The idea of an “empty house tax” certainly has people talking. It has generated letters to the paper from all sides for many weeks. It is a topic on social media as well. The Crested Butte Town Council will start talking more deeply about the idea at the upcoming Monday council meeting and deeper conversation is certainly in order before action is taken. First off,  the conversation should include those who will feel the brunt of any new tax and not just those that might benefit.

When first hearing of the idea, I initially expressed some discomfort but couldn’t explain what that discomfort was. As I’ve thought about it, it is the element of community and division that bothers me. The perhaps unintended consequence that it might shift the view of the local community to more of a commodity—and that’s something no one really wants. Like it or not, communities like Crested Butte are made up of different legs that keep the communal stool standing and second homeowners are one of those important legs. Like it or not, this community as a whole is made up of more than just your friends.

I’ve always considered this place fairly egalitarian. As in most communities with resorts, there are three major demographics that make up the whole: the locals who live and work here; the vacation homeowners who embrace the place close to their heart and probably wish they lived here; and the tourists who come and visit the place for a few days at a time. All three matter in a place like Crested Butte for it to be successful. The entire valley, including Crested Butte, has a pretty nice balance of not being too over the top in fantasy resort land and not too controlled by outside forces based in money. Decisions are still made for the overall betterment of the people who appreciate and respect the place and not simply to add more dollars to the bank account.

Now it has certainly changed in recent years and gentrification is part of the new Crested Butte, where it is harder to be a ski bum. When I first got here everyone sort of mingled together at happy hour whether they were a lift op, the bank president or a rich second homeowner. That still happens but cliques are more evident than 20 or 30 years ago. There are more divisions now and some recent immigrants have a, shall we say, scratchier demeanor than the old Texas and Oklahoma transplants. The scratchiest of the newbies usually feel uncomfortable and move on to other places, so it still is a place where money is not the primary element of social status. It is still much more a textured community than a commodity.

And it is that perspective that I fear could be damaged with the “empty house tax” proposal. It turns the second homeowner element of the community equation into pure commodity. Despite protestations, this tax idea would likely create an “us versus them” division unless a lot of hard work and communication is taken by the town council. They are the politicians after all so it is their job, not the staff’s, to do that work. Inclusively reaching out to the folks who would be taxed to see if they have better ideas would be a good first step that should have started already. Explaining the situation and how it impacts them is better than starting with the threat of another tax.

The front page of last week’s paper highlighted details of the new Crested Butte Center for the Arts and the soon-to-be-completed Long Lake land exchange deal. Those endeavors add culture, open space and affordable housing elements to the valley. A lot of the money that made those deals possible came from second homeowners who love this place and feel a visceral connection to Crested Butte. 

A lot of the reason we have so many great restaurants, such interesting art, myriad coffee options, sweet trails and successful non-profits is because all three elements of the community support them in the best way they can. We would not have nearly the quality and quantity of choices we do if Crested Butte were a place focused on making widgets and if just 1,800 working locals ever came here.

All three demographics contribute to the whole. For many locals it might be volunteering somewhere and eating out in October when the lines are gone. For second homeowners, it might be opening the wallet and eating out several times a week in July, August, December and March and donating to causes they utilize, such as arts or recreation. For tourists, it could simply be visiting once a year to soak up the vibe and spending money that goes toward wages and rents. I know both locals and second homeowners who fit the best of the bill in terms of volunteerism and financial contributions. I know both locals and second homeowners full of crappy attitude and entitlement. There is no ‘one size fits all’ in a community like Crested Butte.

Most working locals will use both the Center and Long Lake in the future and neither deal would have happened without second homeowners. The locals get to live most of the year in a small town but still have access to sophisticated amenities we couldn’t nearly pay for on our own. We get the year-round benefit of those amenities and the tourists and second homeowners get to use them when they are here for a few days or weeks at a time. It’s not a bad deal for anyone as long as balance is maintained. It seems to me the “empty house tax” throws that balance more out of whack.

If the council can articulate a problem that can be specifically solved with this revenue stream, they could perhaps entice support from those who have a house and love for the community but don’t live or vote here. A generic plea to fund affordable housing or climate change action is probably too broad to garner much support from those impacted. I’m not saying such a tax wouldn’t pass but I question the long-term consequences.

You want to do something really strange but very old-school Crested Butte? Proponents on the council have the addresses and contacts of all those empty homes, so do the hard work and reach out and explain to the owners the benefit of having them pony up for a specific affordable housing or climate change project. Explain why they should contribute $1,000 or $5,000 to a town project and see how persuasive your argument is. There is obvious benefit to vacation homeowners of having workers live in Crested Butte. If there’s a convincing need and an actual project to mitigate that need, I think many of these folks would step up. See what other ideas they might have that attain the same result.

I had suggested to some that the holiday period was a good time for champions of the tax to engage those second homeowners who were in town. A cocktail and conversation party perhaps? I am not aware that any such outreach took place. I’ve also suggested that if there is a need for a new tax to fund affordable housing or climate change projects, then any “empty house tax” should actually be imposed on all houses—with some sort of tax discount implemented on homes that are occupied more than X-weeks per year. If you believe everyone could benefit from such a tax, everyone should have a bit of skin in the game.

I get that wealthier people are buying up old houses for vacation homes or to buying them to live here in a more upscale house. That displaces the lower-income workforce and that’s not a positive. But all the local government entities understand the situation and are actively addressing it as the free market eats up the old ski bum shacks.

There are ways for a strong community to address major problems. Crested Butte has done it before and can do it again. The best ideas are formed through inclusivity and communication. Like it or not, ostracizing one of the elements that actually helps make up this strong whole community is not the best way to start.

—Mark Reaman

Back in Planning Commission’s hands for design review

By Kendra Walker

The Mt. Crested Butte Town Council has accepted the Planning Commission’s recommendation to approve the Planned Unit Development (PUD) Major Alteration application of the Nordic Inn. The council has been reviewing over the past several months the proposal to turn the existing Nordic Inn into a five-star luxury hotel, conference area, restaurant and spa, which will now go to design review before the Planning Commission.

