# General plan documents — colorado_springs-colorado Assembled by OpenPublica from the documents it serves for this government. Each section below is a separate publication by the government; page anchors (``) refer to pages of that section's own source PDF, linked in its heading. **Contains 1 document.** OpenPublica has pinned these slots for this government: combined. That is what we have looked for, not a statement that the government publishes nothing else — a plan element absent here may simply not have been reviewed yet. Last reviewed 2026-08-21. --- ## Complete Plan — PlanCOS (Comprehensive Plan) - Source: https://coloradosprings.gov/system/files/inline-images/plancos_2020.pdf - Pages: 316 - Covers: circulation, combined, conservation, ej, housing, land_use, noise, open_space, safety # PlanCOS ## LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE <
> <
> <
> # VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS <
> # THRIVING ECONOMY <
> <
> # RENOWNED CULTURE <
> # MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES # UNIQUE PLACES <
> # STRONG CONNECTIONS <
> # COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ## COLORADO SPRINGS ### January 2019 (blank page) COLORADO SPRINGS OLYMPIC CITY USA <
> # A Message from MAYOR SUTHERS I am thrilled to have been a part of the collaborative and community-involved process that created PlanCOS, the City’s first new Comprehensive Plan since 2001. I am especially proud of the thousands of residents who took the time to provide input that helped shape this plan for the future physical development of our city. PlanCOS reflects our community’s commitment to our founder’s vision; to create a city that truly matches our beautiful scenery. The PlanCOS Comprehensive Plan positions Colorado Springs to take full advantage of its economic opportunities to create and maintain the very best places to live, do business and experience the enhanced quality of life that comes with being part of a forward-thinking, growing and engaged city. PlanCOS is about the attitudes we exhibit and the decisions we make that benefit us not only today, but that will also establish us as “good ancestors” for the Colorado Springs of the future. Thank you again to the community members, stakeholders and professionals who have contributed such creativity, collaboration and critical thought in planning for our best future. Sincerely, <
> John Suthers Mayor # TABLE OF CONTENTS ## CHAPTER 1 ## INTRODUCTION Our Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Our Vision. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Our Big Ideas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Why We Are Planning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 What We Are Planning For . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Using This Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Our Vision Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 Implementing and Monitoring PlanCOS. . . . . 19 A Community-Based Process. . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 ## CHAPTER 2 ## VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS Importance of Neighborhoods . . . . . . . . . . 24 Neighborhood Typologies & Framework . . . 26 Goals and Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 Relationship to Keystone Indicators . . . . . . 39 Essential Questions for City Initiatives . . . . . 40 Relevant Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 ## CHAPTER 3 ## UNIQUE PLACES Importance of Unique Places . . . . . . . . . . . 44 Unique Place Typologies and Framework . . 45 Goals and Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Relationship to Keystone Indicators . . . . . . 60 Essential Questions for City Initiatives . . . . . 60 Relevant Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 ## CHAPTER 4 ## THRIVING ECONOMY Importance of the Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 Economic Typologies and Framework . . . . . 66 Goals and Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Relationship to Keystone Indicators . . . . . . 82 Essential Questions for City Initiatives . . . . . 82 Relevant Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 COVER PHOTO CREDITS: Mike Pach / 3 Peaks Photography, Page Saulsbury # CHAPTER 5 # STRONG CONNECTIONS Importance of Connections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86 Strong Connection Typologies & Framework 88 Goals and Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 Relationship to Keystone Indicators . . . . . . 107 Essential Questions for City Initiatives. . . . . 107 Relevant Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108 # CHAPTER 6 # RENOWNED CULTURE Importance of Culture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112 Renowned Culture Typologies & Framework 113 Goals and Policies 123 Relationship to Keystone Indicators . . . . . . 130 Essential Questions for City Initiatives. . . . . 130 Relevant Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131 # CHAPTER 7 # MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES Importance of Landscapes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134 Landscape Typologies & Framework. . . . . . 136 Goals and Policies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147 Relationship to Keystone Indicators . . . . . . 154 Essential Questions for City Initiatives. . . . . 154 Relevant Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 # CHAPTER 8 # ADAPTABLE IMPLEMENTATION Responding to Changing Conditions. . . . . . 158 Using this Plan 158 Annexations 160 Keystone Indicators & Progress Monitoring 161 Amending the Plan 165 Key Projects & Implementation Strategies. 166 # APPENDICES A: State of the City Snapshots A:2 B: Global Trends B:37 C: Public Engagement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C:49 D: List of Plans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . D:81 E: Glossary of Terms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E:87 F: Keystone Indicators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F:97 PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ## STEERING COMMITTEE Merv Bennett, *Chair* Jill Gaebler, *Vice Chair* Rachel Beck Max Cupp Susan Davies Charles Deason Kent Fortune Joshua Green Maureen Juran Rhonda McDonald Hannah Parsons Eric Phillips Jim Raughton Harry Salzman Tim Seibert Robert Shonkwiler Doug Stimple Taj Stokes ## STAFF TEAM Jeff Greene, *Chief of Staff* Peter Wysocki, AICP, *Planning Director* Carl Schueler, AICP, *Comprehensive Planning Manager* Conrad Olmedo, AICP, *Comprehensive Planner II* Page Saulsbury, *Planning Technician* Jacob Anderson, *Citizen Engagement Administrator* Adrianne Matkovich, *Digital Media Strategist* | | | | :--- | :--- | | Jenny Bishop | Richard Mulledy | | Craig Blewitt | Kim Mutchler | | Kate Brady | Elena Nunez | | Jason Brahler | Karen Palus | | Sarah Bryarly | Ann Werner | | Renee Congdon | Steve Posey | | Beth Conklin | Brian Potts | | Bob Cope | Krithika Prashant | | Adam Copper | James Ridgon | | Jerry Cordova | Tim Roberts | | Sabrina Cotta | Mark Shea | | Catherine Duarte | Marc Smith | | Dave Edmunds | Ryan Tefertiller | | Matthew Fitzsimmons | Ryan Trujillo | | Tim Geitner | Jennifer Valentine | | Eileen Gonzalez | Nina Vetter | | Derek Gordon | Steve Vigil | | Britt Haley | Brian Vitulli | | Mitchel Hammes | Jariah Walker | | Meggan Herington | Pat Wells | | Frank Kinder | Ann Werner | | Kathleen Krager | Scott Winter | | Kim Melchor | | # MAYOR JOHN SUTHERS ## CITY COUNCIL Yolanda Avila Merv Bennett Jill Gaebler David Geislinger Don Knight Bill Murray Andy Pico Richard Skorman Tom Strand ## PLANNING COMMISSION ### MEMBERS AS OF ADOPTION John Almy Reggie Graham Scott Hente Rhonda McDonald James McMurray Jim Raughton Samantha A. Satchell-Smith Carl Smith ### PRIOR INVOLVED MEMBERS James M. Fletcher Sherrie Gibson John Henninger Jeffrey Markewich Eric Phillips Robert Shonkwiler Ray Walkowski ## CONSULTANT TEAM Bruce Meighen, AICP, *Principal* Megan Moore, ASLA, Assoc. AIA, *Project Manager* Miriam McGilvray, AICP, *Lead Author* Kristy Bruce, GISP, *Geospatial Specialist* <
> ## SPECIAL CONTRIBUTORS Samuel Thomas Elliott Sean K. Holveck Mike Pach Amy Reid Mike Ruebenson ## CO-CREATORS Thanks to the volunteers that closely followed and participated in this process. ## COLORADO SPRINGS COMMUNITY Special thanks to the community members, residents, and business owners who helped shape the vision for the future of our city. <
> # COMMUNITY PARTNERS <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # LIST OF MAPS Map 1: Areas of Capacity and Change 11 Map 2: Vision Map 17 Map 3: Community Engagement 21 Map 4: Vibrant Neighborhood Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Map 5: Unique Places Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 Map 6: Thriving Economy Framework. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75 Map 7: Strong Connections Framework - Transportation 97 Map 8: Strong Connections Framework - Utilities 101 Map 9: Renowned Culture Framework 123 Map 10: Majestic Landscapes Framework 147 # ACRONYMS **ADA:** Americans with Disabilities Act **ADU:** Accessory Dwelling Unit **AV:** Autonomous Vehicles **BRT:** Bus Rapid Transit **CDOT:** Colorado Department of Transportation **CSU:** Colorado Springs Utilities **CV:** Connected Vehicle **EDC:** Colorado Springs Economic Development Corporation **EV:** Electronic Vehicle **HEAL:** Healthy Eating & Active Living **IMP:** Intermodal Mobility Plan (potential name for an update to the ITP) **ITP:** City of Colorado Intermodal Transportation Plan **JLUS:** PPACG Joint Land Use Study **LART:** Lodgers and Automobile Rental Tax **PUD:** Planned Unit Development **PPACG:** Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments **PPRTA:** Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority **TABOR:** Colorado Taxpayer Bill of Rights **TOD:** Transit-Oriented Development **TOPS:** Trails Open Space and Parks Sales Tax **TSM:** Transportation System Management **WUI:** Wildland-Urban Interface <
> # INTRODUCTION ## CHAPTER 1 <
> PHOTO CREDIT: VisitCOS MY THEORY FOR THIS PLACE IS THAT IT SHOULD BE MADE THE MOST ATTRACTIVE PLACE FOR HOMES IN THE WEST—A PLACE FOR SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, LITERATURE, SCIENCE...” — General William Jackson Palmer, founder of Colorado Springs (December 23, 1871) TOPOPHILIA IS THE LOVE OF PLACE. ALL OF COLORADO HAS IT, BUT IT IS PARTICULARLY EVIDENT IN COLORADO SPRINGS.” — Gov. John Hickenlooper, United States Olympic Museum groundbreaking (June 9, 2017) COMING TO COLORADO WAS AN ADVENT FOR ME. I FELT LIKE I WAS WALKING INSIDE OF A CASTLE. I DO NOT WANT TO LOSE THAT FEELING.” — Andrew Ezell Wash, Southeast Colorado Springs resident (2017) <
> PHOTO CREDIT: Jason Miller # OUR PLAN This is our community’s Plan for the physical development of Colorado Springs. We expect it to be used and referenced as our city and community develops over the coming decades. Our citizens understand how important it is to plan for the future. The use of this Plan allows us to grow and adapt to a future that is predictable in some cases and uncertain in others. Our Plan should be used to support and not to restrain the market, private initiative, strategic public investment, and innovation. Our Plan ensures that Colorado Springs will continue to be one of the great cities of our nation. The importance of our Plan is apparent from how it is written. It is reinforced when the reader reminds themselves that these words represent more than their individual goals, but rather a collective vision of a better future. Even with the benefit of this vision and insight, future conversations will not always be easy. Decisions about development are complex and often have competing perspectives. Some choices are evident based on this Plan, while others need more deliberation. PlanCOS is an important part of these conversations. The community of Colorado Springs has come together to articulate a common vision that embraces our future and builds on the identity we share in our geographical location and outdoor environment. To realize our vision, we must act boldly to build on our strengths and confront our challenges. The goals we envision and the actions we take today will define our city’s future. # OUR VISION ## We will build a great city that matches our scenery. In the coming decades, Colorado Springs will become a vibrant community that reflects our engaging outdoor setting as pioneers of health and recreation. Our city will be filled with unique places of culture and creative energy, sustainably designed around our natural environment. We will attract and retain residents of all generations with an innovative, diverse economy and dynamic, well-connected neighborhoods that provide viable housing opportunities for all. To achieve our Vision, this Plan is organized around six powerful vision themes. These themes are the result of conversations with our community. Very few comprehensive plans are organized this way. ### Vibrant Neighborhoods Forms diverse and safe neighborhoods with quality gathering areas, a mix of housing types, transportation choices, and a shared sense of pride. ### Unique Places Centers on a vibrant Downtown and is strengthened by our reinvestment in walkable, healthy, and magnetic activity centers that are located in new and reinvented areas throughout the city. ### Thriving Economy Fosters an environment of inclusivity and economic diversity by attracting an innovative and adaptive workforce, advancing existing and targeted employment sectors, investing in quality of life, supporting our military, and expanding our sports ecosystem as Olympic City USA. ### Strong Connections Adapts to how we move by transforming our corridors to support our future generations’ health and mobility needs, enhancing economic vibrancy, upgrading infrastructure, and improving regional connectivity. ### Renowned Culture Promotes and embraces arts, culture, and education as essential parts of our lives and our identity. This builds on the efforts of General Palmer and many others that envisioned culture as the cornerstone of the community and where creative energy generates new possibilities, interpersonal connections, and unprecedented philanthropy. ### Majestic Landscapes Values our natural and man-made outdoor spaces and celebrates our location at the base of America’s Mountain by designing a city oriented around our iconic landmarks. We ensure our community can engage with and enjoy these places through an integrated system of parks, streetscapes, and natural areas. # OUR BIG IDEAS Each of our themes is supported by Big Ideas that keep us focused on the most important things that will shape our future city. These ideas provide the basis for our goals and the more detailed contents of our Plan. ### Vibrant Neighborhoods #### Everybody is in a Neighborhood Neighborhoods are the fundamental building blocks of a great city. Every person in the city deserves to live in a great neighborhood. All neighborhoods are not the same, and we do not want them to be. We foster our shared neighborhood values and strive to improve the character of our neighborhoods. This Plan purposefully moves us in the direction of enhanced neighborhood identity, planning, support, and livability. Individual neighborhood plans will focus attention toward the ideas and goals of each neighborhood and the overall community plan. #### Housing for All Housing should reflect our community, not only where people live now, but where they want to live in the next phases of their life. This Plan recognizes the market realities that impact our housing and what we choose to regulate, incentivize, or subsidize. A fundamental expectation is to move our community in the direction of more housing choices. We choose to accomplish this less by mandated exactions and requirements and more by proactive accommodation, incentives, and support for a full spectrum of attainable housing opportunities, located in different areas of the city. #### Reclaim Neighborhood Space As our city matures, a decline of any neighborhood will not serve us well. Neighborhood disinvestment affects our entire city. If we are not paying attention and being proactive as a city, we should expect areas to change in undesirable ways. A key tenet of this Plan is that viable opportunities for neighborhood reinvestment need to be identified, prioritized, and pursued in all neighborhoods, but particularly those that are most vulnerable. ### Unique Places #### Be a City of Places We are a large and expansive city with a predominant suburban development pattern. This is the foundation for many of the neighborhoods we know and love. Missing in some areas are the unique and special places for these communities to identify with and gather in. Places are what make a city special and how we share it as community. The best and most special places have a combination of common desired elements and unique attributes. This Plan is about community building through placemaking everywhere in the city. The plan looks to incorporate centers in neighborhoods throughout the city. #### Embrace Creative Infill, Adaptation and Land Use Change We value the preservation of our built environment, especially our historic buildings and areas. But, for our city to be even more competitive, we also need areas to infill and adapt in response to a myriad of trends including demographics, technology, and the market. As a community we should embrace the prospect of managed, thoughtful, and forward-thinking changes in land use by reinvesting in key areas. #### Grow the City’s Heart All great cities have vibrant downtowns. Our city center will continue to grow and adapt as the iconic, mixed use, economic, and cultural heart of the city and region. Downtown is and should remain a uniquely special area and priority for our community. ### Focus on Corridors and Centers Downtown is essential, but it is not nearly enough. For Colorado Springs to continue to flourish and grow, we need other places to function as centers for community life. Our Plan addresses how to create and enhance these new and existing corridors and centers. Density, land use diversity, and public spaces need to be key components of these areas if they are to be sustainable, walkable, active, and transit supportive. ### Create Sustainable and Resilient Places We do not seek to be a more resilient city to obtain national acclaim. We desire an environmentally sustainable and resilient future for our city because it makes sense. We plan on leading by example in supporting, embracing and celebrating land uses, buildings, systems, and technologies that promote water conservation and efficient energy use. We plan on building and taking advantage of the latest cost-effective technologies that support our economic and environmental competitiveness. ### Brand as the Best We are the one and only “Olympic City USA” and we intend to celebrate and market our brand through this Plan and in many other ways. We embrace and foster the Olympic spirit as a community and strive for its ideals. Our location, at the base of Pikes Peak, also reminds us of our lofty vision to be a city that matches its scenery. ### Expand our Base The military is the largest direct and indirect contributor to our economy. They have invested in our city and we need to invest in them. We need to grow and develop in a way that complements this major military role in our community. At the same time, we need to create an environment that promotes jobs and investment in other targeted, higher-paying employment sectors. In doing this, we can continue to grow our economy and make it more diverse and resilient. ### Think and Act Regionally Our city does not function in isolation, nor do we want to. Continued coordination and collaboration with other local governments and regional partners will enhance our economic development and stability, expand available services, and improve the quality of life for all of our citizens. ### Embrace Sustainability Our City and its enterprises have large and costly responsibilities to provide the services and facilities our citizens ask for or require. This begins with core services such as public safety and water availability, but extends to other infrastructure and programs. The Colorado Springs Utilities Strategic Plan supports the long-term projected vibrant growth in PlanCOS. Forward thinking, thoughtful planning, and conscious development decisions are essential to our long-term management of City costs. Success in this endeavor will allow us to provide more efficient services. ### Become a Smart Cities Leader We expect to be at the forefront and a national leader of the Smart Cities movement by implementing a Smart City Vision. As SmartCOS, we plan on partnering with experts in this field by piloting and deploying transformative systems and technologies that maximize the effectiveness of our services and facilities and enhance communication among our citizens. Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) also has identified a Smart Utilities plan to further enhance the City’s Smart City concept. ### Connect Multimodal Transportation As the built areas of our city increase, a focus on connecting all modes of transportation will become important to create a livable and accessible city. As we plan for and improve the transportation system, we will do so in response to changes in demographics, lifestyles, and emerging technologies. Mobility and connectivity is essential at the local scale, and in creating places that are accessible and convenient by foot, bike, and transit throughout our community. ### Take Transit to the Next Level We may be a few years out from having a full choice-based transit system that connects both within our city and to other cities along the Front Range. However, we intend to achieve this vision in targeted and strategic sites. We recognize that the way to get there is to continue to actively plan for these systems and to encourage best-practices with transit-supportive uses, densities, and design. ### Remain Focusd on Stormwater Stormwater and flood control systems are vital to a well-functioning city. As such, we need to approach stormwater management as a connected and integrated element of the physical design of our city. This is especially important in new development and redeveloping areas. ### Support Smart and Connected Utilities We need modern and efficient utilities to prosper. We are planning for a future that will use smart systems and technology to revolutionize the way we sustainably use our water and energy. ### Honor Our History Our heritage is a key foundation of the city's strong cultural identity. We plan on preserving the best of our existing historic and cultural resources. Through collaboration with local organizations and new developments, we can integrate design features that celebrate aspects of our historic legacy. ### Grow and Celebrate Our Culture Our city has valued arts and culture since it was settled in the mid-19th century. As such, supporting the places, institutions, and organizations that provide cultural and educational opportunities and experiences is intrinsic to keeping our city's creative environment. We play an important role in nurturing the best of education and culture for all. ### Create Cross-Cultural Connections Great arts and culture cannot be static in its definition or how it is made available. As our city grows, matures, and diversifies, arts, education, and culture will need to be integrated and relevant to our lives throughout the city. Downtown is the center for arts and culture of the city and region. However, it is essential that great arts, culture, and education be available and celebrated throughout our city, particularly in our public places, parks, community centers, streets, and libraries. ### Celebrate Our Partnerships We do not intend for the City to be either the primary funder or the arbiter of arts, education, and culture. Instead, we expect strong partnerships among other public, non-profit and private providers and practitioners. The City's role should be to encourage and support these partnerships and community-oriented philanthropy, and provide opportunities and places for them. ### Strengthen Our Educational Resources There are already strong networks and resources for educational and lifelong learning opportunities in the city, and this Plan intends to recognize and support them as essential community functions. This can come in the form of complementary uses at these hubs or enhancing the connection to residents. This will elevate education as a community priority. ### Provide Parks for the People Our connection with the outdoors is shared by all of us, regardless of who we are or where we live in the city. As it is essential to our community life, we need to ensure access to a variety of well-maintained parks, open spaces, trails, and outdoor venues. We expect our City to be the primary, but certainly not the only, provider of these important spaces, places, and facilities. ### Engaging with Our Landscapes Together, our existing and future parks, open space, trails, and outdoor spaces represent the “green infrastructure” system of our city. We need to provide easy access, manage, and increase this system with a focus on connecting and engaging our citizens to what is in their backyard. ### Celebrate Our Scenery and Environment As a community we value the quality of our wonderful climate and natural environment, and we recognize the importance of clean air, land, and water. This motivates us to spend more time outside. As a city we do not regulate private property view protection. However, we do expect to build and design our streets, parks and public places to respect and share our beautiful vistas. Maintaining the integrity of our natural environment means we have a goal of determining and implementing the most effective ways to be stewards of our environment, as our city grows. ### Invest in Resilient and Adaptable Landscapes It is not enough to simply identify, set aside, and put protections on our cherished natural landscapes. We need to recognize their vulnerability from natural hazards, degradation, and overuse. This requires continuing to proactively invest, adapt, and establish programs for sustainability and resiliency. Careful management and proactive maintenance investment and actions are essential to sustaining our natural systems. ### Complete Our Creeks Our creeks and stream corridors should be the lifeblood and arteries of our green infrastructure. We plan to fully incorporate our creeks as multipurpose and accessible corridors. They should actively be considered as places for wildlife, recreation, transportation, utilities, and for the conveyance of stormwater. ### WHAT IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN? * A guiding document * A framework for city policies and priorities * A long-range vision of what we want our city to become * A tool for making decisions about how that vision should be achieved * Strategic steps to make the vision a reality * Targeted and strategic planning of the city # WHY WE ARE PLANNING PlanCOS is a guide for the development and growth of the city over the next 20 years. The development of the Comprehensive Plan is authorized in Colorado Revised Statutes (C.R.S. 31-23-206) and the Colorado Spring City Code (Chapter 7, Article 1) to achieve several purposes. We have created this Plan because it is important to periodically take a broad look at the trends and issues affecting the physical development of our city, to re establish our land use vision, and to lay out the key steps and priorities to guide us towards this future. There is a lot at stake—in our public investments, our competitiveness, and the quality of our lives. This Plan allows us to make better and more purposeful decisions on major land use applications. It gives us guidance about strategic choices on City initiatives, and it provides an essential framework for the creation and implementation of our more specific plans. # WHAT WE ARE PLANNING FOR We are planning for a physical development and a land use future that is relatively predictable in some ways, and less certain in others. We will need to revisit and adapt as our local, regional, natural and global environments change. Each of this Plan’s theme-based chapters has its own section on key trends and assumptions, with more detail. Appendix A of this Plan includes Community Snapshots that provide additional context about what we are planning for. ## HOW LONG ARE WE PLANNING FOR? Our planning horizon is between now and 2040, or a little more than 20 years. We need to be thinking about and making some choices at least this far ahead. We are also not expecting this entire plan to last that long. We need to pay regular attention to current trends and experiences, and expect that we will need a minor but important update of this plan every 5 years. A more comprehensive review should occur in 10 years. # MAJOR TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS ### Our Population and Employment Projections Official population and employment projections for cities are supported by information from the State of Colorado, as they are adopted for counties. By 2040, El Paso County is expected to grow to 971,444 persons and 500,482 jobs with increases of 295,266 persons and 145,986 employees respectively during the period from 2015 to 2040. We anticipate Colorado Springs to absorb at least 65% of this growth, which would increase our population to close to 700,000 by 2040. It is important to recognize there will be fluctuations well above or below the longer term average trends. There is always uncertainty associated with longer term assumptions. Actual growth will be affected by a combination of factors, not all of which can be controlled or influenced by our City. This Plan is designed around these growth assumptions. It is also structured to be adaptable to alternative growth and futures. We intend to be proactive as a city to influence and direct a substantial share of our region’s population and employment growth to occur within city limits. ### Our Capacity for Development and Redevelopment Our city has the land capacity to absorb our expected population and employment growth through 2040, primarily within existing city limits, but also with some targeted annexed areas. While the majority of this capacity is located in Banning Lewis Ranch, other newly developing areas of the city have their own opportunities. Together, the combination of vacant and redevelopable parcels in the generally developed areas of the city represents an opportunity for our community’s development needs. Table 1 summarizes our assumptions for development capacity. The Areas of Change Map (Map 1) highlights areas we expect to have the most potential for land use change. It includes all potentially developable vacant lands throughout the city, along with assumptions for those areas with a higher relative potential for land use change and redevelopment. Altogether, about 28% of our city is undeveloped. To this total we can and should add already developed areas with a substantial capacity for redevelopment. It is important to recognize that these assumptions of capacity are estimates. Actual experience and rates of development will be variable and uncertain in many cases. For example, there is a national trend toward incorporating accessory dwelling units with supporting covenants as part of the initial planning and approval process for new single-family housing development. This potential additional increase in future development density is not directly accounted for in the capacity tables at this time. What is clear is that the city has capacity for both new development and redevelopment. We expect to regularly update this development capacity information as we move through our planning horizon. ### Table 1: Colorado Springs Development and Redevelopment Capacity | CATEGORY | ACRES | DWELLING UNITS | SQUARE FEET (COMMERCIAL/ OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL) | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | | Existing Development | N/A | 192,000 | 78,078,000 | | Vacant Capacity in Banning Lewis Ranch | 22,000 | 65,000 | 41,677,000 | | Vacant Capacity in other greenfield areas | 6,000 | 13,000 | 9,607,000 | | Vacant Capacity in core (infill) areas | 6,700 | 16,000 | 15,153,000 | | Total Vacant Land Capacity | 34,700 | 94,000 | 66,437,000 | | Single Family Accessory Dwelling Unit Density Increase | N/A | 3,800 | N/A | | Redevelopment Capacity in Urban Renewal Areas | 300 | 2,000 | 6,606,000 | | Redevelopment Capacity in Areas of Change | 5,000 | 4,600 | 2,415,000 | | Total Redevelopment Capacity | 5,300 | 10,400 | 9,021,000 | | Total Additional Capacity | 40,000 | 104,400 | 75,458,000 | | **Total Capacity** | | **296,400** | **153,536,000** | What is essential to understand about our areas of change map is that it is generalized and not intended to establish bright line distinctions and borders. Put another way: * Identification as areas of relative land use stability is not intended to imply these areas should not be expected or allowed to undergo land use change at a more local level and scale; and * Identification as an area of change is not intended to confer an open-ended expectation for development without regard for the character and context of that area. ### A Much Older Population Between 2015 and 2040 our population 65 and older will double with even greater proportional increases in the 85 and older category. Although many of our seniors can expect to "age in place," this large increase in older residents will create a whole range of impacts and market demands for the built environment. ### A More Diverse Population As our much more diverse younger population gets older, our city will become substantially more diverse overall. We will need to have a city that is built to be responsive to the needs of this new demographic. ### Millennials Millennials (born between about 1981 and 1996) comprise the single largest segment of our population, and are moving to our city at the fastest rate in the country. They are in the process of inheriting our city. Our Plan anticipates this group continuing to do a lot to things differently including living, working, traveling, and communicating. ### Multiple Impacts of Technology Changes in technology continue to have a large effect on how we live in and use our city, and this Plan is created with expectation of more profound impacts in the coming few decades. Vehicles will rapidly transition to being more autonomous. Information, products, and communication will be even less restricted to particular places. Entirely new ways of moving people and goods (e.g. with drones or in vacuum tubes) are possible, and some cases probable. ### Opportunities for Attainable Housing Like many U.S. metro areas, our city has challenges with the mismatch between available incomes and the full real cost of providing services and housing. This Plan assumes these overall income distribution relationships will continue. Therefore, the challenges associated with attainable housing will remain for sizable segments of our citizenry. Refer to Appendix A for more details. PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Areas of Capacity and Change <
> **Areas of Change** | | | | | | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :--- | | Low | 3 | 5 | 7 | High | <
> City Boundary <
> Interstate 25 — Major Roads <
> Parks <
> Waterbodies This map is intended to provide a general identification of potential development changes across the city based on parcel level information. Elements considered in identifying the degree of change include zoning, development pressure, vacancy, and environmental constraints. A greater number of elements that could impact the development of a parcel results in a higher score. The parcels with a higher score are deeper red on the map. Change in development could include changing land uses, densification, or development of vacant areas. # USING THIS PLAN We expect this plan to be used for three primary purposes. 1. To review larger and discretionary land use applications for consistency with our overall land use vision in conjunction with the City Zoning Code and any of the City’s applicable topical or sub-area plans. See Chapter 8 for more important detail on how we expect this to work. 2. As a guide for city initiatives pertaining to the physical development of the city, including but not limited to the following: a. Priorities and areas of focus for small area and topical plans of the City; b. Direction for changes to our Zoning and other sections of our City Code; c. A consideration in development of the capital improvement priorities of the City and region including proposals for new or extended voter initiatives such as Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority, TOPS and 2C (hyperlink these); d. Guidance for grant applications and community partnerships; and e. A source of input for our ongoing City Strategic Plan. 3. To monitor and adapt where necessary to ensure that we are always making our city better. ## WHO SHOULD USE THIS PLAN A wide range of users can find meaning in PlanCOS. Our residents and property owners, businesses and developers, and city staff, leaders, and partners all use the Comprehensive Plan to guide and realize the future success of our city. **Residents and Property Owners:** To document our values and vision for the future of Colorado Springs, in a way that allows them to participate as informed and active participants in the overall physical development of the city including in the decisions about land use that impact them most directly. **Businesses and Developers:** To provide guidance on how to best achieve the community’s vision in ways that allow them to grow, adapt, and implement their development and business plans. **City Staff:** To work with applicants and stakeholders to review development proposals, and to provide decision-makers with information about how the proposals align with the intention, vision, and policies of the Plan. To create and implement city initiatives including Code changes and process improvements that advance the goals and recommendations of this Plan. To work collaboratively with stakeholders on the more detailed plans and projects necessary to implement and achieve the goals of this Plan. To monitor and report on the implementation and success of the Plan through measurable indicators, and to respond and adapt to this information. **City Leaders:** To position us for the future by establishing annual work plan priorities, developing partnerships, ensuring accountability of city departments, and making thoughtful and informed decisions in harmony with the goals of this Plan. **Colorado Springs Utilities:** To coordinate infrastructure planning with the City’s Strategic Plan, Comprehensive Plan, Annexation Policy, and other governmental agency plans. **Other Partners:** To ensure that we share a collective vision and leverage existing resources. # ELEMENTS OF THIS PLAN AND # HOW TO USE THEM Chapters 2 through 7 provide much of the primary contents of our plan organized around our themes. Development applications and city initiatives should be evaluated using a hierarchy of applicability beginning with the themes, and then the goals, policies, and strategies. Each chapter has common elements. The text and contents of this Plan are also formatted to support navigation to the most applicable policy direction. The following is a description of what these are and how we expect them to be used. ### 1. Importance Each chapter begins with an introduction and description of the plan theme, focusing on the issues that the city faces. It describes why we believe each theme is important and it highlights a few of the key trends that particularly relate to them. This section sets up the context for the goals, policies, strategies, and essential questions found in the subsequent sections. ### 2. Typologies This section describes a set of typologies—or classifications of similar kinds of areas—related to the chapter’s plan theme. These typologies recognize different functions and desired patterns for areas of the city and provide a context for the City’s goals and policies. The typologies are a very unique and innovative approach to city planning, and are one of the cornerstones of our Plan. They attempt to graphically represent the key elements of each theme in a way that applies them to different areas of the city depending on their context, conditions, and what characteristics we desire to encourage or discourage. This tailored approach provides a generalized but real world sense for how, where, and to what extent we want to “move the needle” with respect to a given theme in a given area. Defining common desired elements and expectations helps inform what makes it successful and what enhancements should be considered in the future. Not all attributes are desired or applicable for all projects. Instead, this section outlines best practices, example areas and ideas that should be at, a minimum, actively considered. Typologies should be used as purposeful and important examples. At the same time they need to be understood as examples and should not be expected to be complete or universally applicable. ### 3. Framework Maps Each of Chapters 2 through 7 has a Framework Map. These maps provide a spatial “framework” to help describe the typologies for each theme as they relate to the overall physical fabric of our city. These maps are intended to provide a general location for predominant typologies. These maps link elements and typologies spatially, allowing the reader to navigate to other important elements of this Plan, and to the more detailed plans that support it. These maps express important concepts and priorities for areas of our city, and are expected to be used. However, their boundaries, extents, and limits are purposefully generalized. These maps are advisory and not regulatory. However, they should be referenced prior to moving on to other components of the plan. # TYPOLOGY EXAMPLE <
> # FRAMEWORK # MAP EXAMPLE <
> # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE INDICATOR EXAMPLE <
> ### 4. Goals, Policies, and Strategies The goals and policies support and advance the PlanCOS vision. The goals identified in Chapters 2 through 7 encompass the Big Ideas of this Plan and are purposefully limited in number. They articulate a desired ideal and a value to be sought. The policy statements under each goal are outcome-based and guide decision-making. The supporting strategies are most specific and intended to provide examples of action-based implementation of the vision. They are not inclusive of all actions and options. If a given theme is applicable, consideration would be expected to start with that and then move on to the most applicable goals, policies, and strategies. Individual statements should not be applied in isolation, in cases where additional context and balance is needed. Chapter 8 goes into more detail concerning the process of using this to review development applications in conjunction with Chapter 7 of the City Code. ### 5. Essential Questions Chapters 2 through 7 each include essential questions. The intent of these questions is to provide an easy and consistent way to maintain a focus on and apply the key aspects of each vision to pertinent City-initiated decisions, such as Code changes, capital improvement planning, and programming priorities. Depending on the nature of the decision, the questions from one or more of the Chapters should be prioritized. Not all questions will be applicable to every decision and these questions are not intended to be directly applied as review criteria for privately initiated development applications. ### 6. Indicators Indicators measure progress toward achieving the City's vision and goals. They can facilitate prioritization of future actions, policy, and funding based on this evaluation and tracking. Indicators are meant to be reproducible, attainable, affordable, and quantifiable. This section includes only the most relevant indicators to the chapter. A full list with descriptions is found in Chapter 8. ### 7. Relationship to Relevant Plans For a city of the size and complexity of Colorado Springs, it is essential that we have and maintain many different plans. While PlanCOS establishes our overall context and vision for the physical development of our city, much of the real work needs to be in the form of specific topical or local plans. A key challenge with PlanCOS lies in how to integrate and balance it with all the other plans we have or develop. Of particular importance is understanding how this Plan relates with CSU's Strategic and infrastructure plans and with privately initiated land use master plans. Generally, PlanCOS should be viewed and used as "the first place to look" when considering decisions that have comprehensive planning considerations. From there, the expectation will be to tier off into more detailed plans. Appendix D helps describe this system of related plans. With these other plans, a very general rule of thumb is that the more current they are, the more they should be relied on, especially when balancing sometimes competing policy and priority directions. . Each of Chapters 2 through 7 has a section on relevant plans. These sections provide additional focus on the other plans or categories of plans most relevant for each theme, and on how they are expected to be used. PlanCOS provides an opportunity to align the vision for the physical development of the city with its enterprises, one of those being CSU. The City Council convenes separately as the Board of Directors for CSU, and jointly with CSU’s Chief Executive Officer who is responsible for CSU’s strategic planning, governance policies, long-term organizational sustainability, performance, and its infrastructure planning. While PlanCOS recognizes the important distinctions in roles between CSU and the general city governance, it also envisions partnership, alignment, coordination, and complementary strategic planning in implementing the goals and strategies of PlanCOS. The balancing of PlanCOS with Privately Initiated Land Use Master Plans is particularly important. Generally, developers, property owners, and neighbors should expect to rely on these previously adopted land use plans as entitlements. This Plan is expected to be consulted when amendments of Privately Initiated Land Use Plans are being requested. PlanCOS and any other relevant city-initiated master plans should also be considered in the review of and action on, the more specific land use applications needed to implement these privately initiated plans. ### 8. Definitions Words and how we use them are important. For this Plan we have particularly tried to define words and terms that can be have different interpretations or may be controversial. We have also defined words that have a special use in this document, along with those that are more technical in nature. All of these definitions are found in and hyperlinked in Appendix E: Glossary of Terms. Some definitions of special importance are also highlighted within the text. With some words, one really has to read into the relevant parts of this document in order to capture the full context their intended meaning. For words and terms not defined in this Plan, Chapter 7 of our City Code should be considered a source for words defined in it. For all other words, we expect to rely on a combination of recognized technical sources, the dictionary, common sense, and course, the overall context of this Plan. We have tried not to use too many acronyms, but those we do use are explained in under Acronyms at the front of the Plan. # RELEVANT PLAN EXAMPLE <
> # OUR VISION MAP How land should be used is one of the most important and fundamental issues for determining the future of Colorado Springs. Where and when new growth and development should occur, how it should be managed, what locations are most appropriate for different kinds of development, how they should be combined—all these questions are basic to deciding what type of city we want to become. Simply relying on past trends and current practices will not help us as a community make that decision. Nor should they be ignored. PlanCOS provides positive guidance by presenting a framework for creating livable, walkable neighborhoods, attractive and accessible shopping areas, conveniently located schools, parks, and public spaces, dynamic centers for employment, and a network of natural areas and greenways. The vision and goals of our Plan is embodied in the Vision Map. ## VISION MAP Our Vision Map illustrates the essential components of the PlanCOS vision. It visually represents the connection and interdependence between the six themes of our Plan by bringing together the more detailed Framework Maps found in Chapters 2 through 7. This Vision Map is intended to graphically represent key elements of our desired future in way that captures the essence of our big ideas and priorities. The Vision Map and the corresponding Framework Maps provide a high level window into our desired mix, character, and location of our neighborhoods, places, industries, transportation, utilities, cultural landmarks, and landscapes. They are advisory—not regulatory—and do not replace existing zoning or development entitlements. The maps provide a starting point for conversations about city initiatives and development proposals by illustrating how specific proposals might fit into our overall community framework. # PlanCOS ### LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Vision Map <
> **Majestic Landscapes** - Parks & Open Space - Complete Creeks - Primary Trail Network - Legacy Loop & Ring the Springs **Thriving Economy** **Renowned Culture** **Activity Centers** - Mature/Redeveloping - New/Developing - Reinvestment Area & Community Hub **Strong Connections** - Intercity Corridors - City Priority Corridors - Smart Corridor - Bike Network - Park-N-Ride - Transit Hub **Vibrant Neighborhoods** - Downtown - Established Historic Neighborhood - Established Traditional Neighborhood - Established Suburban Neighborhood - Changing Neighborhood - Newer Developing Neighborhood - Future Neighborhood - Airport Note: This map depicts a unified city boundary, including enclaves of land that have not yet been annexed. (blank page) # IMPLEMENTING AND MONITORING PLANCOS ## MOST IMPORTANT IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Implementation of PlanCOS is discussed holistically, comprehensively, and in much more detail in Chapter 8. Some of the most important overall implementation strategies are as follows: 1. Use this Plan and keep a focus on it; 2. Comprehensively update and refresh our Zoning and Subdivision Code consistent with this Plan; 3. Comprehensively update our Intermodal Transportation Plan in alignment with this Plan; 4. Incorporate key priorities in periodic updates of the City's Strategic Plan; 5. Complete our neighborhood planning process and content template and secure resources for the highest priority areas; 6. Complete Smart Cities pilot projects and move on to implementation; and 7. Initiate and complete an Attainable Housing Master Plan. ## KEYSTONE INDICATOR TRACKING Plan monitoring and evaluation involves tracking progress and setbacks in accomplishing plan objectives, and determining an appropriate response and effective course of action toward achieving progress. PlanCOS uses these indicators to help clarify existing and desired conditions by measuring key elements and trends. The following keystone indicators will be analyzed annually in order to track the successful implementation of the goals and policies within PlanCOS. Additional information about the indicators is found in Chapter 8: Adaptable Implementation. Each chapter also highlights the most relevant indicators to that vision theme. 1. New Residential Net Density 2. Net City Lane Miles Added Compared with Development and Redevelopment 3. Number of High Priority Neighborhood Plans Completed 4. Infill and Redevelopment Activity a. Remaining Vacant Acres in Overall Infill Area b. Total Building Permit Value in Infill Area 5. Housing Attainability a. Single Family Home Ownership Affordability Index b. Apartment Rental Affordability Index c. Total Homeless Populations in El Paso County 6. Existing Downtown Measures a. New Residential Units Added Annually b. Value of Building Permit Activity Compared with Prior Years and with the Overall City 7. Economic Indicators a. City Proportion of New Residential Units Added Annually b. New Jobs Added that are At or Above the Median Salary for the Region Unemployment Rate c. Median Wages Compared with State 8. Renowned Culture Indicators a. Creative Vitality Index b. Number of Creative Jobs c. Creative Industry Earnings 9. Majestic Landscapes Indicators a. Percent of City Population, Area, And Employment Within ½ Mile of a Park, Trail, or Accessible Open Space Area b. Per Capita Total Funding for Parks Operations and Maintenance c. Miles of Urban Trails d. Miles of Park Trails 10. Citywide Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Infrastructure a. Walkscore®, Bikescore®, and Transitscore® b. Bike Lanes, Bike Boulevards, and Bike Routes <
> # A COMMUNITY-BASED PROCESS Throughout the planning process, hundreds of meetings and other outreach efforts were used to gather community input to ensure resident input was heard and included. # 53 STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS # 90 CO-CREATORS # 274 OUTREACH MEETINGS # 753 DRAFT PLAN COMMENTS # 9,000 PARTICIPANTS # 5,146 SURVEY RESPONSES # 24,508 SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS PHOTO CREDIT: Conrad Olmedo PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Community Engagement <
> * 1 Survey or Open House Response * Co-Creators * City Boundary * Outreach Events and Meetings Number of Responses by Neighborhood 5 to 160 <
> # VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS ## CHAPTER 2 <
> PHOTO CREDIT: Ryan O'Shea ### PLANCOS VISION Forms diverse and safe neighborhoods with active gathering areas, a mix of housing types, transportation choices, and a shared sense of pride. ### KEY STRATEGIES * Develop Neighborhood Plans * Update Code and Zoning * Create and Implement Incentives # IMPORTANCE OF NEIGHBORHOODS An essential premise of PlanCOS is that every person and place is part of a neighborhood. The strength of a neighborhood’s identity, values, and positive attributes extend beyond traditional residential areas and can benefit the overall character of the city. Neighborhoods are fundamental to our city’s identity and development. Each of us deserves a great neighborhood. Great neighborhoods are more than simply places we live—they bring us together at schools, workspaces, parks, coffee shops, and on sidewalks. Neighborhoods create a sense of identity around a shared built environment and shared experiences on the human scale. PlanCOS provides a vision and framework for enhancing the quality, diversity, and safety of our neighborhoods. It speaks to each neighborhood by addressing the effects of growth and land use changes, as well as attainable housing options. When needed, it offers ideas for revitalization. Above all, PlanCOS supports and encourages pride and investment in all of our neighborhoods. Our neighborhoods are not all the same. We recognize and celebrate their diversity—whether they are already established, changing, emerging, or not yet built. We set the city up to adapt to the impacts of future growth and changes in the market. Creating and recreating resilient neighborhoods will require attention to physical details, connectivity, and encouragement of mixed and integrated land uses. This Plan has a particular focus on nurturing and reinvesting in distinct neighborhoods where deterioration has negatively affected their vibrancy and livability. Living in a large urban area requires the recognition that the use of our property often influences, improves, and affects our neighborhood. In Colorado Springs, homeowner and neighborhood associations of various types play a critical role in providing the first level of representation for our neighborhoods in support of their character and function. For our neighborhoods to thrive, it is essential that they be represented. This chapter defines various types of neighborhoods, or typologies, in order to provide a more focused direction to protect, enhance, or revitalize our different types of neighborhoods. It also establishes a framework for future neighborhood-specific planning and involvement. # KEY TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS The following trends and assumptions provide a quick overview of some of the high-level issues related to Vibrant Neighborhoods. They are intended to provide a baseline understanding of emerging trends, preferences, and opportunities that may affect how Colorado Springs will grow and change in the coming years. This foundation sets up PlanCOS to provide tailored policy direction and implementation strategies. More background information can be found in Appendix A: State of the City Snapshots. * Over the next 20 years, the average size of households is not expected to increase but our household types will continue to diversify. This includes an increase in demand for more urban and walkable neighborhoods and housing options. * Demand for single-family housing is nonetheless expected to remain strong both in traditional stable neighborhoods and in new planned communities, assuming they have a desired combination of lifestyle, location, amenities, and access. * The majority of our growing senior population will prefer to “age in place” within existing neighborhoods. Many will seek residential accommodations to suit their emerging needs. However, there will also be a growing demand for highly specialized senior living facilities within the context of neighborhoods. * Maintaining housing attainability will continue to be a challenge due to natural market appreciation, increasing land and construction costs, and the impacts of regulations. Housing options are essential for an excellent quality of life, strong economy, business retention, and new business recruitment. * Geographic disparities in life expectancy may continue to show inequitable access to opportunities residents have to live the healthiest life possible. Building a citywide culture of health that improves places where we live, learn, work, and play may help residents in all parts of the city live healthier and longer lives. ## DEFINITIONS **Homeowner and Neighborhood Associations:** Generally, the biggest difference between an HOA and a NA is that an HOA has dues and enforceable covenants, whereas, a NA may or may not have dues and generally will not enforce covenants. **Neighborhood:** A geographic sub-area within the City that contains but is not limited to residential land uses. The extent of a neighborhood is variable and may be defined by tradition, organizational boundaries, period of building and development, or subdivision patterns. Neighborhood boundaries may include such features as major streets or other physical elements. **Mixed-use Development:** Development that integrates two or more land uses, such as residential, commercial, and office, with a strong pedestrian orientation. **Master Plan:** A plan for the development of a portion of the City that contains proposed land uses, a generalized transportation system, and the relationship of the area included in the plan to surrounding property. # COMMON DESIRED ELEMENTS **Certain qualities and elements should be widely encouraged, supported, and promoted for most neighborhoods. These include the following:** a. a strong sense of identity, sense of place, and community, including distinguishing attributes and focal points (e.g. schools, parks, gathering areas, and unique places); b. an integrated mix of land uses to allow siting of residential, retail, office, recreational, and educational facilities within close proximity; c. a diversity of housing choices; and d. safe physical connections to support and encourage walkability with links to existing and future multimodal transportation systems, the city’s trails and green infrastructure network, and neighborhoods. # NEIGHBORHOOD TYPOLOGIES & FRAMEWORK For a city with the legacy, size, and complexity of Colorado Springs, there is not a one-size-fits-all approach to neighborhoods. The goal of this Plan is to give residents of a neighborhood the tools to identify and prioritize the uniquely important attributes of their neighborhoods that make them safe, livable, and desirable. That said, there are certain unifying elements that contribute to any strong neighborhood and create a sense of community. These should be encouraged throughout all neighborhoods. ## NEIGHBORHOOD TYPOLOGIES Neighborhoods throughout the city have very different characteristics, and are at different stages in development. Therefore, they have differing issues, needs, and priorities. To help address this variety, PlanCOS recognizes several different desired neighborhood typologies to provide a more useful context for City goals and policies. Typologies inform what makes vibrant neighborhoods and suggest enhancements. Achieving these goals will contribute to the prosperity of the city overall. As major projects and changes are proposed, these neighborhood boundaries and typologies should be considered as guidance for discussion and choices about strengthening and supporting neighborhoods. As such, these typologies should be consulted and applied with the understanding that they are examples and therefore need to be considered in context to the surrounding land uses, land use transitions, and overall character. Some neighborhoods may not fit into a single type because of their individual circumstances and conditions. Planning challenges also result from overlaps in neighborhood typologies that arise from transitions between neighborhoods, or other factors such as varying landscapes (Chapter 7: Majestic Landscapes), multimodal transportation corridors (Chapter 5: Strong Connections), and incorporation of activity centers (Chapter 3: Unique Places). As further described in Chapter 3 and under Typology 2 below, Downtown is considered its own unique type of neighborhood. Neighborhood typologies are as follows: 1. Established Neighborhoods a. Historic Neighborhoods b. Traditional Neighborhoods c. Suburban Neighborhoods 2. Changing Neighborhoods 3. Emerging Neighborhoods 4. Future Neighborhoods # Typology 1: Established Neighborhoods **Established Neighborhood Recommendations:** * Integrate Traffic Calming Measures * Integrate Neighborhood Monumentation * Enhance Existing Parks * Enhance Landscape Treatments on Collector Streets * Improve Sidewalks and Bike Lanes * Redevelop Commercial Areas * Connect to Off-street Trail System **Example Location:** Patty Jewett Neighborhood Columbia St. and N. Corona St. <
> Encourage Alley Access with Garages at Back of Lot Maintain Dense Tree Canopy Encourage Houses to Build Close to Street Preserve Historic Homes and Character of Historic Districts Accommodate a Variety of Lot Configurations and Building Orientation Maintain the Variety of Lot Sizes Widen and Connect Sidewalks *** **The goal of this neighborhood typology is to recognize, support, and enhance the existing character of these neighborhoods, while supporting their ongoing investment and improved adaptation. New development and/or redevelopment should incorporate elements of the existing neighborhoods.** Established Neighborhoods are predominantly built-out and have been for at least a few decades. Relative to other neighborhoods, they are stable and do not anticipate high levels of land use changes. However, most Established Neighborhoods within the city should expect some degree of infill and redevelopment. Within this typology, several distinctions are important to the application of PlanCOS, as defined by the following sub-categories: 1. Historic Neighborhoods have an especially high value for preserving the legacy of existing design and architecture, although they may have to experience some amount of change especially in areas of transition with less historic uses. These Historic Neighborhoods may or may not have specially adopted City design guidelines or other publicly initiated master plans. These neighborhoods are also closely aligned with Historic Districts in Chapter 6. ### EXAMPLES Old North End, parts of the Westside, and Old Colorado City ### EXAMPLES Knob Hill, Ivywild, and Patty Jewett. Refer to the Framework Map for additional neighborhoods ### EXAMPLES Rockrimmon and Springs Ranch. Refer to the Framework Map for additional neighborhoods 2. Traditional Neighborhoods, regardless of a formal historic status or relative historic values, are older and developed or at least laid out prior to the mid-1950s. These neighborhoods have a high value in preserving and enhancing walkability features including their gridded street patterns, wide sidewalks, and sometimes limited building setbacks from the street. Some of these areas were developed before zoning was established, or they were annexed following initial development. These established neighborhoods may or may not have adopted publicly initiated master plans, but should eventually have them subject to resources and priority. 3. Suburban Neighborhoods include those that developed with a suburban pattern, including curvilinear streets with cul-de-sacs. These neighborhoods have matured to the point where they are not actively being developed and no longer have actively managed privately initiated master plans, and ordinarily do not yet have publicly initiated master plans. These neighborhoods have a high value in maintaining the privacy of homes and safe streets for families. New development should focus on safe connections into and within these neighborhoods. # Typology 2: Changing Neighborhoods **Changing Neighborhood Recommendations:** * Redevelop Commercial Areas * Redevelop Drainage Areas * Increase Connectivity Between Commercial and Neighborhood * Develop Off-street Trail System * Create Community Centers * Integrate Neighborhood Identifiers and Artwork **Example Location:** Pikes Peak Park North Neighborhood S. Circle Dr. and Hwy. 24 <
> ### The goal of this neighborhood typology is to retrofit, reinvent, and introduce new features to enhance the identity, quality, affordability, and attractiveness of these neighborhoods. Changing Neighborhoods primarily include existing neighborhoods that have the potential or need for City attention, reinvestment, and land use change. Areas of change within these neighborhoods may be focused at the edges (e.g. because of a redeveloping arterial corridor or special area) or be more evenly distributed throughout. Planning emphasis should be placed on implementing strategies necessary to support, incentivize, or adapt to change resulting from market forces, redevelopment, or disinvestment. These neighborhoods will expect to see more infill and redevelopment than other areas of the city. ### EXAMPLES Southeast COS, Valley Hi, and Park Hill. Refer to the Framework Map for additional neighborhoods Downtown, and specifically Southwest Downtown, is a subcategory of this typology. Redevelopment here could be transformative due to the potential for extremely high densities. # Typology 3: Emerging Neighborhoods **Emerging Neighborhood Recommendations:** * Enhance Off-street Trail System Interior to the Neighborhood and Provide Connections to Major Trail Systems * Create Additional Pedestrian / Trail Connections * Incorporate Higher Density and Mix of Housing Types on Remaining Parcels * Utilize Drainageways and Small Spaces for Neighborhood Amenities **Example Location:** Wolf Ranch Neighborhood Research Pkwy. and Tutt Blvd. <
> ### The goal of this neighborhood typology is to ensure the further application of amenities and best practices within these neighborhoods in order to enhance their livability and adaptability as they mature. ### EXAMPLES Generally, neighborhoods in the north and east, Wolf Ranch, and Woodmen Heights. Refer to the Framework Map for additional neighborhoods. Emerging Neighborhoods are found in newer areas of the city, now farthest from Downtown. Actively managed, privately initiated master plans typically guide their initial development and can be refined and updated for not-yet-developed properties. Such adaptations are a focus of this Plan, as development in these neighborhoods should consider the impact that proposed development has on existing infrastructure and neighborhoods. Parts of these neighborhoods with recently completed construction are assumed relatively stable, and less vulnerable to near- and mid-term change. In most cases, these Emerging Neighborhoods are located in and served by special districts that are used to finance public improvements and to provide higher levels of ongoing services and amenities. # Typology 4: Future Neighborhoods **Future Neighborhood Recommendations:** * Integrate Diversity of Housing Types * Provide Neighborhood Parks and Gathering Places * Connect to Regional Trails and Open Space * Utilize Smart Technology and Efficient Utility Infrastructure * Maximize Connectivity with Paths, Alleys and Short Blocks **Example Location:** Stapleton Neighborhood Denver, CO <
> ### The goal of this neighborhood typology is to include those desired elements that result in great neighborhood design as each new neighborhood emerges over the next 20 years. Future Neighborhoods are those that have yet to be developed in the city, most notably within Banning Lewis Ranch. These areas provide an opportunity to create, from the ground up, new, diverse, and “smart” connected neighborhoods that reflect the PlanCOS Vibrant Neighborhoods vision and goals, while addressing emerging demographic and market considerations. These neighborhoods should consider the impact their development has on existing infrastructure and neighborhoods. For the most part, they are expected to be actively guided by privately initiated master plans or other guiding documents such as Planned Unit Development plans or holistic concept plans. These newly developed or amended documents should be prepared and adopted with consideration of this Plan. # NEIGHBORHOOD FRAMEWORK The Neighborhood Framework Map provides a graphic framework for our vision of Vibrant Neighborhoods. This map is intended to further the City’s focus on neighborhood planning based on logical, manageable, and inclusive areas. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic as neighborhoods grow or change. The City and neighborhoods can use this map to determine available resources and opportunities to leverage them. All areas of the city have been identified by neighborhood name and typology for the purposes of generalizing a development pattern. This map is not intended to strictly define neighborhood boundaries or create neighborhood identity. In order to realize the full spectrum of neighborhood identification, representation, advocacy, and planning needs, more refined neighborhood boundaries based on neighborhood identity will be necessary. For purposes of broader identification and strategy, smaller neighborhoods may be combined into larger macro-neighborhoods (e.g. all of Briargate or all of the Westside). PHOTO CREDIT: Logan Simpson # PlanCOS ## LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Vibrant Neighborhoods Framework <
> ### Predominant Typology | | | | :--- | :--- | | ■ Downtown | ■ Established Traditional Neighborhood | | ■ Newer Developing Neighborhood | ■ Established Suburban Neighborhood | | ■ Changing Neighborhood | ■ Airport | | ■ Established Historic Neighborhood | ■ Future Neighborhood | [ ] City Boundary ➡ Interstate 25 — Major Roads (blank page) # GOALS AND POLICIES ## EVERYONE IN A NEIGHBORHOOD ### GOAL VN-1 ### Increase neighborhood identity, inclusion, and participation throughout the city for residents, employees, and visitors. **Policy VN-1.A:** Prioritize replicable, effective, and up-to-date neighborhood plans and programs for those areas with the most potential for change and need of direction. **Strategy VN-1.A-1:** Prioritize development of Neighborhood Plans, particularly in mature areas of the city. Update outdated plans. **Strategy VN-1.A-2:** Amend zoning and subdivision regulations, as necessary, to implement Neighborhood Plans (e.g. redistricting, new zoning or design overlays, and/or changes to dimensional requirements). **Strategy VN-1.A-3:** Support the location of City and County services and amenities within or near neighborhoods that need them the most and along/near bus services. **Strategy VN-1.A-4:** Celebrate, support, and advocate neighborhood identity through the City’s marketing, programs, events, and communication. **Policy VN-1.B:** Inform and engage with neighborhoods, neighborhood-based organizations, and individual residents during the development review process, capital improvement planning, and decisions on City and County facilities and services. **Strategy VN-1.B-1:** Create and implement state-of-the-art, transparent, clear and cost-effective methods to inform and involve neighborhoods and affected property owners in development applications and planning initiatives. **Strategy VN-1.B-2:** Collaboratively include and partner with neighborhood associations and the development community on planning initiatives of community or area-wide importance. ### APPLICATION **Neighborhood Template:** Resources for new and updated neighborhood plans will always be limited. PlanCOS recommends the creation and use of a standardized process and format template for each unique neighborhood plan. The process template would provide certainty and speed up the planning process. The replicable format would make the resulting documents easier to use and navigate. # HOUSING FOR ALL ## GOAL VN-2 ### Strive for a diversity of housing types, styles, and price points distributed throughout our city through a combination of supportive development standards, community partnerships, and appropriate zoning and density that is adaptable to market demands and housing needs. ### DEFINITIONS **Attainable Housing:** Attainable housing means decent, attractive, safe, and sanitary accommodation that is affordable for the full spectrum of the City's residents. #### Policy VN-2.A: Promote neighborhoods that incorporate common desired neighborhood elements. **Strategy VN-2.A-1:** In partnership with other organizations and agencies, continue to develop and support existing, expanded and new initiatives to address homelessness to include provision of additional shelter beds, permanent supportive housing, and programs to be coupled with increased enforcement of applicable laws including camping bans. **Strategy VN-2.A-2:** Collaborate with Colorado Springs Utilities, non-profit, and private sector partners to create and implement a comprehensive attainable housing plan that incorporates a full range of options, strategies, and priorities to support the development and provision of housing for households below the area median income level. **Strategy VN-2.A-3:** Support land use decisions and projects that provide a variety of housing types and sizes, serving a range of demographic sectors, and meeting the needs of residents and families through various life stages and income levels. **Strategy VN-2.A-4:** Allow for zoning residential bonuses that result in the provision of additional attainable housing, such as increased heights or densities. **Strategy VN-2.A-5:** Amend the City’s zoning code to allow attainable housing in multi-family and commercial zoning districts in order to maximize the availability and distribution of this housing option in the city. **Strategy VN-2.A-6:** Update the City’s zoning code, processes, and standards to support the construction of additional accessory dwelling units and micro homes. **Strategy VN-2.A-7:** Collaborate with local organizations and experts to develop and implement policies and programs by providing funding and technical assistance to support existing and new attainable housing. # RECLAIM NEIGHBORHOOD SPACE ## GOAL VN-3 ### Through neighborhood plans, associations, and partnerships, empower neighborhoods to reinvest in order to create community, vibrancy, and to address their specific vision and needs. **Policy VN-3.A:** Preserve and enhance the physical elements that define a neighborhood’s character. **Strategy VN-3.A-1:** Support a variety of approaches to encourage sustainable investment in and maintenance of established neighborhoods including strategic and targeted use of special districts, homeowners associations, and grant funding. **Strategy VN-3.A-2:** Partner with neighborhood and industry organizations on civic engagement programs such as neighborhood cleanups, property maintenance and repair events, and neighborhood academies. **Strategy VN-3.A-3:** Incorporate existing natural features into project design by providing amenities such as trail connectivity, outdoor dining areas, promenades, and plazas. **Strategy VN-3.A-4:** Modify City Code and create incentives to encourage redevelopment of underperforming buildings to include higher-density housing, mixed-use, civic services, gathering areas, and additional employment opportunities. **Strategy VN-3.A-5:** Update plans and City Code to encourage a blend of uses that positively affect neighborhoods. **Strategy VN-3.A-6:** Where and when applicable, specifically incorporate mixed-use neighborhood building as an outcome tied to the use of urban renewal area designation, public/private partnerships, and other tools and incentives to encourage redevelopment. **Strategy VN-3.A-7:** Encourage neighborhood plans and initiatives that reflect neighborhood identity and a built environment supporting residents of all age ranges and abilities. **Policy VN-3.B:** Support unique and innovative community design elements and features such as urban farms and gardens, co-op housing, live/work spaces, or neighborhood gathering places. **Strategy VN-3.B-1:** Encourage neighborhood and school partnerships to coordinate joint use of school facilities. **Strategy VN-3.B-2:** Update City Code to allow credit for more types of parks-related lands and facilities and to allow use of fees for upgrading existing parks and recreation properties and facilities. **Strategy VN-3.B-3:** Encourage walkable civic, retail, and community gathering places as design elements within neighborhood centers. ### APPLICATION **In 2018, Ivywild School is a flourishing communal atmosphere linking commerce and community with gathering spaces, local cuisine, education, art and gardens. Formerly an elementary school, Ivywild’s façade still holds true to its roots as reimagined spaces fill the halls once again with the voices of children and adults alike.** ### Policy VN-3.C: Promote neighborhood-level shopping and service options to include a variety of healthy food markets, coffee houses, restaurants, and other supportive businesses that increase local access and walkability. **Strategy VN-3.C-1:** Assign land use designations and implement zoning to support and facilitate neighborhood activity centers within walking or biking distance of residential areas. **Strategy VN-3.C-2:** Expand City support of small business and neighborhood assistance programs. **Strategy VN-3.C-3:** Provide ongoing small business assistance with navigating the City’s land entitlement and other permitting processes. ### Policy VN-3.D: Create strong neighborhood identity through the inclusion and integration of arts and culture. **Strategy VN-3.D-1:** Develop a public art policy that considers citywide as well as individual neighborhood approaches. Consider and encourage public arts and culture elements in Neighborhood Plans. **Strategy VN-3.D-2:** Identify and secure grants and other funding to create and sustain neighborhood identifiers including gateways, signage, lighting, markers, and enhanced streetscapes. ### Policy VN-3.E: Encourage and support the integration of mixed-use development in neighborhoods. **Strategy VN-3.E-1:** Focus incentives for mixed-use development within parts of the city that have been identified as priority redevelopment areas or corridors that have the potential for enhanced multimodal access and walkability. **Strategy VN-3.E-2:** Encourage vertical mixed-use design in neighborhood focal points along with neighborhood design meant to encourage a sense of community and provide a walkable environment. Vertical developments, where the various uses are “stacked” on top of each other, are typically used in areas with limited space, while larger sites allow those different components to be built next to each other—such as an apartment building adjacent to a grocery store. **Strategy VN-3.E-3:** Though a combination of Zoning Code changes and development review decisions, encourage and support flexible site and building designs and residential densities that are adaptable to the specific site. ### Policy VN-3.F: Enhance mobility and connectivity between neighborhoods across Colorado Springs and with surrounding jurisdictions. **Strategy VN-3.F-1:** Increase transportation and recreation choices for all neighborhoods by improving or adding bike lanes, sidewalks, off-street neighborhood trails, and greenways that connect to larger system trails with associated wayfinding/signage. **Strategy VN-3.F-2:** Retrofit existing features to create multipurpose amenities, including drainage ways and infrastructure corridors with trail systems. # RELATIONSHIP TO KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following keystone indicators are representative of primary measures of the health and livability of our neighborhoods over the long term and support the Vibrant Neighborhood vision. Although there is a strong high-level correlation between our plan for physical development and these indicators, we recognize that they will often not be directly applicable to individual development plans or to city initiatives. A full list and description of all indicators is in Chapter 8: Adaptable Implementation. **New Residential Net Density:** A mix of residential densities is important to support people with different incomes and in different stages of life. Where appropriate, most residential neighborhoods should be planned and designed to increase citywide densities overall in order to support a more sustainable infrastructure and networks of services, and to ultimately support emerging technology multimodal transportation systems. This measure tracks the net density of added residential units every year. **Number of High Priority Neighborhood Plans Completed:** As the second largest city in Colorado, it is no surprise that Colorado Springs has a variety of neighborhoods with an equally diverse range of needs and preferences. Many already have specific neighborhood plans in place, but many others would benefit for the level of care and detail that this type of plan can provide. This measure tracks the number of new high-priority neighborhood plans completed each year. **Housing Attainability:** These measures track the overall proportion of the median income needed to afford median priced single-family housing, overall rental affordability index, and total homeless populations. # ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY INITIATIVES These essential questions should be considered as a tool to focus on and promote implementation of our Vibrant Neighborhoods vision for applicable City initiatives (refer to Chapter 1): 1. Support the overall focus of our Vibrant Neighborhoods theme? 2. Add value and improve the keystone indicators for Vibrant Neighborhoods? 3. Encourage additional investment or reinvestment in neighborhoods? 4. Positively contribute to a diversity of attainable housing choices throughout the city or a particular neighborhood? 5. Contribute to the connectivity within and between neighborhoods and to other areas of the city? 6. Pre-position the neighborhood for new transportation options? 7. Create options for new gathering areas or centers? 8. Support the redevelopment of blighted and/or underperforming properties? 9. Enhance the connection of neighborhoods to trails, parks, open space, and green infrastructure networks? 10. Enhance cultural, historical, educational, and/or human service opportunities to support neighborhoods? 11. Support and be consistent with adopted and relevant small area or neighborhood plans? 12. Plan to be a fiscally responsible, long-term choice for the city and the neighborhood? <
> PHOTO CREDIT: Logan Simpson # RELEVANT PLANS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PLANCOS While PlanCOS provides overarching guidance, numerous City plans provide additional detail required for effective application and implementation of this Vibrant Neighborhoods Chapter. Of particular importance will be publicly and privately initiated neighborhood-specific master plans. Used in conjunction with the overall themes and ideas in PlanCOS, these plans should be relied on to allow for and articulate land use and other area-specific recommendations for the neighborhoods they address. As existing plans are updated and new plans created, these plans should support the themes of PlanCOS. Where a discrepancy exists between small area plans and the City’s Comprehensive Plan, the more specific plan should generally take precedence particularly if these plans are up-to-date and are reflective of the key elements of this theme. New and updated Neighborhood Plans should follow the guidelines and vision of PlanCOS and include its common desired elements. Links to relevant plans are found below. ### City Adopted Neighborhood, Corridor, and Master Plans See full list of plans: Appendix D ### Privately Initiated Master Plans Developers and property owners within the area should be expected to rely on active and previously approved, privately initiated master plans providing they have not expired. Amendments to these plans should be reviewed for consistency with PlanCOS. Additionally, PlanCOS is expected to be used for relevant guidance in the review of the more detailed development applications that follow from these master plans—in cases where the original master plan does not provide sufficient guidance. Land use applications in implemented privately initiated master plans should similarly be fully reviewed for PlanCOS consistency. See full list of plans: Appendix D ### Other Important Citywide Plans Other City plans will be particularly applicable to this Vibrant Neighborhoods theme and chapter depending on the context of the decision. These should be considered in conjunction with PlanCOS. The Intermodal Transportation Plan, and one or more of its elements, will often have significant applicability. Likewise, the Parks Plan will have direct applicability in many cases. The City’s Historic Preservation Plan and its area-specific plans and design guidelines will have obvious importance for the older areas of the city they address. ### Partner Entity Plans * Age Friendly Colorado Springs Plan See full list of plans: Appendix D ### OTHER MEASURES Through the creation, implementation and update of publicly and privately initiated plans, it may be appropriate to track and measure additional indicators as it relates to the Vibrant Neighborhood vision and policy direction. Such indicators could include the following: **Accessory Dwelling Units:** New dwelling units built on parcels that already have housing on them **Housing and Transportation Affordability Index:** A nationally-available index that measures the combined cost of housing and transportation for a city or area within it <
> <
> # UNIQUE PLACES ## CHAPTER 3 ### PLANCOS VISION Centers on a vibrant Downtown and is strengthened by our investment in walkable, healthy, and magnetic activity centers that are located in new and reinvented areas throughout our city. ### KEY STRATEGIES * Update development requirements and adopt design standards * Identify, promote and support redevelopment and infill opportunities * Implement Experience Downtown Master Plan * Implement public, non-profit and private partnerships # IMPORTANCE OF UNIQUE PLACES Colorado Springs has many interesting places to shop, eat, work, recreate, meet up with friends, and otherwise experience our great city. Our vision is to have more of them. As our city and region continue to grow in area and population, it will be all the more important to keep and create unique and special places throughout our community. Together these places create the fabric for a well-functioning city. Each of these places should have a unique combination of characteristics that contribute to making our entire city more livable, desirable, and sustainable. These centers of activity are the man-made counterparts to our city's majestic natural setting. Our legacy of places is continually evolving within the city’s diverse areas. Distinct places reinforce our cultural identity and support a strong economy. They are essential for a robust and healthy community life. It is important that each of these older, emerging, or new places sustain and enhance their appearance, character, and function. We can accomplish this by recognizing and supporting the aspects that make them valued by residents and visitors alike. We need to proactively support and enhance these existing and valued unique places in more mature areas of our city, and ensure that more of these places are created in newly developing areas. Our vision of placemaking should be applied enthusiastically and broadly across the city. However, the details of how we best create and support these places should be expected to vary based on their particular context. ## KEY TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS The following trends and assumptions provide a quick overview of some of the high-level issues related to Vibrant Neighborhoods. They are intended to provide a baseline understanding of emerging trends, preferences, and opportunities that may affect how Colorado Springs will grow and change in the coming years. This foundation sets up PlanCOS to provide tailored policy direction and implementation strategies. More background information can be found in Appendix A: State of the City Snapshots. * The way we view and use our favorite places is changing significantly as technology is freeing us more and more from the need to be tied to any one particular physical location for activities like working, shopping, education, and basic communication. * Our best places will be walkable and pedestrian friendly, be accessible by bicycle and mass transit, and be responsive to individual motor vehicle demand. * We should assume and be prepared for many of our best places to regularly adapt to emerging trends, technology, and markets. # UNIQUE PLACE TYPOLOGIES AND FRAMEWORK Our places will not remain or become more unique if they are held to a single model and set of standards. However, to achieve our City’s vision for these places, certain overall qualities and elements need to be widely encouraged, supported, and promoted. Although not all of these elements will be necessary or even relevant for every great place, the best will incorporate many of them. ## UNIQUE PLACE TYPOLOGIES Colorado Springs’ unique places are a blend of attractions, destinations, uses, and experiences. They integrate a range of uses and activities which complement and support each other. A predominant use often determines the type of place. However, depending on their purpose, location, and context, places can and should vary in size, intensity, scale, and their mix of supportive uses. In each case, activity centers are intended to be mixed-use and pedestrian-oriented and to establish good connections and transitions to surrounding areas. The following typologies for unique places are intended to encompass a range of scales and orientations of places throughout the city. Because places consist of a wide range of combinations of existing and desired uses, patterns, scales and contexts, not all places in the city will fall into one of these typologies. In some cases they will include a blend of more than one typology, or they may be evolving and transitioning into a different kind of place. Therefore, it is essential to apply these typologies in a manner that is sensitive to their stage of development, needs, and relative potential for future change. Urban place typologies are as follows: 1. Neighborhood Centers 2. Community Activity Centers 3. Entertainment and Commercial Centers 4. Regional Employment and Activity Centers 5. Corridors a. New/Developing Corridors b. Mature/Redevelopment Corridors These typologies are intended to be used as one tool in guiding City decisions and initiatives including City-initiated master plans, future City zoning plans and requirements, as well as choices about infrastructure and other City investment priorities. They can also be used as a frame of reference for evaluating private land use applications for Comprehensive Plan consistency when this finding is applicable. These typologies are intended to provide examples of the attributes that are desired particularly for our centers of activity of varying scales. They primarily focus on areas and corridors with a potential for development, reinvestment, and mixed use densification. For new development proposals, the applicability of these typologies will vary depending on the location, scale, and other factors associated with the site or area. ### COMMON DESIRED ELEMENTS These common contributing elements include the following: a. a uniquely identifiable character and design that reinforces a sense of identity, focus and place; b. an accessible location and design that promotes the safety and convenience for all users, c. a center of activity with an integrated mix of land uses; d. a network of physical connections to support walkability, links to and alignment with the City’s trails, bike lanes, and green infrastructure network; e. an incorporation of historic buildings, features, legacy, and character (when available); f. a focus on public gathering places with areas for public interaction; g. a connection with and orientation to the outdoors, parks, public plazas, streets, and views of important natural features; h. a walkable and human scale experience with the built environment; i. an incorporation of “Third Places;” and j. a focus on arts, education, and culture. # Typology 1: Neighborhood Centers **Neighborhood Center Recommendations:** * Integrate Character and Neighborhood-Defining Features * Design Buildings at a Pedestrian Scale * Reinforce Connection with Outdoor Spaces and Trails * Integrate Different Uses and Housing Types * Improve Sidewalks and Bike Lanes **Example Location:** Casa Verde Cohousing Patty Jewett Neighborhood Columbia St. and N. Corona St. <
> Diversify Housing Types and Densities Adjacent to Commercial Areas Include Links to Trails, Parks and Other Public Spaces Ensure ADA-Accessible Sidewalk Connections Provide On-Street Parking Design “Third Places” and Neighborhood-Serving Businesses at a Pedestrian Scale *** ### The goal of this place typology is to provide a focal point for community life and services at a neighborhood scale. ### EXAMPLES Ivywild, Casa Verde Co-housing, Deerfield Hills Community Center, and Flying Horse Community Center. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. These centers are smaller-scale limited impact places that fit into the neighborhood fabric and provide benefits and amenities for residents and other users from a local area. Strong and vital Neighborhood Centers incorporate a variety of uses and services available to local residents. They are designed for well-connected multimodal local access and are oriented to the pedestrian. ## Typology 2: Community Activity Centers **Community Center Recommendations:** * Design Buildings and Site at a Neighborhood and Pedestrian Scale * Support Wide Range of Uses * Reinforce Connections to Residential Areas * Anchor with Interesting “Third Places” * Align with Local Transportation Options **Example Location:** Rockrimmon Shopping Center W. Rockrimmon Blvd and Delmonico Dr. <
> * Integrate Family/ Medical Services * Locate at Intersections and Larger Streets for Accessibility and Convenience * Ensure ADA-Accessible Sidewalk Connections * Diversify Housing Types and Densities Adjacent to Commercial Areas * Design Mixed-Use Buildings at a Pedestrian-Scale * Improve Internal Pedestrian Circulation and Connections to Surrounding Neighborhoods * Share Off-Street Parking for Multiple Destinations * Anchor Center with “Third Places” and Neighborhood-Serving Businesses * Integrate Mix of Professional Offices, Services and Commercial Retail *** ### The goal of this place typology is to reinforce and create desirable places that provide identity, mixed use focus, and offer integrated support and services to subareas of the city. Community Activity Centers are places that serve the day-to-day needs of subareas of the city and their surrounding neighborhoods. These places may be anchored by uses such as grocery stores and supporting public, private, and non-profit service establishments. Although the definition of these places is intended to encompass options well beyond traditional commercial centers, a 100,000 to 300,000 square foot community shopping center provides a useful example for the size, market, and service area for this typology. These places should be designed to be multimodally connected to the surrounding development. Community Activity Centers should include a well-integrated mix of uses including smaller businesses and a variety of housing choices. ### EXAMPLES Ongoing or future redevelopment of centers such as Rockrimmon Shopping Center, Mission Trace Shopping Center, Lower Shooks Run, and Catalyst Campus. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. # Typology 3: Entertainment and Commercial Centers **Entertainment Center Recommendations:** * Reinforce Unique Entertainment and Commercial Experience * Increased Connectivity to Region and Surrounding Neighborhoods * Create Defining Features * Expand Diversity of Land Uses * Design Buildings and Site to Appropriate Scale * Connect with Interior Sidewalks and Trails * Expand Transit and Multimodal Facilities **Example Location:** Broadmoor World Arena Lake Ave. and I-25 Improve Transit Connections and Integrate Throughout Center Anchor Center with Major Retailers Provide a Diverse Mix of Supporting Retail, Services, and Accommodations Emphasize Pedestrian and Bicycle Circulation Share Off-Street Parking for Multiple Destinations and Attractions Feature Major Community/Tourist Attractions Locate Higher-Density Residential Close to Commercial and Transit Services Enhance Connections to Surrounding Neighborhoods <
