The Colorado Springs Utilities' appeal, filed earlier this week, is shedding light on why the utility believes the Wilson Water Tank should stand.
The 10-page filing, explains what happened from Utilities' point of view. For months, we've covered the controversy over the water tank built too tall, and the decision over what to do next. Some say Utilities should take it down. Others say, the city can use this as a lesson to improve the planning and building approval process, but leave the tank erected since fixing the problem will cost millions.
Now we're learning why Utilities thinks this matter needs to be considered by the City Council. When it applied for a 45-foot tall permit last year, it didn't have the dimensions back from the tank designer. Utilities first laid out the chronology of events in its September 7 filing of an appeal to the stop-work order ahead of the planning commission meeting.
"The actual height of the proposed tank was unknowable at the time the development plan was submitted because Utilities had not yet contracted with its prime construction contractor, according to the documents. It said after it entered into a contract with DN Tanks in August 2022, the structure's height became evident.
In its February 2023 building permit application submitted to Pikes Peak Regional Building, Utilities notes that its application for a building permit included the development plan and the tank construction drawings which reflected its 60-foot height.
"The building permit application was reviewed by City Planning, Development Review Enterprise, and approved on May 5, 2023. After receiving the approved building permit, Utilities through its construction contractor, commenced construction on the Tank in reliance on the building permit at the site," the appeal said.
Then in June when a neighbor alerted Utilities and the city that the tank was higher than its permit allowed, Utilities said in its appeal that it met with Code Enforcement at the tank site, and no stop-work order was issued.
"At approximately the same time, Utilities contacted its land use consultant on this matter and was informed that the City had erroneously issued the building permit and that the recommended corrective action was to amend the developmental plan," the appeal states.
When the Planning Commission met on October 11th, and both denied Utilities' request to change the permit height to 60 feet and issued a stop-work order, the appeal states the majority of the commissioners didn't mention the Uniform Development Code criteria they had to use to make a decision.
"As such, the decision of the planning commission is contrary to the express language of the UDC, clearly erroneous and contrary to the law," the appeal said.
It notes ahead of the 6-2 vote against Utilities, a majority of commissioners mentioned the timing of the application, which is not a factor of consideration on the UDC. It says that others, including Chair Scott Hente, expressed that Utilities should be held to a higher standard, given that it is owned by the city and therefore, the citizens.
"The UDC does not provide for Utilities or any other public entity to be held to a higher standard on land use applications than other property owners," the appeal said.
The City Council next meets on November 14 and will consider the appeal at that time, according to a council spokesman.
Editor's Note: This article has been changed to reflect that Utilities first laid out its timeline of events in a September filing.