Design updates

Since council first looked at the proposal on November 6, the Pearls Management, LLC applicant team has made a number of changes based on public comment and Town Council feedback. Principal architect Gary Hartman and Pearls attorney Aaron Huckstep shared those changes with council on December 17.

The proposal’s design has been reduced from 148 units to 132 units, with 75 garage parking spaces available to the public, as previously conditioned by the Planning Commission. In addition to the 132 units, 8.46 affordable housing units (4,677 square feet) as required by the town code will be provided on site.

During their November 19 meeting, council voiced their concerns for the building’s height and massing, asking if the top floor could be eliminated and units could be reoriented elsewhere to alleviate the height massing. On December 17, Hartman presented the elimination of one complete story from the façade, taking it from six stories down to five stories. The building on lot NI-1 has been rotated away from the Evergreen Condos to improve the lot line setback, and the end was updated from a three-story massing to two stories. On lot NI-2, the building was rotated to improve the neighbors’ views from the north, and the massing was also stair-stepped from four stories to two stories.

Huckstep also noted that the tallest height of the buildings still remains almost 30 feet lower than the elevation of Whetstone Road behind it. “We don’t expect that it’s going to be a direct line of obstruction,” said Huckstep of those neighbors. “The building heights are now more sympathetic to the previous building height metrics,” he said, referring to the proposal that was already approved in March 2018. That previous proposal did not receive council or public concern over the building’s massing, but did gather pushback on the surface parking lot.

The commercial and retail floor area (CRFA) has been reduced by 1,164 square feet and the overall GRFA of the building has been reduced by an additional 1,128 square feet since the last meeting. The team also showed council that the maximum roof height measured by elevation on NI-1 is 1.75 feet lower than the maximum roof height of the March 2018–approved PUD and the maximum roof height on NI-2 is 3.25 feet higher than in the approved PUD.

Huckstep also reiterated the public amenity aspect of the proposal. In addition to the affordable housing, the hotel provides a conference facility for shoulder season vitality, public restrooms, a restaurant and a bar. The parking garage will provide the public covered spots, and town has the right to its revenue stream and can set the rules and regulations while Pearls takes risks of construction and operation.

Architectural adjustments

Throughout the review process, council expressed their displeasure with the architectural aspects of the proposal, including the building’s “Modern Nordic” design on the outside façade.

“We are hearing you loud and clear,” said Huckstep. He then reiterated that the PUD Major Alteration process is not about the architecture, rather about the zoning. “It’s absolutely critical to remind everyone that the Planning Commission already approved the mass and scale,” he said.

The Pearls team presented examples of three different structures they believe fit within the PUD guide and DDA guidelines, also demonstrating that there is still flexibility on the building’s appearance once going into design review.

“Once we go back to the Planning Commission we can continue to refine. We’re not saying any one of these is better than the other but asking that you let the Planning Commission have the final say at the end of the day.”

Council agreed the changes were a big improvement from the originally approved PUD, as well as the updated proposal presented to them over the past several months.

“I think they’ve done a good job in addressing our concerns from the last meeting,” said councilman Dwayne Lehnertz. Regarding leaving it in the hands of the Planning Commission, he noted, “The architect is listening.”

Huckstep also pointed out that “The planning chair is on record that he wasn’t comfortable” with the Modern Nordic aesthetic either.

Council agreed to accept the Planning Commission’s recommendation to approve the Nordic Inn PUD major alteration, with several additional conditions, including that: the applicant works with the Planning Commission to consider alternatives to Modern Nordic architecture that are compliant with DDA guidelines; the affordable housing deed restrictions shall be reviewed and approved by Town Council prior to building permit; and the PUD guide is updated to reflect the application changes presented at the December 17 meeting.

“I feel like we’ve gotten to a much better project. It’s different from what the Planning Commission sent to us,” said mayor Janet Farmer. “Thank you for the work that you guys have done on it.”

Design review with Planning Commission has not yet been scheduled.

Closing slated for January and then focus turns to stewardship

By Mark Reaman

One of the largest, most innovative and most far-reaching open space transactions in the valley received its last $150,000 commitment earlier this month to put it over the top and guarantee its completion. After a year and a half of fundraising by the Crested Butte Land Trust (CBLT), the Long Lake land exchange has raised the needed $3.3 million to finalize the swap that will not only protect open space, but will help finance affordable housing projects in the county and develop a stewardship plan for the land. The deal will officially close in January 2020.

“Getting that final donation feels really great,” said Crested Butte Land Trust executive director Noel Durant. “It has been very empowering for the Land Trust to see the community stand up for this project. It really strikes a chord for us. It is super exciting to see this complicated project come to a close.”

Logistics for the complicated deal began in 2017 with the public launch of the fundraising campaign starting in July 2018. Long Lake sits adjacent to more than a thousand acres of land conserved by the Crested Butte Land Trust. The 120 acres of national forest on Long Lake was prioritized for disposal due to its small size and isolated location, surrounded by private land. The Land Trust, along with the Forest Service and the Trust for Public Land, assembled a transaction whereby the Land Trust would take ownership the Long Lake property in exchange for private forest inholdings of equivalent value.

The entire deal involves the Land Trust, the U.S. Forest Service, the Trust for Public Land, and the Valley Housing Fund. Basically, the Land Trust is purchasing 613 acres  in Fossil Ridge from the Trust for Public Land (TPL) for the exchange and contributing 15 acres on Copley Lake that it currently owns to the USFS. Both of these properties are surrounded by national forest. The USFS will transfer the 120 acres of property on the east side of Long Lake to the Land Trust. Given stipulations of the initial 2010 TPL Fossil Ridge deal with the original property owners, Butch and Judy Clark, the money from that purchase will then go toward helping affordable housing projects in the valley through the Valley Housing Fund.

Durant explained the $3.3 million includes not only the purchase price of the property but also helps fund a pool of money for stewardship of the property at Long Lake. The final $150,000 pledge came during a fundraising trip to Oklahoma City. Durant said longtime second homeowners Celina and Russ Harrison closed out the campaign in early December. “They have been coming here for many years and are very passionate about Crested Butte and the valley. They love it here,” said Durant. “Their philanthropic gift came at the right time and we are very appreciative of their donation.

