Jump to content
This Our View is the most accurate Pilot piece on the URA to date. While the contemplated URA and BID district would gather revenue from 3 streets, Lincoln, Yampa and Oak, the expenditures will be focused on Yampa St. The draft URA budget establishes the same philosophy, with $5 million going to Yampa St, and $450,000 going to Oak St.
That is the wrong approach to improving downtown.
Please recall that two years ago this discussion began with consultations and a report from the Urban Land Institute (ULI), chaired by Jim DeFrancia. The ULI report reads, "The panel drew its findings by reviewing the advance packet, touring Yampa, Lincoln, and Oak streets...The panel recommends a comprehensive approach to all of downtown. The panel envisions downtown Steamboat 2030 consisting of three well-articulated and thriving pieces (Yampa, Lincoln, and Oak Streets)."
After DeFrancia's presentation of the ULI report to City Council, I commented to the hearing that we on Oak St are primarily a professional office use. While we are perfect for Location Neutral Businesses, we won't see much benefit from the BID's currently stated goals of "marketing" and Yampa Street "events" to create foot traffic. Obviously those will be good for the retailers and restaurants of Yampa and even Lincoln. I commented that my Oak Street taxes should bring a parity of benefit back to Oak Street. We are an asset to downtown too. Jim DeFrancia was kind enough to stand and second my comments as meeting the intention of his panel.
Please advocate a more balanced approach to improving our downtown.
I do have some questions:
1) The last BID was a separate election process, requiring each BID voter to do legwork to register, acquire a ballot and deliver it to the BID. Is this one different?
2) Can the BID taxpayers be allowed to elect the BID board?
3) Who is responsible for sidewalk liability in a BID maintained scheme. Perhaps insurance coverage negotiated for the district could save us $$.
4) "A survey of downtown property owners found that maintenance and the overall appearance of the district were the things they most valued." How did the property owners rank marketing?
We did this survey of Oak St commercial owners Jan 2013. Marketing and planters did not score very high (question #1):
The City selects the BID board. It would be better if those paying the tax elected the board who will spend their tax $$.
Where is the $29/$100,000 documented?
the BID tax proposal deserves more serious treatment from the newspaper. "Maintenance" describes only part of the potential use of such a tax. Marketing is another use. And what will we be maintaining? Aren't you curious what the tax $$ will actually be spent on? Please tell us about this BID we are voting on in November. Thank you.
Thanks Robin. With the new 2A trails coming on Linda and I upped our game this Spring with new mtn bikes. Very fun. Kudos to what you guys are accomplishing.
And MTB.com is just what we needed. We are venturing to other biking sweet spots these days, like Park City, but were having trouble finding a nice ride halfway there. With MTB it's as simple as zooming into the U.S. map. Not every ride is there, hopefully leaving the homies some trails of their own.
Thanks Sureva. I was glad to catch some of that flavor arriving in '79. The typical vehicles on Lincoln then were old pickups and beat up Subarus. That seemed emblematic of priorities better placed, on cows, hay meadows and mountain trails. Steamboat has taught me so much and there's more to learn. Have a wonderful reunion.
"Sonja Macys didn't want to act on any of the Yampa Street recommendations until the council was presented with a clear plan for what it would take to maintain the new amenities."
Thank you Sonja. I support that council is trying to do what 2A ballot proponents promised - purchase of park space on Yampa. But before making such a purchase, I believe council must clearly establish who will be paying to maintain it.
Local foods and efficient use of resources are good goals, not bad goals. We all have our view of conditions 10, 20 and 30 years out, and while the views are different each of us does apply them to our planning. That to me is the meaning of "sustainability".
My own view favors economic stability in these futures, and self-sufficiency in our remote setting would be some defense for that. I'm nervous about disruption and expect a big one when the flights become a marginal business proposition.
We may disagree about sustainable practices, yes. But the topic belongs on the table.
SB700, if its annexation had passed, would be a series of bankrupt entities today - sunk by the road/sewer infrastructure and other contracts made as the recession hit. Danny might be long gone, but the City would have a pile of litigation and one or two upside down municipal taxing districts to sort out.
The City is currently sending the message that more taxes are needed for servicing the City we already have, so the demands on the next annexing property will also be very costly. Why would the City take the risk with another partner? Same reason as before. Maybe we'll call it "available housing".
Sorry to disagree with you Ben, but I think allowing new landowners into the UGB can be a good thing.
Let it snow.
Our farmers love it, and depend on it. For that matter, everything green depends on it.
Hope some of this gets to California.
Last login: today
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2014 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.