HomeMy Public PortalAboutTBP 2022-08-17Board of Trustees
Regular Meeting Agenda
Fraser Town Hall, 153 Fraser Avenue and Virtually
Wednesday August 17, 2022
6:00 PM - 9:00 PM
Members of the Board may have dinner together @ 5:30
p.m.
NOTE: Times are approximate and agenda subject to
change
Watch the meeting live on Fraser's YouTube
Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs5aHnl7d -kk0j1cxV28DSg
Participate in the meeting through our virtual platform
Zoom Meeting Information
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/2590408013
Meeting ID:259 040 8013
Phone 1 -346 -248 -7799
Workshop - 2023 Budget Priorities
Roll Call
Approval Of Agenda
Consent Agenda
Minutes August 3, 2022
TBM 2022 -08 -03.Pdf
Sign In Sheet August 3, 2022.Pdf
David Buckley Candidate For Colorado House District 13
Lindsey Morrow Grand County Tourism Board Suitability Study
Discussion And Possible Action Regarding
Treasurer's Report - Rob
Treasurers Report 081722.Pdf
Industrial Pretreatment Program - Joe
Retention And Cost Of Living Adjustment Plan - Rob
TBM MEMO Bonus And COLA.pdf
Housing Needs Assessment Recap - Michael
Fraser River Valley Housing Needs Study Presentation For Town Board
Meeting.pdf
FraserRiverValley_Housing Needs Assessment Final.pdf
Resolution 2022 -08 -02 Approving Housing Needs Assessment And
Legal Expenditures - Michael
Resolution 2022 -08 -02 Approving Housing Needs Assessment And Legal
Expenditures.pdf
Ordinance 488 Short Term Rental Registration Fees - Michael
STR Registration Fees Staff Briefing (Updated).Pdf
Ordinance No. 488 - Short Term Registration Fees V3.Pdf
STR Ordinace Matrix.pdf
STR Correspondance.pdf
Town Of Fraser Organization Chart
Aug 3 2022 Org Change Staff Memo.pdf
Org Chart .Pdf
Open Forum
a) Business not on the agenda (If you would like to request time on a future
agenda please contact the Town Clerk)
Updates
Adjourn
UPCOMING MEETING
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2022 BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Please contact the Town Clerk to request accommodations to assist people with
disabilities to participate in public meetings. Listening devices for people with
hearing impairment are available upon request.
Town Clerk, Antoinette McVeigh 970 -531 -9943 or amcveigh@town.fraser.co.us
1.6:00 P.M.
2.7:00 P.M.
3.
4.
a.
Documents:
5.
6.
7.
a.
Documents:
b.
c.
Documents:
d.
Documents:
e.
Documents:
f.
Documents:
g.
Documents:
8.
9.
10.
Board Staff
Direct : Define the service, product or value
to be delivered
Lead : Future focused planning
Protect : Establish the operational
boundaries to be respected by Staff and
monitored by the Board
Manage : Now focused policy and procedural
guidance to ensure on time, on budget, and on
target service delivery
Enable : Advocacy, resource development,
and role discipline
Accomplish : Ensure the work defined by the
direction of the Board of Trustees is accomplished
Board of Trustees Regular Meeting Agenda Fraser Town Hall, 153 Fraser Avenue and Virtually Wednesday August 17, 2022 6:00 PM - 9:00 PM Members of the Board may have dinner together @ 5:30 p.m. NOTE: Times are approximate and agenda subject to change Watch the meeting live on Fraser's YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs5aHnl7d -kk0j1cxV28DSg Participate in the meeting through our virtual platform Zoom Meeting Informationhttps://us02web.zoom.us/j/2590408013 Meeting ID:259 040 8013 Phone 1 -346 -248 -7799Workshop - 2023 Budget PrioritiesRoll CallApproval Of AgendaConsent AgendaMinutes August 3, 2022TBM 2022 -08 -03.PdfSign In Sheet August 3, 2022.PdfDavid Buckley Candidate For Colorado House District 13Lindsey Morrow Grand County Tourism Board Suitability StudyDiscussion And Possible Action Regarding
Treasurer's Report - Rob
Treasurers Report 081722.Pdf
Industrial Pretreatment Program - Joe
Retention And Cost Of Living Adjustment Plan - Rob
TBM MEMO Bonus And COLA.pdf
Housing Needs Assessment Recap - Michael
Fraser River Valley Housing Needs Study Presentation For Town Board
Meeting.pdf
FraserRiverValley_Housing Needs Assessment Final.pdf
Resolution 2022 -08 -02 Approving Housing Needs Assessment And
Legal Expenditures - Michael
Resolution 2022 -08 -02 Approving Housing Needs Assessment And Legal
Expenditures.pdf
Ordinance 488 Short Term Rental Registration Fees - Michael
STR Registration Fees Staff Briefing (Updated).Pdf
Ordinance No. 488 - Short Term Registration Fees V3.Pdf
STR Ordinace Matrix.pdf
STR Correspondance.pdf
Town Of Fraser Organization Chart
Aug 3 2022 Org Change Staff Memo.pdf
Org Chart .Pdf
Open Forum
a) Business not on the agenda (If you would like to request time on a future
agenda please contact the Town Clerk)
Updates
Adjourn
UPCOMING MEETING
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2022 BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Please contact the Town Clerk to request accommodations to assist people with
disabilities to participate in public meetings. Listening devices for people with
hearing impairment are available upon request.
Town Clerk, Antoinette McVeigh 970 -531 -9943 or amcveigh@town.fraser.co.us
1.6:00 P.M.2.7:00 P.M.3.4.a.Documents:5.6.7.
a.
Documents:
b.
c.
Documents:
d.
Documents:
e.
Documents:
f.
Documents:
g.
Documents:
8.
9.
10.
Board Staff
Direct : Define the service, product or value
to be delivered
Lead : Future focused planning
Protect : Establish the operational
boundaries to be respected by Staff and
monitored by the Board
Manage : Now focused policy and procedural
guidance to ensure on time, on budget, and on
target service delivery
Enable : Advocacy, resource development,
and role discipline
Accomplish : Ensure the work defined by the
direction of the Board of Trustees is accomplished
Board of Trustees Regular Meeting Agenda Fraser Town Hall, 153 Fraser Avenue and Virtually Wednesday August 17, 2022 6:00 PM - 9:00 PM Members of the Board may have dinner together @ 5:30 p.m. NOTE: Times are approximate and agenda subject to change Watch the meeting live on Fraser's YouTube Channel https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCs5aHnl7d -kk0j1cxV28DSg Participate in the meeting through our virtual platform Zoom Meeting Informationhttps://us02web.zoom.us/j/2590408013 Meeting ID:259 040 8013 Phone 1 -346 -248 -7799Workshop - 2023 Budget PrioritiesRoll CallApproval Of AgendaConsent AgendaMinutes August 3, 2022TBM 2022 -08 -03.PdfSign In Sheet August 3, 2022.PdfDavid Buckley Candidate For Colorado House District 13Lindsey Morrow Grand County Tourism Board Suitability StudyDiscussion And Possible Action RegardingTreasurer's Report - RobTreasurers Report 081722.PdfIndustrial Pretreatment Program - JoeRetention And Cost Of Living Adjustment Plan - RobTBM MEMO Bonus And COLA.pdfHousing Needs Assessment Recap - MichaelFraser River Valley Housing Needs Study Presentation For Town Board Meeting.pdfFraserRiverValley_Housing Needs Assessment Final.pdfResolution 2022 -08 -02 Approving Housing Needs Assessment And Legal Expenditures - MichaelResolution 2022 -08 -02 Approving Housing Needs Assessment And Legal Expenditures.pdfOrdinance 488 Short Term Rental Registration Fees - MichaelSTR Registration Fees Staff Briefing (Updated).PdfOrdinance No. 488 - Short Term Registration Fees V3.PdfSTR Ordinace Matrix.pdfSTR Correspondance.pdfTown Of Fraser Organization ChartAug 3 2022 Org Change Staff Memo.pdfOrg Chart .PdfOpen Foruma) Business not on the agenda (If you would like to request time on a future agenda please contact the Town Clerk)UpdatesAdjourn
UPCOMING MEETING
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 7, 2022 BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Please contact the Town Clerk to request accommodations to assist people with
disabilities to participate in public meetings. Listening devices for people with
hearing impairment are available upon request.
