CITY OF COLORADO SPRINGS
2002 ANNEXATION PLAN
CHAPTER 3 - EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ANNEXATION
The most common method by which a municipality adds land area is voluntary extra-territorial annexation. The property under consideration must have one-sixth contiguity with the annexing municipality. This chapter will classify and prioritize areas that are likely to be considered for extra-territorial annexation.
CITY-COUNTY COOPERATION
Regional cooperation in matters of growth and development is emphasized in the Land Use Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Objective LU 1 of the Comprehensive Plan focuses on improved regional planning and cooperation and Strategy LU 101d promotes cooperation between the City of Colorado Springs, El Paso County and other municipalities in the updating of the City’s Annexation Plan. The policies and strategies from the Land Use Chapter are in Appendix I.
The Potential Urban Growth Area, a concept proposed by the City of Colorado Springs, the City of Fountain and El Paso County in the Cooperative Planning Agreement signed in 1985, is an area identified for cooperation in planning efforts. It also recognizes the plans and policies of the participating entities. Geographically this is an area that roughly follows the eastern edge of the Three-Mile Plan. El Paso County uses its Small Area Planning process to determine when and where development will occur. These Small Area Plans ring the City’s exterior and are listed in Appendix IV. The City of Fountain’s Comprehensive Plan was also consulted in determining annexation priorities.
Comprehensive Plan Strategy LU 102a recommends that the boundaries of the Potential Urban Growth Area be adjusted to reflect current and projected development patterns. The focus of this Chapter is to review the current growth boundaries and recommend adjustments. Map 3.1 illustrates the prioritized potential annexation areas and suggests changes to the Potential Urban Growth Area.
CITY SETTING
At present, Colorado Springs contains about 186 square miles of land area, of which about 100 square miles are developed. As part of the Comprehensive Plan update a Phase One Report was published in 1998 and evaluated current conditions and assessed future growth trends. Using the moderate population growth forecast from that report, Colorado Springs is expected to increase in population by 130,000 and add 70,000 jobs for the period 1997-2020. Approximately 70 percent of the population growth in El Paso County occurs within the City of Colorado Springs.
Using current development characteristics such as residential densities and square footage of space per employee, the amount of land needed to accommodate the projected growth for 2020 was calculated to be approximately 12,000 acres of residential land; 3,000 acres of land for commercial, office and industrial uses; and 5,000 acres for schools, parks and other related uses, for a total of approximately 20,000 acres. After subtracting out floodplains and environmentally constrained areas, projected growth would consume about one-half of the current vacant and developable land in the City. If current development patterns hold, the majority of this growth will be in the City’s northeast area. However, it is expected that the remaining developable land in the foothills west of I-25 will be absorbed during this period. There is limited annexation potential west of I-25 because of the topographic constraints, the Pike National Forest and the United States Air Force Academy.
El Paso County refines their countywide land use guide by developing Small-Area Plans for identified sub-areas of the unincorporated County. These plans function as the overall guiding document and master plan for the specific area. They are more detailed planning documents covering such topics as land use, transportation, natural environment, public facilities and drainage control. These Small-Area Plans ring the exterior boundary of the City.
Urban level development that is occurring just beyond the City’s borders within El Paso County is provided with urban amenities such as central water and , wastewater and fire protection by either special districts or metropolitan districts. The presence of urban development on the City’s borders makes annexation difficult. Because of tThe numerous developed small parcels and the special and metropolitan districts, make annexation is unlikely in these urbanizing portions of El Paso County.
Opportunities for physical expansion of the City through annexation will be limited. There are two areas major where expansion is expected. The first is in the northern portion of the City centering on the area between Northgate and State Highway 83. This area is numbered 1 and 4 on Map 3.1 on page 17. The second area is located in the vicinity of the intersection of Woodmen Road and Powers Boulevard. This area is identified as numbers 2 and 5 on Map 3.1 on page 17.
