Town of Breckenridge Sustainable Breck Background Information

Town of Breckenridge Sustainable Breck Background Information

TOWN OF BRECKENRIDGE Sustainable Breck Background Information 2010 Town of Breckenridge Sustainable Breck Background Information Prepared by the Community Development Department P.O. Box 168 Breckenridge, Co. 80424 Town Council John Warner, Mayor Eric Mamula Rob Millisor Jeffrey Bergeron Peter Joyce Jennifer McAtamney David Rossi Planning Commission Rodney Allen, Chair Michael Bertaux Dave Pringle Dan Schroder Leigh Girvin Jim Lamb J.B. Katz Table of Contents Overview 1 Local Economy 1 Energy 5 Forest Health 18 Child Care 23 Water Quality & Supply 26 Housing 29 Land Use 36 Transportation 46 Wildlife Habitat 56 Recreation 60 Cover Photo: Town from Ski Hill Road By Scott Reid Overview In 2009 the Town Council directed staff to commence work on a Sustainability Action Plan for the Town. As a first step in the process a Sustainability Task Force (STF) was formed to review specific sustainability topics prior to public process portion of the development of the plan. The STF consisted of two Council members and the Mayor. The Sustainability Task Force Background Information Packet is an edited collection of memos the STF received on topics that have been included in the Sustainable Breckenridge public process. This information has been compiled to ensure that the general public has access to detailed information on sustainability issues before giving feedback on the Sustainable Breck project. Local Economy Economic Development Ideas • Find new regional niche market, get corporate support/funding. o This could be provided by private funding (i.e. Nike training center on McCain, outdoor ski/snowboard camps on mountain in summer like Mt. Hood etc.) to fill shoulder season. Option is limited with land limitations. • Add neighborhood commercial retail node on McCain property, Wellington and/or Block 11. o Increase some areas for retail revenue, less trip generated from neighborhoods. • Business incubator project for unfilled sectors of the business community. o Used by other communities as a method for increasing entrepreneurship and “economic gardening”. • Job training for community youth and retraining for those already in the workforce. o Opportunity to partner with CMC, Summit High School and major employers in the community to train current students to work in fields offered in Breckenridge to maintain local base. o Also, enhancing and/or retraining the current workforce for jobs of the future (i.e. construction field to green related jobs and forestry-biomass harvesting and conversion, nanotechnology and next-generation forest products). • Promote redevelopment. • Develop ways to entice second home owners to spend more time in Breckenridge during our shoulder seasons. • Green business programs and practice incentives. • Upgrade Town broadband system to today’s standards to allow for increased web traffic and utilization. Investments in broadband infrastructure will enhance community competitiveness and also could create higher value-added jobs and make new business models possible. • Do not place new restrictions on second homes that are utilized as short-term rentals to maintain short-term bed base. 1 Town Revenue Enhancement Ideas • Implementation of a Ski Lift Ticket Tax/Amusement Tax o The implementation of a tax on ski lift tickets has been researched by Staff and BEDAC which would add an estimated $1-3 million per year to the Town- price point and use to be determined. A similar tax is assessed in Vail. • Revenue Sharing o 1. Could be between municipalities/county (regional)-can discuss pros/cons; 2. Public/private partnerships for new niche market (thru TIF), if found. • Business Diversification o Recommend an “economic gardening” approach, based on attracting location neutral residents (i.e. lone eagles). This approach is being taken by other mountain communities to diversify income streams. Attraction to the existing “real town” atmosphere and amenities. (i.e. Steamboat Springs) o Other Options: Attract other business types (i.e. outdoor oriented niche businesses, biosciences, software, etc.)-needs to be sized for infill. • Business Improvement Districts or Assessment Districts o A public-private partnership typically with businesses in a particular area (i.e. Main Street) elect to pay an additional tax or fee in order to fund improvements and maintenance within the BID boundaries. o An Assessment District which would tax property owners separately for services such as Recreation and/or Transit. • Income/Payroll, Service Tax, or other Excise Tax o Income tax was researched and found to be PROHIBITED by the Colorado Constitution. o Tax implemented upon services conducted or on payroll based on how many employees per company. (researching this as a possibility) • Increase Existing Excise Tax (sales, accommodations, etc.) See attached chart on other mountain town tax rates. • Increase property tax rate for second homeowners (Utah rate of 0.55 for locals and 1.0 for second homeowners). o PROHIBITED by State Constitution. • Add mill levy (for childcare, sustainable incentives, housing). • Form a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT) for