View the Online Newspaper
Subscribe to the Newspaper

Welcome! Sign In Here.

Not a Member? Join Now! Forgot Password?

Search: Site   Web
Print Story | E-Mail Story | Font Size
What is this?

Save & Share this Article

Talk to neighbers, developer told

Comments 0 | Recommend 0

Final decision on new store at Citadel Crossing delayed

THE GAZETTE

The Colorado Springs City Council stopped short of approving a new Lowe’s store at Citadel Crossing shopping center after a four-hour hearing stretched past 9:30 Tuesday night.

Postponing a vote for two weeks, the council told the developer to meet with neighbors to outline the latest proposal presented Tuesday and return Oct. 23 for a final decision.

“We have a golden opportunity in our community to make something great happen,” Mayor Lionel Rivera said, noting it would be “a mistake” to send it back to the Planning Commission, which voted 5-4 to recommend rejecting the project.

Instead, Rivera and six other council members voted to have the city arrange a meeting between the developer and neighbors. The purpose of the meeting would be to discuss changes that could be made to address opponents’ concerns and reduce the impact the home improvement store might have on the neighborhood of 270 homes east of the center. Councilman Darryl Glenn was opposed, preferring to send it back to the Planning Commission and Randy Purvis was absent for the vote.

Lowe’s is proposing to locate in the Citadel Crossing, a once thriving shopping center at Academy Boulevard and Galley Road that has emptied out with the exodus of retailers to Powers Boulevard. At full occupancy, the center had annual sales of $70 million, generating about $2.4 million in city sales tax revenue.

Last year, sales plummeted to $20 million, and city sales tax revenue dropped to $700,000, said center owner Patrick Nesbitt of Windsor Capital Group, Inc., of Santa Monica, Calif.

The Citadel Crossing’s neighbors want the city to force Lowe’s to honor a 1983 promise to maintain 100 feet and a buffer of trees between houses and shops.

Nesbitt’s has modified his plan to leave a 72-foot setback and a 33-foot greenway, 7 feet less than the 40 feet required by the city.

Although some neighbors objected to any variance from the 1983 requirement, others embraced the idea of a national retailer coming to a center that’s 52 percent vacant after Kmart pulled out four years ago.

Jeff Stedman, owner of the movie theater in the center, said if Lowe’s doesn’t come, he’ll close. He’s seen a 15 percent attendance drop this year alone.

Yvonne Sievers, a neighbor, said, “When I learned that Lowe’s was coming to our neighborhood, I was thrilled. You’d be surprised how things will perk up if we have a Lowe’s in the neighborhood.”

But John Cerny, a spokesman for several dozen neighbors, said opponents want the city to stand firm on the 1983 decision. “It’s not the Lowe’s store. It’s the plan,” he said.

The Council of Neighborhood Organizations also opposed the plan.

One resident, Fred Forrest, said crime has escalated since the storefronts have emptied out. Bringing in new business would help, he said.

Rivera reminded residents that Nesbitt has tried to recruit a major retailer for four years without success.

Councilwoman Margaret Radford told Nesbitt to work with neighbors one more time. “That’s my neighborhood,” she said. “I want this to work, but I want this to work for them, too.”

Among the new conditions Nesbitt offered: a 33-foot landscaped area in which the existing trees would be saved except four Russian olives and four Austrian pines; add additional landscaping, including 1,705 new shrubs, grasses and perennials; relocate the trash compactor to an enclosed area; eliminate loud speakers in the garden center; limit the forklift usage to 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.; limit truck deliveries to 7 a.m. to 5 p.m., and install wood privacy fences for the neighbors abutting the property, if they want one.


See archived 'Local' stories »
 


Reader Comments
We want our site to be a place where people discuss and debate Ideas that foster stronger communities. We built this for you. Please take care of it. Tolerate broad thinking, but take action against obscene or hateful material. Make it a credible and safe place worth preserving and sharing.

Featured Events

 
  • Find an Event
ADVERTISEMENT 
Poll
Lottery
Harrison school district closer to pay for performance for teachers
Should teacher pay be based on performance?
Yes. Teachers should be rewarded for good work, and poor performers should be weeded out.
No. Pay for performance is just a back-door way of blaming teachers for other problems in the education system.
It depends on what "performance" means. It's good if there's a fair measurement of performance.
Undecided.
Enter The Code To Vote
 
Read Related Article
powered by
google
Search
        Search: Web    Site