Town Clerk, Antoinette McVeigh 970 -531 -9943 or amcveigh@town.fraser.co.us
1.6:00 P.M.2.7:00 P.M.3.4.a.Documents:5.6.7.a.Documents:b.c.Documents:d.Documents:e.Documents:f.Documents:g.Documents:8.9.10.
Board Staff
Direct : Define the service, product or value
to be delivered
Lead : Future focused planning
Protect : Establish the operational
boundaries to be respected by Staff and
monitored by the Board
Manage : Now focused policy and procedural
guidance to ensure on time, on budget, and on
target service delivery
Enable : Advocacy, resource development,
and role discipline
Accomplish : Ensure the work defined by the
direction of the Board of Trustees is accomplished
FRASER BOARD OF TRUSTEES
MINUTES
DATE:August 3, 2022
MEETING:Board of Trustees Regular Meeting
PLACE:Fraser Town Hall Board Room and Virtually
PRESENT
Board:Mayor Philip Vandernail; Mayor Pro-Tem Eileen Waldow; Trustees;
Brian Cerkvenik, Kaydee Fisher, Lewis Gregory, Parnell Quinn and
Katie Soles
Staff:Town Manager, Ed Cannon; Town Clerk, Antoinette McVeigh;
Assistant Town Manager, Michael Brack; Finance Director, Rob
Clemens; Wastewater Superintendent, Joe Fuqua; Police Chief
Glen Trainor
Others:See attached list
Mayor Vandernail called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
1.Rollcall: Mayor Philip Vandernail; Mayor Pro-Tem Eileen Waldow; Trustees;
Brian Cerkvenik, Kaydee Fisher, Lewis Gregory, Parnell Quinn and Katie Soles
2.Approval of Agenda:
Trustee Waldow moved, and Trustee Cerkvenik seconded the motion to
approve the agenda. Motion carried: 7-0.
3.Consent Agenda:
a)Minutes July 6, 2022
b)Minutes July 20, 2022
Trustee Waldow moved, and Trustee Quinn seconded the motion to approve the
consent agenda. Motion carried: 7-0.
4.Discussion and Possible Action:
a)2021 Audit
Paul Backes with McMahan and Associates, LLC presented to the 2021 Audit.
b)Ordinance No. 488 - Short Term Registration Fees
Page 2 of 3
Staff will work on proposed changes and will present an amended Ordinance at
the next meeting.
c)Retention And Cost of Living Adjustment Plan
Staff will work on different options for the retention and cost of living adjustment
and present these at the next meeting.
d)Resolution 2022-08-01 Adopting Wastewater Collection System Master
Plan
Trustee Soles moved, and Trustee Gregory seconded the motion to approve
Resolution 2022-08-01 Adopting Wastewater Collection System Master Plan.
Motion carried: 7-0.
The Board called an emergency Executive Session to order to discuss the
Financial Analysis Proposal for Metropolitan District Amendment.
f)Executive Session:
For a conference with the Town Attorney for the purpose of receiving legal advice
on specific legal questions under C.R.S. Section 24-6-402(4)(b) regarding the
Metro District Amendment including Town Manager Ed Cannon and Town
Attorney Kent Whitmer.
Trustee Quinn moved, and Trustee Cerkvenik seconded the motion to open the
executive session regarding the Metro District Amendment Motion carried 7-0.
Trustee Quinn moved, and Trustee Cerkvenik seconded the motion to close the
executive session regarding the Metro District Amendment. Motion carried 7-0.
Attorney’s Opinion Required by C.R.S. 24-6-402(2)(d.5)(II)(B).
As the attorney representing the Town of Fraser, I am of the opinion that the
entire executive session, which was not recorded, constituted a privileged
attorney-client communication.
_______________________________
Kent Whitmer, Town Attorney
e)Financial Analysis Proposal for Metropolitan District Amendment
Trustee Quinn moved, and Trustee Soles seconded the motion to approve
Municipal Markets Group Inc. proposal for the Financial Analysis Proposal for
Metropolitan District Amendment. Motion carried: 7-0.
Page 3 of 3
5. Open Forum:
a) Darren Lomorande, Short Term Rental Comments
6.Updates
a) Colorado Municipal League Annual Conference Update
b)TM Ed Cannon, First Amendment Rights, Emergency Interconnects
c)Trustee Gregory, Move Public Comment to the beginning of the meeting.
d)Trustee Waldow, by 2026 Recycling will be part of the producer’s cost, In
2024 single use plastic bags will be banned in Colorado.
e)Trustee Cerkvenik, TAC proposed the 2022 winter routes.
f)Trustee Soles, Move Public Comment to the beginning of the meeting.
g)Trustee Fisher, Town of Fraser employee housing options, what is happening
with the Market Street buildings?
7.Adjourn:
Trustee Soles moved, and Trustee Gregory seconded the motion to adjourn.
Motion carried: 7-0. Meeting adjourned at 8:59 p.m.
_____________________________
Antoinette McVeigh, Town Clerk
TOWN BOARD REGULAR MEETING
REGISTRATION SHEET
AUGUST 3, 2022
The Public Forum is an opportunity for the public to present their concerns and recommendations regarding Town Government issues to
the Town Board. Those wishing to address the Town Board will be allowed a five-minute presentation. A maximum of six (6) people will
be allowed to address the Town Board at each Public Forum. If a topic that you wish to discuss has been scheduled for a formal Town
Board Meeting, we would ask that you reserve your remarks for that specific date and time. Topics that are in litigation with the Town will
not,beheard during this forum. All presenters are urged to: (1) state the concern; and (2) list possible solutions. Please keep the
following guidelines in mind:
Remarks that discriminate against anyone or adversely reflect upon the race, color, ancestry, religious creed, national origin, political
affiliation, disability, sex, or marital status of any person are out of order and may end the speaker's privilege to address the Board.
Defamatory or abusive remarks or profanity are out of order and will not be tolerated.
Anyone attending Town Board meetings must sign in to ensure accurate records and minutes. Sign your name, address, and email on
the sign in sheet. Thank you for your cooperation.
NAME
PHYSICAL ADDRESS
EMAIL
t Car)
7
Treasurer’s Report
ROB CLEMENS
FINANCE DIRECTOR
Overview
Statement of Funds
Sales Tax Revenue
2022 GF Reserves & Operations Positions
20,000,000
S19,500,000
1,000,000
1 ,.500,000
1,000,000
X17,500,000
$17,000 000
$1.0,500,000
10,000,000
15500,000
1.5000,000
■ 2022 GF Reserves 2022 GF Ops
Sales Tax evenue +v Month 2.1: -222
700,000
600,000
50Q000
40Q000
300,000
20Q000
100,000
0
2019
2018
Review and Looking Forward
Questions?
MEMO TO: Mayor Vandernail and the Board of Trustees
FROM: Rob Clemens, Finance Director
DATE: 08/09/2022
SUBJECT: Retention Bonus and COLA Request, continued from 08/03/22 meeting
MATTER BEFORE BOARD:
The Budgeted salaries and benefits across the 2022 funds are projecting an 8% surplus
($192,810) by year end. This surplus is largely due to staffing vacancies. These vacancies
required long term employees to cover roles, positions, and shifts beyond their regular job
descriptions. The successful use of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to recruit new
employees has helped fill most of these vacancies but has created inequity for the long-term
employees who put in the extra time and energy to keep the infrastructure running. This inequity
has been compounded by the persistent Consumer Price Index (CPI) ranging from 7-9.1% that
has eroded the value of the January wage increase. Therefore, the Town would like the Board
to consider implementation of retention bonuses in line with the recruitment bonuses and
consider a Cost of Living Adjustment (COLA) to help employees withstand current inflation
pressure.
