Developer withdraws controversial Garden of the Gods Road housing proposal, councilman skeptical

Breeanna Jent, The Gazette (Colorado Springs, Colo.)
·4 min read

Mar. 27—A developer on Monday withdrew an application to build high-density housing and new commercial space along Garden of the Gods Road, contentious plans residents were prepared to fight in front of the Colorado Springs City Council this week.

Attorney Steve Mulliken, representing Nevada-based developer 2424 GOTG LLC, submitted a letter to Colorado Springs City Clerk Sarah Johnson on Monday stating the applicant rescinded the application to redevelop a partially vacant 125-acre office complex at 2424 Garden of the Gods. The developer was in the process of asking the city to rezone the property and allow about 320 units — including apartments and possibly single-family, townhome or retirement home units — as well as commercial buildings on about 26 acres near an existing 750,000 square-foot office building along North 30th street.

The withdrawal comes a day before a scheduled appeal hearing on Tuesday, when neighborhood advocates planned to ask the City Council to overturn the Planning Commission's Feb. 8 recommended approval of the proposed redevelopment. Residents living in the area have for years fought plans to build new housing and commercial buildings on the site, citing public safety concerns, among others.

The developer also planned on Tuesday to ask the City Council to postpone the appeal hearing until August. In a March 21 letter to Johnson, Mulliken requested the postponement because of scheduling conflicts and the need to prepare additional information for their presentation to City Council.

Because the application has been withdrawn, the council on Tuesday will not hear either proposal, city staff said Monday.

Mulliken told the council on Monday he advised the developer to withdraw the application because developer representatives wanted more time than they believed they would have on Tuesday to present their project to the City Council, and they expected a full nine-member council would not be present on Tuesday because of illnesses.

"It's an important project, and we need a full council to present it," he said.

Mulliken also said he was concerned the proposal was getting caught "in the heat of battle in a very controversial, angry mayoral election," but did not elaborate.

"I've been in a position where all of a sudden your project gets caught up in the political landscape and your project does not get evaluated on its merits," Mulliken said. "... I can't promise a client I can deliver a victory for them, but I should be able to promise them I have a fair consideration of their issues. ... I recommended that we pull (the application) because we have the right to do that."

Additionally, Mulliken said he wanted more time to prepare to address emergency evacuation concerns, which have been a significant point of contention for Mountain Shadows residents living near the project site, many of whom lived through the destructive and fatal 2012 Waldo Canyon fire.

Mulliken said he expected the developer would resubmit a new application for the city's consideration sometime in the future, though he did not provide details on when that could be or the possible scope of any future proposal.

Councilman Bill Murray said Monday he was concerned the developer was withdrawing its application strategically so it could try to bring it before a new City Council for approval. The city is holding its municipal election on April 4, and voters will elect four new councilmembers — three at-large councilmembers and the District 3 council seat.

"That bugs me," Murray said. The current City Council previously heard a first iteration of the project and denied it in the summer of 2021, siding with neighborhood advocates opposed to the project because, among other concerns, they feared it could make wildfire evacuation more dangerous.

"This is a major project affecting a major community on our city. ... That's what's so distressing about this in particular," Murray said.

A district court judge upheld the city's rejection in May 2022, but the developer appealed, a process that is ongoing with the Colorado Court of Appeals. The developer submitted the revised development plan it withdrew on Monday even as its litigation against the city is pending.

Bill Wysong, president of the Mountain Shadows Community Association and wildfire awareness advocacy group Westside Watch, said the developer's decision to withdraw its application was "frustrating."

Wysong has led the charge against the project over the past three years.

"Any kind of an opposition group spends a lot of time and effort to put together a good opposition case, which is exactly what we've done," he said. Wysong estimated community members spent hundreds of hours working to fight the project.

"I think it really boils down to they saw a loss, with only seven members of City Council that would be potentially present tomorrow, and they didn't want to take that. It's frustrating that they can do that," Wysong said.

If the applicant does resubmit a new application, they will have to start the application process all over again. This could include new neighborhood meetings and another hearing in front of the Planning Commission.