Resurrected controversial Garden of the Gods project earns Planning Commission approval

Feb. 8—The Colorado Springs Planning Commission voted Wednesday to approve a slightly tweaked request to build high-density housing and commercial space along Garden of the Gods Road after hearing hours of public opposition to the project — this a year and a half after the City Council denied the controversial project in the summer of 2021.

The nine-member commission split 6-3, with those in favor of the resurrected proposal for redevelopment of a partially vacant 125-acre office complex at 2424 Garden of the Gods carrying the vote. The developer and its representatives will again make their case for the controversial project before the City Council at a future date.

Some commissioners said they did not feel apartments — and now possibly townhomes — were in character with the surrounding neighborhood.

"You're basically taking our crown jewel and making a messy approach to it," Commissioner John Almy said, referring to nearby Garden of the Gods Park. Almy voted against the project.

Commissioner James McMurray disagreed, saying the project could not be "out of character" when apartment buildings already exist directly east of the site.

"Could I envision a project I think would be better? Sure," McMurray said before voting to recommend its approval. "That's not our job. ... This project will stabilize the area by providing more housing."

The revised plans are also "more in harmony" with the surrounding area than were previous plans the developer brought forth for consideration, he said.

The developer is asking the city to rezone the property to allow about 320 units in two- or three-story buildings, and commercial buildings, on about 26 acres near an existing 750,000-square-foot office building along North 30th Street, developer representative Andrea Barlow with N.E.S. Inc. said. Housing options could include up to 220 apartments and possibly 100 single-family, townhome or retirement home units, she said.

As originally planned, about 55 acres of property to the west is proposed to be set aside as open space.

In the first iteration of the proposal, developers sought approval to construct about 420 market-rate apartments and up to 200,000 square feet of commercial building along North 30th Street.

Last May, a district judge upheld the city's first rejection of the proposed redevelopment of a partially vacant 125-acre office complex. But Nevada-based developer 2424 GOTG LLC appealed, a process that is ongoing within the Colorado Court of Appeals.

The developer submitted the revised plan even as litigation against the city is pending. But if the revised project receives final approval from the City Council, the developer would "most likely terminate the lawsuit" and move ahead with development per the new plan, the developer's representative Joe Hooker told the Planning Commission.

Ahead of the meeting, the wildfire awareness advocacy group Westside Watch requested the commission postpone its review of the resubmitted proposal. They argued against city planner Daniel Sexton's previous statements that the developer may resubmit the same proposal after 12 months. The city must evaluate it separate from the first application, Sexton said.

Residents said last week because the developer chose to appeal the district court's decision, there has not been a final determination made in the matter. Twelve months have not yet passed since a final judgment has been determined by the courts, they said.

Sign Up for Springs AM Update

Your morning rundown of the latest news from Colorado Springs and around the country

Sign Up

View all of our newsletters.

Success! Thank you for subscribing to our newsletter.

View all of our newsletters.

Lisa O'Boyle with the City Attorney's Office said on Wednesday that since neither the district nor appellate courts ordered a stay motion, or a ruling to stop or suspend the city's action or consideration of the project temporarily or indefinitely, the 12-month period is calculated from the time of the council's original decision to deny the request in August 2021.

Three people who spoke in favor of the project were housing industry professionals who applauded the project for its plans to increase housing availability as the city and greater Pikes Peak region faces a housing shortage.

"This development will bring much-needed housing in a variety of forms to this area of town. That includes apartments, but also townhomes, which are in high demand and very limited in availability," Apartment Association of Southern Colorado Executive Director Laura Nelson said. "Colorado Springs continues to need a variety of housing options for its retirees, military personnel and young professionals."

But more than 20 residents in the nearby Mountain Shadows community and others who live on the city's west side spoke for hours Wednesday against the project, citing concerns they have repeatedly shared that more residents living in the area could cause critical traffic delays during emergency evacuations, and that development could block views and disturb a nearby bighorn sheep herd.

The project "is not in our best interest," said Bill Wysong, president of the Mountain Shadows Community Association and an organizer for Westside Watch.

Many recalled the chaotic evacuation of the area during the 2012 Waldo Canyon fire that burned more than 18,000 acres, destroyed 346 buildings and killed two people and the traffic delays they faced in that emergency.

In December, Barlow told residents developers were reintroducing the project because there was "a material change of circumstance" since the project was first proposed in 2020, as the city has taken steps to address wildfire concerns.

As part of that effort, the Colorado Springs Fire Department contracted with Zonehaven, a software that allows officials to evacuate targeted zones in an emergency and which they say could help avoid the gridlock residents faced during the Waldo Canyon fire.

Fire Marshal Brett Lacey said Wednesday he did not have concerns the new development would critically delay emergency evacuations. He said he was confident in the city's additional steps over the last year to improve emergency response in wildfires.

"What I need as fire marshal is the cooperation of everybody in the community that is on the west side ... to prepare and take steps now," he said. "... From an emergency evacuation standpoint, I think we're at a better place than we ever have been. Is it going to be perfect? No."

Residents also said the development would disturb the area where a nearby bighorn sheep herd frequents to eat and mate.

"The (request) is definitely detrimental to bighorn sheep," Wysong said. The herd frequently gathers on the project site, "less than 600 feet from proposed development. Their lambing area is 700 feet from the open space," he said.

Barlow said she would not "dispute that they occasionally come onto this property." But a letter from Colorado Parks and Wildlife noted the herd's "primary habitat ... and favored location" is in the nearby Queens Canyon area, she said.

Residents also said the proposed concept plan for the project violates the hillside overlay criteria.

Sexton said more detailed site plans that would come forth as part of the project request would be subject to hillside overlay requirements "and taken into consideration with respect to greater scrutiny."

CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE GAZETTE