ACTION REQUESTED:
This request requires a Board motion because it includes approving use of Grant funds and
because it could involve shifting General Fund dollars into other funds.
Motion to approve one of the options below:
1) Use a combination of ARPA and General Fund dollars to provide retention bonuses for
all employees who have been with the Town of Fraser for at least one year.
2) Use a combination of ARPA and General Fund dollar to provide retention bonuses for
employees who have been with the Town of Fraser for at least one year and have a Job
Grade 600 or below.
3) Use a combination of ARPA and General Fund dollar to provide retention bonuses for
employees who have been with the Town of Fraser for at least one year and have a Job
Grade 600 or below. Allow $28,000 of the $70,000 in additional General Fund
compensation savings to cover a COLA increase (3-5%) for employees Job Grade 500
or below.
BACKGROUND:
Long-term employees of the Town of Faser received a 9% increase in wages at the beginning of
2022. 4% was based on merit while 5% was tied to a COLA. With CPI growing from 7% to 9%
in the first half of 2022, the value of that raise has been to keep pace with overall inflation,
assuming the CPI in the Fraser Valley is not higher than overall average inflation. Since
housing, food, and energy costs in the Fraser Valley have exceeded the national averages, the
resulting erosion of the wage increase has led to at least three employees experiencing housing
insecurity or displacement. The decision to move farther outside Fraser for more affordable
options is also eroded by the 60% year over year increase in motor fuel
(https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/year.htm).
The town received approximately $332,000 in ARPA funds to use to recruit hard to fill positions,
support businesses impacted by the pandemic, and retain essential workers. $86,000 in ARPA
funds have been used or are projected to be used to recruit new employees. These funds have
been used for signing bonuses, relocation assistance, and temporary housing assistance to
recruit hard to fill positions critical for providing public services. There were nine vacancies in
May 2022 and only three remain at this time. $70,000 in ARPA funds were used to help Grand
Kids and KFFR cover cash flow shortages during the pandemic. There are approximately
$176,000 in remaining ARPA funds that we would like to spend down by June 30, 2023.
Awarding one-time Retention Bonuses to the essential workers who maintained service levels in
the face of 40% shift level shortages aligns with the ARPA objectives and Town priorities.
Some positions are essential for the Town to operate, but do not meet the ARPA definition of
essential workers. Therefore, utilization of up to $22,000 of the $102,558 in General Fund
dollars would provide equitable retention bonuses to those long-term employees not covered by
ARPA funds. This aligns with past Town initiatives around compensation.
The competition for workforce has grown in the Fraser Valley as seen by signing bonuses
ranging from $4000-$10,000. The cost to replace one employee is at least $20,000 when
including overtime, signing bonuses, relocation costs, opportunity costs to conduct the hiring
process, and training costs for new hires. This process can take six months to a year before you
consider a position “replaced.”
The budget and economic risks to the Town of Fraser need to be balanced with the staffing and
culture risks. The opportunity to invest in the 19 long-term employees and 9 new hires will go a
long way in helping establish a strong culture after an extended period of transition.
ALTERNATIVES:
The honest alternatives tend to fall along the spectrum of balancing budget and economic risks
versus staffing risks. Using General Fund savings from this year to increase carry forward for
next year may provide a buffer against potential declines in sales tax revenue. The overall
impact of a $200,000 buffer on a $3M line item may not provide much budget security to offset
potential turnover risks.
Delaying COLA increases to wages until the end of the fiscal year could reduce budget impacts
if inflation declines. If inflation persists, then it will require a larger COLA increase in January to
maintain the same impacts. Pulling a beginning of year COLA into the prior year mitigates the
need for a big COLA change. Adjusting wage increase percentages across Job Grades can limit
some of the budget risk while securing funds for employees feeling the greatest impact. The
actual budget impact depends on the Job Grade and number of employees excluded.
Bonuses in lieu of wage increases do not contribute to wage inflation. Bonuses tied to specific
metrics tend to be most effective drivers of targeted performance. Such a structure is not in
place for the Town of Fraser. ARPA funds could be used to set up a bonus structure in 2023
prior to expiration of the program.
On the downside, bonuses do not help employees budget for major surges in housing
expenses. Also, employees who have worked in the ski industry are a bit jaded on bonus
promises that are not realized.
Creating emergency funds within the budget to help with employee housing or other hardships
could mitigate the need for broader wage increases, but also create other equity and
implementation issues.
RECOMMENDATION:
Employee survey data from May showed that majority of employees like their jobs and working
for the Town of Fraser. Employee and Board survey data highlight staffing levels as a critical
challenge for the Town of Fraser. Part of this is the competitive landscape for hiring in the
Fraser Valley. Another component is the limited housing options combined with the high cost of
living. As Finance Director and Human Resources, I recommend the value offered by Motion
option #3.
Fraser River Valley
Housing Needs Assessment Findings
August 2022
The Purpose of the Report
The report identifies current and future housing demand, specific to local workforce.
GRANBY
FRASER
WINTER
PARK Housing is affordable when the monthly payment is equal to no more than
30% of a household’s gross income (i.e., income before taxes).
•Inform housing policies, priorities, and developments;
•Educate about the housing issues that affect the local workforce
and employers; and
•Support access to financing for projects and programs.
Report Overview
Demographics &
Economics Housing Costs &
Availability
Housing ChallengesHousing Programs &
Accomplishments Housing Demand
Analysis
Recommendations &
Next Steps
Capital Gap Return On
Investment
Process
Site Visits Employer/Stakeholder
Interviews
Data Analysis
Property Manager/Realtor
Focus Group
Community Meeting
and Final Report
Local Guidance
Construction is not keeping
up with the production of
jobs and the demand for
worker housing.
Lack of housing inventory, many
developments are in the pipeline
most of these homes are at price
points for second homeowners.
The Fraser Valley
Housing Landscape
There is a shortage of long-
term rentals and surplus of
short-term rentals.
Market rate housing is out of
reach for local workers in both
the rental and for sale
markets.
For -Sale Market
Average sale price per
finished square foot
2020 2021 2022
$395
$498
$592
Additional barriers
for local prospective
homebuyers:
•HOA fees
•Cash offers
•Bidding wars
Rental Market
2022 Conditions
•Low Vacancy (1.6%)
•High demand, low supply
•Dramatic increases in asking rents
•Greatest need: 1 Bedroom Units
Average Asking Rents
•$1,600 –1 bedroom
•$2,700 –2 bedroom
•$4,500 –3 bedroom
Loss of Housing
5
9% of renters
in Grand County had been
displaced due to long-term
rental conversions to
short-term rentals.
78% of homebuyers
in Grand County were from out of
town in 2021. Remote workers or
“Zoom Boomers” are moving into
the County at higher rates adding
pressure to the housing market .
384 homes
were destroyed by the East
Troublesome Fires in 2020.
Only 99 permits have been
issued so far to rebuild these
homes.
Demand: Disincentive to provide rental and ownership opportunities
$3,250
MONTHLY
REVENUE
STR LTR$2,291
MONTHLY
REVENUE
3-BEDROOM AT 100%
AMI
Short term rentals provide a median monthly
revenue of $3,250. There is a disincentive to
rent units long-term at a rate affordable to the
average locally employed household.
$635,027
MEDIAN PRICE
MARKET
RATE
Local
Buyer$495,100
MAX PRICE
HOUSEHOLD
MAKING 200% AMI
STR: SHORT TERM
RENTAL
LTR: LONG TERM
RENTAL
Market rate homes sold for a median $635,027.
