Realities of resort growth
Discussion Monday will convey experience of other communities
Saturday, August 11, 2007
Steamboat Springs — There's a saying that in Aspen, the billionaires have driven the millionaires "down valley," a reference to the belief that the fellow resort town has become a haven for only the super-wealthy.
The saying sounds like it must be an exaggeration, but Terry Minger says it's not.
"It's kind of scary," he said, "but it's true."
Avoiding that kind of future for Steamboat Springs will be the focus of a discussion Monday. Minger and Harry Frampton will lead the discussion, "The Present and Future Impacts of Resort Development on the Yampa Valley." Minger was the first city manager of Vail from 1968 to 1979. He is the current president and CEO of the Center for Resource Management. Frampton is a managing partner of East West Partners. The two were greatly involved with the development of other resorts such as Vail, Beaver Creek and Whistler Blackcomb.
The discussion is the third installment in the "Dynamics of Growth in Resort Communities" series presented by a variety of local organizations.
Scott Ford, co-founder of the Mountain Learning Network, said he is looking forward to the presentation.
"You've got two individuals who have done quite a bit of development in resort communities," Ford said. "Since they don't have any products in this fight, they'll be able to give a good perspective."
Although he was greatly involved with the creation of Vail, Minger said he is not offended by the fear many people in Steamboat have of becoming like that town. He said there are fair criticisms of how Vail has grown and what it has become.
He said both Aspen and Vail failed to address community housing and transportation soon enough.
Tracy Barnett, director of Main Street Steamboat Springs, said it will be valuable to learn from how communities such as Vail grew.
"We don't have to reinvent the wheel here," Barnett said. "We're heading right down the path that they've gone."
Carl Steidtmann, Steamboat resident and chief economist for New York-based accounting firm Deloitte, said Steamboat's reluctance to become a glitzy resort town is "reverse snobbery." He said the challenges facing Steamboat as it grows and tries to maintain its character at the same time are "the usual suspects:" affordable housing, labor force and land conservation.
These values are often at odds, Steidtmann said. For example, conserving land reduces supply and drives land and real estate prices up, which works against attempts to provide affordable housing.
"There's no easy solution to any of this," Steidtmann said.
Minger said that as Steamboat grows, it will be crucial for the town to articulate its desires.
"Where communities get stuck is it's easy to say what we don't want to be, but what do we want to be?" Minger said.
Minger said most of the angst and worry in Steamboat is unjustified and believes that mistakes, while possible, won't carry the day.
"I think it's a great community and you're at an interesting moment in time," Minger said. "I think you're going to be fine."
Ford said he is cautiously optimistic about Steamboat's future and said that if nothing else, it's better to have a growing economy than a declining one.
"I sense we will always be a town before a resort," Ford said. "Some of this does not affect us the same way. I don't see this as negative, just different."
Steidtmann agreed.
"I think it's developing in a way that the resort won't be the only business in town," Steidtmann said. "It has a chance to be very different."
Minger said it is important for Steamboat to realize that Aspen and Vail are successful on several levels. The challenge is for Steamboat to adapt those towns' successes in a way that localizes it and makes it Steamboat's.
"This hand-wringing (in Steamboat) is a healthy sign," Minger said.
The absence of such zeal in Vail worries Minger. He said the town has suffered due to the high proportion of the population who aren't stakeholders in the town because they don't stay long, or don't vote because they are only temporary residents.
"You erode your democracy a little bit," Minger said. "I worry about Vail."
In the end, Minger said Steamboat is most likely to trip itself up if it follows one of two extremes. Letting growth run rampant would be bad, but so would ignoring the "resortification of the West" and deciding not to allow any growth at all.
- To reach Brandon Gee, call 871-4210
or e-mail bgee@steamboatpilot.com
Comments
nightbird 5 years, 9 months ago
Who is moving here? It is likely not the "common working folks". The "common working folks" and particularly the next generation (age 25-40) are being precluded from living here. If we value the unique character of Steamboat Springs, (kids, safety and our sense of community), we better wake up. Specifically, our sense of community is at risk. Sense of community is very hard define, easy to lose and once gone it is almost impossible to salvage.