Block 11, other town owned property? o Could explore if the Town is able to form a REIT and essentially sell “shares” of the development to interested businesses for housing to off-set up front infrastructure costs. • Add municipal waste management department, charge per bag-encourage recycling. o Municipal waste management has been a revenue generator for other communities. Currently, this profitable business is conducted by the private sector (some State limitations, additional information in Appendix). • Create a Town Asset Management Plan to review value of Town property to private sector. • Marijuana special tax 2 Second Homes Second homes are a significant contributor to the Breckenridge economy. According to the Northwest Colorado Council of Governments (NWCOG) second homes are the second largest basic economic driver in Summit County, accountable for 32% of the base economy. Second homes only trail winter visitation, 39%, in the basic sector and are significantly ahead of the third and fourth basic drivers, resident income, 12%, and summer visitation, 11%. In 2001 it was estimated $512,000,000 of outside money was brought into Summit County that was directly tied to second homes. “Compared to the average single property homeowner the second homeowner spends five times as much on lawn care, home security, pest control and housecleaning. They spends four times as much on contributions to churches, charities and educational groups, and three times as much on transportation for trips, hotels and other travel-related expenses” (Venturoni, 2004). In addition to the revenue brought into the community directly attributed to second homes, revenue from two other basic economic sectors, winter and summer visitation, is facilitated through significant portions of second homes being available for short term rental. According to NWCOG 38% of Summit County second homes are utilized for short-term rental, in Breckenridge this amounts to 1,695 of our estimated 4,461 second homes. By comparison Breckenridge has an estimated 970 dedicated short-term lodging units. These lodging units are comprised of hotel rooms and fractional ownership units. Considering 63% percent of our short- term stock is second homes, and an even greater percentage of the estimated 25,000 pillow tops, it is apparent how important second homes are to the local economy. Job Generation Within the central mountain counties of Summit, Eagle, Grand and Pitkin, second homes account for 44% of basic jobs. This is well ahead of the next most prevalent basic job generators, winter visitation, 25%, resident income, 14%, and summer visitation at 11%. Beyond basic jobs, seconds homes lead the way in this four county area for total jobs at 39%. Within Summit County each basic job has a .67 multiplier effect. That means for every dollar going toward a basic job in Summit County, $0.67 of that dollar then goes toward supporting a non-basic job. Taxable Revenue Property Tax – In 2008 $ 3,416,289 in property tax revenue was collected by the Town. Going off the common assumption that 68% of properties located in the Town are second homes, we can surmise based on averages that $2,323,077 of the property tax collected can be attributed to second homes. Lodging Tax – As noted above in the Local Economy section 63% of our short-term lodging stock is provided by second homes. Since the Town doesn’t distinguish between second homes and commercial lodging properties when tracking lodging tax it is difficult to estimate what percentage of the $2,139,687 in lodging tax that was collected in 2008 is attributed to second homes. It is assumed that commercial lodging properties designed as “hot beds” provide a 3 majority of the taxable lodging revenue but considering second homes make up 63% of all short term lodging rentals they also contribute significantly to lodging tax revenue. Real Estate Transfer Tax - From Census data we estimate 4,461 of Breckenridge’s 6,551 housing units are second homes. Of the 2,090 housing units that are estimated as permanent residences, 543 are deed restricted and exempt to RETT. Subtracting out our deed restricted housing stock increases the percentage of RETT eligible housing units controlled by second home owners to 74%. Though not tracked through Town records, national data shows second homes change ownership more frequently than permanent residences with “45% of second are sold within six years of purchase,” this also increases the percentage of RETT attributed to second homes (Research Institute for Housing America). In addition to the greater overall percentage of second homes and more frequent change of ownership for second homes that account for the majority of RETT collected by the Town, there is evidence the community is losing market rate housing that has served as work-force housing to second buyers. From 2003-2007 Aspen Mayor Mick Ireland tracked Breckenridge properties that changed ownership from local ownership to out of county or vice versus and found that housing units were much more likely to become second homes then bought by locals as they changed identity.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    68 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us