“We are appreciative of all the donations,” Durant continued. “Whether it was $5, the $150,000 that Jeff Hermanson donated to kick off the campaign, the $150,000 the Harrisons donated to close the campaign or the $1 million grant from the town of Crested Butte, it all mattered and showed the commitment of the community to this project. From municipal partners like Mt. Crested Butte and Gunnison, to non-profit partners like 1% for Open Space, and Vail Resorts, and new funders such as the Freeport McMoRan Foundation and the Conservation Alliance, this project shows that everyone is engaged in this type of public project. It shows the people’s passion for open space and the community with the added benefit of affordable housing being part of the project. It demonstrates that the people here donated at all levels because they have a personal and positive stake in this place for this type of project.”

Durant said the Land Trust had also received what he termed creative contributions to help bridge the financing gap. Two major “impact investors” stepped up to help bridge the multi-year financial commitments people had pledged. This will allow them to come to the closing with the money needed to complete the sale.

Valley Housing Fund board president Jim Starr congratulated the Land Trust in completing the deal and is excited about the future. “The real beauty of this highly collaborative effort is that it benefits the public by serving the goals of three public and non-profit organizations,” he said. “The Valley Housing Fund will receive over $2.5 million by exchanging land it currently controls to the United States Forest Service, who will now provide public access to a former in-holding in the Forest, and the land trust will acquire the right to own and manage Long Lake, a historic community recreational amenity. The proceeds received by the Valley Housing Fund will be used to assist governmental and private entities in creating critically needed affordable housing within the county.”

“A federal land exchange project is not something you do overnight,” said Durant. “It has been a learning process for us at the Land Trust. This is one of the biggest deals ever for the Land Trust and it is great it comes with added benefits beyond just open space and land protections.”

Gunnison National Forest Service District ranger Matt McCombs said the deal is phenomenal and not that normal in other places outside the valley. “I continue to hold that this deal is one of the most innovative works of land conservation art I’ve been a part of,” he said. “Through this effort, the community, resource management and our shared commitment to a strong conservation ethic are all strengthened. I commend all the hard work, perseverance and generosity that got us to this point.”

Starr agreed. “I think it is very fitting that for this holiday season we have so clearly demonstrated how collaborative efforts can succeed in providing significant benefits for our communities,” he said. “Our hats are off to Noel Durant, and his staff and Board for this major success which will provide a recreational treasure and local housing for our communities for generations to come.”

The CBLT will take a breath and then dive into the stewardship and planning piece of the deal. New signage at the trailheads up Washington Gulch will go up in early spring. A master plan for things such as access, parking and maintenance will then be developed.

“We are so grateful to the entire community for the fantastic support for the project,” concluded Durant. “It really was a broad effort. There is always pressure to complete a capital campaign. But this style of campaign helps build a stronger local land trust. It shows the community we are capable of completing complex projects.”

While no specific date has been set for the closing, Durant said it would take place in January 2020.

Council pushing for fast timeline and possible state funding

By Mark Reaman

Members of the Crested Butte Town Council are chomping at the bit to start an affordable rental housing project as soon as possible in Crested Butte, while the town staff is counseling them to have a little patience.

In an extended discussion at the Monday, December 16 council meeting, council member Mallika Magner discussed with the staff about holding more meetings and deeper conversations on how to tap into state Department of Local Affairs (DOLA) affordable housing funds, which were at one time anticipated to be hundreds of millions of dollars. That pool of money is now expected to be less than originally hoped for.

Originally, DOLA was to receive about an additional $77 million annually for three years starting in 2021 to address housing needs in the state. But word is trickling out from Denver that number might be reduced by about $40 million each year.

At the same time, town staff suggested to the council that the town would not need that DOLA money and its accompanying regulations to do a rental project on the upcoming Slate River annexation property across from the Gas Café. While that annexation is in the pipeline and expected to be done next spring, the town does not yet own the land.

Council member Will Dujardin questioned how long the Crested Butte council would have to wait before making a decision to pull the trigger on a rental housing project, depending on the Mt. Crested Butte North Village proposal that includes potential rentals. He also questioned the need for more “For Sale” unit construction as opposed to focusing on rentals.

Town manager Dara MacDonald explained that the “For Sale” units could be built in Paradise Park where there was already infrastructure installed, while the rental project was slated for a portion of the new annexation that would need a clean-up of the old town landfill.

She also said more solid information on the status of the North Village project should be made in early January after a January 7 meeting between the Mt. Crested Butte Town Council and the North Village development team. “A lot more information is expected to be clarified pretty soon,” MacDonald said.

“We all want more in-depth conversation about the priorities and timelines being discussed,” said Magner in relation to a recently formed North Valley affordable housing subcommittee. “Several of us on council don’t understand what’s planned on the Slate River annexation property and why.”

“That is the purpose of the January 21 work session scheduled for the Crested Butte council after there is more clarity with the North Village,” said MacDonald.

“I would like a joint meeting here with the DOLA officials, us, Mt. Crested Butte, the county, the Valley Housing Fund so we can get hard information about how the DOLA process would best work. It is my understanding that the most successful process would be if we approach the state with the idea of a unified plan for the valley,” said Magner, supporting a process put forward by the Valley Housing Fund. “I’m certainly not comfortable with the idea of Crested Butte trailing any other entity with affordable housing. We all talk constantly about the need for rental housing and I don’t want to see Slate River as a low priority in the subcommittee.”

“It would be prudent for the town to have the DOLA conversation internally first,” suggested MacDonald.

Crested Butte community development director Michael Yerman told the council he had been on an informational phone call that day (December 16) with DOLA representatives and there were two main takeaways. The first was that the state had no plan yet, based on the public input gathered about the potential affordable housing funds. The second was that because the funds were likely to be reduced, DOLA was going back to “business as usual.”