A household making 200% AMI can afford
$495,100. Seller have a disincentive to sell
homes to local wage earners.
5
Fraser Valley Resident Experience
HOUSING PRICE INCREASING
FASTER THAN WAGES
21% increase in average
sale price from 2020 to
2021. Only 6% increase
in average annual pay.
COST-BURDENED
HOUSEHOLDS
About one in three
households in the Valley pays
more than 30% of their gross
income for housing.
Total workforce housing
units needed by 2027:
755 to 840
FOR SALE
Price points needed:
$170,000-
$380,000 FOR RENT
Price point needed:
<$1,800
Needs & Gaps
The gap between what the market can provide
and what the workforce needs has increased by
over $100,000 in the past seven years
Housing Needs and Gaps
Low High
Catch Up Need 450 450
Unfilled Jobs (12% of jobs) 450 450
Keep Up Need 305 390
New Jobs 75 160
Retiring employees 230 230
Catch-up and Keep-up through 2027 755 840
Under construction (112) (112)
Adjusted Catch-up and Keep-up 645 730
Summary of Housing Units Needed through 2027
Note: Seasonal housing needs are not included in these figures.
Deed Restricted Housing
1,436
new residences have been
permitted since 2018
148
were deed
restricted
(10%)
Housing in Planning Stages
Key Considerations:
•Planned market residences start at $750,000, and
are unlikely to be accessible to local workers
•Deed restricted housing will need significant
financial support to be feasible.
Fraser River Valley: Five Year Residential Projection
Market
Residences
Deed
Restricted Total % Deed
Restricted
Granby 801 200 1,001 20%
Fraser 500 130 570 23%
Winter Park 1,570 65 1,900 3%
Unincorporated
Valley 600 40 640 6%
Total 3,471 435 4,111 11%
Annual average 694 87 822
Community Benefits
PMORE PERMANENT
RESIDENTS
INCREASED LOCAL
EXPENDITURES
REDUCED VEHICLE
MILES
PARKING
SAVINGS
MORE PERMANENT
RESIDENTS
36%
of market rate homes are occupied by
permanent residents100%
of deed restricted homes are occupied by
permanent residents
$8.9
Is generated by the 225 households occupying
deed restricted units in the Valley towards the
local economy.
million/
YEARINCREASED LOCAL
EXPENDITURES
REDUCED VEHICLE MILES
PARKING SAVINGS
$825
For Valley employees that live locally –with the
average commute of those workers living outside
of the valley being 33 miles away. This translates to
330 miles a week.
Monthly
Savings
P $10,000
In the Town of Winter Park. A structured parking
space costs $30,000 in Winter Park.
Per 1 surface parking space
Employer/Employee Benefits
housing for essential
employees
stronger & more
responsive services
improved customer
service
cost savings on job
recruitment/training
housing
essential
employees
benefits the
whole
community
About 530 people turned down job offers in the
past year because they lacked housing they could
afford in the area.
Employer’s express that the lack of housing is
the biggest issue impacting their ability to fill
jobs and retain employees.
Recommendations
Build More
Community
Housing
Increasing supply
is key. See the
projects that are in
the pipeline
through.
This will take
serious effort.
Add
momentum,
capacity, and new
partners to current
initiatives,
particularly the
Housing Authority.
Partner with
Employers
Local jurisdictions
and other
professionals
should partner
and support
employers to
create employee
housing.
Increase
Dedicated
Funding
Ensure dedicated
funding source and
regional
coordination.
Preserve
Existing
Inventory
Preserving existing
affordable housing
must be paired
with new
construction.
Promote
Equity and
Inclusion
Development and
policy processes
must be actively
inclusive of
populations so
that housing is
meeting the needs
of all.
Questions and Discussion
Fraser River Valley
August 2022
Housing Needs Assessment Update
--- This page intentionally blank --
Table of Contents
Purpose and Scope of the Study ................................................................................................... 1
Purpose ................................................................................................................................................... 1
Study Area .............................................................................................................................................. 1
Key Definitions ........................................................................................................................................ 2
Executive Summary ....................................................................................................................... 4
Changes in Market Indicators ................................................................................................................. 5
For Sale Inventory ................................................................................................................................... 6
Market Rents .......................................................................................................................................... 6
Rental Vacancy ....................................................................................................................................... 7
Housing Needs and Gaps ........................................................................................................................ 7
Community Response ............................................................................................................................. 8
How do investments in community housing benefit the community and economy? ................... 9
Community Benefits ............................................................................................................................. 10
Employer and Employee Benefits ........................................................................................................ 12
Employer Involvement in Housing ....................................................................................................... 15
What housing has been built and what is planned? .................................................................... 16
Deed Restricted Housing Inventory...................................................................................................... 16
Housing Permits Since 2018 ................................................................................................................. 16
Deed Restricted Housing Under Construction ..................................................................................... 17
Five Year Housing Production Projection ............................................................................................. 18
Housing in the Planning Stages by Community .................................................................................... 19
Housing Production Compared to Prior Needs Assessments .............................................................. 25
Loss of Housing ..................................................................................................................................... 25
How much community housing is needed through 2027? .......................................................... 30
Catch Up Needs (Current Conditions) .................................................................................................. 30
Keep Up Needs (Future Needs) ............................................................................................................ 31
What are residents of the Fraser River Valley experiencing with regard to their housing? ........ 35
Unoccupied Housing (Vacation Homes) ............................................................................................... 35
Local Residents: Rent vs. Own .............................................................................................................. 36
Local Wages .......................................................................................................................................... 36
Cost Burden .......................................................................................................................................... 37
How has the for-sale market changed? ....................................................................................... 39
Price Trends .......................................................................................................................................... 39
For Sale Availability .............................................................................................................................. 42
Local Workforce Affordability .............................................................................................................. 44
How has the rental market changed? ......................................................................................... 45
Rental Availability ................................................................................................................................. 45
Rental Market Prices ............................................................................................................................ 46
Local Workforce Affordability .............................................................................................................. 47
What are the challenges to addressing our community housing needs? .................................... 49
Market Appreciation ............................................................................................................................ 49
Cost of Construction ............................................................................................................................. 49
Rate of Production ................................................................................................................................ 50
Community Buy-In ................................................................................................................................ 50
What has been accomplished for workforce housing in the past five years? ............................. 51
Granby .................................................................................................................................................. 51
Fraser .................................................................................................................................................... 51
Winter Park ........................................................................................................................................... 52
Unincorporated Grand County and Region Wide ................................................................................ 53
Recommendations and Next Steps ............................................................................................. 55
Produce new housing to meet your local workforce market ............................................................... 55
Add momentum, capacity, more funding and new partners to current initiatives ............................. 56
Encourage, support, and partner with employers ............................................................................... 60
Balance workforce housing with vacation home production .............................................................. 60
Preserve your existing inventory .......................................................................................................... 61
Ensure equity, inclusion, and adherence to community values ........................................................... 61
Appendices ............................................................................................................................ 62
Appendix A – Study Methodology, Data Sources, Definitions, and Acknowledgements ............. 63
Primary Research .................................................................................................................................. 63
Secondary Data..................................................................................................................................... 63
Definitions/Terminology ...................................................................................................................... 64
Acknowledgements .............................................................................................................................. 67
Appendix B – Catch Up and Keep Up Tables ............................................................................... 68
Jobs per Employee and Employees per Household ............................................................................. 68
Appendix C – Demographics and Housing Inventory .................................................................. 69
How have The Valley’s demographics changed? ................................................................................. 69
How has the housing inventory changed? ........................................................................................... 73
Appendix D – Area Median Income Table ................................................................................... 76
Williford/WSW/Continuum 1
Purpose and Scope of the Study
Purpose
The Fraser River Valley Housing Needs Assessment Update was sponsored by Grand County, Colorado,
and the Town of Granby, Town of Fraser, and Town of Winter Park. The purpose of this assessment is to
evaluate the housing market in the Fraser River Valley, summarize existing housing programs and
successes, and identify the housing needs of those who make their living locally.
