Home

We appreciate the efforts of the city's historic preservation specialist and Historic Routt County to preserve buildings of historical or architectural significance in our area.

That said, the Harbor Hotel is not such a building. The location -- at Seventh Street and Lincoln Avenue -- is a cornerstone of downtown, and the city should take care to ensure that whatever development occurs there is held to the highest standards of design, use and architecture. But if that development includes razing the hotel, so be it.

Real estate agent Jim Cook is working with a buyer whose plan is just that. Cook said the buyer wants to demolish the hotel and construct a building that would include commercial, residential and public space.

Laureen Schaffer, historic preservation specialist with the city of Steamboat Springs, argues that the building's prominent location, "international-style" architecture and history make it key to downtown character. Schaffer would like to see the developer preserve the building.

Schaffer also is concerned that demolishing the Harbor would threaten efforts to have the strip of Lincoln Avenue from Seventh Street to 12th Street designated as a national historic district.

The Harbor originally was built in 1939 as a motor court. For years, it was the nicest hotel in Steamboat Springs, Arianthe Stettner of Historic Routt County said. Stettner appreciates the hotel's "modesty" and thinks it helps tell the full story of Steamboat.

City ordinance limits how much historic preservationists can do to save the building. When a demolition permit is filed, Schaffer's office can request a public hearing on the building. The city then can request a 90-day "cooling-off" period during which preservation advocates can try to negotiate with the developer. But the developer ultimately controls the decision.

Cook said the building is coming down. "People are just going to have to understand that," he said.

Cook doesn't share preservationists' appreciation of the Harbor's architectural style. And he noted that engineers have indicated that the building is structurally unsound. Renovation is neither cost efficient nor wise.

We would tend to agree. As it stands, the Harbor is not a particularly functional building. The hotel hasn't been used since the current ownership group purchased it in 2002. The owners' plans were to renovate it and the condominiums behind the hotel, which were added in the 1970s. But when the condominium project was complete, the owners figured out that renovating the hotel was an overwhelming undertaking. It simply was not a practical option.

The new owner, who still must finalize purchase of the property, has no such renovation interest.

That doesn't mean all remnants of the Harbor must be lost. Perhaps there are features of the hotel that can be incorporated into the new building's design. That seems more logical than trying to salvage what may be an unsalvageable building.

We agree with preservationists' stance about the importance of the Harbor Hotel's location. The city has a vested interest in making sure that site enhances the downtown area.

But the best way for the city to do that is by focusing on the site's future, not its past. That means letting the Harbor come down, if necessary, and making sure that the building that replaces it is worthy of the location.