The Aspen City Council on Monday approved a resolution that deems a swath
of property on West Hopkins Avenue eligible for annexation, a decision elected
officials emphasized does not reflect any positions on a pending Four Seasons
resort eyed for the land.
Monday’s hearing was a technical step the City Council was required to
take because of state annexation laws. Now that the council has deemed it
eligible for annexation, a pathway has been established for it to ultimately
fold the property from Pitkin County into city limits.
“This is not a decision on annexation,” City Attorney Jim True told the
council. “This is not a comment on appropriateness of annexation. It’s just a
technical step statutorily mandated.”
The council’s vote was 3-1, with Bert Myrin dissenting. Councilman Art
Daily recused himself because he practices with the Holland & Hart law
firm, which represents developer Cisneros Real Estate. It is controlled by
Hispanic media giants the Cisneros family, owners of the property at 705 W.
Hopkins Ave.
Cisneros Real Estate is developing a Four Seasons in the Dominican
Republic and has designs to build a 140-unit Four Seasons in Aspen that also
would include 31 fractional-lodging units and four free-market residences. They
have yet to file a land-use application, which is contingent on annexation.
Annexing the 6.6 acres of the 19.6-acre property, none of which is currently
zoned for lodging and includes a Victorian-style home, would allow the
developers to negotiate with the city to create a zone for lodging.
The City Council is not legally required to annex the property, True and
Mayor Steve Skadron noted.
“Annexation would have to be done by ordinance,” True said. “This is just
a resolution considering its eligibility for annexation.”
Myrin voted against the annexation-eligibility issue because he disagreed
that the land is in an “urbanized” area of Aspen. Being urban is a state
requirement for annexing land into a municipality.
“I don’t know how we can find that this is urban,” Myrin said.
Likewise, Aspen resident Ward Hauenstein argued during the public-comment
portion of the meeting that the council could find the area is not urban and
put an end to the Four Seasons talks.
“I don’t see a 140-room hotel on that parcel,” he said. “If we can nip
this in the bud now on the definition of what is urban, I would love to see
it.”
A Holland & Hart lawyer said the property is urban — at least by
state legal definitions — because at least one-sixth of its perimeter borders
the city.
Council members also expressed some frustration with the process.
Councilwoman Ann Mullins said she felt the council was “hijacked” by the
process because a Four Seasons materializing at that spot seems remote. She
said the council eventually will “say we’re not interested.”
Patrick Freeman, president of Cisneros Real Estate, spoke briefly to the
council and said he understands the community mood about the Four Seasons
development.
“It’s a very complex project and a complex process,” he said. “And there
are a myriad of issues in the community that need to be addressed. I think we
all know it’s going to take a lot of community interaction, ... and that’s
fully our intent.”
Several nearby residents of 705 W. Hopkins Ave. attended the meeting but
did not speak. An attorney for one of the neighbors also was present.
“There will be ample opportunity in the future to discuss the annexation,” True said.