Too Many Tourists In Colorado

[WTF is dat]

so much to say about that one, it's not even funny

look into how much affordable housing breckenridge grand vacations has provided with all their development over the years NONE look at the laws regarding development and they don't have to follow a single rule

they have used every loop hole and side ways around the law that they can, they are one of a couple developers who get to do whatever they want

look at the building they are putting up right now, it's one building divded into two sections with a gap in the middle, someone took them to task for not following zoning rules and went after the town and BGV it wasn't pretty but the person questioning them got their way since the basic rules were ignored

Your grammar makes me want to vomit

[Buster Highmen]

One resort that has stood out in terms of a decent welcoming community, at least from a tourist POV, is Telluride.

One the one hand it's kind of weird since there's so many upscalers there and I know of a few people who tried living there that didn't find it welcoming.

But in my experience, it's been great with a minimal amount of exclusive brobrahmistry.

One thing that T-ride has been on the cutting edge of is affordable housing which, from what little I know, has engendered a bit of friction between the town and the r.e. developers. But I wonder if affordable housing buffers the feeling of resentment for tourists since there's a decent body of people who work the jobs there that can actually afford to live there.

As far as why the tourists should care, maybe most of them are too dull to consider why they would want to go places where there's a vibrant local scene and good vibe.

[sb]

http://snowbrains.com/rocky-mountain...ousing-crisis/

[Benny Profane]

http://snowbrains.com/rocky-mountain...ousing-crisis/

Summit, as has been noted above, is heavily influenced by one of the best economies in the country, Denver and the front range. Fuck, if I lived in Denver, I'd have a little place up there. It's the equivilant of the Jersey Shore or Cape Cod in the east.
The place I rented for a few months the last season is on the long term market now, because you could get probably 3 grand a month for it on an annual or at least six month term. Awesome summer market, too, right on the lake. Man, all of those people who picked up those shitty old condos for nothing in the eighties are sitting on cash machines right now. Kaching.

[PNWbrit]

we're pretty lucky in the PNW to be off the winter tourist radar.
1 resort 1 gondy dead end road

I'm confident we will not have to deal with a rabbit problem in WA.

[Foggy_Goggles]

I don't think anyone has the right to live anywhere. I think publicly funded affordable housing is corporate welfare and I'm opposed. It is always spun that the affordable units benefit the lucky few who get to live there. In reality, the employers get to artificially suppress the wage scale. I'd like to see supply and demand in the labor market drive up the wage scale. Viable public transport would enable lower income workers to affordable commute from the locations with cheaper rent.

[Buster Highmen]

I don't think anyone has the right to live anywhere. I think publicly funded affordable housing is corporate welfare and I'm opposed.

I think you could call it welfare, but I don't understand how you can call it corporate.

It is always spun that the affordable units benefit the lucky few who get to live there. In reality, the employers get to artificially suppress the wage scale. I'd like to see supply and demand in the labor market drive up the wage scale. Viable public transport would enable lower income workers to affordable commute from the locations with cheaper rent.

If supply and demand in some sort of free market worked, wouldn't it have done so by now?

[TahoeJ]

I don't think anyone has the right to live anywhere. I think publicly funded affordable housing is corporate welfare and I'm opposed.

Tell that to people who live in cities where they're having trouble hiring people for basic services. It's also about traffic reduction since you don't want all of your service people driving all the way in and out every day.

[Buster Highmen]

Tell that to people who live in cities where they're having trouble hiring people for basic services. It's also about traffic reduction since you don't want all of your service people driving all the way in and out every day.

Then wouldn't his answer regarding mass transit address the situation?

There's a similar situation for public school teachers in the Seattle area where a lot of them can't afford to live in the communities in which they teach. I think that's a problem and the teachers salaries have not been keeping pace with the increases in cost of living. In this case, for teachers, I do think it's an asset to the community if the teachers can actually live there for a variety of reasons. For instance, being able to stay late and spend time on students rather than commuting as well as letting kids know that education is important.

[Foggy_Goggles]

I think you could call it welfare, but I don't understand how you can call it corporate.


If supply and demand in some sort of free market worked, wouldn't it have done so by now?

Like most things, it is more about the execution than the concept. In the Town of Winter Park, there is a 1% real estate transfer fee on all homes sold. The town then plays realestate developer and builds deed restricted units (something like 3% max annual appreciation and the owner can't lose anymoney).

Two problems. One, If you can't afford owning a home, why should the tax payers defer that expense for you? Second problem, while there are income qualifications, many of these units are purchased by ski area employees and such. Fast forward a few years and they become senior managers or in one instance I know, a realtor. I also know one person who lives here who doesn't even live in the county.