> *** ### The goal of this place typology is to create, redevelop, or reinforce entertainment and large commercial places in a manner that increases their multimodal connectivity, number, quality, and extent of their defining attributes. ### EXAMPLES First and Main Town Center, Old Colorado City, Olympic Training Center, University Village, and Colorado Springs World Arena. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. Entertainment and Commercial Centers may accommodate larger retail establishments and serve a number of residential and employment areas over a significant portion of the city. The special characteristics and tourist attraction of some entertainment centers may draw users from a statewide market area or even beyond. These centers typically include a mix of supporting uses, such as higher density residential, office, service, medical, and civic uses. # Typology 4: Regional Employment and Activity Centers **Regional Center Recommendations:** * Increase Mix of Supporting Land Uses * Integrate High Density Residential Development * Improve Regional Transportation Connections at Transit Hubs * Design Public Gathering Places and Event Space * Focus on Pedestrian Experience **Example Location:** Chapel Hills Mall Academy Blvd. and Voyager Pkwy. <
> ### The goal of this place typology is to encourage the continuing adaptation and development of regional centers as more complete and well-functioning places, each with an increase of desired elements and unique places within them. Regional centers draw from the largest regional service areas and are major concentrations of employment and commercial activity. They are large intensive centers that serve the city and region as a whole. These places are supported by a mix of uses that meet the needs of employees and visitors, such as restaurants, lodging, child care, higher density residential development, and educational facilities. A regional center may be focused on one or more predominant uses, such as a large shopping mall, office park, major medical complex, or educational institution, but are supported by a variety of other uses, including housing. Because of the scale, extent, and complexity of these regional centers, their boundaries may contain one or more focusing unique places within them. ### EXAMPLES Chapel Hills Mall and Briargate Business Campus, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs/ University Village, Airport/Airport Business Park, Copper Ridge/ Polaris Point, and potential new regional center in Banning Lewis Ranch. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. # Typology 5: Corridors **Corridor Recommendations:** * Integrate and Connect Pedestrian, Bicycle and Transit Facilities Along the Corridor * Use Similar Styles and Building Materials for Visual Connections * Attention to Streetscape Design * Create Activity Nodes along Corridor **Example Location:** Old Colorado City W. Colorado Ave. <
> Separate Business and Roadway with Landscaping and Wide Sidewalks Minimize Auto-Centric Layout with Inclusion of Paths and Transit Create Community Activity Nodes Encourage Pedestrian-Oriented Building Design Along Main Street Frontage Connect with Residential Areas to Support and Balance Commercial Relocate Parking Lots to Side and Back of Buildings *** ### The goal of this place typology is to take advantage of the capacity and potential of these corridors to create unified, vital, connected, and more transit supportive urban places, each with its unique character, identity, and design. #### EXAMPLES Powers Blvd., Woodmen Road, Interquest Pkwy., and future corridors in Banning Lewis Ranch. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. #### EXAMPLES Academy Blvd., Tejon St., and North and South Nevada Redevelopment. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. Corridors are the places that line major arterial streets with a variety of higher intensity and density uses oriented to the street. They include older corridors that have developed with an "in-line retail" focus, more recently developed or emerging corridors, and those that may be created in the future. These are combined and represented as two types of corridors: a. New/Developing Corridors: Corridors that have recently developed, are now in the process of developing, or that still may be developed. The existing pattern along many of these corridors is automobile-dominated, with more limited access points and often with greater separation from the roadway. b. Mature/Redevelopment Corridors: Corridors that line older arterial streets including current or former state highways. Often the existing pattern along these corridors includes a combination of retail uses and auto-oriented services developed in a typical in-line retail pattern, with multiple curb cuts, individual parking lots, cluttered signage, and small lots. These corridors represent significant infill and redevelopment opportunities. The length, high traffic, differing uses, and variable economic conditions along many of these corridors can present challenges in creating and sustaining truly unique places along their entire length. However, larger and longer corridors can be unified and improved through branding, zoning, design, landscaping, and transportation investments. There are opportunities within and along these corridors to achieve a higher standard of desirable placemaking. These special opportunities exist particularly at nodes and along individual segments. A combination of more robust transit and attention to streetscape design and maintenance can contribute greatly to the viability of all or part of these corridors as existing or transformed unique places. ## Typology 6: Downtown **Downtown Recommendations:** * Increase Mix of High Density Housing * High Quality Walkable Destinations * Mix of Institutional Centers, Retail, Lodging and Supportive Uses * Focus on Walkable and Bike-Friendly Connections * Lead in Innovative Urban Design <
> ### The goal of this place typology is to continue to grow and adapt Downtown Colorado Springs as the singular economic and cultural heart of the city and region, consistent with the Experience Downtown Colorado Springs Plan. Downtown Colorado Springs has its own separate place typology because we only have one downtown, and it is truly unique in terms of its role, proximity, mix of uses, and high density. This typology encompasses an increasing mix of higher density housing options in and near Downtown along with additional high quality walkable destination elements, institutional centers, retail, lodging, and a full range of supportive uses. Details of our established vision for Downtown are included in the Experience Downtown Plan. # UNIQUE PLACES FRAMEWORK The Unique Places Framework Map provides a graphic framework for our vision of Unique Places. This map depicts only a selection of major or representative activity centers for highlighting or focus. It is intended to be used as one means of furthering the City’s focus on designing places to be compatible with, accessible from, and serve as a benefit to the surrounding neighborhoods or business areas. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic. It is not intended to strictly define place boundaries. <
> PHOTO CREDIT: Logan Simpson # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Unique Places Framework <
> ### Predominant Typology | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | ● | Neighborhood Centers | ///// | Mature/Redeveloping Corridors | | ● | Community Activity Centers | ///// | New/Developing Corridors | | ■ | Entertainment and Commercial Centers | ///// | Reinvestment Area and Community Hub | | ■ | Regional Employment and Activity Centers | | | | ■ | Downtown | | | | | | | :--- | :--- | | [ ] | City Boundary | | $\rightarrow$ | Interstate 25 | | — | Major Roads | page intentionally left blank # GOALS AND POLICIES ## BE A CITY OF PLACES ### GOAL UP-1 ### Enrich the texture and livability of the city as a tapestry of unique, vibrant, and walkable places. #### Policy UP-1.A: Emphasize placemaking throughout the city with design and programming that supports a distinctive identity and experience. **Strategy UP-1.A-1:** Incorporate distinctive placemaking as an element of public and private development plans including privately initiated master plans, concept plans, and Planned Unit Development zoning. **Strategy UP-1.A-2:** Evaluate new and redeveloping land use related to enhancement and support of existing, transitioning, and new activity centers. **Strategy UP-1.A-3:** Activate identified community areas with events like regular farmers’ markets and concerts. **Strategy UP-1.A-4:** Plan and design activity centers to be supportive of and well connected with multiple modes of transportation. **Strategy UP-1.A-5:** Design urban activity centers to encourage walkability. **Strategy UP-1.A-6:** Collaborate with the community, service providers, and stakeholders to plan a small business-supportive community hub in the southeast part of the city. #### Policy UP-1.B: Establish a network of connections such as gateways, signature streets, festival streets, and trails to support, define, and provide context for our unique places. **Strategy UP-1.B-1:** Support and promote a system of gateways and signature streets extending beyond Downtown to create unique, desirable, and identifiable entries to the overall city and the distinct places within it. **Strategy UP-1.B-2:** Integrate the design and location of existing and future transit stops within urban places. **Strategy UP-1.B-3:** Create connections between urban places and natural settings, especially through repurposing urban waterways. **Strategy UP-1.B-4:** When feasible, integrate development with surrounding natural areas and maximize trail connectivity to enhance quality of life. #### Policy UP-1.C: Locate and design new and repurposed civic facilities to make them highly visible focal points that express quality design, permanence, importance, and community identity. **Strategy UP-1.C-1:** Locate and design public spaces and civic facilities at key locations throughout the city that set an example for quality design and integrate with surrounding private development. ### APPLICATION **South Tejon Street Redevelopment:** Areas of South Tejon Street, around the repurposed Ivywild School, are being redeveloped with a particularly wide range of desired attributes. Tools and incentives including special districts and urban renewal are being used to support this redevelopment. The result is anticipated to be an especially unique, identifiable, and livable urban environment. <
> # EMBRACE CREATIVE INFILL, ADAPTATION, AND LAND USE CHANGE ## GOAL UP-2 ### Embrace thoughtful, targeted, and forward-thinking changes in land use, infill, reinvestment, and redevelopment to respond to shifts in demographics, technology, and the market. ### DEFINITIONS **Infill Development:** Development of vacant land within previously built areas. These areas are already served by public infrastructure, such as transportation and utilities. Parks and open space are also considered infill, since they are permanent uses for vacant parcels. **Policy UP-2.A:** Support infill and land use investment throughout the mature and developed areas of the city. **Strategy UP-2.A-1:** Encourage the development or redevelopment of vacant properties in the core area of the city by using a combination of incentives, rezoning, and creative design solutions. **Strategy UP-2.A-2:** Provide opportunities for redevelopment by identifying and supporting catalyst projects in underutilized locations such as disinvested shopping centers and business parks, former “big box” retail spaces, and no longer needed school buildings. **Strategy UP-2.A-3:** Continue to implement infill supportive Code changes including provisions tailored for older developed areas. **Strategy UP-2.A-4:** Actively support ongoing and potential infill projects, employ problem-solving approaches and continue to implement process improvements in support of infill and redevelopment. **Strategy UP-2.A-5:** Revise zoning and building regulations to be more streamlined and flexible regarding infill, redevelopment, and mixed-use development, especially in older, underutilized commercial areas. **Strategy UP-2.A-6:** Consider adoption of zoning regulations and design guidelines for identified mature and developed areas to encourage building use and orientation towards the street and public realm. # GROW THE CITY’S HEART ### GOAL UP-3 ### Continue to grow and support Downtown as an inclusive, mixed use, cultural, and economic heart of the region. **Policy UP-3.A:** Proactively participate and invest in the development of Downtown as the city’s premier urban activity center. * **Strategy UP-3.A-1:** Place a high priority on implementation of the City’s adopted Experience Downtown Master Plan, including upgrades to festival streets, multimodal transportation facilities, Southwest Downtown improvements, Downtown park enhancements, and alley and street activation projects. * **Strategy UP-3.A-2:** Continue to refine, adapt, and expand the Downtown Form Based Zone District as Downtown develops and evolves. * **Strategy UP-3.A-3:** Further strengthen city collaboration with Downtown organizations to implement Downtown initiatives. * **Strategy UP-3.A-3:** Construct Downtown multimodal transit hub and actively prioritize supportive development around it. # FOCUS ON CORRIDORS AND CENTERS ### GOAL UP-4 ### Strengthen our overall community identity and better serve the needs of residents and businesses within our large metropolitan area by developing active, unique, and connected centers and corridors. **Policy UP-4.A:** Actively plan and encourage a development pattern consisting of unique centers located along new and redeveloped corridors and at other designated areas throughout the city. * **Strategy UP-4.A-1:** Revise City Code to support and allow for onsite parking, limited parking lot areas between the public right-of-way and buildings, design elements that enhance visual impressions from the street, multimodal access, and the safety and enjoyment of the onsite pedestrian experience. * **Strategy UP-4.A-2:** Focus area-specific planning attention and capital improvements prioritization on mature corridors and centers with a potential and need for redevelopment. <
> <
> ### DEFINITIONS **Greenfield Development:** Development of previously undeveloped or vacant sites that are generally located outside or on the fringe of the city. **Strategy UP-4.A-3:** In conjunction with committed transit improvements, create and adopt new transit-oriented development and mixed use-supportive base zoning or overlays to support the continued development and redevelopment of key corridors and centers. **Strategy UP-4.A-4:** Encourage new and redeveloped buildings to activate street life and support multimodal access. ### Policy UP-4.B: Within unique centers, incorporate density and mixed uses along with higher standards of design, attention to the public realm, and design for multimodal access including transit. **Strategy UP-4.B-1:** Evaluate development applications in and around unique centers with particular attention to their contribution to the integration and mixing of uses, orientation to the public realm, and their support of connections with multimodal transportation. **Strategy UP-4.B-2:** Develop and implement design standards to support the vision for identified, prioritized, and redeveloping corridors and centers that lack density and mixed uses. ### Policy UP-4.C: Ensure that the City Zoning Code supports the intent of unique places. **Strategy UP-4.C-1:** Support additional mixing and integration of land uses as zoning use-by-right or administrative approval. **Strategy UP-4.C-2:** Complete an overall update of the City Zoning Code to support regulations, standards, or guidelines that encourage a unique character for unique place typologies. ### Policy UP-4.D: Leverage funding tools, partnerships, and policies to fund and maintain redevelopment centers, corridors, and gateways. **Strategy UP-4.D-1:** Continue to utilize special area designations, such as Economic Opportunity Zones, to highlight and prioritize the importance of areas targeted for redevelopment as unique urban places and centers (e.g. South Academy Blvd. and North Nevada Ave.). **Strategy UP-4.D-2:** Consider the impact on infill and redevelopment as a criterion for decisions on public improvement project choices and priorities (e.g. as a criterion for project selection for a possible extension of Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority funding). **Strategy UP-4.D-3:** Proactively involve the Urban Renewal Authority in identifying infill and redevelopment opportunities and targeting public infrastructure investments. **Strategy UP-4.D-4:** Aggressively pursue and leverage public, non-profit and private grants, and matching funds to support public/private redevelopment in designated areas such as Southeast Colorado Springs. # CREATE SUSTAINABLE AND # RESILIENT PLACES ## GOAL UP-5 ### Develop and support unique places and centers as models of resilience and sustainability. **Policy UP-5.A:** Actively evaluate plans for existing, new, and redeveloping urban places and corridors from the perspective of fiscal and environmental sustainability. **Strategy UP-5.A-1:** Consider fiscal and environmental sustainability in the preparation of small area and corridor plans. **Strategy UP-5.A-2:** Proactively plan for the closure, repurposing, and redevelopment of the Martin Drake Power Plant. **Strategy UP-5.A-3:** Encourage creation of a City recognition program for excellence in sustainable and resilient urban development and local business practice. **Policy UP-5.B:** Encourage cost-effective development that promotes the wise use of resources. **Strategy UP-5.B-1:** Promote development that results in the efficient use of energy and water through the revision and adaptation of codes, criteria, and procedures. **Strategy UP-5.B-2:** Examine and consider zero-waste standards, policies, and practices for City projects as well as private development receiving special City incentives. **Strategy UP-5.B-3:** Revise, adapt, and apply codes and requirements to encourage landscape design and maintenance that uses water efficiently and effectively. **Strategy UP-5.B-4:** Provide City, Pikes Peak Regional Building Department, and other code flexibility to allow projects that incorporate elements of energy and water efficient building and development. <
> # RELATIONSHIP TO KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following Unique Places keystone indicators are representative of primary measures of the economic success and social attraction of our unique places over the long term. Although there is a strong high-level correlation between our plan for physical development and these indicators, it is recognized that they will often not be directly applicable to individual development plans or to city initiatives. **Infill and Redevelopment Activity:** Infill and redevelopment activity is identified as a key indicator because it extends across many of the themes and ideas that are priorities for this Plan. This incorporates a combination of reduced vacant acreage in core areas of the city combined with evidence of increasing comparative development activity (i.e. building permit value) in these areas. In addition to being applied to the entire core area of the city, this combined indicator can also be used to evaluate sub-areas within the overall infill area as well as to support specific infill projects or initiatives. The detailed components of this indicator are described in Appendix F: Keystone Indicator Profiles. **Existing Downtown Measures:** Progress toward making Downtown the economic and cultural center of the region will be critical to the overall success of PlanCOS. In this case, the recommended indicators are those already in place and being measured by the organizations responsible for managing the Downtown program and funding initiatives (currently coordinated through the Downtown Partnership). Key measures at this time include: * New residential units added annually; and * Value of building permit activity compared with prior years and with the overall city. **Walkscore®, Bikescore®, and Transitscore®:** Improving walkability throughout the city is a cornerstone goal of PlanCOS. Increasing bicycle infrastructure and safety is also a major objective, as is taking transit to the next level especially in key activity centers and corridors. Walkscore® and its related Bikescore® and Transitscore® are nationally recognized measures for walkability and bicycle and transit access in communities. These scores can be calculated city-wide, or for areas of focus, and can be compared with other communities. However, because these measures are primarily based on a calculation of land use proximity, and do not account for the quality and design of walkable infrastructure, care should be taken in interpreting the results. # ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY INITIATIVES These essential questions should be considered as a tool to focus on and promote implementation of our Unique Places vision for applicable City initiatives (refer to Chapter 1): 1. Support the overall focus on our Unique Places vision? 2. Add value and improve the keystone indicators for Unique Places, including use diversity, density, walkability, and support of enhanced transit? 3. Support the continued development/redevelopment of Downtown? 4. Result in additional infill, development, or redevelopment in urban places? 5. Provide a range of opportunities for transportation access, interconnection of urban centers, and enhanced demand and feasibility for multimodal transportation options? 6. Include, result in, or support the creation of new or enhanced places for community interaction? 7. Enhance connections to and integrate with the city’s green infrastructure networks including trails, parks, and open space? 8. Enhance, support, or incorporate the provision of “third places?” 9. Support or incorporate cultural, historical, educational, and/or human service opportunities? 10. Maintain consistency with and support adopted, applicable, and relevant subarea or topical master plans? 11. Result in places that are adaptable, sustainable, and resilient? # RELEVANT PLANS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PLANCOS While PlanCOS provides overarching guidance, numerous City plans provide additional detail required for effective application and implementation of this Unique Places Chapter. Of particular importance will be publicly and privately initiated neighborhood-specific master plans. Used in conjunction with the overall themes and ideas in PlanCOS, these plans should be relied on to allow for and articulate land use and other area-specific recommendations for the areas they address. As existing plans are updated and new plans created, these plans should support the themes of PlanCOS. In cases of discrepancy between more detailed elements of the Comprehensive Plan, alignment with the vision of PlanCOS should be considered in the use and application of these plans. ### City Adopted Neighborhood, Corridor, and Master Plans Publicly initiated small area, corridor, and neighborhood plans are essential to providing the detail necessary to realize the Unique Places vision. To the extent of the Comprehensive Plan, these remain in force and effect, and should be utilized in conjunction with PlanCOS to determine Comprehensive Plan consistency. As existing plans are updated and new plans created, these plans should support the themes of PlanCOS. Of particular importance are the following plans because of their currency and applicability to Unique Places: **Experience Downtown Plan (2016):** This plan should be relied on extensively to inform and direct the vision for Downtown. **Envision Shooks Run Corridor Facilities Master Plan (2017):** This plan should be relied on to inform and direct the vision for catalytic redevelopment in the Lower Shooks Run areas. **Renew North Nevada Avenue Plan (2017):** This plan should be relied on extensively to inform and direct the vision for the North Nevada corridor. **Academy Boulevard Corridor Great Streets Plan (2011):** Although non-specific with respect to recommended land use, this document should be relied on to more fully inform the development of Academy Blvd. **Infill Action Plan (2016):** This document should be relied on to continue to inform the direction for infill projects and strategies. ### Urban Renewal Plans Other active neighborhood plans should continue to be consulted regardless of their age. However, in the event of an apparent conflict between older plans and this vision, consideration should be given on a case-by-case basis to determine the extent to which circumstances have or have not changed since those plans were adopted. A balance should be struck among the relevant polices and recommendations of PlanCOS and the more specific relevant plans. ### Privately Initiated Master Plans Privately initiated master plans will be integral to long term success of this Unique Places vision, especially in newly developing and large scale redevelopment areas. Although developers and property owners should expect to rely on their previously approved and active privately initiated master plans, they are strongly encouraged to adapt the more specific implementation of these plans to best align with this theme. New master plans and amendments to existing plans should be reviewed for consistency with this theme. See full list of plans: Appendix D <
> ### OTHER MEASURES Through the creation, implementation and update of publicly and privately initiated plans, it may be appropriate to track and measure additional indicators as it relates the Vibrant Neighborhood vision and policy direction. Such indicators could include the following: **Accessory Dwelling Units:** New dwelling units built on parcels that already have housing on them **Housing and Transportation Affordability Index:** A nationally-available index that measures the combined cost of housing and transportation for a city or area within it <
> # THRIVING ECONOMY ## CHAPTER 4 <
> PHOTO CREDIT: Ethan Beute ### PLANCOS VISION Fosters an environment of inclusivity and economic diversity by attracting an innovative and adaptive workforce, advancing existing and targeted industry clusters, investing in quality of life, supporting our military, and expanding our sports ecosystem as Olympic City USA. ### KEY STRATEGIES * Nurture cornerstone institutions, target industries, spinoffs, startups, and entrepreneurship * Expand high quality infrastructure and technology * Create amenities to attract new businesses and residents # IMPORTANCE OF THE ECONOMY Our vision for physical development will not be fully realized unless we have a strong local economy. A thriving economy is needed in order to accomplish our ambitious goals, and to maintain our competitive edge. Strategic attention to our physical development is essential to attracting and maintaining the employees, jobs, and investment we need for a healthy economy. In turn, continued land use investment provides the public revenues needed to support the facilities and services necessary to create and maintain our great places. Great places attract a high-quality work force and investment in the community. Although the attraction and retention of well-paying and sustainable jobs is the essential and foundational lynchpin for a thriving economy, this Plan also recognizes that relatively lower-paying jobs will be associated with and support this base. Therefore, a city and economy that thrives overall, needs to have places, housing, transportation, and services that meet the needs of citizens across our economic spectrum. PlanCOS recognizes the importance of taking care of, growing, and adapting our traditional and anchoring economic bases starting with our military, and all of its related sectors, including technology and cybersecurity. At the same time, our Plan reflects the importance of never being complacent, especially when it comes to our part in creating a business climate that supports economic diversification, innovation, entrepreneurship, and economic inclusion. A thriving economy is one that offers diverse and well-paying jobs, along with a strong educational and workforce training system that effectively prepares our residents for these opportunities. As a city, we recognize our important role in assuring that basic infrastructure and services are provided to support a healthy economy. For people of all ages, high quality, adaptive, and accessible education will also be essential for developing and maintaining our adaptive and competitive workforce. Therefore, we need to partner with and support our educational providers. # KEY TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS The following trends and assumptions provide a quick overview of some of the high-level issues related to Thriving Economy. They are intended to provide a baseline understanding of emerging trends, preferences, and opportunities that may affect how Colorado Springs will grow and change in the coming years. This foundation sets up PlanCOS to provide tailored policy direction and implementation strategies. More background information can be found in Appendix A: State of the City Snapshots. * New business development and attraction are important, but most job growth will come from expansion of existing businesses and spin-offs within related industries. The fundamentals of sites, workforce, and targeted incentives are key for both. * Technology will drive a majority of industry growth in the near and long term. While automation may remove the need for some jobs, technology may also create additional economic opportunities. Sectors, such as cybersecurity and datacenters have the greatest potential for technology-related growth. * The impact of the shared economy and independent work will continue to increase. This type of work is a necessary alternative for people who can't find traditional jobs. Growth is seen in the increased popularity of digital platforms. In turn, people now have a greater ability to choose where they want to live first and find a job second; the opposite of what has traditionally been the case. * There will continue to be less emphasis on the traditional workplace and more need for spaces that nimbly adapt to changes in technology and market demand. * The Colorado Department of Labor predicts that the majority of jobs created in the next few decades will be at medium-wage levels. A proactive community response will be necessary to capture jobs that provide higher-than-average wages. * Future military employment levels in the Pikes Peak Region are difficult to predict. As military base missions change, this will have impacts to the city. The City expects to proactively and collaboratively support existing missions and solicit opportunities for new missions of the military. * A sustainable level of efficiently operated core city services, including but not limited to public safety, is recognized as foundational for the success of our Thriving Economy and other goals of this Plan. * Continued increases in online purchasing of goods and services will affect the built environment, particularly but not only for retail establishments. * For revenues necessary to provide ongoing services, maintenance and capital improvements, Colorado Springs has become increasingly dependent on a combination of general and limited purpose sales taxes. This continued reliance should be expected to impact land use policy and choices, including approaches to the fiscal sustainability of development. * For this Plan, it is assumed that TABOR (the "Taxpayer Bill of Rights") will remain in place, thereby requiring a direct role of the electorate first in deciding to increase or extend taxes or borrowing; and then often in limiting or directing the use and application of tax revenues. In this role, our voters will have a significant responsibility for choices made about funding or not funding priorities identified in this Plan. * There has been a tremendous expansion of both the extent and role of special districts within the city. The majority of all new private construction and development will occur within existing and future special districts. These districts are now routinely used to finance a portion of required or desired infrastructure, and are increasingly being used for ongoing services. Districts will have a larger role and influence on how we develop and maintain our public realm in the future. * There is an increasing awareness of and desire for sustaining and supporting a localized economy that celebrates and nurtures locally produced goods, products, and services. This desire and trend will need to be reconciled with overall continuing trends towards consolidation of business and services. ### COMMON DESIRED ELEMENTS Although not universally applicable to all Thriving Economy typologies or all areas within them, many of the following physical elements are broadly desirable for many of them: a. Access to or opportunities for well-connected multimodal transportation; b. A mix of complementary uses; c. A variety of integrated or nearby housing options for employees working in the area; d. Opportunities for additional economic development and investment, particularly tied to fiscally sustainable job growth; e. Amenities including walkability, parks, gathering places and supporting uses that attract investment and provide value to employees, customers and visitors; f. A recognizable and attracting physical design and character; and g. Land use integration with surrounding areas. # ECONOMIC TYPOLOGIES AND FRAMEWORK Employment centers throughout our city have different characteristics and issues, and therefore are in need of differing priorities and physical elements. This Plan identifies several employment and industry typologies to address and clarify these differences; and to allow for more refined and useful application of City goals and policies. Each typology is intended to broadly encompass a range of specific industries, based on similar physical characteristics and needs. While there are six individual typologies, it should also be understood that none exist in a vacuum, and often there is blending among them. Therefore, not all employment hubs within the city fit conveniently into a single typology, and in many cases, locations (such as Downtown) are appropriate for several typologies. Local economic development organizations have currently identified three core targeted industry clusters based on our region’s unique competitive advantages and existing strengths. These industries—sports medicine and related health services; professional, scientific and technical services; and aviation and specialty manufacturing—are embedded and highlighted in the typologies below. Employment and Industry typologies are as follows: 1. Cornerstone Institutions 2. Spinoffs and Startups 3. The Experience Economy 4. Life and Style 5. Industry Icons 6. Critical Support These typologies are intended to be used as one tool in guiding City decisions and initiatives including City-initiated master plans, future City zoning plans and requirements, as well as choices about infrastructure and other City investment priorities. These typologies can also be used as a frame of reference for evaluating private land use applications for Comprehensive Plan consistency when this finding is applicable. # Typology 1: Cornerstone Institutions **Cornerstone Institutions Recommendations:** * Integrate Core Targeted Industry Clusters * Support Complementary Uses * Integrate with Residential Neighborhoods * Connect Amenities and Infrastructure * Attract Spinoff Industries * Orient Towards Campuses **Example Location:** Colorado College N. Tejon St. and Cache La Poudre St. <
> ### The goal of this typology is to support, reinforce, and expand these cornerstone institutions and to connect and integrate them within the larger community. Core educational, medical, aviation, and military institutions of Colorado Springs have long served as the foundation of the local economy. The economic success of the city is in large part driven by these institutions. They attract and create new talent, generate emerging spinoff industries, and enhance overall quality of life in Colorado Springs. While these institutions are located throughout the city, they are most often concentrated on major campuses that function as nodes of activity and employment. Ensuring these institutions remain strengths for Colorado Springs while also integrating into surrounding neighborhoods is a focus of this Plan. This can be accomplished through continued investment in quality infrastructure, integrating these campuses within surrounding neighborhoods, and collaborative approaches to meet workforce needs such as nearby attainably-priced housing. Places that accommodate this industry typology include Downtown, other urban activity centers, and existing and new campus-style developments. ### EXAMPLES UC Health-Memorial Health System, Penrose-Saint Francis Keys College, University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, Pikes Peak Community College, U.S. Air Force Academy, Peterson Air Force Base, Fort Carson, and the Colorado Springs Airport. # Typology 2: Spinoffs and Startups **Spinoffs and Startups Recommendations:** * Target Creative Industries, New Technologies, and High-Paying Jobs * Prioritize Easy Access to Downtown and Urban Centers * Cluster Business * Create Campus-Like Environment * Integrate with the Neighborhood * Integrate Open Space **Example Location:** Catalyst Campus Pikes Peak Ave. and Colorado Ave. <
> Capitalize on Easy Access to Downtown Reuse Old/Historic Facilities Incorporate Technology and Manufacturing Industries Increase Access to Trails and Open Space Integrate Complementary Uses *** ### The goal of this typology is to become increasingly competitive at business and worker attraction in medium and high-wage jobs by supporting the creation of environments that attract them and allow them to thrive. #### EXAMPLES Catalyst Campus, Epicentral Co-working, and The Enclave. Spinoff and startup industries are those that are emerging as increasingly important segments of the local economy and jobs base. These include technology, cybersecurity, green industries, sports-based industries, and creative industries. This typology also includes two of the Chamber’s targeted industry clusters: sports medicine and related health services, and professional, scientific, and technical services. Based on national economic trends, the importance of these emerging industries is only expected to grow, particularly those based in technology. While some segments may not yet be well represented locally, they all appear to be a strong fit with Colorado Springs’ unique economic assets, location, and workforce. The City can help nurture these industries through strategic alignment of incentive programs, workforce initiatives, enhanced infrastructural amenities such as high-speed fiber, and encouragement of compact, walkable districts with urban amenities. Places that are optimal for this typology include Downtown, mixed use neighborhood activity centers, and districts that enable an eclectic mix of commercial and industrial uses, such as office parks, Innovation Districts, employment corridors such as Garden of the Gods Road, and mixed business districts such as the area south of Citadel Mall. # Typology 3: The Experience Economy **Experience Economy Recommendations:** * Highlight Regional and Local Destination * Attract Large-Scale Retail, Entertainment, and Lodging * Focus on Sports and Cultural Attractions * Enhance Walkable Destinations **Example Location:** Downtown Colorado Springs <
> **The goal of this typology is to support a variety of high quality existing and new attractions and related amenities for residents and visitors, appealing to a diverse mix of interests and incomes.** The experience economy includes tourism, entertainment, and cultural industries throughout the region that serve both residents and visitors. This typology has a particularly high correlation with the Cultural and Tourist Attractions in Chapter 6. This sector can be a catalyst for economic growth across the spectrum of other typologies by encouraging spending in areas impacting sales tax collections. The experience economy is critical to maintaining high quality of life, a factor that is important for attracting and retaining skilled talent and the businesses that rely on these workers. The strategies that relate to this typology focus on enhancing infrastructure, transportation, connectivity near venues, and activating areas targeted for new entertainment amenities. Places that are optimal for this typology include Downtown, areas on and adjacent to Colorado College’s campus, Old Colorado City, and places associated with our parks and other civic spaces. ### EXAMPLES The U.S. Olympic Museum and Colorado Springs Olympic Training Center, Pioneers Museum, The Fine Arts Center, The Money Museum, Pikes Peak Center for the Performing Arts, Cottonwood Center for the Arts, ENT Center for the Performing Arts at University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, Garden of the Gods, Manitou Incline, the Olympic Velodrome, and resort and convention destinations such as the Broadmoor, Cheyenne Mountain Resort, and Great Wolf Lodge. # Typology 4: Life and Style **Life and Style Recommendations:** * Integrate Retail and Services * Encourage Activated and Vibrant Spaces * Encourage High-Quality and Mixed-Use Environment * Focus on Pedestrian Friendly Design * Locate Supporting Housing Nearby **Example Location:** Ivywild School S. Cascade Ave. and S. Tejon St. <
> *** ### The goal of this typology is to meet the daily needs of residents and businesses with high quality, varied, and easily accessible options. ### EXAMPLES Large retail and service destinations such as First and Main Town Center and Citadel Mall, community shopping centers, small neighborhood centers, and stand-alone retail, restaurant, and service establishments. The Life and Style typology encompasses much of the large retail and services sector that serves the daily needs of local residents and businesses. It is important that this typology is dispersed throughout Colorado Springs and easily accessible to all. Places that accommodate this typology include corridors, neighborhood centers, community activity centers, entertainment and commercial centers, along with places within regional activity centers and Downtown (as defined in Chapter 3: Unique Places). Strategies in support of this typology promote neighborhoods and encourage activation of Downtown and numerous other connected and accessible retail and service districts. # Typology 5: Industry Icons **Industry Icons Recommendations:** * Provide Opportunities for Manufacturing and Industries * Focus on Distribution and Warehousing * Accommodate Related Office Support * Locate Strategically with Convenient Highway Access * Provide Transitions to Residential Areas **Example Location:** Garden of the Gods Corridor I-25 and Garden of the Gods Rd. <
> ### The goal of this typology is to maintain and grow a diversified primary employment and manufacturing economy that attracts investment and provides a variety of jobs and opportunities for the local workforce. The manufacturing, distribution, data processing and national service industries are a traditional strength of the Colorado Springs economy. This segment of the economy is diverse and provides varied employment opportunities. It builds upon the city’s established strengths in semiconductor and related device manufacturing, aerospace and defense, as well as newer strengths such as datacenter operations. Some of its businesses fall within one of the Chamber’s three target clusters: aviation and specialty manufacturing. Places that are optimal for this typology include highway and major road corridors, near the airport, and along railroad corridors, areas that fit its specific infrastructural needs. To continue and strengthen this industry, enhanced infrastructure and coordination with community colleges and workforce training programs are needed, as well as protecting the limited number of key sites that are desirable to large new employers of this typology. ### EXAMPLES Bal Seal Engineering, Microchip Technologies, Advantage Manufacturing, Springs Fabrication, Ace Hardware Distribution Center, Northrup Grumman Warehouse, USAA Insurance, and Walmart Colorado Data Center. # Typology 6: Critical Support **Critical Support Recommendations:** * Provide Fundamental Services and Activities * Distribute Government Service Areas * Accommodate Large-Scale Utilities **Example Location:** Mountain Metropolitan Transit Center E. Fountain Blvd. and Hancock Expy. <
> *** ### The goal of this typology is to ensure fundamental needs of residents and businesses are reliably met every day. ### EXAMPLES El Paso County Citizens’ Service Center, Colorado Springs Utilities, waste haulers, construction companies, and outdoor storage facilities. There are fundamental activities that ensure that the city continues to work on a day-to-day basis including reliable utility services, keeping it clean and safe, removing waste, constructing buildings and infrastructure, growing and production of local foods, and responding to emergencies. A majority of this work takes place behind the scenes, but is critical to a functional and livable city. Places that can accommodate this economic typology are those along interstate and highway corridors that are properly buffered from residential areas. These areas require truck, heavy equipment, and sometimes rail access. Some industries in this typology are a fit in locations that would be suitable for the Industry Icons typology. Others have a combination of requirements and impacts that support their segregation from most other uses in the city. Strategies to support this typology focus on maintaining quality basic infrastructure, identifying and retaining sites and locations for higher impact industrial-type uses, reducing impact on nearby residential areas, providing affordable workforce housing, and fiscally responsible city management to ensure that Colorado Springs’ city services remain reliable. PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Thriving Economy Framework <
> ### Predominant Typology * Cornerstone Institutions * Spinoffs and Startups * The Experience Economy * Life and Style * Industry Icons * Critical Support * City Boundary * Interstate 25 * Major Roads ### ECONOMIC FRAMEWORK The Economic Framework Map provides a graphic framework of the vision of Thriving Economy. This map is intended to be used as one means of furthering Colorado Springs' economic health when making land use decisions moving forward. It focuses on diversifying the local economy but also building on the city’s current strengths, thinking regionally, and remaining fiscally responsible through land use decision-making. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic. It is not intended to strictly define place boundaries. page intentionally left blank # GOALS AND POLICIES ## BRAND AS THE BEST ### GOAL TE-1 #### Build on our quality of place and existing competitive advantages. **Policy TE-1.A:** Preserve and strengthen key economic sectors and strive to grow medium and high-wage jobs in targeted industry clusters. * **Strategy TE-1.A-1:** Provide an adequate supply of varied, development-ready sites that are appropriate for new investments in existing industry and targeted clusters. * **Strategy TE-1.A-2:** Prioritize growth in regional targeted industry clusters—sports medicine and related health services; professional, scientific and technical services; and aviation and specialty manufacturing—when allocating available economic development incentives. * **Strategy TE-1.A-3:** Prioritize Downtown redevelopment to establish it as the region’s employment center, hub of commerce, governing, innovation, tourism, entertainment, art and culture. * **Strategy TE-1.A-4:** Target, create, and promote incentives for businesses and industries that foster growth and retention of jobs offering wages higher than the county average. **Policy TE-1.B:** Build on our emerging sports, recreation, and outdoors economy. This includes the Olympic Training Center, Olympic Museum sports and recreation organizations and other related businesses and industries. * **Strategy TE-1.B-1:** Integrate the sports, recreation, and outdoors economy and Olympic City USA brand into other areas of focus and citywide initiatives, such as tourism, education, and arts and culture. * **Strategy TE-1.B-2:** Invest in infrastructure and facilities to accelerate emerging economic sub-sectors. * **Strategy TE-1.B-3:** Pursue opportunities for building additional sports venues throughout the city, including in or near Downtown. * **Strategy TE-1.B-4:** Ensure sports, recreation, and outdoors-related venues and facilities are walkable and well-connected through wayfinding, connectivity, and other streetscape enhancements. <
> **PlanCOS** LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE ### APPLICATION **Update Zoning:** Enables tools such as small lot mixed-use and cluster development, added options for accessory dwelling units, and more form based Transit Oriented Development (TOD) options. ### Policy TE-1.C: Leverage the city’s livability as a workforce and economic driver. **Strategy TE-1.C-1:** Improve access to parks, trails, nature and the outdoors from employment centers. **Strategy TE-1.C-2:** Support and leverage projects and initiatives with mixed uses, transit supported and walkable attributes to attract and retain a skilled workforce and business investment **Strategy TE-1.C-3:** Ensure an adequate supply of attainable housing for the workforce across all industries, and that it is conveniently located near hubs of employment and/or public transportation. **Strategy TE-1.C-4:** Support and encourage projects and built environments that meet the need for workforce and business development targeted toward lower income and other populations and areas with limited access to jobs and business opportunities . **Strategy TE-1.C-5:** Provide for convenient access to quality goods and services that support major employment areas, through a combination of proactive and responsive planning, zoning, and development approval actions. ### Policy TE-1.D: Enhance our Cornerstone Institutions (Typology 1[^p88-1]) campuses, while also integrating them into the surrounding community. **Strategy TE-1.D-1:** Encourage the development of spinoff and startup businesses that build upon the research and development strengths of our major institutions, and locate on or adjacent to these campuses. **Strategy TE-1.D-2:** Support Cornerstone Institutions (Typology 1[^p88-1]) campus developments that provide amenities, services, and cultural assets to nearby residents. **Strategy TE-1.D-3:** Provide a mix of uses that are both neighborhood and institutional campus-serving to help integrate them into the community. **Strategy TE-1.D-4:** Work with institutions to adjust zoning and land use regulations that allow them to densify and expand while also managing impacts on surrounding neighborhoods. **Strategy TE-1.D-5:** Support the growth and adaptation of Colorado Springs Airport to maintain its economic value as an air service provider for the city and region, and to strengthen its role as an integrated hub for economic development. **Strategy TE-1.D-6:** Ensure that these employment and activity nodes are pedestrian-oriented and easily accessible by existing or future alternative modes of transportation. [^p88-1]: Typology 1 # EXPAND OUR BASE ## GOAL TE-2 ### Diversify the local economy by fostering a range of business types and sizes. #### Policy TE-2.A: Preserve and strengthen the city’s Industry Icons Typology (Typology 5). **Strategy TE-2.A-1:** Identify, accommodate, and provide supportive zoning for key sites for industrial uses with good multimodal access to highways, railroads, and the Airport. **Strategy TE-2.A-2:** Provide attainable and conveniently located workforce housing for major concentrations of employees. **Strategy TE-2.A-3:** Promote improvements that make industrial districts cleaner, energy efficient, and safer for integration with surrounding neighborhoods, including the implementation of cost-effective technologies and environmentally sensitive building and site design. **Strategy TE-2.A-4:** Ensure screening or other mitigation around high impact industrial districts to reduce impacts on nearby residential areas. #### Policy TE-2.B: Create a positive atmosphere for spinoffs, startups, and entrepreneurship. **Strategy TE-2.B-1:** Support business growth in innovation, research, development, and emerging technologies by being nimble and responsive in the application and adaptation of City processes and requirements. **Strategy TE-2.B-2:** Ensure that land regulations allow for a diverse mix of workplace types including non-traditional and flexible workspaces, such as co-working facilities. **Strategy TE-2.B-3:** Retain or modify plans and regulations to allow for a complementary mix of industrial and commercial uses, workforce training, and business services in locations identified for commercial and business development. **Strategy TE-2.B-4:** Allow for and promote the addition of facilities and such as incubators and maker spaces, to assist in the creation and growth of Innovation Districts. **Strategy TE-2.B-5:** Partner with the K-12 school system, technical and community colleges, and universities on physical plans that support workforce training opportunities for jobs in sectors with the greatest need and growth potential, such as skilled nursing. ### DEFINITIONS **Co-working:** A workspace used by people who are self-employed or working for different employers, allowing users to share equipment and ideas in a flexible office space. **Incubator:** A facility used by startups that provides affordable workspace, shared equipment, training and mentors, and access to financing, to help these new businesses grow. **Maker space:** Similar to co-working and incubator facilities, a space that provides technology and equipment (such as 3D printers), used by entrepreneurs to experiment, test ideas, and build product prototypes. **Innovation District:** A district that encourages the density of institutions and tech-related firms and start-ups that utilize their proximity to collaborate and share knowledge. ### DEFINITIONS **Pop-up retail:** Temporary retail shops where business owners can test products and ideas without committing to a permanent location. Pop-up shops are often used to help activate vacant and underutilized spaces. **Street Activation:** A combination of building design choices, streetscape treatments, and multimodal options that results in increased and enhanced use of and orientation towards the street, especially by pedestrians. The type and extent of desired and achievable street activation will be influenced by factors including the functional classification of the roadway and safety considerations. ### Policy TE-2.C: Enhance the physical environment by creating new amenities that help attract and retain new businesses and residents. **Strategy TE-2.C-1:** Prioritize redevelopment and activation in Downtown and other urban activity centers in order to establish or enhance economic development. **Strategy TE-2.C-2:** Support the redevelopment and adaptive re-use of functionally obsolete buildings, commercial centers, and office parks, as new mixed use employment centers. **Strategy TE-2.C-3:** Identify and develop new and underutilized areas as opportunities for unique attraction of new retail, dining, entertainment, and housing development. **Strategy TE-2.C-4:** Create street activation in the design of employment and business centers through the use of supportive zoning, design guidelines, and street standards. **Strategy TE-2.C-5:** Incorporate street-activating uses in City- and County-owned facilities including parking garages, transit facilities, and service centers. **Strategy TE-2.C-6:** Accommodate creative temporary uses such as food trucks, farmers markets, pop-up retail, and craft markets to help activate business and employment centers ### Policy TE-2.D: Provide high-quality infrastructure and technology citywide. **Strategy TE-2.D-1:** Support the city’s Cornerstone Institutions (Typology 1[^p90-1]), manufacturing core, and other industries with continued quality infrastructure that meets the city’s needs. **Strategy TE-2.D-2:** Enhance infrastructure, transportation, and communications connectivity near major cultural, hospitality, and entertainment venues. **Strategy TE-2.D-3:** Collaborate with providers to expand internet capacity and speed throughout the city, including targeted development-ready sites. **Strategy TE-2.D-4:** Provide for high quality and redundant utility services for manufacturing and industrial sites with the greatest economic development potential. **Strategy TE-2.D-5:** Focus and adapt plans, regulations, and initiatives to assure that the city is successful as a cybersecurity industry leader. [^p90-1]: Typology 1 # THINK AND ACT REGIONALLY ## GOAL TE-3 ### Continue and initiate regional coordination and partnerships focused on economic development and shared fiscal sustainability. **Policy TE-3.A:** Foster cross-jurisdictional collaboration and planning with other public agencies including El Paso County, City of Manitou Springs, City of Fountain, Town of Monument, Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments, Colorado Department of Transportation, and surrounding jurisdictions. **Strategy TE-3.A-1:** Consider regional and statewide market conditions and development trends when creating new land use regulations. **Strategy TE-3.A-2:** Coordinate land use decisions of major economic impact with Colorado Springs Utilities and applicable economic organizations. **Strategy TE-3.A-3:** Pursue intergovernmental agreements focused on mutually supportive fiscal sustainability. **Strategy TE-3.A-4:** Coordinate with relevant agencies and other community partners in the identification, refinement, alignment and marketing of federal, state and locally designated opportunity zones and other investment areas in order to maximize their overall use and benefit to the City and region. **Policy TE-3.B:** Coordinate and partner with regional military installations. **Strategy TE-3.B-1:** Incorporate appropriate recommendations of the Joint Land Use Study into City plans and initiatives. **Strategy TE-3.B-2:** Coordinate among military installations and other partners on public improvements and facilities that serve the city and installations. **Strategy TE-3.B-3:** Provide attainable, diverse, attractive and convenient off-base housing options for active military, contractors, and military retirees. **Strategy TE-3.B-4:** Encourage new land uses and business opportunities that help attract and integrate former service members and their families into the Colorado Springs community. **Strategy TE-3.B-5:** Ensure development adjacent to military installations is consistent with their long-term and operational goals. **MILITARY INSTALLATIONS** <
> # EMBRACE SUSTAINABILITY ## GOAL TE-4 ### Focus on productively developing and redeveloping areas already in, nearby, or surrounded by the city in order to preserve open spaces, maximize investments in existing infrastructure, limit future maintenance costs, and reduce the impacts of disinvestment in blighted areas. #### Policy TE-4.A: Prioritize development within the existing City boundaries and built environment (not in the periphery). **Strategy TE-4.A-1:** Encourage revitalization and infill in underutilized urban places, as detailed in Chapter 3. **Strategy TE-4.A-2:** Ensure land use regulations allow for increased density in areas identified for this, including Downtown, activity centers, and urban corridors. **Strategy TE-4.A-3:** Support greenfield development that includes mixed-use, higher-density clusters, and quality design. **Strategy TE-4.A-4:** Modify the City’s fiscal impact requirements for master plans and annexations to incorporate a longer (e.g. 30-year) forecast period. These reports should allow consideration of the fiscal context of the surrounding area. #### Policy TE-4.B: Improve local funding mechanisms to better support economic development efforts. **Strategy TE-4.B-1:** Tailor existing City incentives to target priority clusters in alignment with these and other non-city incentives to achieve the goals of this chapter. **Strategy TE-4.B-2:** Regularly evaluate and reprioritize incentives for targeted industry clusters and other economic development efforts. **Strategy TE-4.B-3:** Consider an increase in and modified allowable uses for the Lodgers and Automobile Rental Tax (LART). #### Policy TE-4.C: Promote sustainable efforts and initiatives in the public and private sector. **Strategy TE-4.C-1:** Encourage the integration of sustainable and cost effective best practices and technology into public infrastructure investments. **Strategy TE-4.C-2:** Promote the development of businesses, jobs, and programs focused on renewable energy, clean technology, waste reduction, and recycling. **Strategy TE-4.C-3:** Promote the city’s natural assets, infrastructure, and supportive policies to expand our green economy and attract additional green jobs. # BECOME A SMART CITIES LEADER ### GOAL TE-5 **Become a Smart Cities leader in applying innovative technology in ways that enhance the City’s ability to better manage our facilities and services and improve our overall quality of life. (Also see Chapter 5: Strong Connections for additional direction on Smart Cities)** #### Policy TE-5.A: Create a plan for a Smart City future. * **Strategy TE-5.A-1:** Regularly adapt, refine, and execute a SmartCOS implementation plan in coordination with private sector partners. * **Strategy TE-5.A-2:** In all City initiatives and decisions consider ways to implement innovative technology from SmartCOS. #### Policy TE-5.B: Implement Smart City innovations and technology. * **Strategy TE-5.B-1:** Test prioritized Smart Cities ideas beginning with pilot projects. * **Strategy TE-5.B-2:** Implement proven and cost-effective Smart Cities applications and technology. * **Strategy TE-5.B-3:** Continue to incorporate adaptive, secure state-of-the-art technology as a part of new and redeveloped facilities, infrastructure, and services throughout the city. ### DEFINITION **Smart City:** to utilize technology and the Internet of Things (IoT) to address challenges facing our community and improve the quality of life for our citizens, particularly in the areas of connectivity, energy and resilience. The City identified four organizational pillars to implement a vision for Smart Cities: * Energy & Utilities * Transportation & Mobility * City Services * Buildings & Sustainability # RELATIONSHIP TO KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following Thriving Economy keystone indicators are representative of primary measures of the health and resilience of our economy over the long term. Although there is a strong high-level correlation between our plan for physical development and these indicators, it is recognized that they will often not be directly applicable to individual development plans or to city initiatives. **Economic Indicators:** The economic indicators for PlanCOS include the following measures, each of which are available from existing data sources and are easily comparable with other jurisdictions: * New jobs added that are at or above the median salary for the region; * Unemployment Rate: annual employment rate; * Median Wages Compared with State; and * Residential Units Added. These measures are chosen because together they reflect a combination of the economic outcomes PlanCOS is intended to support as well as the economic activity that will be needed to allow many of the recommendations in the Plan to be fiscally sustainable with private and public sector resources. From another perspective, many of the other recommendations of PlanCOS are intended to encourage the conditions that will be necessary to attract the economic development and workforce that will contribute to a sustainably strong economy. Although the importance of these interrelationships between high quality and attractive physical development, and a strong economy are implicitly understood, we also recognize that it will be challenging to directly tie progress with economic indicators to progress related to physical development. # ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY INITIATIVES These essential questions should be considered as a tool to focus on and promote implementation of our Thriving Economy vision for applicable City initiatives (refer to Chapter 1): 1. Support the overall focus of our Thriving Economy theme? 2. Help attract new businesses in targeted industry clusters? 3. Create or enhance a built environment with amenities that will help attract new, skilled talent to the city? 4. Support the creation of new, high-paying, and livable wage jobs? 5. Contribute to effective and efficient use of City resources? 6. Provide for fiscal sustainability for the city over the long-term? 7. Support or is it consistent with regional business attraction and retention efforts? 8. Support the mission and role of the military in the city and region? 9. Have a positive impact on the educational competitiveness of the city? 10. Contribute or align with our goal of becoming a Smart Cities leader? # RELEVANT PLANS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PLANCOS While PlanCOS provides overarching guidance, other City plans provide additional detail required for implementation of the Thriving Economy vision. Because it can be responsive to the particularly dynamic and rapidly changing nature of the economy and associated systems and technology, the City’s Strategic Plan will be of particular importance in supporting this theme. Likewise the plans of partner entities responsible for economic development should be relied on for more specific planning direction. Facility Master Plans such as the Airport Master Plan should be relied on to guide and implement our Thriving Economy vision for their particular focus. In the future Colorado Springs expects to have a Smart Cities Implementation Plan. Additionally, any capital improvements plans of the City and its enterprises and Colorado Springs Utilities through Utilities Board policy direction, should first be aligned with PlanCOS, and then relied on to assist in its implementation. The adopted plans of the Colorado Springs Chamber and Colorado Springs Economic Development Corporation should particularly be considered. Although not formally adopted by the City, these plans should be relied on to allow for and articulate specific recommendations if otherwise consistent with PlanCOS. Links to the most relevant plans are found below. Other publicly and privately initiated master plans should also be considered to the extent they contain recommendations directly pertinent to furtherance of this theme. As existing plans are updated and new plans created, these plans should support the themes of PlanCOS. In cases where there is a discrepancy between these supporting plans and PlanCOS, the vision identified within PlanCOS should be considered in the use and application of these plans. See full list of plans: Appendix D ### City Adopted Plans **Colorado Springs Strategic Plans** **Colorado Springs Airport Master Plan** **Experience Downtown Master Plan** **Envision Shook’s Run Plan** **SmartCOS Plan (anticipated)** **Capital improvements and priorities plans** ### Partner Entity Plans **Strategic Plan of the Colorado Springs Chamber and Colorado Springs Economic Development Corporation** **Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Joint Land Use Study Plan** **Colorado Springs Destination Master Plan (Visit COS)** **El Paso County Policy Plan (as amended)** <
> <
> # STRONG CONNECTIONS ## CHAPTER 5 <
> ### PLANCOS VISION Adapts to how we move by transforming our corridors to support our future generations’ health and mobility needs, enhancing economic vibrancy, upgrading infrastructure, and improving regional connectivity. ### KEY STRATEGIES * Make Transit a More Viable Option * Add Non-Motorized Facilities * Adapt to and Implement New Technologies * Maximize Existing Capacity * Invest in Smart Technologies # IMPORTANCE OF CONNECTIONS Our citizens desire a full range of options for where, when, and how we choose to travel. However, changes in technology are providing increasing options to communicate, obtain services, and do business without physically traveling. Our energy, water, wastewater, and stormwater systems also require a robust and well-integrated network of connections. Finally, both the sustainability and enjoyment of our natural environment depends on green infrastructure connections. Altogether this framework of connections represents an extremely large public and shared investment. Our regional and local connections are essential for a well-functioning city, our safety, economic prosperity and the quality of our lives. A well-planned transportation system provides us with opportunities and choices for all modes of travel. This increases the efficiency of our system, reduces ongoing maintenance costs, and minimizes the impact of expanding the system on overall livability. As our city becomes larger and more diverse, the economic and community value of a smart and multimodal system will become even more vital to our success and quality of life. In addition to large scale systems, connectivity at a local, human and oftentimes walkable scale, is also essential for healthy, safe, efficient, desirable and community-supportive development and design. For quality of life and financial efficiency reasons, the desired outcomes for our transportation system include more available and accessible options, increased capacity, less congestion, and a smaller environmental and land use footprint. Strong connections include ground-based transportation systems, air travel, and interrelated networks of utilities, stormwater, and communications infrastructure that serve as the foundation of our basic support services. Streets themselves carry more than people, vehicles, and goods. They also serve as conduits for utilities and communications. However, the importance of our utilities connections extends well beyond shared use of streets, easements, and rights-of-way. Our City’s vision also includes smart and connected utilities systems that maximize resiliency, adaptability, and options for customers. ## KEY TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS The following trends and assumptions provide a quick overview of some of the high-level issues related to Strong Connections. They are intended to provide a baseline understanding of emerging trends, preferences, and opportunities that may affect how Colorado Springs will grow and change in the coming years. This foundation sets up PlanCOS to provide tailored policy direction and implementation strategies. More background information can be found in Appendix A: State of the City Snapshots. ### Transportation * Over the next 20 years, it is assumed that most of the miles traveled by city residents and visitors will continue to be by individual motorized vehicle. However, trends of reduced per capita vehicle miles of travel and lower rates of motor vehicle ownership are expected to continue. * In response to changes in travel behavior and technology, with increasingly convenient access to transportation options other than owner-occupied motor vehicles, demand for alternative modes of transportation, such as transit and ridesharing, is expected to grow. * Over time, proven and emerging technologies will continue to dramatically change our vehicle mix and the way we travel (in some cases, by reducing our need to travel at all). Vehicles of various types will become substantially more autonomous, smart technologies will be increasingly deployed in the management of our systems, and our fleet will likely become more electrified. * Other new mass transit technologies have the unproven potential to change the way we travel and transport goods (e.g. vacuum transport and magnetic levitation). ## Utilities and Stormwater * Stormwater infrastructure needs and requirements will have substantial cost and physical development impacts throughout the city. The interrelated system flood control and water quality ponds, conveyance facilities, and other structures that the city is ultimately responsive for, will continue to grow, along with the regulatory requirements associated with designing and operating them. * Smart controls and management represent a very significant trend: Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) will invest substantially in smart meters, which will open up options including net and two way metering and demand side pricing management. * Energy storage technology is improving along with automobile technology and will allow opportunities for capture of lower cost off-peak energy as well as energy from renewable sources, including microgrid energy installations at the neighborhood level. * CSU works continually to secure water supplies for the coming decades. Per capita water use continues to decline; however, the water supply is susceptible to the impact of multi-year droughts and more can be done to provide for a more sustainable water supply for the city and possibly the Pikes Peak Region as a whole. Over the past few decades, ratepayers have made significant contributions to infrastructure, infrastructure redundancy, and planning for future water supply and infrastructure needs. * Over the next 30 years, CSU will see a significant transformation of the electric utility industry as technology drives more cost effective renewable energy resources, distributed generation, demand-side management, energy storage, and Smart Grid * As the city grows and becomes more urban in places, demand is expected to increase for intra- and inter-city transit, as well as for localized non-motorized options. * The Colorado Springs Airport is anticipated to continue to adapt to emerging travel markets and technologies and to further diversify its roles and functions beyond traditional air travel. * Transportation choices, such as public transit, walking, or biking, require higher levels of density and connected land use patterns in order to be successful. Therefore, not all options should be expected to be equally available throughout the city. opportunities. At the same time, per capita electric sales are declining and environmental regulations are expected to increase. These changes will drive the need to partner more closely with customers as CSU utilizes both customer-owned and CSU-owned resources to manage power supply and consumption. * Over the past two decades, natural gas demand-side management and energy efficiency measures have resulted in the annual use per residential customer to decline by approximately 25 percent. Despite declining use per customer, natural gas demand is expected to increase slightly due largely to the increase in population. CSU’s natural gas usage is predominantly driven by weather-sensitive heating loads. The annual, peak-day, and peak-hour forecasts of natural gas customer requirements into the future is the starting point for ensuring a safe, economical, and reliable supply to meet customer demand going forward. CSU continues to explore ways to reduce both peak-hour and peak-day natural gas demand on the system. * Communications have and will continue to evolve rapidly with ever new technologies. Maintaining cutting edge communications facilities will help attract high tech industries and a highly skilled workforce. # STRONG CONNECTION TYPOLOGIES & FRAMEWORK The concepts within this chapter define types of streets, corridors, and utilities based on their location and function within the city. They provide direction for mobility across all modes of transportation, and also encompass the need for and development of utility, stormwater, and communications connections from the local to regional scale. Although it is common for transportation and utilities typologies to overlap and interrelate, there are enough differences to support separate typologies for each category. Our city’s green infrastructure is also an essential part of our system of connections, and our waterways in particular, are corridors for a multitude of purposes. The role of green infrastructure and trails in our connections is addressed primarily in Chapter 7. Although we recognize their importance, we have not created separate typologies for the airport or railroads that carry freight. ### COMMON DESIRED ELEMENTS These include the following: a. A design and pattern that supports safety, commerce, mobility for all users, long-term sustainability, and adaptability; b. Cost-effective and applicable transportation choices and options that are integrated; and c. A network of physical connections to support community life, including walkability, alignment with existing and future multimodal systems, and connections to the city’s trails and green infrastructure network. ### Transportation Typologies For a city with the size and complexity of Colorado Springs, there should not be a one-size-fits-all approach to transportation across the city. However, certain qualities and elements should be broadly supported, encouraged, and promoted in the transportation and connections network. Streets and corridors throughout our city have very different characteristics depending on the period they were built. To help address this diversity, PlanCOS recognizes several different roadway typologies to provide context for our goals and policies. Typologies identify the characteristics of these streets and what enhancements should be considered to support them. In the application and use of these transportation typologies, it is recognized that some corridors, or segments within them, share characteristics of more than one typology. It is also understood that major transportation corridors will often be planned and managed best as an integrated system of related facilities and not as isolated single streets. The city has several thousand miles of streets. Most of this mileage is classified as local streets and provides access to individual homes and other destinations. Since many of these existing streets are unlikely to change in their use or in their need for more multimodal accommodations, PlanCOS primarily focuses on effecting change along existing streets traditionally classified as collectors and minor and major arterials. For future local streets, PlanCOS recommends strengthening their design and function at a human scale. This will result in more connected local streets with a reduced emphasis on design solely for the convenience of short distance motor vehicle travel. As we apply transportation-related typologies, it is important to recognize that more conventional and standards-based functional classifications (i.e. “minor arterial” or “collector”) will also continue to be used in our City’s more specific or technical plans, documents, and requirements. Transportation typologies are as follows: 1. Urban Core Streets a. Major Transportation Streets and Parkways b. Special Character Livable Streets 2. Established Suburban Streets c. Community Connector Corridors d. Area Connectors 3. Recent Suburban Streets a. Major Roadways b. Area Connectors 4. Future Streets and Corridors 5. Special Focus Corridors a. Multimodal Corridor b. Technology Corridor c. I-25 and Eastern Ring 6. Local Streets and Connections # Typology 1: Urban Core Streets **Major Transportation Streets and Parkway Recommendations:** * Redevelop Corridor with Multimodal Facilities * Maintain and Adapt Landscaped Medians and Tree Lawns * Accommodate Range of Transportation Options * Design Street in Relation to Land Uses and Build-to Lines **Example Location:** N. Nevada Ave. north of Uintah Street <
> ### The goal of this transportation typology is to recognize the existing character of these streets, while incorporating redevelopment, and the addition of new facilities to encourage multimodal use and optimized capacity. New uses and redevelopment along these streets should incorporate elements including landscaped medians, tree lawns, and bike and bus facilities. These are major streets in the long-established urban core areas that have been predominantly built out for many decades and encompass the area of the city in and around Downtown. Compared with other areas of the city, streets in this area have more landscaped tree lawns (the area between the sidewalk and the curb) and medians. The local system that these streets connect to is typically a more fine-grained grid. Traffic volumes are relatively stable. Within this typology, there are a several distinctions that are important to the application of PlanCOS. #### a. Major Transportation Streets and Parkways: These streets serve regional traffic and connect the larger city area to the Downtown. Medians, sidewalks, and often on-street parking are common characteristics. Although these streets are intended to accommodate a range of transportation options and be integrated with adjacent uses, they also carry vehicular traffic substantial distances. #### b. Special Character Livable Streets: These are streets in the urban core with a particularly notable character and pedestrian focus. In general, these streets are characterized by elements such as landscaped medians, on-street parking, bike lanes, and wide sidewalks. In commercial and mixed-use areas, these streets could contain larger tree lawns and wider sidewalks that can accommodate outdoor dining. Segments of the same street may transition between the two typologies of Urban Core Streets. Certain street segments can be transformed into this typology with thoughtful planning and attention to regional traffic flow. ### EXAMPLES Pikes Peak Ave. east of Downtown, parts of Colorado Ave., Cimarron St. outside of Downtown, segments of Nevada Ave. north of Uintah St. and south of Downtown. ### EXAMPLES Tejon St. Downtown and in the Ivywild area, Vermijo St., Bijou St., Colorado Ave. west of I-25, Cascade Ave., and Wahsatch Ave. PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE ## Typology 2: Established Suburban Streets **Established Suburban Street Recommendations:** * Additional Street Orientation * Enhance Transit Facilities * Retrofit with Integrated Land Uses and Density * Reinforce Connection to Urban Core * Integrate Pedestrian and Bike Facilities with Transit * Reduce Barriers and Enhance Local Connections **Example Location:** S. Academy Blvd. at Airport Road <
> **The goal of this transportation typology is to retrofit and reinvent these roadways to provide opportunities for additional integrated land uses and density, orientation of uses more toward the street, and enhanced multimodal facilities, all resulting in an increased transit mode share, optimized capacity, and reduced physical barriers to non-motorized and other local connections.** Streets of this typology are outside of the urban core and in areas of the city where streets do not have a strong grid pattern. These streets were generally built in support of development that occurred between the 1950s and the 1980s. They pre-date the City’s current typical street sections. Streets in these areas may or may not have medians and if they do they tend to be narrow. Sidewalks may be attached or detached from the street, but the separating landscaped area or tree lawn areas are generally smaller than in the urban core. These streets often lack multimodal elements such as bike facilities, multi-use trails, and bus accommodations. Within this typology, there are several distinctions that are important to the application of PlanCOS. ### EXAMPLES Academy Blvd., Union Blvd., Platte Ave. east of Union, Constitution Ave., and Circle Drive. ### EXAMPLES Galley Road, Murray Blvd., Chelton Road, Cheyenne Blvd., Cheyenne Road, Maizeland Road, and S. Carefree Circle. ### a. Community Connector Corridors: These streets serve regional traffic and often define the borders of neighborhoods. They are currently characterized by four or more vehicle travel lanes, some direct property access (curb cuts) along older sections, low-maintenance medians, and narrow sidewalks. Buses operate on these streets but overall the number of lanes, speeds, and number of accesses give these streets a strong auto-centric character. ### b. Area Connectors: These streets do not primarily provide regional connectivity but do provide connectivity within the areas defined by this typology (see Transportation Framework Map). These streets have two to four lanes, and may or may not have a median area. Compared with Community Connector Corridors these have slower speeds and lower traffic volumes. In some areas, single-family homes may have direct access to these streets. Multimodal facilities or services within these corridors are typically designed and operated in ways that are responsive to existing conditions which sometimes include limited available rights of way. # Typology 3: Recent Suburban Streets **Recent Suburban Street Recommendations:** * Strengthen Connections with Trail and Sidewalk Network * Integrate Traffic Control Measures * Enhance Crosswalks * Adapt to Multimodal Facility Needs * Integrate On and Off-Street Bike Facilities **Example Location:** Briargate Pkwy. at Chapel Hills Drive <
> *** ### The goal of this transportation typology is to ensure the further application of multimodal facilities along these streets to optimize their capacity and to enhance their livability and adaptability as these neighborhoods mature. A key component in achieving this goal is ensuring strong and safe connections between on-street and off-street non-motorized facilities. Streets in this area follow the classic recent suburban street pattern of curvilinear roadways with a limited grid and intersections. These streets were planned and designed after the 1980s and were constructed similar to the City’s current typical street section standards. These streets are generally characterized by raised medians, sidewalks, tree lawns, and limited direct access to adjacent land. Residential buildings are either set back from the street or oriented away and screened from the roadways with walls or fences. Within this typology there are several distinctions that are important to the application of PlanCOS. #### a. Major Roadways: These streets connect areas of the city to Community Connectors (Typology 2) and Parkways (Typology 1). These current roadways typically have six lanes, sidewalks, medians, high traffic volumes, high traffic speeds, and large intersections. #### c. Area Connectors: These streets do not provide regional connectivity but do provide connectivity within the areas defined by this typology and between major roadways. These streets have two to four lanes, sidewalks, varying types of traffic control (e.g. signals, stop signs, roundabouts) and may or may not have a median. ### EXAMPLES Research Pkwy., Briargate Pkwy., Union Blvd., Dublin Blvd., Stetson Hills Blvd., Barnes Road, and Centennial Blvd. ### EXAMPLES Rangewood Drive, Briargate Blvd., Vickers Drive, Peterson Road, and Delmonico Drive. ### Typology 4: Future Corridors **The goal of this transportation typology is to apply best practices that result in new streets and corridors that accommodate a variety of modes for newly developing areas as they emerge over the next 20 years.** Future streets are major transportation corridors that have yet to be built in the city, most notably within Banning Lewis Ranch. These areas provide an opportunity to create, from the ground up, new connections that reflect the Strong Connections vision and goals of PlanCOS. ### Typology 5: Special Focus Corridors Special Focus Corridors are corridors identified for a particular type of transportation application. PlanCOS identifies three types of these corridors: #### EXAMPLES Nevada Ave. corridor from University of Colorado-Colorado Springs to South Academy Blvd., Constitution Ave., Woodmen Road, I-25, and Colorado Ave. #### DEFINITIONS **Bus Rapid Transit (BRT):** A bus-based public transit system combining and increasing capacity and speed with the flexibility and the economics of a more traditional bus system; BRT buses can be a specialized design with a dedicated infrastructure, yet are adaptable. **Multistreet Corridor:** A transportation corridor consisting of two or more parallel streets planned and managed in a coordinated and integrated fashion. <
> **a. Multimodal Corridor:** A Multimodal Corridor is a facility and planning approach that accommodates varied types of users but with a specific and concerted effort to promote effective transit service to connect key destination areas within the city. High-end transit service could include a bus rapid transit (BRT) line, a street-car line, specialized bus or transit system, or fully autonomous transit vehicles. In many cases, and especially for Urban Core Streets with parallel streets, Multimodal Corridors should be planned and operated as Multistreet Corridors rather than as single streets. This approach allows for the benefits and impacts of all modes to be better managed and accommodated. **The goal of this typology is to transform or further transform these corridors into transit-supportive areas of focus for development, redevelopment, and community life.** <
> **b. Smart Street Corridor:** Technology will allow cities to re-imagine their streets. Cameras and sensors along streets have the potential to provide data about how people navigate and interact on and with our streets. This data could be used to improve safety by detecting roadway hazards, to evaluate traffic flows to optimize signal timing in real time, and to create a communication platform for the operations of connected vehicles (CV) and autonomous vehicles (AV). **The goal of this typology is to strategically invest in and implement emerging technologies to provide enhanced and safer travel, leverage and economize existing investments, and support the economic development of the city and region.** --- **c. I-25 and Eastern Ring:** Interstate 25 and Powers Boulevard are unique as typologies within the city because of their existing and emerging function as the high speed, high capacity, and limited access transportation backbone of the region, but also because the State of Colorado and the federal government are primarily responsible for their planning, funding, and maintenance. **The goal of this typology is to develop and maintain these facilities as limited access, high speed, high capacity, vehicular and transit corridors while, improving and maintaining non-motorized connections across these facilities and reasonably addressing adverse impacts to adjacent properties and development, including noise and limited local connectivity.** ### DEFINITIONS **Connected Vehicle (CV):** A vehicle that can communicate with other vehicles and infrastructure. The most common wireless technology used for connected vehicles is dedicated short range communication (DSRC). **Autonomous Vehicles (AV):** Vehicles in which some aspect of operational control is automated. AVs do not necessarily need to communicate with infrastructures or other vehicles since they usually have their own sensors and cameras equipped in the car. ### EXAMPLES I-25, Powers Blvd., Platte Ave., Academy Blvd., Woodmen Road, Banning Lewis Pkwy., Briargate Pkwy., and Union Blvd. # Typology 6: Local Streets and Connections **Local Street Recommendations:** * Enforce Local Speeds * Increase “First Mile” and “Last Mile” Connections to Trails, Paths, and Bike Facilities * Integrate Intersection Control Measures * Design at Human Scale * Fill Gaps in Sidewalk Connections **Example Location:** Renaissance Subdivision Dublin Blvd. and Mustang Rim Dr. <
> ### The goal of this transportation typology is to emphasize safety and local connectivity while deemphasizing vehicular speed. Within the parts of this network serving local origins and destinations this is accomplished through enforcement, increased connections, intersection control, narrower streets, and emphasis on designing or adapting facilities at a human and pedestrian scale. Our community needs and aspires to be physically connected at the very local level. From a trip-making perspective, local connections address what is sometimes referred to as the “first mile,” “last mile,” or in some cases “only mile” traveled. This typology impacts every home, business, and other destination in the city and encompasses the majority of the City’s overall network, including neighborhood and low-volume roads. Availability of, connections with, and the safety of non-motorized modes are essential components of this typology. Because of the scale of this typology, it is manifested in hundreds if not thousands of locations throughout the city, each with its unique context and conditions. Therefore, PlanCOS only provides generalized guidelines, and specific locations are not included in the Framework Map. # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Strong Connections Framework ### Transportation <
> ### MOBILITY FRAMEWORK The Mobility Framework Map provides a high level graphic framework of the transportation vision for Strong Connections. This map is intended to be used as one means of furthering the City’s focus on enhancing the multimodal opportunities in the city and on improving the efficiency of the system. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic. It is recognized that some major streets combine the characteristics of more than one typology. As a high level city-wide framework, this map is also not able or intended to fully represent the sometimes unique and important conditions associated with specific segments of larger and sometimes multistreet corridors. This map is not intended to strictly define street types for all city streets. More detail will be provided with the City’s Intermodal Mobility Plan. (blank page) ## UTILITY TYPOLOGIES Utilities knit the entire city together through a vast network of infrastructure, much of which goes unseen or un-noticed by the general public. Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) treats the city’s wastewater and oversees the delivery of potable and non-potable water, electricity and natural gas to city residents and others outside city limits. The city contains thousands of miles of utility transmission, distribution, and collection infrastructure and treatment facilities in varying states of use, quality, and capacity. When we talk about utilities, we refer to local, on-site facilities, as well as citywide integrated utilities. Utility typologies are as follows: 1. Modern Upgrades 2. Smarter Prospects 3. Regional Roles ## TYPOLOGY 1. MODERN UPGRADES **The goal of this typology is to adaptively and systematically retrofit and modernize older buildings, facilities, and local utility systems to promote responsive and efficient resource use, production, and distribution, and to reduce negative impacts of utilities systems and use at local scale.** This typology looks at the current systems in place in the developed areas of Colorado Springs. With all the new technology and building techniques available, older buildings and developments can be upgraded to use less energy, water, and natural gas. At a local level, this includes the installation of smart grids, efficient water use infrastructure, and Smart City technologies. These areas encompass the majority of Colorado Springs, and therefore provide the most capacity to affect resource efficiency and management. These areas should continue to underground overhead utility lines as feasible, especially in conjunction with redevelopment efforts. **a. Stable Neighborhoods:** Retrofitting homes and buildings provides more possibilities, through the use of home energy monitors, solar panel installations, net-metering, energy efficient appliances, wise water use, and building techniques to retain heat and air conditioning. Within this area most utility upgrades will be building or site-based. **b. Changing Neighborhoods:** Neighborhoods that will see more opportunities for redevelopment in the future have a wider range of options to upgrade the utility infrastructure. ## COMMON DESIRED ELEMENTS Certain qualities and elements should be widely encouraged, supported, and promoted for all areas of the city in the application of PlanCOS. These include the following: a. Implement new Smart Cities and smart systems technologies to reduce utility demand; b. Proactively respond to climate change and the federal and state regulatory environment; c. Provide cost effective, fiscally sustainable, and reliable service; d. Provide resilient utility facilities and infrastructure; e. Use renewable and sustainable resources; f. Provide capacity for future growth; g. Optimize utility system capacities where possible; h. Explore regionalization of utilities where it benefits CSU ratepayers; i. Coordinate with other infrastructure and improvement projects; and j. Provide for denser utility corridors that maximize developable space. ### EXAMPLES Systematic installation of smart meters throughout the city, Neighborhood-specific undergrounding of local electric lines in older neighborhoods (i.e. Mill Street Neighborhood and Lake Ave.). Extension of non-potable water use infrastructure, to irrigate existing or potential streetscape landscaping (i.e. existing improvements on Briargate Pkwy. or potential new landscaping on Academy Blvd. in southeast Colorado Springs). ### EXAMPLES Banning Lewis Ranch development proactively designed non-potable water systems for large and connected parks and landscaped areas. ### EXAMPLES Power plants, wind and solar farms, regional wastewater treatment, Arkansas River Basin storage, Colorado River projects, and Propane Air Plant for peaking capacity. ## Typology 2. Smarter Prospects **The goal of this typology is to plan and build new utility systems that leverage new technology and Smart City initiatives. New utility systems will have the ability to track and manage resource use at different levels.** This typology encompasses the newest areas of Colorado Springs, the areas that are currently under construction or not-yet-developed (including large scale redevelopment projects). These areas have a lot of potential to build better systems that will last longer and that can embody the PlanCOS vision for Strong Connections. Integrating new systems in new developments, such as non-potable water systems, is generally easier than in existing neighborhoods. New development can also utilize more efficient and integrated electric consuming fixtures and infrastructure in building and development. Water use and required wastewater capacity can be reduced by using water efficient fixtures/appliances, and more xeric landscaping will reduce seasonal summer water demands. ## Typology 3: Regional Roles **The goal of this typology is to explore opportunities for regional collaboration to increase the capacity and supply of renewable water, high quality integrated wastewater treatment, and cleaner energy.** This typology encompasses options for acquisition, planning, design and construction efforts to expand utility service capacities and to provide system redundancies and risk reduction for all four utility services. These efforts should leverage existing water rights and buying power of the large customer base on the energy side, and provide for collaborative regional improvements that benefit CSU ratepayers. This includes additional natural gas transmission pipelines to service the city for system redundancy; and the construction of more or expansion of existing raw water storage facilities. # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Strong Connections Framework ## Utilities <