Yerman said he didn’t think the state had the funding they anticipated. “My impression is that the north end of the valley might get a LIHTC [Low-Income Housing Tax Credit] project,” he said. “I would ask that the council be patient. The North Village developer knows what to expect from DOLA and money for horizontal infrastructure is probably not part of it. There are other funds that can help with that but not at the level expected. Between now and a January 6 meeting with the Mt. Crested Butte Town Council, the developer will determine the funding and have a better idea of the project viability.”

According to Yerman, the DOLA representatives indicated they were not interested in income averaging to accommodate people earning more than 60 percent of Average Median Income (AMI). DOLA projects are geared at rental projects for people making less than that 60 percent figure. “There has been no official state decision yet but the conversation was not encouraging,” he said.

“I would like to see the state people come here and talk to us directly,” said Magner. “It is my understanding the state is open to a joint project.”

“A town project on the Slate River annexation does not envision going after state money,” responded Yerman.

“Why?” asked Magner.

“We don’t need it,” said Yerman. “We don’t have the horizontal infrastructure needs and there are significant tax credits on the back end of  the VCUP [Voluntary Clean-up and Redevelopment Program] process cleaning up the old dump. We can work with a private developer and they can make money on such a project. Then we won’t be hamstrung by the requirements put on the money from the state. There is enough there that we don’t need the state money.”

“I want a deeper conversation about using state funds,” said Magner.

“We can have that but the state doesn’t fund rentals for that 80 percent to 120 percent AMI levels that we target,” said MacDonald.

“Willa [Williford, local housing consultant] feels there is room for one more LIHTC project that focuses on the 60 percent AMI or less. But we can go vertical quicker,” said Yerman. “Mt. Crested Butte has the need for extensive horizontal infrastructure. We can do a project and have more flexibility without the state funding requirements.”

Yerman said how Mt. Crested Butte and the North Village proceed will determine actual timelines for Crested Butte projects.

Council member Chris Haver said it would be prudent to wait and continue the discussion at the planned January 21 work session on future housing. “We will have more information to digest on the north valley layout at that time,” he said.

Newest council member Mona Merrill said it was important for the council to be kept in the loop of changing information. “It sounds like the staff gets information and it is happening fast, with things evolving quickly. But we can’t make decisions without the information.”

“I have been saying we need more time while we are all working as fast as humanly possible,” said Yerman. “The hope is that Mt. Crested Butte reaches a consensus on their direction after the January 7 council meeting and then we can figure out what we want.”

“The council wants to be guiding the timeline,” said Magner, “not us having to accept someone else’s timeline.”

“The timeline is just a draft right now,” explained MacDonald. “We are still waiting on all the information.”

“Looking at a timeline, the main question seems to be, when do we have to decide whether we can go forward and break ground on a clean-up this coming summer?” said Yerman. “We have until March or April to make that decision. We’re getting there.”

Yerman again emphasized the advantage of not using DOLA funds on the project. “We have the ability then to serve the people you want to serve,” he said. “Be careful because if you invite DOLA to come in and create expectations of them, it can lead to confusion.”

“I love the idea of a public-private partnership on the annexation property,” said council member Chris Haver. “I could see us doing that and supporting a LIHTC project in Mt. Crested Butte.”

“I would want a meeting with DOLA representatives and how they expect to award the money,” said Magner, saying that the state agency is being inundated with project proposals from other communities within the state. “We haven’t given them our feedback or a plan.”

“They were here and received a lot of feedback,” said MacDonald.

“It just feels like we aren’t getting significant information to make these decisions,” said Magner. “I want a separate meeting to go over all the numbers. Maybe bring in the Valley Housing Fund. I also want to have a deeper discussion about the absorption rate and the idea of building too many units.”

“That is the plan for the meeting on January 21,” said mayor Jim Schmidt.

“You have a staff that has built more housing than almost anyone in the last five years,” Yerman reminded the council. “We understand how to do it. The North Village is going as fast as it can to get answers. January 7 is its decision point.”

The council will hold a work session on the topic January 21 with the hope Mt. Crested Butte supplies a direction for its potential North Village project before then.

Looking for lots of public engagement and collaboration with Mt. Crested Butte

By Mark Reaman

The Crested Butte Town Council shifted direction Monday and has given a nod to town staff to pursue a so-called “Community Compass” master planning process in 2020. There was resistance to such an effort at the last council meeting as the council members felt engaging in such a long public process would take away from other projects, notably affordable housing.

“Sometimes we need to slow down to speed up,” town manager Dara MacDonald wrote in a memo to the council at the December 16 meeting. “Solutions to the complex questions facing the community are available and it may be helpful to slow down for a few months to allow for a deeper dialogue and understanding of the challenges so that we can then focus our intention and energy on the solutions… With a clear vision of where the community wants to be in the future the Town Council can quickly and clearly make choices that keep the town moving in the desired direction.”

The concept of the compass is to have a series of public outreach meetings and encounters with citizens to determine what the public sees as Crested Butte’s future. From there, the deeper analysis of how to handle conflicts within that future should be made clearer. For example, does putting solar panels on an historic building conflict with two separate community values?

MacDonald also noted that Mt. Crested Butte wanted to update its community plan so there was opportunity for collaboration to share resources in the planning process. She noted the two towns “currently enjoy the most productive working relationship in recent memory and the opportunities for collaboration are great.”

Councilman Chris Haver was not at the previous meeting and spoke in favor of the process. “I am a huge proponent of this,” he said. “Having a clear vision is important to me. It is important to know if my decisions are falling into what the community wants to be. It is a great opportunity to get some more public input into what our bright idea of Crested Butte is in 20 years.”

New council representative Mona Merrill agreed. “When knocking on doors during the campaign, the input I heard was what I expected but also enlightening,” she said. “For me, this is more about the tradeoffs needed to accomplish bold things. I think it is a great idea to pull the community back in and tell us what this place should look like in 20 years. Can the staff do it along with the other projects we would like?”

“If the council prerogative is to move ahead with this, we can accommodate it,” assured MacDonald.

“I’m in favor,” added council member Laura Mitchell. “It will buy us a balance. I think having goalposts and community engagement is beneficial.”

Council member Candice Bradley agreed.

