Breckenridge officials support accessory housing units in the city’s track district, but staff members say that this could create accessibility problems

The Breckenridge Breckenridge district has just started and elected officials have recently been responsible for determining what role, if necessary, the accessory housing units should play.

Although no official vote took place during a Tuesday, August 12, the meeting of the Breckenridge municipal council, a large part of the council expressed the desire to see the inclusion of an infrastructure ready for the accessory unit in what the civil servants judged the last major district of the housing of the city’s workforce.

About 27 single -family houses out of the 81 dwellings in the first phase of the track district could have accessories housing units. Proposed for the first time as a two -phase project with approximately 148 units, the elected officials decided to engage only in the first phase with around $ 34.6 million subsidy in the city instead of engaging in the two phases at around 50 million dollars due to economic uncertainty.

Staff members recommend an “accessory home ready for unit” model, in which “shells” are built and equipped with infrastructure to become accessory housing units, but are not entirely built. They said there was a possibility of potential grant to encourage buyers to develop them who are always explored by staff.

Officials previously discussed how units could give the city the opportunity to add more rental units for local workforce and provide the owner of the single-family house with the possibility of receiving additional income by invoicing the rent. Some were in favor of them and an obligation to have them praised, while others estimated that the city should not force the owners to be owners.

Estimates build accessories housing units at $ 120,000 per unit, and construction costs and public service license costs are expected to reach $ 30,000 per unit. Officials discussed the price difference of around $ 800,000, considering 27 eligible houses and $ 30,000 per unit for public services and permits, between the accommodation units fully built compared to the shells.

A memo for the staff for the meeting of August 14 details the staff members believe that it would reduce the basin of qualified buyers and “would then create problems with long -term affordability”.

“We really couldn’t feel good at the cost of a million dollars in a five -bedroom and restricted house,” said Melanie Leas, director of the housing project.

She said that adding accessory housing units could delete the possibility for owners to add value over time thanks to their own investment. Mayor Kelly Owens asked whether the owners responsible for the construction of accessory housing units could resume some of the expenses during a resale. Staff members said they thought there would be opportunities for this.

Some advice thought that, despite the price increase, the addition was worth it.

“The flat land at the bottom of the valley is limited, and 47% of our workforce living in the valley as an objective that we currently have, I think without (accessory housing units), the project is about six units per acre, which, for me, is a little low,” said Todd Rankin, member of the Council. He wanted to see at least some of the entirely constructed accessory units.

“Who pays for that?” Leas asked, wondering if he offered to add $ 150,000 to the price of units for buyers.

Rankin suggested adding a light restriction with fewer requirements concerning income levels and prices as opposed to a complete restriction of acts, adding that it was flexible.

“Flexible, but someone has to pay for this,” said housing director Laurie Best.

Owens has interrupted and said that this case “would get rid of the process.

The member of the council, Jay Beckerman, said that he previously thought that there were ineffectiveness with the Shell model to have units being of the accessory unit ready to have them. He asked the staff if the owners would be responsible for ensuring that the units are connected to public services such as water or the heating installation themselves, or if they buy the house and the following unit with the elements included.

The team behind the project replied that it would depend if the units were attached to the houses or not. Detached units would require a different process to connect to a heat source and other public services, as opposed to attached units. Staff members said that the units detached in general would be more expensive than attached.

Beckerman said that he did not know that certain accessory dwellings would be attached to the unifamilial houses while others will not be, and would be wary of the impact of the overall cost of the project and the authorization process.

He said he wanted to see at least half built, but said it would be very advantageous for the owners to have them all fully built.

The board member, Dick Carleton, supported the Shell model and liked the idea of a subsidy to encourage the owners.

The members of the Carol Saade and Marika Page council declared that they appreciated the consideration of the staff members of what the inclusion of the accessory housing units would make buyers prices, but that they ultimately support the Shell model. The member of the Steve Gerard council also supports the Shell model.