This sounds like an opportunity to listen and learn. Hopefully we can avoid making the same mistakes other resort towns did. I remain hopeful we will be smart enough to see what is coming and not make mistakes that could have been avoided.
rodcarew 5 years, 9 months ago
I've heard Minger speak before and he is very insightful and entertaining to listen to. I think we'd be wise to study the Vail/Aspen experience to not only avoid their mistakes, but to embrace some of the things they've done right. We all know Aspen's extravagance, but they have one of (if not the most) successful affordable housing programs in the country. This is the only thing preventing the town from being a total ghost town at night. We can't build our way out of the affordable housing problem by merely flooding the market with supply because it would be at the risk of ruining community character. We need well designed and located permanently restricted housing priced initially to meet the real need of the community. No one is going to (nor can afford to) build this product without being required to. The public at large also bears responsibility for addressing this issue because it's a community issue.
id04sp 5 years, 9 months ago
We absolutely MUST make more buildable land available and let developers break their necks using it up until a surplus exists and prices start to fall.
Actually, prices will never fall around here. They may become steady, and rates of sales will decrease, and then incomes will eventually catch up, but not for hourly wage people. This is like expecting a chamber maid working in a hotel in Manhattan to be able to live in an apartment within walking distance. It is NOT going to happen.
As for becoming a ghost town after dark, what's wrong with that? It's the sign of a family town with an older, peace loving population. You want night life? Las Vegas and Reno await, along with lots of jobs for service staff, etc.
Younger people who came here straight from high school or college and took the low wage jobs are simply going to find themselves becoming older people with no experience to sell in job markets elsewhere to move up on the economic ladder. They are living their retirement years now, and will work the rest of their lives to avoid starvation. The best thing we could do for the 20 to 30 year old crowd that's demanding housing would be to run them out of town so they have a chance to succeed elsewhere. The truth hurts, but that doesn't change the fact that it's the truth.
thecondoguy1 5 years, 9 months ago
terrific discussion, and I agree, I don't think they are making any more land..................
rodcarew 5 years, 9 months ago
So, sbvor, you're saying that over 2,700 permanent affordable housing units in Aspen/Pitkin County, where they have to hold lotteries for the available positions, is a failure? This is an amazing feat considering the cost of land and construction there. Without these units, Aspen would largely cease to exist or function. Steamboat Spgs. would be wise to follow their program before it's too late.
You're solution relies on the good nature of existing landowners to sell their land at below market and for developers to take a massive decline in profit to bring in non restricted/attainable housing- when there is far more money in higher end. Good frickin luck there. You are the naive one.
As for you, idio4....you made a point, then went on to contradict yourself......Also, let's run all the people who are the future leaders of the community and the folks that basically keep our community running....and tell them to get out! That's brilliant...I guess you can replace all of them? Also, you're okay with a ghost town at night? I bet the restraunters and other businessess would think otherwise.
id04sp 5 years, 9 months ago
rodcarew,
I try to deal in realities and predictable cause and effect. We know from experience what will happen.
Steamboat is a tiny little town in terms of land area. Our future leaders don't need to live in town, and in fact, should not. Steamboat ought to be following the county instead of the other way around. Steamboat is basically a world-class ski resort with a rather extensive base-area development problem.
Your assertion that a lottery is the answer only goes to prove my point that sometimes it's all about luck.
There is no industry in Routt County that will sustain large scale non-resort property development. A few niche businesses will do okay, but skiing is the family business and that's why we're in the fix we're in with respect to housing for workers.
As for restauranteurs and Steamboat turning into a ghost town after dark, I'd much rather have a super Wal-Mart with more affordable groceries. The fact is that locals don't support the restaurants in the slow season, for obvious economic reasons, and we attract far too many groups that double up in cheaper lodging and live on PB&J during the summer.
Snowbird and Alta in Utah are two of my favorite places to ski. Very few people who work there live nearby, because there's no real choice in the matter. Mammoth Lakes in California is very much like Steamboat, but again, not many people who work there live nearby. In both cases, there are broader economies that support less expensive housing on a larger scale, and the ski industry reaps the benefit.