“I am not a big fan of master plans but I feel going through this process can be valuable,” said mayor Jim Schmidt. “There are still things I remember from a similar process done many years ago. It is fair for the community to discuss its values and make sure we are respecting them.”

“It is my understanding it was either the Community Compass or affordable housing,” said council member Mallika Magner. “Is there bandwidth within the staff to do both?”

MacDonald again assured the council there was.

Council member Will Dujardin expressed some skepticism and said he hoped the process produced something different from similar projects like the ongoing One Valley Prosperity Project. “I appreciated Jim’s observation at the last meeting that the Crested Butte compass is sort of decided every two years with an election. This will have to go deeper than engaging people at a Kochevar’s Happy Hour, so good luck.”

Under a draft timeline given to the council, the community outreach efforts would begin in earnest in February and result in a draft plan by September. A final plan would be expected in November 2020.

Concerned the “Community Compass” would take away from housing

By Mark Reaman

Members of the Crested Butte Town Council made it clear at the December 2 council meeting that they want to focus on tangible affordable housing projects and not spend town staff resources on a master planning process for the town.

Staff had prepared a timeline to craft a so-called “Community Compass” plan that would “weave together essential public values and goals into a positive, proactive set of guideposts that inform discussions and guide decisions now and in the future.”

Staff laid out an extensive year-long public engagement process that would result in what was described as a concise document capturing the unique voice of the Crested Butte community. It would explore the vision of the community and the trade-offs the community was willing to make to achieve its goals. The idea was to collaborate with Mt. Crested Butte to use the public information process so that municipality could begin to craft a similar document.

“We don’t want this to be a checklist of things to do, we want it to be more visionary,” explained town manager Dara MacDonald. “This would lay out who the community wants to be in a big picture sense and how to get there.”

The idea fell flat for the most part with much of the council.

“You don’t want it to be the same thing that every other ski town has posted in their town hall,” said mayor Jim Schmidt. “For me, the compass of town changes every time there is an election. That sets vision and direction.”

“This would be meant to be deeper and explore the real trade-offs needed to accomplish goals,” said MacDonald. “We want a meaningful conversation.”

“We are expected to make complicated decisions so I would like to see a presentation like that,” said new council member Mona Merrill. “I think it would be good to explore the trade-offs of these complicated decisions we make.”

Responding to a question from council member Mallika Magner, MacDonald said the Community Compass project would take a lot of staff time and no new major projects were slated to come on board in 2020.

“When I went door-to-door during the campaign I didn’t hear people say they wanted a Community Compass. They said they wanted affordable housing,” said Magner. “Our businesses are hamstrung because we don’t have enough housing. I would hate to see that left behind for a lovely group get-together. We are in desperate need of more affordable housing.”

“I second what Mallika is saying,” said council member Will Dujardin. “No one is talking about the need for a Community Compass. Staff priority should be on affordable housing.”

“We could still be doing some of that,” said MacDonald.

“We want housing now, not more plans,” said Dujardin. “It’s not just the staff, but the public only has so much more capacity, too.”

“I want to make sure we deliver affordable housing to the community,” said Merrill. “But I also want to make sure the decisions I make over the next four years have good benefit for the community. Getting the housing to the right people with the right income and that it is full.”

“With all due respect, housing in 1995 was a tremendously difficult issue and it still is,” said Magner. “It has never gotten better. It is always an issue.”

Magner said her understanding was that the state had a big pot of money for workforce housing projects and she wanted to jump on the Valley Housing Fund bandwagon and come up with a regional approach for several major projects across the county to tap into that money. “If there is a potential to build affordable rental housing in Crested Butte we should take it. We all ran our campaigns on that.”

Town community development director Michael Yerman said he respectfully disagreed with the conclusions of the Valley Housing Fund.

“Understand that we are a county of 17,000 people and we are not going to get three major projects funded from the state,” Yerman said. He had suggested the council be supportive of the Mt. Crested Butte North Village planning process that could include significant affordable housing. And while council expressed support for that project, they anticipated a long review process and wanted to forge ahead with Crested Butte planning for more housing.

Magner insisted that she felt a regional approach with the state was in order and could result in money for a project inside of town. She also re-emphasized the Valley Housing Fund desire to bring in the state officials who distribute the money to the county to get firsthand knowledge of how that money would be allocated.

She also said the idea of building too much housing was not a real issue. “I would rather see our town resources spent on an actual project in town instead of another plan,” she said.

“I understand the housing issue and it is important but it is not the only issue,” said Yerman. “That is what the Community Compass would try to address. What are the ramifications of 156 more affordable housing units?”

“It feels like if we just build without thinking about impacts we are blindly heading down a path and that doesn’t work,” said MacDonald.

“It doesn’t work now,” responded Magner.

“Where are we aiming?” asked MacDonald. “What is the balance point for Crested Butte?”

“The public is commenting that we need housing now,” said Dujardin. “I understand supporting Mt. Crested Butte but who knows how long the North Village will take to approve? I want to be good to go with a project when the annexation is complete. I don’t think people want to see us spend money on a Community Compass. It feels like a document that will be put over here on a shelf. I am not convinced we need to do this. We’re hearing what people want and it is housing.”

“If you keep building without a plan, you will eventually fail. More building means more traffic and more impacts on things like school and safety. You will never be able to house all the people who want to live in town,” said MacDonald.

“To me it feels like meetings for the sake of meetings,” said Dujardin. “Our constituents want us to take action.”

“I agree with Will and Mallika on this,” said Schmidt. “The problem is starting the Compass now. I feel we can put it off at least three months and focus on a housing discussion with Mt. Crested Butte.”

“No one elected me to start a Community Compass,” said Dujardin. “The character everyone loves about this place is figuratively dying because workers can’t afford to live here.”

“If we are going to do a plan it should not be about visions, but about issues and solutions,” said Magner.

MacDonald again emphasized the need to take a big picture look at the community and include affordable housing. “I would rather not do things in isolation but if you as a council want that, just let us know,” she said.

Citizen Kent Cowherd said big picture views from the council were important and they should not entirely dismiss the idea of a community master planning project.