The data and information in this assessment will help to:
• Inform and assist in the development of future housing policies, new development, and
programs;
• Educate the community and stakeholders about the housing issues that affect the local
workforce and employers and the benefits to the local community, economy, and environment
of expanding housing opportunities for local residents and employees; and
• Acquire financing for local housing projects and programs.
The assessment builds upon data from prior studies, which include Winter Park Housing Needs
Assessment (2015), Fraser Housing Needs Assessment (2016), Grand County Study Area Housing Needs
Assessment (2018), and Mountain Migration – Are COVID Impacts on Housing and Services Here to Stay?
(2021).
Study Area
The study area aligns with the geographic boundary of the newly formed Fraser River Valley Housing
Partnership in Grand County, which includes the Fraser Valley Recreation District and the Town of
Granby, as shown in the below map. Throughout this report, this area is referred to as the Fraser River
Valley or The Valley.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 2
Fraser River Valley Study Area
Source: ESRI
Key Definitions
Affordable
This Assessment centers on the understanding of how much households can afford for housing in The
Valley. It explores where their needs are being met, and where there are gaps. It uses the definition that
housing is affordable when the monthly payment (rent or mortgage, plus utilities) is equal to no more
than 30% of a household’s gross income (i.e., income before taxes). This definition is industry standard
and used by federal and state housing programs. This applies across the income spectrum, from
minimum wage to six figures and above.
Granby
Fraser
Winter
Park
Fraser Valley
Grand
County
Grand
County N
Williford/WSW/Continuum 3
Area Median Income
(AMI)
Household Income
Range
(2-person household)
Maximum Affordable
Rent
(2-person household)
Affordable For Sale
Price
(2-person household)
100% $70,500 $1,763 $212,300
Source: CHFA, consultant team
Community Housing
Throughout this report, the term “community housing” is used to mean dwellings occupied by residents
who live and/or work in the Fraser River Valley. This concept is also referred to as “workforce” or
“attainable” housing. The intent is that community housing meets the full range of rental and ownership
housing types and prices needed to support household changes over time and ensure The Valley
remains a complete and vibrant community.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 4
Executive Summary
While housing opportunities for employees and local residents in the Fraser River Valley have long been
challenging, a combination of factors in recent years have exacerbated an already difficult housing
situation for people making their living in The Valley. This includes:
A burst of demand spurred by the COVID pandemic, with a wave of out-of-area households
seeking to make The Valley their home – both owners and renters;
A surge of work-from-home opportunities as businesses shut their offices and permitted
employees to work from home. While many businesses have been reigning in their workers in
recent months, others have retained this flexibility;
The East Troublesome fire destroying 384 homes, displacing many long-time residents and
reducing the already short housing supply;
An increase in the number of homes being short-term rented for visitors, while the long-term
rental opportunities for locals stagnated, rents rapidly increased, and competition for units rose;
and
Construction supply chain issues and labor shortages contributing to historically high costs of
construction, meaning a higher price point for new housing.
The cost to construct
a home is higher than
it’s ever been.
There is a lack of housing for local workers.
Many developments are in the pipeline, but
most are priced for out-of-area buyers and
second homeowners.
There is a shortage of long-
term rentals for locals; short-
term rentals for visitors have
increased.
Market rate rentals and for-sale
housing is too expensive for local
workers.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 5
Changes in Market Indicators
Looking more specifically at key housing indicators shows the extent of the impact of some of these
changes.
Local Occupancy
Changes in the percentage of homes that are occupied year-round indicates whether local residents are
gaining or losing ground to second homes and homes for vacation use. The Fraser River Valley has a very
low percentage of occupied homes (37%), a rate that is essentially unchanged since 2010. Year-round
occupancy did not change much from 2010 to 2020 in Winter Park or Granby, but there was a decrease
in Fraser.
Homes Occupied Year-Round
2000 2010 2020
Grand County 47% 40% 42%
Fraser River Valley 43% 36% 37%
Granby 92% 51% 49%
Fraser 66% 49% 44%
Winter Park 26% 19% 19%
Source: 2000, 2010, 2020 US Census, ESRI
Growth in the Labor Force
A labor force that is growing slower than job growth, as is the case in Grand County, leads to a labor
shortage and may be a symptom of a lack of housing options. An estimated 12% of jobs are vacant in the
Fraser River Valley, with most employers indicating that a lack of housing is the biggest issue affecting
their ability to fill jobs and retain employees.
Change in Labor Force and Jobs: Grand County – 2010 to 2021
2010 2015 2019 2021
Annual
Average %
Change
(2010-
2021)
Labor
force 8,924 9,056 9,777 9,718 0.8%
Jobs 8,821 9,792 10,302 10,098 1.2%
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) LAUS, Colorado Demography Office
Home Prices and Incomes
Home sale prices have risen extremely fast. Incomes have also increased, but not nearly at the rate of
housing prices. Between these two dynamics, homes are further out of reach for households working
locally.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 6
Change in Median Home Sale Prices and Household Incomes: 2018 vs. 2022
2018 2022 % Change
Granby $269,550 $684,500 154%
Fraser $378,200 $874,500 131%
Winter Park $404,161 $785,000 94%
Median Household Income
(Grand County - 3-person
household)
$68,400 $79,300 16%
Source: Land Title, MLS, CHFA, consultant team
Note: prices reflect unit types including single family, townhouses, condos and duplexes. Winter Park includes the resort and
town areas.
For Sale Inventory
A for-sale inventory below a six-month supply of homes for sale is generally considered to be a seller’s
market. While a seller’s market has existed for many years, the current situation is an extreme seller’s
market; local workers are unable to find anything to purchase across The Valley.
The majority of employees need homes priced below $380,000 (or 180% AMI). Only one home was
available at this price in early June 2022.
For Sale Housing Inventory – Number of Months Supply
Prior Study 2022
Granby (2018) 2.6 months 1.3 months
Fraser (2016) 1.9 months 1.1 months
Winter Park (2015) 1 year 0.9 months
Fraser River Valley unknown 1.1 month
Sources: previous Housing Needs Assessments, MLS, consultant team
Market Rents
Market rents have increased significantly in recent years. Average rents have more than doubled in
Granby, Fraser, and Winter Park.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 7
Rent Listings – Average Rent Increases
Granby 2018 Granby 2022 % Change
Average
Monthly Rent $1,417 $3,157 123%
Fraser 2016 Fraser 2022 % Change
1-bedroom $808 No listings -
2-bedroom $1,243 $2,759 122%
3-bedroom $1,700 $4,550 168%
Winter Park 2015 Winter Park 2022 % Change
1-bedroom $841 $1,691 101%
2-bedroom $1,175 $2,644 125%
3-bedroom $1,860 $4,067 119%
Note: 2022 figures are based on a small sample size.
Sources: previous Housing Needs Assessments, local rental listings March-April 2022
Rental Vacancy
The rental vacancy rate is and historically has been very low across The Valley. A healthy vacancy level is
generally considered to be at least 5%. With vacancies below 1%, the rental market is over capacity and
cannot absorb new residents or employees moving to the area, much less allow for existing residents to
move as their needs change.
Vacancy Rates for Rental Housing
Prior Study 2022
Granby (2018) less than 1% less than 1%
Fraser (2016) 4-6% less than 1%
Winter Park (2015) less than 1% less than 1%
Sources: previous Housing Needs Assessments, local rental listings March-April 2022
Prior studies reported high seasonal fluctuation in vacancy in Winter Park and Fraser, with Winter Park
having shoulder season vacancy as high as 30%. Recent property manager interviews indicated that
seasonal vacancy has declined.