> ### Predominant Typology * Modern Upgrades (stable neighborhoods) * Modern Upgrades (changing neighborhoods) * Smarter Prospects * City Boundary * Interstate 25 * Major Roads ### UTILITY FRAMEWORK MAP The Utility Framework Map provides a graphic framework of the utility vision for Strong Connections. This map is intended to be used as one means of furthering the City's focus on promoting smart technologies and modernizing existing utility systems to ultimately reduce resource consumption. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic. It is not intended to strictly define boundaries nor does it exhibit the majority of the regional facilities and resources that the city draws upon. page intentionally left blank # GOALS AND POLICIES ## CONNECT MULTIMODAL TRANSPORTATION ### GOAL SC-1 #### Multimodally connect people and land uses throughout the city and region. **Policy SC-1.A:** Plan for and implement transportation projects for the overall mobility of people and to manage the impacts of cars on our built environment. **Strategy SC-1.A-1:** Approach the Intermodal Transportation Plan update as an overall mobility plan, with a focus on maximizing the multimodal capacity of the current and future transportation system, thereby reducing the overall need for land and pavement. Focus and brand this effort as an intermodal mobility plan (IMP). **Strategy SC-1.A-2:** Focus attention on increasing multimodal east-west transportation capacity. **Strategy SC-1.A-3:** Continue to coordinate with State and regional partners, and the development community to plan, phase, and secure funding to complete connections and upgrades of key developing north-south corridors including Powers Boulevard, Marksheffel Road, and the future Banning Lewis Parkway. **Strategy SC-1.A-4:** Take full advantage of advances in technology to increase the capacity of the primary transportation system to move people and goods. **Strategy SC-1.A-5:** Build “complete streets” by safely and reasonably incorporating multiple modes in the design of new and redeveloped transportation corridors. **Strategy SC-1.A-6:** Focus planning and design attention on the transportation hubs and other elements that provide for safe and convenient interconnections between modes. **Strategy SC-1.A-7:** Specifically continue to invest in and adapt facilities and services, including multimodal transportation improvements, in order to increase the number, range and cost-competitiveness of airline flights to and from the Colorado Springs Airport. **Strategy SC-1.A-8:** Design land uses and transportation improvements with an emphasis on “first and last mile” trips having desirable and safe options for non-motorized travel. **Strategy SC-1.A-9:** Reduce the emphasis on requiring transportation facilities to be designed to fully address peak hour traffic demand forecasts, especially in Downtown and other identified higher density multimodal corridors and centers. **Strategy SC-1.A-10:** When applicable, use a multistreet corridor in the planning and implementation of transit routes in order to manage impacts while maintaining a high level of service (Typology 1: Urban Core Streets). ### APPLICATION The City’s Bike Master Plan, the Trails Master Plan, the Year 2040 Transit Plan, and the updated Intermodal Mobility Plan will guide the implementation of these goals as part of the City’s transportation system. The Region’s PPRTA program, the City’s capital improvement program and other public funding tools will provide the resources to support infrastructure improvements needed to meet these goals. Potential improvements to transportation, stormwater and utility systems will be a major consideration in the review of development and redevelopment proposals. ### DEFINITION **Complete Streets:** Complete streets are streets that have been built for safe and convenient travel by all road users, including people on foot and bicycle, as well as transit users. Complete streets policies call for routinely providing for travel by all users when building and reconstructing streets and roads. (Adopted by 2005 Ordinance 05-196) ## APPLICATION **Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA):** an entity responsible for the voter-approved 1.0% regional sales tax dedicated for a combination of transit funding, roadway maintenance and new capital transportation projects. The capital portion of this sales tax is tied to a specific list of projects established by the voters and will “sunset” after the Year 2024 unless it is extended. This potential second extension of the PPRTA capital portion, along with the IMP, would provide an opportunity for a community discussion about what types of projects best support our PlanCOS vision. **Electric Vehicle (EV) Plan:** PlanCOS anticipates the likelihood that electric vehicle use will increase considerably in the coming decades, with a corresponding need for additional home-based and publicly available charging systems, capacity, and capabilities. Proactive and coordinated planning for this anticipated change should involve stakeholders including transportation planners, Colorado Springs Utilities, the Pikes Peak Regional Building Department, the business and development communities, and neighborhood representatives. ### Policy SC-1.B: Proactively consider and incorporate the needs of our senior population in all relevant transportation planning and project decisions. * **Strategy SC-1.B-1:** Continue to promote and support collaborative and adaptive partnerships among service providers across the region to cost-effectively meet transportation needs of seniors with limited mobility options. * **Strategy SC-1.B-2:** Particularly focus on the needs of seniors by creating more walkable environments that provide Americans with Disabilities Act-compliant, short and direct connections among parking, buildings, other destinations, transit stops, and drop off locations. * **Strategy SC-1.B-3:** Improve safety for older pedestrians with improved visibility, sufficient timing for street crossings, and enhanced facilities such as bump outs and pedestrian refuges in medians. ### Policy SC-1.C: Improve transportation connectivity to the Denver metro area through I-25 capacity expansion. * **Strategy SC-1.C-1:** Continue to advocate for and support funding and completion of the I-25 Gap improvements. * **Strategy SC-1.C-2:** Support plans for I-25 that allow for future accommodation of alternate high speed transportation modes such as passenger rail, connected vehicles, or vacuum tube transport. ### Policy SC-1.D: Establish and maintain convenient multimodal connections between neighborhoods, local destinations, employment and activity centers, and Downtown. * **Strategy SC-1.D-1:** Encourage well-connected system of streets, sidewalks, bike facilities, and off-system trails in areas defined by Recent Suburban (Typology 3) and by Future Streets (Typology 4) typologies for new developments and redevelopments areas. * **Strategy SC-1.D-2:** Enhance street connectivity in new developments with shorter, pedestrian-scale blocks and narrower local streets to improve walkability and connectivity. * **Strategy SC-1.D-3:** Consistent with City-adopted plans, restripe select streets to optimize the use of existing right-of-way and street pavement to provide bike lanes for Urban Core (Typology 1) and Established Suburban Streets (Typology 2). * **Strategy SC-1.D-4:** Continue to fund Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA) program and other programs for adding, replacing, and maintaining sidewalks in neighborhoods with missing or substandard sidewalk connections. * **Strategy SC 1.D-5:** Pay particular planning attention to addressing and reasonably mitigating the impacts multimodal transportation decisions have on traditional, historic, and established neighborhoods, and apply a multistreet corridor planning approach where appropriate and feasible. * **Strategy SC-1.D-6:** Continue to coordinate bicycle and pedestrian planning, design, and implementation with other infrastructure projects and land use decisions. Specifically, coordinate implementation among elements of the Intermodal Transportation Plan, the Bicycle Master Plan, as well as Parks and Trails Master Plan. Strategy SC-1.D-7: Implement and if necessary adapt key priorities of the Bicycle Master Plan. Strategy SC-1.D-8: Complete the system of hard and soft-surfaced trails for off-street non-motorized and non-equestrian uses, with an emphasis on addressing identified high priority gaps and connections. Strategy SC-1.D-9: Create multimodal corridors between key activity centers and local tourist attractions that emphasize all modes of travel equitably. Strategy SC-1.D-10: Implement designs and technologies to improve the safety and efficiency of mass transit and connections to other modes. Strategy SC-1.D-11: Create and implement a scale and project-appropriate methodology for analyzing and responding to the multimodal opportunities and impacts associated with proposed development plans. Strategy SC-1.D-12: Promote interjurisdictional collaboration for consistent design along shared facilities, including signage, amenities, and design, where feasible. ### Policy SC-1.E: Develop a “Smart City” plan that includes comprehensive recommendations for multimodal projects and priorities the City can implement over time. Strategy SC-1. E-1: Create a “mobility marketplace” to allow residents and visitors to find and pay for a variety of transportation options—bikeshare, carshare, transit, rideshare, and transportation network companies—all in one place. Strategy SC-1.E-2: Create the communications infrastructure needed to accommodate connected vehicles and autonomous vehicles. Strategy SC-1.E-3: Create an integrated data exchange to collect, process, analyze, and share data. Strategy SC-1.E-4: Promote the early use of autonomous vehicles to connect visitors and residents between popular destinations including tourist routes. Strategy SC-1.E-5: Create and implement a long-term Electric Vehicle (EV) Plan in collaboration with Colorado Springs Utilities and other stakeholders. Strategy SC-1.E-6: Develop priority Smart Roadway corridors to be developed for smart cars, communications, and Intelligent Transportation System applications. ### Policy SC-1.F: Maximize multimodal transportation options serving the Downtown area to reduce the need for individual car ownership and use by visitors, residents, and employees. Strategy SC-1.F-1: Consistent with City-adopted plans, repurpose identified wide rights-of-way of Urban Core Streets (Typology 1)[^p115-1] to provide and enhance non-motorized travel in the Downtown area. Strategy SC-1.F-2: Plan for and preserve options for location of a high speed commuter rail station serving the Downtown area. Strategy SC-1.F-3: Complete the new Downtown transit center as the main multimodal hub for Mountain Metro transit service and augment with smaller hubs as the transit system matures. Strategy SC-1.F-4: Actively support car share programs beginning in Downtown and in higher density activity centers, as a means of reducing the footprint of car storage and the need for household car ownership in these areas. Strategy SC-1.F-5: Plan for and implement shuttle services, bike-share, and other programs to help travel among Downtown destinations and the airport, in coordination with a Downtown parking plan (see Strategy 1.F-7). Strategy SC-1.F-6: Establish additional and more robust multimodal connections between Downtown and tourist destinations such as the Old Colorado City, Garden of the Gods Park, and the City of Manitou Springs. Strategy SC-1.F-7: Complete, periodically update, and implement a fully strategic Downtown parking plan to support economic and residential development of Downtown. [^p115-1]: Typology 1 refers to the Street Typology categories defined in the Intermodal Transportation Plan (ITP). ### Policy SC-1.G: Reduce the barrier and other negative impacts of major transportation corridors without unreasonably reducing their capacity and function. **Strategy SC-1.G-1:** Where feasible and economical, incorporate additional or enhanced local roadway and non-motorized crossings to better connect neighborhoods and communities on either side of major roads, including I-25, the Powers Eastern Ring, and Hwy 24. **Strategy SC-1.G-2:** Support separate non-motorized connections with single point urban interchanges in order to accommodate safe and effective non-motorized traffic connections (e.g. separate non-motorized trail incorporated with the I-25/ Cimarron Interchange). **Strategy SC-1.G-3:** Proactively design Future Streets and Corridors (Typology 4) with a focus on mitigating their impacts to local connectivity, including local non-intersecting crossings and limited or specialized access locations and designs. **Strategy SC-1.G-4:** Redesign and make changes to Multimodal Corridors (Typology 5a) with an emphasis on enhancing intermodal connectivity. **Strategy SC-1.G-5:** Retrofit Urban Core Streets (Typology 1) to focus predominantly on increasing connectivity and multimodal utility while maintaining their needed capacity. **Strategy SC-1.G-6:** Incrementally and strategically redesign and retrofit Established Suburban Streets (Typology 2) to adapt them to their evolving transportation needs and to incorporate state-of-the-art designs for intersections and non-motorized crossings. **Strategy SC-1.G-7:** Retrofit key corridors and crossings to accommodate high-frequency transit options in a manner that is responsive to impacts on adjacent neighborhoods. **Strategy SC-1.G-8:** Design safe pedestrian crossings along major arterials that are coordinated with transit stop locations. ### Policy SC-1.H: Improve neighborhood livability by providing connections between neighborhoods and Neighborhood Centers (Chapter 3: Typology 1) and by reducing vehicular speeds. **Strategy SC-1.H-1:** Make non-motorized connections between recreational trails and on-street non-motorized facilities across the city. **Strategy SC-1.H-2:** Identify streets in areas defined by Recent Suburban Streets (Typology 3) and Future Streets and Corridors (Typology 4), where streets can be repurposed to provide non-motorized facilities. **Strategy SC-1.H-3:** Modify local streets to be consistent with their purpose by implementing speed control measures using enforcement, intersection control, and design. **Strategy SC-1.H-4:** Continue to work with Colorado Springs Utilities and the Fire Department to allow narrower streets and on-street parking for local “first and last mile streets.” # TAKE TRANSIT TO THE NEXT LEVEL ## GOAL SC-2 ### Lay the groundwork for an intercity transit connection along the Front Range and for more robust, choice-based transit within the city and larger region. **Policy SC-2.A:** Systematically support and encourage the density and design needed to support this network beginning with Downtown, key corridors, activity centers, and trip generators. * **Strategy SC-2.A-1:** Design and construct the new Downtown Transit Center to include immediate capacity for intercity bus trips and for eventual integration with potential commuter rail service. * **Strategy SC-2.A-2:** Continue to update zoning and other regulations to allow mixed-use and high-density development as uses by right. * **Strategy SC-2.A-3:** Plan and promote "high-capacity" transit in the Urban Core (Typology 1) and Established Suburban areas (Typology 2) in such corridors as Academy Blvd., Nevada Ave., Weber St., Colorado Ave., and Platte Ave. * **Strategy SC-2.A-4:** Rewrite the zoning and subdivision codes to better support densification and mixed-use to support multimodal transportation. **Policy SC-2.B:** Continue to enhance the existing transit system to make it a more viable option and strategically expand the existing system in response to new needs. * **Strategy SC-2.B-1:** Expand transit service frequency and times within the Urban Core area (Typology 1) and along existing key routes. * **Strategy SC-2.B-2:** Expand transit service into the Recent Suburban areas (Typology 3) with partnerships to serve major destinations such as hospitals and military installations. * **Strategy SC-2.B-3:** Pursue the implementation of a new governance structure for transit, consistent with agreed-upon funding structure. * **Strategy SC-2.B-4:** Identify sufficient funding sources to support the desired level of transit service. * **Strategy SC-2.B-5:** Provide convenient and inexpensive transit connections between the Colorado Springs Airport and key locations within the city. **Policy SC-2.C:** Actively plan for a high-speed commuter rail or similar service along the Front Range. * **Strategy SC-2.C-1:** Support Colorado Department of Transportation’s operation and expansion of Bustang between Pueblo and Denver, as an interim connection. * **Strategy SC-2.C-2:** Preserve existing and potential railway corridors within the city for possible use as future rail corridors between Colorado Springs and Denver. # REMAIN FOCUSED ON STORMWATER ## GOAL SC-3 ### Manage our stormwater and flood control system as a vital and integrated community asset. (See Chapter 7 for additional stormwater policies and typologies.) #### Policy SC-3.A: Design new and redeveloped projects to reduce their contribution to regional stormwater flows and to improve the quality of the runoff that is generated. #### Policy SC-3.B: Design stormwater infrastructure as an integral and connected part of new development and redeveloping areas and preserve or incorporate naturalistic stream profiles and features where feasible. Strategy SC-3.B-1: Design and construct stormwater improvements to incorporate recreational opportunities and protect infrastructure. Strategy SC-3.B-2: Incorporate complete creek stormwater corridors as part of the City’s overall non-motorized transportation network where feasible and environmentally sustainable. #### Policy SC-3.C: Continue to invest in upgrading and maintaining facilities and infrastructure to manage stormwater. Strategy SC-3.C-1: Update City Code and implement programs that enhance sustainable long-term operations and maintenance of stormwater facilities on property not owned by the City. # SUPPORT SMART AND CONNECTED UTILITIES ## GOAL SC-4 ### Achieve a more environmentally sustainable utilities system for the city. #### Policy SC-4.A: Efficiently use the existing utility system capacity. Strategy SC-4.A-1: Support a combination of density, infill, redevelopment, and design to reduce the rate of addition of pipeline and conductor miles that need to be maintained by Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) or other entities. Strategy SC-4.A-2: Support programs to upgrade older buildings so that they are more efficient, use less energy, water, and gas, and partner with public, non-profit, and private entities to collaborate on home retrofitting programs. Strategy SC-4.A-3: Coordinate with CSU in their plans for terminal water storage, conservation, distribution, and recreation. #### Policy SC-4.B: Support CSU and other investments in smart technologies to reduce energy consumption. Strategy SC-4.B-1: Coordinate with CSU energy conservation initiatives and programs including installation of systems to support demand side management. Strategy SC-4.B-2: Plan and integrate implementation of Smart City technologies and infrastructure in coordination with CSU. # RELATIONSHIP TO KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following Strong Connections keystone indicators are representative of primary measures of the connectivity, efficiency, and diversity of our transportation and utility facilities over the long term. Although there is a strong high-level correlation between our plan for physical development and these indicators, it is recognized that they will often not be directly applicable to individual development plans or to city initiatives. A full list and description of all indicators is in Chapter 8: Adaptable Implementation. **Net City Lane Miles Added Compared with Development and Redevelopment:** The total lane miles of streets maintained by the City are an important barometer of efficient land use patterns. By reducing the amount of new street pavement added to the city compared to the additional development activity the system serves, future street maintenance costs will be reduced because there will be less pavement to maintain per person. Environmental impacts (such as from stormwater) will become more manageable. Positively affected areas of the city should become more livable at a human scale. PlanCOS ideas and priorities that contribute to this indicator include increased density in targeted activity centers and corridors, infill and redevelopment, use of technology to enhance existing transportation capacity, and recommendations for narrow local street profiles. This indicator is intended primarily to be used as a city-wide measure and may also be used to track activity and progress in sub-areas of the city. **Citywide Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Infrastructure:** Improving walkability and throughout the city is a cornerstone goal of PlanCOS. Increasing bicycle infrastructure and safety is also a major objective, as is taking transit to the next level especially in key activity centers and corridors. Walkscore® and its related Bikescore® and Transitscore® are nationally recognized measures for walkability and bicycle and transit access, in communities. These scores can be calculated city-wide, or for areas of focus, and can be compared with other communities. # ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY INITIATIVES These essential questions should be considered as a tool to focus on and promote implementation of our Strong Connections vision for applicable City initiatives (refer to Chapter 1): 1. Support the overall focus of our Strong Connections theme? 2. Add value and improve the typologies and keystone indicators for Strong Connections? 3. Contribute positively to increased mobility throughout the city and particularly related to east/west transportation needs? 4. Specifically contribute in any way to enhance transit? 5. Contribute to enhanced non-motorized transportation systems, connections with them or their use? 6. Result in fiscally sustainable additions or other changes to the transportation network? 7. Have a positive impact on walkability? 8. Promote conservation of water and energy resources? 9. Promote densification and sustainable utility usage? 10. Support a reduction in vehicle miles traveled per capita? ### OTHER MEASURES Through the creation, implementation and update of publicly and privately initiated plans, it may be appropriate to track and measure additional indicators as it relates to the Strong Connections vision and policy direction. Such indicators could include the following: **Traffic Operations:** New projects should achieve a desired level of traffic operations. **Trail Connections:** Completion of missing trail connections **Multi-modal Options:** Number and extent of existing or planned modes available for a specific new development # RELEVANT PLANS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PLANCOS While PlanCOS provides overarching guidance, numerous City plans provide additional detail required for PlanCOS’s implementation. Of particular importance are City transportation and infrastructure plans. These should be relied on to allow for and articulate specific transportation and infrastructure improvements, particularly if these plans are up-to-date and are reflective of the key elements of this theme. In cases where there is a discrepancy between plans, the vision identified within PlanCOS should be considered in the use and application of these plans. Links to relevant plans are found below. See full list of plans: Appendix D ### City Adopted Corridor and Master Plans **Experience Downtown Development Plan and Master Plan (2017)** **Intermodal Transportation Plan (2001 and as amended)** **COS Bikes! Colorado Springs Bike Master Plan (2018)** **Envision Shooks Run Master Plan (2017)** **City of Colorado Springs Park System Master Plan (2014)** **East-West Mobility Study (2002)** **Infill Plan (2016)** **Renew North Nevada Master Plan; Transportation Sub-Plan (2018)** **Academy Boulevard Great Streets Plan (2011)** **Colorado Springs Airport Master Plan (2013)** ### City or Colorado Springs Utilities Adopted Plans and Criteria **City of Colorado Springs Drainage Criteria Manual V1 & V2** **Integrated Water Resource Plan** **Wastewater Integrated Master Plan** **Electric Integrated Resource Plan** **Natural Gas Integrated Resource Plan** ### Partner Entity Plans **El Paso County Major Transportation Corridors Plan (as amended)** **Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Long Range Transportation Plan** <
> PIKE RIDE Bike Share the Love. A program of DOWNTOWN COLORADO SPRINGS Acacia Park Station <
> Get Started with PikeRide Bike Share Purchase a membership card at the kiosk or download the Bcycle app and follow the onscreen instructions. When your ride is over, you can lock your bike at a hub for free or any safe location in the designated service area for $1. See above for service area. Need Assistance? PikeRide.org | 719-235-5862 Powered by thrive KAISER PERMANENTE With Support From COLORADO COLLEGE NORWOOD PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE <
> # RENOWNED CULTURE ## CHAPTER 6 <
> ### PLANCOS VISION Promotes and embraces arts, culture, and education as essential parts of our lives and our identity. This builds on the efforts of General Palmer and many others that envisioned culture as the cornerstone of the community and where creative energy generates new possibilities, interpersonal connections, and unprecedented philanthropy. ### KEY STRATEGIES * Complete, update, and implement public art plans * Consider arts and culture in other city plans * Support centers of education, arts, and culture * Identify and preserve our rich and diverse history # IMPORTANCE OF CULTURE The built environment of Colorado Springs can be an expression of our distinctive culture. For our arts, culture, and education to continue to flourish, we will need places that support their incubation, growth, and celebration throughout the community. Our architecture, public art, parks, wide boulevards, museums, performance and educational institutions, historic areas, and public gathering places all help define the collective sense of place for our growing and diversifying citizenry. The intrinsic value of arts and culture is indisputable, and its economic value is becoming more understood and recognizable. Arts and culture in Colorado Springs directly benefits our tourism industry and attracts companies and residents to the city. We have an established and valued legacy of philanthropy. From its inception, Colorado Springs has enjoyed a unique history of cooperation among the public, private, and nonprofit sectors of our economy. As younger professionals migrate to cities across the nation, they are increasingly considering the arts, education, and culture of a place when choosing where to live. The presence, quality, and quantity of music venues, entertainment centers, lifelong education, and cultural opportunities are increasingly playing a significant role in attracting new businesses and individuals. Our historic legacy is a key foundation of the city’s strong cultural heritage. It reflects our roots in the mining industry, railroad expansion, early health and educational institutions, faith-based organizations, and our deep association with the military. As OLYMPIC CITY USA, we are home to headquarters for the United States Olympic Committee, the Olympic Training Center, over 20 national Olympic governing bodies, numerous national sport organizations, and the United States Olympic Museum. Our association with the Olympic movement is infused in our educational, medical, technology, design, and cultural assets. As a city we understand that our roles in arts, culture, and education should not be overly prescriptive. It is our imperative to provide a climate, places, and opportunities for the continued flourishing of our renowned culture in cooperation with the for-profit and non-profit sectors. # KEY TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS The following trends and assumptions provide a quick overview of some of the high-level issues related to Renowned Culture. They are intended to provide a baseline understanding of emerging trends, preferences, and opportunities that may affect how Colorado Springs will grow and change in the coming years. This foundation sets up PlanCOS to provide tailored policy direction and implementation strategies. More background information can be found in Appendix A: State of the City Snapshots. * Destination Travel is an important and growing sector of our city's economy, which continues to rely on a healthy and robust cultural ecosystem. * The diversity of the population of Colorado Springs will continue to increase, creating an evolving cultural landscape and emerging markets, and needs for new and adapted venues, facilities and programs. * As our city both grows and becomes more mature, the unique role and value of our established historic sites, buildings, and places will become more pronounced, as they evolve to represent a diminishing proportion of our overall city. Additional areas of our city will be eligible for some level of historic consideration, and we will need to determine which of these areas merit historic attention and potential preservation. # RENOWNED CULTURE TYPOLOGIES & FRAMEWORK Our Renowned Culture typologies are intended to help focus on, support, and grow those places and spaces within our community that are most important to the value and expression of our history, arts, culture, education, and tourism. They are also intended to assist us in infusing these values throughout more of our community. Some of these renowned culture typologies (or particular examples of them) have well defined boundaries and desired characteristics. In other cases, both the boundaries and the characteristics may be much more organic and less predictable. Some of our most cherished cultural places combine aspects of more than one typology. For example, Old Colorado City would clearly combine elements of Typologies 3, 4, 5, and possibly 6 below. Renowned Culture typologies are as follows: 1. Defining Institutions 2. Community Assets 3. Historic Districts 4. Creative Districts and Corridors 5. Cultural and Tourist Attractions 6. Pop-Up Culture ### DEFINITION **Destination Travel:** A type of trip or travel that encompasses all visits to Colorado Springs from persons who do not ordinarily reside, work, attend school, or shop and obtain services within the city. This includes tourists, conference goers, event attendees, visiting athletes, business travelers, shoppers from outside the region, and other visitors from outside the city. # Typology 1: Defining Institutions **Defining Institutions Attributes and Recommendations:** * Strengthen Partnerships with Community Organizations * Integrate Complementary Uses, Services and Infrastructure * Serve as Focal Point of Unique Places * Expand Access to Resources and Range of Activities * Virtually and Physically Connect to Region * Attract Investment from Outside the Community **Example Location:** University of Colorado - Colorado Springs Austin Bluffs Pkwy. Provide Educational Programming for Children and Adults Emphasize Access to Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Integrate Conference and Performance Space Concentrate Activities and Resources for Art, Culture and Lifelong Learning Spotlight Internationally Recognized Educational Institutions Encourage Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) <
> *** ### The goal of this cultural typology is to reinforce the city’s cultural cornerstone institutions, to foster the creation of new ones, and to empower additional collaboration and leadership among these institutions, the City, and the remainder of the community. ### EXAMPLES University of Colorado-Colorado Springs, Olympic Training Center, Olympic Museum, Colorado Springs Fine Arts Center, Colorado College/ Cornerstone Arts Center, Pikes Peak Center for Performing Arts, Colorado Springs Pioneers Museum, Broadmoor World Arena and Cheyenne Mountain Zoo, and Ent Center for the Arts. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. Colorado Springs has numerous exceptional cultural and educational institutions that put us on the map regionally, nationally, and internationally. These facilities and their organizations provide foundational cultural centers for our citizenry and offer a wide range of arts, education and cultural activities and resources, from classes to performance space. They often collaborate and partner with other community organizations, strengthening the cultural fabric of the region and attracting world famous talent. # Typology 2: Community Assets **Community Asset Attributes and Recommendations:** * Provide Lifelong Learning Opportunities * Increase Connections with Surrounding Neighborhood * Offer Space for Creative Expression * Serves as Focal Point of Unique Places * Encourage Community Engagement **Example Location:** Library 21c Jamboree Dr. and Chapel Hills Dr. <
> Provide Educational Programming for Children and Adults Serve as a Local Resource for Surrounding Neighborhoods Coordinate with Schools and Community Groups for Shared Facilities and Resources Spotlight Community Performance Space and Art Exhibits Emphasize Access to Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities Open Up Meeting, Study and Maker Spaces Concentrate Activities and Resources for Artistic, Educational, and Cultural Exploration *** ### The goal of this cultural typology is to increase access and foster thriving arts, education, and cultural organizations and resources at all levels and throughout the city. This typology recognizes the remarkable strength of non-profits, community organizations, and public resources associated with our renowned culture. Many of these assets are geographically distributed throughout the city, including libraries, schools, and community centers. They provide access to and create environments for lifelong learning, creative expression, and community engagement. ### EXAMPLES Public libraries, community colleges, K-12 schools, community centers, YMCAs, Colorado Springs Convention and Visitors Center, Silver Key Senior Services, and Tim Gill Center. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. # Typology 3: Historic Districts **Historic District Attributes and Recommendations:** * Conscientious Development and Design Standards * Encourage Adaptive Use and Reinvestment * Integrate Features that Represent Our City's History and Heritage * Integrate Historic Themes into Public Art and Landscaping * Increase Public Awareness of Historic Resources * Follow Historic Preservation Plan **Example Location:** Old North End Historic District N. Nevada Ave. <
> Integrate Compatible Neighborhood Land Uses Cluster National Register Designated and Eligible Historic Properties within District Emphasize Transit, Bicycle and Pedestrian Connectivity Provide Historic Walking Tours and Preservation Education Maintain Character-Defining Medians, Parkways, and Canopy Trees Employ the Historic Preservation Ordinance and Overlay Zoning Implement Wayfinding and Signage of Historic District Leverage Existing Architectural Resources ### The goal of this cultural typology is to plan for, preserve, protect, and allow for ongoing adaptive use and reinvestment in districts with an established historic identity and values. ### EXAMPLES Historic North End, Historic Old Colorado City, Westside historic areas, and North Weber/ Wahsatch historic areas. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. Historic Districts encompass many of the important historical assets and neighborhoods within Colorado Springs that require conscientious development and design standards. These districts are characterized by significant historical features and character that invoke a visual memory of our city's heritage. Identification as part of an historic district typology is not intended to imply that any or all of that area has or should have special zoning designations such as overlay zoning. # Typology 4: Creative Districts and Corridors **Creative District Attributes and Recommendations:** * Provide Studio Space and Exhibition Space * Cluster Art and Creative Organizations, Spaces and Resources * Integrate Public Art into Streetscape * Incorporate Artist Live/Work Spaces * Increase Transportation Access and Connectivity **Example Location:** Cottonwood Center for the Arts Catalyst Campus Colorado Ave. and Wahsatch Ave. <
> ### The goal of this cultural typology is to create supportive environments for creative organizations, artists, and enthusiasts to live, work, and share ideas. Creative Districts and Corridors include areas with clusters of arts organizations, galleries, and public art. These areas bring artists, arts organizations, and artistic activity to the forefront though the integration of studio space, live/workspaces, and creative placemaking projects. While Downtown Colorado Springs is currently the only state-certified Creative District in Colorado Springs, this typology is intended to encompass other areas that bring together the combination of arts, innovation, and the creative class. ### EXAMPLES Colorado Springs Downtown Creative District, Old Colorado City, Cottonwood Center for the Arts, Artspace Live/Work Space, Creative Corridor along Colorado Ave. and Manitou Ave., and future arts and creative districts. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. # Typology 5: Cultural and Tourist Attractions **Cultural and Tourist Attributes and Recommendations:** * Strengthen Branding and Wayfinding * Increase Regional Access and Connectivity * Focus on Pedestrian Experience * Preserve Character-Defining Features **Example Location:** Old Colorado City Colorado Ave. <
> *** ### The goal of this cultural typology is to recognize, protect, and enhance the values associated with special places in our community, including those most important to our tourism industry. ### EXAMPLES Garden of the Gods, America the Beautiful Park, Memorial Park, Downtown, Old Colorado City, and the Broadmoor. Refer to the Framework Map for additional places. Our city’s culture is quintessentially associated with our places and attractions. These places may have other primary roles and functions, but their attributes usually exhibit our city’s unique heritage or have a particular association with the arts and to destinations that draw residents and visitors alike. In some cases, these districts and places encompass iconic landscapes, like Garden of the Gods, but they also include retail and mixed use areas with a focus on culture. # Typology 6: Pop-up Culture **Pop-Up Culture Attributes and Recommendations:** * Integrate Public Art into Streetscape * Design Community Event Spaces * Activate Underused Spaces and Engage Residents * Reinforce Civic Pride and Community Building * Support Temporary Uses and Installations **Example Location:** Mission Trace Shopping Center Hancock Expy. and S. Academy Blvd. <
> Connect Paths with Adjacent Neighborhoods Provide Civic and Community Meeting Space to Engage Area Residents Activate Outdoor and Indoor Spaces with Multicultural Events and Activities Use Parking Lots for Events like Food Trucks or Farmers Markets Collaborate to Install Temporary or Permanent Public Art Installations and Exhibits Provide Spaces for Community-Building Leverage Opportunities for Pop-Up Restaurants or Shops *** ### The goal of this cultural typology is to support community events and exhibitions that celebrate the diversity of Colorado Springs, activate public space, and engage residents of all ages and backgrounds throughout the city. This typology celebrates the temporary or rotating access to culture in the form of events, festivals, tours, and non-permanent public art exhibits. They are found throughout our city, from neighborhood block parties to parades and event with a citywide draw. Pop-up culture occurs in tandem with all other cultural typologies, in neighborhoods and activity centers, in parks and along streets. It can passively engage residents and visitors, with public art displays, or actively engage with guided tours and activities. These events reinforce civic pride, community engagement, and community building. > ### EXAMPLES > Art walks; street breakfasts; Porchfests; farmers markets; food trucks; Art on the Streets; outdoor concerts in parks; and community gathering areas. # CULTURAL FRAMEWORK MAP The Cultural Framework Map provides a graphic framework for the vision of Renowned Culture. This map is intended to be used as one means of reinforcing the city’s wide variety of cultural, educational, historic, and artistic assets and resources. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic. It is not intended to strictly define place boundaries. For instance, the community asset locations provide representative examples. # PlanCOS ## LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Renowned Culture Framework <
> ### Predominant Typology * Defining Institutions * Historic Districts * Creative Districts and Corridors * Cultural and Tourist Attractions * Community Assets * Pop-Up Culture * City Boundary * Interstate 25 * Major Roads Note: Potential or future areas of Cultural Typologies are indicated with a dashed line. (blank page) # GOALS AND POLICIES ## HONOR OUR HISTORY ### GOAL RC-1 #### Preserve the best of our history. **Policy RC-1.A:** Continue to preserve and advance Colorado Springs’ historic and cultural resources and integrate themes and features into design and development that represent Colorado Springs’ history and heritage. **Strategy RC-1.A-1:** Consistent with priorities and direction from the Historic Preservation Plan, work with neighborhoods and other organizations to designate limited additional historic districts and apply the appropriate adaptation and preservation standards. **Strategy RC-1.A-2:** Integrate historical themes into project design, public art, and landscaping areas of the city with a historic legacy. **Strategy RC-1.A-3:** Continue to research, inventory, register, and secure resources to protect Colorado Springs’ highest priority historic resources. **Strategy RC-1.A-4:** Promote education and programs that increase public awareness of the city’s historic resources. ### DEFINITIONS **Creative Placemaking:** Incorporating artistic or creative solutions as part of urban design and development. **Cultural Focal Points:** Any place in the community with one or more special features of art, performance, or distinctive architecture that are part of the public realm. These features can include but are not limited to publicly accessible art, fountains, band shells, and amphitheaters. <
> # GROW AND CELEBRATE OUR CULTURE ## GOAL RC-2 ### Add to, enhance, and promote Colorado Springs’ institutions, attractions, and community assets integral to our local culture and civic pride. #### DEFINITIONS **Cultural Hub:** A Community focal point for arts, cultural, and educational uses and activities. **Creative Class:** For the purposes this Plan, this term is broadly defined as a socioeconomic class that encompasses a wide range of knowledge-based occupations and industries with a focus on innovation, such as education, design, computer programming, engineering, science, the arts, healthcare, and business. #### Policy RC-2.A: Support existing and new Defining Institutions (Typology 1) for arts and culture. **Strategy RC-2.A-1:** Allow for the addition of complimentary uses, services, and infrastructure to support existing Defining Institutions and tourism destinations. **Strategy RC-2.A-2:** Support the creation and location of new Defining Institutions and Community Assets (Typology 2) as part of Unique Places. #### Policy RC-2.B: Promote existing and new arts and cultural hubs, venues, and focal points as elements of activity centers throughout the city. **Strategy RC-2.B-1:** Support the approval of development and public facility plans that include public art and creative and performance space as part of activity centers. #### Policy RC-2.C: Increase accessibility and awareness about the city’s unique attractions, activities, and resources, across all cultural typologies. **Strategy RC-2.C-1:** Partner with arts and tourism organizations, our Defining Institutions (Typology 1), Community Assets (Typology 2), and Cultural and Tourist Attractions (Typology 5) to market local arts and cultural resources. **Strategy RC-2.C-2:** Use new technologies and communication tools to enhance notification, awareness of, and wayfinding for historic, cultural, and educational events and resources. # CREATE CROSS-CULTURAL CONNECTIONS ## GOAL RC-3 ### Ensure the accessibility and diversity of arts and culture opportunities throughout the city. #### Policy RC-3.A: Integrate arts, culture, and education as part of the planning process. * **Strategy RC-3.A-1:** Include arts, cultural, education, and historic elements in publicly initiated small area and topical master plans. * **Strategy RC-3.A-2:** Encourage incorporation of arts, culture, and educational elements as part of privately initiated land use master plans through flexibility in code requirements. #### Policy RC-3.B: Reinforce Downtown as an historic, cultural, and entertainment center of the community and the region. * **Strategy RC-3.B-1:** Continue to work with property owners and civic organizations to implement the Experience Downtown Master Plan to market arts and festivals and incorporate creative placemaking into new developments and redevelopments. * **Strategy RC-3.B-2:** Encourage the establishment of more and improved arts, education, and cultural opportunities in and near Downtown. * **Strategy RC-3.B-3:** Encourage temporary or short-term uses in Downtown to activate vacant storefronts or underutilized parking lots. This can include pop-up restaurants, pop-up retail, and food trucks. #### Policy RC-3.C: Encourage the creation and evolution of Creative Districts and Corridors (Typology 4) throughout the city through support and attraction of additional museums, performance venues, and galleries for the fine and performance arts. * **Strategy RC-3.C-1:** Complete the first phase of a public arts plan focusing on city-owned venues and assets and expand to a more encompassing plan to include other accessible arts and culture. * **Strategy RC-3.C-2:** Enable the incorporation of arts and cultural elements as part of development and redevelopment in zoning and related codes. * **Strategy RC-3.C-3:** Consider the incorporation of public art and other cultural features when reviewing and approving design guidelines and form based zoning plans. * **Strategy RC-3.C-4:** In coordination with the arts and culture community, establish new Creative Districts and Corridors, such as an East Platte Arts District and Colorado Avenue Creative Corridor. * **Strategy RC-3.C-5:** Complete access, parking, and shuttle feasibility studies within targeted Creative Districts and Corridors, and implement agreed-upon solutions. * **Strategy RC-3.C-6:** Continue to make reinvesting in the City Auditorium a priority; to include securing resources for major renovation and incorporation of ongoing permanent uses that complement its use as a venue for events. * **Strategy RC-3.C-7:** Support regional collaboration needed to promote such corridors, which serve local residents, artists, and visitors. <
> ### Policy RC-3.D: Integrate the arts into the natural landscape with outdoor concert venues and public art in parks and along greenways to support Pop-Up Culture (Typology 6). **Strategy RC-3.D-1:** Expand the Art in the Streets program and partner with local arts organizations to install additional public art features within public properties, including parks, greenways, and medians. **Strategy RC-3.D-2:** Build one or more outdoor amphitheaters in locations such as parks and redeveloping or newly developing areas of the city. **Strategy RC-3.D-3:** Support larger community gathering spaces with services and features including dining, restrooms, and universally accessible design. ### Policy RC-3.E: Encourage the adaptability of public rights-of-way and public gathering space to accommodate a wide variety of events and exhibits. **Strategy RC-3.E-1:** Through partnerships with interested neighborhood and homeowner associations and community groups, install community-defining public art. **Strategy RC-3.E-2:** Activate redevelopment areas such as the North Nevada, South Nevada, and Academy Blvd. corridors with temporary arts and cultural events. **Strategy RC-3.E-3:** Designate festival streets within the Unique Places typologies around the city that can be temporarily closed or otherwise repurposed for special events. (Also see Policy UP-1.B in Chapter 3: Unique Places) ### Policy RC-3.F: Support creative placemaking and environments for artistic expression within Creative Districts and Corridors. **Strategy RC-3.F-1:** Continue partnerships with local and state organizations like ArtSpace to develop attainable housing and studio space for local artists, similar to the Space to Create Colorado initiative. **Strategy RC-3.F-2:** Expand allowable artistic expression in Unique Places typologies throughout the city, such as painted murals on the side of the buildings. **Strategy RC-3.F-3:** Repurpose and revitalize blighted areas and infrastructure as places with creative public spaces. **Strategy RC-3.F-4:** Pursue the potential for incorporation of arts and cultural elements as part of approved urban renewal area plans. ### Policy RC-3.G: Empower neighborhoods to add music, art, and culture to their communities and community events. **Strategy RC-3.G-1:** Encourage neighborhood-specific arts, culture, and educational opportunities in Neighborhood Plans. # GOAL RC-4 ## Support and promote Colorado Springs as a welcoming place for locally produced food, beverages, creative, and healthy cuisine. ### Policy RC-4.A: Recognize and incentivize the production and procurement of local and regional food as fundamental to our city's identity as a Healthy Eating & Active Living (HEAL) city. **Strategy RC-4.A-1:** Create a city-run recognition program that highlights restaurants, stores, and institutions that utilize and sell local and regional food products. **Strategy RC-4.A-2:** Adopt procurement rules that encourage the use of local and regional food vendors for city contract. **Strategy RC-4.A-3:** Support the cottage foods industries allowing residents to sell food, eggs, jams, etc. out of their home. ### Policy RC-4.B: Encourage culinary events, collectives, and other food-related Pop-Up Culture that celebrate local chefs and food artisans. **Strategy RC-4.B-1:** Continue to provide zoning and other Code regulations supportive of both temporary and more permanent locations for food trucks, and farmers markets throughout the city. **Strategy RC-4.B-2:** Actively encourage the development and expansion of a public/ artisan market in the vicinity of Downtown and the eventual location of these facilities in other activity centers. ### Policy RC-4.C: Support options for healthy and locally produced food. **Strategy RC-4.C-1:** Support zoning that increases access to local food and supports urban agriculture. **Strategy RC-4.C-2:** Identify and develop city-owned land for community gardens, experimental/educational gardens, and urban agriculture. **Strategy RC-4.C-3:** Establish community-supported fruit trees, vegetable gardens, and community gardens with spaces for public gathering in parks, other City-owned properties, and available locations within public rights-of-way. **Strategy RC-4.C-4:** Support educational programs for residents and neighborhoods about gardening and other forms of local food production. **Strategy RC-4.C-5:** Develop a City master plan that establishes Colorado Springs as the hub of the region’s food shed, which directly ties local food production, distribution, allocation, and consumption to all areas of the city and forms a future policy framework to address local food opportunities and access. ### APPLICATION **Mid Shooks Run Community Garden:** a community garden with 40 raised beds built in partnership with the City, Pikes Peak Urban Gardens, and the Mid Shooks Run Neighborhood. # CELEBRATE OUR PARTNERSHIPS ## GOAL RC-5 ### Celebrate the strength of and collaboration with philanthropic foundations, local nonprofits, and faith-based groups. ### Policy RC-5.A: Build on the momentum of local organizations to connect residents with community-based resources and activities. **Strategy RC-5.A-1:** Identify opportunities to partner with existing facilities, particularly schools, churches, nonprofits, and shopping malls to make their facilities available for civic and cultural purposes. **Strategy RC-5.A-2:** Collaborate with organizations that promote and coordinate cultural events in the city. **Strategy RC-5.A-3:** Support plans for facilities that proactively and holistically address the mental health needs of our community, and that are reasonably and appropriately integrated with surrounding land uses. **Strategy RC-5.A-4:** Engage with and support the full diversity and underrepresented populations of our community in the planning for city-related arts and culture facilities and events. ### Policy RC-5.B: Maintain and financially support the sustainability of arts and cultural programming, facilities and initiatives of our Community Assets (Typology 2). **Strategy RC-5.B-1:** Explore available and dedicated funding sources for the arts associated with municipal projects. **Strategy RC-5.B-2:** Coordinate with and support grant funding, nonprofit arts groups, and private contributions to sustain public arts. **Strategy RC-5.B-3:** Partner with special districts, such as Business Improvement Districts, General Improvement Districts, and Local Improvement Districts, to integrate and fund public art programs and events. # STRENGTHEN OUR EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES ## GOAL RC-6 ### Strengthen and diversify the range of educational and lifelong learning opportunities and resources in Colorado Springs. #### Policy RC-6.A: Reinforce the city’s Defining Institutions and Community Assets as hubs of educational activity. **Strategy RC-6.A-1:** Partner with the city’s institutions of higher learning on their plans for growth, adaptation, and reinvestment. **Strategy RC-6.A-2:** Provide or allow for a full range of complementary uses to support Defining Institutions, including housing options, retail, lodging, allied businesses, and access to transit. #### Policy RC-6.B: Support a network of public resources, schools, community centers and other Community Assets that address the city’s educational and training needs and also function as places for community activity. **Strategy RC-6.B-1:** Review and approve plans for new or redeveloped educational facilities and other Community Assets (Typology 2) to enhance integration within the surrounding neighborhood with an emphasis on access connectivity. **Strategy RC-6.B-2:** Support the adaptive reuse of existing educational facilities. **Strategy RC-6.B-3:** Modify zoning and other requirements to encourage the integration of educational uses in older traditional retail areas. **Strategy RC-6.B-4:** Actively encourage arrangements between educational institutions, local arts agencies, cultural websites, online community calendars, and the City and other properties for shared use of assets such as parks, athletic facilities, and parking. <
> # RELATIONSHIP TO KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following Renowned Culture keystone indicators are representative of primary measures of the strength of our arts, cultural, and educational resources over the long term. Although there is a strong high-level correlation between our plan for physical development and these indicators, it is recognized that they will often not be directly applicable to individual development plans or to city initiatives. When considered together, these renowned culture indicators provide a measure of the ongoing activity that is indicative of a rich culture throughout the city. A full list and description of all indicators is in Chapter 8: Adaptable Implementation. **Creative Vitality Index:** An annual measure for creative activity. It couples creative occupation, industry sales, and nonprofits data into a nationally comparable index by population. **Number of Creative Jobs:** Part of the Creative Vitality Suite that annually measures the number of jobs within creative job classifications. **Creative Industry Earnings:** Part of the Creative Vitality Suite that annually measures the earnings of creative industries. # ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY INITIATIVES These essential questions should be considered as a tool to focus on and promote implementation of our Renowned Culture vision for applicable City initiatives (refer to Chapter 1): 1. Support the overall focus on our Renowned Culture theme? 2. Support or be consistent with the role of Downtown as a cultural heart of the region? 3. Add value or help establish a cultural identity within a neighborhood (Chapter 2) or unique place (Chapter 3)? 4. Preserve or incorporate the historic assets of the city or promote this legacy? 5. Maintain consistency with and promote our brand as Olympic City USA? 6. Provide cultural services, opportunities, or access to underserved populations or neighborhoods? 7. Incorporate public art in association with this action or decision? 8. Support the enhancement of centers of lifelong learning and innovation in the city? <
> # RELEVANT PLANS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PLANCOS While PlanCOS provides our overarching vision and guidance for renowned culture, other city plans should be relied on for the necessary detail required for implementation. The City’s pending public art plan and related future efforts will articulate the vision and goals for this key aspect of arts and culture. Because of the intersection of outdoor space with civic engagement, the City’s Parks, Recreation, Trails, and Open Space Master Plan will all play an important role. Similarly, because Downtown is identified as the cultural heart of the region, the Experience Downtown Master Plan will be an essential guiding element. The pending 2018 Historic Preservation Plan should be used, along with the area-specific plans it references, to more specifically articulate our vision for the role of history and historic places in our physical development culture. Public and privately initiated master plans may also provide important direction for renowned culture, depending on their content and areas of focus. Going forward, the expectation is that publicly initiated master plans, such as corridor and small area plans, should address this Renowned Culture theme as appropriate and pertinent. Privately initiated master plans are encouraged to address this theme within the context of their anticipated physical development. As existing plans are updated and new plans created, these plans should support the themes of PlanCOS. In cases of discrepancy between more detailed elements of the Comprehensive Plan, alignment with the vision of PlanCOS should be considered in the use and application of these plans. Links to particularly relevant plans are found below. Privately initiated master plans should also be considered to further implementation. ### City Adopted Plans **Public Arts Master Plan (pending)** **City of Colorado Springs Park System Master Plan** **Corridor plans** **Historic Preservation Plan (pending)** **Urban Renewal Plans** **Privately Initiated Land Use Master Plans** ### Partner Entity Plans **Experience Downtown Master Plan** **College and University plans** **School District Plans** **Cultural Plan for the Pikes Peak Region (as amended)** See full list of plans: Appendix D ### OTHER MEASURES Through the creation, implementation, and update of publicly and privately initiated plans, it may be appropriate to track and measure additional indicators as it relates to the Renowned Culture vision and policy direction. Such indicators could include the following: * Percent of population within walking distance of a grocery store (10-minute walk or ¼ mile distance) <
> # MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES # CHAPTER 7 <
> PHOTO CREDIT: Miriam McGillvray ### PLANCOS VISION Values our natural and man-made outdoor spaces and celebrates our location at the base of America’s Mountain by designing a city oriented around our iconic landmarks. We ensure our community can engage with and enjoy these places through an integrated system of parks, streetscapes, and natural areas. ### KEY STRATEGIES * Examine all options to identify and increase sustainable funding * Public-Private Partnerships * Infrastructure amenities to facilitate events and engagement * Education about environmental stewardship and recreation * Coordinated stormwater, parks, transportation, and recreation projects * Upgraded maintenance and operations standards * Updated development requirements * Increased the quality and resilience of built landscapes * Update Commercial Landscape Code * Consider a residential landscape code # IMPORTANCE OF LANDSCAPES Our citizens and City government place a high priority on the natural environment—protecting natural features, minimizing impacts of environmental hazards, and conserving natural resources. Both the sustainability and enjoyment of our natural environment depend on healthy and maintained green infrastructure connections integrated with parks, streetscapes, and open spaces. Our city’s quality of life is enhanced through the preservation of open space and greenways and the improvement of parks, streetscapes, and other built landscapes. These designated areas, including riparian areas, foothills, bluffs and mesas, and mature vegetation, provide a regional asset on which people and wildlife depend. Appropriately managed healthy vegetation in both natural areas and the built environment help mitigate natural hazards and improves water quality. Open spaces, parks, streetscapes, and rights-of-way, and greenways provide wildlife habitat, help shape growth, maintain scenic vistas, and provide non-motorized transportation and recreational opportunities for residents and visitors. In certain areas, they also accommodate infrastructure corridors. This chapter establishes policies to preserve, protect, and integrate the significant features of our city’s natural environment with the built environment through open space conservation and development standards and guidelines for all of our outdoor spaces. Strategies will help minimize risks posed by environmental hazards and protect and conserve our natural and economic resources. ## KEY TRENDS AND ASSUMPTIONS The following trends and assumptions provide a quick overview of some of the high-level issues related to Majestic Landscapes. They are intended to provide a baseline understanding of emerging trends, preferences, and opportunities that may affect how Colorado Springs will grow and change in the coming years. This foundation sets up PlanCOS to provide tailored policy direction and implementation strategies. More background information can be found in Appendix A: State of the City Snapshots. * Colorado Springs is known as a top city for outdoor recreation with access to over 17,000 acres of parks and open space. * Colorado Springs residents are “ultra-users” of park and open space facilities and the per-capita use rates for these facilities are twice those of similar communities. * Although the demand for particular facilities and activities within our green infrastructure system is expected to fluctuate in response to changes in demographics and recreational behavior, overall demand is projected to increase in response to our growing population. * Despite the relative popularity of our parks and open spaces, the City of Colorado Springs has a limited parks and recreation budget, compared with other cities. Continued under-funding of these critical assets diminishes the health, resilience, beauty, and value of our built environment which has increasingly negative impacts on property values, tax revenues, quality of life, and water quality. * There are numerous benefits of a park, streetscapes, and open space network that are both directly and indirectly quantifiable. Proximity to parks increases property values and subsequently property tax; residents of Colorado Springs have saved millions of dollars in medical care costs annually by using the parks and recreation system amenities for exercise; time spent in parks and open spaces can help individuals fight against mental health issues like depression, anxiety, and stress; and the natural cleansing of air and stormwater by landscapes and vegetation reduces stormwater and air quality mitigation costs. * Not only do parks, streetscapes, and open spaces play a major role in the city’s and the state’s tourism economy, but access to and availability of parks and recreational opportunities has become one of the primary reasons an individual chooses to live or locate their business in Colorado Springs. Prospective residents and employers are attracted to locations that offer these amenities and value their care. * Street trees provide shade, make streets more walkable and bikable, and lower the average electricity and water bills of surrounding households; they lower the average driving speed, making roadways safer for pedestrians and drivers; they improve the health of nearby residents, lower crime rates, and drastically increase property values in an area. * Diversification of the urban forest is critically important to mitigate the impacts of insect infestations, drought, and other sources of tree decline. Declining tree health in parks, streetscapes, and other public rights-of-way will further cost the City of Colorado Springs and its citizens as these are the responsibility of the City to maintain. This is also the case with the invasion of noxious weed and tree species in open spaces and rights-of-way. * Many man-made landscapes in Colorado Springs are currently in decline. The City of Colorado Springs has an important role to play in demonstrating the value and importance of the built landscape as this supports and enhances the stewardship and appreciation of our majestic natural landscapes. ### DEFINITION **Destination Travel:** A type of trip or travel that encompasses all visits to Colorado Springs from persons who do not ordinarily reside, work, attend school, or shop and obtain services within the city. This includes tourists, conference goers, event attendees, visiting athletes, business travelers, shoppers from outside the region, and other visitors from outside the city. ### COMMON DESIRED ELEMENTS a. A design that is functional, sustainable, and provides for public safety, flood hazard mitigation, and maintenance of all associated facilities; b. Community focal points for open space and recreation; c. A design and pattern that allows water to slow down, spread out, and soak in to reduce erosion potential; d. Amenities for park and recreation users; e. Attention to Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)-accessibility and Universal Design; f. Preservation of and creation of additional important native habitat and natural systems within and surrounding the city; g. A culture of environmental stewardship; and h. Flexibility and adaptability in our park and trail system design as the way we use our parks changes. # LANDSCAPE TYPOLOGIES & FRAMEWORK Our Majestic Landscape typologies are intended to highlight the important and varied natural landscapes within our city. They span a whole range of sizes—from mini parks to federal and state lands—and can encompass a range of recreational activities—from group sports to hiking or picnicking. Additionally, our city’s green infrastructure provides an essential system of connections, waterways, and corridors that serve a variety of purposes. The city is connected by creeks, streams, ditches and other water channels that carry surface water flows as well as increased stormwater run-off. Creek corridors and greenways offer a green network that connects our city from north-to-south and from east-to-west. Creeks connect us with off-street trails, provide living classrooms, and provide relaxing spaces. Majestic Landscape typologies are as follows: 1. Neighborhood Greenspaces 2. Sports and Active Recreation 3. Natural Resources and Regional Recreation 4. Community Education Landscapes 5. Greenways a. Trails and Connectors b. Complete Urban Creeks c. Complete Greenways # Typology 1: Neighborhood Greenspaces **Neighborhood Greenspaces Recommendations:** * Integrate into Surrounding Neighborhood * Allow for Variable Area Size and Programs * Preferably Connect with Linear Greenspace * Connect to Sidewalk, Trail and Bike Network * Provide Convenient On- or Off-Street Parking * Offer Active and Passive Recreation * Provide for Sustainable Maintenance **Example Location:** Sagebrush Park Crestline Dr. south of Airport Rd. <
> **The goal of this landscape typology is to strengthen partnerships and resources available to provide smaller and more localized park and recreation facilities within neighborhoods.** This typology includes neighborhood parks, mini parks, pocket parks, medians, parkways, rights-of-way, trails, linear parks, playgrounds, and other facilities with various sizes and programs. In some areas of the city, these can include shared facilities, or facilities owned and managed by non-city entities such as school districts, metropolitan districts, or homeowners associations, as long as they are reasonably open or available to the public. These areas should be conveniently located to serve their immediate neighborhoods and contribute to the fabric of these local communities. Independent of size, they should be activated with recreation and leisure opportunities, and should serve as a common area for neighbors of all ages to gather, socialize, and play. Neighborhood Greenspaces should be accessible within walking distance and connected to the neighborhood by pedestrian trails and sidewalks. With the City requiring major annexors and new developments to construct and maintain their dedicated neighborhood park land, special districts including metropolitan districts play a significant role in the ownership and maintenance of these areas. ### EXAMPLES Ford Frick, Mountain Shadows, Nancy Lewis, Thorndale, Sagebrush, and Village Green Parks. # Typology 2: Sports and Active Recreation **Sports and Active Recreation Recommendations:** * Provide Community-Wide Recreation Activities * Strengthen Connections with Major Streets and Regional Trail System * Renovate and Upgrade Facilities to Align with Community Needs * Accommodate both Passive and Active Recreational Activities * Incorporate Landmark Facilities and Public Art **Example Location:** Memorial Park Pikes Peak Ave. and S. Union Blvd. <
> **The goal of this landscape typology is to provide opportunities and flexible facilities that accommodate a range of active and passive recreation activities.** ### EXAMPLES Memorial Park, Coleman Park, Rampart Park, Sky View Sports Complex, El Pomar Youth Sports Complex, Monument Valley Park, Quail Lake Park, Valley Hi Golf Course, Patty Jewett Golf Course, and Pine Creek Golf Course. This typology includes community parks, sports complexes, golf courses, and other active recreation facilities. These areas serve as focal points for community-wide recreation activities. The larger areas that these facilities cover offer diverse opportunities for programmed sports and other community activities such as gardens and picnic areas. Sports and Active Recreation areas should preferably have good access from major streets and direct access to the regional trail system. Community parks provide active recreational facilities such as athletic fields, community recreation buildings, and/or other special features that cannot be easily accommodated in neighborhood parks. In addition to furnishing facilities for programmed activities, Sports and Active Recreation areas may also provide large areas for open play, walking, and other non-programmed uses. # Typology 3: Natural Resources and Regional Recreation **Natural Resources and Regional Recreation Recommendations:** * Protect Regional Environmental Resources and Important Habitats * Reinforce Environmental Stewardship through Provision of User Infrastructure and Facilities * Preserve Important Ecological, Historic, Cultural and Archaeological Features in Their Natural State * Limit Development Encroachment that Threatens the Integrity of the Natural Landscape * Designate Specific Areas for Public Access and Recreation **Example Location:** Garden of the Gods Juniper Way Loop <
> Support Educational and Visitor Center Resources Include Natural Buffers Between Development and Key Landscapes Preserve Ecosystems and Support Biodiversity Other Modes of Transportation Design and Maintain Official Trails to Keep Other Areas Pristine Integrate Interpretive Signs and User Wayfinding Limit Imposing Infrastructure to Highlight Unique Natural Features *** ### The goal of this landscape typology is to balance tourism, recreation use, and environmental protection of important natural resource areas that embody the majestic scenery of Colorado Springs. This typology includes regional parks and open space areas, including many federal, state, and county parks and open space areas, along with City-managed open space resources. These are large protected areas with regionally significant natural resources, often functioning as major natural area or regional landmarks. This typology focuses on nature-oriented, passive outdoor recreation, with an emphasis on appropriate balance between resource protection and public use. Additionally, open space areas set aside land to retain ecological, historic, cultural, archeological, and aesthetic features in their natural state. Many of these areas attract a significant number of tourists as well as local users. The environmental benefits include providing wildlife habitat, preserving fragile ecosystems, supporting biodiversity, and protecting groundwater and surfacewater quality. These natural areas create a buffer around urban areas, generally considered the Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI), and are particularly at risk to natural hazards. This system of open spaces and natural areas is essential to the PlanCOS vision of protecting its scenic and natural landscapes. ### EXAMPLES Garden of the Gods, Palmer Park, North Cheyenne Cañon Park, Red Rock Canyon, Stratton Open Space, Corral Bluffs Open Space, Jimmy Camp Creek Park, and Austin Bluffs Open Space. # Typology 4: Community Education Landscapes **Community Education Landscapes Recommendations:** * Highlight Important Areas of Historical and Cultural Significance * Support the Special Uses and Community Amenities * Encourage Community Events and Gathering Opportunities * Maintain Public Educational and Community Facilities **Example Location:** Acacia Park Bijou St. and Tejon St. <
> ### The goal of this landscape typology is to reinforce the city’s culture and history within public educational and community facilities. #### EXAMPLES Acacia Square, Alamo Square, Bancroft Park, City Hall Park, Antlers Park, Starsmore Visitor and Nature Center, Rock Ledge Ranch, Evergreen, and Fairview Cemeteries. This typology includes urban plazas, areas that have special historical community significance, visitor and environmental centers, and cemeteries. Many of these facilities are located in the Downtown core of Colorado Springs. These facilities serve a particular community need, such as a horticultural center, environmental education center, working farm, performance area, urban plaza, civic park, or burial ground. ## Typology 5: Greenways This typology includes natural, landscaped, and stream corridors that connect parks and natural areas. Often these links include off-street trails and connectors, but some may only serve as open space and wildlife links. The city encompasses several hundred miles of streams and drainageways. Many streams are hidden from view and may or may not be used by the public. Since many of these streams are unlikely to change in their use or in their need for more multi-purpose accommodations, PlanCOS primarily focuses on effecting change along streams with a large enough corridor for recreational or improvements. Furthermore, due to their locations, conditions, and current use, some streams are more difficult to categorize, and may change from one typology category to another as they travel through the city. These typologies emphasize balancing linear recreation with natural resource conservation, enhancement of wetland and riparian areas, and water quality improvements. *** **Trails and Connectors Recommendations:** * Integrate and Connect with Surrounding Neighborhoods * Link Parks and Open Space Areas Throughout the City * Provide Mix of Wide Paved Multiuse Paths and Natural Soft Surface Paths * Align with Natural Drainageways, Riparian Areas and Wetlands * Connect with Local Sidewalk Network * Incorporate Areas to Rest and Gather * Enhance Wayfinding **Example Location:** Homestead Trail Inspiration Dr. <
> Capitalize on Natural Drainageways and Riparian Areas Link Natural Areas with Parks Plan and Design for a Variety of Non-Motorized Modes Address ADA Access Consistent with Context Complete Gaps in Tier 1 and 2 Trail Routes Integrate Signage and Wayfinding Features for Users Support Secondary Unpaved Trail Routes Connect Conveniently to Surrounding Residential Areas Maintain Wide Paved Paths for Multiple User Groups ### a. Trails and Connectors **The goal of this typology is to connect parks, open space, and natural areas through a network of off-street and multiuse trails.** By providing a dedicated trail for non-motorized mobility, residents will feel more comfortable walking, picnicking, exploring nature, or just enjoying the outdoors. ### EXAMPLES Rock Island Trail, Homestead Trail, Stetson Trail, Manitou Springs Trail, Foothills Trail, Mesa Springs Greenway, Midland Trail, Woodmen Trail, and Briargate Trail. **Complete Urban Creeks Recommendations:** * Increase Public Access and Recreation With Wide Paved Paths * Align New Off-Street Paths Along Creeks and Stormwater Areas * Use Existing Natural Areas for Linear Recreation Opportunities * Connect Creeks to Surrounding Uses and Neighborhoods * Integrate Stormwater and Flood Mitigation Best Practices * Provide Educational and Wayfinding Signage * Incorporate Public Art along Trails **Example Location:** Shooks Run Fountain Blvd. and Corona St. Address Stormwater Flood Protection and Utilities Needs Implement Stormwater and Flood Best Practices Strengthen Connections between Creek and Neighborhoods Restore Natural Creekbeds and Habitat Incorporate History and Culture Plan and Design for Bikes and Pedestrians Provide Convenient Rest and Picnicking Areas Extend Park Experience with Connected Trails Enhance Trail Connections and Safety with Signed Crosswalks and Underpasses <
> ## b. Complete Urban Creeks **The goal of this typology is to retrofit and reinvent streams to provide multi-purpose infrastructure and non-motorized trails in more established areas of the city, and to provide walking and biking connectivity between neighborhoods, Downtown, and other significant areas.** ### EXAMPLES Fountain Creek, Monument Creek, Shooks Run, Cheyenne Creek, Camp Creek, Spring Creek, Creek Walk Trail (City of Manitou Springs), Douglas Creek, and Lower Sand Creek. Complete Urban Creeks incorporate non-motorized trails with streams and stormwater facilities and access to natural areas. Streams in and just outside the long-established urban core have typically been constricted by development as the city grew historically. These corridors have significant potential for enhancements and redevelopment as a community, educational, transportation, or recreational focal point while integrating stormwater and flood mitigation best practices. New development and/or redevelopment should incorporate these streams as focal points with public access and trails along these corridors. This enables additional transportation options and connections by foot and bicycle. These corridors can connect us to the places where we live, work, and play. This typology provides an opportunity to make our creeks valued community places that enhance our beautiful city and provide new and different experiences along our creeks. Urban Creeks provide opportunities to view our creeks as one of our most unique and incredible assets worth maintaining for future generations. **Complete Greenways Recommendations:** * Apply Best Practices for Healthy Stream Corridors * Balance Multiple Uses Along Corridor: Recreation, Infrastructure, and Wildlife Habitat * Leverage Drainageway Opportunities for Other Improvements and Infrastructure * Connect Regional Parks and Open Space Areas * Enhance Access from Surrounding Neighborhoods and Land Uses * Consider Natural Greenway Corridors in Design of New Development **Example Location:** Upper Sand Creek Stetson Hills Blvd. <
> Provide Convenient Connections to Surrounding Neighborhoods Link and Align with Natural Open Space Areas and Parks Implement Stormwater Design and Best Practices Use Wide Open Space and Complete Greenways as a Natural Delineator Between Neighborhoods Connect Neighborhood Schools and Destinations with Safer Off-Street Paths ### c. Complete Greenways **The goal of this typology is to ensure the application of multi-purpose facilities along these streams in developed and developing areas of the city in order to enhance their livability, adaptability, and further connectivity as these neighborhoods mature. This includes applying best practices that result in healthy stream corridors that integrate stormwater, infrastructure, recreation opportunities, wildlife habitat, and trail connections.** Streams in this area are typically in more residential areas with larger open spaces along the stream corridor due to the City's flood mitigation and streamside overlay regulations. These stream corridors often incorporate trails in conjunction with maintenance access for utilities and stormwater infrastructure. These drainage corridors typically provide ample opportunity for other improvements along the stream in terms of recreation and infrastructure. Future development around streams denotes those areas that have yet to be developed in the city, most notably within Banning Lewis Ranch. These areas provide an opportunity to thoughtfully plan stormwater, recreation, and utility infrastructure along stream corridors that reflect the Majestic Landscapes vision and goals. ### EXAMPLES Upper Sand Creek, Upper Cottonwood Creek, Kettle Creek, Pine Creek, Jimmy Camp Creek, and the Upper East Fork of Sand Creek. # MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES FRAMEWORK The Majestic Landscapes Framework Map provides a graphic framework of the vision for PlanCOS. This map is intended to be used as one means of furthering the City’s focus on investing in our parks and open space system as well as enhancing the use of the stream and stormwater network. This map is expected to be a living and evolving graphic. It is not intended to strictly define park facilities or all stream types. # PlanCOS ## LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # Majestic Landscapes Framework <
> ### Predominant Typology | | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Neighborhood Greenspace | — Trails and Connections | Regional Parks and Open Space | | | Sports and Active Recreation | Major Trail Corridors | City Boundary | | | Natural Resources and Regional Recreation | — Complete Urban Creeks | Interstate 25 | | | Community Education Landscapes | — Complete Greenways | — Major Roads | | page intentionally left blank # GOALS AND POLICIES ## PROVIDE PARKS, TREES, AND TRAILS FOR THE PEOPLE ### GOAL ML-1 **Provide for accessible, safe, engaging, and sustainable parks and open space systems and facilities for all city residents and visitors.** **Policy ML-1.A:** Ensure adequate and sustainable funding for parks, recreation, urban forest, and open space assets. **Strategy ML-1.A-1:** Establish coordinated, dedicated, permanent, and sustainable sources to adequately fund parks, forestry, trails, streetscape, and open space property acquisition, development, and ongoing maintenance. **Strategy ML-1.A-2:** Specifically consider an increase of the TOPS (Trails Open Space and Parks) sales tax from the current 0.10 percent. **Strategy ML-1.A-3:** Use partnerships, grants, private donations, and businesses to leverage dedicated revenue sources and fund strategic parks, facility adoption programs, streetscape, open space, recreation, and trails priority projects. **Strategy ML-1.A-4:** Evaluate and implement additional opportunities for fee-based and other options to generate revenue from City parks and recreation facilities while retaining equitable access. **Policy ML-1.B:** Optimize sustainable on and off-street access to Pike National Forest and other Natural Resources and Regional Recreation areas (Typology 3) for all residents and visitors. **Strategy ML-1.B-1:** Coordinate physical planning with managers of regional parks and open space in and around Colorado Springs, such as El Paso County, Colorado State Parks, the U.S. Forest Service, and military installations. **Strategy ML-1.B-2:** Support the completion of regional and interjurisdictional trail systems, such as Ring the Peak. **Strategy ML-1.B-3:** Participate in changes to the vision and current plans for the Pike National Forest that leads to improved public access. **Strategy ML-1.B-4:** Establish off-street trail connectivity from Downtown and other key areas of the city directly to the Pike National Forest, including major trail heads. **Policy ML-1.C:** Develop an inclusive and safe non-motorized system that connects the city and serves the varied needs of trail users including various age groups and ability levels. **Strategy ML-1.C-1:** Establish, design, and implement a network of connected trail, open space, and park facilities within a maximum 10-minute walk or ½ mile distance from most homes and businesses. ### APPLICATION **Trails, Open Space, and Parks Sales Tax (TOPS):** A 0.1 percent (one cent for each $10 spent) tax on all sales in the City of Colorado Springs. The TOPS program was established in 1997 to acquire real property in the City and El Paso County. Extension beyond 2025 will require voter approval. As of 2017 TOPS has played a vital role in enabling the City to make significant land purchases, adding 4,723 acres of open space, 37 neighborhood and community parks, and 46.8 miles of urban trails to City inventory in the last 20 years. **Strategy ML-1.C-2:** Encourage installation and maintenance of trails with wayfinding to allow for pedestrian and bicycle-friendly connectivity to local parks, outdoor places, open spaces, and regional trail networks. **Strategy ML-1.C-3:** Continue to meet the requirements and specifications of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) through Universal Design approaches with trail design when feasible. **Strategy ML-1.C-4:** Design, construct, and increase maintenance of trails to facilitate sustainable, appropriate, safe, and secure recreational and commuter usage. **Strategy ML-1.C-5:** Ensure seamless connectivity within the trail system and between on and off-street trails. **Strategy ML-1.C-6:** Focus on closing physical gaps and addressing challenging crossings within the existing and planned Tier 1 and Tier 2 trail system. **Strategy ML-1.C-7:** Complete Ring the Springs, a 54-kilometer trails system that connects many of the city's parks and trails. ## ENGAGE WITH OUR LANDSCAPES ### GOAL ML-2 #### Activate and expand sustainable community use and interaction with open spaces, parks, and cultural resources. **Policy ML-2.A:** Support a parks and recreation system that provides safe, year-round access to facilities, programs, events, and services. (Also see Policies 2.B and 3.B in Chapter 6: Renowned Culture) **Strategy ML-2.A-1:** Invest public safety resources necessary to allow a safe experience in the city’s parks, recreation and open space system, and encourage use and activation of park facilities throughout their hours of operation. **Strategy ML-2.A-2:** Develop local trails coalitions with regional, county, state, and federal landowners to build on a destination hiking and mountain biking trails system to attract tourism and serve local interests. **Strategy ML-2.A-3:** Establish criteria to encourage sustainable and low impact events at parks. **Strategy ML-2.A-4:** Activate spaces in parks and trails with regularly occurring events such as farmer’s markets, food trucks, educational events, tours, and cultural festivals that build community and provide market opportunities. **Strategy ML-2.A-5:** Invest in infrastructure, such as restrooms, water fountains, picnic areas, benches, seating areas, stages for events, access to utilities, and Wi-Fi, in developed parks in order to facilitate and expand upon their level of service by event organizers and park users. **Strategy ML-2.A-6:** Improve and expand upon technology and online services for the Park’s Department in order to maximize accessibility and use of our parks and recreation system. **Strategy ML-2.A-7:** Support entrepreneurial partnerships with the City to provide enhanced parks and recreation facilities and programs consistent with the Parks Master Plan and this Majestic Landscapes vision. **Strategy ML-2.A-8:** Implement interactive recreation and educational features within parks, such as climbing walls, splash pads, nature playgrounds, dog parks, and community gardens. **Strategy ML-2.A-9:** Invest in ancillary services such as bike and car share and mass transit to support sustainable access to parks. **Strategy ML-2.A-10:** Provide public education and online information about year round parks and recreation opportunities and events in order to maximize the use of available capacity, especially for off season activities. ### Policy ML-2.B: Market and regionally promote visitation of the Sports and Active Recreation areas (Typology 2) and Regional and Natural Recreation areas (Typology 3) for increased economic development, tourism, and recreation participation. **Strategy ML-2.B-1:** Celebrate the Olympic City USA brand in Colorado Springs by encouraging sports-related physical activity in parks, open spaces, and along trail systems. **Strategy ML-2.B-2:** Partner with national sports governing bodies and other professional and non-profit sports teams and organizations to invest in new and redeveloped athletic facilities. These facilities should complement and add value to our parks and recreation system, and increase opportunities for city residents. **Strategy ML-2.B-3:** Add video cameras to highlight views from parks and open space (much like traffic or weather cameras). **Strategy ML-2.B-4:** Educate citizens and visitors about the cultural significance of our public assets and encourage “leave no trace” practices for all natural resources and landscapes. ### Policy ML-2.C: Provide green infrastructure lands, facilities, and services that are tailored and aligned to meet the conditions and needs of all areas of the city. **Strategy ML-2.C-1:** Align City and new private development investments in parks, open space, and trails with a focus on providing access within a 10 minute or ½ mile walk for residents and business users. **Strategy ML-2.C-2:** While maintaining a city-wide focus on progress toward Strategy ML- 2.C-1, also identify and support opportunities to increase the proportion of community residents and businesses within a ¼ mile walking distance of parks, trails, open space and other publically accessible outdoor spaces and amenities. **Strategy ML-2.C-3:** Maximize opportunities for citywide and non-exclusive access to linear and linked open space systems with convenient non-motorized connection. **Strategy ML-2.C-4:** De-emphasize reliance on a single standard for both the size and program for neighborhood parks (e.g. 5 acres) in favor of options for facilities of different sizes and programs. **Strategy ML-2.C-5:** Coordinate with local developers and private interests to construct and maintain pocket parks with higher density Unique Places. **Strategy ML-2.C-6:** Repurpose underserved areas with new parks and encourage creation or redevelopment of Neighborhood Greenspaces (Typology 1) associated with neighborhood focal points, unique places, and activity centers (also see Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods and Chapter 3: Unique Places). **Strategy ML-2.C-7:** Encourage new development and redevelopment to occur near existing parks and open spaces to increase their access to and use by the public. # COMPLETE OUR CREEKS ## GOAL ML-3 ### Optimize the shared use of our waterways as corridors for wildlife, recreation, stormwater conveyance, non-motorized transportation, utilities, and as natural areas and assets of the environment. **Policy ML-3.A:** Utilize, maintain, and expand upon open space and natural areas along creeks to convey stormwater while meeting recreation, education, and transportation needs consistent with the Complete Creeks Typology 4b. **Strategy ML-3.A-1:** Design stormwater projects to incorporate recreation, education, and transportation uses and facilities when feasible. **Strategy ML-3.A-2:** Incorporate creeks and waterways as focal points for recreation, education, and off-street transportation, within and abutting neighborhoods. **Strategy ML-3.A-3:** Implement efforts similar to the Pikes Peak Regional Greenway Master Plan and Fountain Creek Restoration Plan along other stream corridors, to improve stormwater management and decrease flooding issues while optimizing other uses and benefits of these waterways. **Strategy ML-3.A-4:** Educate citizens on the impact of development on wildlife and encourage the preservation of significant wildlife corridors and contiguous open lands through regulation. **Strategy ML-3.A-5:** Refer to the City of Colorado Springs Streamside Design Guidelines for specific recommendations regarding floodplain treatments, vegetation management, stream bank stabilization, and other elements that mitigate flood events. **Policy ML-3.B:** Preserve and maintain the creek and waterway system as an essential component of stormwater infrastructure. **Strategy ML-3.B-1:** Encourage streamside adjacent developments and those that are located near existing or future trail systems to dedicate lanes, access, or easements to allow for creek improvements, points of connectivity, and other critical-trailhead elements. **Strategy ML-3.B-2:** Create management plans for greenways to strategically address maintenance and ensure ecological functions are enhanced. **Strategy ML-3.B-3:** Create a coordinated system among City departments and other organizations and agencies for the development of an operations and maintenance program for our complete creeks. This will ensure the protection, preservation, and enhancement of our creeks ecology. **Strategy ML-3.B-4:** Support interjurisdictional efforts to identify, restore, and support aquatic habitat in appropriate areas, such as the Fountain Creek Corridor. # VALUE OUR SCENERY AND ENVIRONMENT ## GOAL ML-4 ### Provide stewardship for our majestic natural landscapes through improved preservation, resource conservation, air quality, and protection of our viewsheds. **Policy ML-4.A:** Emphasize preservation of undeveloped land and natural areas that result in the preservation of the most environmentally and culturally significant areas and incorporate low-impact recreation. **Strategy ML-4.A-1:** Acquire or protect additional properties to preserve as part of Natural Resources and Regional Recreation Typology 3[^p163-3] and Greenways Typology 5[^p163-5]. **Strategy ML-4.A-2:** Protect, document, and interpret for education, cultural resources within parks, open spaces, and along trails. **Strategy ML-4.A-3:** Support adaptive plans for protection of significant wildlife habitat in coordination with development proposals and plans. **Strategy ML-4.A-4:** Align annexation, master plans, and large-scale planned unit developments to contribute and connect to natural areas. **Strategy ML-4.A-5:** For major development projects in sensitive wildlife areas, consider a requirement for wildlife and habitat health studies similar to traffic impact studies. **Policy ML-4.B:** Promote built landscape practices and innovative and environmentally-conscious design that uses water wisely, reflects and respects our natural environment, reduces pesticide and fertilizer application, restores biodiversity, and improves resiliency. **Strategy ML-4.B-1:** Encourage the limited and environmentally sensitive use of pesticides and herbicides on City property. **Strategy ML-4.B-2:** Consider establishment of wildlife-sensitive composting and recycling programs on City-owned and partner-entity properties. **Strategy ML-4.B-3:** Further implement water conservation technologies and standards for all City property. **Strategy ML-4.B-4:** Encourage increased use of xeric and native plants throughout most landscaped park and median areas. Reduce the water demand footprint and maintenance costs in parks by identifying high water use turf areas not suitable for recreation and replacing a percentage of these areas with lower-water requiring native grass species. **Strategy ML-4.B-5:** Upgrade irrigation systems at public parks and city facilities to expand use of non-potable water resources and more efficient systems. **Strategy ML-4.B-6:** Create a plan to incorporate Colorado native species and ecosystems into Colorado Springs. **Strategy ML-4.B-7:** Update the Commercial Landscape Code and Policy Manual to improve its effectiveness at ensuring healthy, resilient, water-conserving landscapes. Provide adequate funding to ensure on-site inspections of each project. **Strategy ML-4.B-8:** Explore the possibility of implementing a Residential Landscape Code incorporating a variety of landscape practices supporting this goal. **Strategy ML-4.B-9:** Manage the invasion of noxious weed and tree species on all City property. [^p163-3]: Natural Resources and Regional Recreation Typology 3 [^p163-5]: Greenways Typology 5 ### APPLICATION **Adaptable Climate Response Plan:** PlanCOS recognizes the differing perspectives of our citizens about the extent of global and regional climate change and the appropriate role of the City of Colorado Springs. The plan should be both informed and forward thinking, but primarily locally focused in planning for an adaptive and resilient city responsive to emerging trends in both the physical and regulatory environments. A full range of community stakeholders and experts should be involved in this ongoing, adaptive process, including Colorado Springs Utilities, our military and regional transportation partners, land and forest managers and emergency responders. ### Policy ML-4.C: Implement standards, policies, and practices that encourage and support enhanced air and water quality. **Strategy ML-4.C-1:** Coordinate with Colorado Springs Utilities on the decommissioning of the Drake Power Plant and replacement power. **Strategy ML-4.C-2:** Evaluate and align investments in long-term multimodal transportation solutions such as mass transit, self-driving car technologies, electric vehicle charging stations, and bicycle and walking trails to support improvements in air and water quality. (Also see Chapter 5: Strong Connections) **Strategy ML-4.C-3:** Create a more sustainable program to maintain, revitalize, create, diversify, and expand the city’s urban forest, focusing on resilient, adaptive, and Colorado native tree species, along streets and in medians. **Strategy ML-4.C-4:** Support and implement cost effective upgrades to Colorado Springs’ vehicle and equipment fleets to incorporate zero and low emissions technology. **Strategy ML-4.C-5:** Initiate an Adaptable Climate Response Plan that includes input from and guidance for private, non-profit, and public organizations. ### Policy ML-4.D: Cultivate an ethic of environmental stewardship and landscape health through community education and engagement. **Strategy ML-4.D-1:** Create a City program that recognizes individuals, businesses, and nonprofits for outstanding environmental stewardship behaviors and practices. **Strategy ML-4.D-2:** Continue to create opportunities for volunteers and non-profit groups to help build parks, install park amenities, and assist in maintaining parks, trails, and open space resources. **Strategy ML-4.D-3:** Partner with Colorado Springs Utilities and school districts to support educational efforts and provide incentives to support water and energy conservation, and environmental quality best practices. **Strategy ML-4.D-4:** Educate and encourage citizens to better care for street trees on private property. # INVEST IN RESILIENT AND ADAPTABLE LANDSCAPES ## GOAL ML-5 ### Strengthen resiliency to natural disasters and the impact of climate changes through development patterns, hazard mitigation, and education. **Policy ML-5.A:** Recognize the vulnerability of both our natural and built landscapes to natural hazards, degradation, and overuse. **Strategy ML-5.A-1:** Develop and implement an effective citywide integrated urban forest and noxious weed management plan to enhance the beauty, integrity, and usability of City property. **Strategy ML-5.A-2:** Focus on projects to restore degraded natural areas and open spaces. **Strategy ML-5.A-3:** Plan for, improve, and complete a comprehensive system of wildlife corridors including crossings of major transportation barriers. **Strategy ML-5.A-4:** Incentivize mitigation on private property within the Wildland Urban Interface (WUI) and provide adequate public funding for forest management on public land. **Strategy ML-5.A-5:** Continue to update and implement the Colorado Springs Hazard Mitigation Plan. **Policy ML-5.B:** Focus on resilient landscapes in the face of drought, flood, and fire hazards. **Strategy ML-5.B-1:** Promote innovative design and integration of green landscapes such as rooftop and vertical gardens, and reduction of impervious surfaces. **Strategy ML-5.B-2:** Develop fire mitigation partnerships and create natural area management plans with land managers, utility providers, public safety officials, and state and federal representatives. **Strategy ML-5.B-3:** Work with natural resource managers of wildlife habitat to balance wildlife needs with management for fire, floods, and drought. **Strategy ML-5.B-4:** Form stormwater, floodplain, and vegetation management partnerships with flood control districts, watershed managers, City and County public works departments, ditch companies, and other land managers. **Strategy ML-5.B-5:** Incentivize the reclamation of degraded private landscapes with landscapes that are drought-resilient and improve quality of life and property values. <