The following paragraphs give a brief description of the developing areas in El Paso County along the eastern border the City. A more detailed assessment of these areas and their annexation potential is found in the Territorial Limits section of this Cchapter.
The Falcon area, located adjacent to the northeast portion of Colorado Springs, is planned for urban level residential densities and commercial activity and will be provided with utility and fire protection services by a number of special districts and metropolitan districts. This area is not a likely candidate for annexation. The number of small individually owner parcels coupled with the numerous service districts makes this an unlikely area for annexation.
South of Falcon along the eastern edge of the City low-density residential development (21/2 and 5 acre lots) is occurring. This very low-density development is an inefficient development pattern for the provision of urban level services making it expensive to serve and thus creating a fiscal disincentive for annexation.
Along the southern boundaries of the City are three distinct areas all with differing annexation options.
Because of the limits to the ability of Colorado Springs Utilities to serve the extreme southeastern portions of this area the City of Fountain should provide utility service.
Moving westerly there is an area located south and west of Powers Boulevard in the vicinity of the Big Johnson Open Space. The area is mostly undeveloped and its annexation would help to consolidate the City boundary and help the provision of emergency service into that portion of City.
Finally is the area in the vicinity of South Circle Drive, Interstate 25 and Academy Boulevard generally referred to as Stratmoor Hills and the northern reaches of Security. Two major highways, I-25 and Academy Boulevard, and Fountain Creek split the area. There is an established land use pattern and several special districts providing water and wastewater services and fire protection. Annexation in this area is unlikely.
Lower density residential development in El Paso County creates a situation where it is highly unlikely that the City will have opportunities for aggressive annexation, such as existed in the 1980’s.
The availability of water is a major influence on growth. Estimates from Colorado Springs Utilities indicate the City owns enough water rights to accommodate a potential population of approximately 605,000, which is the projected population for the City for the year 2040. It is estimated that the existing water conveyance facilities have adequate capacity until the year 2010 or a population of 409,500.
ANNEXATION CLASSIFICATIONS
Evaluation factors such as location and service provision were used in recommending adjustments to the boundaries of the Potential Urban Growth Area. This plan is also a guide concerning the City’s intent towards extra-territorial voluntary annexation.
Listed below are the five evaluation factors:
Location
A parcel’s relationship to the existing City boundary is the key factor in the determination of its eligibility for annexation. One-sixth is the minimum amount of contiguity required.
There are areas adjacent to the City, particularly along the eastern edge, that meet the 1/6th requirement for annexation but are remote and costly to serve due to distance from existing public facilities and services.
There are peninsulas of land remaining within El Paso County that could be served with a full range of urban level services if they were within the City. Currently the El Paso County Sheriff and the fire protection districts have to travel through the municipality to provide service. This situation is inefficient and confusing to emergency service providers and their dispatchers.
Existing Services and Service Provision
The geographic relationship of the county land to Colorado Springs Utilities lines is a key factor in determining annexation classification. It will manycould be several years until the eastern portion of the Banning-Lewis Ranch and the unincorporated land to the east can be served by water and wastewater extensions.
When special districts provide services such as fire protection or utilities to potential annexation areas and a portion of that district’s service area is annexed, the City generally compensates the district for loss of revenue. Incremental annexations of special district lands may impact the financial viability of those districts.
There are portions of El Paso County adjacent to the City that do not have structural fire protection. Occasionally the City’s fire department responds to emergencies in these areas. Since these areas do not pay property tax, when the service is provided it is done without compensation. Fire protection is a basic urban service. Most of these areas are too small to individually form a fire protection district.
Existing Land Development Patterns
Many of the areas adjacent to the City are developing with single family homes on large lots. It is inefficient and expensive to provide urban level services to areas of very low residential density development and many times the cost of providing services exceeds the revenue realized from the development.
Relationship to El Paso County's Small Area Plans
El Paso County’s focus for its comprehensive planning efforts has been to develop Small-Area Plans for various geographic areas and then incorporate these plans into the County’s Comprehensive Plan. The small-area plans are a significant component of the classification system and the land use map. These plans vary greatly in their detail concerning land use and transportation expectations. As such certain latitude was taken in interpreting future land use patterns expressed by these small-area plans.