One of the reasons that supply and demand doesn't work in the labor pool is that the ski area, a very large employer, recruits foreigners and young people who don't need to work to pay there bills. In their defense, they do own their own worker housing which I support.

Supply and demand is working in many industries like construction and property maintenance. Some people are too dumb to see it. I know a glass installer that wants to pay $15/hr. and bill out at $80. Guess what, his guys suck and he is loosing business.

[Benny Profane]

I don't think anyone has the right to live anywhere. I think publicly funded affordable housing is corporate welfare and I'm opposed. It is always spun that the affordable units benefit the lucky few who get to live there. In reality, the employers get to artificially suppress the wage scale. I'd like to see supply and demand in the labor market drive up the wage scale. Viable public transport would enable lower income workers to affordable commute from the locations with cheaper rent.

That wouldn't work in Telluride, or a lot of other places in the mountains. Especially Telluride, though. There's no room. Where will they commute from?
There's a few restaraunts closing or going part time in Jackson because they simply get employees to the location.
The free market just doesn't work well in this way. Maybe in NYC, a little, but they have a very well developed and managed public transit system.

[Foggy_Goggles]

Tell that to people who live in cities where they're having trouble hiring people for basic services. It's also about traffic reduction since you don't want all of your service people driving all the way in and out every day.

If municipalities want to provide worker housing for firemans, teachers, cops etc., go for it! They could also just pay them what would enable them to afford a residence. It is a zero sum game for the taxpayers.

[Foggy_Goggles]

That wouldn't work in Telluride, or a lot of other places in the mountains. Especially Telluride, though. There's no room. Where will they commute from?

I get that, and the I70 corridor is probably heading that way. But what is the proper affordable housing mechanism? Rent or own? Deed restricted? Who is going to be the landlord? Why determines who qualifies?

The problem with funding affordable housing with development is that it requires development so the circle continues. If you place the burden on property tax payers you create the challenge of having people who are struggling to afford their own housing deferring the cost of other people's housing.

If the concept is that the employers can't find employees so the business closes and then there are not enough businesses to support the services demanded by the tourists, then we are headed in the right directions. For example: lift X is closed because they don't have enough lifties, customers are pissed. Ski resort can either pay the lifties more or lose customers. Small businesses deal with this everyday, I don't know why these tourist economies think they have a right to exist outside of normal economic principals.

[Danno]

Once California legalized Colorado is fucked

I am guessing that anyone not specifically in the weed business is hoping CA legalizes it. We have definitely seen some detrimental effects of legal weed here, that might be mitigated if a desirable/warm place like CA legalized.

[TahoeJ]

I am guessing that anyone not specifically in the weed business is hoping CA legalizes it. We have definitely seen some detrimental effects of legal weed here, that might be mitigated if a desirable/warm place like CA legalized.

It's basically legal already and has been for the past several years. The consumer impact wouldn't be all that different (I'm sure there'd be some and it would be slightly more open), it's more about the farming.

[Buster Highmen]

Like most things, it is more about the execution than the concept. In the Town of Winter Park, there is a 1% real estate transfer fee on all homes sold. The town then plays realestate developer and builds deed restricted units (something like 3% max annual appreciation and the owner can't lose anymoney).

Two problems. One, If you can't afford owning a home, why should the tax payers defer that expense for you?

Because there's a problem of affordability at the incomes in rural areas around ski areas. The real estate is driven up by rich fucks like me, so shouldn't we pay for some equalization? Again, it's gets back to the quality of the community and making those that do some less well paid work feel a part of the community.

Second problem, while there are income qualifications, many of these units are purchased by ski area employees and such. Fast forward a few years and they become senior managers or in one instance I know, a realtor. I also know one person who lives here who doesn't even live in the county.

Yeah, there's similar fuckups I know of where the housing resource is used up by those no longer in need. I concede that part. But it's kind of throwing the baby out with the bathwater to not have any affordable housing mechanism.

One of the reasons that supply and demand doesn't work in the labor pool is that the ski area, a very large employer, recruits foreigners and young people who don't need to work to pay there bills. In their defense, they do own their own worker housing which I support.

That may be true for some resort employees, but certainly not all resorts. Plus there's folks who do other stuff in the area that get excluded.

Supply and demand is working in many industries like construction and property maintenance. Some people are too dumb to see it. I know a glass installer that wants to pay $15/hr. and bill out at $80. Guess what, his guys suck and he is loosing business.

OK, but it's still failing for some.

If there's not a real problem regarding resort communities, this wouldn't be such a touchy subject. It gets back to distribution of wealth and why education, healthcare and housing are not affordable nationwide. The resort problem is another microcosm.

[Danno]

It's basically legal already and has been for the past several years. The consumer impact wouldn't be all that different, it's more about the farming.