> # RELATIONSHIP TO KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following keystone indicators are representative of primary measures to support the Majestic Landscapes vision. Although there is a strong high-level correlation between our plan for physical development and these indicators, we recognize that they will often not be directly applicable to individual development plans or to city initiatives. Although it is recognized that additional factors need to be evaluated as part of a more complete measurement of the progress made toward the city’s Majestic Landscapes goals, together, these two measures provide a good sense for the level of access residents and visitors have, along with how well we are taking care of our investment in green infrastructure. A full list and description of all indicators is in Chapter 8: Adaptable Implementation. ### Percent of City Population, Area, and Employment Within 1/2 Mile of a Park or Trail: Use of parks and open space often depends on the accessibility and visibility of these community assets. Not surprisingly, with the high rate of park use in Colorado Springs, a majority of residents have an easy 10-minute walk to open space, a park, greenway, trail, or other kind of parkland. This indicator will help measure the correlation of parks and trails to new developments as the city grows to ensure that most residents have easy access. ### Per Capita Total Funding for Parks Operations and Maintenance # ESSENTIAL QUESTIONS FOR CITY INITIATIVES These essential questions should be considered as a tool to focus on and promote implementation of our Majestic Landscapes vision for applicable City initiatives (refer to Chapter 1): 1. Support the overall focus on our Majestic Landscapes theme? 2. Positively contribute to the safety, security, and well-being of residents, and those who use the park or open space facilities? 3. Encourage additional investment or reinvestment in surrounding areas? 4. Contribute to the connectivity within and between neighborhoods particularly for walkability, access to multimodal transportation alternatives, and will it positively contribute to the feasibility of alternative modes? 5. Enhance the connection to the outdoors, trails, parks, natural areas, and green infrastructure? 6. Maintain consistency with and support the City’s adopted master plans, including the Parks and Open Space Plan? 7. Contribute to the environmental resiliency of Colorado Springs? # RELEVANT PLANS AND THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO PLANCOS While PlanCOS provides overarching guidance, numerous other city plans provide additional detail required for PlanCOS’s implementation. Of particular importance in providing guidance, direction, and detail for this theme will be the City of Colorado Springs Park System Master Plan (“Parks Plan”), as it is amended. The Parks Plan should be relied upon to provide the primary framework for decisions including prioritization of open space, park, recreation, and acquisition and development. PlanCOS is expected to inform future revisions of the Parks Plan. The more detailed adopted individual facility plans of the Parks Department should also be used for the areas and topics they apply to and should be updated in alignment with PlanCOS. Public and private land use master plans that address or incorporate parks, open space, and trails facilities should be used to articulate specific recommendations pertaining to these topics, particularly if these plans are up-to-date and reflective of the key elements of the Majestic Landscapes theme. In cases where there is a discrepancy between more detailed elements of the Comprehensive Plan, alignment with the vision of PlanCOS should be considered in the use and application of these plans. Links to relevant plans are found below. ### City Adopted Plans **City of Colorado Springs Park System Master Plan** **Envision Shook’s Run Facilities Master Plan** **Hazard Mitigation Plan** **Drainage Basin Planning Studies** **Regional Air and Water Quality Plans** **Pikes Peak Regional Greenway Master Plan** **Individual Parks Master Plans (e.g. Garden of the Gods Master Plan, Bancroft Park Master Plan, etc.)** ### Partner Entity Plans **Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Regional Nonmotorized Transportation System Plan** **El Paso County Parks Master Plan** **The Fountain Creek Corridor Restoration Master Plan** **Privately Initiated Master Plans** See full list of plans: Appendix D ## OTHER MEASURES Through the creation, implementation, and update of publicly and privately initiated plans, it may be appropriate to track and measure additional indicators as it relates to the Majestic Landscape vision and policy direction. Such indicators could include the following: * ParkScore: Trust for Public Land scoring methodology * Number of community gardens * USFS i-Tree (calculation for cost savings) * Miles of new urban trail constructed * Miles of urban trail receiving maintenance * Miles of park/open space trail constructed * Miles of park/open space trail receiving maintenance * Access to Parks: Proportion of population within ¼ mile walking distance of accessible parks, open spaces off street trails or similar outdoor spaces and amenities <
> # ADAPTABLE IMPLEMENTATION # CHAPTER 8 <
> # RESPONDING TO # CHANGING CONDITIONS In order for the Comprehensive Plan to be a useful and relevant document, it must be regularly referred to, applied, and implemented. The most fundamental way in which PlanCOS can be implemented is through an adaptable but systematic approach that aligns key City decisions, processes, regulations, and standards with the objectives of this Plan and its overall vision. In this manner, the day-to-day decisions regarding development will effectively result in a physical environment that becomes an expression of our planning objectives. PlanCOS has been created and is expected to be used in ways that are adaptable to future trends, conditions, and choices that are not entirely predictable. Alignment with the overall vision of this Plan is the most important goal and outcome. Equally important is the need for a process of monitoring the implementation of PlanCOS. This effort will provide information on how well the policy objectives are working, where there are opportunities for additional modification, and whether certain elements are not working at all. This monitoring process should also provide meaningful information for decision-makers to ensure that the Plan remains an effective and useful tool. This chapter also summarizes key projects and tools that should be implemented to achieve the PlanCOS vision and goals. These recommended projects and tasks represent high priority efforts that will significantly improve the link between policy objectives and real-world implementation. # USING THIS PLAN We expect this Plan to be used for three primary purposes: 1. **To review** larger and discretionary land use applications for alignment with our overall land use vision and applicable goals and policies in conjunction with the City Zoning Code and any applicable topical or sub-area plans of the City. 2. **As a source of direction for City initiatives** pertaining to the physical development of the city, including but not limited to the following: a. Priorities and areas of focus for small area and topical plans of the City; b. Direction for changes to our Zoning and other sections of our City Code; c. A consideration in development of the capital improvement priorities of the City and region including proposals for new or extended voter initiatives such as Pikes Peak Rural Transportation Authority (PPRTA) and Trails Open Space and Parks Sales Tax (TOPS) (hyperlink these); d. Support for grant applications and community partnerships; and e. A source of recommendations for prioritization within ongoing City Strategic Plans (hyperlink). 3. **To monitor the success of the Plan and adapt** where necessary to ensure that we are always making our city better. ## Adaptable Plan This Plan reflects a great deal of effort by both experts and the broader community in analyzing and thinking about the trends and assumptions that will impact our physical development, and how we expect to address them. However, we recognize that our land use future and the development market are not fully predictable. Therefore, the Plan is designed and intended to be used adaptively in response to changing conditions, circumstances, and markets. Overall alignment with the themes and goals of this Plan should be the paramount consideration. ## Online Document The full power and utility of this Plan is best experienced in its online form. In this format the Plan is designed to be fully navigable, searchable, and interconnected with hyperlinks. Relevant text and graphics are designed to be easily excerpted for applicable use. The maps and graphics are interactive in order to enhance their value. Connections are available and will be maintained with other supporting documents, including the area or topic-specific plans that support this Plan and are essential to its full and effective use and implementation. ## Connecting with Our Citizens Communication and engagement with our residents is essential to implementing the PlanCOS vision. Effective citizen input not only keeps the City informed on community preferences, but also builds a sense of community. In order to become a national leader in communications and enhanced civic engagement, the City should use this Plan to support and implement new and creative technologies and techniques for trusted, informative, and efficient communication between citizens and the City. PlanCOS supports and recommends the development and implementation of cutting edge communications tools and platforms, such as Open Data. The intent is to transparently and effectively allow citizens to learn about and comment on planning and physical development activities they are interested in or that potentially impact them. It is especially important to design these systems and strategies to effectively engage traditionally under-represented constituencies. The content of PlanCOS is expected to be used and delivered in ways that allow it to function as a constructive portal for these enhanced citizen connections. ## PlanCOS and the Development Review Process This document is expected to be used in the development review process in accordance with City Code and particularly as described and set forth in the City’s Zoning Ordinance and its supporting documents, as these are amended. Generally, it is the intent of this Plan to be used in conjunction with higher level discretionary land use decisions in cases when the Code requires a specific finding of alignment with the Comprehensive Plan. Also, generally, the applicability of this document is intended to be most pronounced and significant with the higher level and initial stages of the development approval process (e.g. at the annexation, master plan, rezoning, and concept plan levels). ## Using the Vision Map As described in Chapter 1, the Vision Map illustrates and communicates the overall vision, themes, ideas, and priorities of PlanCOS city-wide. This Vision Map is intended to graphically represent key elements of our desired future in way that captures the essence of our big ideas and priorities. The Vision Map and the corresponding Framework Maps provide a high level window into our desired mix, character, and location of our neighborhoods, places, industries, transportation, utilities, cultural landmarks, and landscapes. They are advisory—not regulatory—and do not replace existing zoning or development entitlements. The maps provide a starting point for conversations about city initiatives and development proposals by illustrating how specific proposals might fit into our overall community framework. ### City Strategic Initiatives, Budgeting Capital Improvement Programs, and Code Amendments In addition to use in development review, this Plan will be used to its fullest practical and applicable extent, as a guide to city-initiated regulatory changes, and with other projects, programs, and relevant funding choices. It is expected that this Plan will be consulted and be reflected in the priorities of the City’s Strategic Plan consistent with available resources and near term priorities. Likewise, it is expected that the highest priority recommendations of this Plan will be considered during development of annual budgets and multi-year capital improvement programs. In particular, this document should be consulted for guidance in designing both the structure and the proposed uses of funding for new and extended tax or fee ballot initiatives, including but limited to potential extensions of PPRTA or the TOPS voter-initiated funding program. A critical and essential role of this document is to serve as a framework for future updates of the City Code including the Zoning and Subdivision Codes, both in the form of comprehensive updates and targeted revisions. In addition to the provisions of City Code most pertinent to land use, other proposed changes to Code should be evaluated for consistency with this Plan, when relevant and applicable. ### Relationship to Other Plans PlanCOS is a high-level, long-range and city-wide plan. Its success and implementation will rely on more detailed area or topically-specific master plans and related documents. In conjunction with PlanCOS, these more detailed plans should be generally relied on for specific land use or topical guidance in cases where they remain applicable and relevant. In cases where there is a clear or potential conflict between PlanCOS and a publicly initiated master plan, all relevant documents should be applied in context, but with consideration for the overarching goals of PlanCOS. As publicly initiated master plans of various types are created or updated, the vision and goals of PlanCOS should be considered and reasonably incorporated. The Utilities Board provides direction for physical infrastructure development coordination with the Municipal Government through utilities governance policies. In cases where a privately initiated land use master plan is approved and active for a property, that document should continue to be relied on as primary guidance for zoning and related land use and transportation decisions. However, PlanCOS should be considered and reasonably incorporated in any new or amended privately initiated land use master plans. Some of the individual master plans or categories of plans that are most pertinent to a particular chapter are highlighted in Chapters 2 through 7 of this Plan. In some cases, more specific guidance for the coordinated use of a specific plan is also provided. # ANNEXATIONS Over the next 20 years, PlanCOS envisions limited but strategic additional outward expansion of city limits, and a focus on developing and redeveloping property currently within city boundaries while becoming more proactive in working to incorporate existing enclaves and near enclaves into the city. Additional strategic annexations around the periphery of the city may be considered if they will have a fiscal benefit to the city, will be well aligned with existing and planned city infrastructure, or will support the primary economic development objectives of the city and regional partners. The City’s 2006 Annexation Plan should be systematically evaluated and updated, consistent with this overall vision. Annexation policies should be evaluated in coordination with Colorado Springs Utilities. To fully realize the City’s goal for more fiscally sustainable and resilient land use, communication should be opened with El Paso County and surrounding municipalities about potential intergovernmental agreements focused on the shared benefits of interjurisdictional land use, service, and revenue sharing coordination. # KEYSTONE INDICATORS AND PROGRESS MONITORING Plan monitoring and evaluation will involve a long term commitment to tracking progress in accomplishing plan objectives. Ongoing monitoring will also assist in determining appropriate and effective courses of action in response to experience with use of the Plan. ### Use and Application of Keystone Indicators Keystone indicators are intended to be used primarily to measure citywide progress toward achieving the PlanCOS vision. In some cases, appropriate comparisons will be against other cites or state or national averages, but most often the best comparison will be between past and future performance specific for our city. Some indicators are especially useful in evaluating how new development and redevelopment is measuring up compared with city-wide averages. Others will lend themselves well to sub-area analysis. Major city-sponsored initiatives should be systematically evaluate for their expected correlation with these indicators. Some but not all of these indicators can and should be used, as appropriate and applicable, in the evaluation of major and discretionary land development applications. In this capacity, the intent is not to require a particular development proposal to demonstrate a positive correlation with every indicator, nor is there an expectation of detailed justifications or data analysis to be submitted by applicants. ## KEYSTONE INDICATORS The following Keystone Indicators are established for the purpose of assessing the progress of PlanCOS over time and the potential alignment of major city decisions with the Plan. A more detailed description of the source, methodologies, expected use, potential limitations, and other key information about these indicators is included in Appendix F. Although many of these indicators have broad applicability across several of the themes in PlanCOS, many of them are especially significant for one or more particular themes. Within Chapters 2 through 7, the most applicable indicators are highlighted in order to underscore their special relevance to those themes. These indicators will be tracked and showcased through an online dashboard accessible by the public on the City’s website. ### MONITORING TECHNIQUES **Two primary monitoring techniques are proposed for PlanCOS:** * Measure and report on a limited number of key indicators that focus on progress toward achieving the overall objectives of the Plan. These “Keystone Indicators” are specific measures that bear a direct or indirect relationship to accomplishing one or more of the primary goals and objectives of the Plan. By tracking selected indicators consistently over a number of years, benchmarks can be identified, trends evaluated, targets set, strategies reviewed, and policies adjusted as necessary to ensure that plan objectives are accomplished as intended. * Create a “progress matrix” that identifies key responsibilities and timeframes for accomplishment of Plan objectives. The progress matrix also serves as a checklist for monitoring progress toward accomplishing intangible or non-measurable objectives for which indicators could not be established. <
> <
> <
> <
> ### 1. New Residential Net Density This indicator will track the density of residential dwelling units added to the city each year compared with average net density of all existing residential areas in the city. This measure is important because it gets to the heart of the PlanCOS density vision by answering whether or not new developments are contributing positively to density with our overall added residential construction. This measure is intended to account for most types of added units including those in established and newly developing areas. Because only residential parcels are included in the analysis, this net measurement approach will largely avoid concerns with accounting for other uses of property including non-residential buildings, street right-of-way, and parks and open space. This indicator is intended primarily to be used as a citywide measure but may also be used to track activity and progress in priority areas identified by the City. It is also helpful to compare with the net density of all residential areas across the city. ### 2. Net City Lane Miles Added Compared with Development and Redevelopment The total lane miles of streets maintained by the City are an important barometer of the efficiency of our land use patterns. By reducing the amount of new street pavement added to the city compared to the additional development activity the system serves, future street maintenance costs will be reduced because there will be less pavement to maintain per person. Environmental impacts (such as from stormwater) will become more manageable. Positively affected areas of the city should become more livable at a human scale. PlanCOS ideas and priorities that contribute to this indicator include increased density in targeted activity centers and corridors, infill and redevelopment, use of technology to enhance existing transportation capacity, and recommendations for narrow local street profiles. This indicator is intended primarily to be used as a citywide measure but may also be used to track activity and progress in sub-areas of the city. ### 3. Number of High Priority Neighborhood Plans Completed High quality, targeted, responsive and representative neighborhood planning is acknowledged as essential to the success of PlanCOS because these plans provide the level of area-specific attention necessary to effectively apply the broad principles the Plan to the individual and unique neighborhoods throughout the city. Rather than keep track of how much of the city has an associated land use master plan, the recommended indicator is the level of progress being made on plans for only those neighborhoods identified through a community and city leadership process. ### 4. Infill and Redevelopment Activity Infill and redevelopment activity is identified as a key indicator because it extends across many of the themes and ideas that are priorities for this Plan. This incorporates a combination of reduced vacant acreage in core areas of the city combined with evidence of increasing comparative development activity (i.e. building permit value) in these areas. In addition to being applied to the entire core area of the city, this combined indicator can also be used to evaluate sub-areas within the overall infill area as well as to support specific infill projects or initiatives. The detailed components of this indicator are described in Appendix F: Key Indicator Profiles. * Remaining vacant acres in overall infill area * Total building permit value in infill area ### 5. Housing Attainability Improving housing affordability over time is identified and addressed as one of the cornerstone challenges and priorities in PlanCOS. This recommended indicator combines overall median single-family and multifamily housing affordability along with total homeless population counts. Together this combination of measures is intended to provide an important and helpful general barometer for progress based on the broad averages and overall counts at different levels along the economic spectrum. It will be important to also be attentive to impacts on sub-groups of housing consumers, whose needs and experience may not be fully represented by measures that focus on overall median housing costs. Likewise, although changes in the overall homeless populations provide an important measure in that area, the status of sub-groups within that overall number will be important. * Single Family Home Ownership Affordability Index * Apartment Rental Affordability Index * Total Homeless Populations in El Paso County <
> ### 6. Existing Downtown Measures Progress toward making Downtown an economic and cultural center of the region will be critical to the overall success of PlanCOS. In this case, the recommended indicators are those already in place and being measured by the organizations responsible for managing Downtown program, and funding initiatives (currently coordinated through the Downtown Partnership). Key measures at this time include: * New residential units added annually * Value of building permit activity compared with prior years and with the overall city <
> ### 7. Economic Indicators The economic indicators for PlanCOS include the following measures, each of which are available from existing data sources and are easily comparable with other jurisdictions: * New residential units added annually * New jobs added that are at or above the median salary for the region * Unemployment Rate * Median Wages Compared with State <
> These measures are chosen because together they reflect a combination of the economic outcomes PlanCOS is intended to support as well as the economic activity that will be needed to allow many of the recommendations in the Plan to be fiscally sustainable with private and public sector resources. From another perspective, many of the other recommendations of PlanCOS are intended to encourage the conditions that will be necessary to attract the economic development and workforce that will contribute to a sustainably strong economy. Although the importance of these interrelationships between high quality and attractive physical development, and a strong economy are implicitly understood, we also recognize that it will be challenging to directly tie progress with economic indicators to progress related to physical development. # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE <
> <
> <
> ### OTHER FORMS OF SUCCESS * Demonstrated progress toward key initiatives identified in this Plan, and the extent to which the results of the initiatives advance the PlanCOS vision, themes, goals, and policies; * Extent to which this Plan is referred to and used in the creation of other plans; and * Experience with the document in the development review process. ### 8. Renowned Culture Indicators When considered together, these renowned culture indicators provide a measure of the ongoing activity that is indicative of a rich culture throughout the city. * Creative Vitality Index * Number of Creative Jobs * Creative Industry Earnings ### 9. Majestic Landscapes Indicators * Percent of City Population, Area, and Employment Within ½ Mile of a Park, Trail, or Accessible Open Space Area * Per Capita Total Funding for Parks Operations and Maintenance * Miles of Urban Trails * Miles of Park Trails Although it is recognized that additional factors need to be evaluated as part of a more complete measurement of the progress made toward the City's Majestic Landscapes goals, together these measures provide a good sense for the level of access residents and visitors have, along with how well we are taking care of our investment in green infrastructure. ### 10. Citywide Pedestrian, Bicycle, and Transit Infrastructure Improving walkability throughout the city is a cornerstone goal of PlanCOS. Increasing bicycle infrastructure and safety is also a major objective, as is taking transit to the next level especially in key activity centers and corridors. Walkscore® and its related Bikescore® and Transitscore® are nationally recognized measures for walkability and bicycle and transit access in communities. These scores can be calculated citywide, or for areas of focus, and can be compared with other communities. However, because these measures are primarily based on a calculation of land use proximity, and do not account for the quality and design of walkable infrastructure, care should be taken in interpreting the results. This indicator can also be coupled with tracking the number of miles of bike lanes and bicycle infrastructure. ## OTHER MEASURES OF SUCCESS Not all evidence of the success of this Plan will come in the form of indicators that can be mathematically measured of over time. In some cases, evidence of success will come in other forms. Progress in these areas should also be monitored and reported on. ## ANNUAL REPORTING An annual report on PlanCOS performance and implementation is expected to be prepared and presented to the Planning Commission and City Council. This report will evaluate whether or not objectives are being achieved by reporting on Keystone Indicators, other measures of success, progress on recommended major city initiatives, experience with the development review process, and recommendations for realignment of strategic city priorities related to the Plan. # AMENDING THE PLAN To be successful, comprehensive planning must be an ongoing activity. As part of that process, this Plan needs to be regularly monitored with respect to its use and effectiveness. Limited and technical amendments will certainly need to be made in order to keep this document up-to-date, fully viable, and maintained as a respected and regularly used source of guidance for the physical development of the city. More significant amendments may be deemed necessary depending on experience. If goals are not met and/ or trends toward achieving trajectory goals are not positive, the Planning Commission and City Council should re-evaluate existing strategies and consider modifications to policies that are necessary to reverse the trend. The City Council and Planning Commission can review and adopt Comprehensive Plan amendments between major updates to ensure that current community issues continue to be addressed and that the Plan continues to provide clear and realistic direction for future growth. In any case, a comprehensive review and update is strongly recommended at least once every ten years, or as directed by City Council. The following language outlines the recommended approach for minor and major amendments. ## TYPES OF PLAN AMENDMENTS ### Revisions to Online Content and Format PlanCOS is intended to be made available and used primarily in an online form. Periodic and incremental revisions of online format and delivery are to be expected and will be handled administratively, as long as they do not modify the key adopted language and graphic elements of the Plan, including but not limited to the adopted text of goals, policies, and strategies. ### Minor Administrative Amendments Minor changes or revisions to the Plan’s text, figures, or maps, may be processed administratively to reflect updated information or grammatical corrections, provided that these changes do not modify the intent or substantive content of the document, as adopted. Examples include correction of spelling or grammatical errors, updating the base information on maps, and the updating of terms and references to reflect current adopted language or organizational structure (e.g. changing the reference to department or organization if it has been renamed or restructured). ### Major Plan Amendments All other changes to the language and text of the Comprehensive Plan that are not considered revisions to online content or minor administrative amendments, are considered major amendments, and will require a recommendation by the Planning Commission and approval of City Council by ordinance. The type and extent of any associated stakeholder and public process should be determined by Council consistent with the type and nature of the proposed amendments. ### ALLOWABLE ADMINISTRATIVE MODIFICATIONS Examples of allowable administrative online modifications include the following: a. Text and graphic formatting and grammatical changes that do not alter the intent of substance of the language and graphics as adopted; b. Changes in hyperlinks within the text and to external documents; c. Updates of interactive map layers associated with PlanCOS map graphics (e.g. the updated maps of active neighborhood associations or adopted neighborhood plans that will be interactively associated with the Chapter 2 Vibrant Neighborhoods Framework Map); d. Inclusion or substitution of photos and related images that serve to provide examples for plan recommendations but are not adopted graphic elements; and e. Inclusion or substitution of promotional or descriptive content that may assist individuals in using the Plan (e.g. written or video plan highlights, testimonials or introductions from elected officials, community members or staff; and Plan navigation guides). ### Plan Updates Plan updates provide an opportunity to more systematically evaluate the content of PlanCOS for ongoing relevancy. This update process allows the city to reconfirm the Plan’s vision and direction with the community as recommended by the Planning Commission and directed by City Council. A limited but systematic update is recommended within five (5) years of adoption, or earlier if sufficient need is indicated based on annual reporting and Plan experience. These updates are anticipated to focus primarily on evaluating and refreshing the Plan’s strategies to keep them current with the overall vision and themes. Plan Updates are not expected to alter the overall organization and structure of the Plan. Moreover, periodic updates should serve to prolong the useful and relevant life of this document, and extend the period before which a more comprehensive and complete revamping of the document is deemed necessary. # KEY PROJECTS AND IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES It is important to note that PlanCOS is an overall guiding document that is linked to numerous other planning tools, including intergovernmental agreements, land use regulations, facility plans, and capital improvement programs. The success of PlanCOS is therefore dependent upon the implementation of a variety of other legislative, regulatory, technical, and financing mechanisms, requiring coordination and cooperation between the public, private, and nonprofit sectors within Colorado Springs and where applicable with the County and surrounding municipalities. ## MOST IMPORTANT IMPLEMENTATION INITIATIVES PlanCOS is intended to provide a framework and impetus for a variety of implementation initiatives throughout the city organization, and intended to be undertaken collaboratively. Highlighted below are some of the key initiatives with a particularly high degree of relevance and importance to the success of PlanCOS. # 1. Update Zoning and Subdivision Code Chapter 7 of the City Code (“Planning Development and Building”) contains Code provisions pertinent to the Comprehensive Plan, Zoning, and Subdivision. This Chapter has been periodically amended over time and was most recently re-codified in 2001. However, the last fully comprehensive evaluation and update of the entire Zoning Code was finalized in 1994. During this period a lot has happened including the addition of almost 200,000 residents, a resurgence of Downtown, the maturing of many areas, and citywide changes in land use demand, trends, patterns, and design. The way we provide and fund infrastructure has changed dramatically, and the impacts of technology on our physical development have been profound. For these reasons, a comprehensive update is recommended. The intent of PlanCOS is not to prescribe the details of the process, format, and content for this Code update, but rather to recommend broad areas of focus. These include the following: * Improved overall alignment of Code provisions and processes with the themes and priorities of PlanCOS. * Increased user access, navigability and leveraging of technology. * Updated codification and organization. * An overall de-emphasis on the required segregation of land uses within many traditional zoning district categories, especially for those districts that allow relatively higher densities and intensities of uses. * Potential application of form based and performance zoning approaches to other urbanizing or changing centers and corridors in addition to Downtown. * Possible simplification of the overall number of zoning categories. * Consideration of a “transit supportive” zoning base districts or overlays applicable to identified developing and redeveloping corridors. Note: full transit oriented development (TOD) zoning approaches are not recommended for full implementation at this time because they are not practical until higher levels of transit are either in place or programmed. * Evaluation and refinement of standards and processes pertaining to mature area reinvestment and redevelopment. * Reconsideration of standards and process for appeals of land use decisions. * Incorporation of options to effectively integrate additional housing design options and choices in additional areas of the city, including smaller and potentially more affordable units such as accessory dwelling units (ADUs). * Specific elimination of the Mixed Use Zone District (MU) which was created as an option in 2004 but has not been implemented. * Overall updating and realignment of developer land and infrastructure dedication requirements. * Update Subdivision Code to modify and reduce requirements for traffic studies in redeveloping areas, systemically scale back and adjust access control standards city-wide and modify level of service criteria and standards accordingly. ## 2. Intermodal Mobility Plan The interrelationship between land use and transportation planning is fundamental and essential. The City’s overall intermodal transportation plan (ITP) has not been comprehensively updated since 2001, in conjunction with the previous major update of the Comprehensive Plan. Since that time our city has grown and changed considerably and transportation demand, technologies, priorities, and impacts have also evolved. Although individual motor vehicles continue to account for the predominant share of the miles we travel within our city, the way we use and interact with them is changing. PlanCOS recommends a more holistic and integrated approach in the form of a comprehensive update of the Intermodal Transportation Plan as an Intermodal Mobility Plan (IMP). Although PlanCOS does not intend to prescribe the details of the expected content and format of this plan, the following high level recommendations are provided: * Improved overall alignment of Code with the overall themes and priorities of PlanCOS, including the goals policies in Chapter 5: Strong Connections. * Increased user access, navigability and leveraging of technology within the IMP document; * Proactive and adaptable recommendations for anticipated changes in transportation demand and technology; * Renewed focus on walkability and bikeability throughout the majority of the transportation system; * Emphasis on maximization of capacity of the existing roadway system using technology and other transportation system management (TSM) approaches in order to reduce the need for additional lane capacity for primary corridors; * Overall de-emphasis on high levels of access control for most major roadways, allowing for higher levels of street interconnectivity; * Additional focus on designing or managing major transportation corridors to mitigate their impacts as barriers to local street and non-motorized connectivity; * Additional support for designing local street networks to be narrower, more connected and with a de-emphasis on motor vehicle speed; and * Incorporation of stretch goals and a plan for achieving higher level transit service particularly for key activity centers and corridors, and to include intercity connections along the Front Range. # 3. Neighborhood Planning Program Effective and viable small area and neighborhood land use plans are essential for implementation of the PlanCOS vision. PlanCOS sets the overall vision and framework, but neighborhood plans are necessary to apply this larger vision in a practical manner. They allow planning and implementation at scale that can address the unique characteristics and needs of different areas of the city. Colorado Springs has accumulated a daunting backlog of neighborhoods that either have no active land use master plan or with plans in excess of 20 years old. This is the result of the fact that very few new or updated plans have been adopted in the past two decades, and because large parts of the city have transitioned into more established and matures neighborhoods during this same period. A key recommendation of PlanCOS is that Colorado Springs needs to become more proactive and intentional about neighborhood planning. Because neighborhood planning is an inherently time consuming and a resource intensive process, the City cannot afford to create new and updated plans for all areas with a need, particularly if the processes used to create them are drawn out and expensive. An overall and long term goal of PlanCOS is that every neighborhood in the city has an active and up-to-date neighborhood or land use master plan. Given the current backlog and the ongoing reality of limited City resources, PlanCOS recommends two primary strategies to best use the resources that do become available: 1. **Prioritized Neighborhood Planning Areas.** Collaboratively create and adopt a citywide list of the highest priority neighborhoods in need of a new or updated plan. Neighborhoods that are at-risk, distressed, or disadvantaged as determined by established criteria should be prioritized. Update the list every five years. 1. **Neighborhood Planning Template.** Create, adopt, and implement a template to include a replicable process that can be used for the creation of new and amended plans along with an agreed-upon standardized format for organization and content areas for neighborhood plans. ## 1. Prioritized Neighborhood Planning Areas ### Process for Prioritizing Neighborhood Plans The process of creating a citywide list and map of the highest priorities would include analysis of the most relevant factors in coordination with applicable staff citywide neighborhood advocacy groups. Recommendations would be considered by senior City staff, reviewed by the Planning Commission, and periodically endorse by City Council. Actual programming for plans would be contingent on annual budget appropriations, other potential funding sources and available in-house staff resources. ### Relevant Factors for Choosing Priorities A combination of one and likely several of the following factors are expected to be relevant in identifying Prioritized Neighborhood Planning Areas: * Lack of an existing active neighborhood or land use master plan * An existing neighborhood plan that is effectively and functionally out of date, based on experience * Neighborhoods experiencing or expected to be impacted by substantial land use activity and change, particularly if decisions have been controversial * Neighborhoods with identified community development needs ## 2. Neighborhood Planning Template ### Purpose and Need for a Neighborhood Planning Template The creation and use of a reasonably systematized and standardized process and format for new and updated neighborhood plans is expected to reduce the time and resources needed to complete each plan, and also result in more complete, effective and useful plans. ### Process Standardization The expected outcomes of incorporating some standardization into the neighborhood planning process include reducing the time and cost necessary to complete each plan. An agreed-upon overall process should also foster citizen participation by reducing the amount of time and resources necessary to create and agree upon a unique process for each individual plan. This reduces uncertainty among participants and should allow for a greater relative allocation of resources toward productive stakeholder input including identifying needs and proposing recommendations and solutions. ### Format Standardization The development and implementation of a “template” outline and format for new and revised neighborhood plans should reduce both the cost of preparing plans, and the uncertainty of participants in the process. With more standardized formats, some of the basic content of the plan could be pre-populated and participants could focus more on responding to the data, contributing to content in each section, and recommending actions and priorities. A template neighborhood plan would better assure all relevant topics and citywide priority areas are addressed, as applicable for the particular neighborhood. These topic areas would include goals and priorities aligned with PlanCOS. Additionally, a more standardized template would be more efficient to access and use for property owners, developers, staff, and decision makers, because relevant information would be easier to find. ### Process for Creating and Adopting a Neighborhood Plan Template The process for creating and adopting a model process and plan would begin with City staff but include a full spectrum of stakeholder input including from citywide neighborhood advocacy groups and the development community. The template would be reviewed by the Planning Commission and endorsed by City Council. Ongoing modifications would be proposed based on experience. ### Use of the Template Process and Format The purpose of the template process and format is to optimize the productivity and results of neighborhood planning and not to impose a strict “one size fits all” approach or set of assumed and preconceived policies and priorities on each individual neighborhood. The intent is to establish a level of certainty, predictability, and consistency with citywide goals and priorities, while allowing participants and the city the freedom to address the particular circumstances, needs and priorities of each neighborhood in innovative and creative ways. The expectation is that these process and format templates will be used for plans supported by outside consultants as well as those that are staffed primarily by City personnel. They should also be effective in those neighborhood planning efforts involving higher levels of resident participation in plan creation. ## 4. Attainable Housing Plan Attainable housing is arguably the most important but also most challenging topic addressed in PlanCOS. A key recommendation is to create and maintain a broad spectrum plan with multiple but coordinated strategies. These would all be directed toward the goal of providing a range of housing types and programs that together will contribute to more attainable housing along the full continuum from homelessness to workforce housing, throughout the city and within its subareas. This would be a City-initiated and maintained plan that would complement but extend beyond the planning requirements associated with federal and state housing programs and funding. Included in the plan would be analysis of overall needs and conditions from a community perspective along with ongoing city recommendations and priorities for strategies to address overall housing attainability. ## 5. SmartCOS Plan The City is developing a Smart Cities Strategy in partnership with private sector, and regional partners. Based in part on the outcome of that process, it is recommended that a SmartCOS program should put the strategy into action through piloting efforts. When completed and implemented, that plan should be consistent with and supportive of the vision and themes of PlanCOS. ## 6. Annexation Plan Update PlanCOS recommends systematic update of the City's annexation strategies and policies to follow the outline of the 2006 City Annexation Plan. Recommended areas of revised policy or emphasis include the following: * Guidance for strategic annexations of properties along the periphery of the city that support economic growth or accommodate expansion of the regional roadway network. * Evaluation of annexation policies to be consistent with the vision, goals, and policies of this plan and in coordination with Colorado Springs Utilities, El Paso County, and other municipalities. * Additional focus on policies and strategies directed toward more expeditious inclusion of enclaves and near enclaves within city limits. (Note: "Near Enclaves" is defined as a non legal term for an unincorporated area that is largely surrounded by the city but does not technically qualify as an enclave.) * Reconsideration of the current annexation recommendations uniquely applicable to the Cimarron Hills enclave in coordination with Colorado Springs Utilities. * Update of current recommendations for properties along the periphery of the city including the annexation of eligible and logical city-owned properties. * Update of the "3-Mile Plan" for unincorporated properties using a version of the current land use designations. <
> # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE # OTHER IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES Strategies are described within Chapters 2 through 7 as approaches to further the identified goals and policies. Many of these strategies outline additional programs, plans, standards, and projects that the City can initiate. The annual review of the keystone indicators will assess the progress towards the vision and goals of the community and help to identify priority strategies for the upcoming year. As part of the Annual Review, City staff should evaluate the work completed over the past year and prioritize strategies for implementation based on how well the City is achieving its vision and which implementation measures are most needed. ### Table 2: Other Implementation Strategies | IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY | RELEVANT STRATEGIES | TYPE | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | A. Expand City support of small business and neighborhood assistance programs | VN-3.C-2 | Program | | B. Plan a small business-supportive community hub in the southeast part of the city | UP-1.A-6 | Project | | C. Implement the Experience Downtown Master Plan | UP-3.A-1
TE-2.C-1
RC-3.B-1 | Programs and Projects | | D. Develop design standards for redeveloping corridors and centers | UP-4.B-2
UP-5.A-1 | Standards | | E. Revise and adapt codes and requirements for water conservation standards | UP-5.B-3 | Standards | | F. Promote electric vehicles in collaboration with Colorado Springs Utilities | SC-1.E-5 | Plan | | G. Complete a fully strategic Downtown Parking Plan | SC-1.F-7 | Plan | | H. Expand the Art in the Streets program | RC-3.D-1 | Program | | I. Build one or more outdoor amphitheaters | RC-3.D2 | Project | | J. Complete the first phase of a public arts plan | RC-3.C-1
RC-5.B-2 | Plan | | K. Identify and develop city-owned land for community gardens, experimental/ educational gardens, and urban agriculture | RC-4.C-2 | Project | | L. Develop a local food production, distribution, allocation, and consumption master plan | RC-4.C-5 | Plan | | M. Create management plans for greenways | ML-3.B-2 | Plan | | N. Establish a composting program on City-owned properties | ML-4.B-2 | Program | | O. Initiate an adaptable climate response plan | ML-4.C-5 | Plan | | P. Create a City program that recognizes individuals, businesses, and nonprofits for outstanding environmental stewardship behaviors and practices | ML-4.D-1 | Program | | Q. Develop a creative citywide integrated urban forest and noxious weed management plan | ML-5.A-1 | Plan | | R. Update and implement the Colorado Springs Hazard Mitigation Plan | ML-5.A-5 | Plan | Each strategy can be assessed on cost/effort and effectiveness. The figures below illustrate the methodology to assess each strategy. Quadrant 1 includes projects that are transformative in nature with a higher cost; while Quadrant 2 projects include projects that are a little less costly and will have incremental positive change over time. Quadrant 3 and 4 projects should be pursued as part of a longer work program and evaluated annually by City Council. Many of these projects would also require additional funding sources, including special assessments, or state or federal agencies. <
> ### Other Implementation Strategies | Plan | Project | | :--- | :--- | | Program | Standard | HIGH EFFECTIVENESS Quadrant 1 0 - 5 Years (High Effectiveness, High Cost) Quadrant 2 0 - 2 Years (High Effectiveness, Low Cost) LOW EFFECTIVENESS Quadrant 3 0 - 20 Years (Low Effectiveness, High Cost) Quadrant 4 0 - 10 Years (Low Effectiveness, Low Cost) HIGH COST/EFFORT LOW COST/EFFORT (blank page) (blank page) # APPENDICES ### A: STATE OF THE CITY SNAPSHOTS ### B: GLOBAL TRENDS ### C: PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ### D: LIST OF PLANS ### E: GLOSSARY OF TERMS ### F: KEYSTONE INDICATOR PROFILES <
> # APPENDIX A: STATE OF THE CITY SNAPSHOTS ## WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE WE ARE GOING ### *What is a PlanCOS Snapshot?* These Plan**COS** Snapshots were integral to the process of creating this Plan including its Vision and Themes. They provide a quick overview of key subjects and trends both presented to and identified by the community during the stakeholder input process. They include input from the Colorado Springs community, Co-Creators, and the Technical and Steering Committees, along with data and document analysis by contributing subject matter experts. They provide the reader high level background and understanding about these key topics, as well as a baseline for ongoing discussion and evaluation of information and trends important to the city’s physical development future. The Plan**COS** Snapshots are just that; snapshots of key information assembled and synthesized near the beginning of the Plan**COS** process. This information is not represented as being complete and entirely up-to-date in all cases. Unlike the content of the main body of this Plan, these Snapshots have not been thoroughly reviewed and validated in detail by the full spectrum of Plan**COS** participants. Some of this information is particularly susceptible to becoming dated or less applicable over time. Therefore, as Plan**COS** is applied, evaluated, implemented, and amended over time, new and updated information should be considered as appropriate. ## UNIQUE PLACES ### *Growth + Demographics* #### What We Should Know About Who We Are And How We Grow With a land area of 195 square miles and a 2017 population of 467,108, Colorado Springs is Colorado’s largest city by area, and second only to Denver in population. By population, we are now the 40^th[^ ]largest city in the country. By 2040, our City could have well over 600,000 people, and El Paso County is expected to be home to almost 1,000,000 people. Regardless of the exact rate of growth, twenty years from now our senior population is projected to increase extraordinarily and we are projected to be considerably more diverse. #### Historic City Growth Colorado Springs has seen extraordinary population growth over the last 50 years, establishing itself as a strong urban hub for southern Colorado. Since the 1960s its annual population growth has been greater than the majority of cities in Colorado. Although the City’s long-term rate of population growth has slowed somewhat compared with the period from the 1950s through the 1980s, the City continues to grow at rates considerably above the national average. It is expected to match Denver’s population in the future. Comparative Population Growth 1960-2017 <
> Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Colorado State Demographer 2017 ### Unprecedented Regional Growth El Paso County will see over a quarter of a million new people by 2045, and the population for the City will likely be home to about 2/3rds of these residents. By that time, Colorado Springs will grow to be the size of the current City and County of Denver, but with a significantly different outlook: Colorado Springs will still have room to grow, while Denver is already land locked. A significant amount of growth continues to occur outside of the City. This trend will continue to result in challenges for the fiscal sustainability of the City. Although the City’s share of the County population has declined over most of the last several decades, recent data show that this trend may decline in the future due in part to demographic shifts and more urban housing choices. | | EL PASO COUNTY | COLORADO SPRINGS | PERCENT OF COUNTY | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **2017 Population** | 701,283 | 467,108 | 66.6% | | **2025 Projected** | 740,069 | 498,788 | 67.4% | | **2030 Projected** | 797,126 | 526,863 | 66.1% | | **2035 Projected** | 853,580 | 536,885 | 62.9% | | **2040 Projected** | 909,947 | 549,481 | 60.4% | | **2045 Projected** | 960,800 | 573,461 | 59.7% | These projections are derived from the current 2017-18 Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Small Area Forecasts which allocate population based on an overall El Paso County control total provided by the Colorado State Demographer. These projections assume a high proportion of regional growth will occur in areas outside the city limits of Colorado Springs and therefore they differ with other assumptions in PlanCOS. ### Growing Young and Old Populations The proportion of Millennials living in the city is increasing, and furthermore, the 20-30 year old age group is by far the largest for in-migration, and is the most important for fueling the city’s growth. This demand is driven, in part, by the strong military presence. Without appropriate housing types, jobs, and urban amenities, we have the potential of losing a share of this important segment of our population. But Millennials are not the only generation that is growing; the Colorado Springs population is also getting older. There are now over 50,000 people 65 years or older—an increase of 50% since 2000—much of which is attributed to the Baby Boomer generation. Population by Age, 2000, 2010 and 2017 <
> Data Source: US Census, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates # Land Use ### What We Should Know About How And Where We Build Future city growth over the next 20 to 30 years can be accommodated within our existing or modestly expanded boundaries. Currently, over 25% of the City is vacant and undeveloped. The majority of this area is in Banning Lewis Ranch, but many additional opportunities for redevelopment and infill exist. Although our mix of land uses is in overall balance with the market, there are inefficiencies in how some uses are distributed throughout our community. The location, quality, and intensity of existing land uses should be expected to change in the future. In particular, this will impact the redevelopment of existing areas, such as older arterial corridors. ### Rethinking Location, Intensity and Design Taking up the largest portion of the City are properties with conventional residential zoning. These account for just over 41% of the land area. The second largest zoning category is Planned Unit Development, which allows a mix of property-specific uses, most often residential. PUD zoning can allow for increased land use diversity, density or enhanced public amenities. Another 11% of the City’s land is zoned for office, business and <
> employment uses, and 9% for industrial. The last 1% includes other special uses and areas with traditional neighborhood and form-based design. Although the City is comprised of a healthy mix of land uses, not all of them are located in optimal locations or have resulted in the desired intensity of quality. ## The Importance of our Military Presence in City Building With nearly 170 square miles of military land in and around the City that employ or house over 175,000 people, the military is a clear economic driver for the region. This strong presence has both benefits and challenges. As the largest military installation, Fort Carson alone has an associated population of close to 125,000; with 26,282 on active duty and another 98,409 retirees, family members, and civilian employees. Many of these individuals live, shop or recreate in Colorado Springs. The impact of this presence can be seen in the workforce, job availability, services and housing type and tenure. Peterson Air Force Base is unique in that it is entirely surrounded by and included within our city limits. Through the Joint Land Use Study (JLUS), the City is collaborating with these institutions and planning for the areas surrounding the bases in order to support resident life on the bases. While the military bases are anticipated to continue to be a stable economic force, at some point overall City growth is expected to outpace military expansion. This will underscore the importance of leveraging the military presence to attract and target related industries. | BASE | ACTIVE DUTY | RETIREES, FAMILY MEMBERS OR CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES | RESERVISTS | TOTAL | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | **Fort Carson** | 26,282 | 98,409 | - | **124,691** | | **Schriever AFB** | 1,618 | 7,583 | 469 | **9,670** | | **Peterson AFB** | 6,750 | 26,101 | 1,525 | **34,376** | | **Air Force Academy** | 5,701 | 1,875 | - | **7,576** | | **Total:** | 40,364 | 132,994 | 1,993 | **176,313** | Source: Schriever AFB Economic Impact Statement FY 2017; Military Installations: http://www.militaryinstallations.dod.mil/MOS/f?p=MI:ENTRY:0 ### We Know Where We Are Growing The majority of the lands identified as vacant or planned for development are located on the east and north edges of the City, although vacant and re-developable infill properties are scattered throughout the City. Most areas anticipated for growth and development over the next 20 years have already been annexed into the City. The majority of the vacant/developable land is within the approximately 24,000-acre Banning Lewis Ranch (BLR), the largest of the master planned developments. In order to accommodate an anticipated 100,000 more people in the coming decade, the City will most likely need to employ a strategy of both new greenfield development and infill/redevelopment. Infill and redevelopment may be a priority, because sites adjacent to developed areas are more easily and efficiently connected to services and infrastructure, can take advantage of existing capacity, and can reduce the potential for blight and disinvestment in <
> # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE mature areas. However, even with a focus on infill and redevelopment, the development of Banning Lewis Ranch is expected to play an important role in addressing population and employment demand. ### Kinds of Development | GREENFIELD | INFILL | REDEVELOPMENT | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Development of previously undeveloped or vacant sites. These areas are generally located outside or on the fringe of urban areas. | Development of vacant land within previously built areas. These areas are already served by public infrastructure, such as transportation, water, wastewater, and other utilities. | Converting an existing built property into another use. Ideally, redevelopment aims for better use of the property that provides an economic return to the community. | ### Why Are We Still Growing Outward? A significant amount of investment is necessary to see additional growth happen within our infill, redevelopment, and large greenfield areas. Due to a combination of costs and market demand, a substantial amount of development is still occurring outside both the city limits where development standards and requirements are lower. If new residential development growth occurs outside the city boundary, but within driving distance of the jobs and services in Colorado Springs, the development could change planned infrastructure needs including utilities, traffic, and the nature of the development. A significant proportion of the periphery of the city now consists of large lot residential development served by individual wells and septic systems. As the city continues to grow out to and sometimes surround these rural residential areas, there will be challenges in matching up uses, services, and infrastructure. Additionally, almost 40 County enclaves within the city limits have not been annexed. With the exception of Cimarron Hills, most of these enclaves do not have a full range of urban services, and they do not contribute tax revenues to the City. # VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS ## Housing ### What We Should Know About How And Where We Live Families continue to be attracted to Colorado Springs’ housing quality and affordability, and much of the new housing stock will continue to be built as single-family homes. However, an increasing proportion of housing will need to meet the changing demand for smaller, multifamily, and specialized units, and to address our ongoing imbalance in affordable/attainable housing. These shifts in the housing market will be driven by increases in the young, senior, and one- and two-person households, as more than one quarter of households now consist of people living alone. In the near term, there is pent-up demand for quality infill and redevelopment units in Downtown and other urban neighborhoods, particularly for the local workers. Going forward, new and existing suburban neighborhoods should expect to incorporate a wider variety of unit sizes, densities, and types, which offer the chance for residents to up- or downsize while remaining in their chosen neighborhood. ### Small Households Drive Growth Our growing population creates a demand for new non-traditional housing needs in the form of smaller housing units. This is combined with a relatively small household size of approximately 2.48. Seniors and Millennials are expected to grow the most, while boomers are expected to decline in proportion to the general population. The baby boomer generation, has shifted upward in age –a phenomenon to which the housing market will be required to respond to with a housing supply suited to a larger number of elderly households. This will likely translate to increased demand for accommodations that would allow such households to age in place. Very young households have similar needs, often looking for “starter” homes that are affordable, manageable, and appropriate for smaller household sizes. ## Need to Match our Housing Stock to Our Future Demand The choices that Colorado Springs residents make represent the continuation of national trends that impact what households look like today including wealth, mobility, delay of marriage, increased longevity, and a departure from traditional family structures. There are over 50,000 single-person households in Colorado Springs, which translates to 29% of all households citywide. Given this increase in smaller households, there is an inadequate supply of smaller housing units; close to 60% of units have 3 or more bedrooms, whereas only 37% of households have 3 or more people. Although 29% of the population lives alone, only 14% of the units are 1 bedroom or studio units. Comparison of Household Size to Housing Stock (2015) <
> Data Source: US Census, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates ## Housing Demands Point to More Infill There is a capacity for infill development, which could accommodate a substantial proportion of housing needs. As of 2017, there were about 6,700 acres of vacant parcels in the core area of Colorado Springs. While this vacant acreage is steadily decreasing, and not all of this property is easily developable, it represents ample redevelopment opportunities. Until recently, the overwhelming majority of new housing units have been built on the edges of the developed area of the City. While greenfield development continues to account for a majority of new housing, infill areas are beginning to capture a larger share. For example, as of 2018, over 500 new residential units have been or are being added in the Downtown area. Millennials and young professionals will continue to drive the demand for infill housing. In combination with older “empty nesters,” they also are the most likely demographic to prefer apartment living, rental housing, and an urban walkable environment, and they are least reliant on owning a car. The proportion of Millennials living in the City is increasing, and furthermore, the 20-30 year old age group is by far the largest for in-migration, and is the most important for fueling the City’s growth. This demand is driven, in part, by the strong military presence. Without appropriate housing types, we have the potential of losing this population. There is also demand for infill housing among a segment of Baby Boomers. While many want to remain in their home, over half are looking to downsize. An even larger segment may not have a choice as they age, as finances will become more constrained. Pikes Peak Region Residential Building Permits <
> Source: Pikes Peak Region Building Department; UCCS Economic Forum. Note: The data includes El Paso County and Woodland Park ## New Types of Living A majority of Boomers desire to “age in place.” We are also seeing a demand for new types of communities. National trends show suburban development adapting to these desires and future needs. One model that has potential in Colorado Springs is the Lifestyle Master-Planned Community (MPC). Lifestyle MPCs offer a wide range of housing types (including single-family, townhomes, and co-housing) and price points, as well as a strong focus on community amenities. Successful examples that can serve as models for the City include Daybreak (located in the Salt Lake City metropolitan area) and Viridian (Dallas metropolitan area). Other housing developments are turning their focus to healthy living, variety of housing types, technology and unique neighborhood gathering spaces. These kinds of communities will be increasingly necessary to capture and keep young families. # STRONG CONNECTIONS ## Transportation ### What We Should Know About How We Get Around In 2004 and 2012, voters in Colorado Springs and surrounding communities passed a one-cent sales tax to fund transportation and transit maintenance and improvements, demonstrating that our citizens value a transportation system that efficiently moves people and goods. In late 2015, city voters approved a 5-year 0.62% sales tax increase for maintenance of our almost 6,000 lane miles of existing roadways (as of 2018). These transportation-related investments have reduced or mitigated congestion along many of our major corridors, and are beginning to improve our standard of maintenance. Our land use pattern has made us dependent on cars. Multi-modal transportation options (buses/bicycles) are easily available only in parts of our community, and these modes account for only small proportions of overall person miles traveled. Our challenge is to maintain a long-term cost effective and efficient transportation system for the automobile while increasing safe and convenient opportunities for alternate modes of travel. ### Congestion Levels Better Than Others The Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) develops congestion statistics for major metropolitan areas in the United States and classifies Colorado Springs and 32 other cities as medium-sized cities. Medium sized cities are generally considered urban areas with population between 500,000 and 1,000,000 people. As shown, in 2013, Colorado Springs was in the top third of least congested medium sized cities. Since TTI has been recording this data, Colorado Springs' position on this list declined for almost two decades, but has improved dramatically since the turn of the century. In the early 1980s, the City was one of the least congested medium sized cities. Due to rapid population growth and relatively lack of investment in infrastructure the City through the 1980s and 1990s became one of the more congested medium sized cities. Widening of the I-25 corridor through the City and the City’s PPRTA program of capital improvements has effectively reduced the City’s congestion relative to other similar cities. Travel Time, 2010 and 2040 <
> Data Source: PPACG ### City Rank Among Least Congested Medium Sized Cities <
> Source: Texas Transportation Institute ### Travel Times set to increase Transportation needs are not expected to keep pace with projected growth in population and employment through the year 2040. Increasing population growth plus the lack of good east-west corridors is expected to cause the travel length of a 30-minute trip to decrease. This highlights the importance of continuing the PPRTA program after the current program expires in the year 2024 in order to keep Colorado Springs as a city with relatively less congestion than its peer cities. #### Travel Times, 2010 and 2040 | DIRECTION | YEAR 2010 | YEAR 2040 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **North** | 20 miles | 12 miles | | **Northeast** | 13 miles | 9 miles | | **US 24 (east)** | 16 miles | 10 miles | | **SH 94** | 15 miles | 10 miles | | **Southeast** | 15 miles | 11 miles | | **South** | 25 miles | 20 miles | ### Cars dominate the road Historically, the automobile has been the predominant means of travel for Colorado Springs residents. Travel mode data shows that about 90% of vehicle-trips are done via a privately-owned automobile. The transit mode split is about 1% and the non-motorized mode split is about 2%. This means that the demand for road infrastructure improvements will continue to be focused on vehicular travel. Compared to other mid-size, mid-continent cities the mode split of public transportation and non-motorized uses tends to be lower than similar cities. Fort Collins, who has been more proactive in building bicycle facilities citywide, has a non-motorized share of nearly 10%. #### Means of Travel to Work <
> Data Source: 2010 Census ### Are We Driving Less? Vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) per capita in the state of Colorado had been decreasing since 2006, although there has been an increase in overall VMT in recent years, likely due to a combination if a strong economy and sustained low gas prices. However, aspects of this longer term shift appear to be connected to other factors. Evidence suggests that the decline is likely due to the lower auto ownership rates by the Millennial generation, changing demographics and congested highways. This trend suggests two possible outcomes. First, a preference for compact, mixed-use neighborhoods which reduce the need for driving and the potential favoring of other travel modes such as walking and biking and riding transit. Second, declining transportation revenue per capita as less driving would lead to lower per capita fuel usage which would result reduced gas tax revenues to fund transportation infrastructure. <
> ### Bicycling The League of American Bicyclists (LAB) designated Colorado Springs as a Silver Bicycle Friendly Community in 2012 and they noted the strong commitment to bicycling in the community as evident by the large number of bicycling-related organizations and businesses including the United States Olympic Committee, and a supportive city government. However, despite this commitment, Colorado Springs compared to other Colorado cities sees only a small percentage of people bicycling on a regular basis. As shown in the graph, Colorado Springs bicycling mode-share is comparable to Lakewood and Pueblo but overall it is lower than the statewide average. Although not shown the figure, the highest rates of bicycling in Colorado occur in Boulder, CO (11.1 percent) and Fort Collins, CO (7.4 percent). These cities are among the leaders in bicycle commuting nationwide and, as college towns, have very different demographics and land use patterns than Colorado Springs. While there are robust bicycle programs and organizations in the City, they are mostly focused on children and those who already bike instead of the broader population. Furthermore, a 2016 on-line survey targeting Colorado Springs residents indicate that interactions with drivers, high traffic volume and speed, and lack of safe routes are among the strongest <
> deterrents to bicycling. Additional analysis this survey data reveal that respondents would be more comfortable to bike in facilities that were curb-protected or barrier protected. Summary of Responses to the Question: “Please indicate why you cannot or do not want to bicycle in Colorado Springs.” <
> Source: Colorado Springs Bike Master Plan. State of Bicycling in Colorado Springs, January 2017. In response to this current state of bicycling in Colorado Springs, a number of community organizations have passionately expressed an interest in enhancing the City’s bicycling culture and environment. To address these realities and desires, Colorado Springs is currently building on its existing strengths, previous planning work, and community momentum to develop the 2018 Bike Master Plan (Plan). This plan envisions healthy and vibrant Colorado Springs where bicycling is part of the community’s identity and where a well-connected and well-maintained network of urban trails, singletrack, and on-street infrastructure offers a bicycling experience that is safe, convenient, and fun for getting around, getting in shape, or getting away. ### How To Stay At The Forefront Of Emerging Technologies Technology in transportation is moving quickly, with technological innovations in vehicles, the transportation network, and interactions between the two. Colorado Springs has been implementing some of these innovations as they upgrade their signal system to better manage and operate traffic flows on strategic corridors. These signal system technologies and other new technologies are already seeing widespread implementation to improve safety and traffic flow in Colorado and elsewhere. Examples include: * Real time weather and traffic conditions information via variable message signs or smartphone applications * Ramp metering on freeways * In-vehicle collision warning or blindspot monitoring systems * Active traffic management to modify signal timing to more efficiently process recurring and non-recurring congestion * GPS navigation <
> <
> Other innovations with the potential to dramatically influence transportation in Colorado Springs are certainly on the horizon, although the specific forms and timing of those innovations will evolve over time and cannot be predicted with certainty. Innovations could come in the form of advances in vehicle-to-vehicle (V2V) communications, vehicle-to-infrastructure (V2I) communications and/or autonomous vehicle technologies. Economic and technical innovations have the potential to lead to a shift away from personally-owned modes of transportation to mobility solutions that are consumed as a service (e.g. car share, rideshare). ### Colorado Springs Airport The Colorado Springs Municipal Airport (COS) is a city-owned, public-use commercial airport and is the primary-use airport for the Pikes Peak Region and Southern Colorado. The three runway airport is the second largest in the state with nearly 135,000 aircraft operations and over 1.7 million passengers annually. Four passenger and two cargo airlines serve the airport—American, Delta, Frontier and United, FedEx Express and Key Lime Air (UPS)—with scheduled commercial service to 13 nonstop destinations, of which six are international airline hubs, making worldwide destinations easily accessible from Colorado Springs. The Airport serves as the first impression for thousands of visitors, giving them breathtaking views of Pikes Peak and a taste of Colorado hospitality. In addition, Colorado Springs is a major catalyst to the economic growth and vitality of the region, playing a significant role in bringing new business, conventions and tourism to the area. The Airport is comprised of four distinct business centers that span across nearly 7,200 acres of land. These business centers include commercial aviation, corporate and general aviation, military aviation and a 900 acre business park that, together, make up one of the most unique airports in the country. # Utilities + Stormwater ## What We Should Know About How We Provide Energy And Water Colorado Springs has made great strides in catching up on prior deficiencies and ensuring that its future infrastructure meets demands. Our per capita utility usage is decreasing due to sustainability and conservation measures; however, as the City continues to grow, overall demand continues to increase for utilities. Stormwater infrastructure will require further development. ## Future Infrastructure Spending The City of Colorado Springs has recently embarked on a Stormwater Program Implementation Plan to upgrade public stormwater facilities in the City and provide updated guidance for both public and private development. The City of Colorado Springs and Colorado Springs Utilities (CSU) have committed to spending a minimum of $460 million on stormwater projects in the next twenty years to upgrade and correct deficiencies in the current stormwater system. The projects include protection of property and public safety, detention, sediment/debris capture and control, water quality, channel improvements and protection of utility crossings. In late 2017, City voters approved Issue 2A which authorized a stormwater fee beginning in July of 2018. City of Colorado Springs Stormwater Projects <
> Source: Colorado Springs Water Resources Engineering ## Drainage Corridors As Amenities Drainage corridors and facilities can and should be used as multiuse improvements. Trails and other recreational facilities are ideal to locate along drainageways, providing for multimodal transportation, recreation and scenery. The corridors are also typically utilized for utilities (primarily gravity wastewater facilities), and joint use with trails can facilitate maintenance access and accessibility for these utilities as well as for maintenance of the stormwater facilities. ### Declining Wastewater Influent Extends Capacity As of 2017, CSU treats approximately 38 million gallons of wastewater per day (mgd) at its two wastewater treatment facilities with a system capacity rated at +85 mgd. CSU currently has adequate treatment capacity for the next 10+ years, but is looking at a new treatment facility to potentially be developed east of the city. Total influent volumes to CSU’s treatment facilities have been declining to steady over past decades even as the city population has increased. The graphic to the right depicts these trends through 2008, but they have generally been continuing. This is due to water conservation, improvements to the collection system, and annual rainfall. Water conservation strategies include installation of more efficient fixtures in new home construction and renovations. System improvements include replacing or relining of old wastewater mains and manholes which also reduces water infiltration into the system. This decreased per capita influent has resulted in extended capacity for the existing wastewater treatment facilities, reducing the need for additional capacity improvements and capital expenditures. This conservation trend is expected to continue, but the pace of conservation gains is expected to slow. ### Wastewater Influent vs. Population <
> Source: Wastewater Integrated Master Plan, December, 2008 ### Buildout Could Nearly Double Existing Water Usage CSU obtains water from three different river basins (Colorado, Arkansas, and South Platte) that is 70% west of the Continental Divide. The water is delivered to the City via the Homestake, Southern Delivery System (SDS), Blue River and Fountain Valley Authority pipelines. It is then treated at one of several treatment facilities and put into distribution. Average annual system water use was approximately 70,000 acre-feet per year (AF/Yr) in 2015, and had a baseline demand of 88,000 AF/Yr assumed. Average annual availability was approximately 151,000 acre-feet per year. As a comparison, available water during the 2002 drought was only in the range of 53,000 acre-feet. As of 2014, CSU had about 100,000 acre feet of developed water supplies and an additional 52,000 acre feet of developing or undeveloped supplies. From 2002 through 2014, system-wide usage averaged 164 gallons per capita per day (gpcd), while average single-family usage was around 94 gpcd. Over the past two decades, per capita demand has generally been trending lower. This is due to several factors to include more water efficient fixtures in new home construction and home refurbishing, drought and related watering restrictions, tiered/block water rates and the use of xeriscape among others. Decreased per capita consumption has resulted in extended capacity for the existing water storage and delivery facilities, reducing the short term need for additional capacity improvements capital expenditures. It is expected that the water conservation trend will continue, but the pace of conservation gains is expected to slow. At full build-out of the CSU service area, it is anticipated that 119,000 AF/Yr to 159,000 AF/Yr will be required to service the needs of the community in an average year. A variety of options are being looked at for future water demand needs to include increased storage, purchasing new supply, conservation incentives and rates, non-potable water use, agricultural transfers, new conveyance, and groundwater among others. ### Water Use vs. Population <
> Source: Draft Water Integrated Resource Plan, December, 2016 ### Build-Out Water Demand Forecasts <
> Source: Water Integrated Resource Plan, December, 2017 CSU Water Sales <
> <
> Source: https://www.cus.org/csudocuments/watertour.pdf ### Increasing Electrical Usage CSU delivers electricity to city residents, some adjacent jurisdictions, and military installations. Current annual demand is at approximately 4,800,000 mega-watt hours (MWh) with a system peak of approximately 900 MW. The transmission and distribution system contains over 3,500 miles of lines together with numerous substations and generating facilities. Use of electricity on a per capita basis is not expected to increase due to efficiencies and sustainability being realized though new technology. However, there are uncertainties associated with these forecasts, including but not limited to the undermined market penetration of electric vehicles. Therefore, CSU projects a series of forecasting scenarios. Electric Load Forecast | YEAR | SYSTEM ENERGY LEVEL (GWH) | SYSTEM ENERGY CHANGE (%) | SYSTEM PEAK LEVEL (MW) | SYSTEM PEAK CHANGE (%) | SYSTEM LOAD FACTOR ANNUAL (%) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **2014** | 4,655 | | 879 | | 60% | | **2015** | 4,681 | 0.06% | 905 | 3.0% | 59% | | **2016** | 4,718 | 0.8% | 917 | 1.3% | 59% | | **2017** | 4,744 | 0.5% | 926 | 1.0% | 58% | | **2018** | 4,774 | 0.6% | 934 | 0.8% | 58% | | **2019** | 4,811 | 0.8% | 941 | 0.8% | 58% | | **2020** | 4,853 | 0.9% | 948 | 0.8% | 58% | | **2021** | 4,887 | 0.7% | 956 | 0.8% | 58% | | **2022** | 4,933 | 0.9% | 964 | 0.9% | 58% | <
> | | | | | | | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | **2023** | 4,980 | 1.0% | 973 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2024** | 5,033 | 1.1% | 982 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2025** | 5,075 | 0.8% | 989 | 0.7% | 59% | | **2026** | 5,113 | 0.8% | 998 | 0.9% | 59% | | **2027** | 5,152 | 0.8% | 1,007 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2028** | 5,192 | 0.8% | 1,016 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2029** | 5,231 | 0.8% | 1,025 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2030** | 5,271 | 0.8% | 1,034 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2031** | 5,311 | 0.8% | 1,044 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2032** | 5,352 | 0.8% | 1,053 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2033** | 5,393 | 0.8% | 1,063 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2034** | 5,434 | 0.8% | 1,072 | 0.9% | 58% | | **2035** | 5,476 | 0.8% | 1,083 | 0.9% | 58% | Source: Electric Integrated Resource Plan, July 2016 ### Continuing Increase in Electric Costs Electric costs are expected to increase in the coming years with increased EPA emissions standards related to coal-fired and natural gas-fired power plants and as a result of CSU's commitment to higher proportions of renewable electric supplies, and the closure of the coal-fired Martin Drake Power Plant in downtown Colorado Springs by 2035 or earlier. CSU has also started a program to utilize programmable thermostats that allow CSU to adjust home thermostat settings to shave peak system loading and costs to the consumer. CSU Electric Market Annual Price Forecast <
> Source: Electric Integrated Resource Plan, July 2016 ### Growing Renewables CSU is subject to and is supportive of the Colorado Renewable Energy Standard, which requires electric providers to utilize a minimum of 20% renewable energy production in their portfolios by the year 2020. CSU is on target to meet that goal and continue to increase that share in the years after 2020. ### Increasing Efficiency in Natural Gas Usage CSU delivers natural gas to City residents, some adjacent jurisdictions, and military installations. Current annual demand is at approximately 23 billion standard cubic foot (Bscf) with a system daily peak demand of approximately 300,000 thousand standard cubic foot (Mscf). The transmission and distribution system contains over 2,400 miles of pipelines together with numerous regulator stations to reduce system pressures. Capacity Mix <
> Source: Electric Integrated Resource Plan, August, 2012 Overall natural gas use is currently trending upward, while current residential use is trending downward. This is due to the use of higher energy efficient furnaces and appliances in addition to the use of more energy efficient building materials. Gas Load Forecast, Ten Year Peak Demand Forecast Scenario | PERIOD | WINTER 2015-2016 | WINTER 2016-2017 | WINTER 2017-2018 | WINTER 2018-2019 | WINTER 2019-2020 | WINTER 2020-2021 | WINTER 2021-2022 | WINTER 2022-2023 | WINTER 2023-2024 | WINTER 2024-2025 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Daily Peak Demand** | 291,357 | 295,611 | 300,310 | 305,442 | 310,507 | 315,400 | 320,295 | 325,225 | 330,215 | 335,256 | | **Hourly Peak Demand** | 15,442 | 15,667 | 15,916 | 16,188 | 16,457 | 16,716 | 16,976 | 17,237 | 17,501 | 17,769 | Source: Gas Integrated Resource Plan, 2015 Gas Use by Customer Type <
> Source: Gas Integrated Resource Plan, 2015 # Plaı LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE Residential Natural Gas Use per Customer Trend <
> Source: Gas Integrated Resource Plan, 2015 ## Stable Natural Gas Costs Natural Gas costs are expected to remain relatively stable for the foreseeable future due to the more recent development of increased supplies in the United States. Pipeline systems are also in place and being developed to transport gas to storage areas and for delivery to market. Costs of regulation and emissions guidelines are expected to increase, but at a manageable rate. CSU Natural Gas Pricing <
