridges, Attorney Robert Bruce): Bruce argued that the height (27 stories, 315 ft) would dominate the skyline, set a precedent for even taller buildings, and that the city should not approve without a community-wide discussion on height limits. He stated that the project’s views would be sold to a few, and that the approval process was premature with unresolved technical issues.
  • Applicant’s Presentation (Frank Andre – Hord Coplan Macht, Nick Benjamin – O’Neill Group, Kevin O’Neill): The design team presented similar successful projects in Kansas City and St. Louis, emphasizing street-level activation, amenity spaces, and iconic architecture. Nick Benjamin confirmed that the project will meet all city standards and that remaining issues (stormwater detention) will be resolved. He noted that the original 36-story proposal was reduced to 27 stories after community feedback.
  • Councilmember Donaldson questioned the lack of citizen vote on height limits, arguing that the form-based code’s unlimited height was never approved by voters. He stated that a ballot measure would likely pass and that approving this project opens the door to administrative approvals of future tall buildings.
  • Councilmember O’Malley and Councilmember Talarico supported denying the appeal, citing economic benefits, compliance with existing codes, and that the building does not obstruct Pikes Peak views.

Key Outcomes

• Motion to Deny the Appeal (uphold DRB approval): Made by Councilmember O’Malley, seconded by Councilmember Talarico.
• Vote: 6–1 in favor (Councilmember Donaldson opposed; Councilmember Hindram and Councilmember Risley were excused; seven members present). The motion carried, thus the DRB’s approval of the ONE Vela Form-Based Zone Development Plan is upheld.
• Executive Session: After the vote, the Council held a closed executive session to discuss legal advice regarding the referendum process and referendum elections (two-thirds consent obtained; vote: 7-0). No further action was taken in open session after the executive session, and the meeting adjourned.