Airport Board Liaison Haynes Challenges Zoning Denial of Aspen Terminal Modernization

The wind off the Roaring Fork Valley doesn’t just carry the scent of pine and cold mountain air; it carries the low, persistent hum of a town waiting for its next move. It’s a sound that settles in the chest, a vibration that feels less like noise than anticipation, or perhaps, anxiety. That’s where we stand now with the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport, caught between the weight of voter approval and the friction of local bureaucracy.

As vice chair of the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Advisory Board and the appointed liaison for the terminal development, Haynes is looking at the recent denial of the Location & Extent permit by the Planning and Zoning Commission and seeing a blockage that shouldn’t be there. The commission interpreted the airport’s development plans as out of conformance, a technicality that Haynes argues ignores the decade-long planning process that led to this moment. For the folks who voted, this isn’t just about concrete and steel; it’s about a project that has the backing of the majority of the community, a project that has been in the works long before the current zoning dispute took center stage.

Look at the numbers, because they tell a story that the denial seems to have overlooked. Three overwhelmingly successful ballot initiatives support the Aspen/Pitkin County Airport Modernization Program. Question 200 passed in November 2024 by 60%, followed by 1C in the same month at 67%, and 1A in November 2025 by 63%. These aren’t narrow margins; these are mandates. Yet, the Planning and Zoning Commission’s decision threatens to obstruct a project that has been validated by the very people it serves.

There’s a warmth to the community engagement process that has defined this modernization effort. It began with the ASE Vision process in 2018, leading to the creation of the Airport Advisory Board and the collaborative development of the Common Ground Recommendations. These recommendations, adopted by a December 2020 Board of County Commissioners resolution, were built on the backs of residents, stakeholders, and technical experts. Today, the Terminal Design and Multi-Modal Connectivity Task Forces are composed of 22 Roaring Fork Valley members, selected from a pool of 87 volunteer candidates. They are passionately dedicated to implementing the publicly determined Common Ground Recommendations, working through the ASE Modernization process with a focus on a safer, cleaner, quieter airport.

The outreach has been extensive. Four open houses held in the upper and middle Roaring Fork Valley locations drew over 400 people. Targeted stakeholder meetings have taken place with community hospitality resources to begin implementing construction, travel, and visitation plans for the future runway shutdown. This isn’t a top-down imposition; it’s a community-driven evolution. The approved and signed Airport Layout Plan opened the door for Federal Aviation Administration funding, and an architectural design team has already completed the first phase of new terminal design work. This resulted in the comprehensive ASE Concepts and Programming Plan, recommended by the AAB and approved by the BOCC in January 2026, allowing the current Terminal Schematic Design phase to commence.

But there’s a rough edge to this polished process: the current terminal has far exceeded its useful life. It is crammed with passengers when there are flight delays, lacking the space and efficiency the community voted to upgrade. Haynes argues that the denial of the permit should not stand in the way of this voter-approved modernization. The question isn’t whether the project should happen — it’s whether local zoning interpretations will allow it to proceed or if the community’s voice will be silenced by technicalities. The wind still blows, the planes still wait, and the valley watches to see if the permits will finally align with the will of the people.