“Affordable housing is the big picture for me,” said Dujardin.

The council decided to add a Community Compass discussion as an agenda item for the December 16 meeting. Council member and vocal master planning advocate Chris Haver was not at the December 2 meeting but will no doubt jump into the discussion at the next meeting.

So I was riding the new Teocalli chairlift Saturday—actually, I might still be riding the new Teo chairlift, given the speed it was running last weekend—and I appreciate that it has given me time to think. A lot of time to think. Teo is not the fastest fixed gripper on the planet but it sure is a pretty ride.

And just because there is time to think doesn’t mean there is time to reach conclusions. For example, I was thinking about this potential “Empty House Tax” that the Crested Butte Town Council is considering. I’m not on board yet. Is it a fair way to help fund affordable housing or is it just another easy revenue stream and quick way to gouge the rich people who like coming to Crested Butte? Maybe tax everyone and give permanent residents a 90% break. The council representatives have clearly stated they do not want to fuel the fire of an “us versus them” vibe that some on council say already exists, but can their good intentions convince that segment of the community that such a tax is a worthwhile contribution to make in order to make their Crested Butte lives better when they are here?

The council made a somewhat persuasive argument for that case Monday, pointing out that if local restaurants can’t find workers because workers can’t find a place to live, those second homeowners won’t have a good experience when they get here. The second homeowners point out they already pay a lot of year-round fees but impact the place only a few weeks or months a year. The dialogue the council wants to have is up to them to seek out, but Lord knows this tax idea is something the community will be thinking (and talking) about for the next few months. As usual, the devil is in the details.

I was thinking about what the upper valley would be like if all of those second homes were occupied all the time. Talk about lines. It would be like July in November. Good luck getting the seven o’clock dinner reservation. The morning school drop-off would certainly be much more interesting.

It sort of goes to the Crested Butte town staff request to the council to take a big picture look at future decisions. If the community builds, say, another 500 rental units up here, where do those additional 1,000 people recreate or where do their kids go to school or who comes to fix their faucet when it is broken since the local trades people are already slammed? More housing, affordable or free market, means more people and more people means more impact on the climate and more need for more workers and more, more, more. What is the limit, if any, for this community? Maybe that idea doesn’t need a year-long Community Compass (silly name) initiative but those questions should always be part of any decision.

I was thinking about how some local businesses are having a hard time finding people to work even a little bit in their places. It used to be that if you moved here, even with a family, you probably needed a couple jobs. There was no shortage of local moms working as waitresses a few years ago but that doesn’t seem to be a necessity for newer residents. So it adds to that worker shortage. There is a sweet spot with just the right number of workers for the community. I wish there were more workers looking for seasonal jobs right now because I feel the angst some local employers are experiencing. But about two minutes after we reach that sweet spot it will move because someone, somewhere will be short a dishwasher or a clerk. As has been said a lot recently, this place can’t house everyone who wants to live here so we need to think about what the top of the curve looks like.

I was thinking about how Dawne’s “Poor Little Rich Town” series basically pointed to the gentrification of Crested Butte. That is neither good or bad, it just is. It might be inevitable. And honestly, it has brought comforts I don’t want to give up. It’s certainly easier to be here now than when I got here in the ’80s. I am thinking there is no question I’ve gotten soft. There is less wildness, less rowdiness, less questionable parenting and more things to do, nicer facilities, more choices on every front. The old rowdy rule breakers have moved on, mellowed out or died. Or maybe I just go to bed too early these days and miss the new wild ones. Soft.

I was thinking that Mt. Crested Butte finds itself in a fortuitous situation when it comes to future affordable housing. They have both land with the upcoming North Village project, and money with the upcoming lodging tax. Not every government entity that wants to address workforce housing has both of those luxuries. I was thinking it will be interesting to see how they approach the opportunities they have with both money and land in their back pocket.

I was thinking (again) that a person can’t honestly be a staunch environmentalist living at 9,000 feet in a ski resort…it just takes too much energy to survive in a cold, remote valley that depends on airplanes, autos and big ski lifts for its economy. But you can try to make a difference with your situation. And maybe those actions will influence visitors who come here and they will take action back in Texas or wherever. Still, I would never claim to be an enviro and I really think the climate issue is ultimately a population issue.

I was thinking that sometimes we all think too much. How can a family of four afford a ski vacation? Why can’t I buy underwear in Crested Butte? What’s the best time to pick up a package at the post office? Heck, one of the Overheards we received about the Teo Lift this week noted how much more weed a person could smoke given the pace of the newest lift on the mountain. While all these thoughts might make it seem I smoked too much weed on the lift, I didn’t.

So sit back and enjoy the new Teo lift. It really is pretty. Teo, like life, doesn’t always have to be fast. Let it flow instead of demanding it get us there immediately. New housing is happening but it will never meet the ultimate need. Second homeowners already pay a lot to vacation here and they may be willing to put more on their tab but take the time to have the deep conversations with them. More coffee options, a good school, a new performance hall have positive and negative impacts but they are here to stay. Don’t think too much about the good old days. They’re old and they’re over.

Take a breath and enjoy the ride. Be where you are. Not everyone gets that opportunity to be in a place like this.

See you on the lift….

—Mark Reaman

No one wants it to be “us vs. them”

By Mark Reaman

Understanding that a lot of outreach and discussion will be needed to convince certain segments of the community to support a local tax on empty houses in town, the Crested Butte Town Council decided on Monday to continue the conversation to see if such a tax is feasible.

They want to gather public feedback from all segments of the community and delve into the details of how the tax could work before putting it to the voters as early as next November.

Council members said they had received both positive and negative feedback on the initial idea of implementing an excise tax on houses that are not occupied by permanent residents. The revenues would be used for affordable housing or climate change mitigation projects. Staff told the council that based on research, not many places aside from Oakland, California and Vancouver, Canada have such a tax and that a voter-approved excise tax of a flat amount per house would be the best avenue for Colorado.