I think the end result is going to be that the people who take the support jobs will ultimately have to be willing to live humbly too. Far too many highly-educated folks who could do better have settled for being voluntarily underemployed to live near Mt. Werner. They've raised kids with the same expectations, but it doesn't work like it used to, and now people are being squeezed.
There is no divine right of succession in the housing market. Besides that, is being chronically pinched financially really worth living in Routt County? I don't think so. People will figure that out.
rodcarew 5 years, 9 months ago
The high cost of housing in Aspen has far more to do with the fact that it's one of the most beautiful locations on the planet, its Victorian architecture and worldwide appeal which puts it in very high demand. High demand equates to high prices - it has very little to do with the disposition of affordable housing. At sales of over $2,000/s.f., it's not denting the developer's bottomline a whole lot-plus they have people left around to actually build and run the place. You may get someone from Rifle to do the job, but they will quit after a year do to the hellacious commute. Plus, that person from Rifle could care less about the town and it's future.
I don't see how deed restricted units hurts locals. They get to live there, save money on commuting, make a modest appreciation and enjoy the tax benefits of homeownership. They are also more likely to contribute positively to the community through volunteering, etc. The ONLY alternative (other than renting) is to live in Glenwood (maybe), but more likely Rifle (about 80 miles one way). Those folks will likely get burned out cause of the commute, quit, then be replaced by a like person who will quit in one year as well. Not only is this bad for businesses (high training and retraining costs), it's bad for everyone who has to deal with these folks (inexperience, lack of local knowledge).
I'm not saying everyone is entitled to a house here. I don't think that's possible. Not everyone wants to live in town either, but we should at least strive to provide the opportunity for as many of those who do want to live in town to do so.
Interesting, you advocate for a much more expensive alternative (light rail) than actually building units to solve the problem. Is this the pot calling the grass weed?
Idio...now you're saying our future leaders shouldn't live in town? That's not even possible under current rules. I'd really like a guy living in Craig tell me how to live in my town. I'm sorry, but that doesn't make sense and is one of the best reasons for in town AH....the lottery is weighted towards people who live there longer and is an indication of how popular the program is.....I don't care if we have a Super Wal Mart, but the question remains....who will work there?
id04sp 5 years, 9 months ago
Hmmmm . . . . uh, I don't care? Put the Super Wally in Hayden. People from Craig will work in it. 20 and 30 somethings who squandered their youth on pot and pills in Craig America are locked into the trailer-court mindset for life, and they can, and will, work for $10.75 an hour and live on it rather than seek self improvement.
My point was that Steamboat is really just a huge base area development which is quickly turning into condos and strip malls. It shouldn't be incorporated. The people who will run the services and businesses should live elsewhere in the county.
I like to take long road trips on US and state highways to avoid the Interstate boredom. Some of the places I go can be reached without losing any time at all because of the shorter distance, even going slower (which saves gas) and hitting places where you have to slow to 35 or 45 mph. (GPS is great for this; helps avoid wrong turns and inadvertant detours,etc.) Along the way, I end up passing through lots of small towns with main streets comparable to Lincoln Ave between the library and the post office. The difference is that you don't see many cars, or many people, and a lot of the storefronts are closed. People in those areas are doing more and more big-box shopping (which puts small business out of business) and purchasing via catalogs and the internet.
If Steamboat's main street does not go the way of these small towns, then it will go the way of Park City or Breckenridge along route 9 and turn into a congested mess of tourist crap stores and condos. All of this will happen while the local "leaders" go around slapping new coats of paint on a rotten house and hoping to sell it before it falls down.
The dust bowl is coming to a ski town near you, but this time people will be driven out by a lack of money instead of a lack of rain, and when it all settles down again, only rich people will be left to enjoy it full time.
thecondoguy1 5 years, 9 months ago
id, I love the part about slap a coat of paint on a rotten old house, good discription of historic preservation.......
Requires free registration
Posting comments requires a free account and verification.
Or login with:
OpenID