Housing Needs and Gaps
Between 645 and 730 housing units (in addition to community housing under construction) affordable
for residents making their living in The Valley are needed through 2027 to address current housing
shortages and keep up with future job growth (see Deed Restricted Production section). The primary
need is for rentals prices below $1,800 per month and homes for purchase priced between $170,000 to
$380,000.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 8
The gap between what market homes cost to build and what the workforce can afford has increased by
over $100,000 in the past seven years. Contributing to this gap are housing prices growing faster than
local wages, historically high construction costs, and a rise in interest rates. (see “How many more
housing units are needed through 2027?”)
Community Response
Communities throughout The Valley have prioritized housing for the local workforce and are primed to
realize significant progress in the coming months and years:
Deed restricted housing that is under construction will add 112 units in The Valley, almost
doubling the current amount (116).
Granby, Fraser, and Winter Park are catalyzing the construction of deed restricted housing on
land they own.
The Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership, a multijurisdictional housing authority, has been
formed and intergovernmental agreements between the four local governments are in place.
This entity will coordinate, facilitate, and support the financial feasibility and development of
deed restricted housing in The Valley.
Employers and non-profits are investing in housing solutions.
Local leaders are exploring asking voters for a dedicated funding source to support the
production of community housing.
Strong commitment, dedicated funding, staffing and perseverance will be required to see these
investments to completion. (See What housing has been built and what is planned? What has been
accomplished for workforce housing? and Recommended Next Steps.)
Williford/WSW/Continuum 9
How do investments in community housing benefit the
community and economy?
Providing housing that local employees can afford greatly benefits the Fraser River Valley. While the
current inventory of deed restricted ownership and rental housing is limited (2.4% of housing units in
The Valley), the positive impact on the community, economy and residents is already apparent. This
section highlights several measurable impacts based on readily available data and input from employers
and residents of deed restricted housing through online questionnaires and interviews.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 10
Community Benefits
More Permanent Residents
Total units
Resident
occupancy
rate
Occupied
units
Fraser River Valley housing units (2020) 9,669 37% 3,564
Market rate units 9,444 35% 3,339
Deed restricted units 225 100% 225
% of units that are deed restricted 2.3% - 6.3%
Source: Census, ESRI, interviews
We are so grateful for the life we have lived in attainable housing. We stayed in the community because
we owned our home. I would love to see the opportunity granted to others.
-Attainable Housing Occupant Comment
Williford/WSW/Continuum 11
Increased Local Expenditures
Average Expenditures Per Year for Consumers With Incomes Under $70,000 1
Food &
Beverage Housing Apparel &
Services Entertainment Health Care Gas &
Motor Oil
TOTAL
Expenditures
$8,466 $20,170 $1,405 $2,659 $4,510 $2,387 $39,597
Source: 2018-2019 US Western Region Consumer Expenditure data, Bureau of Labor Statistics.2
Reduced Vehicle Miles Traveled
Employees that work, but do not live, in The Valley primarily commute from other areas in Grand
County, such as Grand Lake, Hot Sulphur Springs, and Kremmling.3 The average commute distance is
1 The average yearly household income of deed restricted home occupants is about $65,000. Source: 2022 deed
restricted resident online questionnaire.
2 Resort communities have unique economies – in terms of services and amenities offered, preferences of locals
(who may spend more on outdoor activities than other populations), pricing of services and goods (groceries,
apparel, fuel) and, of course, housing. These figures are likely conservative given that only expenditures likely to be
captured locally have been included (e.g. $39,597 of an estimated $57,387 total expenditures) and they are based
on US west averages rather than local pricing and preferences.
3 Based on Census/LEHD commute data, about 60% of employees working in The Valley (including sole proprietors)
reside within Grand County; about 50% reside within The Valley. The majority of employees in the LEHD data that
do not reside in Grand County are seasonal workers who come up from the front range, or from further away, for a
season. Seasonal employees may live locally while employed in the county, but their permanent tax address (which
is a primary source used by the LEHD) shows them living outside of the county. The LEHD shows that only about
Williford/WSW/Continuum 12
about 33 miles one way from these locations. Each employee that resides in The Valley, therefore, saves
an average of 330 miles and 5-or-more hours of drive time per week and $825 per month in commute
costs.4 Increasing the supply of community housing in The Valley not only saves workers time and
money, but may also contribute to fewer vehicle trips on U.S. Highway 40.
Parking Savings
Employer and Employee Benefits
Secure Housing for Essential Employees
Deed restricted housing in The Valley has provided essential workers with rental and ownership
opportunities that would otherwise not be available, providing stability and security to employees,
employers, and the community.
2% of employees reside in neighboring counties (e.g., Summit, Clear Creek, and Routt) from which they may
conceivably commute to work on a regular basis.
4 The IRS 2022 mileage reimbursement rate is 62.5 cents/mile. The IRS bases the mileage reimbursement rate on
cost data and analysis compiled every year using data from across the country and measures auto insurance
premiums, gas prices, maintenance costs, depreciation, and other costs that go into operating a vehicle.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 13
“What, if any, benefits have you experienced by being able to reside in rent or deed restricted housing
in the Fraser River Valley? (Mark all that apply)”
Own Rent Total
Reduced stress about housing 82% 74% 76%
Better quality of life 64% 58% 60%
Reduced commute time/distance 45% 58% 55%
More money for things other than housing 55% 55% 55%
Improved home condition/quality 73% 48% 55%
Opportunity to live without roommates 18% 32% 29%
Other benefit - please specify 18% 10% 12%
None of the above - I do not have benefits to report 0% 10% 7%
TOTAL responses 11 31 42
Source: 2022 deed restricted resident online questionnaire
Williford/WSW/Continuum 14
Cost to Business When Employees Leave
Primary employers in The Valley were contacted to better understand the extent of job recruitment and
turnover challenges experienced.5 The lack of housing for employees was expressed as the biggest issue
impacting employers’ ability to fill jobs and retain employees.
Valley employers were asked to estimate how much it costs them to recruit and train employees each
time they fill a position.
National studies estimate that it costs employers between 20% to 30% of an employee’s yearly
salary to replace that worker. 6 With an average annual wage of $45,260 in the County, this
would mean that it would cost between about $9,000 and $13,000 to replace an average
employee.
Valley employers reported that it cost them $8,450 on average to recruit and train a new
employee, or about 18% of the average County wage. Costs varied significantly based on
5 18 employers were interviewed and/or provided responses to a short questionnaire, representing 45% of jobs in
The Valley.
6 See, e.g., “There Are Significant Business Costs to Replacing Employees,” Center for American Progress, 2012,
available at: https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/economy/reports/2012/11/16/44464/there-are-
significant-business-costs-to-replacing-employees/
I am so grateful to be at Hideaway Place where I can have secure and affordable
housing. I just wish there were more buildings like this so we, as workers, had options.
-Attainable Housing Occupant Comment
I know a number of business owners in the area and every single one says employee
housing is the single biggest issue impacting their business and it's only been getting
worse. It’s not sustainable . . . all I can say is it's absolutely critical to this community and
businesses may actually not survive. I cannot stress enough the importance.
-Local Employer Comment
Williford/WSW/Continuum 15
position, generally ranging from $500 to $2,000 for entry or lower skilled positions, $4,000 to
$10,000 for mid-level positions, and over $40,000 for skilled health care, utility and labor
positions.
Based on these estimates, it will cost survey respondents a combined $1.4 million to replace the 170
employees that left due to a lack of housing.
Employer Involvement in Housing
Employers in The Valley have been active in developing, procuring, and assisting employees with
housing and/or paying higher wages. Only three employers contacted indicated they do not provide any
type of housing assistance.