Town statistics indicate that while house prices are increasing dramatically, income levels are stagnant, so the opportunity to purchase a house in Crested Butte is disappearing for most working locals. That is leading to more houses in Crested Butte being owned by people who use them for vacation homes or short-term rentals. While the tax is intended to both raise revenue and perhaps incentivize people to use the houses as a primary residence or for long-term rentals, the council admitted the likely outcome is more money for affordable housing and minimal behavioral change.

Town staff estimated there are about 416 homes that could be tagged as non-primary residences and subject to the tax.

Mayor Jim Schmidt said he saw a lot of negatives with the idea since it could produce ill will from a segment of the second home community that has contributed to Crested Butte. “I’ve already gotten a lot of calls on this,” he said at the December 2 meeting. “I still have a lot of trouble getting around it. I doubt it will get people in houses as permanent residents, but it will raise money. We have an excise tax on short-term rentals.”

“And it doesn’t seem to have stopped the STRs,” said council member Mallika Magner.

“At the time I didn’t think the 5 percent tax on STRs was enough,” added council member Will Dujardin. “People are certainly reaching out over this and it is uncomfortable for some of them, which is understandable. The people I talk to support it or at least support seeing if it can be used as a mechanism to raise money for housing. As for the concern that this will make an ‘us versus them’ attitude, there is already a lot of that. It started when house prices went up and incomes stayed stagnant. We need to expand the money pool for affordable housing. I know second homeowners are important to the community. I know our constituents need affordable housing. I know we need to do our homework and keep the conversation going to see if we can figure it out.”

“I would like to see the conversation continue,” agreed Magner. “I don’t see it as an ‘us versus them.’ Second homeowners need workers to do the services they want and those workers need to be housed. They may not come back here if the restaurant they like is closed because it can’t find workers. So I think we should be able to bring our valued second homeowners to the understanding that this benefits them. With the average house price in town at $1.5 million, I don’t think this would dissuade anyone from buying a second home. This could generate a significant amount of revenue. I would like more data and more analysis on how it could work. Let’s keep talking about it.”

“That’s where a thorough public process would come into play,” said Dujardin. “What’s the magic number for the amount of tax and the magic number for how many days a house needs to be vacant to be taxed? There is a lot of conversation to have.”

Town manager Dara MacDonald said town would have trouble determining how many days a home was not occupied but could determine if a home was owned by a permanent resident.

Council member Laura Mitchell said she too felt the conversation was worth continuing, and then letting the voters decide.

Schmidt pointed out that it took council about a year and a half to figure out the proper STR tax.

“We need to communicate with everyone that is impacted, including the second homeowners,” said council member Mona Merrill. “We need a dialogue.”

Citizen Kent Cowherd suggested the council consider the same vacancy tax on commercial properties.

Local property manager Steve Ryan said such taxes ultimately do have impacts and used the STR tax as an example. He said it is getting more and more expensive to short-term-rent in Crested Butte because of added taxes and fees, and fewer people are lining up to rent in town. He said while the occupancy of STRs has not decreased, the trend is that fewer people are looking at short-term-renting inside town.

Ryan said where there was once a waiting list to rent a home in Crested Butte, that is no longer the case. He said more people are renting on the mountain and spending less money. “There is not a big drop in occupancy but there is a drop in interest,” he said. “That’s a disturbing trend, especially in such a good economy. These kinds of fee increases make a difference. It is not a simple discussion.”

“I would like to see us explore this and get groups together from all sides to look at it,” said Dujardin.

“Not all of them but many, many second homeowners have contributed a lot to the community,” reiterated Schmidt.

“And this is a way for them to do more,” responded Magner.

“We can try to find the balance and common ground,” said Dujardin who suggested council hold a public work session to delve into the idea and then possibly organize subcommittees that explore the pros and cons. “We can follow some of what we did with the Climate Action Plan.”

“I like the idea of going to the people instead of waiting for them to come to us,” said Merrill. “We can go to the property managers, the homeowners and HOAs to get feedback.”

“We all appreciate our second homeowners. It’s not at all an ‘us versus them.’ It is a way for them to contribute to helping to solve the ills we are facing. It is great for us to explore this and see what the public will say,” concluded Magner. “They will make the ultimate decision.”

The concept will be discussed again at the January 6 council meeting.

“I know you guys are trying”

By Kendra Walker

The proposed Nordic Inn Planned Unit Development (PUD) major alteration discussions continued as the Mt. Crested Butte Town Council reviewed the latest plan updates with Pearls Management, LLC, representatives at the November 19 Town Council meeting.

The latest proposal, which would develop the existing Nordic Inn into a new five-star hotel and conference center with underground parking garage, has raised concerns from the community and council members regarding the building’s size, public parking availability and lack of cohesive architecture with the surrounding neighborhood.

Pearls attorney Aaron Huckstep and principal architect Gary Hartman walked council through the latest changes, which included: decreasing the hotel units from 144 to 134 (with 8.59 affordable housing units); reducing more of the massing on the north and south wings of the building; and more break-up in the building’s façade. The idea, Huckstep explained, was to keep more of the mass toward the middle and open up views on either side.

“We believe this took council’s concerns in respect to massing and parking,” said Huckstep. “The units have been decreased, but we did not change the total number of parking spaces. There will be less demand for those parking spaces, which means there will be more available for parking for the public.” There are 75 designated public spaces of the 220 spaces proposed.

“We think those are substantial benefits compared to the 2018 PUD [which is already approved]. With parking changed to underground, the change in the orientation of the building and then pushing it back into the hillside, I don’t know how [neighbors] can argue with this,” said Huckstep.

Council members and town staff who were present for the 2018-approved PUD confirmed that the biggest concern at the time was around the surface parking lot and road safety. Design aspects like mass and architecture were not heavily discussed by council or through public comment.

“You’re trying to make the high density look like less high density,” said councilman Dwayne Lehnertz on the most recent building adjustments. “But you’re moving in the right direction.”

“This proposal has gone up approximately 13,000 square feet from the 2018 approved PUD,” said councilmember Lauren Koelliker. “It’s not just the [issue of] height but also the scale of the building.”

