Fire district and town remain stalled over campus

Council not interested in eliminating initial affordable housing

[  By Mark Reaman  ]

Without much enthusiasm shown to figure out a solution Monday evening, there seems to be an impasse between the Crested Butte Fire Protection District (CBFPD) and the town of Crested Butte over transferring property that would accommodate the building of a new fire station, new Search-and-Rescue building and a deed restricted four-plex in the new Slate River subdivision along Gothic Road. 

With the sudden increase in material costs and expected labor challenges, the fire district had hoped to break ground on its new campus this summer. But the construction costs and the size of the lot the town was willing to give the fire district for such a purpose hamstrung the idea. Even with $30 million in funds approved by voters through a property tax increase last November, it is not enough to build the currently proposed 30,000-square-foot fire station headquarters, the 10,000-square-foot Search-and-Rescue building and the fourplex for deed restricted housing given current material costs. The 1.55 acres of land being given to the CBFPD was also not large enough to accommodate the designed campus, so the fire district went under contract with Spann Ranches to purchase 1.8 acres of adjoining property just north of the town boundary.

The CBFPD came to the town council with a proposal to amend the Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) that currently requires four affordable housing units with a total of at least eight bedrooms be constructed in any first phase of the campus construction before title to the property is transferred. The IGA also requires that a Search-and-Rescue building be included to facilitate the moving of the current building from the Crested Butte Public Works Yard. 

“Our original budget covered everything until the latest estimates we received in March that showed we were $5 million over budget,” explained CBFPD chief executive officer Sean Caffrey. “We analyzed our options and the board was most comfortable taking the housing out of the first phase of the project.”

The CBFPD proposed amending the IGA so that affordable housing could be dropped from the first phase of construction and the S-and-R building be allowed to not be totally finished. The council was not at all supportive of the idea. They also asked fire district representatives if they had made requested progress on adhering to the most recent building codes. The answer was negative.

Council had made clear it wanted construction to meet the more sustainable 2021 building codes instead of the current 2015 codes or built to LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) Silver specifications. When asked by councilmember Jason MacMillan if that had been done, Caffrey said the current price estimates were based on the design using the 2015 codes.

“We did not make an entire code switch but it would be the most energy efficient building in the town,” Caffrey said. CBFPD building consultant Todd Goulding confirmed that the design was still based on the 2015 code and said the Conceptual Annexation Application had also not been redesigned to the 2021 building code standards.

When asked to explain how the affordable housing might be built in a phased project by councilmember Beth Goldstone, Caffrey said it had been contemplated for phase one but with $29 million left in funding, “we would build as much as we could for the two public safety buildings and address the housing element in the future.” He said the district could consider another bond to pay for the housing, which wasn’t likely, or explore things like lease-purchase agreements to fund the units, but no definitive timeline was in place to do the housing. Caffrey said the district would feel an obligation to eventually provide the housing but under the proposed IGA amendment, it would not be a legal requirement. He gave no indication there was any interest in reinstating such a provision. 

“The primary intent of transferring this land for free was in part to move Search-and-Rescue out of its current location in the public works yard and provide more housing opportunity,” town manager Dara MacDonald reminded the council. 

Caffrey said that if the campus construction was not started in the next four months, the district would likely lose the 2021 building season given the size of the project and weather. Add to that the inflationary costs rising at about 1.5% a month, he said, “and we would be looking at a vastly different project if we go into 2023 with the current trends.”

Town staff said council had three basic alternatives: 1) Agree to the concept of the proposed IGA amendment; 2) Reject the proposed IGA amendment proposal; 3) Reject the proposed amendment proposal but identify alternative strategies that might address the CBFPD concerns.

Citizen Jim Starr urged the council to not change the IGA if housing was to be eliminated in the first phase. “The housing element is an important piece of this,” he said.

“A lot of folks I spoke with about this situation feel the same way,” said MacMillan. 

“The ballot language on the fire district bond promised housing and to change it makes me nervous. So does not having a timeline and not having a future legal obligation to provide it,” said councilmember Gabi Prochaska.

Coming up with the IGA took a lot of time and the housing element was important,” added councilmember Chris Haver. “So was the obligation to include it in phase one.”

No councilmember voiced support to amend the IGA as proposed by the CBFPD. 

“I’m hesitant to provide too much direction for alternatives on their project,” said mayor Ian Billick.

No other councilmember felt compelled to offer alternatives. Caffrey and other representatives of the fire district at the meeting also did not offer alternatives.

“Sustainability and housing have been clear priorities for the council from the beginning,” concluded Billick. “But we are still open to other alternatives and urge the staff and fire district to see if anything else can be proposed.”

With that, the discussion fizzled away and the fire district representatives filed out. When asked Tuesday if the CBFPD had a back-up plan to perhaps build a new station somewhere else, Caffrey said he would be catching up with town staff later this week to explore where the situation stood.” If I was making observations, I would say there is a disconnect regarding the District and Town priorities for the project and the Town’s desires appear to now substantially outweigh the funds available,” he said. “So either we come into better alignment quickly, or the current plan will collapse.”