> Source: Gas Integrated Resource Plan, 2015 # MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES ## *Parks + Recreation* ### What We Should Know About Where We Play Colorado Springs is known as one of the top outdoor cities in the nation due to its location at the base of Pikes Peak; access to over 17,000 acres of parks and open space; and double the per-capita usage rates for these facilities as compared to similar communities. We are “ultra-users”! Studies show strong economic returns and health benefits from investing in recreational amenities. Our future challenges will be in identifying necessary funding options to retain and enhance this high level of community-valued amenities. ### What Makes Colorado Springs a Top Outdoor City? The City receives of 249 days of sun annually and has easy access to nearly four million acres of Rocky Mountain wilderness and a dozen world-class ski resorts. The City sits at the base of 14,115-foot Pikes Peak; the Arkansas's Class IV rapids; world-class athletic facilities (Carmichael Training Systems is based here); and miles of multisport trails and acres of parkland. The earliest Parks included North Cheyenne Cañon in 1885, Palmer Park in 1902, and Monument Valley Park in 1907. With Pikes Peak, Bureau of Land Management, El Paso County and state parks, and the City’s own regional, community and neighborhood parks, there are 126,000 acres of parkland within a 15-mile radius of the City. This includes natural gems such as Pike’s Peak, Garden of the Gods, Cave of the Winds, and Seven Falls which attract residents and tourist alike. The City boasts: * 13,330 acres of city managed parkland * 8 Regional Parks * 9 Community Parks * 137 Neighborhood / Mini Parks * 3 Sports Complexes * 5 Special Purpose Parks * 49 Open Space Areas * 178 Miles of Urban Trails * 135 Miles of Park Trails As the City continues to develop, new neighborhood parks, open space, community parks and sports complexes will need to be added in order to keep up with the needs of new residents. There are also over 900 acres of planned but undeveloped parks that need to be completed to achieve the level of service goals outlined in the 2014 Parks System Master Plan. Acres of Parks per Capita Colorado Springs and Comparable Cities <
> Source: Center for City Park Excellence, Trust for Public Land. 2016 City Park Facts; 2015 ACS 5-year estimates ### Easy Access to Parkland and Recreation Centers Use of parks and open space often depends on the accessibility and visibility of these community assets. Not surprisingly, with the high rate of park use in Colorado Springs, a majority of residents have an easy 10-minute walk of open space, a park, greenway, trail or other kind of parkland (77%). This indicates that the City parkland is well distributed and located to provide easy access for most current residents. Similarly, close to 80% of homes are within a 10-minute drive of one of the six recreation and community centers in the City. On the other hand, Colorado Springs has a relatively low number of these centers, compared to similar cities. Boise has a similar number of recreation centers, serving half the number of people as Colorado Springs, and Austin has three times as many centers for twice as many residents. #### Walkability Percent of Residents within a Walkable Distance of Parkland <
> Source: Trust for Public Land, City of Colorado Springs, ESRI Residents within 10-min walk of Parkland Center <
> Residents within 10-min drive of Recreation <
> ### Not Enough Resources For Parks The City of Colorado Springs has a relatively limited parks and recreation budget, compared with other city parks and recreation departments. Per capita, this equates to about $65 for both capital investments and operations and management, which is less than half of what both Aurora and Denver spend. This indicates that the City is accomplishing quite a bit with a limited annual budget, but may be stretched too thin in the long term. This also affects the City’s ability to develop planned parks and maintain a high level of quality and care for existing parks, open space and trails. Spending and Usage Total Parks and Recreation Spending per Resident <
> Source: Center for City Park Excellence, Trust for Public Land. *2016 City Park Facts*, 2015 ACS 5-year population estimates ### Olympic City USA And Its Relationship To Urban Form Colorado Springs is known as OLYMPIC CITY USA. As headquarters for the United States Olympic Committee, Colorado Springs is home to the Olympic Training Center, over 20 national Olympic governing bodies, more than 50 national sport organizations, and the future United States Olympic Museum. Athletes and coaches have long recognized Colorado Springs as the epicenter of the United States Olympic and Paralympic Movements. This importance infuses itself in the City’s educational, medical, technology, design, and cultural assets. In 2009, Colorado Springs was rated the best community to live by Outside Magazine. Residents and businesses often select Colorado Springs due to its setting and access to the outdoors and nature. Colorado Springs has also been rated as one of the healthier cities in the country, and many new initiatives have been directed to improve health. We have found these initiatives have materialized in new capital investments for trail improvements and extensions and new policy changes such as the approval of cottage food industries. ### Economic Benefits of Investing in Health, Parks and Recreation There are certain benefits of a park and open space network that cannot be economically quantified, such as the mental health benefits or even carbon sequestration. However, research by the Trust for Public Land shows that a number of other aspects can absolutely show a direct financial benefit to residents and the City. For example, proximity to parks increases property values and subsequently property tax. Additionally, Colorado Springs residents save $56.5 million in medical care costs annually by using the parks and recreation system amenities to exercise. For the City’s bottom line, the natural cleansing and storage of stormwater by trees and plantings can save the City from additional stormwater treatment costs. Parks play a major role in the City’s and the state’s tourism economy. Colorado tourism consistently outpaces the nation in travel and tourism growth, with Colorado attracting more outdoor visitors while nationwide this type of travel declined in 2015. The dip in visitors after the 2012 Waldo Canyon and the 2013 Black Forest fire and flooding has made a full recovery, with Colorado Springs attracting record visitors and tourism revenue in 2016. This is in no small part due to the City’s natural beauty and outdoor tourism destinations. Garden of the Gods is one of the most visited city parks in the nation, with over 2,000,000 annual visitors. The access to and availability of parks and recreational opportunities has become one of the primary reasons an individual’s choose to live or locate their businesses in Colorado Springs. Prospective residents and employers are attracted to locations that offer these amenities, as they improve a community’s quality of life and provide an important benefit to the local economy. # RENOWNED CULTURE ## Community Character ### What We Should Know About What Defines Us The built environment of Colorado Springs, from our architecture and sculpture, parks and wide boulevards - to our identification as Olympic City USA - helps define our iconic individualism. By the 1940s, Colorado Springs was known for its neighborhood pride and traditional community gathering places. Over time, historic areas have been identified, and today we recognize 432 individual neighborhoods. As we look forward, a structure for better identifying, rejuvenating, and enhancing the character in many of the neighborhoods has begun and will continue through the prioritization and development of neighborhood plans. ### Strong History, Identity And Culture Colorado Springs was founded in 1871 by General William Jackson Palmer as a resort destination for tourists visiting the American West. He played a major role in developing the area with his investment in the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad. Neighborhood pride and identity was as strong then as it is now, with a great variety of architectural beauty and design, as well as key gathering areas such as the YMCA. With the discovery of one of the richest gold strikes in American history, Colorado Springs saw a boom in population and wealth in the 1850-60s and again in the 1890s, making it known as the “City of Millionaires.” At the turn of the 19th[^th] century, Colorado Springs was the wealthiest per capita city in the nation. During this growth period many of the historic buildings in downtown were removed and there was a focus on new construction. There are still 60 nationally recognized historic landmarks and another 20 state recognized landmarks just within the city limits. This includes five historic districts, and 65 individual historic places, reflecting the strong roots in the mining industry, railroad expansion, early health and educational institutions, and social and civic life. The City has supported historical preservation for three decades. The City’s Historic Preservation Board helps preserve and enhance the City’s history and heritage using tools such as the unique Historic Preservation zoning overlay district, design standards for historic districts, and the Historic Preservation Plan. ### A City Built On Its Neighborhoods The residents of Colorado Springs hold significant pride in the neighborhoods where they live. These neighborhoods are where residents invest their money –purchasing a home is often the largest investment one will make– and their time, through neighborhood volunteerism and local HOA and neighborhood organization boards. With 432 different recognized neighborhoods within Colorado Springs, residents will testify to their individual character and how each neighborhood offers something different. Similar to branding efforts in other cities (Denver’s Lodo and Capitol Hill neighborhoods or Minneapolis’s Lowry Hill), residents are moving to preserve and amplify the unique identities of each neighborhood, to strengthen their brand and make them more recognizable. Conversations with Colorado Springs residents illuminated the collective desire to have more walkable neighborhoods with a mix of uses: residential, retail, office, etc., moving away from isolated single-use districts. By creating pockets of walkable and bikeable commercialism and gathering places, Colorado Springs’ neighborhoods can become interconnected through their different amenities. From stakeholder interviews, it is apparent that residents desire the pedestrian-scale environments and tangible identities that set distinct neighborhoods apart from the more commercial and corporate structures of society. They want to live in a place where repeated casual and spontaneous interactions can occur with neighbors, friends, and business owners. This greater urban trend of city-dwellers preferring to live, work, and play within a shrinking radius will continue to impact the development patterns of Colorado Springs. Residents also seek safe neighborhoods. Overall, crime in Colorado Springs is higher than the national average, varying by neighborhood but over time, Colorado Springs has become safer and there is a desire for this trend to occur across all neighborhoods. The City continues to capitalize on the value of the neighborhood through introducing more mixed-use development, neighborhood infill, and adaptive reuse projects. For example, not long after the historic Ivywild School was closed, a group purchased the building and transformed it into the new center of the neighborhood as a gathering place for community and commerce. Aside from the design guidelines for the historic districts of Colorado Springs, there are a half dozen other plans that outline standards and design guidelines for specific zoning and overlay zones, corridors, or other special areas in the City. Most of these plans are implemented through the Comprehensive Plan or by regulation in the City Code. Colorado Springs’ commitment to streetscape design excellence is also reflected in being part of Tree City USA for over 40 consecutive years –the longest-serving Colorado community. Currently, 20% of the City is covered with trees, which is a strong percentage for a city in the plains, where not a lot of trees are naturally found. As the City looks forward, a structure for rejuvenating many of the neighborhoods has begun through the development of neighborhood plans, including those in the southeast where some areas suffer from disinvestment. Although Colorado Springs has a framework of neighborhoods and a community organization in place (Council of Neighbors and Organizations) to advocate for them, our neighborhood identity and identification process is incomplete, and many neighborhoods are not fully organized. Additionally, only a minority of mature, established areas of the City have a city-initiated neighborhood plan in place; where these plans do exist they are often 20 or more years old. Finally, at this time, there is no comprehensive framework in place to determine which neighborhoods should have the highest priority for new or updated neighborhood plans. ## The Importance Of Arts + Culture Long before General Palmer founded the City of Colorado Springs, the area attracted many groups of people and cultures. Home to the Ute, Cheyenne, and Arapaho Native American tribes, among others, the Pikes Peak region has played host to diverse cultures and civilizations for centuries. When General Palmer arrived in Colorado, he saw that diversity of cultures as the cornerstone of civilization. It was through Palmer's original contributions to our society –through facilitating the creation of important civic institutions and fostering parks, tourism, higher education and intellectual interaction– that Colorado Springs began to become the city it is today. Although the intrinsic value of arts and culture is indisputable, throughout the world and at home in Colorado Springs, the economic capital attributable to the arts is becoming more respected and recognizable. The Cultural Office of the Pikes Peak Region estimates that the non-profit arts industry alone generates over $70 million within the Pikes Peaks region annually, and creates over 2,000 local jobs. When creative businesses are included, Americans for the Arts puts the number of jobs created at around 10,000. Additional revenue of over $40 million comes from El Paso County artists and galleries. The impact of the renowned arts in Colorado Springs directly benefits the City’s tourism industry. The Springs is repeatedly found on lists of top art destinations, and ranks in the top 50 of 276 metropolitan areas nationwide in number of arts businesses per capita. The community receives over $50 per person per day above the national average in additional expenditures when non-residents visit for a show or arts event, as they frequently choose to dine, shop, and stay in the area before or after the event. As younger professionals migrate to urban centers across the nation, they are repeatedly considering the arts and culture of a place when choosing where to live. The presence, quality, and quantity of music venues, entertainment centers, museums, galleries, public art, and art opportunities are increasingly playing a significant role in attracting new businesses and individuals. As the arts have proven to weather economic uncertainty, and drive local innovation and economic development, residents of Colorado Springs are pressing for further investment in the City’s arts and cultural scene. # THRIVING ECONOMY ## *Economic Trends* ### What We Should Know About How We Work And Do Business Across the board, the City is advertising more jobs than it can fill. The City’s unemployment at the beginning of 2018 was at a low 3.8%. Job opportunities in military, cybersecurity, the sports ecosystem, and healthcare are abundant, and in some cases openings in these robust sectors have been difficult to fill. The economy and associated jobs will continue to evolve over the next 20 years with less emphasis on traditional long-term employment with fixed hours and more need for office space that nimbly adapts to changes in technology and market demand. Although many jobs will continue to be tied to a physical location, employers will have more choice in where to locate their jobs, and many knowledge workers will be less tied to one work location. Within this evolving context, enhancing urban amenities and housing options is expected to increasingly be a factor in attracting and retaining top talent. ### Stability And Growth In Key Sectors Military employment is expected to remain stable and defense spending accounts for an estimated 40% of the Pikes Peak region’s economy. Healthcare continues to grow, as roughly $1 billion was invested in hospital expansions in 2016. Registered nurses are currently the most in-demand position in Colorado Springs. Across the board, the City is advertising more jobs than it can fill. Tourism is also stable and has a solid outlook. Hotel rates hit a 20-year high, 500+ hotel rooms have recently been added or are currently under construction, and airport traffic is up. While sports and outdoor recreation might be the biggest draws, arts & culture are growing segments of the tourism economy; Pikes Peak Performing Arts visitors number grow significantly each year, and the Olympic museum is expected to significantly increase visitors. Promoting and enhancing Colorado Springs attractions can help in other sectors like healthcare and tech. ### Competition For Cybersecurity Talent Colorado Springs is the ***top U.S. city*** in terms of concentration of cybersecurity firms (100+ firms). The confluence of military, jobs, and quality of life make the City a major competitor for cybersecurity talent. The City is home to the National Cybersecurity Center, and its National Cyber Symposium. However, Colorado Springs will increasingly compete with cities like Salt Lake City, San Antonio, and Washington D.C. for top talent. By a handful of measures, young skilled professionals might prefer amenities in one of the City’s competitor cities, if given a choice. The four competitor cities, for example, each have at least one “cool” neighborhood listed in the Cool Streets report, while Colorado Springs has none. Walk Score, along with Transit Score and Bike Score describe a city’s overall walkability, accessibility, density, and livability. Colorado Springs ranks comparatively lower than other cyber competitor cities in each. Similar to cybersecurity, Colorado Springs ranks in the top ten best places to find a job in technology, but competes with the likes of San Jose, San Francisco, Washington D.C., Seattle, Austin, Boston, and Dallas, that all have a distinct advantage in terms of urban amenities. ### Downtown Economic Development In general, from tech to healthcare, the professional services sector increasingly leans toward more urban, walkable setting to cater to young creative talent. Companies increasingly locate in places where their employees can easily choose from a variety of modes to travel among home, work, entertainment, services and shopping. In the cybersecurity world, urban amenities matter: According to Gensler’s Top Workplace Trends, “…companies will be under greater pressure to find the best employees, balance work modes, and broaden their locational options. Urban areas with transit access and a mix of nearby amenities are in play, adding a layer of security requirements for the owners and developers of buildings catering to the sector.” Downtown Colorado Springs is well positioned to become a significant economic hub. It already accounts for about 29,000 jobs, and has over 500 recently added housing units already completed or under construction. A state-of-the-art Olympic Museum is slated to open in 2019, two large hotel projects are in process, and two sports venues are in the planning stage. One strong indicator metric is commercial office vacancy; Downtown (defined as zip code 80903) experienced 13% vacancy in 2015 compared to 20% citywide. ESRI estimates show that the professional, scientific and tech services industries accounts for nearly a quarter of all Downtown businesses, more than double the percentage in the City. Yet, only 4% of the Colorado Springs workforce lives Downtown, compared to 10+% in competitor cities. There is an emerging live-work-play life-style in downtown Colorado Springs which is not yet well-known. # Fiscal Sustainability ### What We Should Know About How We Invest Well over 25% of the land within the City is owned and managed for the benefit of the public. These uses include parks, open space, transportation rights-of-way, utility corridors, stormwater ponds and channels, schools, and a variety of other public facilities. PlanCOS provides a unique opportunity to understand how growth, development, redevelopment, and reinvestment choices affect the City’s current and future fiscal condition. Understanding this relationship can help inform land use and policy decisions leading to a fiscally sustainable and resilient comprehensive plan to guide future city decision-making. The fiscal sustainability of additional growth outside of the city boundary and lack of intergovernmental agreements with neighboring municipalities will also continue to be an issue. ### Building a Strong Economic Base Colorado Springs has a diverse economic base, with strong anchoring sectors leading the way. We are a national leader in the aerospace, aviation, defense, and cybersecurity industries. Along with the presence of the Air Force Academy and our other military installations, these industries are a top economic engine for our City, creating some of the world’s most innovative technologies and attracting and producing highly-skilled talent. Higher education institutions, including UCCS (University of Colorado, Colorado Springs), Colorado College, Pikes Peak Community College and technical colleges, also drive the local economy forward, producing highly-skilled talent for our City’s employers to draw from. UCCS is expanding rapidly as the identified growth campus for the entire University of Colorado system. Colorado Springs’s role in a thriving economy starts with our brand-as Olympic City USA. This brand needs to be part of us. We are home to numerous headquarters, governing bodies, and related sports organizations as well as many former and future Olympic athletes, thanks to our unparalleled natural training grounds and conditions. This has helped create a diversified sports economy, with businesses focused on training and fitness, equipment manufacturing, and technology. The Olympic City brand and regular athletic events, as well as access to great local parks and the Rocky Mountains, has also fueled a strong local tourism market that is an economic driver for our City. From these strengths, modern technology-based industries have emerged and are growing. Colorado Springs ranks in the top ten amongst U.S. cities for finding a job in technology. We have a growing number of businesses partnering with healthcare providers and research institutions to create innovations in the medical technology sector. In addition to our strength in cybersecurity, we have a thriving information technology industry developing software for a variety of industries, and we have become a leading location nationally for datacenter operations. The confluence of higher education institutions, military installations, trainees and retirees, and quality of life make Colorado Springs a strong contender for technology and engineering talent. Readiness of physical sites, availability of financial incentives and a qualified workforce are key drivers for economic development and business attraction. Quality of place is increasingly important in attraction and retention of a talented workforce, particularly in industries with desirable, well-paying jobs. With our natural landscape, access to outdoor activities, quality K-12 schools and higher education institutions, and a relatively affordable cost of living, it is no wonder that Colorado Springs consistently ranks as one of the best cities to live. The Colorado Springs Chamber & EDC focus its efforts on assisting with the expansion and retention of existing employers, which yields the majority of job growth, as well as on attracting new businesses to the region. Keenly aware of the wage gap that is growing nationally, the Chamber & EDC also emphasize creation of living-wage and higher salaried jobs. The City can support these efforts by ensuring it creates desirable site and neighborhood conditions for workers, businesses, and residents. This means ensuring that the above strengths remain in place, focusing on creating quality infrastructure, housing that is affordable and attractive to people of all income levels, and neighborhoods in which people want to live. Many skilled workers have strong preferences for compact, walkable, unique settings with easy access to recreation and entertainment. The City’s investments and regulations can create this type of physical environment that attracts businesses and skilled workers, as a part of the broader economic development strategy. ### Balancing service standards and ability to pay for services Fiscal sustainability is the ability of a local government to pay for public services and infrastructure at an established level of service. To determine whether a combination of land uses is fiscally sustainable, a fiscal impact analysis can be conducted. Fiscal impact analysis enables local governments to estimate the difference between the public costs to provide services and infrastructure and the sales and property taxes, user fees, and other revenues generated. A fiscal impact analysis is different from an economic impact analysis, which evaluates the economic benefits to a community in terms of jobs, income, and economic output—some of which may not have a direct fiscal effect on local government finances. In all communities, there are fiscal “contributors” and “recipients.” One goal for future growth is to achieve a mix of land uses that results in a balance of contributors and recipients thus achieving fiscal sustainability for the locality as a whole. ## Cost of Growth ### What We Should Know About How We Pay For Growth The PlanCOS process can help identify where existing infrastructure and services can accommodate additional growth in the City, where current development patterns are fiscally beneficial, and where redevelopment makes sense fiscally. This is also an opportunity for meaningful dialogue on cost burdens and community priorities for services and infrastructure that ultimately can be embedded in PlanCOS policies and goals. ### Understanding The Costs Of Growth Outside Our Boundaries In the short term, development outside of city limits appears to cost less, as initial infrastructure costs are paid by the developer. However, long-term costs for upsizing and operations and maintenance have future consequences for the community. Developments closer to the core of the city are typically less expensive to serve long-term and have ancillary benefits to a community. Potential exceptions to this—not inconsequentially—are places with aging and inadequate infrastructure needed to support intensified redevelopment. The impacts have been summarized as follows: > Two sets of infrastructure are being created and both are underutilized: the one Americans are running away from (cities and older developed suburbs) and the one they never catch up with (the new spreading development). This development pattern results in overly high costs to local governments, developers, and housing consumers. As a result, taxes are increasing in the older communities due to excessive capacity in their infrastructure and in the sprawl developments due to the need for required systems to serve new growth, including such physical infrastructure items as community water and sewer. (Burchell, Costs of Sprawl, 2002) On the other hand, Burchell’s research has found that “[s]prawl does provide less expensive single-family housing at the periphery of metropolitan areas... it provides “congestion management” due to the suburb to suburb work trip... and allows a choice in community settings including smaller, more accessible local governments.” Furthermore, it has been argued that annexation allows for a locality to capture a larger tax base particularly in fiscally struggling localities. ## Who Benefits and Who Should Pay? In Colorado Springs, the current policy is for the private sector to construct on-site and off-site (adjacent) public facilities with the expectation that ongoing urban services (e.g., public safety) will be funded with General Fund revenues. Paying for public services presents a set of tensions. Certain types of services are more appropriate to be funded with general tax dollars because they are a public good and benefit all of a community, rather than an individual (e.g., public safety). At the other end of the continuum, some types of services can be viewed as more appropriately funded with user fees because the benefit is directly enjoyed by an individual (e.g., development services such as building permits). Still others are a mix of both community and individual benefits and therefore appropriate to be funded with a combination of general tax dollars and fees. Because of these issues, local governments often establish policies regarding acceptable thresholds for cost recovery from fees while considering social and economic factors. The City of Colorado Springs recently adopted a user fee policy that sets cost recovery levels for City departments to use in setting a fee structure. The following policy guide is from the City’s User fee Policy. City of Colorado Springs Cost Recovery Levels and Policy Considerations | Cost Recovery Levels | Cost Recovery Percentage Range | Policy Considerations | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Low | 0% - 29% |
  • There is a community-wide benefit to the service
  • The fee will discourage compliance with regulatory requirements
  • Collecting fee is not cost effective
  • Public goods
| | Medium | 30% - 69% |
  • Services having factors associated with the low and high cost recovery levels
| | High | 70% - 100% |
  • The service has attributes similar to services available in the private sector (therefore the government should not subsidize a service that the private sector provides)
  • Those individuals receiving the benefit of the service pay the cost of the service
  • The goal is to discourage use of a service or at least limit demand
  • The service is regulatory in nature
| Source: City of Colorado Springs User Fee Policy ### Infrastructure Investment Shared Between Private And Public A key element in the Mayor’s Strategic Plan is “Investing in Infrastructure.” This is more than an investment in expansions of infrastructure system but rather an acknowledgment that investing in the City’s existing infrastructure is essential for long-term economic and fiscal success. The City Council has identified the need to develop a “long-term, realistic funding and action plan” to fund infrastructure improvements. Currently, private development is required to provide on-site infrastructure as well as adjacent off-site facilities only when necessitated by the specific development. However, the City has not generally required development to pay for its fair share of system-level improvements with a few exceptions. ## Revenue Trends ### What We Should Know About How Much Funding We Have Like most municipalities in Colorado, Colorado Springs is dependent on sales tax revenues to fund core services and infrastructure. Current per capita retail spending in the City is just above the statewide average. However, shifts in consumer behavior (with a trend toward online purchasing which is often tax-free) and demographics in the City may have a direct effect on our future fiscal sustainability. Anticipating these trends and seeking to mitigate negative fiscal impacts through physical planning and policies can create quality places and opportunities to maximize revenue. ### Increasing The City’s Tax Revenues Like most cities in Colorado, sales and use tax revenues are the major source of revenue in the General Fund. In Colorado Springs, sales and use taxes comprised 60% of the City’s General Fund budget, as of 2017. Reliance on a relatively volatile revenue source such as sales tax requires the City to be diligent in preparing for inevitable economic downturns. Through 2017, the City has experienced a 21% increase in per capita sales tax revenue since the low point of 2009, while population has grown by 10% over the same time period. This has allowed the City to somewhat catch up with deferred costs and services resulting from the Great Recession. <
> Colorado Springs Sales Tax Revenue Per Capita <
> Note: Amounts shown in current dollars (not adjusted for inflation). Compared to other Colorado cities and the state, taxable retail sales per capita in Colorado Springs is close to the statewide average and in the mid-range of comparable cities. In communities reliant on sales tax revenue, retail development is often aggressively pursued. However, the retail landscape is changing rapidly with an ever increasing share of purchases being made online. Despite the majority of purchases still being made at bricks and mortar establishments, almost all growth in retail sales nationally is taking place online. What is even more important for sales-tax dependent localities like Colorado Springs is that the goods that are shifting to online sales are those goods that comprise taxable goods — therefore reducing sales tax revenues collected locally over the long term. Taxable Retail Sales per Capita: Comparison of Select Cities and State Average (CY 2015) <
> Colorado Springs has revenue limitations due to the provisions of the State Taxpayers Bill of Rights (TABOR) and the City Charter. TABOR essentially caps annual City revenue based on a growth formula that is applied to the City’s previous year actual revenue or TABOR revenue limit, whichever is less. The TABOR limitations present two key challenges for the City: (1) City revenue received above the annual revenue cap must be refunded to local taxpayers or can be retained via voter approval. This results in limited opportunities to invest one-time surpluses. (2) Applying the growth formula to the previous year’s **actual** revenues in years when revenues are lower than the TABOR limit **ratchets down the revenue limit** thus negatively affecting subsequent years when revenues begin to increase. # *Expenditure Trends* ### What We Should Know About How We Spend Public Dollars Lower per capita city revenues has resulted in fewer dollars available for core facilities and services compared with many other communities. PlanCOS provides an opportunity to understand and consider implications of these expenditure trends as well as assumptions related to the physical development and care of our City. ### Spending Habits Are Based On Available Revenue Cities provide a range of services at varying levels of service. The City of Colorado Springs spends less per capita for City services than comparable cities in Colorado and elsewhere, which is likely due to the Colorado Springs’ revenue limitations. It should be noted that the expenditures shown reflect General Fund expenditures only. For some jurisdictions General Funds can be a reflection of the amount spent on general services. However, some general services can be funded through non-General Fund sources of revenue (such as the City of Colorado Public Safety Sales Tax). FY 2017 General Fund Expenditures Comparison per Capita <
> Year 2017 General Fund expenditures totaled $272 million with just over 50 percent spent on public safety. The costs shown do not include the additional funding of $32 million from the City’s dedicated Public Safety Sales Tax (PSST) and also does not include additional expenditures for the City’s 5-year voter approved “2-C” sales tax. Furthermore, the PSST ballot issue requires that the City expend at least 49% of its General Fund revenues on public safety. ### General Fund Expenditures (FY17) <
> \* Other includes City Auditor, City Council, Finance, Community Development, Economic Development, and Planning & Development # Special Districts ## What We Should Know About How We Publicly Finance The City allows the use of special districts to reimburse developers for a share of public infrastructure costs and, increasingly, as a means to finance the ongoing maintenance of community facilities not maintained by the City. Given prior decisions to allow districts and the City’s revenue constraints, this tool is likely to stay in place for future generations. However, PlanCOS provides an opportunity to review special district policies in light of other larger discussions on, “Who should pay for what?”, as well as to identify possible changes to special district policies in line with PlanCOS goals and objectives. ### A Widely Used Funding Tool To help pay for infrastructure needed to serve new development, special districts are used throughout Colorado. Special districts are “special purpose governments” established to provide public financing through property tax mill levy to pay for public capital facilities and occasionally to operate and maintain those public facilities. The use of Special Districts has grown significantly over the past 15 years in Colorado with a fivefold increase in the number of districts throughout the state. There can also be issues with existing districts and overlapping entities, when properties are annexed into the city. Special districts used in Colorado Springs include Metro Districts, Business Improvement Districts, General Improvement Districts, and Special Improvement Maintenance Districts. Special districts are useful tools in places with revenue constraints due to TABOR, like Colorado Springs. In Colorado Springs, as of 2017 special districts of all types reflect approximately 20 percent of total City property value and Metro Districts reflect approximately 10% of total City property value. ### The Perception Of A Heavy Tax Burden Title 32 special districts often impose much higher property tax levies as compared with the City and El Paso County. This means that residents of these districts may be more averse to approving future general purpose property tax increases because of their higher relative tax burden. Currently, the City of Colorado Springs accounts for almost all of the property value in El Paso County special districts and a little over half of metro districts. The reality for Colorado communities —and particularly Colorado Springs— is that given property tax limitations, use of special and metro districts is an essential tool for new development to be able to provide infrastructure. This creates a system of multiple “typical tax payers” with tax rates varying across the City based on location inside or outside a special or metro district. What also varies widely is the actual tax rate (levy) from district to district —particularly in metro districts. While the City’s property tax mill levy is 4.279 (per $1,000 in market value), special district property tax mill levies can range upward to 50 mills depending on the district. Levies vary across the City with an additional $16 million generated by special district property tax mill levies in the City, as of 2017. This amount reflects almost double the amount of General Fund property tax revenues generated, and is expected to increase rapidly. (blank page) The 2017 edition of P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report highlights opportunities arising from converging shifts in demographics, lifestyles and competition that are rapidly shaping our cities. An award-winning research effort, P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report is a go-to resource for downtown management organizations, business leaders and local decision-makers. # 2017 <
> # TOP 10 GLOBAL TRENDS ## Affecting Downtowns & How to Respond at Home 2017 marks the tenth year that Progressive Urban Management Associates (P.U.M.A.) has conducted ground breaking research to identify the top global trends impacting American cities. Originally prepared for the Downtown Denver Plan to forecast our hometown’s growth, the P.U.M.A. Global Trends Report has subsequently been utilized in cities throughout the nation to support a variety of downtown planning, marketing and economic development initiatives. Broadening and deepening our research, the last two Trends Reports were created along with the University of Colorado Denver College of Architecture and Planning. P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report was the recipient of the International Downtown Association’s President’s Award, acknowledging its value to the place management and downtown development fields. The 2017 edition of P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report finds downtowns and urban districts benefiting from powerful market forces that have accelerated. Urban areas that once took decades to improve are transforming in a matter of years. The resulting urban renaissance is good news for city builders but is also presenting new challenges. As in past editions, the 2017 Trends Report introduces new trends to reflect the latest market dynamics and thought leadership in the evolution of cities. Joining mainstay trends in demographics, lifestyles and competition, we offer insight into new phenomena that are becoming game changing considerations for cities, including: * The emergence of Gen Z, the generation now coming of age behind Millennials. * The Rise of the Mid-Tier City, exploring how Millennials are increasingly attracted to the affordability and lifestyle of smaller cities. * Housing and Livability looks at how downtowns are becoming multi-dimensional neighborhoods. * Social Equity is becoming an economic imperative for downtowns to retain their historical role as centers of opportunity, diversity and tolerance. # [GLOBAL TRENDS] | 2007 | 2011 | 2014 | 2017 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Demographics** | **Demographics** | **Demographics** | **Demographics** | | Changing American Demographics | Changing American Demographics | Changing American Demographics | Changing American Demographics | | Immigration Trends | Education, Talent & Jobs | Education, Talent & Jobs | Education, Talent & Jobs | | Changes with the “Creative Class” | Emergence of Young Professional Women | Influence of Women | Rise of the Mid-Tier City | | | | | | | **Lifestyles** | **Lifestyles** | **Lifestyles** | **Lifestyles** | | Traffic Congestion & Value of Time | Changing Consumer Behaviors | Changing Consumer Behaviors | Changing Consumer Behaviors | | Trends in Health Care/Wellness/Recreation | Shifts in Transportation & Mobility | Shifts in Transportation & Mobility | Shifts in Transportation & Mobility | | Growth of Tourism | Health, Wellness & Urban Form | Health & Wellness | Housing & Livability | | America’s Growing Debt Burden | The Age of Austerity | Rise of Regionalism | Regionalism | | | | | | | **Competition** | **Competition** | **Competition** | **Competition** | | The Emergence of a Planetary Middle Class | The Emergence of a Planetary Middle Class | Shift in Global Wealth | Shift in Global Wealth | | Continued Advances in Technology | Continued Advances in Technology | Continued Advances in Technology | Continued Advances in Technology | | Environmentalism, Sustainability, | Sustainability Mainstreamed | Social Equity – The Neglected Pillar | Social Equity | | Climate Change | | of Sustainability | | PROGRESSIVE URBAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES # [CONCLUSIONS] Overall, global trends continue to appear favorable to promote growth in vibrant downtowns. **America’s population is growing younger and older and more culturally diverse.** Demographic trends in the United States continue to support downtown development. The population is growing both older (aging Baby Boomers) and younger (Millennials and emerging Gen Z). Both Boomer and Millennial markets have fueled downtown population growth over the past decade and are poised to continue to populate urban environments, particularly in those cities that offer jobs, housing, amenities and activities that respond to their needs. America will become more culturally and ethnically diverse, creating an advantage for downtowns that welcome, accommodate and celebrate diversity. **Capitalize on an increasingly connected and competitive world.** Broader distribution of information technologies is encouraging “bottom-up” innovation from entrepreneurs throughout the globe. Education will be key in ensuring that America remains competitive and cities that make connections to higher institutions of learning, including community colleges, will benefit. Companies are now moving to cities where young skilled workers (Millennials and soon Gen Z) prefer to live and work. A focus on entrepreneurship and innovation will be essential if Gen Z eschews college as expected. Downtowns are poised to be centers of creativity and innovation if they can offer a business climate favorable to the incubation and growth of small dynamic enterprises. **Small and mid-size downtowns can anchor the emergence of new “opportunity cities”.** A nascent trend finds increasing numbers of Millennials moving from top tier “superstar” cities to smaller markets in search of affordable living, quality of life and civic involvement. Small and mid-size downtowns can capitalize on this trend by being portals of opportunity, offering assistance to find jobs, housing and services, and, perhaps most importantly, connections to “city building” activities that bring new vitality to center cities. **Global growth will continue to make investment in cities more attractive.** While many global economies are experiencing turbulence, long-term trends support the expansion of a planetary middle class. India is the next global powerhouse and could eclipse China’s economic importance within ten years. Growth in emerging economies will strain the supply and increase the costs of non-renewable resources, making traditional suburban land use and vehicular transportation patterns increasingly expensive and inefficient. At the same time, American lifestyle preferences are favoring more walkable, bikeable and transit-rich communities. Cities will look to maximize the use of existing infrastructure and promote sustainable development. **Innovation and investment is more reliant on regional initiative.** Increasing federal debt and political polarization in Washington result in diminished federal and state resources dedicated to infrastructure, education and innovation. America’s economic growth will be led by cities that choose to invest in regional transportation, education and cultural facilities. New financing solutions are required and a willingness to invest (yes, new taxes) and innovate (public/private partnerships) will keep cities that choose to do so competitive and connected to the global economy. Downtowns, often led by innovative public/private partnerships, can play a stronger role in leading regional policy and investment initiatives. **Planning for economic and cultural diversity is a priority.** With trends in their favor, many downtowns are experiencing a renaissance that is attracting new investment and higher income households. To ensure long-term economic vitality, urban centers need to advance social equity by encouraging a variety of housing and transit options, better schools, holistic approaches to reducing homelessness, public amenities that promote healthy lifestyles and policies that encourage equity. Downtowns should welcome everyone and showcase the cultural diversity of the city, thereby preserving their historical role in delivering the American Dream. # [IMPLICATIONS FOR DOWNTOWNS] Research and conclusions from Global Trends offer many implications for the future of downtowns. Highlights, as analyzed by Progressive Urban Management Associates, include the following: ### DEMOGRAPHICS **Capture the young skilled workforce:** Downtowns have the edge in attracting the young skilled workforce coveted by employers. To capture this market predisposed to urban living and experiences, downtowns should provide a welcoming environment and information services that make it easy to relocate for jobs and housing. Embracing social tolerance, celebrating multi-culturalism and using social media tools will invite populations that are increasingly diverse and technologically savvy. Creative incentives, such as subsidizing student loan debt, should be considered. **Create an environment that appeals to diverse populations:** The next professional, working and creative classes will increasingly be dominated by women and people of color. Downtowns must look for ways to engage these populations in all facets of the downtown experience, including active public spaces, mixed-use living options, transit and mobility, daycare, retail, art, creative expression and entertainment offerings. Encouraging under-represented populations to participate in local policy and urban design leadership positions can create a competitive edge. **Develop meaningful opportunities for “city building”:** Many young skilled workers are moving from expensive top-tier markets to more affordable and livable second-tier markets. A key motivation for many of these migrants, including “rebounders” that are moving back to home cities, is to be involved in civic initiatives including those aimed at energizing downtown. City building initia- tives that match volunteers to downtown improvement opportunities can be a powerful inducement for talent recruitment. **Foster education:** Educational institutions are civic anchors, economic stabilizers and incubators of new creative businesses and jobs that should be encouraged to locate and grow in downtowns. Education continuums, connecting local public school systems to colleges and technical schools, should be explored. As cities work to attract and retain young families, the development of quality downtown K-12 schools is essential. **Multiple Generations “Aging In Place”:** Both Baby Boomers and Millennials are projected to perpetuate demand for downtown living. Urban amenities that appeal to both Boomers and Millennials should be considered, including robust dining and entertainment options, and investments in promoting healthy lifestyles and social interaction from dog parks to public markets. The eldest of Gen Z are entering adulthood, will also be attracted to urban places and will be looking for these same amenities. ### LIFESTYLES **Implement comprehensive mobility strategies:** Downtowns need to invest in streetscapes, two-way conversations, connectivity improvements and other ways to implement complete streets principles that support a variety of modes beyond vehicles. Mobility options are needed to appeal to younger populations that are increasingly disinterested in automobiles . Age-friendly Universal Design standards should be employed to promote accessibility for all, from aging Boomers to young families with infants and toddlers. **Promote the sharing economy:** Grounded with less consumptive values and armed with mobile technologies, Millennial consumers are increasingly seeking opportunities to share, rent or resell goods and services. Bicycle and car sharing are becoming the accepted norm in downtowns, and in larger cities are now a priority supported by major employers. Localized apps and other accessible technology platforms for sharing consumer goods, workplaces, housing, recreation and social experiences can build a sense of community. **Support authentic and unique retail concepts:** In a changing retail environment, downtowns can capitalize on national preferences for brick and mortar stores that offer one-of-a-kind products and personalized customer service. Shared retail and “pop-ups” can fill vacant storefronts and test new concepts. **Encourage housing with diverse price points and unit types:** To provide an environment that attracts a multi-skilled workforce and culturally-mixed demographics, varied housing price points and unit types are needed. Zoning codes, development standards and incentives should be updated to promote opportunities for affordable, flexible, multi-generational and other non-traditional housing. Downtown organizations can be leaders in local initiatives that create a continuum of housing choices, including attainable choices for younger populations that are just starting their careers. **Create new amenities for living:** For downtowns seeking to jump start residential development, investing in civic amenities can help to attract new investment. A wide range of amenities for living include active parks and plazas, bike and pedestrian facilities, and neighborhood services including a grocery. Downtowns in secondary markets can also reach out to urban residential developers in top tier markets that have become expensive and less profitable. **Keep it fun, entertaining and interesting:** Many downtowns have become hubs for entertainment, arts, culture and sports. To remain competitive and continue to attract a young and diverse workforce, fortifying and expanding downtowns’ experiential attractions will be critical. Downtowns should integrate new mobile technologies into marketing and promotions. A variety of cultures and languages should also be accommodated, appealing to an increasingly diverse local population and international tourists. **Be a strong advocate for regional investment and collaboration:** Federal and state investment in infrastructure, mobility and education has decreased. Cities and regions that choose to invest in these initiatives will thrive; those that do not may stagnate. Downtowns can help to educate communities on the benefits of regional cooperation and investment. Solutions to increasing challenges related to housing affordability, better wages, improved schools and homelessness, will require regional approaches. A new emphasis for downtown organizations may include introducing skill sets and leadership capabilities to affect policy and foster regional collaboration. ### COMPETITION **Entrepreneurship will continue to be a key to job growth:** Downtowns should explore ways to support small businesses and startups through direct technical assistance, co-working and other flex spaces, creative incentives, designated innovation zones and other options. Entrepreneurship becomes more important as Gen Z comes of age with a larger tech-savvy population preferring entrepreneurial pursuits over more traditional collegiate pathways. **Develop innovative public/private partnership approaches:** While Global Trends are favorable for downtown investment, conventional financing will be constrained due to lingering effects of recession and government dysfunction. Increasingly sophisticated downtown partnerships can diversify revenue and add capacity to build capital improvements, activate greenspaces, manage parking, advance solutions to homelessness and more. **Be technologically relevant:** Mobile communications for social and business uses continue to grow with the influx of Millennials and Gen Z into the workforce. Downtowns need to make sure that they are technologically relevant, both in providing the infrastructure that supports speed and security for computing and in developing the creative applications that keep a tech savvy population engaged. **Adaptive reuse will be more affordable as construction costs rise:** As global demand continues for building materials, the cost of new construction will increase. Beyond traditional historic properties, reuse opportunities will become increasingly attractive for post-1950 buildings, including office high rises that were constructed during the 1970s and 1980s. **Incorporate sustainability as part of the downtown brand:** Downtowns can incorporate environmental sustainability as a key component of the center city brand. With compact mixed-use urban environments, downtowns offer inspiration and relevancy to emerging generations and the economic model for a sustainable future. **Stay on the leading edge of social equity issues:** With income and social inequality a growing national concern, and urban areas prospering from Global Trends, there is growing responsibility for downtowns to plan for and participate in social equity solutions. By bringing private sector perspectives, downtown management organizations are in a unique position to offer leadership, resources and balance in issues that include housing, wages, education, homelessness and other related topics. # TOP 10 GLOBAL TRENDS Affecting Downtowns & How to Respond at Home # [DEMOGRAPHICS] <
> ### TREND 1: CHANGING AMERICAN DEMOGRAPHICS As the younger generations of Americans begin to assume more responsibility at home and in the workplace, the impacts of differing lifestyle preferences are becoming more apparent in downtowns. Non-white races and ethnic groups are fast becoming the majority, diverse cultural and religious backgrounds are becoming ubiquitous, and gender roles and norms are being redefined. To this end, a notable preference for living and working environments that prioritize diversity, collaboration, inclusivity and the free exchange of ideas is emerging. Though the influence of youth is rising, four distinct generations are shaping the development of American cities: **Baby Boomers**, born between 1945 and 1962, have lost their position as the largest generation, having been surpassed by Millennials in 2015. Recession-driven dents in retirement savings and rising medical costs are driving increased debt in this generation, forcing many who are well past traditional retirement ages to prolong their stay in the workforce. Longer life expectancies, increasing health care demands, and continued participation in the American job market mean that the Boomers' impact is still strong. **Generation X** (Gen X), born between 1963 and 1978, is the American generation smallest in number. Gen Xers are savvy, skeptical, and self-reliant. They are often referred to as the “middle child” between the older Boomers and younger Millennials, falling between conservative Boomers and liberal Millennials with regard to social and political issues. Gen Xers are most influential in the workplace, having advanced to management positions where their structured and linear work ethic has the potential to clash with that of their more carefree Millennial subordinates. **Millennials**, born from 1979 to 1996, are the first “digital native” generation. Burdened by student debt, Millennials have redefined adult milestones for themselves, choosing to live with their parents longer and marrying and buying homes later in life than past generations. They are racially diverse and, unlike previous generations, define diversity as the mix of experiences, identities, ideas, and opinions, instead of placing it within the more traditional racial framework. They will comprise up to 75% of the workforce by 2025 and are the most educated of all adult generations. Millennials place a high emphasis on healthy lifestyles and are willing to splurge on healthy food, wellness and athletic gear. **Generation Z** (Gen Z), born after 1996, is racially diverse and projected to be majority-minority by 2020. Now beginning to enter the workforce and higher education, Gen Zers display a high level of anxiety regarding future job satisfaction, a fear that translates into a highly entrepreneurial generation—the majority express a desire to start or own their own businesses. Tech-nology-savvy from birth, Gen Z is interested in developing technology-related job skills, especially those relating to development and design. Having witnessed the effect of the economic downturn on Millennials, Gen Z is evolving into a financially conservative generation that prefers to save money rather than spend it. When they do spend, they exhibit a preference for material objects much like the generations encompassing their Gen X parents and Boomer grandparents. ### TREND 2: EDUCATION, TALENT & JOBS The premium on a young skilled workforce continues to drive development and investment in American cities. While college-educated workers make up about one-third of the American workforce, they produce more than half of the nation’s economic output. Where young skilled workers choose to live is increasingly the key decision factor for business growth and relocation. The shift to a preference among young people for living in denser, more urban neighborhoods began in the early 2000s. This reversed the 30-year-old trend toward suburbanization among recent college grads, much earlier than previously realized, and suggests that the recent return to urban areas is more of a long-term trend rather than a temporary phase. With a growing share of the population attaining higher levels of education, cities will need to ensure that they have a talented employee base with the skills needed in a modern, high-skill service-oriented job market. Private investment in metro areas has been on the rise, with venture capital flowing into metros that are not only larger, denser, and more affluent, but also more open and diverse with greater concentrations of talent. High-growth companies have said they value a talented employee base as the most important business-related resource that cities can offer, outranking access to customers and suppliers, low tax rates, and business-friendly regulations. Employers and employees alike value an inclusive quality of life and are attracted to cities that support and promote a diverse population as well as invest in the livability of their downtown areas. Large employers have taken steps to align their values and commitments with those of their employees. Women, people of color and immigrants will play important roles as entrepreneurs. Women continue to outperform men in higher education, accounting for nearly 60 percent of all college degrees, including advanced degrees. The projected five percent growth of the American labor force over the next two decades is attributed to the growth in the non-White population, without which the American labor force would actually shrink. The rate of growth for women-owned business has also been on a steady upward trend, with cities averaging a growth rate well above the national average. Research has shown that diversity in the workplace prompts interactions between people of varying backgrounds, promoting the development of new perspectives and creativity in problem-solving, leading to higher productivity and wages. Cities that invest in programs and services that fulfill the needs of residents of all income levels and demographic groups in order to ensure access to jobs and amenities will maintain an economic advantage. TREND 3: ### RISE OF THE MID-TIER CITY The dense, large “superstar” cities that were synonymous with economic growth and opportunity during the past decades are slowly being overtaken in popularity by smaller, less flashy but more affordable, urban areas. These mid-tier cities are beating out superstar cities like New York and San Francisco in attracting 25- to 34-year-olds with a college education because they are more affordable and livable. Metropolitan cities like Buffalo, Cleveland, New Orleans and Pittsburgh, which are experiencing negative population growth, are simultaneously experiencing gains in their college-educated youth populations. Millennials migrating to more affordable urban areas present a unique opportunity for second- and third-tier cities to experience long-term economic benefits from the influx of young, college-educated professionals. College-educated young adults aged 25 to 34 are twice as likely to live within three miles of a city’s downtown core. But rising downtown real estate prices in big cities have priced out the very demographic that are now the main driver of economic growth in America. Businesses, too, are finding that their investment dollar stretches much further in mid-tier markets. With a resurgence of talent returning to smaller cities, businesses are following—and reaping excellent returns. These cities are now being referred to as “opportunity cities,” those with metro areas where both businesses and residents have the best chance to thrive. Mid-tier cities with strong connections to education are also seeing unprecedented growth and development. Cities are fostering engrained relationships between education and business, creating permanent pipelines that funnel talent straight from their local higher education institutions into their local businesses. Cities are aligning their own development priorities to match the livability preferences of young talent by investing in extensive downtown amenities and attempting to become “18-hour cities,” where restaurants, retail, and housing are keeping people downtown long after the typical work day ends. Mixed-use development projects that incorporate retail, office and residential continue to dominate new construction in downtowns, catering to the desire for integrated living and working. <
> TREND 4: ### CHANGING CONSUMER BEHAVIORS Advances in technology continue to impact the nature of the retail industry and the shape of brick-and-mortar stores that are critical to downtowns. The convenience and ease of e-commerce is stimulating increases in online sales; however, the majority of retail transactions still occur in traditional stores. In 2015, e-commerce sales grew nearly 15%, but still only accounted for 7.5% of total retail sales in America. Ninety percent of all retail transactions still occur in a physical store. Brick-and-mortar stores provide the sort of visual navigation and tactile experience that will be difficult to replicate online, making the in-store experience unique in that it offers consumers the ability to physically engage with their chosen brand and brand ambassadors. Consumers prefer to support locally produced items that offer the added value of an emotional connection through the product with the local neighborhood. Downtown retail formats that prioritize a personalized consumer experience will stay competitive. Consumers are increasingly voting with their dollars, seeking out companies they believe to be trustworthy, reliable, authentic and visionary. They demand that companies and brands are transparent about their production processes, ingredients, materials and labor, and they show a preference for brands that protect consumer privacy and treat their employees well. The exchange of information between company and consumer is more comprehensive and immediate than ever; companies that demonstrate their responsiveness to consumer preferences are better positioned to retain their share of the competitive American marketplace. Millennials in the workforce now exhibit the largest influence on the American economy. Compared to previous generations, Millennials are much more deliberate when considering major purchases, and retail stores must make adjustments to meet their changing preferences. This generation will continue to influence the retail industry with their support for the modern bartering system of goods and services, known as the sharing economy, which can provide opportunities for small business growth through [LIFESTYLES] shared retail spaces. Cities that provide flexible spaces for pop-up retail stores and markets will be able to capitalize on this new interpretation of brick-and-mortar retail. Early research on Gen Z, the next generation behind the Millennials, suggests they will be more materialistic and opt to own consumer items more like Gen X and Boomers. Having witnessed Millennials suffer from student loans, underemployment and the delay of adulthood during the Great Recession, 60 percent of Gen Z believes that “a lot of money” is evidence of success compared to only 44 percent of Millennials that believe the same. TREND 5: ### SHIFTS IN TRANSPORTATION & MOBILITY The previous Global Trends Report documented a national shift away from auto-dependence and toward walkable cities. This trend has continued and is made even stronger by the lower-than-ever numbers of teens and young adults who are getting their driver’s licenses and owning cars. Only 60% of 18-year-olds have their driver’s licenses today, as opposed to 80% in the 1980s – resulting in overall lower rates of car ownership. Millennials are about 30% less likely to buy a car than those in Gen X, and they also generally wait longer to buy their first car, meaning they will usually own fewer cars over their lifetime. After a decade of declining per capita vehicle miles traveled, 2015 evidenced a reversal of this trend credited to low fuel prices and a stronger economy. However, long-term trends point to continued decreases in vehicle use driven primarily by demographic preferences. Capitalizing on the increasingly ubiquitous shared economy model, carshare programs are on the rise, expanding from universities and cities into other areas as well. Carshare program memberships have doubled over the last five years, demonstrating steady growth in the field. Another significant and growing impact on transportation in cities is Uber and Lyft. Though the increase in these services might actually be contributing to an increase in vehicle miles traveled, cities that have such ride sourcing programs have noticed decreases in fatalities from drunk driving. Bike sharing also continues to grow steadily. In the 2014 Global Trends Report, more than 500 cities globally had a local bike share program; now nearly 1,000 cities support them, continuing bike share’s momentum as the fastest growing mode of transportation in human history. A majority of local bike share initiatives are found in Europe and China, and more than 100 are now found in North America. Public transit options are increasing in many downtowns, with cities across the U.S. attempting to make the transit experience more enticing. Streetcar investment is on the rise, though returns on this particular transit option are inconsistent across markets. Rapidly growing southern and western cities are experiencing excellent results in coordinated efforts to focus development around new light rail corridors, while Bus Rapid Transit investment across the country has consistently proven to be the most cost-effective and reliable improvement to public transit systems. Transit riders continue to prioritize commute time, reliability, expense, and distance from home and work when selecting a public transit option. While the demand for multi-family units has been growing in urban cores, the supply of people being able to afford to live in them has been declining. erations want in housing is much of the same thing: urban, multi-family housing that allows for better transportation options, walkable communities, increased social connections, and technology-oriented spaces. A 2016 analysis found extraordinary rent premiums for housing and other uses in “walkable urban places.” In a walkable urban place multi-family residential commands a rent premium of 66%, retail a 71% premium and office space a 90% premium. While the demand for multi-family units has been growing in urban cores, the supply of people being able to afford to live in them has been declining. The surging trend in luxury housing is ultimately beginning to create less diverse, livable, and economically vibrant downtowns by “squeezing-out” the working class and placing an extreme cost-burden on a high number of renters. <
> ### TREND 6: HOUSING & LIVABILITY The high demand for multi-family units in center cities is expected to continue. Though renting has increased among all age groups, household types, and income groups, the primary reason for the high demand for multi-family units in downtowns has been attributed to the Millennial and Baby Boomer generations. Studies have shown what both of these generations want in housing is much to shape future rental housing demand is the aging of the Millennial generation. The desire to “age in place,” a phrase typically used for the elderly, is now emerging as a trend for Millennials in downtown cores. As Millennials begin having children, they will have needs for larger spaces, easy access to employment centers, and, perhaps most importantly, close proximity to safe and well-rated schools. As minorities become majorities in many urban areas, it is becoming increasingly important for downtown housing to cater to the specific cultural preferences and needs of these populations. This includes space, configurations, and amenities that can accommodate cultural housing makeups such as larger family sizes, multigenerational families, and younger average ages, as well as affordability. New senior living options are emerging as seniors reject traditional sunbelt retirement communities. These include communities based on the Village Concept, Cohousing, Home Sharing and Eco-communities. Other emerging housing types include micro-units and mixed-use apartments atop commercial uses. ### TREND 7: REGIONALISM The fiscal health of federal, state, and local governments has generally improved since the depths of the Great Recession, but long-term projections indicate worsening deficits fueled by growth in entitlement and healthcare spending at the federal and state levels. Ten years ago, when the first P.U.M.A. Global Trends Report was published, the per capita share of the national debt was $29,000. In 2016, the per capita share of national debt had ballooned to nearly $60,000 and growing. Post-recession recovery of state and local government tax revenues has been slow and uneven, and unfunded pension and healthcare liabilities will put significant pressure on state and local budgets in the long-term. Meanwhile, political gridlock in Washington and in many state legislatures across the country shows little sign of letting up, and it is unclear whether Millennials or possible disruption to the political status quo signaled by the 2016 election will lead to any breakthroughs. Twenty years ago, 64% of Republicans were more conservative than the median Democrat, and 70% of Democrats were more liberal than the median Republican. By 2015, these percentages increased to 93% and 94% respectively. In response to dwindling resources and political gridlock at the state and federal levels, city and county governments in metropolitan regions across the country are turning to collaboration with private companies, universities, hospitals, non-profits, and each other in order to accomplish tasks once reserved for or funded by state and federal governments. Cities and regions as different as Denver, Oklahoma City and Cleveland are finding ways to expand transit systems, attract jobs and talent, upgrade civic and cultural facilities, and invest in other regional priorities through cross-jurisdictional collaboration, regional bond initiatives, and partnerships with private businesses and institutions. Cities and regions that embrace these new forms of cooperation and leadership on a regional scale will be best prepared to weather the effects of declining fiscal health and growing political dysfunction. Downtowns, which have long relied on innovative public/private partnerships to attract investment and manage the public realm, can be leaders in new regional dialogues. Downtowns, which have long relied on innovative public/private partnerships to attract investment and manage the public realm, can be leaders in new regional dialogues. # [COMPETITION] <
> ### TREND 8: ### SHIFTS IN GLOBAL WEALTH In prior editions of Global Trends, we looked at consumption patterns in emerging economies around the world and their impact on American cities. Despite recent twists and turns in the global economy, a dramatic rise in personal wealth is creating a rapidly growing international middle class. In a world of interconnected parts, America’s ability to chart its own destiny continues to diminish. Despite a slowdown in its rate of growth, China is the world’s second largest economy with a growing middle class. China’s relative consumption of global commodities continues to increase, accounting for 27.5% of global car sales in 2015 versus less than 1% in 2000. India is now growing faster than China and is predicted to have the world’s largest and youngest workforce within 10 years. Over 80% of the world’s population lives in emerging markets, and these regions are expected to be responsible for nearly all future global population growth and expanding middle-class consumer spending. Emerging economies are expected to account for 60% to 70% of global GDP growth for the foreseeable future as they expand at more than twice the rate of developed economies. In the long-term, this trend appears to indicate further globalization in the natural resource marketplace along with continued acceleration in global resource depletion. Foreign investment in apartment housing, mixed-use development, office and industrial space is driving the transformation of American cities. Mid-tier cities such as Austin, Denver, Seattle, Charlotte and Nashville are expected to see high levels of investment from both domestic and foreign interests as investors find better returns in these markets than the larger markets that have historically attracted investment. This trend may have far-reaching implications for cities as traditional American property rights interests are intertwined with those of international corporate shareholders. ### TREND 9: ### ADVANCES IN TECHNOLOGY To maintain and improve high service levels on tighter budgets, downtowns are increasingly looking toward technological solutions. With global mobile phone subscriptions expected to top nine billion by 2020, cities are increasingly leveraging mobile access to communicate directly with their citizens. Mobile devices are continuing to diminish the importance of static office locations, allowing for connections anywhere, anytime. Office space configurations are changing, with reduced space needed to conduct business and greater utilization of space beyond traditional eight hour workdays. To attract young skilled employees, office design is increasingly combining business and social functions – a growth of mixed-use principles within buildings as well as outside of them. The growing popularity of “co-working” spaces are reflective of these trends. Because more data is being exchanged through electronic means cybersecurity infrastructure is becoming a priority. Small- and medium-sized cities are working cooperatively, investing on a regional scale in security measures in order to defer costs. Technology advances are also finding their way into public works projects. In response to high-profile infrastructure failures throughout the country, cities are seeking strategies to manage the high costs of infrastructure maintenance. Sensors are being increasingly used by cities to measure the status of infrastructure and to cue maintenance. Investment in monitoring technology may provide cities operating on a limited budget with better information to allocate their funds. In terms of mobility, autonomous cars have the potential to dramatically change the arrangement of cities in the coming decades. Limited introduction to the market is possible within the next couple of years. If driverless cars are adopted by individual owners, parking will still be necessary downtown, but in tighter space configurations. Reduced congestion and fewer accidents may result, positively impacting fuel efficiency but with unintended consequences of more driving and less use of public transit. ### TREND 10: ### SOCIAL EQUITY The last Global Trends Report predicted a rising tide of civic activism to demand equitable living circumstances in American cities. This prediction has come to fruition, with social equity issues relating to income inequality, affordable housing, living wages and inequalities within the justice system becoming mainstay topics of debate within the American zeitgeist. The richest 1% of households owns 35% of the country’s wealth, while the lower 50% owns only 2.5% -- a gap widened to extremes not experienced since the 1920s. The big picture impact of income inequality is debated, but there is growing evidence to suggest that one-dimensional wealthy cities are at an economic disadvantage. If a variety of housing and employment types cannot be provided, a fully functioning diversified economy is difficult to sustain. The implementation of progressive policies that promote social justice and equal economic opportunity are becoming increasingly mainstream. A fiscal disparities plan in Minneapolis gives back to poor communities more than they contribute into a tax-sharing fund. And some larger cities like Los Angeles have implemented community benefits policies that work as a type of fiscal concession to lower-income communities that may have been adversely affected by development projects. Cities are taking active measures to address the lack of affordable housing that is disproportionally affecting working Millennials. To attract and sustain a diverse market demand, downtowns must offer a mix of housing options that cater to multiple lifestyle needs and that serve residents through all stages of life. Access to quality education and jobs plays a pivotal role in increasing economic mobility. Due to the skyrocketing costs of college education, young adults’ record-breaking student debt loads will delay their ability to accumulate wealth. Downtowns can produce a homegrown pool of workforce talent by ensuring high quality public school education for local residents and by creating programs to support the pursuit of a post-secondary education. Those that work to attract a diverse mix of employers, especially those in new-economy sectors, will have the competitive advantage. # Research Team for Global Trends Primary research for P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report 2017 was undertaken by 11 graduate students in the spring 2016 urban revitalization class at the University of Colorado Denver College of Architecture and Planning, Master of Urban and Regional Planning (MURP) program. The MURP program counts over 1,300 alumni and is the largest planning program in the Rocky Mountain region. Located in the heart of Downtown Denver, we use Colorado as our classroom and emphasize experiential, hands-on, real-world learning. Our teaching, research and community engagement center on three issues at the forefront of planning practice: Healthy Communities, Urban Revitalization, and Regional Sustainability. Primary research was verified and edited by P.U.M.A. intern and project assistant Liz Munn. P.U.M.A.’s Brad Segal finalized the report, with contributions from Erin Lyng and Yvette Freeman. Supporting research for P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report 2017 is available upon request by contacting us at www.pumaworldhq.com <
> **Front row from left to right:** Brad Segal, co-lecturer, Laurie Tabachnick, Fontaine Burruss, Cayla Cothron, Jungwha Yuh **Second row from left to right:** Anna Jones, co-lecturer, Liz Munn, project assistant, Kevin Carder, Jessica Vargas, Liia Koiv-Haus, Lauren Richardson, Megan Yonke, Steve Price IV, Kelsey Blaho *** # PROGRESSIVE URBAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES **Progressive Urban Management Associates (P.U.M.A.)** is an economic development and planning firm that delivers community-based solutions to create thriving downtowns, corridors and neighborhoods. A national leader in downtown and community development, we advise clients on a wide range of management, marketing, financial, urban design and implementation tactics that help communities and organizations create and sustain dynamic places. ### Specialties * **Economic Development Strategies** Downtown Action Plans and Place-Based Economic Development * **Strategic Planning** Strategic Plans and Community Engagement * **Equitable Communities** Social Equity and Healthy Places * **Community Development Tools** BID Creation, Expansion and Renewal and Community Development Financing ### Client Communities <
> <
> ### MEET P.U.M.A. Left to right in photo above: **J.J Folsom, Vice President** jj@pumaworldhq.com **Andrea Buglione, Project Assistant** andrea@pumaworldhq.com **Erin Lyng, Senior Associate** erin@pumaworld.com **Brad Segal, President** brad@pumaworldhq.com **Yvette Freeman, Senior Strategist** yvette@pumaworldhq.com **Erica Heller, Vice President** erica@pumaworldhq.com **Daniel Makela, Associate** daniel@pumaworldhq.com | FOR MORE INFORMATION ON P.U.M.A., VISIT WWW.PUMAWORLDHQ.COM | | :--- | 2018 GLOBAL TRENDS UPDATE: # SIZZLING SECOND-TIER CITIES ### INTRODUCTION P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report highlights opportunities arising from converging shifts in demographics, lifestyles, and competition that are rapidly shaping our cities. An IDA President’s Award Winner, P.U.M.A.’s Global Trends Report is a go-to resource for downtown management organizations, business leaders and local decision-makers. This report dives into **Global Trends Update: “Sizzling Second-Tier Cities.”** The full Global Trends Report can be obtained at pumaworldhq.com. In the U.S., the shift to a preference among young people for living in denser, more urban neighborhoods began in the early 2000s, reversing the 30-year trend toward suburbanization. Millennials, the largest demographic cohort and the main driver of economic growth in America, value walkable, urban places that provide easy access to services, quality of life amenities and a live-work lifestyle. However, rising downtown real estate prices in many cities, coupled with national trends of stagnant wages and widening inequality, are pricing out the Millennial demographic. Further, the surge of luxury housing within these areas is ultimately beginning to create less diverse, livable and economically vibrant downtowns by placing extreme cost burdens on many renters. The dense, large “superstar” cities that were synonymous with economic growth and opportunity during the past decade are slowly being overtaken in popularity by smaller, less flashy but more affordable, urban areas. A Brookings analysis of recent census data showed that large metropolitan areas lost migrants to smaller and non-metropolitan areas for the first time since 2008. Small and mid-size downtowns can capitalize on this trend by being portals of opportunity, offering assistance to find jobs, housing and services, and, perhaps most importantly, connections to “city building” activities that bring new vitality to center cities. ### DEFINITIONS Based on our analysis of over 80 major American cities tracking median population, median rent and listing price, and housing and transportation costs, the following categories emerged: <
> SUPERSTAR CITIES: Established cities with median populations over 1.5 million, such as New York or San Francisco, that are also giving rise to “regional” cities surrounding them <
> STEADY-STAR CITIES: Catchment cities of superstar cities with median populations of 700,000, such as Seattle or Denver <
> SIZZLING SECOND-TIER CITIES: High-growth cities with median populations of around 300,000, such as Boise, Des Moines, Louisville, Cincinnati and Reno <
> CITIES TO WATCH: Following the trends of Sizzling Second-Tier Cities, cities such as El Paso, Tulsa, and Evansville have populations around 300,000 and have the potential for innovative planning work over the next decade <
> # THE SIZZLING SECOND-TIER CITY ADVANTAGE Fortunately, the benefits of city living can be realized in second-tier cities. With the proliferation of technology and advances in transportation options, every city has the potential to benefit like the superstar cities. Businesses are finding that their investment dollar stretches much further in mid-tier markets. With a resurgence of talent returning to smaller cities, businesses are following—and reaping excellent returns. These cities are now being referred to as "opportunity cities," those with metro areas where both businesses and residents have the best chance to thrive. Mid-tier cities can provide opportunity through employment and education; offer a high quality of life with affordable and attainable housing; strengthen a community through diversity; invest in dynamic, dense and mixed-use places; and encourage opportunities for residents to become engaged in community. ### ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY Mid-tier cities with strong connections to place-based anchor institutions, such as universities, are seeing unprecedented growth and development. Cities are fostering existing relationships between education and business, creating permanent pipelines that funnel talent from their local higher education institutions into local businesses. Cities should curate ample employment opportunities by providing integrated workforce development programs, educational access, opportunities for advancement at multiple skill levels, broadband and wifi capability, and reliable transportation connections between jobs and homes. ### AFFORDABILITY Growing evidence indicates that one-dimensional wealthy cities are at an economic disadvantage, and that if a variety of housing and employment types cannot be provided, a diversified economy is difficult to sustain. Therefore, downtowns should work to attract a diverse mix of employers and attainable housing options to gain and sustain a competitive advantage. These options may include planning for "missing-middle" housing with options such as townhomes, condos, multi-family units, affordable starter homes, multi-generational living, more energy-efficient units, adaptive reuse, and locating near transit access. ### DYNAMIC PLACES Cities are aligning development priorities to match the livability preferences of young talent by investing in extensive downtown amenities and moving to become "18-hour cities," where restaurants, retail, and housing are keeping people downtown long after the typical work day ends. Mixed-use development projects that incorporate retail, office and residential continue to dominate new construction in downtowns. They should incorporate transit access; walkable urbanism; comprehensive mobility options; support of authentic and unique retail concepts; "surprise and delight" by making a place fun, entertaining and interesting; and focus on the experience of a place. ### DIVERSITY + AUTHENTICITY It is in a city's best interest to create and foster environments that appeal to diverse populations. Diversity is a social strength, an indicator of welcomeness, and a competitive economic advantage. Global trends indicate that the next workforce generation will be increasingly dominated by women and people of color, and cities must look for ways to engage these populations in all facets of the placemaking experience. Cities that invest in programs and services that fulfill the needs of residents of all income levels and demographic groups will maintain an economic advantage. Research shows that walkable urban places hold the most potential for inclusive prosperity and social equity. ### COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT Anecdotal research shows that Millennials and Gen Z both value engagement in their communities. They want to participate in neighborhood events and in city-building, and they desire pride in a place, connections, community, and engagement. Many young skilled workers are moving from expensive top-tier markets to more affordable and livable second-tier markets. A key motivation for many of these migrants, including "rebounders" that are moving back to hometown cities, is to be involved in civic initiatives including those aimed at energizing downtown. City-building initiatives that match volunteers to downtown improvement opportunities can be a powerful inducement for talent recruitment. **EXAMPLES: Engaging Anchor Institutions** - London ON Fanshawe College Downtown Campus partner-ship; Cleveland's University Circle District. **Economic Development** - Downtown London ON Incentives such as: Tenant Improvement Loans, About Face Façade Grant Program, Last Mile Fibre Optic Grant; Downtown Sacramento's Calling All Dreamers Business Competition. **Multi-Modal Transportation Options** - Transit-Oriented Development in Downtown Richmond; Smart Parking Management in Downtown Tempe and Downtown Pasadena **EXAMPLES: Inclusive Planning** - Downtown Cleveland's focus on physical connections between affordable housing and service jobs, focus on workforce housing and targeted incentives; Downtown Grand Rapids GR Forward planning process to build racial equity and opportunity in downtown. **Infill** - Downtown Orlando's Parramore Neighborhood Comprehensive Plan resulted in Parramore Infill Housing with the CRA's Down Payment Assistance Program. **Affordability** - Seattle's Housing Affordability and Livability Agenda campaign. **EXAMPLES: Parks and Greenspace** - Downtown Columbus' Scotio Greenways and Riverfront; Downtown Oklahoma City's Myriad Gardens; Tulsa's Riverfront Park- The Gathering Place; Downtown Grand Rapids' whitewater rapids restoration; San Antonio's Hemisfair Park. **Arts & Culture** - Louisville's Alley Gallery; Downtown New Haven's Elm City Mosaic, Downtown Santa Ana's Calliotree. **18-hour cities** - Community Safety in Downtown Orlando; Elbow Entertainment District in Downtown Jacksonville; Nighttime Economy in Downtown Delray Beach. **EXAMPLES: Authentic Place Branding** - Downtown Louisville's Bourbon & Beyond; Downtown Winnipeg at The Forks: skating, food, drinks, and entertainment; Downtown Halifax's Date Night. **IDA's Authenticity Checklist** includes the key points of: engaged and involved property ownership, commercial diversity and independent businesses, walkability, accessibility, clean, welcoming, diversity in culture and attitudes, public spaces as gathering places, arts, historic preservation, and vibrancy of place . **EXAMPLES: Community Engagement** - The Downtown Denver Partnership's CityLive engages residents in city-building efforts to ensure they are informed, engaged and inspired; Downtown Grand Rapids Downtown Residents Network; Downtown Ithaca Association sets aside one board seat specifically for downtown residents. <
> GLOBAL TRENDS UPDATE: SIZZLING SECOND-TIER CITIES PROGRESSIVE URBAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES # SUPPORTING RESEARCH <
> | | SUPERSTAR | STEADY STAR | SIZZLING SECOND TIER | CITIES TO WATCH | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | Boston, Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, New York City, Philadelphia, San Diego, San Francisco, San Jose, Washington DC | Austin, Dallas, Denver, Miami, Nashville, Phoenix, Portland OR, Seattle | Atlanta, Boise, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Colorado Springs, Columbus, Des Moines, Durham, Fort Wayne, Fort Worth, Grand Rapids, Greenville SC, Huntsville AL, Indianapolis, Las Vegas, Lincoln, Louisville, Madison, Mesa, Minneapolis, Omaha, Orlando, Pittsburgh, Raleigh, Reno, Richmond, Sacramento, St. Petersburg, Salt Lake City, Tampa, Wilmington NC | Albuquerque, Baltimore, Billings, Buffalo, Cedar Rapids, Chandler, Cleveland, El Paso, Evansville, Fresno, Greensboro, Jacksonville, Kansas City MO, Knoxville, Memphis, Milwaukee, Norfolk, Oklahoma City, Providence, Rapid City SD, St. Paul, San Antonio, Savannah, Sioux Falls, Spokane, Tucson, Tulsa, Wichita, Winston-Salem | | = Significant Data Point | | | | | | **Change** Median 7-Year Population | + 9% | + 12% | + 10% | + 5% | | % Gen Z (18-24 year old) | 11% | 10% | 12% | 11% | | % Millennials (25-34 year old) | 19% | 20% | 17% | 16% | | Millennials: Bachelor’s Degree or Higher | 49% | 49% | 40% | 31% | | Median 1-BR Rent | $2,176 | $1,595 | $1,150 | $795 | | Median Rent (All Homes) | $2,750 | $1,848 | $1,438 | $1,188 | | Median Home Listing Price (All Homes) | $714,000 | $460,000 | $283,948 | $214,750 | | **Change** in 3-Year Median Listing Price (All Homes) | + 26% | + 28% | + 31% | + 19% | | Median Citywide Walk Score | 78 | 61 | 42 | 40 | | Median Housing Cost as % of Income | 28% | 27% | 26% | 25% | | Median Transportation Cost as % of Income | 16% | 19% | 22% | 23% | \*These data are based on PUMA selected samples of 83 cities over 100,000 based on data from the ACS US Census, Center for Neighborhood Technology, Walk Score, and Zillow. This analysis is not scientific and is meant for informative purposes only. Analysis included population growth, median rental and home listing prices, median household income, median walk score, domestic migration patterns, and CNT’s housing & transportation index. We analyzed patterns that emerged and then categorized by city typology for ease of understanding the data. Not all data used to inform these typologies is included in this handout. Strong college towns and strong regional node cities were excluded from this analysis since they represent unique categorizations. Median 7-year population change is from ACS Census population estimates from 2010 and 2017. Gen Z are represented as total population 18-24 years old and Millennials are represented by total population 25-34 years old from ACS Census 2016 5-year estimates at the place level. Median rental rates and home listings (not values) are from Zillow, July 2018 and 3-year changes are calculated from July 2015 to July 2018. The housing and transportation index is from the Center for Neighborhood Technology Housing and Transportation Index at the municipality-level, Accessed September 2018. **Population Growth:** While continued population growth (12 percent) may be expected within “steady star cities,” it is notable that “sizzling second-tier cities” are experiencing a high rate of population growth over the past seven years at 10 percent. **Rising Home Listings:** Most notably, the median listing price of homes in “sizzling second-tier cities” has increased by 31 percent over the past three years, the highest percentage of all four city categories. Some individual sizzling cities’ home listings increased by a lot more (Fort Wayne: 42%, Atlanta: 47%, Boise: 38%, Cincinnati: 43%, Grand Rapids: 45%, Las Vegas: 36%, Louisville: 39%, Lincoln: 37%, Orlando: 34%, St Petersburg: 60%, and Tampa: 36%). **Transportation Cost:** The above table exemplifies the importance of investing in multi-modal, accessible transportation options. While housing costs vary slightly between city categories, the transportation costs increase significantly (16 percent to 23 percent) as one moves from “superstar” to “steady star” to “sizzling second-tier” to “cities to watch.” Transportation is less of a cost burden in more established cities with more pedestrian-friendly built environments that have more public transportation options. A lesson for the “cities to watch” is to begin planning efforts now around investment in multi-modal transportation options such as bus rapid transit, rideshare and autonomous vehicle planning, bicycling infrastructure and pedestrian improvements. <