“The vision of Pearls is to create this as a five-star amenity in Mt. Crested Butte, that’s why it’s not just a hotel,” explained Huckstep. “When you think about the vision, it requires that you have the additional square footage attributed to those ancillary uses that are a part of a five-star experience.” He then listed amenity examples such as a larger kitchen facility; public restrooms; dedicated housekeeping elevators separate from public elevators; conference space along with backhouse storage areas; onsite laundry; employee lockers and lounge; and additional storage.

“My problem from the beginning when you presented this two weeks ago is looking at the massiveness of this from Gothic Road,” said mayor Janet Farmer. “While there are aspects of this that are better than the already approved one, like the parking, I’m not comfortable with how big it is. I really do not believe this fits within the design appearance of our community. I can’t live with that. I don’t know what you do to change the size and the appearance to make your project work but I can’t support this particular proposal.”

“Is there a way to shave off a story and reorient the units?” asked councilman Steve Morris regarding possible reshuffling of the building. “How do we shave that sixth floor off of the big boy?”

“I think we can look at that,” said Huckstep.

“How complicated is it going to get to drop the thing down?” asked Lehnertz.

“It’s very complicated,” said Hartman.

“We know that this design is not finished and that is an inherent conflict between the PUD process and the design process,” said Huckstep. “Rather than shaving the architecture, what if you express your concerns in the architecture back to the Planning Commission [for design review]? I would encourage you to allow the Planning Commission to do their job.”

“And the design review will follow DDA guidelines,” said Morris.

“Just because the Planning Commission approved it doesn’t mean that it’s okay,” said Farmer. “This is not the first time that I have disagreed with the Planning Commission’s decisions and I’m not comfortable leaving that up to them when it’s something that I really don’t like. It’s too modern for me, it’s too modern for this community.”

Council is still undecided on next steps and has asked Hartman to continue adjusting and modifying the mass, scale and architecture of the building, and present updates at the December 17 Town Council meeting.

“I know you guys are trying,” Farmer added at the conclusion of the meeting.

$750K to $950K annually for affordable housing projects

By Kendra Walker

With the new 2.9 percent lodging excise tax passed by voters this November election, the Mt. Crested Butte Town Council began discussing how to prioritize the future funds toward affordable housing. The tax is expected to bring in approximately $750,000 to $950,000 a year.

During a work session on November 19, council members brainstormed their top priorities and ideas for affordable housing projects.

Council agreed that one of the first areas of focus should be determining plans for the 17 acres town owns called Parcel F, adjacent to the North Village. Council has been in conversations with North Village owner Claudio Alvarez about adding affordable housing or workforce rental units onto Parcel F that would correlate with the North Village design and construction. Council is planning an upcoming work session to determine their input and guidance on North Village.

Guidance from the experts

Several council members prioritized using the lodging tax funds toward hiring an expert to provide direction for moving forward on affordable housing opportunities.

“One thing that’s really important is to work with someone to help us navigate housing so that we don’t just kind of guess,” said council member Lauren Koelliker. “I think it’s a priority to get some outside opinions from housing experts.”

Council has already been working with housing practitioner Willa Williford over the past several months to update Mt. Crested Butte’s Community Housing Guidelines and to identify opportunities for housing funds.

Jennifer Kermode, executive director of the Gunnison Valley Regional Housing Authority, sat in on the November 19 work session to offer her insights. “From my experience in Summit County and learning from other resort towns, helping to reduce costs to the builder and subsidizing building fees upfront—that’s huge,” said Kermode.

In addition to reducing construction costs, council also liked the idea of using funds to waive or decrease tax fees and other development, utilities and infrastructure costs.

Taking care of our own

Council agreed that some of the excise tax funds could also go toward housing for town staff.

“My number one, and probably my number two and number three also are all the same thing: use what we collect to secure housing for our town staff,” said councilman Nicholas Kempin. “Joe [Fitzpatrick] is not going to do this job forever and I really struggle to think how we would hire a new town manager and have them live here…

“Wouldn’t it be great to have our chief of police live in the town that he polices?” Kempin said, referencing that chief of police Nate Stepanek currently lives in Crested Butte South. “I feel very strongly that should be our top priority.”

“I’m curious whether or not the town could participate in the lottery for the 22 units going in Homestead?” asked councilman Dwayne Lehnertz.

“I think we just outright buy maybe four of those units [before the lottery],” said Fitzpatrick.

“I like the idea, I wonder, can we be in the rental market?” asked councilman Roman Kolodziej.

“We would have to look carefully how those deed restrictions are written,” said Fitzpatrick. “It’s no different from Crested Butte selling to businesses that would turn around to employees.”

Kermode added, “In resort communities, we have to start paying attention to looking at providing loan assistance to town employers who are in older units, who already own units. To keep their homes and to keep them in their homes they need access to $25,000 to $35,000 in cash.”

Payment assistance, deed restrictions, Brush Creek and solar

Other ideas from council members included deposit assistance for renters, down payment assistance for buyers and purchasing deed restrictions. Council has expressed interest in Vail’s InDeed housing program, in which the town purchases deed restrictions on either new units or those being sold, ensuring that the units are within reach to local buyers and will be occupied by full-time working residents.

Council also wants to look into getting water studies done at Brush Creek (a parcel Mt. Crested Butte co-owns with Crested Butte, Crested Butte Mountain Resort and Gunnison County) so everyone has a better idea of the development options moving forward as they seek affordable housing projects for that parcel.

Community development director Carlos Velado also suggested that town could contribute some of the funds to add solar on units during construction of an affordable housing development, such as Homestead. “What that does is it would make the housing itself more affordable to live in,” he said. “It reduces their utility cost, increasing the likelihood of [residents] to stay.”

Council plans to review each other’s ideas and flesh out priorities further in a future meeting, with the date to be determined. Town staff also plans to verify the ballot question language of the excise tax to make sure none of the items stray from the boundaries allowed for the funds.

“I think we have a pretty good start with coming up with a list,” said mayor Janet Farmer.

“I personally enjoy the process of being proactive rather than reactive,” said Lehnertz. “This process of engagement is incredibly positive.”