EXTRA-TERRITORIAL ANNEXATION CATEGORIES
Extra-territorial annexations are divided into three categories. See Map 3.1 for the specific locations.
Strongly recommended for annexation
Land within this classification is either optimal for urban development or functions as an enclave. If urban development is to occur it should be under the jurisdiction of Colorado Springs.
Recommended for annexation
Urban level services could easily be extended and urban development is appropriate.
Eligible for annexation but not recommended
Although provision of urban level services is not contemplated for the next 10 to 15 years, portions of these areas are This category identifies areas that are eligible for voluntary annexation, but for various .reasons such as existing service districts and development patterns, are not being considered for annexation.
TERRITORIAL LIMITS
The Potential Urban Growth Area boundaries have not changed since 1985. Land use patterns for the City and the County are mapped annually, providing an up-to-date representation of the development trends occurring on the City’s borders. The areas are numbered 1-12 and placed in one of the three extra-territorial annexation categories. Area 12 is a potential growth area for the City of Fountain. Map 3.1 illustrates these twelve areas.
Areas Strongly Recommended for Annexation
Area 1. An area of approximately 560 acres located in the northern part of the City north of the Interquest Parkway Interchange. Black Squirrel Creek crosses the area from east to west. This portion of unincorporated El Paso County functions as an enclave, but does not meet the statutory requirements, as the United States Air Force Academy owns the property directly to the west. Urban development is occurring on three sides. Currently there are few structures and dwellings on the site. If this area is to develop it is most likely that urban densities would be requested. It would be difficult for El Paso County to provide the necessary services. The City of Colorado Springs is well positioned to provide urban level services.
Area 2. This is an area of approximately 1250 acres that straddles the Woodmen Road and Powers Boulevard corridors focusing upon that intersection. Black Forest Road is the eastern edge of this area. The focal point of this area is the intersection of Powers Boulevard and Woodmen Road. This intersection is characterized as a regional center on the City’s 2020 Land Use Map. A regional center is typically located at the intersection of major roads and provides retail services and employers that serve a citywide and regional market. Regional centers are areas of heavily concentrated land use and require appropriate urban infrastructure and services. The City of Colorado Springs is the only service provider of choice in this area.
Areas Recommended for Annexation
Area 3. This area of approximately 406 acres is located south of Old Ranch Road along the east side of I-25. The area functions as an enclave but does not meet the statutory requirements, as the United States Air Force Academy borders the property on the west. This area is characterized by low-density residential development on individual water and wastewater systems. Most of the land is developed and thus the land use pattern is established. It is anticipated that this land use pattern will continue and redevelopment is unlikely.
Area 4. This is an area of approximately 1850 acres located adjacent to the Northgate development and west of State Highway 83 and south of Northgate Road. An annexation petition has been filed for the majority of this area. Utilities exist in the Northgate development located to the west and could be extended easterly into this area. The development east of State Highway 83 is low density residential on individual water and wastewater systems. State Highway 83 is the logical eastern edge of the City in this section of El Paso County.
Area 5. This is an area of approximately 1740 acres located north and south of Woodmen Road and east of the proposed extension of Peterson Road. Black Forest Road is the northerly extension of Peterson Road. The area extends easterly along the south side of Woodmen Road to the eastern limits of the City. The westerly portion of this district is characterized by low-density residential development and scattered commercial development. The land east of Marksheffel Road is mostly vacant. Development occurring in El Paso County east of Black Forest Road and north and east of the proposed extension of Research Parkway to Marksheffel Road is mainly residential at densities greater that one unit per 21/2 acres. The land area southwest of the planned extension of Peterson Road is mostly vacant with some residential, commercial and industrial land uses. Since there is not a clear development pattern and Research Parkway is a major arterial road this area is recommended for annexation.