> # P.U.M.A. CASE STUDIES ## URBAN PLACE MANAGEMENT AND STRATEGIC PLANNING Urban place management, strategic planning initiatives, and public-private partnerships will be particularly useful as second-tier cities take advantage of their current appeal. Place management is a tool to activate places, encourage thoughtful and strategic growth, provide business and economic development support, and advocate for inclusive prosperity. Second-tier cities are heating up and comprehensive, strategic, market-based action plans, through the work of a place management organization, can provide a catalyst to reshape downtowns. P.U.M.A. has had the opportunity to work on a number of these plans in cities throughout the United States and Canada, and highlights from two recent planning efforts are provided below. <
> <
> ### DOWNTOWN EVANSVILLE MASTER PLAN UPDATE P.U.M.A. led an interdisciplinary team to develop a master plan for downtown Evansville, Indiana. Titled "Community Handbook for City Building," the plan provides an action plan that includes several catalytic projects and a road map to form a self-sustaining downtown management organization financed in part by an economic improvement district (EID). The planning process engaged the community to come up with core values and opportunities: an activated downtown with a main street and waterfront; innovative regional job hub; unique businesses; a connected place— safe, walkable, bikeable; a downtown neighborhood with diverse housing options and amenities; an infrastructure framework and network of enhanced complete streets; public space amenities; a designated entertainment district; activation of ground-floor retail space; and parks as gathering spaces. The resulting progress in downtown Evansville has been palpable, with an influx of new investment and the subsequent creation of the EID. ### DOWNTOWN RENO ACTION PLAN AND BID CREATION P.U.M.A. led an inclusive community process to create the Reno Downtown Action Plan, which identifies and prioritizes strategies to advance downtown. The plan focuses on three major initiatives: Economy - help to attract new investment, build housing and create jobs downtown with a boost from a new innovation and industrial district, economic linkages to the University of Nevada, diversify the tourism draw, use housing as a transformative element and capitalize on the strong demand for retail. Environment - make physical improvements to strengthen connectivity and accessibility for all modes of transportation especially by bicycle and on foot to the University and Truckee River and invest in amenities to encourage housing. Experience - make downtown more welcoming, safe and active, address social issues, redevelop vacant properties and preserve historic buildings. Following completion of the plan, downtown stakeholders formed a new business improvement district (BID) that anchors a public/private partnership to champion and sustain downtown vitality. ## ABOUT P.U.M.A. Progressive Urban Management Associates (P.U.M.A.) is an economic development and planning firm that delivers community-based solutions to advance thriving downtowns, corridors and neighborhoods. A national leader in downtown and community development, we advise clients on a wide range of management, marketing, financial, urban design and implementation tactics to help communities and organizations create and sustain dynamic places. P.U.M.A. has worked in nearly 200 communities throughout the United States, Canada, and the Caribbean. <
> P.U.M.A. Team (front row: from left) **Erin Lyng**, Associate Vice President, **Brad Segal**, President, **J.J. Folsom**, Vice President, (back row: from left) **Amanda Kannard**, Associate, **Andrea Buglione**, Associate, **Daniel Makela**, Senior Associate, **Yvette Freeman**, Senior Strategist, **Bree Davies**, Equitable Communities Strategist, **Cole Judge**, Senior Associate <
> PROGRESSIVE URBAN MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATES <
> **P.U.M.A.** 1201 E. COLFAX #201 DENVER, CO 80218 TEL: 720.668.9991 pumaworldhq.com <
> # APPENDIX C: PUBLIC OUTREACH PROCESS ## OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT PROCESS The public outreach and engagement process for PlanCOS is celebrated as an unprecedented undertaking by the City of Colorado Springs. Thousands of citizens participated in online surveys, Facebook live streams, and the many events held by the team. Sincere efforts were made to utilize several tools to make sure the process of creating PlanCOS was inviting, open, inclusive, and transparent. Overall, PlanCOS held, attended, or participated in over 270 meetings and events with stakeholder groups ranging from just 1 person to over a few hundred. Groups consisted of public, private, and non-profit sectors, such as the City of Manitou Springs, representatives from the Colorado Springs Homebuilders Association, and the Homeless Advisory Council at Springs Rescue Mission. At these events and meetings, stakeholders provided input from their particular viewpoints and perspectives. This input was critical in developing and then fine tuning the content for PlanCOS. <
> Mayor John Suthers at COSTALKS held at Pikes Peak Community College, 3.16.17 (photo: Sean Holveck) ### Intent and Highlights The intent of PlanCOS public engagement was to be inviting, open, inclusive, and transparent. While PlanCOS achieved what could be considered remarkable numbers for public engagement, the real success is in that citizen comments were incorporated into drafting PlanCOS throughout the entire creation process. Efforts like Survey I, Survey II, online commenting public commenting, the plan being developed into a website, hosting of stand-alone and piggy-backed events, and meetings, PlanCOS was effectively able to engage citizens, stakeholders, interests groups, and more to talk about what they wanted for the future of Colorado Springs. It is this effort that was responsible for the ultimate end product of PlanCOS. # WHO WAS INVOLVED ## Steering Committee Oversight for the PlanCOS effort was provided by a Comprehensive Plan Executive Steering Committee. This Committee consisted of representatives from the community that were selected by Mayor John Suthers. Committee members met beginning in June 2016 and concluded with the final endorsement of this Plan in September 2018. Their role in the creation of PlanCOS was critical, in that they were a bouncing board of ideas and conducted ultimate vetting of the plan’s content. The PlanCOS team provided the materials, analysis, and recommendations for PlanCOS but the Steering Committee was the final decision maker. Steering Committee members not only attended scheduled meetings to discuss PlanCOS, but also acted outside of these meetings as champions for PlanCOS. Many Steering Committee members participated in PlanCOS events with various degrees of involvement. The following table lists the Steering Committee members and their major affiliations and interest groups: ### Table 1: Members of the PlanCOS Steering Committee | STEERING COMMITTEE MEMBER | AFFILIATION AND INTEREST GROUP | | :--- | :--- | | Merv Bennett, Chair | City Council | | Jill Gaebler, Vice Chair | City Council | | Rachel Beck | CONO (prior), PPACG (prior), Chamber/EDC | | Max Cupp | CONO | | Susan Davies | TOPS | | Charles Deason | NE Colorado Springs | | Kent Fortune | Military Affairs | | Josh Green | Connect Colorado and Young Professionals | | Maureen Juran | Urban Renewal Board and Land Use Law | | Rhonda McDonald | City Planning Commission and Construction Industry | | Hannah Parsons | Chamber/EDC (prior) and Exponential Impact | | Eric Phillips | City Planning Commission (prior) and Small Businesses | | Jim Raughton | City Planning Commission, CSURA (prior), and Philanthropic Community | | Harry Salzman | Residential Realtor Community | | Tim Seibert | HBA, Planning Consultants, and Nor’wood | | Robert Shonkwiler | SW Colorado Springs, CUSRA, and City Planning Commission (prior) | | Doug Stimple | Residential Development and Classic Communities | | Taj Stokes | SE Colorado Springs and Related Community Initiatives | Steering Committee discussions involved hammering out ideas and synthesizing data. The committee was committed to delivering a product that represented the City of Colorado Springs at its best. This was accomplished by meeting twenty times through the process. Members were consistent in their attendance. Many members attended PlanCOS special events and some helped organize them. As such, dedication to the process by the Steering Committee speaks much to the community-relevant content found in the plan. Fine tuning the PlanCOS Vision Themes at Steering Committee Meeting #4, December 12, 2016 <
> <
> Steering Committee Meeting #20, endorsement of PlanCOS, 9.27.18 ### Table 2: Steering Committee Meetings Dates | DATE | EVENT | | :--- | :--- | | 6/28/2016 | SC Meeting #1 | | 8/19/2016 | SC Meeting #2 | | 10/21/2016 | SC Meeting #3 | | 12/16/2016 | SC Meeting #4 | | 2/10/2017 | SC Meeting #5 | | 5/12/2017 | SC Meeting #6 | | 6/15/2017 | SC Meeting #7 | | 8/11/2017 | SC Meeting #8 | | 9/28/2017 | SC Meeting #9 | | 3/2/2018 | SC Meeting #10 | | 4/13/2018 | SC Meeting #11 | | 4/27/2018 | SC Meeting #12 | | 5/11/2018 | SC Meeting #13 | | 5/18/2018 | SC Meeting #14 | | 6/1/2018 | SC Meeting #15 | | 6/15/2018 | SC Meeting #16 | | 8/10/2018 | SC Meeting #17 | | 8/30/2018 | SC Meeting #18 | | 9/14/2018 | Keystone Indicators | | 9/20/2018 | SC Meeting #19 | | 9/27/2018 | SC Meeting #20 | <
> Steering Committee Meeting #1, June 28, 2016 <
> Steering Committee Meeting #14, May 18, 2018 # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE ## Technical Support Team PlanCOS content was presented to and commented on by technical experts from City departments and external agencies. This group of experts composed the Technical Support Team (TST). TST membership was regularly updated to reflect changes in staffing. TST feedback and participation allowed facilitated discussion about how the plan would impact everyday professional practice, and also provided a high degree of alignment with ongoing plans and initiatives across the City and throughout the region. At times, the PlanCOS team would follow up with separately with TST members on specific areas of content for the draft Plan. <
> Technical Support Team #2, May 12, 2017 ### Table 3: Technical Support Team Meeting Dates | DATE | EVENT | | :--- | :--- | | 4/13/2017 | TST Meeting #1 | | 5/12/2017 | TST Meeting #2 | | 8/11/2017 | TST Meeting #3 | | 9/28/2017 | TST Meeting #4 | | 3/2/2018 | TST Meeting #5 | | 5/11/2018 | TST Meeting #6 | | 5/18/2018 | TST Meeting #7 | | 6/1/2018 | TST Meeting #8 | | 8/10/2018 | TST Meeting #9 | | 3/2/2018 | SC Meeting #10 | ### Table 4: Technical Support Team Members and Associations | TST MEMBER | ASSOCIATION | | :--- | :--- | | Jacob Anderson | COS - Citizen Engagement Specialist | | Jenny Bishop | Colorado Springs Utilities | | Craig Blewitt | Mountain Metro Transit Authority | | Kate Brady | COS - Public Works, Bicycle Planning | | Beth Conklin | CSFD | | Sabrina Cotta | COS - Office of Innovation and Sustainability | | Aubrey Day | El Paso County Health | | Catherine Duarte | COS - Community Development | | Matthew Fitzsimmons | COS - Urban Planning, Downtown | | Chelsea Gaylord | COS - Economic Development | | Tim Geitner | COS - City Council | | Eileen Gonzalez | COS - City Council | | Britt Haley | COS - Parks and Recreation | | Mitchell Hammes | COS - Neighborhood Services | | Meggan Herington | COS - Land Use Review | | Carly Hoff | COS - City Council | | Frank Kinder | Colorado Springs Utilities | | Matt Mayberry | COS - Pioneers Museum | | Mike McConnell | COS - Land Use Review | | Richard Mulledy | COS - Stormwater | | Kim Mutchler | Colorado Springs Utilities | | Christian Nelson | Colorado Springs Utilities | | Elena Nunez | Colorado Springs Utilities | | Karen Palus | COS - Parks and Recreation | | Connie Perry | COS - Parks and Recreation | | Andy Phelps | COS - Homelessness Outreach Coordinator | | Brian Potts | PPACG - Joint Land Use Study | | James Ridgon | CSPD | | Tim Roberts | COS - Public Works, Transportation Planning | | Ryan Tefertiller | COS - Urban Planning, Downtown | | Ryan Trujillo | COS - Office of Innovation and Sustainability | | Jennifer Valentine | PPACG - Transportation Planning | | Nina Vetter | COS - Strategic Planning | | Steve Vigil | COS - Geographic Information Systems | | Jariah Walker | Colorado Springs Urban Renewal Authority | | Ann Werner | PPACG - Joint Land Use Study | | Scott Winter | Colorado Springs Utilities | | Vanessa Zink | COS - Communications | <
> ## Practitioners Working Group After an initial working draft of this Pan was created, a small Practitioner's Working Group (PWG) was convened to review and suggest detailed modifications to the language in the Plan from the perspective of the ultimate “users” of the document. The PWG included Steering Committee members as well as two additional community volunteers. The worked with staff to review PlanCOS content on a l, from catching typos and grammatical errors to conceptual application of the Plans’ vision, goals, policies, and strategies to . Input from this group was provided with the understanding that PlanCOS was still to be a final product fully vetted and endorsed by the full Steering Committee. ### Table 5: Practitioners Working Group | MEMBER | AFFILIATION | | :--- | :--- | | Jill Gaebler* | City Council | | Megan Moore | Logan Simpson | | Conrad Olmedo | COS | | Amy Reid | Pikes Peak Realtors | | Mike Reubenson | La Plata Homes | | Carl Schueler | COS | | Tim Seibert* | Nor’wood Development | | Doug Stimple* | Classic Homes | | Peter Wysocki | COS | | *Denotes Steering Committee Members | | ## Co-Creators Although the Steering Committee, City Planning Commission, and City Council provided and diverse perspectives for the PlanCOS process, the PlanCOS team reached out to and supported citizen champions for the plan called Co-Creators in order to further broaden the reach of representation. This allowed PlanCOS to more directly engage representatives of demographic groups, organizations, disciplines or other interest groups, not directly included in the Steering Committee. Co-Creators met to talk about what the plan could offer the City of Colorado Springs. Their input and participation in the PlanCOS process could well be compared to that of a focus group. Online survey data and ideas from the Steering Committee and Technical Support Team was presented to Co-Creators. They were able to then respond to this information and provide on-the-ground observations and perspectives that may have otherwise been missed. Aside from participating in meetings with the PlanCOS team, they also participated in other ways. A citizen engagement tool, modeled after Imagine Boston, was created for the Co-Creators so that they could enter the community and host their own focus groups. Co-Creators also helped spread the word of PlanCOS to their own respective communities and interests groups, such as their places of work and church groups. They also provided essential staffing power at events like COSTALKS and EnvisionCOS. A few Co-Creators provide valuable specialized services such as professional photography, social media consulting, and creating actual content for major PlanCOS events and meetings. ### Table 6: Practitioners Working Group Meeting Dates | DATE | EVENT | | :--- | :--- | | 1/31/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #1 | | 2/14/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #2 | | 2/23/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #3 | | 2/28/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #4 | | 3/7/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #5 | | 3/14/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #6 | | 3/19/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #7 | | 4/4/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #8 | | 4/11/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #9 | | 4/25/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #10 | | 5/4/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #11 | | 5/15/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #12 | | 6/6/2018 | Practitioners Working Group Meeting #13 | ### Table 7: Co-Creator Meetings Dates | DATE | EVENT | | :--- | :--- | | 11/14/2016 | Co-Creators Meeting #1 | | 12/15/2016 | Co-Creators Meeting #2 | | 3/8/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #3 | | 4/13/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #4 | | 5/18/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #5 | | 6/21/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #6 | | 7/18/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #7 | | 8/23/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #8 | | 9/27/2017 | Co-Creators Meeting #9 | | 10/9/2018 | Co-Creators Meeting #10 | <
> Co-Creator Meeting #3, March 8, 2017 <
> Co-Creator Meeting #7 at Discovery Church Colorado, July 18, 2017 ### Boards/Commissions PlanCOS incrementally checked in with the full Planning Commission and City Council as the entities that would ultimately be responsible for formal adoption of the Plan. In addition to periodic status updates and joint meetings, staff and the consultants provided opportunities for one-on-one briefings. <
> Co-Creator Sean Holveck with Springs TV filming PSA, May 22, 2018 ### Table 8: Joint City Council and City Planning Commission Meetings | DATE | EVENT | | :--- | :--- | | 3/5/2018 | CC/CPC Meeting #1 | | 6/18/2018 | CC/CPC Meeting #2 | <
> City Council and City Planning Commission Joint Meeting #2, June 18, 2018 ## Stakeholder Interviews Beginning in July thru August 2016, the PlanCOS team initiated a series of stakeholder interviews with members of the community. This was the first of the PlanCOS community outreach process. The interviews were intended to have an initial conversation with community representatives about current issues, opportunities, and how the city should change over the next 10 to 20 years. ### Table 9: PlanCOS Stakeholder Interviews, August 2016 | STAKEHOLDER | AFFILIATION AT THE TIME OF INTERVIEW | | :--- | :--- | | Claire Anderson | Innovations in Aging | | Tatiana Bailey | University of Colorado - Colorado Springs (UCCS) and Economic Forum | | Allen Beauchamp | Cycling Community | | Rachel Beck | Steering Committee, Council of Neighbors and Organizations (CONO), and Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG) | | Craig Casper | Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG) | | Welling Clark | Organization of Westside Neighbors (OWN) | | Stuart Coppedge | American Institute of Architects (AIA) and community | | Tim Coutts | Central Bank & Trust | | Aimee Cox | Homeless, Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), and affordable housing | | Matt Craddock | Developer including SE | | Lynette Crow-Iverson | Steering Committee | | Susan Davies | Steering Committee and Trails and Open Spaces Coalition (TOSC) | | Aubrey Day | YMCA and Infill Committee | | Susan Edmondson | Downtown Partnership | | Bill Fisher | American Institute of Architects (AIA), advocacy | | Kent Fortune | USAA and Steering Committee | | Jill Gaebler | Steering Committee and City Council | | Chris Jenkins | Nor'wood, downtown etc. | | Kevin Kratt | Steering Committee and commercial real estate | | Rob MacDonald | Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments (PPACG), Director | | Laura Nelson | Apartment Association | | Hannah Parsons | Steering Committee and Regional Business Alliance (RBA) | | Doug Price and Jim Cassidy | Colorado Springs Visitors Bureau (CVB) | | Bruce Rau | Banning Lewis Ranch, Oakwood | | Christy Riggs | American Institute of Architects (AIA), Chair | | Harry Salzman | Steering Committee - Realtors | | Larry Stebbins, Zac Chapman, and Chris Cipoletti | Local foods and public market | | Doug Stimple | Steering Committee and Classic Homes | | Taj Stokes | Steering Committee, Southeast, and religious community | | Courtney Stone and Patricia Yeager | The Independence Center - Transit and disabilities | | Janet Suthers | Various initiatives and Planning Commission (former) | | Tom Taylor | Utilities Policy Advisory Committee (UPAC), Chair and developer | | Mark Tremmel | Design community | | Andy Vick | Cultural Office of the Pikes Peak Region (COPPeR) | | Boyd Williams | YMCA of the Pikes Peak Region, Director | | Jason Wood | United Way, Director | ### Targeted Feedback from Interest Groups Interest groups in the community partnered with PlanCOS to help spread the word of PlanCOS to their respective community members and participated in workshops. These groups have memberships that come from a vast array of backgrounds and professions. For example, the Pikes Peak Outdoor Recreation Alliance (PPORA) has memberships that include local sports businesses and state and federal outdoor recreation agencies. The groups contributed extensively to the creation of PlanCOS content. This was particularly useful in drafting content for the Renowned Culture and Majestic Landscapes vision themes. The following is a list of interest groups who were engaged with PlanCOS: #### Table 10: List of PlanCOS Stakeholders and Partners | ORGANIZATION NAME | | | :--- | :--- | | 1. 1 Million Cups Entrepreneurs Meetup | 24. Council of Neighbors and Organizations (CONO) | | 2. AM 740 KVOR - Our Town | 25. Deerfield Hills Community Center | | 3. Atlas Preparatory School | 26. Downtown Partnership of Colorado Springs | | 4. Carmel Street Festival | 27. Eco Cabins | | 5. City of Colorado Springs Active Transportation Advisory Committee (ATAC) | 28. El Paso Club | | 6. City of Colorado Springs Citizens Transportation Advisory Board (CTAB) | 29. El Paso County Planning Commission and Planning Staff | | 7. City of Colorado Springs Commission on Aging | 30. El Pomar Black Advisory Council | | 8. City of Colorado Springs Council | 31. El Pomar Hispanic Advisory Council | | 9. City of Colorado Springs Downtown Review Board (DRB) | 32. El Pomar Native American and Asian Advisory Council | | 10. City of Colorado Springs Human Resources Commission | 33. Envision Shooks Run | | 11. City of Colorado Springs New City Employee Orientation | 34. Food Policy Advisory Board (FPAB) | | 12. City of Colorado Springs Parks and Recreation Advisory Board | 35. Garden of the Gods Rotary Club | | 13. City of Colorado Springs Planning Commission | 36. Grace Be Unto You Church | | 14. City of Colorado Springs Sustainability Committee | 37. Harrison School District 2 | | 15. City of Manitou Springs | 38. Hispanic Chamber of Commerce | | 16. Colorado College | 39. Housing & Building Association of Colorado Springs | | 17. Colorado Photography Learning Group | 40. Housing Provider Experts | | 18. Colorado Springs Chamber & Economic Development Corporation | 41. Hyperloop Entrepreneurs | | 19. Colorado Springs Housing Authority | 42. Innovations in Aging | | 20. Colorado Springs Leadership Institute | 43. Institute of Internal Auditors | | 21. Colorado Springs Urban Renewal Authority (CSURA) | 44. Joint Ballistic Missile Defense System Training and Education Centers (JBTEC) Facility | | 22. Colorado Springs Utilities Policy Advisory Committee (UPAC) | 45. Joint Land Use Study (JLUS) Policy Committee | | 23. Colorado Springs Young Ambassadors | 46. KCME 88.7 FM - The Culture Zone | | | 47. Kissing Camels Golf Men's Club | | | 48. Leadership Pikes Peak | | | 49. Lincoln Center - EnvisionCOS | | | 50. Local Relic | | | 51. Manitou Art Center | <
> # ORGANIZATION NAME 52. North Colorado Springs Rotary Club 53. Patty Jewett Neighborhood Association 54. Pikes Peak Alliance for a Sustainable Future 55. Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments 56. Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments - Citizens Advisory Committee 57. Pikes Peak Association of Realtors 58. Pikes Peak Community College - COSTALKS 59. Pikes Peak Library District - Managers 60. Pikes Peak Outdoor Recreation Alliance (PPORA) 61. Regional Business Alliance (RBA) and Military Representatives 62. RISE Coalition 63. School District Superintendents 64. Shades of Colorado Springs 65. Southeast Armed Services YMCA 66. Studio 809 Radio - Town Square 67. The Springs Rescue Mission - Homeless Advisory Council 68. Ticket to Success! 69. Toastmasters #555, City Hall, Colorado Springs 70. Transit Passenger Advisory Committee 71. UCCS - Futuristic Cities event, Technical Writing Faculty and Students, other Students 72. UCCS Regional Leadership Forum 73. Unified Title Educational Power Series 74. United States Air Force Academy 75. Urban Land Institute, Colorado Springs 76. Vectra Bank Economic Forum 77. What If...? Festival <
> Pikes Peak Outdoor Recreation Alliance (PPORA) Majestic Landscapes Forum, November 30, 2017 <
> Renowned Culture Forum at the Fine Arts Center, September 25, 2017 <
> Dot Exercise from the PPORA Majestic Landscapes Forum, November 30, 2017 <
> CONO Board Outreach, January 11, 2017 <
> Springs Rescue Mission Outreach, October 16, 2017 <
> Grace Be Unto You Food Pantry Outreach, May 31, 2017 # COMMUNITY EVENTS PlanCOS recognized that the team needed to go into the community versus expecting the community to come to the team. The team planned its first community public event, COSTALKS, in March of 2017. Following Survey II, the team then conducted further engagement targeted toward the traditionally under-represented Southeast of Colorado Springs as well as the younger populations of Colorado Springs. In July 2017, events Heading Southeast and EnvisionCOS, respectively, were events that targeted these particular demographics and solicited their input. In the summer of 2018, the team then coordinated a series of open houses in each City Council District and one for At-Large members to showcase and solicit input on PlanCOS Draft 1. ## COSTALKS Pikes Peak Community College (PPCC) President Dr. Lance Bolton, and his staff provided a venue for and hosted the premier event for PlanCOS , COSTALKS on March 16, 2017. An incredible number of individuals helped to make this event a success, principally including the staff of PPCC, and the PlanCOS Co-Creators who volunteered to assist with seating and checking in attendees. The event was live streamed onto the PPCC network and Facebook page as well as recorded for later playback. <
> <
> Audience members at COSTALKS, photos by Sean Holveck, March 16, 2017 <
> Mountain Metro Transit Authority placed COSTALKS posters on bus shelters throughout the city, March 2017 ## EnvisionCOS Discussions regarding how to engage the younger demographics of Colorado Springs were championed by Steering Committee member, Josh Green. Beginning in the Spring of 2017, he and Samuel T. Elliott, then UCCS Student Body President began working with Co-Creator Sean Holveck, City staff and PlanCOS consultants on an event, specifically targeted to younger folks in Colorado Springs. The event location was the Lincoln Center, in what was once an elementary school turned into a venue for multiple local businesses. The Cross fit gym, in what was once the school’s gymnasium, was where the event was held on July 19th, 2018 (7.19, which is also the regions telephone area code). The intent of the event was to solicit input from stakeholders based on the plan’s vision themes. Josh Green moderated the discussion and solicited responses from the participants. With the Mayor, City Councilmembers, and Steering Committee members present, the discussions of the evening were able to be heard by the city’s leadership and PlanCOS decision-makers. <
> EnvisionCOS flyer, designed for print, social media, and email advertisement (credit, Sean Holveck) <
> EnvisionCOS, pre-event set up at CrossFit SoCo, July 19, 2018 The following shows top responses from texts: ### Table 11: Textizen Summary Responses, July 2017 | MOST IMPORTANT TO YOU...? | TOP RESPONSE | | :--- | :--- | | Majestic Landscapes | Natural | | Renowned Culture | Culture and Arts | | Vibrant Neighborhoods | Neighborhoods | | Strong Connections | Bike | | Unique (Urban) Places | Downtown | | Thriving Economy | City & Businesses | | Theme Most Resonates with You? | Thriving Economy | | What would you Keep in COS? | Community | The screen would project a word cloud of what was being provided by the audience. Josh would then solicit responses from the community based on what the word clouds were coming up with. As such, the participants would then be able to respond to the word clouds and take the conversation to another level. <
> Facebook Live Stream, Textizen, and Facilitated Discussion engage the community, July 19, 2018 <
> Word Cloud of Strong Connections generated and presented live at EnvisionCOS, 7.19.18 This event was also the first PlanCOS team’s Facebook Live stream. The video of the event has had over 1,200 views and has reached over 2,500 persons (per Facebook logistics). Having the event live streamed allowed persons unable to be at the event in person an opportunity to post as the event was occurring as well as watch it live or at a later time. Link to Facebook Live Stream: https://www.facebook.com/goplanCOS/videos/286559468480067/ <
> Survey 2 Map showing Southeast Colorado Springs Zip Codes with fewer responses than other Zip Codes in Colorado Springs, Spring 2017 # Heading Southeast <
> Flyer designed by the El Pomar Foundation and used to promote the event, July 2017 Survey II data included a field where a survey respondent could input their Zip Code. From this data, it was observed that responses from Southeast Colorado Springs were limited. To address this gap it was determined that the team should host an event in the Southeast community. This event was held the day after EnvisionCOS, on July 20, 2018. The team partnered with the El Pomar Foundation and the Southeast Armed Services YMCA. The El Pomar Foundation assisted with staff personnel, payment for food, child care, and analysis of the event. The Southeast Armed Services YMCA was the venue location and provided necessary logistics to actualize the event. The event and was moderated by Eric Phillips, and featured a panel that interacted with audience members. Keypads were provided to audience members and key questions were posed to the audience. Consultant staff compiled the answers to illustrate back to the audience, and prompted additional questions, comments and discussion with the panelist and audience. One of the more t surprising results was that 62% of audience members selected mixed use redevelopment as the type of land use projects they would be most excited about. ### Table 11: Heading Southeast Panelists | PANELIST | AFFILIATION | | :--- | :--- | | Yolanda Avila | City Councilwoman for District 4 - Southeast Colorado Springs | | Bruce Meighen | Logan Simpson | | Eric Phillips | Moderator and Steering Committee member | | Robert Shonkwiler | Steering Committee and Southwest Representative | | Taj Stokes | Steering Committee and Southeast Representative | | Peter Wysocki | Planning and Development Department Director | <
> Attendees raise their hands in participation with the panel, July 20, 2018 <
> <
> Panel Discussion over PowerPoint slide showing mixed use redevelopments with 62% of the room in support, July 20, 2018 # TYPES OF INVOLVEMENT ## Web-Based Public Involvement SpeakUp! COS survey's and discussions were used to solicit input on PlanCOS. In addition, over 1,500 emails were acquired and provided with updates on PlanCOS via Mailchimp. In March 2017, PlanCOS initiated its own City-based Facebook page, @goplancos, to encourage outreach into the community via social media. PlanCOS Draft 1 was also made into a website, where chapters and sections were broken down into individual pages. Each webpage of Draft 1 provided a direct link to a SpeakUp! COS survey, where the public could provide immediate input. At the PlanCOS landing page, a button was provided where citizens could ask to sign up for PlanCOS updates. Overall, through web-based public involvement, PlanCOS has been able to augment public participation of events and input solicitation beyond more traditional means of input gathered through public meetings. Rather, online and live inputs have complemented one another and provided an enhanced public engagement experience. <
> PlanCOS's Facebook Page, @goplanCOS, November 28, 2018 ## Survey I Utilizing the Speak Up! COS tool, Survey 1 was initiated on August 17, 2016 and ended on March 6, 2017. The survey collected 1,540 completed responses in a 6-month collection period. Survey I consisted of several open-ended questions that served as a basis from which the plan's vision themes could be derived. Results were categorized and organized by topic and ranked by frequency of occurrence. The following were Survey I's questions: 1. What do you love about Colorado Springs? 2. What elements of the community would you like to see preserved for the future? 3. What elements of the community would you like to see improved in the future? 4. What areas of focus would you like this plan to address to improve Colorado Springs in the future? 5. What neighborhood do you live in or identify with? 6. What is your vision for Colorado Springs in 2036? 7. How should we focus our efforts to reach the Colorado Springs community? 8. Would you be willing to be a Co-Creator? 9. Would you like to receive the #PlanCOS newsletter? 10. (optional) Please provide your email if you would like to be included in future communication about the #PlanCOS effort. ### SpeakUp! COS Data What do you love about Colorado Springs? <
> Chart showing top 10 loves based on input from Survey 1, Springs 2017 ### Citizen Engagement Exercises To supplement online surveys, the team also developed a Citizen Engagement Exercise toolkit modeled after Imagine Boston. The toolkit was designed so that Co-Creators could hold a meeting, conduct the exercise, and then submit results to the PlanCOS team. The entire toolkit was provided on the internet so that any citizen could download the content, follow directions, and hold a meeting. The toolkit was developed and refined throughout Spring 2017. Staff held seven meetings and one Co-Creator, Courtney Stone, held one meeting where the exercises were conducted. Three exercises were created: 1. Favorite Places 2. Opportunities and Challenges 3. Place Making Example of filled out Citizen Engagement Exercise worksheet, Spring 2017 ### Table 12: Citizen Engagement Exercise Groups | DATE | GROUP | | :--- | :--- | | 3/3/17 | Land Use Review Planners | | 3/22/17 | Very Interested Parents (VIP) - Harrison School District 2 | | 4/5/17 | Urban Geography Students - University of Colorado Colorado Springs | | 4/6/17 | Library Managers - Pikes Peak Library District | | 4/7/17 | Affordable Housing Group | | 4/11/17 | Young Ambassadors | | 4/14/17 | Students - Colorado College | | 5/11/17 | Community Transit Coalition (Visually Impaired Adults) - done by Courtney Stone | ### Survey II Survey II was opened on February 24, 2017 with responses received until July 25, 2017. A total of 4,395 completed responses were received in a period of over 5 months. Survey II provided insight regarding potential goals, policies, and strategies to accomplish the vision themes of PlanCOS. In addition to providing an opportunity for open-ended comments, Survey II asked the following questions: 1. In order to represent your area of the community, please enter your zip code: 2. Which vision theme would you most like to comment on? 3. Which opportunities do you feel best address the above Vision? (select those most important to you) [repeated 6 times, 1 for each vision] Results from Survey II were then ranked in order of opportunities having received the most responses as being able to fulfill each vision. Open-ended comments were also read and interpreted to provide further insight. <
> “OUR MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES ARE ONLY MAJESTIC IF WE PRESERVE THEIR INTEGRITY AND ECOSYSTEM HEALTH—NOT JUST WHAT IS VISUALLY PLEASING OR ECONOMICALLY PROFITABLE.” # SpeakUp! COS Data <
> Example of ranked opportunities for the Thriving Economy and an open-ended comment on Majestic Landscapes, Spring 2017 ## Open Houses Seven Open Houses were held in each of the six Council districts with one held for the three At-Large Council Members. Open houses were scheduled to occur in July 2018 in order to run concurrent with the online commenting period occurring from June to August. Input gathered from the open houses supplemented and corresponded to input acquired through SpeakUp! COS to aid in the creation of Draft 1. Data at the open houses was collected in the form of comment cards and post-its posted on boards by attendees. At the end of the open houses, a compiled synthesis of 142 Post-Its and 111 comment cards were processed by staff (examples below). Comments were organized by vision theme, recorded verbatim, and categorized accordingly. Comments were analyzed by staff conducting keyword searches and reading comments. ### Table 13: Max Count of Attendees | OPEN HOUSE | COUNT | TIME | | :--- | :--- | :--- | | District 5 | 92 | 6:15 P.M. | | District 3 | 83 | 6:30 P.M. | | At-Large | 51 | 6:30 P.M. | | District 1 | 45 | 6:30 P.M. | | District 6 | 30 | 6:30 P.M. | | District 2 | 28 | 6:30 P.M. | | District 4 | 28 | 6:30 P.M. | | **TOTAL** | **357** | | Staff conducted counts of attendees at each Open House every 15-minutes with the most persons counted at one time occurring at 6:15 p.m. and at 6:30 p.m. Open houses began at 6:00 p.m. and were ended at 8:00 p.m. It is estimated that over 350 persons attended the seven open houses held throughout July 2018. # PlanCOS Open House ## Max Count of Attendees Observed at One Time <
> <
> Thumbtack Map from PlanCOS Open Houses, July 2018 | PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE | PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE | TRANSIT IDEA 5 | 2 Proposed accessory units will change the nature of our neighborhood for the worse. Everyone will then have R-2 (vs. R-1) zoning. Most accessory units will become Air BnB's and further disrupt the neighborhood. | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | COMMENT CARD....................
After reviewing the Draft PlanCOS Comprehensive Plan, please provide your input for the future physical development of Colorado Springs. Please indicate the chapter you are commenting on.
SECTION OF PLAN: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
COMMENT: I would like to see a plan for developing a sense of ownership among the people of the City for the city. Colorado Spring - in a sense - is an enterprise. And if our enterprise prospers we all benefit. It would be nice if more people took an interest in our city. | COMMENT CARD....................
After reviewing the Draft PlanCOS Comprehensive Plan, please provide your input for the future physical development of Colorado Springs. Please indicate the chapter you are commenting on.
SECTION OF PLAN: Renowned Cultural Framework
COMMENT: Comments - throughout plan to update existing infrastructure - Where is investment in intuitions such as Penrose Event Center - things are moving to World Arena - why not enhance that facility? | RAPID TRANSIT down Center of Powers. | | Example of citizen-filled Comment Cards and Post-Its received during PlanCOS Open Houses, July 2018 # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE Join the conversation! VISIT COLORADOSPRINGS.GOV/PLANCOS <
> June 25 - August 6 PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD WE WILL BUILD A GREAT CITY THAT MATCHES OUR SCENERY VIBRANT NEIGHBORHOODS UNIQUE PLACES THRIVING ECONOMY STRONG CONNECTIONS RENOWNED CULTURE MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES 7 OPEN HOUSE MEETINGS JULY 2018 f @GOPLANCOS COLMEDO@SPRINGSGOV.COM 719.385.5621 ACCOMMODATIONS & ACCESSIBILITY INFO. COLORADO SPRINGS <
> Councilmember Merv Bennett at Ivywild School for Draft 1 press release, June 25, 2018 <
> At-Large PlanCOS Open House, July 13, 2018 PlanCOS Bookmarks were distributed throughout the PPLD system and local bookstores, July 2018 # 2018 JULY | Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | | | | | | | | | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | | | 8 | 9 | 10 | **District 1** 11
National Cyber Security Center
Don Knight | **At-Large** 12
City Auditorium
Merv Bennett
Bill Murray
Tom Strand | 13 | 14 | | | 15 | 16 | **District 2** 17
Falcon Division PD
David Geislinger | **District 3** 18
Westside Community Center
Richard Skorman | **District 4** 19
Deerfield Hills Community Center
Yolanda Avila | 20 | 21 | | | 22 | 23 | 24 | **District 5** 25
Patty Jewett
Jill Gaebler | 26 | 27 | 28 | | | 29 | **District 6** 30
Stetson Hills PD
Andy Pico | 31 | | | | | Flyers for each Open House were used on social media and sent via email, July 2018 <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> <
> # PlanCOS ### LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE A total of seven Open Houses were held throughout the City. One in each City Council District and one for At-Large Council Members, July 2018 Open House District 1 <
> Open House District 2 <
> Open House District 3 <
> <
> Open House District 4 <
> Open House District 5 <
> Open House District 6 # Draft PlanCOS Commenting On June 25, 2018 PlanCOS Draft 1 was opened for online public commenting and closed on August 6th. This period coincided with the July PlanCOS Open Houses to facilitate concurrent marketing of public engagement opportunities. At the close of online commenting, staff collected and analyzed 518 total responses emerging from a total of 24 different Zip Codes both within and outside of Colorado Springs. Geographic data of responders indicate that the most responses came from the 80907 Zip Code (87). Additionally, the most responses were found in the Vibrant Neighborhoods Chapter (168). The online commenting period asked three questions: 1. Which section of [vision theme] are you commenting on? 2. Please provide your enhancements, additions, what do you like or not like, on this chapter. 3. To represent your community, what is your home ZIP code? <
> SpeakUP! COS Draft PlanCOS public commenting survey, Summer 2018 Staff conducted an analysis of received comments and synthesized the comments into thirteen top trends and themes found in the data. Overall, comments were interpreted to suggest that Draft 1 sufficiently fell within the bookends of polar opposite public sentiment, opinion, and value. This was seemingly accomplished while still maintaining a cohesive direction of fulfilling the intent to deliver a planning document that will guide the growth of the city as dictated through collective observation and analysis of the entire public process for the plan's creation. ### Table 14: Top Trends and Themes of Draft 1 Public Comments | ORGANIZATION NAME | | :--- | | 1. Comments arguably validate the overall balanced and moderate tenor of the existing recommendations and content. | | 2. Where will the funding will come from? | | 3. Homelessness | | 4. Do not over-emphasize Downtown | | 5. Plan graphics should clearly demonstrate their use and purpose | | 6. Concern about bicycle conflicts with automobiles | | 7. Affordable housing | | 8. Old North End and Nevada Avenue Concerns | | 9. Safety concerns including pedestrian safety, crime and homelessness | | 10. Drake Power Plant Closure | | 11. Elements of a neighborhood plan - not one size fits all | | 12. Minority and disenfranchised populations | | 13. Sprawl | ### PlanCOS Response Count by Zip Code ### on SpeakUp! COS (8.7.18) <
> ### PlanCOS Response Count by Chapter on SpeakUp!COS (8.7.18) <
> # PlanCOS LEADING THE WAY TO OUR FUTURE <
> | Number of Responses to Online Public Input | | | | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | | 53 - 87 | | 2 - 12 | | June 25 - August 6 by Zip Code | 26 - 52 | | No Data | | | 13 - 25 | | City Boundary | ## Public Hearings PlanCOS went through a formal process of ordinance adoption and was modified to include additional meetings. This allowed more time and consideration by the City Planning Commission and City Council to review and comment on PlanCOS. A total of six meetings were held to formally adopt PlanCOS. The only meetings without public comment were the City Council Work Sessions. Emails and social media posts were sent out to the community to encourage their attendance and participation in the formal public hearing processes. In addition to the meetings below, PlanCOS was presented to the Informal City Planning Commission on October 11, 2018. ### Key Dates #### Planning Commission * October 18, 2018, 8:30 a.m. at 107 N. Nevada Ave. - Planning Commission first hearing and presentation of Plan (public comment) * Item 6.G.: http://coloradosprings.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=990 * November 15, 2018, 8:30 a.m. at 107 N. Nevada Ave. - Planning Commission second hearing and recommendation to City Council (public comment) * Item 5.A.: http://coloradosprings.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=1007 #### City Council * November 26, 2018, 1:00 p.m. at 107 N. Nevada Ave. - City Council work session, first presentation (no public comment) * Item 9.A.: http://coloradosprings.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=1010 (video cut short but items are available for download) * December 10, 2018, 1:00 p.m. at 107 N. Nevada Ave. - City Council work session, second presentation (no public comment) * January 8, 2019, 1:00 p.m. at 107 N. Nevada Ave. - City Council, first reading (public comment) * January 22, 2019, 1:00 p.m. at 107 N. Nevada Ave. - City Council, second reading and Plan adoption (public comment) ## OTHER EVENTS In addition to making its own events, the PlanCOS team attended events that were sponsored by other organizations. This was effectively termed “piggy backing”. The PlanCOS team would attend the event, set up a table or booth, and be able to engage with attendees. The number of attendees, demographic, and geographic range varied widely in these events but consistently provided opportunities to expose and increase PlanCOS awareness. For example, PlanCOS reached about 700 individuals for the duration of the Downtown What If...? Festival in September 2017. <
> What If…? Festival where hundreds of attendees spun the tabletop wheel spinner and placed a thumbtack on their neighborhood, September 9, 2017 <
> Local Photographers in their respective teams prepare for the Photo Scavenger Hunt, 10.20.18 The PlanCOS team partnered with a local photography group, the Colorado Photography Learning Group (CLPG), the Manitou Art Center, and the Downtown Partnership to look into how to acquire community-based images for PlanCOS. The CLPG has held an annual photo scavenger hunt. In this partnership, it was expanded to occur along the West Colorado Avenue Creative Corridor. The group began the scavenger hunt at Manitou Springs, then to Old Colorado City, and ended at Downtown. At the end of the day, the group met at a local brewpub, Local Relic, and shared images in competition. The purpose of this event both celebrated community and evaluated the possibility of acquiring imagery to complement PlanCOS online. Because the plan’s website will have flexibility in terms of imagery and video, it is highly possible to incorporate a reoccurring number of images. While much of this imagery could be acquired by staff, this event provided an opportunity for the community to directly contribute to PlanCOS content. This event has initiated further discussions with the local arts community. <
> Team 1’s photograph from the Photo Scavenger Hunt, 10.20.18 <
> Bookmarks were developed, similar to PlanCOS Open Houses, and distributed throughout the PPLD system and local bookstores, October 2018 # GOING FORWARD ## Web-Based Plan The American Planning Association (APA) awarded the City of Plano, TX the 2017 Daniel Burnham Award for an online Comprehensive Plan: https://www.planning.org/awards/2017/planotomorrow/ and http://www.planotomorrow.org/. This inspired the PlanCOS team to expand upon the traditional document delivery of having a comprehensive plan product that is just printed or downloaded in multiple .pdf chapters. With the support of the consultant team and the City’s Communication’s Office, the intent to make a web-based plan for PlanCOS was established. The test run of having an online plan was the release of Draft 1, which while available as a complete .pdf download and in print, was also created as a website. As such, based on the success of Draft 1 as an online document, the final adopted plan is set to be easily incorporated into the already existing website template. Furthermore, having a web-based plan will allow incorporation of up-to-date images and videos to help communicate the plan’s contemporary relevance. <
> Example of the web-based plan, from Draft 1, July 2018 ## Images and Videos Various forms of media for PlanCOS were acquired throughout the duration of the public engagement process. This media formed the basis from which future media could be incorporated into a web-based plan. In collaboration with Springs TV and community-based media production organizations, the possibility for digital media is limitless. Videos and imagery have already been used to showcase PlanCOS public processes, including Facebook live streaming of the EnvisionCOS and COSTALKS events. As such, the foundation and expectation to include more videos and imagery for PlanCOS has been laid. For example, upon the release of PlanCOS, the team is hoping to incorporate video introductions for the overall plan, each of the vision themes, and imagery that showcases and highlights the goals, policies, and strategies. <
> Public Service Announcements by Jeannie Orozco, Susan Davies, and Sean Holveck, Summer 2018 ## On-Going Discussions PlanCOS, since the initial stages, has had the pending question of what happens after the plans is adopted and approved. Will it sit on the shelf and collect dust? Absolutely not. PlanCOS will continue to utilize the latest and greatest means of communicating with the public and express the achievements of the plan on an annual basis. With tools that allow emails to large groups of citizens and social media, it will be very simple to continue the work laid during the creation process on through the plan’s implementation phase. Content communicated will change but engaging the public will remain. The goal is to continually let the community know that “We’re Listening.” <
> <
> Postcards, “We’re Listening #PlanCOS”, developed by Co-Creator, Sean Holveck, and used at Grace Be Unto You Church Food Pantry Outreach, May 31, 2017 <
> Hi <>, Thank you for patiently being part of a two-year process to create the new City of Colorado Springs comprehensive plan, PlanCOS. This next phase of the process is to present PlanCOS before the City Planning Commission and City Council through a formal adoption process. What this means is that PlanCOS is technically *still in a draft form and open to discussion*. As such, you, the public, are invited to contribute to that discussion and comment on the PlanCOS draft at the upcoming formal public hearings. To help prepare you for the upcoming opportunities to comment on PlanCOS, this email is dedicated to helping you break the ice and speak up at a formal public hearing. __________________________________________________________________________________ **Public Speaking: Think you’re alone? Think again!** Going before the City Planning Commission or City Council and speaking at a public hearing can be intimidating. It definitely can bring around the ‘butterflies in the stomach” feeling. Rest assured though, that if you get nervous and hesitant to speak in public, you’re not alone. Mailchimp email sent to the PlanCOS distribution list, October 11, 2018 # APPENDIX D: LIST OF PLANS ## INTRODUCTION The plans in the following list are considered to be component elements of the Comprehensive Plan that provide additional context and detail for its use and application throughout the city. These relationships to PlanCOS may be further described in sections of this Plan that address relevant plans. In some, but not all cases, these categories of plan types are specifically defined in City Code. This list will be kept updated to reflect newly adopted and revised plans, as well as changes in the status of existing plans. ## CITY-ADOPTED PLANS City-adopted plans include all component elements of the Comprehensive Plan that have been or will be adopted by City Council by ordinance or resolution. ### Master Plans City adopted Master Plans include Citywide System Plans, Land Use Master Plans and Facility Master Plans. Currently, these types of Master Plans are adopted based on procedures and criteria included in Chapter 7, Article 5, Part 4 of the City Code. #### Citywide Plans As more specifically defined in City Code, Citywide System Plans are City-adopted master plans that apply to the entire city area. * Annexation Plan * Beautification Plan for the City of Colorado Springs * City of Colorado Springs Park System Master Plan * Historic Preservation Plan * Intermodal Transportation Plan * COS Bikes! Bicycle Master Plan * Master Plan Extraction of Commercial Mineral Deposits #### Land Use Master Plans As more specifically defined in City Code, Land Use Master Plans are plans for specific geographic areas of the city focusing on recommendations for land use and associated facilities such as transportation. Privately initiated master plans are those that are prepared and submitted by one or more owners and developers or redevelopers of property. Publicly Initiated Land Use Master Plans are ordinarily initiated and prepared under the oversight of City staff. However, these may be initiated, funded, or staffed by groups of property owners or other organizations in areas within established areas. **Publicly Initiated Land Use Master Plans** Most publicly initiated master plans are considered to be “operative” as defined in City Code, even if they are 85% or more developed. * Airport Master Plan * Academy Boulevard Corridor Great Streets Plan * Boulder Park Neighborhood * Colorado Springs Airport * Experience Downtown Master Plan * Ivywild Neighborhood * Knob Hill Neighborhood Redevelopment Plan * Mesa Springs * Midland/Fountain Creek Parkway Corridor Plan * Midland * Mill Street Neighborhood Preservation Plan * North End Neighborhood * Near North End * Pikes Peak Greenway Plan * Platte Avenue Revitalization Plan * Prospect Park * Rawles Open Space Neighborhood Master Plan * Renew North Nevada Avenue * Shooks Run Redevelopment Plan * Street Sweeping Depository * Westside Avenue Action Plan * Westside Master Plan * Urban Renewal Plans: * City Auditorium Block Urban Renewal Plan * CityGate Urban Renewal Plan * Copper Ridge at Northgate Urban Renewal Plan (Polaris Pointe) * Gold Hill Mesa Urban Renewal Plan * Ivywild Neighborhood Urban Renewal Plan * North Nevada Avenue Urban Renewal Plan * Museum and Park Urban Renewal Plan (anticipated 2018) * South Central Downtown Urban Renewal * South Nevada Avenue Area Urban Renewal Plan * Southwest Downtown Urban Renewal Plan * Tejon and Costilla Urban Renewal Plan (anticipated 2018) * Vineyard Property Urban Renewal Plan ### Privately Initiated Land Use Master Plans Privately initiated land use master plans are initiated by a private developer or group of developers. They are considered to be "operative" as defined in City Code, until they are 85% or more developed, at which time they become defined as "implemented." * Adams Subdivisions * Allison Valley * Austin Heights * Banning Lewis Ranch * *BLR North* * Bellhaven Addition * Bonnie Glenn * Bradley * Briargate * Bridlespur * Broadmoor * Broadmoor Skyway * Broadview Business Park * Brookwood * Carefree Commerce Park * Cedar Grove * Cedar Heights * Centennial Industrial Park * Centre in Gateway Park * Chapel Hills Center * Cheyenne Mountain Ranch * Colorado Country * Colorado Springs Ranch * Constitution Center Carefree Commercial Park * Copper Ridge at Northgate * Cordera * Cumbre Vista * Drennan Industrial Park * Dublin Business Park * Dublin North * Dublin/Powers * East Creek * East Creek Second Amend * Eastview * El Pomar * Erindale Park * Falcon Columbine and Yorkshire Estates * Falcon Estates Number Two West * Falcon High School No. 3 * Falcon Ridge * Fillmore Industrial Park * Flying Horse * Gateway Industrial Center * Gateway Park * Greenbriar/Powerwood * Hancock Park * High Chapparal * Hancock and Fountain Industrial Park * Hill Properties * Holland Park West * Hollow Brook Corners * Houck Estate Tract A * Houck Estate B * Houck Estate C * Indian Mesa * Industrial Park South * Interquest Marketplace * J-L Ranch * Lincoln Park * Marksheffel/Woodmen * Maytag * Mesa Springs Neighborhood * Mohawk Commercial Centre * Monument Creek Commerce Center * Mount Saint Francis * Mountain Shadows * Neal Ranch * Newport Technological Center * Northgate * Northgate East * North Academy Hollow Brook Corners * Norwood * Oak Valley Ranch * Old Farm * Or Study Area at Bijou and Circle * Park West * Penrose Hospital * Peregrine * Pinecliff * Pinehurst * Pinon Valley * Printers Park * Polo Point/Beacon Hill * Powerwood No. 2 * Powerwood No. 3 to 6 * Printers Park * Prospect Park * Prospect Park Neighborhood * Quail Brush Creek * Rockrimmon * Rustic Hills No. 6 * Sand Piper * Siferd Addition * Skyway Heights * Soaring Eagles * Southface * Spring Creek * Springs Ranch * Star Ranch * Stetson Hills * Stetson Ridge * Stetson Ridge South * Stout Allen Addition * Templeton Heights * T-Gap Addition * The Bluffs * The Ridge * The Estates at Middle Creek * The Ridge at Woodmen * Town and Country Center * Towne East * Toy Ranch * Tudor Land Company * Tutt Corners * University Park * Valerie Acres Two * Van Teylingen and Academy * Vickers and Academy * Village Seven * Villa Loma * Vineyard Commerce Park * Vista Grande * Western Sun * Wolf Creek * Wolf Ranch * Woodland Hills Village * Woodmen Heights * Woodmen East * Woodmen Oaks * Woodmen Plaza West * Woodmen Pointe ### College and University Plans * Colorado College Campus Master Plan ### Facilities Master Plans As more specifically defined in City Code, Facilities Master Plans are plans that focus on the physical components particular types of public, private, or not-for-profit facilities. * Colorado Springs Airport Master Plan * Envision Shooks Run Facilities Master Plan * Garden of the Gods Park Transportation Study * 2018 Memorial Park Improvements Project * Penrose Hospital Plan * Rapid Transit Feasibility Study and System Plan ## Other City-Adopted Plans These include all other applicable City-adopted plans that are not defined and adopted as Master Plans under Chapter 7, Article 5, Part 4 of the City Code, as may be amended. ### Drainage Basin Planning Studies Drainage Basin Planning Studies are documents that identify existing and planned regional stormwater approaches and improvements at a basin-wide level. They also serve as a mechanism for allocating and reimbursing eligible costs among participating developers. As such, these documents are important in identifying and implementing basin level approaches to stormwater, along with their relationships to other aspects of physical and land use planning. * Bear Creek * Big Johnson Reservoir * Black Canyon * Black Squirrel Creek * Camp Creek * Columbia Road Drainage * Cottonwood Creek * Douglas Creek * Dry Creek * Elkhorn (MDDP Fairlane Technological Park) * Fishers Canyon * Fountain Creek * Jimmy Camp Creek * Little Johnson Basin * Kettle Creek * Kettle Creek – Old Ranch Road Tributary * Mesa Basin * Middle Tributary * Monument Creek * Nineteenth Street Drainage * Rockrimmon North Basin * Rockrimmon South * Peterson Field Basin * Pine Creek * Pine Creek Amendment 1 * Popes Bluff Drainage * Popes Bluff Amendment 1 * Pulpit Rock Basin * Rockrimmon North Basin * Rockrimmon South Basin * Roswell Area Drainage * Sand Creek * Shooks Run * Shooks Run * North Templeton Gap * Smith Creek * South Pine Creek Amendments 1-4[^] * Southwest Area Drainage (Cheyenne Creek, Cheyenne Run, and Spring Run) * Spring Creek * Templeton Gap Basin * Twenty-first Street Basin * Upper Sand Creek * West Fork Jimmy Camp Creek * Windmill Gulch ### Design Guidelines * Hillside Development Design Manual * Historic Westside Design Guidelines * Landscape Design Guidelines * Mixed-Use Design Guidelines * North End Historic District Design Guidelines * North Weber/Wahsatch Historic District Design Guidelines * Streamside Design Guidelines ### Other City Adopted Plans [Insert explanation of these plans here] * Colorado Springs Destination Master Plan (Visit COS) * North Nevada/University of Colorado, Colorado Springs Economic Opportunity Zone Task Force Findings and Recommendations * Academy Boulevard Corridor Economic Opportunity Zone Task Force Recommendations * City of Colorado Springs 2016-2020 Strategic Plan * Colorado Springs Utilities Adopted Plans and Criteria: * City of Colorado Springs Drainage Criteria Manual V1 & V2 * Integrated Water Resource Plan * Wastewater Integrated Master Plan * Electric Integrated Resource Plan * Natural Gas Integrated Resource Plan * Colorado Springs Utilities Strategic Plan * East-West Mobility Study * Hazard Mitigation Plan * Infill Action Plan (2016): With the adoption of PlanCOS, the 2016 Comprehensive Plan Infill Supplement, which was adopted by ordinance as a supplement to the 2001 Colorado Springs Comprehensive Plan, is no longer in force and effect. However, the corresponding Infill Action Plan, as adopted by resolution in 2016, is intended to be maintained and further implemented as a referenced element of PlanCOS. # NON-CITY ADOPTED PLANS These are the plans of other agencies and organizations that have particular relevancy to the Comprehensive Plan but have not been formally adopted by the City. ## Partner Entity Plans These include agency or organizational plans adopted by boards that may include one or more City Council Members. * Age Friendly Colorado Springs Plan * Cultural Plan for the Pikes Peak Region * Water Quality Management Plan * Strategic Plan of the Colorado Springs Chamber and EDC ### College and University Plans Plans for public colleges and universities are not formally adopted by the City, and land use decisions within these facilities are largely exempt from most City zoning and development approval processes. However, these plans ordinarily reflect high levels of coordination with the City. * Pikes Peak Community College Facilities Master Plan * University of Colorado - Colorado Springs Master Plan ### Municipal Plans * Plan Manitou (City of Manitou Springs Comprehensive Plan) * City of Fountain Comprehensive Development Plan * Town of Monument Comprehensive Plan ### Regional and County Plans * The Fountain Creek Corridor Restoration Master Plan * El Paso County Policy Plan (as amended) * El Paso County Major Transportation Corridors Plan (as amended) * Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Joint Land Use Study * Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Long Range Transportation Plan * Pikes Peak Area Council of Governments Regional Nonmotorized Transportation System Plan * El Paso County Parks Master Plan # APPENDIX E: GLOSSARY OF TERMS ## DEFINITIONS The following terms are defined for their particular use and application with this Comprehensive Plan. In some cases these terms may defined and used differently in City Code or other City documents. | | | | :--- | :--- | | **Activity Centers** | A general term for mixed-use centers that integrate a range of uses and activities which complement and support each other. Typically, an activity center includes a predominant type of use, such as commercial or employment-related, that is then supported by a mix of one or more other uses, such as residential, civic, or institutional. The predominant use generally determines the type of center. Activity centers vary in size, intensity, scale, and their mix of supportive uses, depending on their purpose, location, and context. Activity centers are intended to include mixed uses, be pedestrian-friendly and provide good connections and transitions to surrounding areas. | | **Arterial Streets** | Similar in role to arteries in human physiology, arterial streets are high-volume roadways that deliver motorized traffic between urban centers and connect local streets to highways. They are often classified as major or minor arterial streets depending on their capacity and particular functions. | | **Arts and Culture** | A range of cultural sectors: high or fine arts and literary arts, as well as ethnic, film and commercial arts and historic preservation; a range of visual and performing artists, craftspeople, designers, arts educators and cultural practitioners; radio and film; and a range of cultural events: performances, exhibitions, festivals and celebrations. | | **Attainable Housing** | Decent, attractive, safe, and sanitary accommodation that is affordable for the full spectrum of the City’s residents. While a cost of no more than 30% of gross household income is a good rule of thumb for affordability, there will be some circumstances where higher or lower thresholds may be more applicable. | | **Autonomous Vehicles (AV)** | A vehicle in which some aspect of control is automated. AVs do not necessarily need to communicate with infrastructure or other vehicles if they have their own sensors and cameras. | | **Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)** | A bus-based public transit system combining the quality of rail transit and the flexibility and economics of a traditional bus system. BRT systems are usually constructed on designated multimodal corridors connecting increased population and employment densities with transit oriented land uses. BRT can operate on bus lanes, HOV lanes, expressways or ordinary streets. A BRT system typically incorporates a simple route layout, frequent service, limited stops, passenger information systems, traffic signal priority for transit, cleaner and quieter vehicles, rapid and convenient fare collection, high-quality passenger facilities and integration with supportive land use policy. | | **Community Hub** | A location that serves as an accessible community focal point and gathering place with retail uses, resources and services, and is designed and oriented to meet the needs of a particular neighborhood or subarea of the city. | **Complete Creeks** Major waterways within the city that serve as stormwater, wildlife and greenway corridors and which often provide additional complimentary functions including non-motorized trail connections and routes for utilities. **Complete Streets:** Complete streets are streets that have been built for safe and convenient travel by all road users, including people on foot and bicycle, as well as transit users. Complete streets policies call for routinely providing for travel by all users when building and reconstructing streets and roads. (Adopted by 2005 Ordinance 05-196) **Comprehensive Plan** A vision of what we want our city to become; a guiding document with a framework of maps, vision themes, goals, policies, and strategies; a tool for making decisions about how the vision should be achieved; strategic steps to make the vision a reality; targeted, directional, and measured metrics and indicators to illustrate the state of progress of the city. **Connected Vehicles** Vehicles that can communicate with other vehicles and the infrastructure they use. The most common wireless technology used for connected vehicles is dedicated short range communication (DSRC). **Co-Working** Work activities occurring in flexible workspaces shared by people who are self-employed or working for different employers. **Creative Class** For the purposes this Plan, this term is broadly defined as a socioeconomic class that encompasses a wide range of knowledge-based occupations and industries with a focus on innovation, such as education, design, computer programming, engineering, science, the arts, healthcare, and business. The term was originally coined by economist and social scientist, Richard Florida, PhD. **Creative Industries** A range of economic activities associated with the generation or exploitation of knowledge and information. While no formally agreed-upon list of businesses exists, examples include publishing, advertising, performing arts and architecture. **Creative Placemaking** Incorporation of artistic or creative solutions as part of urban design and development. **Critical Support Services** The service centers, industries and City services necessary to meet the fundamental needs of residents and businesses, on a day-to-day basis. Industry services are usually located along rail and highway corridors and are buffered from residential areas. Service centers and City services can be located closer to the neighborhoods and business areas they support and provide services. **Cultural Ecosystem** The interconnected system of places, businesses, facilities and supporting elements that promote the creation, experiencing and performance of education, arts and culture throughout the city. **Cultural Focal Point** Any place in the community with one or more special features of art, performance or architecture that are part of the public realm. These can include but are not limited to public art, fountains, band shells, and amphitheaters. Cultural Hubs A community focal point for arts, cultural, and educational uses and activities. Datacenter A facility made up of networked computers and storage used by major companies to organize, process, store, and distribute large amounts of data. Design Guidelines Written statements, explanatory material, graphic renderings and/or photographs intended to inform property owners and the public of specific examples of techniques and materials appropriate to achieve identified design goals and objectives. Design Standards Written requirements adopted by the City that set forth criteria, the design of particular areas, buildings or elements related to the physical development of the city. Destination Travel All travel to Colorado Springs by persons who do not ordinarily reside, work, attend school, or shop and obtain services within the City. This includes tourists, conference goers, event attendees, visiting athletes, business travelers, shoppers from outside the region, and other visitors from outside the City. Electric Autonomous Vehicles Autonomous Vehicles powered using electric energy stored in rechargeable batteries. Employment Centers Activity centers that include major concentrations of employment supported by a mix of uses that meet the needs of employees and visitors, such as restaurants, lodging, child care, higher density residential, and educational facilities. Enclaves Unincorporated areas entirely surrounded by property within the municipal boundaries of the City, as further defined in the Colorado Revised Statutes. Facility Master Plans Documents that describe and provide planning guidance for the physical components of public and specialized private sector facilities. Examples include the Colorado Springs Airport Master Plan and hospital or university plans. Festival Streets Streets with an identified public space and enhanced streetscape treatments that allow for year-round activities. These streets act as connections among districts and the amenities within them, Examples of existing and proposed festival street include Vermijo Avenue, Sierra Madre Street, Pueblo Avenue, and the future Champions Boulevard. First and Last Mile Connections A combination of short segment transportation solutions and facilities that are focused on the origins and destinations of what may be longer and higher speed trips of varying purposes. These connections often encompass some combination of a need to connect from a mode with higher speed or capacity to one with slower speeds and more localized capacity. Frequent Transit Fixed or flexible route transit service of varying types and designs with intervals of 15 minutes or less between trips during peak travel periods. Goal A statement about an end toward which efforts are directed, and that provides the community with direction. A goal is a desired ideal and a value to be sought. **Green Infrastructure** The interconnected system of parks, open space, trails, waterways and other natural areas that connect the city to its natural environment and which provides environmental functions. **Greenfield Development** Development of previously undeveloped sites located outside predominantly developed areas or within recently developing outward expansion areas of the city. **Greenway** A linear open space established along either a natural corridor, such as a creek or stream valley, a ridgeline, a railroad right-of-way converted to recreational use or any natural or landscaped course for pedestrian or bicycle passage. Greenways often serve as open space connectors linking parks, nature reserves, cultural features, or historic sites within populated areas. **Grid Pattern** Streets that are built at right angles to each other to form a grid. Fine-grained street grid refers to a pattern of shorter blocks and more intersections. **High-wage jobs** Jobs that pay above the county average. **Historic Preservation District** A geographic area composed of structures, objects or improvements that display historic and/or architectural significance and that the City has designated to be appropriate for preservation. **Homeowner and Neighborhood Associations** Home owners associations (HOAs) ordinarily have dues and enforceable covenants, whereas, a may or may not have dues and generally cannot not enforce covenants. **Human Scale** Elements of the physical environment and design that match and compliment the size, scale and speed of an individual operating as a pedestrian, and that encourage activity and interactions at an interpersonal level. **Incubator** A facility used by startup companies that provides affordable workspace, shared equipment, training and mentors, and access to financing, to help these new businesses grow. **Indicators** Numerical measures of progress toward achieving the City’s vision and goals. Indicators are meant to be reproducible, attainable, affordable, and quantifiable. (Also see Keystone Indicators) **Infill Development** Development of vacant, blighted or underutilized land within previously built areas. These areas are already served by public infrastructure, such as transportation and utilities. Parks and open space are also considered as infill, since they represent permanent uses for vacant parcels. **Innovation Districts** Districts that encourage a density of institutions and technology-related firms and start-ups and utilize their proximity to collaborate and share knowledge. **Intermodal Transportation Plan (ITP)** The 2001 master plan for City transportation activities. It includes the Major Thoroughfare Plan, a Truck Route Map, a Transit Plan and a Bicycle Plan, as well as a plan for managing travel demand and pedestrian programs. The purpose of the ITP has been to guide policy and decision making with respect to serving the City's existing and long-term future transportation needs and to carry out the goals of the Strategic Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. **Intermodal Mobility Plan (IMP)** The anticipated name for the recommended update of the 2001 Intermodal Transportation Plan. **Internet of Things (IoT)** The concept of any modern electronic device’s ability to connect to the internet and/or to each other. The inter-networking of vehicles, “smart devices,” buildings, sensors, actuators and other embedded electronics where network connectivity enables these objects to collect, interact and exchange information. **K-12 School System** The combined system of traditional public, charter, private, and non-traditional schools and other facilities providing education to preschool through 12th grade students, and in some cases including post-secondary opportunities. **Keystone Indicators** Set of numerical measures of progress toward achieving the City’s vision and goals. Indicators are meant to be reproducible, attainable, affordable, and quantifiable (also see Indicators). **Land Use Master Plans** Plans that identify or guide allowable or desirable land uses and densities for specific geographic areas. These plans provide information about such issues as land use, transportation, open space, parks, and schools. Plans for undeveloped land are most frequently prepared by the private sector, while plans for established or redeveloping areas are prepared by neighborhood organizations or the City, either singly or collaboratively. **Low-Impact Recreation** Activities, such as hiking, that are accommodated within open space areas in a manner that recognizes and sustainably manages their impacts, especially to the most sensitive natural environments within these areas. **Maker Space** Similar to co-working and incubator facilities, a space that provides technology and equipment (such as 3D printers), used by entrepreneurs to experiment, test ideas, and build product prototypes. **Master Plan** A plan for the development of a portion of the City that contains proposed land uses, a generalized transportation system, and the relationship of the area included in the plan to surrounding property. **Mature/Redevelopment Corridors** Corridors that line older arterial streets and state highways with retail uses and auto-oriented services developed in a typical strip commercial pattern, often with multiple curb cuts, individual parking lots, cluttered signage, and small lots. These corridors include significant infill and redevelopment opportunities. **Millennials (Generation Y)** Existing and future residents born between about 1982 and 2004. Millennials comprise the single largest segment of the city’s population. **Mixed-Use Development** Development that integrates two or more distinct land uses, such as residential, commercial, and office, with a strong pedestrian orientation. | | | | :--- | :--- | | **Multimodal** | Incorporating more than one mode of transportation. For example, a multimodal transportation corridor is one that is proactively designed and operated to accommodate more than one mode (i.e. a street with motor vehicle travel lanes, but also separate defined bike lanes, transit facilities, and enhanced pedestrian infrastructure). | | **Multistreet Corridor** | A transportation corridor consisting of two or more parallel streets planned and managed in a coordinated and integrated fashion. | | **Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing Units (NOAHs)** | Market rate housing units that are affordable for various segments of the population at or below the median household income levels of the city. | | **Near Enclaves** | Unincorporated areas -mostly surrounded by property within City limits but not technically qualifying as enclaves, in some cases because they are bordered on one side by property within another municipality or by federally owned property. | | **Neighborhoods** | Geographic sub-areas within the city that contain and derive at least some of their identity from residential land uses, but which also encompass and incorporate a variety of other land uses and facilities. The extent of a neighborhood is variable and may be defined by tradition, period of building and development, subdivision patterns, or formally adopted boundaries. | | **Neighborhood Centers** | Small, low impact, limited use centers that fit into the neighborhood and are a benefit and amenity to neighborhood residents. | | **Neighborhood Planning Templates** | Anticipated City adopted and standardized templates for both the process and format for new and updated neighborhood plans and intended to result in more efficient creation and use of these future plans. | | **New/Developing Commercial Corridors** | Major street corridors with high volumes of traffic that have recently developed, or are now in the process of developing predominantly with non-residential uses. | | **Opportunity Zones and other Investment Areas** | A term intended to encompass a broad spectrum of existing and future areas designated or otherwise qualified for the purpose of providing location-specific grants or incentives to support investment or reinvestment. Examples may include, but are not limited to federally qualified opportunity zones, Community Development Block Grant (CGBG)-eligible areas, state enterprise zones, and urban renewal areas. | | **Pedestrian-Scale** | Physical development and facilities sized and designed so support the pedestrian experience. (Also see Human Scale and Pedestrian-Oriented Development) | | **Pedestrian-Oriented Development** | Development that incorporates safe, attractive, and continuous connections and walkways for travel and access by foot at a human scale as an integral part of its overall layout and design. | | **Placemaking** | The process and philosophy that results in the creation or enhancement of quality places that people identify with and want to live, work, play or learn in. | **Plan** This Colorado Springs Comprehensive Plan (PlanCOS along with its appendices and referenced documents). **Policy** A statement of principle or a course of action that provides a broad framework for guiding governmental action and decision making. **Pop-Up Culture** A term used to label a PlanCOS typology that refers to wide variety of temporary events, activities, art installations and performances, taking place primarily but not entirely in outdoor settings and contributing to the cultural diversity of the city. **Pop-Up Retail** Temporary retail shops where business owners can test products and ideas without committing to a permanent location. Pop-up shops are often used to help activate vacant and underutilized spaces. **Primary Employment** Jobs that primarily bring external funds into the city and region in the form of wages, sales or investments. Examples include federal employees paid from the U.S. Treasury, manufacturing jobs, or national organization headquarters jobs. **Privately Initiated Land Use Master Plan** A Land Use Master Plan initiated by a private developer or group of developers. **Public Realm** The public and private, primarily outdoor areas of the City, with high levels of open public access, including street rights-of-way extending from building face to building face, plazas, publicly accessible parking lots, and public parks. Note: this term is defined more specifically for use in the Downtown Form Based Code. **Publically Accessible Outdoor Spaces and Amenities** A broadly defined term intended to include City owned and other parks, open spaces, off-street trails, playgrounds, public plazas and other similar outdoor spaces that are widely accessible either to all city residents or to residents and employees within the serviced area of that amenity. **Publicly Initiated Land Use Master Plan** A Land Use Master Plan initiated by the City or another public entity, including neighborhood or corridor plans advocated for by existing neighborhoods or business groups. **Purposeful Density** Thoughtful and well-planned increases in density will be an important part of our future as a growing metropolitan area, particularly in areas of focus such Downtown, along designated corridors, and in activity centers. Increased density will support our transit and walkability visions, maintain the vitality of our mature areas, contribute to our long term fiscal sustainability and help us create desirable places. **Redevelopment** Conversion of existing built property into another use, ideally resulting in better use of the property that provides an economic return to the community. **Regional Centers** Large, intensive activity centers that combine the uses of commercial centers and employment centers and serve the city and region as a whole. They often encompass regional malls or corporate headquarters. **Residential Density Bonuses** A general term referring to a potential combination of additional allowable density, increased building heights, or reduced building setbacks as otherwise permitted in a zone district **Resiliency** The capacity for the City, and its residents and businesses to prepare for disruptions, to recover from shocks and stresses, and to adapt and grow from a disruptive experience. **Ridesharing** A variety of options for the shared use of smaller vehicles including traditional car and van pooling, a taxis or systems like Lyft or UBER that provide individualized transportation options. **Signature Streets** Streets that provide a walkable environment by incorporating: wide sidewalks, sidewalk patio dining, adjacent retail and entertainment activities; streetscape design features, low-level pedestrian lighting, ornamental landscaping, pedestrian benches, and public art. These streets support key retail, entertainment and employment nodes, i.e., Pikes Peak Avenue, Vermijo Avenue, and Tejon Street in Downtown. **Significant Natural Features** Ridgelines, bluffs, rock outcroppings, view corridors, foothills, mountain backdrops, unique vegetation, floodplains, streams, surface water, air, natural drainage ways and wildlife habitats that contributes to the attractiveness of the community. **Single Point Urban Interchanges** A type of grade separated interchange with a comparatively small property footprint and allows free flow of traffic on the major highway, and focuses the flow of traffic on the more minor facility to a single signalized traffic control point. **Smart City/ies** To utilize technology and the Internet of Things (IoT) to address challenges facing our community and improve the quality of life for our citizens. **Special Districts** Districts authorized by the City and created under Colorado Revised Statutes or City Code for the purposes of financing and/or maintaining public improvements for particular areas of the City. Special districts include but are not necessarily limited to metropolitan districts, business improvement districts (BIDs), and general improvement districts (GIDs), special improvement maintenance districts (SIMDs), and City special assessment districts. **Sports Ecosystem** The interconnected system of sports venues, governing bodies, associated businesses, training environment and events that promote the experiencing and economic benefits of sports throughout the City. **Stormwater** Surface runoff and drainage, induced by precipitation events, and conveyed, treated and managed in pipes, channels, creeks, ponds and other public and private facilities. **Strategic Plan** A planning document approved by the City which identifies key areas requiring the resources of City government, and which identifies specific actions steps necessary to achieve desired goals. **Strategies** Plans of action intended to support a specific policy. **Street Activation** A combination of building design choices, streetscape treatments, and multimodal options that results in increased and enhanced use of and orientation towards the street, especially by pedestrians. The type and extent of desired and achievable street activation will be influenced by factors including the functional classification of the roadway and safety considerations. **Street Car** A trolley that runs on rail infrastructure and serves as an alternative mode of transportation for the public. **Street Section** A set of standards for how the public right of way is divided between sidewalks, bike lanes, travel lanes, medians, and other uses and functions. **Streetscape** The overall appearance of a street and the features related to both it and the directly associated public realm, including medians, street trees and other landscaping, street-facing building treatments, entry features, walls, fences, amenities including street furniture and public art, and associated facilities such as street lights, utilities, signage, sidewalks and trails. **Sustainability and Sustainable Development** Strategic initiatives and policies that provide both short and long-term solutions to benefit the people, environment, and economic welfare of our Colorado Springs community. From the perspective of the physical development of the City, development and redevelopment that meets the needs of our residents today without compromising the needs of generations tomorrow. **Third Place** Social environments that provide a space for people to meet, hang out, play, study, or otherwise build community. They are separate from the usual social settings: private homes (first place) and offices (second place). Examples include coffee shops, parks, and public libraries. These places are found throughout the City, but when they occur in conjunction with other features of urban places, they can add particular value. **Topophilia** A strong sense of place, which often becomes mixed with the sense of cultural identity among certain peoples and a love of certain aspects of such a place. **Transit-Oriented Development (TOD)** Development that supports transit use through a concentration and mix of uses and pedestrian connections. **Transit-Supportive Zoning** Zoning that allows for and results in densities, land uses, designs and building orientations that can be expected to support higher levels of transit use as a result of the physical development patterns that are established. Unlike Transit Oriented Development (TOD) which responds existing or programmed higher level transit service, transit supportive zoning set the stage for higher levels in the future. **Transportation Hubs** Areas of convergence or terminals for transportation users. Includes train stations, bus stations, bus stops, park-and-rides, and airports. Bus stops or intersections that serve several bus lines are also considered transportation hubs. **Travel Demand Management (TDM)** Any program or policy that reduces demand on a transportation system. Reductions in demand can be by time-of-day, route, length, mode, or absolute reduction, and are usually a combination of the four. **Tree Lawns** The strip of landscaped area between the sidewalk and the curb. **Typologies** A tool that classifies and graphically represents areas of Colorado Springs related to the major themes of this Comprehensive Plan. Typologies are based on the characteristics, stages of development, issues, needs, and priorities of different areas of the City, and rely primarily on examples of existing areas as a means of articulating the recommended goals of the Plan. **Universal Design** Design of the built environment that promotes access, to the greatest extent feasible, for all people regardless of age, size, ability, or disability. **Urban Activity Center** Major centers with a combination of elements that typically include urban character, higher densities, mixed land uses, walkable design elements, orientation to the street or community gathering areas, and the potential to support higher levels of transit service. **Urban Core** The area of the City in and around Downtown. **Walkable/Walkability** A physical design and environment with availability of safe, accessible, connected and inviting facilities that encourage and result in more pedestrian activity for a variety of purposes. Walkability purposes will vary depending on location and local conditions City. # APPENDIX F: KEYSTONE INDICATOR PROFILES Note: These keystone indicator profiles are expected to be reviewed and refined annually to keep their data and methodologies current. The date of this version is: February, 2019 ## OVERVIEW How do we know if we are achieving the PlanCOS vision? The Comprehensive Plan is shaped by the vision and a set of goals that state the community’s aspirations for the future. Keystone Indicators are established to further describe the community’s desired direction, and help monitor performance and progress towards achieving the Plan’s vision and goals. Indicators help track and communicate progress, and can also serve as alerts to emerging problems or challenges. Characteristics of effective indicators include the following: * **Relevant** to the Plan’s vision and goals to track meaningful desired outcomes; * **Clear and understandable** and do not rely on overly complex definitions or calculations; * **Defensible and grounded** in quality data that can be regularly reported and can be consistently and accurately tracked over time; * **Useful** in making decisions that affect the community, reflecting topics the community directly or indirectly addresses through local plans, policies or implementation programs; * **Interdisciplinary** in that the same indicator can be used across different chapters in this Plan in conjunction with other City plans and programs: * **Comparable** to other regional, municipal, state or national benchmarks These Indicator Profiles are intended to provide an overview of the general approach to the calculation and use of each indicator. As experience is gained, and new data sources or techniques become available, it is expected that adaptations to these methodologies will be made over time in order to maximize the ongoing effectiveness and value of these indicators as measures of PlanCOS progress. ### How are they used? Regular tracking of indicators can help the city staff, leaders, and community members assess whether or not PlanCOS is leading the community toward its vision and goals. While no singular indicator can paint a complete picture of progress, a suite of carefully-selected indicators can help present a compelling story of achievements and challenges related to the Comprehensive Plan vision, goals, policies and strategies. To ensure that the City is making progress toward achieving our vision and goals, the indicators are expected to be used by City staff in annual reporting along with more frequently updated online “dashboard” reporting on progress being made to achieve plan success. A summary of each indicator is provided on the following pages. Data availability varies by indicator, and as such, the baseline years shown on the indicator graphics include the most recent year for which data are available. The trajectory, amount of change and variability of progress over time, will be different for each indicator. Depending on the indicator, the degree of direct influence on a measure will also vary. Although regular reporting on these measures is important, the overall goal is to show progress over the longer term. # CAPACITY CALCULATIONS METHODOLOGY The future development capacity of Colorado Springs was projected to identify how many households and how many square feet of employment development might exist within the current city limits at densities allowed by the current zoning code. This analysis takes into consideration environmentally sensitive areas and high density zoning overlays. Development capacity for vacant land was calculated based on expected zoning densities for three vacant land types; Banning Lewis Ranch area, other greenfield areas, and vacant areas within the city core (infill areas). Redevelopment capacity was calculated in three steps; assessing areas for potential accessory dwelling units, including expected densities from current Urban Renewal Plans, and adding in the maximum entitled densities for the areas of the city with the highest likelihood to change or redevelop. It is recognized that the future densities and the mix of uses for some properties and areas are especially susceptible to uncertainty. In particular, the capacity for larger greenfield areas such as Banning Lewis Ranch should be expected to require substantial recalibration as plans and entitlements for these properties evolve and actual development patterns take shape. Similarly, for larger areas and corridors with a capacity for change (such as Downtown and mature commercial centers and corridors) recalibration will also need to occur as patterns emerge and development plan are established. At a more site and project specific level, it should also be noted that this methodology effectively averages or smooths the capacity assumptions for particular properties. Therefore, it is recommended that this capacity analysis be recalculated on a periodic basis (at least every five years), using a recalibrated methodology that best reflects emerging trends, pattern and conditions. | Category | Acres | Dwelling Units | Square Feet (Commercial/Office/ Industrial) | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Existing Development** | **N/A** | **192,000** | **78,078,000** | | | | | | | Vacant Capacity in Banning Lewis Ranch | 22,000 | 65,000 | 41,677,000 | | Vacant Capacity in other greenfield areas | 6,000 | 13,000 | 9,607,000 | | Vacant Capacity in core (infill) areas | 6,700 | 16,000 | 15,153,000 | | **Total Vacant Land Capacity** | **34,700** | **94,000** | **66,437,000** | | | | | | | Single Family Housing Accessory Dwelling Unit Density Increase | N/A | 3,800 | N/A | | Redevelopment Capacity in Urban Renewal Areas | 300 | 2,000 | 6,606,000 | | Redevelopment Capacity in Areas of Change | 5,000 | 4,600 | 2,415,000 | | **Total Redevelopment Capacity** | **5,300** | **10,400** | **9,021,000** | | **Total Additional Capacity** | **40,000** | **104,400** | **75,458,000** | | **Total Capacity** | | **296,400** | **153,536,000** | # 1. NEW RESIDENTIAL NET DENSITY | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | This indicator will track the density of residential dwelling units added to the city each year compared with average net density of all existing residential properties in the city. This measure is important because it gets to the heart of the PlanCOS density vision by answering whether or not new developments are contributing positively to density. This measure is intended to account for most types of added units including those in established and newly developing areas. Because only residential parcels are included in the analysis, this net measurement approach will largely avoid concerns with accounting for other uses of property including non-residential buildings, street right-of-way and parks and open space. This indicator is intended primarily to be used as a citywide measure but may also be used to track activity and progress in priority areas identified by the City. It is also helpful to compare with the net density of all residential areas across the city. | | <
> | | | Units of Measure | Dwelling units per acre (du/ac) of land with an Assessor’s residential land use code. Comparison of densities for added new unit with existing averages. | | Existing Citywide Condition | 6.5 du/ac (through 2020) – Net density of all residential development