Yeah, I don't think you realize how different it is. We also had "basically legal for several years" before it went to truly legal. There is a huge difference. What I was referring to specifically is that anecdotally, people in my town have seen a large increase in homeless/transients, thinking that slumming it in Colorado where they can smoke legally is a good thing.

It may not be a lot different to you as a CA smoker, you'll still be able to acquire it, albeit slightly easier to do so. But it will be different overall, don't fool yourself.

[MMP]

Go Buffs, touristing This weekend!

[funkendrenchman]

I don't have the answers and I'm not sure there really is a problem. The problem I see from a local political standpoint is that the tourist economy is basically a closed loop. The "economic benefits" i.e. revenue, tax or otherwise, seem like they go back into expanding the tourist economy. The local municipalities have town councils stacked with realtors, developers, and hospitality business owners who all stand to benefit from having it be "busier".

This......

[Buster Highmen]

The problem with funding affordable housing with development is that it requires development so the circle continues. If you place the burden on property tax payers you create the challenge of having people who are struggling to afford their own housing deferring the cost of other people's housing.

I do think that there's a problem with comparative compensation and financial gradients that the free market hasn't fixed. Otherwise this wouldn't be a topic. Part of being in any community is subsidizing because there's always someone who less well off that is doing a necessary job.

If the concept is that the employers can't find employees so the business closes and then there are not enough businesses to support the services demanded by the tourists, then we are headed in the right directions. For example: lift X is closed because they don't have enough lifties, customers are pissed. Ski resort can either pay the lifties more or lose customers. Small businesses deal with this everyday, I don't know why these tourist economies think they have a right to exist outside of normal economic principals.

In our ski market in the PNW, the resort owners can do fuckall what they want because they have a nearly inexhaustable supply of ski hungry hordes. And so the experience degrades with lifts not opening.

[Foggy_Goggles]

If there's not a real problem regarding resort communities, this wouldn't be such a touchy subject. It gets back to distribution of wealth and why education, healthcare and housing are not affordable nationwide. The resort problem is another microcosm.

Agreed, I'm not a public policy expert but are not most taxes a system to redistribute wealth. In my community, the public is currently funding a couple giant projects with a grocery store, retail, with a yet to be defined "community center" and "affordable housing thrown in the mix". At the same time, the library district is closing branches and laying off employees, the schools are always financially challenged (teacher turnover due to wages being a big problem) and county department are under a spending freeze with a reduction of non-essential services.

From a community benefit standpoint, how about viable public transport, affordable childcare, latchkey programs to help working parents who have night and weekend shifts, expanding the school bus program, adult education to help resident gain skills for higher paying jobs. The list goes on. The reality is that affordable housing programs benefit very few low wage earners. It just isn't working. I can only speak to what I know and other places may be very different.

[TahoeJ]

Yeah, I don't think you realize how different it is. We also had "basically legal for several years" before it went to truly legal. There is a huge difference. What I was referring to specifically is that anecdotally, people in my town have seen a large increase in homeless/transients, thinking that slumming it in Colorado where they can smoke legally is a good thing.

It may not be a lot different to you as a CA smoker, you'll still be able to acquire it, albeit slightly easier to do so. But it will be different overall, don't fool yourself.

For sure, but I think the impact will be less since a lot of those types already fled to WA and CO for the reasons you mentioned. It won't be quite as novel or new since there are already several states / options.

[stuckathuntermtn]

I wonder if all the pretty little white girls with "Native" stickers appreciate the least bit of irony in that.
Stucky out.

[Buster Highmen]

Agreed, I'm not a public policy expert but are not most taxes a system to redistribute wealth. In my community, the public is currently funding a couple giant projects with a grocery store, retail, with a yet to be defined "community center" and "affordable housing thrown in the mix". At the same time, the library district is closing branches and laying off employees, the schools are always financially challenged (teacher turnover due to wages being a big problem) and county department are under a spending freeze with a reduction of non-essential services.

From a community benefit standpoint, how about viable public transport, affordable childcare, latchkey programs to help working parents who have night and weekend shifts, expanding the school bus program, adult education to help resident gain skills for higher paying jobs. The list goes on. The reality is that affordable housing programs benefit very few low wage earners. It just isn't working. I can only speak to what I know and other places may be very different.

In your context, it does read like there's more pressing needs for money for basic stuff like schools, libraries, etc.

But in T-ride, the way it works is that the funding for affordable housing comes from developments over x amount. So the funding stream is different from normal taxes.

I question public funding of private businesses be they malls or sports arenas.

[Name Redacted]

Deed restricted housing is a great way to keep the poor in their place. Never gain any equity, oh and pay a shitload in pmi too!