Colorado mountain town authorizes major development despite vocal public outcry

After a contentious second meeting, the Dillon Town Council voted 4-2 in favor of plans for a new "branded residence" development located along 626 Lake Dillon Drive in Colorado's mountains.

While there were folks both in support of the development and against it that night, those in opposition to the plan were the vast majority, with enough people crammed into the town council meeting room that people were left standing and sitting on the floor.

Part of that seems to be because of where the construction is planned to go; one of the most valuable spots in town, right along the lake, across the street from the Dillon Amphitheater, stretching into downtown and a short walk from the marina. The former A-Cafe is also being cleared from the property along with the Best Western. There's also the size of the building.

The plan itself showcases the location, 200 beds, proposed traffic impact, height, efforts taken to address concerns with the skyline and view of the water from town and details the retail opportunities for three businesses -- the developer named a spa as a likely option.

Those 200 residences would be owned by someone but then rented out by a major hospitality corporation as a short-term rental most of the year. The owner would get 90 days unless they were willing to pay an additional tax on the property.

The developer, Jake Porritt, said on Tuesday that he and his team had been hard at work to get the project up to speed so they can begin work, should they get approved, and that they are proud of the adjustments they had made to try to appease the concerns brought up by the public about the project, like trying to add a tower that matches the town aesthetic, which he insisted they did not have to do, but were willing to gift the town.

"We don't need towers, we have mountains," Dillon resident John Gillian said during public comment. "We are entrusted with the development of one of the best places on Earth."

"Let's be sure we get this one right," he continued.

Part of Gillian's concern, along with other members of the public, stemmed from the stalled construction project just up the street nicknamed "Uptown 240," which Porritt's group has now taken over after its original owners bankrupted on the project.

Gillan said, "I would love you to finish that one!"

Porritt explained that an estimated 75% of tax revenue for the funding of these projects is expected to be generated from the 626 Lake Dillon Drive project, and that's why it needs to be completed first, to get the money for the rest of the projects.

Bethany Pava, who lives just outside Dillon in Summit County, said she believes that the plan is missing a crucial step: affordable housing for locals who could be asked to work in the buildings and shops created.

"That can't be something that comes later," Pava said, while suggesting affordable housing be a part of the development promise. "There are already people that are living in their cars, that are sleeping on couches, that don't have homes to sleep in at night and that's crazy." 

Porritt said later in the meeting while they were looking at doing some affordable housing on the currently stalled project up the road, this particular project simply will not include that, and it's not their responsibility to figure that part out. 

"We have confidence we have people willing to travel to fill the positions we need filled," Porritt said when questioned where the workforce for the development would come from.

Another member of the public stood up after hearing a lone dissenting opinion, saying he too agreed the development would be good for Dillon and that something had to change with the town, as it's overlooked by both locals and tourists compared to other mountain towns within Summit County.

After going over the specifics of the plan and proposing stipulations for the developer, like making sure he can prove they have the money to build when the time comes and making sure to try and save the Arapahoe Cafe if possible the council came to a vote.

Porritt has said several times he is happy to do what the public wants with A-Cafe, so long as it doesn't get in the way of the new building. He does, however, have concerns that trying to move it might crumble the entire structure regardless of intent because of its age.

Porritt left with approval for the project, and many members of the public who came to speak that night hoping to sway the vote of the council left feeling disappointed and unheard.