8.97 du/ac (2020) – Net density of new residential development | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase over time subject to cyclical market fluctuations | | Source | Assessor’s parcel data, combined with building permit data | | Methodology | For the city-wide base density calculation, sum all units on parcels with a residential assessor use code and divide by the acreage of the residential parcels. For each new year added to the trend analysis, building permit data for that year will be used in lieu of the assessors use code because this yields annual better results. All residential building permits for units added are geo-coded to a parcel. In the case where multifamily units have been permitted on a larger parcel with units from prior years, a distinct polygon will be created to account for just the newly developed part of the site. This method excludes rights-of-way, parks, and non-residential development so as not to decrease density calculations when a mix of land uses or open space amenities are within the neighborhood. A more detailed methodology will be documented to assure year-over-year consistency. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | This data can be prepared annually, with a few months required to perform the analysis and quality assurance | Timeline and areas expected for change | Density trends are anticipated to vary from year to year with the expectation of longer term trends becoming evident in 5 year intervals or after major development or redevelopment projects are completed. There is expected to be some annual volatility in this measure based on fluctuations in market demand for housing types, and on the timing of building permits for larger projects. --- | --- Scale of Application | Municipal, and major subareas of the city Statistical Confidence | 100% of the city sampled for existing density. Any parcels with a building permit for added residential dwelling units can be captured annually for density changes. Dependent on careful and consistent correlation between building permit data and the Assessor’s database. Requires careful QA/QC to verify geo-referencing of building permits is accurate Level of Effort | Some calculation required. Can be completed immediately at the end of each year using building permit and parcel data along with the related parcel improvement table. Effort to create the data and maps for each year will be considerable. However, the data for one year only has to be calculated once, and it will then be available for additional (e.g. sub-area) analysis. Relevant Chapters | Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods
Chapter 3: Unique Places ### Table: Net Density of New Residential Development | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Number of New Units | 3586 | 3230 | 3585 | 3220 | 4561 | | Acres of Property with New Units | 383.8 | 401.3 | 426.3 | 400.6 | 508.6 | | New Net Density | 9.34 | 8.05 | 8.41 | 8.04 | 8.97 | ### Table: Net Density of All Residential Development | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Number of Units | 194,082 | 197,312 | 200,897 | 204,117 | 208,678 | | Acres of Property with Residential Units | 30,350.58 | 30,751.88 | 31,178.2 | 31,578.78 | 32,087.38 | | All Net Density | 6.39 | 6.42 | 6.44 | 6.5 | 6.5 | ## 2. NET CITY LANE MILES ADDED COMPARED WITH DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | The total lane miles of streets maintained by the City are an important barometer of the efficiency of our land use patterns. By reducing the amount of new street pavement added to the city compared to the additional development activity the system serves, future street maintenance costs will be reduced because there will be less pavement to maintain per person. Environmental impacts (such as from storm water) will become more manageable. Positively affected areas of the city should become more livable at a human scale. PlanCOS ideas and priorities that contribute to this indicator include increased density in targeted activity centers and corridors, infill and redevelopment, use of technology to enhance existing transportation capacity, and recommendations for narrow local street profiles. This indicator is intended primarily to be used as a citywide measure but may also be used to track activity and progress in sub-areas of the city. | | <
> | | | Units of Measure | Lane Miles per Dwelling Unit; Lane Miles added compared with Dwelling Units added | | Relevant Chapters | Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods

Chapter 3: Unique Places

Chapter 5: Strong Connections | | Existing Citywide Condition | 0.02 lane miles per added dwelling units (2020)

0.03 lane miles per dwelling unit overall citywide (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Decrease in proportion of lane miles to dwelling units | | Source | Colorado Springs Cartegraph OMS database | | Methodology | Annually request a year-end report of total lane miles from existing data base. Compare with prior year to calculate annual change. Query Assessor's data base at the end of each year to determine total number of dwelling units added from prior year. Compare ratios. There are 6,453 square yards in an eleven foot lane one mile long. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | This data can be obtained annually, at the beginning of the year. Historical data is not available since the data was not previously tracked in the Cartegraph OMS database. New street inventories are updated in the database efficiently and timely. Although there is essentially no lag obtaining queries from this database, there may be a lag in inclusion of land miles in the database. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Mid to long-term (5-10+). This measure is particularly susceptible to short term fluctuations depending on development phasing and the timing of acceptance of roadway by the City. Considering the timeline to complete | developments, new or changing trends in development patterns will only start to appear after a few years. Scale of Application | Municipal, and subareas of the city --- | --- Statistical Confidence | Each segment of pavement is hand measured by an inspector and recorded as square yards. Level of Effort | Some calculation required to convert total square yards to total lane miles. #### Table: Net City Lane Miles Added | | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Total Lane Miles | 5,849.45 | 5,972.75 | 6133.13 | 6232.051 | | Added Lane Miles | N/A | 123.30 | 160.13 | 99.371 | | Total Dwelling Units | 197,312 | 200,897 | 204,118 | 208,678 | | New DU in Infill and Redevelopment | 579 | 1,166 | 1,227 | 920 | | Added Dwelling Units | 3,230 | 3,585 | 3,221 | 4561 | | Lane Miles Per Added Dwelling Unit: | | 0.034 | 0.05 | 0.02 | | Lane Miles Per Dwelling Unit Overall Citywide: | 0.030 | 0.030 | 0.03 | 0.03 | ## 3. NUMBER OF HIGH PRIORITY NEIGHBORHOOD PLANS COMPLETED Overview | High quality, targeted, responsive and representative neighborhood planning is acknowledged as essential to the success of PlanCOS because these plans provide the level of area-specific attention necessary to effectively apply the broad principles the Plan to the individual and unique neighborhoods throughout the city. Rather than keep track of how much of the city has an associated land use master plan, the recommended indicator is the level of progress being made on plans for only those neighborhoods identified through a community and city leadership process. --- | --- <
> | 2016 – Experience Downtown Master Plan | | 2017 – Renew North Nevada Master Plan, Envision Shooks Run Facilities Master Plan | | 2018 – The Bicycle Master Plan | | 2019 – PlanCOS, HistoricCOS | | 2020 – HomeCOS, Public Arts Plan Relevant Chapters | Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods | | | | :--- | :--- | | Units of Measure | Number of new or updated neighborhood plans completed | | Existing Citywide Condition | 2 high priority plans were adopted in 2019, The Mill St. Neighborhood Plan was adopted in 2019 and is not included in this figure. | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase over time | | Source | Colorado Springs Planning Department | | Methodology | Count the number of neighborhood plans adopted annually. As part of the annual reporting, more specifics can be provided on the particulars of any plans completed, or in process, as well as on other progress or programs aligned with the neighborhood planning goal. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Immediate availability of data. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Short to Mid-term (3-5 years). High priority neighborhoods. Due to low expected numbers, and timing/resource considerations, multi-year trends will be most important. | | Scale of Application | Neighborhood and Municipal | | Statistical Confidence | High | | Level of Effort | Low. Plans should be readily accessible to track once adopted. | #### Table: Number of High Priority Neighborhood Plans Completed | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **New Neighborhood Plans** | **1** | **2** | **1** | **2** | **2** | # 4. INFILL AND REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | Infill and redevelopment activity is identified as a key indicator because it extends across many of the themes and ideas that are priorities for this Plan. This incorporates a combination of reduced vacant acreage in core areas of the city combined with evidence of increasing comparative development activity (i.e. building permit value) in these areas. In addition to being applied to the entire core area of the city, this combined indicator can also be used to evaluate sub-areas within the overall infill area as well as to support specific infill projects or initiatives. The detailed components of this indicator are described in the Appendix. | | <
> | | | Units of Measure | • Remaining vacant acres in overall infill area
• Building permit value in infill area | Relevant Chapters | Chapter 3: Unique Places Chapter 4: Thriving Economy --- | --- ### Remaining Vacant Acres in Infill Area | | | | --- | --- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 5217 remaining vacant acres of infill (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Decrease | | Source | Colorado Springs Parcel Data | | Methodology | Annual calculation in coordination with City IT/GIS. IT/GIS performs an established annual process to determine total vacant parcels in City using the Assessor’s land use codes as a beginning. Based on prior year’s data and additional review, the results then need to be “scrubbed” to remove political subdivision and other parcels with an Assessor’s designation of vacant, but with a clear other use (e.g. stormwater pond or dedicated/restricted open space). Then adjusted again using Pikes Peak Regional Building Department’s building codes for building starts and related platted parcels. This is followed by a simple query of remaining vacant acres in the established infill area polygon. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annual calculation usually performed mid-year for the prior year; Some lag time in determining most current status of parcels related to available air photography and the lag in the Assessor’s process of updating use codes in their data base. Source: City GIS Department with Planning & Community Development Department | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Except in the event of unlikely large scale demolitions that convert previously developed property to vacant status, continuous progress is anticipated. However the rate of progress will be contingent on how robust the overall development market is. Therefore, short term fluctuations in the rate of annual change should be expected. Also, adaptive reuse projects and the highest density infill projects will have the least impact on this measure | | Scale of Application | City-wide and sub-area, such as infill areas | | Statistical Confidence | Relatively high over the long term; however parcel-specific choices to include or not include as vacant can have a substantial impact if these choices pertain to large parcels (for example a conversion of a large infill area parcel from a vacant to a dedicated open space designation could imply more infill progress than was really evident in a given year). Good confidence for overall data and for larger parcels. Lower confidence for smaller parcels because they are not reviewed based on level of effort. Because the database is always being improved, year over year trends may not be fully reflective of near term trends. | Level of Effort | Significant for QA/QC on the initial results of the query, effort focused on larger parcels that will have more impact on the overall result. ---|--- ### Table: Remaining Vacant Infill Acres | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | |---|---|---|---|---|---| | Vacant Infill Acres | 7,333 | 6,564 | 6,295 | 5,564 | 5,217 | | Vacant Acres City Wide | 37,661 | 36,013 | 35,062 | 32,401 | 31,207 | | Vacant Acres Banning Lewis Ranch | 22,299 | 22,124 | 22,002 | 21,766 | 21,617 | ### Building Permit Value In Infill Areas Existing Citywide Condition | 507 M (2020) ---|--- Goal/Trajectory | Higher or steady proportions of total permit value in infill areas, noting that overall city-wide permit value is expected to fluctuate significantly due to economic cycles. Source | Pikes Peak Regional Building Department Methodology | Pikes Peak Regional Building Department, GPS coordinate building permit data for residential and excludes small residential alteration permit values. Residential includes single-family and multi-family building permits valuations of each project. Commercial building permits includes electric, plumbing, HVAC, but excludes the cost of materials, labor, demolition and elevator building permit valuations for the project. Adjustments to these methods are subject to refinement. Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annual; very little data lag Timeline and areas expected for change | Annual fluctuations should be expected based on the overall development market. Downtown data could be susceptible to the timing of major building permit issuance. Longer term trend will be important, including proportional comparisons with the entire City. Scale of Application | Citywide and for infill area; Downtown Partnership also collects data for downtown Statistical Confidence | High level of confidence based on RBD data; but limited to values as reported to RBD, and subject to some geo-coding errors Level of Effort | Low Table: Building Permit Value in Infill Areas | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Residential Building Permit Value in Infill Area | $264,122,374 | $171,510,827 | $261,248,880 | $264,413,584 | $217,127,471 | | Commercial Building Permit Value in Infill Area | $160,038,712 | $198,350,522 | $143,150,493 | $207,686,242 | $289,562,031 | | Total Valuation City wide | $424,161,086 | $369,861,349 | $404,399,373 | $472,099,826 | $506,689,502 | # 5. HOUSING ATTAINABILITY | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | Improving housing affordability over time is identified and addressed as one of the cornerstone challenges and priorities in PlanCOS. This recommended indicator includes overall median single-family and multifamily housing affordability along with total homeless population counts. Together this combination of measures is intended to provide an important and helpful general barometer for progress based on the broad averages and overall counts at different levels along the economic spectrum. It will be important to also be attentive to impacts on sub-groups of housing consumers, whose needs and experience may not be fully represented by measures that focus on overall median housing costs. Likewise, although changes in the overall homeless populations provide an important measure in that area, the status of sub-groups within that overall number will be important. | | <
> | | | Units of Measure | • Single Family Home Ownership Affordability Index
• Apartment Rental Affordability Index
• Total Homeless Populations in El Paso County | | Relevant Chapters | Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods
Chapter 3: Unique Places | ### Single Family Home Ownership Affordability Index/ Housing Opportunity Index | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 60.1 (2020 Q3) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | | | | :--- | :--- | | Source | National Association of Home Builders(NAHB) and Wells Fargo | | Methodology | The NAHB has established a Housing Opportunity Index (HOI) with data maintained and provided for Metropolitan Statistical Areas nation-wide, The MSA for Colorado Springs includes all of El Paso and Teller Counties. Colorado Springs will use the calculations provided as a reasonable proxy for the City. The HOI is defined at the share of homes sold in that area that are affordable to a family earning the local median income based on standard mortgage underwriting criteria. Includes new and existing homes.

For income, NAHB uses the annual median family income estimates for metropolitan areas published by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. NAHB assumes that a family can afford to spend 28 percent of its gross income on housing; this is a conventional assumption in the lending industry. That share of median income is then divided by twelve to arrive at a monthly figure.

Annual time series date will be provided to depict the change in this index over time. The City's index can also be compared with other municipalities. The City may also calculate indices based on other AMI levels in order to evaluate changes by income level and employment sector. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Data are available quarterly, subject to a lag time of about six weeks. It is anticipated that this data will be reported annually | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Attention to annual trends will be important, although trends over a longer period will be most important. As a standard calculation, this measure will be influenced by national as well as local trends and decisions. | | Scale of Application | Citywide | | Statistical Confidence | High | | Level of Effort | Very low | ### Table: Single Family Ownership Affordability Index | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 Q3 | | :--- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | | **Median Price** | $250,000 | $275,000 | $295,000 | $322,000 | $360,000 | | Housing Opportunity Index | 75.2 | 70.4 | 61.7 | 69.8 | 60.1 | | Median Income | $71,000 | $73,600 | $77,700 | $81,400 | $75,800 | | National Rank | 96 | 128 | 138 | 136 | 153 | | Regional Rank | 10 | 14 | 12 | 12 | 15 | | **Affordability Index** | **75.2** | **70.4** | **61.7** | **69.8** | **60.1** | ### Apartment Rental Affordability Index | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 1.26 (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Decrease | | Source | Methodology created by City staff (Community Development HUD Program Manager) using available published data sources from federal and State agencies. | | Methodology | 50% AMI for 3 person household obtained from federal sources; affordable rent calculated based on 30% of this monthly income. Average rent based on Apartment Association Vacancy and Rental Report. Simple calculation of ratio. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annual, with some of the data used in the calculation, based on prior surveys and calculations. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Although annual changes will be important, the longer term trends (.i.e. 5-years) will be most important. | | Scale of Application | Citywide | | Statistical Confidence | High based on formally accepted data; but only representative of the averages for one category of renter, and not necessarily reflective of the full continuum of rental affordability. Average rents are stated asking rents, and may not be fully reflective of discounts and/or leasing. | | Level of Effort | | #### Table: Apartment Rental Affordability Index | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 Q3 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **50% AMI 3 person household** | $31,950 | $33,150 | $35,000 | $36,650 | $36,750 | | | | | | | | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | 2 BR 1 Bath Affordable Rent | $799 | $829 | $875 | $916 | $919 | | 2 BR 1 Bath Average Rent | $942 | $1,024 | $1,080 | $1,128 | $1159 | | **Affordability Index** | **1.18** | **1.24** | **1.22** | **1.23** | **1.26** | ### Total Homeless Populations in El Paso County | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 1,339 homeless (January 2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Decrease | | Source | El Paso County, Pikes Peak Continuum of Care. Point in Time data | | Methodology | Rely on existing Point in Time count which has an established methodology | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Data collected in January of every year. The report is generally made available in May of that same year. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Mid-term (around 5 years). The numbers fluctuate annually, in part based on the conditions associated with each year's survey. and are subject to many factors including policy decisions and funding. | | Scale of Application | County, State, National | | Statistical Confidence | Methodology is highly replicable, and considerable resources are applied to the survey. However, results can vary based on relative resources and conditions in any given year, and there is always the potential for missing of double counting persons. | | Level of Effort | Low. Data is collected by Pikes Peak Continuum of Care. | #### Table: Number of Homeless People in El Paso County | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | **Sheltered: Total** | **991** | **958** | **1,038** | **1,562** | **981** | | Sheltered: Emergency | 591 | 536 | 652 | 679 | 621 | | Sheltered: Transitional: | 400 | 422 | 386 | 439 | 360 | | **Unsheltered Persons** | **311** | **457** | **513** | **444** | **358** | | Total Persons – HUD Count | 1,302 | 1,415 | 1,551 | 1,562 | 1,339 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | ## 6. EXISTING DOWNTOWN MEASURES | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | Progress toward making Downtown an economic and cultural center of the region will be critical to the overall success of PlanCOS. In this case, the recommended indicators are those already in place and being measured by the organizations responsible for managing Downtown program, and funding initiatives (currently coordinated through the Downtown Partnership). | | <
> | | | Units of Measure | • New residential units added annually
• Value of building permit activity compared with prior years and with the overall city | | Relevant Chapters | Chapter 3: Unique Places
Chapter 4: Thriving Economy | ### New Residential Units Added in Downtown | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 214 new units (2020), | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase or ongoing strong trends | | Source | Downtown Partnership | | Methodology | Developed and applied by Downtown Partnership. For Downtown dwelling units the Downtown Partnership keeps track of RBD units started and units completed within ¼ mile of the DDA boundary. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annual; limited lag time; somewhat dependent on when the Downtown Partnership produces the numbers | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Specific to the Downtown area; Annual trends will be important; however annual numbers are expected fluctuate depending on the timing of building permit issuance for larger projects and/or the exact date of certificates of occupancy | | Scale of Application | Limited to Downtown area; but comparable to city-wide numbers | | :--- | :--- | | Statistical Confidence | High based on RBD and limited data points that can be cross checked | | Level of Effort | Very low assuming Downtown Partnership continues to collect this data | ### Table: Residential Units Built Downtown | | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Unit Starts** | 31 | 29 | 172 | 276 | 205 | 235 | | **Units Delivered** | - | 53 | 195 | 241 | 0 | 214 | ### Value of Build Permit Activity in Downtown | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | $207,555,870 (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Downtown Partnership | | Methodology | Building permit data is obtained from RBD by Downtown Partnership for the 80903 Zip Code and not the downtown boundaries. Plancheck valuations are the estimated cost of the project in entirety including permits, cost of materials and labor. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annual, subject to some potential delay based on priorities of the Downtown Partnership | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Annual trends will be important , subject to cyclical economic fluctuations similar to those noted for residential units added | | Scale of Application | 80903 Zip Code, but comparable to city or county-wide numbers | | Statistical Confidence | High | | Level of Effort | Low | Table: Total Downtown (80903 Zip Code) Building Permit Valuations | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Total Plancheck Valuations** | $187,278,854 | $112,286,927 | $119,307,772 | $125,472,799 | $207,555,870 | # 7. ECONOMIC INDICATORS Overview <
> The economic indicators for PlanCOS include the following measures, each of which are available from existing data sources and are easily comparable with other jurisdictions: These measures are chosen because together they reflect a combination of the economic outcomes PlanCOS is intended to support as well as the economic activity that will be needed to allow many of the recommendations in the Plan to be fiscally sustainable with private and public sector resources. From another perspective, many of the other recommendations of PlanCOS are intended to encourage the conditions that will be necessary to attract the economic development and workforce that will contribute to a sustainably strong economy. Although the importance of these interrelationships between high quality and attractive physical development, and a strong economy are implicitly understood, we also recognize that it will be challenging to directly tie progress with economic indicators to progress related to physical development. Units of Measure * New residential units added annually * New jobs added that are at or above the median salary for the region. * Unemployment Rate * Median Wages Compared with State Relevant Chapters Chapter 4: Thriving Economy ### New jobs added that are at or above the median salary for the region | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | Data Acquisition in Process | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Bureau of Labor Statistics | | Methodology | Bureau of Labor Statistics reports hourly and annual 25th, median, 75th, and 90th percentile wages and the employment percent relative standard error.

The percentile wage estimate is the value of a wage below which a certain percent of workers fall. The Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey is a semiannual survey measuring occupational employment and wage rates for wage and salary workers in nonfarm establishments in the United States. OES estimates are constructed from a sample of about 1.2 million establishments and weighted sampled employment. Personal Wage reported for all occupations

High-paying jobs are defined as those within industries where the average earnings are above average. Utilizing the wage data and number of employees calculate the total percentage of workers in all sectors that earn above average. For 2017, these industries include: professional, scientific, and technical services; finance and insurance; manufacturing; construction; information; public administration; wholesale trade; utilities; management; and mining, oil and gas. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | TBD | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Mid-term (5-10 years); This measure is susceptible to influence by national economic trends.

Citywide, however based on how industries have been grouped into typologies, Spinoffs and Startups has the highest proportion of high-paying jobs, and therefore can expect the most change. | | Scale of Application | Municipal, Regional, State, National | | Statistical Confidence | Jobs are reported by employers, estimates from surveys, and weighted. | | Level of Effort | Some effort to collect, aggregate, and calculate utilizing multiple datasets. | ### Table: Number of Jobs Above the Median Salary | | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | |---|---|---|---|---| | | | | | | | **At or Above Median Salary (50^th)** | | | Data Acquisition in Process | | | | | | | | ### City-wide New Residential Units Added Annually | | | |---|---| | Existing Citywide Condition | 4561 Total residential units added (2020)
3080 Single Family (2020)
1481 Multi Family (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase or maintenance of proportion of new units added in city compared with overall County increase; overall long term increase in dwelling units in City. | | Source | Pikes Peak Regional Building Department | | Methodology | Obtain annual GPS coordinate permit data for added residential units from the Pikes Peak Regional Building Department; QA/QC the data points for building codes, residential use, and city boundaries; select related parcels; prepare and maintain maps of distribution of units; perform calculations. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Data are available monthly, but annual calculations are proposed in part because of the need to perform quality control on the data. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Annual; citywide with most activity occurring in greenfield areas, followed by redevelopment areas including downtown; Because numbers can be expected to fluctuate along with state and national trends, a proportional comparison with the County will also be important. | | Scale of Application | Municipal, County, State, National | | Statistical Confidence | Fairly High subject to QA/QC concern with addressing and geocoding. | | Level of Effort | Low. Relatively easy to calculate. | ### Table: New Residential Units Added Annually | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Total Added County wide Residential Units** | 4954 | 4854 | 5585 | 5388 | 6808 | | **Total Added City Residential Units** | 3442 | 3230 | 3585 | 3220 | 4561 | | Single-family City | **1952** | **2121** | **2208** | **2110** | **3080** | | Multifamily City | **1490** | **1109** | **1377** | **1110** | **1481** | | **City Proportion of County (of total added units)** | 69% | 67% | 64% | 60% | 67% | Graph: <
> ### Unemployment Rate | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 6.95% annual average (2020 Jan- Nov) | | Goal/Trajectory | Maintain Low | | Source | US Bureau of Labor Statistics | | Methodology | The Bureau of Labor Statistics produces a monthly unemployment rate and an annual average for past years. 2019 not seasonally adjusted | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Monthly unemployment rates are reported with a lag time of 1-2 months. Official annual averages are reported in April the following year. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Mid-term (around 5 years). The numbers fluctuate annually, and are subject to many external factors. | | Scale of Application | Municipal, Regional, State, National | | Statistical Confidence | Each year, historical estimates from the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) program are revised to reflect new population controls from the Census Bureau, updated input data, and reestimation. The data for model-based areas also incorporate new seasonal adjustment, and the unadjusted estimates are controlled to new census division and U.S. totals. Substate area data subsequently are revised to incorporate updated inputs, reestimation, and controlling to new statewide totals. | | Level of Effort | Minimal. No calculation is necessary. | ### Table: Unemployment Rate (Annual Average) | | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020(Jan-Nov) | |---|---|---|---|---|---|---| | COS Annual Unemployment Rate | 4.6% | 3.7% | 3.3% | 3.7% | 3.35% | 6.97% | | Colorado Unemployment Rate | 3.9% | 3.3% | 2.9% | 3.5% | 3.04% | 6.95% | ### Median and Mean Wages Compared with State | | | |---|---| | Existing Citywide Condition | $81,629 Colorado Springs (2020) – HUD Median Household Income | | | No CO – HUD Median Household Income data | | | $19.11 Colorado Springs (2019) – BLS Median Hourly Wage | | | $21.28 State of Colorado (2019) – BLS Median Hourly Wage | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | The source for wage data has been updated. The Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for median household income and the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) for median hourly wage. We are not using American Community Survey (US Census) – ACS 2013-2017, five year estimate at this time due to the data becoming outdated and less accurate between Censuses. | | Methodology | HUD - A special tabulation of Median Family Income (MFI) estimates from the 2013-2017 5-year ACS was prepared by the U.S. Census Bureau and used by HUD as the basis for calculating HUD's FY2020 MFIs. Estimates of MFI from this tabulation are used if they are determined to be statistically reliable. For FY2020, the test for reliability is whether the margin of error for the estimate is less than 50% of the estimate itself and whether the ACS estimate is based on at least 100 survey cases.

BLS - The Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey is a semiannual survey measuring occupational employment and wage rates for wage and salary workers in nonfarm establishments in the United States. OES estimates are constructed from a sample of about 1.2 million establishments and weighted sampled employment. Personal Wage reported for all occupations

American Community Survey (ACS), Current Population Survey (CPS) and Annual Social and Economic (ASEC) Supplement. The CPS is | | | | | :--- | :--- | | | a joint effort between the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Census Bureau. Household income reported | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | For Bureau of Labor and Statistics OES survey, panels and estimates are reporting semiannually. | | | For Census data, it is best to update the metric at the 10 year Census interval to re-calibrate. American Community Survey data is built off of a sample size while the 10 year census number attempts to survey all citizens. For either data set, there is a processing lag time of 2+ years. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Annual trends are important, but long , Colorado Springs income growth has been statistically slower than the State | | Scale of Application | Municipal, Regional, State, National | | Statistical Confidence | Occupational Employment Statistics are based on survey responses, panels and are adjusted. Percent relative standard error is 1.1% | | | American Community Survey shows a margin of error of 1% | | Level of Effort | Minimal. Readily available at American Fact Finder or other census websites. | **Table: Median Household Income (HUD)** | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **COS Mean Income** | **$ 70,954** | **$ 73,608** | **$77,675** | **$81,376** | **$81,629** | | Colorado Mean Income | No data | | | | | **Table: Median Hourly Wage (ACS)** | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | COS Median Wage | $17.90 | $18.15 | $18.61 | $19.11 | | Colorado Median Wage | $19.09 | $19.66 | $20.34 | $21.28 | # 8. RENOWNED CULTURE INDICATORS Overview | When considered together, these renowned culture indicators provide a measure of the ongoing activity that is indicative of a rich culture throughout the city.

• Creative Vitality Index
• Number of Creative Jobs
• Creative Industry Earnings ---|--- <
> | Existing Citywide Condition | Creative Vitality Index (2019) = 0.89
Number of Creative Jobs (2019) = 10,650
Total Industry Earnings (2019) = $751.1M Goal/Trajectory | Increase Source | Creative Vitality Suite (cvsuite.org) Methodology | WESTAF © Creative Vitality™ Suite 2019, zip codes within the Colorado Springs city limits used to run regional snapshot.

The Creative Vitality Index (CVI) is an index that provides a value for the relative economic health of a region’s creative activity. The Creative Vitality Index compares the per capita concentration of creative activity in two regions. Data on creative industries, occupations, and cultural nonprofit revenues are indexed using a population-based calculation. The resulting CVI Value shows a region’s creative vitality compared to another region. The US CVI benchmark value is 1.0.

Data Sources: Economic Modeling Specialists International, National Assembly of State Arts Agencies, National Center for charitable Statistics. Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Can be computed upon request, annually, with a lag time of two or more months. Timeline and areas expected for change | Two to five years with steady growth. Redeveloping areas of the city will expect to see growth in this sector. Scale of Application | Citywide, or for subareas Statistical Confidence | Based on regional economic, occupation, and non-profit reporting. Level of Effort | Low assuming access to this tool remains available and can be coordinated with the Downtown Partnership Relevant Chapters | Chapter 6: Renowned Culture ### Table: Creative Vitality Suite | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Creative Vitality Index** | **0.90** | **0.99** | **1.08** | **0.89** | | **Number of Creative Jobs** | **10,960** | **11,068** | **11,320** | **10,650** | | **Total Industry Earnings** | **$681,700,000** | **$677,700,000** | **$685,500,000** | **$751,100,000** | | Total Industry Sales | $2,900,000,000 | $2,800,000,000 | $2,600,000,000 | $2,700,000,000 | | Cultural Nonprofit Revenues | $32,000,000 | $68,300,000 | $68,300,000 | $27,500,000 | Graph: # 9. MAJESTIC LANDSCAPES INDICATORS Overview <
> Although it is recognized that additional factors need to be evaluated as part of a more complete measurement of the progress made toward the city's Majestic Landscapes goals, together, these two measures provide a good sense for the level of access residents and visitors have, along with how well we are taking care of our investment in green infrastructure. Units of Measure * Percent of City Population Within ½ Mile of a Park * Per Capita Total Funding for Parks Operations * Miles of Developed Urban and Park Trails * Percent of City Population, Area, and Employment Within ½ Mile of a Park, Trail, or Accessible Open Space Area Relevant Chapters Chapter 7: Majestic Landscapes Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods Chapter 3: Unique Places ### Percent of City Population, Area, and Employment within ½ Mile of a Park, Trail, or Accessible Open Space Area | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 74% population within 0.5 miles of only a Park (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | The Trust for Public Land Park Score | | Methodology | Annually municipal publications form The Trust for Public Land table. Information is sourced from the US Census Bureau, ESRI’s 2017 Demographic Forecasts, and the Trust for Public Land’s annual survey of all public and non-profit park agencies and groups in the 100 largest US cities. (Trust for Public Land)

Percent Population and Percent Employment that live and or work within 0.5 miles of park land, trail or accessible open space is not a readily available resource. A methodology would need to be created. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annually; this will require a rigorous GIS analysis | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Expected increased access in gap areas and newly developed areas; On a City-wide basis the expectation is that there will be slow progress toward improving this measure. This is a function of existing development patterns coupled with the fact that the resources required to add facilities of this nature. | | Scale of Application | Municipal, Regional; could also be evaluated for sub-areas of the City | | Statistical Confidence | Relatively high | | Level of Effort | low | ### Table: Population within ½ Mile of a Park or 10 min. walk | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | **Park Land as % City Area** | **9%** | **9%** | **9.3%** | **9.4%** | **9.4%** | | **Percent Population within ½ Mile** | **69%** | **70%** | **69%** | **74%** | **74%** | ### Table: Population, Area and Employment within ½ Mile of a Park, Trail, or Accessible Open Space Area | | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | | :--- | :---: | :---: | :---: | :---: | | **Percent Population** | | Data Acquisition In Process | | | | **Percent Employment** | | | | | Graph: ### Per Capita Total Funding for Parks Operations | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | $79.53 per capita spent annually on park operations (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Trust for Public Lands Park Score | | Methodology | Annually municipal publications form The Trust for Public Land table. Information is sourced from the US Census Bureau, ESRI’s 2017 Demographic Forecasts, and the Trust for Public Land’s annual survey of all public and non-profit park agencies and groups in the 100 largest US cities. (Trust for Public Land). One complicating factor is that special districts account for an increasing share of sometimes equivalent parks funding. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Annually with little lag time, data is available by 3^rd quarter of the year following the year of reporting | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Short to Mid-term with a clear ability to consider year over year trends; with additional attention to longer term trends | | Scale of Application | Municipal and comparable municipalities | | Statistical Confidence | Medium, some discrepancies in data appear between table and fact sheets, the table was used. | | Level of Effort | Low | #### Table: Dollars Spent on Park Operations per Person | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | **Colorado Springs** | **$58.00** | **$76.00** | **$81.00** | **$86.00** | **$79.53** | | Denver | $109.00 | $115.00 | $121.00 | $115.00 | $130.01 | | Aurora | $132.00 | $139.00 | $143.00 | $145.00 | $149.33 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Austin, TX | $92.00 | $103.00 | $108.00 | $119.00 | $147.03 | | Omaha, NE | $74.00 | $76.00 | $79.00 | $80.00 | $78.59 | | Albuquerque, NM | $59.00 | $58.00 | $62.00 | $65.00 | $62.15 | ### Miles of Trails | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | On and off-street trails not only provide opportunities for active transportation alternatives (biking, walking etc.), but they also encourage additional passive recreation and access to natural landscapes throughout Colorado Springs. Tracking the miles of trails is a good indicator and benchmark for recreation access and can easily be compared to other cities and metropolitan regions. | | Units of Measure | Miles of Developed Urban and Park Trails | | Existing Citywide Condition | 147 miles of Urban Trails (2020) | | | 135 miles of Park Trails (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Colorado Springs trail data measured in a GIS environment. | | Methodology | To measure only city-owned trails, sum all developed Tier 1, 2, 3, 4 trails in the GIS database including Cheyenne Mountain State Park trails. This may include trails that are technically outside the city limits. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Trail data is regularly updated and available to the City. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Short to Mid-term. Attention to annual added increments will be important) | | | There are a number of trails that the City is already planning on developing in the coming years. Many of the large trail additions will be seen in Emerging Neighborhoods in north Colorado Springs and Banning Lewis Ranch. Additional connections are planned in Mountain Shadow, Pinecliff, and Pulpit | Rock neighborhoods, and connecting the Broadmoor neighborhoods north-south. | | :--- | :--- | | Scale of Application | Municipal, State, National | | Statistical Confidence | GIS trail data should be reasonably accurate. | | Level of Effort | Readily available data | ### Table: Miles of Trails | | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Urban Trails | 125 | 125 | 138 | 138 | 147 | | Park Trails | 135 | 135 | 135 | 135 | 135 | # 10. CITYWIDE PEDESTRIAN, BICYCLE, AND TRANSIT INFRASTRUCTURE | | | | :--- | :--- | | Overview | Improving walkability and throughout the city is a cornerstone goal of PlanCOS. Increasing bicycle infrastructure and safety is also a major objective, as is taking transit to the next level especially in key activity centers and corridors. Walkscore® and its related Bikescore® and Transitscore® are nationally recognized measures for walkability and bicycle and transit access, in communities. These scores can be calculated citywide, or for areas of focus, and can be compared with other communities. However, because these measures are primarily based on a calculation of land use proximity, and do not account for the quality and design of walkable infrastructure, care should be taken in interpreting the results. This indicator can also be coupled with tracking the number of miles of bike lanes and bicycle infrastructure. | | <
> | | | Units of Measure |
  • Walkscore®
  • Bikescore®
  • Transitscore®
  • Bike Lanes, Routes, and Boulevards
| | Relevant Chapters | Chapter 2: Vibrant Neighborhoods

Chapter 3: Unique Places

Chapter 5: Strong Connections | ### Walkscore®, Bikescore®, and Transitscore® | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | Walkscore® = 35 (2020)

Bikescore® = 45 (2020)

Transitscore® = 19 (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Walkscore.com | | Methodology | Measures on a scale from 0 – 100.

Walk Score analyzes hundreds of walking routes to nearby amenities. Points are awarded based on the distance to amenities in each category. Amenities within a 5 minute walk (.25 miles) are given maximum points. A decay function is used to give points to more distant amenities, with no points given after a 30 minute walk. Walk Score also measures pedestrian friendliness by analyzing population density and road metrics such as block length and intersection density. Data sources include Google, Education.com, Open Street Map, the U.S. Census, Localeze, and places added by the Walk Score user community.

Transit Score is a patented measure of how well a location is served by public transit. Transit Score is based on data released in a standard format by public transit agencies. To calculate a Transit Score, we assign a "usefulness" value to nearby transit routes based on the frequency, type of route (rail, bus, etc.), and distance to the nearest stop on the route. The "usefulness" of all nearby routes is summed and normalized to a score between 0 - 100.

Bike Score measures whether an area is good for biking. For a given location, a Bike Score is calculated by measuring bike infrastructure (lanes, trails, etc.), hills, destinations and road connectivity, and the number of bike commuters. These component scores are based on data from the USGS, Open Street Map, and the U.S. Census.

(Walkscore.com) | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | The data can be tracked annually, at the beginning of the year. Historical data is not available, however annually tracking will be part of the PlanCOS updates building historical patterns from 2019 forward. | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Ttrends for Walkscore in particular will occur over substantial periods of time this score is contingent on citywide development patterns that will take a long time to change. The Bikescore and Transitscore measures have some potential for more rapid change if service or facilities were extended. | | | | | :--- | :--- | | Scale of Application | Municipal and subareas - will differ in range | | Statistical Confidence | A ubiquitous measure in urban planning. | | Level of Effort | Low | ### Table: Walkscore®, Bikescore®, and Transitscore® | | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Walkscore | 36/100 | 36/100 | 35/100 | | Bikescore | 42/100 | 42/100 | 45/100 | | Transitscore | 19/100 | 19/100 | 19/100 | ### Miles of Bike Lanes, Routes and Boulevards | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 557 miles of bike lanes, routes, and boulevards (2020) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Colorado Springs bike facility data, provided by Bike Plan | | Methodology | Isolate and sum only miles of bike lanes, bike routes, bike boulevards, buffered bike lanes, shared lane marking, protected bike lanes and contra-flow bike lanes. Each segment is assigned a field and measured in GIS environment. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Regularly updated in the city's open data platform, data.coloradospring.gov | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Gained access in gap areas and continued connections in Colorado Springs Bike Plan Vision Network. (2-5 years): Annual increments will be important to pay attention to as trends. | | Scale of Application | Municipal, Regional | | Statistical Confidence | Based on GIS bike infrastructure database calculations, relatively high | Level of Effort | Medium ---|--- ### Table: Miles of Bike Lanes, Routes and Boulevards | | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Bike Lanes | 226.6 | 244 | 246.6 | 253.6 | | Bike Routes | 212.4 | 214 | 214 | 209.9 | | Bike Boulevards | 3 | 3 | 3.27 | 3.0 | | Buffered Bike Lanes | 7.7 | 16 | 19.4 | 22.8 | | Shared Lane Marking | 2.3 | 5.7 | 5.7 | 5.7 | | Protected Bike Lane | 0 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | | Contra-flow Bike Lane | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.4 | 0.6 | | **Miles of Bike Lanes, Routes, and Boulevards** | **455** | **484.6** | **545** | **557** | 30 minute walk. Walk Score also measures pedestrian friendliness by analyzing population density and road metrics such as block length and intersection density. Data sources include Google, Education.com, Open Street Map, the U.S. Census, Localeze, and places added by the Walk Score user community. **Transit Score** is a patented measure of how well a location is served by public transit. Transit Score is based on data released in a standard format by public transit agencies. To calculate a Transit Score, we assign a "usefulness" value to nearby transit routes based on the frequency, type of route (rail, bus, etc.), and distance to the nearest stop on the route. The "usefulness" of all nearby routes is summed and normalized to a score between 0 - 100. **Bike Score** measures whether an area is good for biking. For a given location, a Bike Score is calculated by measuring bike infrastructure (lanes, trails, etc.), hills, destinations and road connectivity, and the number of bike commuters. These component scores are based on data from the USGS, Open Street Map, and the U.S. Census. (Walkscore.com) Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | The data can be tracked annually, at the beginning of the year. Historical data is not available, however annually tracking will be part of the PlanCOS updates building historical patterns from 2018 forward. --- | --- Timeline and areas expected for change | Ttrends for Walkscore in particular will occur over substantial periods of time this score is contingent on citywide development patterns that will take a long time to change. The Bikescore and Transitscore measures have some potential for more rapid change if service or facilities were extended. Scale of Application | Municipal and subareas - will differ in range Statistical Confidence | A ubiquitous measure in urban planning. Level of Effort | Low ### Table: Walkscore®, Bikescore®, and Transitscore® | | 2018 | | --- | --- | | Walkscore | 36/100 | | Bikescore | 42/100 | | Transitscore | 19/100 | ### Miles of Bike Lanes, Routes and Boulevards | | | | :--- | :--- | | Existing Citywide Condition | 484.6 miles of bike lanes, routes, and boulevards (2018) | | Goal/Trajectory | Increase | | Source | Colorado Springs bike facility data, provided by Bike Plan | | Methodology | Isolate and sum only miles of bike lanes, bike routes, bike boulevards, buffered bike lanes, shared lane marking, protected bike lanes and contra-flow bike lanes. Each segment is assigned a field and measured in GIS environment. | | Frequency of data collection and lag time for reporting | Regularly updated in the city's open data platform, data.coloradospring.gov | | Timeline and areas expected for change | Gained access in gap areas and continued connections in Colorado Springs Bike Plan Vision Network. (2-5 years): Annual increments will be important to pay attention to as trends. | | Scale of Application | Municipal, Regional | | Statistical Confidence | Based on GIS bike infrastructure database calculations, relatively high | | Level of Effort | Medium | #### Table: Miles of Bike Lanes, Routes and Boulevards | | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :---: | :---: | | Bike Lanes | | | 226.6 | 244 | | Bike Routes | | Data Unavailable | 212.4 | 214 | | Bike Boulevards | | | 3 | 3 | | Buffered Bike Lanes | | | 7.7 | 16 | | Shared Lane Marking | | | 2.3 | 5.7 | | Protected Bike Lane | | | 0 | .6 | | Contra-flow Bike Lane | | | 0.4 | 0.4 | | **Miles of Bike Lanes, Routes, and Boulevards** | | | **455** | **484.6** |