Meeting colors

OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD

Record of Proceedings

Colorado Springs Planning Commission Denies Conditional Use for Communications Tower – September 3, 2025

City Council — Wednesday, September 3, 2025

BodyColorado Springs, Colorado

SessionCity Council

DateWednesday, September 3, 2025

StatusFILED

Video Record

0:00 / 3:57

Transcript — VerbatimClick a line to jump · ⧉ to share it

0:00

Yeah, and I can also understand the people here that would like to have uh a little more protection for the value of their properties as well.

0:10

So I'm not quite sure which way I want to go on this one just yet until you guys can come up with uh a good answer other than you're gonna move forward one way, shape, or form.

0:20

Um that part I didn't like.

0:23

Anyway, thank you.

0:42

Okay.

0:42

Well, I guess I have a couple comments before we wrap up.

0:46

Um, you know, in in light of the 19 approval, uh, you know, most of us weren't a part of that.

0:52

It was, you know, approved um to aid communications.

0:58

You know, as we look at the communications map and coverage map, um, you know, we we see colors and we see towers, and what I see is buildings that you know don't surround this 360.

1:12

So accurate representation that everything that was worked uh to add coverage from 2019 that will be removed.

1:20

I just I um can't agree with that logic train, right?

1:25

Two is that these proposed apartments have one more year before uh their their conditional use expire.

1:32

So we don't know if they will or will not get built.

1:34

We don't know that an equal height will eliminate all coverage that you already currently have.

1:40

Um, whether it's your purview under federal law to build above.

1:45

I mean, that's federal law that supersedes Colorado Springs Planning Commission jurisdiction.

1:51

Um but I do see it as a problem with adjacencies to residential neighborhoods, and I'm gonna have to follow the code on this.

2:00

So it seems like there's no more comments from the dias, and I'll open it up to uh motion.

2:19

I'll make a motion to deny the conditional use based upon the findings so that the request complies with the criteria set forth in city unified development code section 7.5.601.

2:35

If I could just make one comment on that, there's a typo in there, it should say does not comply.

2:39

Does not, I agree.

2:41

So does not comply.

2:42

So it should say deny the conditional use based upon a find that the request does not comply with the criteria set forth in city unified development code section 7.5.601.

2:52

It does uh correctly represent that in the motions on legislatar, so it will be recorded correctly.

3:03

Commissioner Casey seconds.

3:23

That motion passes 72.

3:35

I will read the appeal instructions in accordance with the requirements of section 7.5.415 of the city unified development code.

3:44

An affected party may appeal to the city council any action of the city planning commission in relation to the zoning code where the action was adverse to that party.

3:54

The notice of appeal and 176 dollar fee shall be filed.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting

Land Use and Zoning█████████████████████████████████████████████70%

Technology and Innovation███████████████████30%

Summary of Proceedings

Colorado Springs Planning Commission Denies Conditional Use for Communications Tower – September 3, 2025

The Colorado Springs Planning Commission met on September 3, 2025, to consider a conditional use request related to a communications tower. After deliberation and public comment, the commission voted to deny the request based on non-compliance with the city's unified development code.

Public Comments & Testimony

A member of the public expressed understanding of property owners' desire for property value protection, but stated uncertainty about how to decide on the request. They criticized the applicant's statement that they would move forward regardless of the commission's decision, indicating displeasure with that approach.

Discussion Items

A commissioner noted that the original 2019 approval for communications coverage involved a different commission. They argued that removing existing coverage by approving a new structure of equal height would be illogical, as coverage maps show towers and buildings, not a full 360-degree surround. The commissioner also pointed out that proposed apartment buildings with a conditional use have one more year before expiration, so it is unknown if those apartments will be built. They questioned whether an equal-height tower would eliminate all current coverage and noted that federal law may supersede local planning commission jurisdiction. However, they stated that the adjacency to residential neighborhoods posed a problem under the city code, and they would follow the code.
No further comments were made from the dais, and the chair opened the floor for a motion.

Key Outcomes

A motion was made to deny the conditional use based on a finding that the request does not comply with City Unified Development Code Section 7.5.601. The motion initially had a typo stating "complies," but was corrected to "does not comply."
The motion was seconded by Commissioner Casey and passed with a vote of 7–2.
The chair read appeal instructions: an affected party may appeal the commission's action to the Colorado Springs City Council by filing a notice of appeal and paying a $176 fee within the required timeframe.

Meeting Transcript

Yeah, and I can also understand the people here that would like to have uh a little more protection for the value of their properties as well. So I'm not quite sure which way I want to go on this one just yet until you guys can come up with uh a good answer other than you're gonna move forward one way, shape, or form. Um that part I didn't like. Anyway, thank you. Okay. Well, I guess I have a couple comments before we wrap up. Um, you know, in in light of the 19 approval, uh, you know, most of us weren't a part of that. It was, you know, approved um to aid communications. You know, as we look at the communications map and coverage map, um, you know, we we see colors and we see towers, and what I see is buildings that you know don't surround this 360. So accurate representation that everything that was worked uh to add coverage from 2019 that will be removed. I just I um can't agree with that logic train, right? Two is that these proposed apartments have one more year before uh their their conditional use expire. So we don't know if they will or will not get built. We don't know that an equal height will eliminate all coverage that you already currently have. Um, whether it's your purview under federal law to build above. I mean, that's federal law that supersedes Colorado Springs Planning Commission jurisdiction. Um but I do see it as a problem with adjacencies to residential neighborhoods, and I'm gonna have to follow the code on this. So it seems like there's no more comments from the dias, and I'll open it up to uh motion. I'll make a motion to deny the conditional use based upon the findings so that the request complies with the criteria set forth in city unified development code section 7.5.601. If I could just make one comment on that, there's a typo in there, it should say does not comply. Does not, I agree. So does not comply. So it should say deny the conditional use based upon a find that the request does not comply with the criteria set forth in city unified development code section 7.5.601. It does uh correctly represent that in the motions on legislatar, so it will be recorded correctly. Commissioner Casey seconds. That motion passes 72. I will read the appeal instructions in accordance with the requirements of section 7.5.415 of the city unified development code. An affected party may appeal to the city council any action of the city planning commission in relation to the zoning code where the action was adverse to that party. The notice of appeal and 176 dollar fee shall be filed.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI

TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com