“Do you provide any of the following types of housing or cost of living assistance to your employees?
(select all that apply)”
Source: Employer questionnaire 2022
Looking ahead, many employers have interest in becoming more involved. Technical assistance and
facilitation of partnerships can open up more opportunities.
17%
22%
39%
39%
0%10%20%30%40%50%
Hiring bonus/salary stipend
Temporary/relocation housing
Employer owned or leased units rented to or
provided as compensation to employees
Higher wage than nearby communities for the
same/similar jobs
Percent of Respondents
We are interested in working with other community members, businesses,
governments, NGOs, school districts, etc. to help address this issue.
-Local Employer Comment
Williford/WSW/Continuum 16
What housing has been built and what is planned?
Deed Restricted Housing Inventory
A total of 116 deed restricted ownership and rental housing for local employees exists in the Fraser
River Valley.
Fraser River Valley – Deed Restricted Inventory 2022
Project Name Own Rent Location ≤60% 61%-
80%
81%-
120%
Employment
Only Total
Miller's Inn 10 8 Winter
Park - 8 10 18
Hideaway Junction 10 0 Winter
Park - - - 10 10
Wapiti Meadows* 0 50 Fraser 50 - - - 50
Hideaway Place
Apartments 0 38 Winter
Park - - 38 - 38
Subtotal 20 96 0 50 8 48 10 116
% of subtotal 17% 83% 0% 43% 7% 33% 9% 100%
Source: previous Housing Needs Assessments, interviews, consultant team
*Deed restrictions expire 2025
Housing Permits Since 2018
About 1,436 new residences have been permitted since 2018, or about 343 homes and apartments per
year. This data excludes the 99 permits for East Troublesome Fire re-builds, which are outside the study
area. Of new residential permits, 150 (10%) were deed restricted.
Fraser River Valley New Residential Permits: 2018 - present
Source: Grand County and Winter Park Building Departments
Granby Fraser Winter
Park
Unincorporated
Valley Total
2018 39 72 96 122 329
2019 136 62 44 79 321
2020 41 38 15 112 206
2021 113 125 117 160 515
2022 YTD 19 12 5 29 65
Total since 2018 348 309 277 502 1,436
Annual Average 82 74 68 118 343
Market Rate 348 249 189 502 1,288
Deed Restricted - 62 88 - 150
Deed Restricted % of total 0% 19% 32% 0% 10%
Williford/WSW/Continuum 17
Despite many permits issued from 2018 to 2020, housing production from 2010 to 2020 did not keep
pace with previous decades. The pace of development in 2021 picked up, however, with 60% more
permits issued over the 2019 pre-pandemic level.
Age of Homes in the Fraser River Valley
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates, 2020 DEC Redistricting Data (PL 94-171)
Deed Restricted Housing Under Construction
Three developments at price points attainable to the local workforce are under construction. Local
approvals, financing, and building permits have been secured. Upon completion, these developments
will provide much needed housing opportunities for local workers and residents. The 112 rental units
currently under construction will essentially double the current inventory. Upon completion, the vast
majority will be rentals. The 112 units in the chart below is used to adjust the total housing need,
because the new units are not yet occupied. (See How much Community Housing is Needed through
2027?)
Workforce Housing - Currently Under Construction 2022
Development
Name Location Type Tenure # of units Deed
Restricted
Target
Market
Fireside Creek Winter Park Apartments For rent 50 50 80-120%
AMI
Old Town
Apartments
Grand County
near Fraser Apartments For rent 60 50 30-60%
AMI
Koselig on Main Fraser Apartments For rent 20 2 Under 80%
AMI
Total 130 112
Source: stakeholder interviews
8%
21%
16%15%
31%
9%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Before 1970 1970 to 1979 1980 to 1989 1990 to 1999 2000 to 2009 2010 to 2020
Williford/WSW/Continuum 18
Fireside Creek Apartments
This 50-unit building is currently under construction. It includes 40 one-bedroom units and 10 two-
bedroom units. There is a deed restriction that buys down rents to 80% AMI for the first five years, after
which rents are restricted to 120% AMI. Town contributions included land and about $1.5 million over
10 years. It is a three-story building that had originally been envisioned as a four-story building. One
floor was lost through the discretionary site plan review process.
Old Town Apartments
Old Town Apartments is under construction. The development team secured competitive 9% Low
Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and Division of Housing (DOH) Funding in 2019. The Grand County
Housing Authority is participating as a special limited partner. The development will have 60
apartments, serving households ranging from 30% to 80% AMI ($21,150 to $56,400). Construction is
anticipated to be complete late in 2022. This project has also been called Mill Avenue Apartments in
some documents.
Koselig on Main
The development team for Koselig on Main worked with the Town of Fraser to implement a mixed-use
project design compatible with a newly updated Residential Mixed Use (RMU) zone that provides
incentives for retail and deed restricted housing. The development includes 20 residential units intended
to be attainable for people who live and work in The Valley. Apartments range from one- to four-
bedrooms, and include two deed restricted units for households below 80% AMI. A local business has
also agreed to master lease units for their employees. The development has received Planning
Commission support and submitted for building permits to begin construction this summer.
Five Year Housing Production Projection
Housing production appears to be on the rise across The Valley, based on current and pending
development approvals. A promising number of developments are proposed to be deed restricted for
local residents and employees, however, significant resources will be required to make them
economically feasible and they may or may not come to fruition, depending on changing economic
conditions. (see What are the challenges to addressing our community housing needs?). If these
developments are successful, new deed restricted housing production represents about 11% of total
projected new housing inventory.
Three important points to consider when interpreting the chart below.
1) None of the units projected in this chart are a sure thing. Economic conditions are changing
rapidly, construction and development are resource and risk intensive endeavors, and this
housing may not get built.
2) The market rate residences that are planned and entitled are priced and marketed for second
homeowners and out-of-town buyers with prices starting at $750,000. Therefore, it is assumed
the planned “Market Residences” in the table below will not serve the local workforce.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 19
3) The planned deed restricted developments face serious headwinds related to the cost of
infrastructure and construction. Substantial financial support from the local communities will
be needed for them to come to fruition. Currently, an estimated subsidy of about $350,000 is
needed to serve a household with income of 100% AMI (See Cost of Construction). These
developments will need creativity, persistence, public/private partnerships, and new tools to
reduce costs and increase local contributions to be successful. Accessing state and federal
resources for some portions of these planned developments is also recommended, to ensure
scarce local funds are used strategically.
Fraser River Valley: Five Year Residential Projection
Market
Residences
Deed
Restricted Total % Deed
Restricted
Granby 801 200 1,001 20%
Fraser 500 130 570 23%
Winter Park 1,570 65 1,900 3%
Unincorporated Valley 600 40 640 6%
Total 3,471 435 4,111 11%
Annual average 694 87 822
Notes: Seasonal employee housing is not included; totals do not match the community inventories in the “Housing in the
Planning Stages by Community” section because those inventories extend well beyond five years.
Source: stakeholder interviews, building department data, consultant team
Housing in the Planning Stages by Community
The sections below summarize the known development opportunities where land has residential
entitlements, or entitlements are in process. These development opportunities span from current to
several decades in the future.
