Land-use consultant Peter Patten, left, points out boundary lines of the proposed Steamboat 700 development Thursday. At right, in the hat, is Steamboat Springs City Councilman Steve Ivancie, then council members Meg Bentley, Loui Antonucci and Scott Myller. The pole in the background marks the city's Urban Growth Boundary.

Photo by Mike Lawrence

Land-use consultant Peter Patten, left, points out boundary lines of the proposed Steamboat 700 development Thursday. At right, in the hat, is Steamboat Springs City Councilman Steve Ivancie, then council members Meg Bentley, Loui Antonucci and Scott Myller. The pole in the background marks the city's Urban Growth Boundary.

City Council to vote on pre-annexation agreement for proposed development

Advertisement

Pre-annexation

agreement highlights

- The agreement does not commit the city or the applicant to annexation.

- Requires Steamboat 700 to partially or completely fund 14 studies of issues including transit capacity, fiscal impacts, wildlife, water capacity, wetlands, visual impacts, sustainable design and slope analysis; and to reimburse the city for staff time to review the annexation application, at a rate of $50 per hour.

- Anticipates submittal of a complete annexation application in October of this year.

- Requires Steamboat 700 to fully fund the federal and Colorado Department of Transportation studies required before upgrading U.S. Highway 40 to support proposed growth in west Steamboat Springs.

- Requires Steamboat 700 to fund a share of the transit upgrades and U.S. 40 improvements required to serve the development and allows the city to limit future development until improvements are constructed.

A copy of the Pre-Annexation Agreement can be found on the Web at: www.yampavalley.i...

Source: John Eastman,

Planning Services Manager for

Steamboat Springs

Past Event

Steamboat Springs City Council meeting

  • Tuesday, August 5, 2008, 5 p.m.
  • Centennial Hall, 124 10th St., Steamboat Springs
  • Not available

More

The Steamboat Springs City Council will vote on a resolution to approve the pre-annexation agreement for Steamboat 700 during its meeting Tuesday.

The city's Community Development Code requires a pre-annexation agreement before city officials will consider an annexation application. Although the agreement does not guarantee annexation, city Planning Services Manager John Eastman said it "nails down big policy issues" such as funding for improvements to U.S. Highway 40 that would be required before developers would be allowed to begin construction.

"Basically, we're saying 'if you aren't willing to commit to taking care of transportation issues and if you aren't willing to commit to taking care of fiscal impacts, we're not even interested in seeing an (annexation) application,'" Eastman said Thursday.

Steamboat 700 is a proposed development of about 2,000 units on 700 acres west of Steamboat Springs. Developers are awaiting the decision to amend the Urban Growth Boundary, which would allow them to develop the complete 700-acre parcel at urban densities. That decision will come at a joint meeting between City Council and the Routt County Board of Commissioners on Aug. 12.

"There is a misconception that the pre-annexation agreement is an approval to move forward with annexation," Eastman said Thursday. "It's not."

The proposed Steamboat 700 pre-annexation agreement outlines a number of requirements that have been discussed previously in public meetings May 6, June 17 and July 1.

The requirements outlined in the pre-annexation agreement are unique to Steamboat 700. They relate primarily to identifying financial responsibilities of the developers, because of impacts city officials expect the development will have on the broader community.

Traffic, funding top list

The agreement states that Steamboat 700 will agree to pay either a share or the full cost for 14 studies regarding Steamboat 700's potential impacts. The studies would address issues including U.S. Highway 40 assessments and improvements, transit accessibility, fiscal impacts, wildlife, water capacity, wetlands, visual impacts, build out analysis, sustainable design and slope analysis. Developers also will be responsible for reimbursing the city for staff time devoted to the studies, at $50 per hour.

Steamboat 700 will be required to pay for a portion of improvements to U.S. 40, but the exact cost won't be known until the environmental assessment is completed, which Eastman said could be a year out.

The agreement includes a 12-month schedule for review of an annexation application, after submittal by Steamboat 700. Eastman said he anticipates more than 30 additional public meetings before a vote on the annexation agreement.

The agreement also suggests several methods for how Steamboat 700 would offset fiscal impacts the development might have on taxpayers within existing city limits. The options include establishing several metro districts, adding a public improvement fee to retail sales and real estate transfer fees.

Few cities require a pre-annexation agreement, Lauren Mooney, assistant to the city manager, said Thursday.

"It's a step that Steamboat Springs requires above and beyond," she added.

Peter Patten, the land-use consultant for Steamboat 700, said vested rights and future growth ordinances could affect the development.

"There are still some issues to discuss on Tuesday," he said.

Regarding whether approval of the pre-annexation agreement would help Steamboat 700 gain approval for an Urban Growth Boundary amendment, Patten said, "We think it's a major step forward."

City Council President Loui Antonucci disagreed and said the pre-annexation agreement has nothing to do with the Urban Growth Boundary.

"The agreement is for what is currently inside the UGB," Antonucci said. "It's general, and I don't think we'll even be talking about (the Urban Growth Boundary) Tuesday."

Steamboat 700 is expected to submit a petition for annexation to the city by Oct. 1. Eastman said he expects it will take a year before an annexation decision is made.

Comments

Steve Lewis 6 years, 4 months ago

Whether you agree with annexing or not, EVERYONE acknowledges the PUBLIC BENEFIT of annexing would be affordable housing (AH). The west area plan says the same.

The west area plan is explicit - that public benefit will be 20% of units sold to 80% AMI ownership.

Yes we should allow averaging and yes we should heed the Community Housing Demand Analysis (CHDA). But we should accept no less PUBLIC BENEFIT in this area. The public benefit of a 120% AMI unit is MUCH LESS than the public benefit of an 80% AMI unit. City staff has laid out the method to adjust AH unit numbers, as the AMI mighy vary, to maintain our public benefit.

The pre-annexation agreement should acknowledge we will use this measuring of the affordable housing public benefit from this annexation. It does not. Lack of such language greatly complicates upcoming annexation negotiations, and puts us at a disadvantage. -Steve Lewis

0

Steve Lewis 6 years, 4 months ago

My only other complaint with the pre-annexation agreement is its 20 year vesting: "...the rights to be vested shall extend only to the permitted uses and densities...". In other words, the annexed parcel will have its own, static development code. Future buyers of even unplatted 700 land will be immune to City code improvements for 20 years.

10 years may be fair to stabilize 700's expectations, but 20 year vesting is NOT a smart move by the City. Circumstances of our valley, nation and world are changing too fast to lock in today's permitted uses for 20 years.

Viewed another way, would Steamboat Springs be content today applying the development codes of 1988? We WILL regret 20 year vesting.

Other land owners are protected against unfair value losses via code changes by the precedent of "takings". Takings are code changes which unfairly reduce one's property value or property rights. This benchmark ownership right has extremely well precedented parameters and wide awareness of the principle routinely bars unfair code changes.

Beyond 10 years, 700 and its future owners should accept the same protections the rest of the market has. 20 year vesting is a giveaway of unknowable social and financial cost to the City. -Steve Lewis

0

424now 6 years, 4 months ago

You have valid points Steve.

I just want to say I sincerely hope that annexation goes through for the 700 club. To me it looks like the one game in town where the potential for a decent house at reasonable price could appear.

It's been a long time coming and we worker bees are hard pressed in the boat.

Come on 7! Hundred that is.

0

ColoradoNative 6 years, 4 months ago

Sorry Steve. We don't all agree that forced affordable housing is a public benefit. Forcing others to pick up the tab so a chosen few have to pay less is not a public benefit for all.

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.