Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Linkage Fee topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Steamboat council asks staff to draft linkage-fee ordinance after months of study
Summary
City planners presented a proposed affordable-housing linkage fee — residential citywide and selected nonresidential uses concentrated in the mountain area — and council gave majority direction to begin drafting an ordinance while asking for additional options on nonresidential scope and hotel/health-care rates.
Steamboat Springs planning staff and consultants presented a proposed affordable-housing linkage fee to the City Council on Aug. 4, outlining a framework staff say is intended to generate money for deed-restricted housing while minimizing harm to the development market.
Planning Director Rebecca Bessie said the proposal applies a residential fee citywide and would apply targeted fees to six categories of nonresidential uses in the mountain area. She said exemptions would include deed-restricted affordable and workforce housing, and staff recommended a phased-in implementation to allow the market to adjust.
"We would apply this to residential development citywide and to new nonresidential development in the mountain area," Bessie said during the presentation. "We recommend exempting any deed-restricted residential units, and allocating a small portion of revenue for administrative costs."
Consultants from EPS explained the methodology: employment-generation rates by land use, a mitigation rate that council must set, and an affordability gap per employee produce a defensible per‑square‑foot fee. The study identifies maximum defensible fees but staff proposed mitigation rates well below those maxima to avoid impairing development.
Councilors probed several policy choices. Some members said hospitals and health-care facilities should be treated carefully because of constrained reimbursement models; others argued that hospitals do generate housing impacts and should remain in the table so council can set a low mitigation rate or a zero rate if desired.
Council also debated how to define "substantial additions" to existing buildings; staff proposed triggering the fee on additions that increase gross floor area by 50% or more, with exemptions for deed-restricted units. Several councilors suggested alternative thresholds and asked staff to model consequences.
On geography, staff recommended focusing nonresidential fees in the mountain-area planning zone, where resort and mixed‑use economics differ from downtown and the west side; some councilors asked staff to return with options that expand the mapped area along Highway 40 or offer lower mitigation rates citywide instead.
By the end of the discussion council gave majority direction to draft an ordinance and return with options on nonresidential applicability and additional review of hotel and health-care fee calculations. Bessie said staff will draft ordinance language consistent with council feedback and provide different options for council to consider.
What happens next: staff will prepare an ordinance and alternative options addressing the questions raised by councilors, including alternate area maps, mitigation rates and the substantial‑addition threshold. The council asked for further cost examples and requested time to review a proposed ordinance before any vote.
Provenance: The presentation and the bulk of the council discussion on options and thresholds began when Planning Director Rebecca Bessie introduced the linkage program at the start of the study session ("So we're gonna go ahead and walk through the presentation."), and the council reached direction on drafting an ordinance at the end of the segment when staff confirmed next steps.
