Implementation Could Take DecadesMOUNTAIN VILLAGE – Nearly two years after Mountain Village began a concerted effort to create its own future reality by means of its first comprehensive planning process, it reached a milestone on Thursday when Town Council gave a nod to the direction of a long-awaited draft policy plan.
The draft Mountain Village Comprehensive Plan, the fruit of untold hours of effort by a 15-member task force (made up of full- and part-time residents, second homeowners and business representatives in Mountain Village) and consultant teams from AECOM and Economic and Planning Systems, explores upzoning certain active open space and single family parcels to ultimately achieve community goals of economic vitality and workforce housing.
“Council basically blessed the process to continue on, knowing that there are additional steps that have to be taken,” said Community Development Director Chris Hawkins.
As a result, “we have the ability to really get the process dialed in and to set a direct path now,” he continued. “From this point out it will be really clear in terms of the steps we have to take.”
Originally conceived of as the “15-Year Plan,” the draft plan now doubles that timeframe to envision the community 30 years from now.
“What you’re talking about isn’t going to happen tomorrow,” said Mayor Bob Delves.
Instead, it’s about, “What does Mountain Village look like when our kids and grandkids are living here?”
The plan is borne out of a series of vision statements generated through community input and adopted by council last summer that specified the goals of increased economic vitality, affordable housing and public amenities, while protecting the open space, view corridors and quality of life beloved by Mountain Village residents and visitors alike.
To achieve that vital mix, the draft plan direction preferred by council allows for increased density in five subareas that provide the greatest opportunity for infill and redevelopment.
Land use models predicated on current zoning don’t generate enough economic activity to be sustainable, while the ski area itself could not handle the 1.1 million skier visits projected by a model that attempts to duplicate the number of visitors and retail performance seen at larger destination ski resorts.
“I’ll tell you right now that the Telluride Ski Resort cannot handle one million skier visits,” said Telluride Ski and Golf Co. Chief Executive Officer and plan taskforce member Dave Riley.
“We just don’t have the acreage.”
Although tested for environmental feasibility, economic sustainability, and overall character, the subareas are not specific development plans, but instead represent possible scenarios. They include: the Mountain Village Center, Town Hall Plaza, the Meadows, Prospect Flats and Boomerang areas.
The Mountain Village Center is envisioned as a place for additional short-term rentals or hotbeds, a flagship hotel and conference facilities that will provide year-round amenities, as well as new commercial and retail space. The goal at Town Hall Plaza would be to enhance the site as a hub for locals’ and visitors’ daily needs, adding additional community services such as a recreation or medical center and potentially ski instruction, and employee housing.
Task Force Chairman John Horn suggested that the unfinished parking structure there could potentially house a recreation center.
“It would be something that sets us apart from every other resort area in the nation,” he said.
With strategic development and redevelopment the Meadows area could better serve the full-time population living there with the addition of workforce housing and space for services such as day care or education and offices, AECOM consultant Nancy Locke told council.
But council hesitated on the idea of non-residential uses there.
“Every time we had commercial down there we ended up with complications,” said Councilmember Dan Garner, explaining that parking meant for residents was often taken by commercial users. “We should not encourage any more commercial development down there and stay true to residential.”
The Prospect Flats area offers an opportunity to significantly increase the town’s inventory of workforce housing, while Boomerang, located on the ski run but hidden from most views, could inject badly needed short-term rentals into the Mountain Village lodging mix and new retail space, to offer, “not just more hotbeds but really great development opportunities,” said Locke.
But making allowance for change doesn’t necessarily mean it will happen.
“We’re enabling land use to support a future,” said Delves. “But it doesn’t guarantee that future will play out,” he continued, cautioning that ultimately the free market will determine what does and does not get built.
While the task force will take a two-month break from the planning process, the consultants and staff will continue refining the plan with additional studies, as well as begin meeting with other entities whose participation will be critical to the end result, such as San Miguel County, the town’s Open Space and Recreation Advisory Board, and private stakeholders.
Hawkins estimated that a final draft of the plan could be complete during the first half of next year.
Still, “it’s based on the private sector,” he warned.
Given the economy and the tight lending market that has halted large development projects, “it could take decades to implement,” he said.
What country in the world offers affirmative action, govt subsidies, etc. for these oppressed races?
Crying teabagger racist all the time shows the limit of your arguments which are basically rants.
Gambling profits...
Cheap alcohol....
Government subsidies...
If any of them wanted to return to the land, why havent they?
Same with the descendants of slavery....not a single African nation has anywhere near our lowest quality of life....
Look at Obama's half brother, living in a roofless hut
Stolen from the Utes, that is...
$100 lift tickets aint it.
$600 per night at Capella, aint it.
Riley is right in that we need more hotels but he wont help with lower pass costs. He wants to build the beds on lower zoning burdens, increased public subsidy and the like.
Why is it that we hire these 'consultants"?
Take the VF for example-250k for a bunch of outsiders to tell us how to run our stolen land...
I agree with Dave Riley in that this mountain probably couldn't handle 1.1 million skier visits. Maybe, with some sort of serious mitigation plan to address safety ... especially at bottlenecks and during peak times in the day.
I believe the big reason for this is the fact that primary egress occurs on what is a relatively narrow ridge line which starts at the top terminal of the Revelation lift (or God knows, maybe a surface lift at this point) and then feeds the masses onto t-trail to get into town if you're a beginner, intermediate/advanced, or just don't want to take Stumper or Riley's into town.
The trick would probably be to get as many people into the MV as possible and promote the use of the gondola and downloading into town at the end of the day. As far as starting the day and lift lines in general, I'm sure it'd simply just resemble Vail a lot more ... although I've noticed it's getting pretty bad here over the past couple of years on powder days when a giant herd of people are released onto the mountain in a limited manner, and keep on migrating to the "next lift" which opens in sequence. For instance, a lot of times I'll stick around lift 9 when a gazillion people race over to the Gold Hill lift. Early season when new terrain is getting opened seems to amplify this phenomenom. It would only get worse with greater usage.
I think there's still some headroom left; however, at some point I believe there would be an issue. It's kind of funny that the maximum capacity of the mountain has never really been officially discussed or debated in the public spotlight. It's interesting because it's a VERY IMPORTANT number ... for a lot of reasons ... but mostly that everything kind of flows from that point & you can work backwards and see what follows in terms of marketing plans.
Nothing stops the crack pot scheme of expand or die in this country...this economy is like a cancer cell-growth no matter what.
Riley, can you not make money at this existing level or do you need a hand with everything but prices? One thing for sure, we will not get 1.1 million visitors at $100 per ticket-what was it that you said, "low density, high yield"?