Granby
Granby has many new market residential units in the planning stages and a significant town-owned site
(Highway 40) that could be catalytic for addressing workforce housing needs, as summarized in the
following table.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 20
Granby: Planned Residential Development
Name # of
Homes
Deed
Restricted Tenure Type of
Home Target Market Timing
Village
at Eagle
Ridge
26 No Own Townhouses
Second
homeowners
$700,000+
Under
construction;
many phases
Smith
Creek
Crossing
Phases 2
and 3
80 No Own Mobile
Homes
Lot rent $643-
$693/mo, home
prices $250,000+
2022-2023
Granby
Market
Square
10 No Both Mixed Use
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Construction
start 2022
Granby
Station 13 No Both Mixed Use
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Planning
stage
Granby
Business
Center
Unknown No TBD Mixed Use
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Planning
stage
Granby
Ranch 430 No Own
Single
Family
Townhouses
Second
Homeowners
Construction
start 2023
Silver
Ridge 184 No Own TH and SF
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Construction
within 5
years
Highway
40 258 Yes -
mixed Both Mixed
Density Local workforce RFP this
summer
Childress
Property Unknown No TBD Medium
density TBD Seeking
Annexation
Total 1,001
Known
DR* 200
Known
DR % 20%
Sources: developer interviews, Town of Granby
*DR = Deed Restricted
Highway 40 – Workforce Housing
The Town of Granby owns 30 acres and has developed a master plan that could yield 258 units. The
master plan shows a wide range of housing types, with the potential for serving the full spectrum of
local housing needs.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 21
The master plan shows development potential for:
100 apartments
77 townhomes
32 duplexes
49 single family homes
Most of the site is governed by a covenant that will require homes to be affordable to households below
180% AMI. The Town has drafted a request for qualifications (RFQ) for potential development partners
and is seeking to move forward with selection of a development team by early fall 2022, and begin
infrastructure development in 2023.
Smith Creek Crossing
This master planned manufactured housing community on the west side of Granby has completed one
phase, is under construction on the second phase, and anticipates the third phase being complete in
spring 2023. Sun Communities Inc. is the developer and provides financing and community
management. Lot rent is $643-$693/month and home prices begin in the mid $200,000 range. Homes
are marketed and sold to local residents and second homeowners. Sun Communities works with a third-
party financing company called Triad Financial, as traditional mortgages are not available for this
product.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 22
Fraser
The current rate of development applications could yield several thousand units over the next decades.
Fraser: Planned Residential Development
Name # of
Homes
Deed
Restricted Tenure Type of
Home Target Market Timing
Grand Park 2,697 Unsure
Apartment,
Condo, SF,
Duplex
For Sale
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
25-50
Years
Forrest
Meadows 380 Unsure Apartment,
Condo
For Sale and
Rental
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Unsure
Rendezvous
(Fraser) 420 Unsure
Apartment,
Condo, SF,
Duplex
For Sale and
Rental
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Unsure
Victoria
Village 130 Yes – likely
100%
Apartment,
Townhome,
SF
For Sale and
Rental Local workforce 5-7
Years
Koselig on
Main 20 Mix – 2 DR Apartment,
Condo
For Sale and
Rental Local workforce 2
Years
Total 3,647
Known DR* 130
Known DR
% 3.60%
Sources: developer interviews, Town of Fraser
*DR = Deed Restricted
Most projects are not planned to provide much, if any, housing for local residents. Victoria Village is an
exception, and could have a positive impact on the workforce inventory in the near term.
Victoria Village
The Town of Fraser has 11.3 acres to build at least 105-130 units of workforce housing in downtown.
The Town is proposing to develop rental housing affordable to households earning 30%-100% of the
Area Median Income (AMI), and homeownership opportunities to households with incomes between
60% and 120% of AMI. A mix of uses including commercial buildings and common areas are proposed
for the site. The parcel sits at the intersection of two highways on the north side of town, and is adjacent
to existing neighborhoods, bus transportation, and employment opportunities. The parcel contains
existing water and sewer mains, and electric and natural gas infrastructure. It is a complex site with
wetlands, flood zones and easements, but at least 5-7 acres are suitable for housing development.
The property was purchased in May 2022, using a DOH Operation Turn-Key grant, combined with
$760,000 from the Town of Fraser. The funding source requires that the project break ground within 24
months of closing, so planning and entitlements will need to move forward quickly. Several developers
Williford/WSW/Continuum 23
have contacted the Town regarding partnerships, and the Town intends to issue a RFP to select
development partners in the second half of 2022.
Winter Park
Based on entitlements, Winter Park could see over 6,000 new housing units in the future. About 2,000
new residential units are anticipated to be completed over the next five years. Overall, about 5% of
entitled units will be targeted to address local workforce housing needs.
Winter Park: Planned Residential Development
Winter Park # of
Homes
Deed
Restricted?
For Sale /
Rent Target Market Estimated
Occupancy
Estimated
Build-out
Roam 1,076 No Sale Second
homeowners 2019-2035 15 years
Roam 60 Yes Sale/Rent Local Unknown Unknown
Lakota 324 No Sale Second
homeowners 2018-2032 14 years
Rendezvous at
Winter Park 1,867 No Sale Second
homeowners 2020-2050 30 years
Sojourn at
Idlewild 216 No Sale Second
homeowners 2019-2025 6 years
Hideaway
Junction –
Phase 2
20 Yes Sale Local 2024 2 years
Resort Employee 250 No Rent Local 2022-2023 2 years
Retreat at Atlas 25 No Sale Second
homeowners 2022-2025 3 years
Whistlestop 16 No Sale Second
homeowners 2019-2025 6 years
Lake Trail 16 No Sale Second
homeowners 2022 1 year
WP Resort 1,454 No Sale Second
homeowners Unknown 30 years
Arrow 63 No Sale Second
homeowners 2018-2022 4 years
Reunion Station 8 No Sale Second
homeowners 2022 1 year
Williford/WSW/Continuum 24
Winter Park # of
Homes
Deed
Restricted?
For Sale /
Rent Target Market Estimated
Occupancy
Estimated
Build-out
Riverwalk Tract F 33 No Sale Second
homeowners 2023-2026 3 years
Headwaters
Condo 24 No Sale Second
homeowners 2022 1 year
Chill
Condominiums 42 No Sale Second
homeowners 2022-2025 3 years
Cooper Creek
Village 875 No Sale Second
homeowners Unknown 30 years
Cooper Creek
Village 45 Yes Rent Local Unknown 6 years
Rogers
Annexation 90 No Sale Second
homeowners Unknown Unknown
Total 6,504
Known
DR*/Employer 315
Known
DR*/Employer % 5%
Sources: developer interviews, Town of Winter Park
*DR = Deed Restricted
The community has made significant investments in workforce housing and is on pace to double the
current inventory that serves locally employed residents. The planned workforce housing opportunities
are summarized below.
Hideaway Junction – Phase 2
The Town of Winter Park owns 20 development ready lots, and is partnering with a private sector
developer to deliver deed restricted single family homes for sale as the second phase of this
neighborhood. The Town and developer are currently working through contract negotiations, with the
hope of delivering homes for sale in early 2024. Town support for the project includes land,
infrastructure, and a subsidy of $1.5 million to fill the gap between the cost to construct and desired sale
prices.
Resort Employee Housing
Winter Park Resort is proposing to build 250 units which will generate 332 beds. The development is
currently going through the planning and predevelopment process, and is on track to begin construction
this summer. The new beds are primarily targeted toward the resort’s seasonal employees and will
house much of the resort’s seasonal workforce based on anticipated growth.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 25
Unincorporated Grand County
In recent years, the County has issued about 118 new residential permits per year throughout the
unincorporated county, not just in The Valley. The vast majority are for single family homes. While some
of these homes may serve locally employed households, interviews indicate they are mostly intended
for second homeowners. There is one development in the planning stages with a proposed community
housing component.
Winter Park # of
Homes
Deed
Restricted?
For Sale /
Rent
Target
Market
Estimated
Occupancy
Estimated
Build-out
Byers Peak Ranch 1,517 Mix
Apartment,
Condo, SF,
Duplex
For
Sale
and
Rental
Second
Homeowners/Some
Full Time Residents
Unknown
Red Hawk Ranch 227 Yes Sale Local Second
Homeowners Unknown
Total 1,744
Known DR* 0
DR % 0%
Sources: interviews
*DR = Deed Restricted
Housing Production Compared to Prior Needs Assessments
Significant progress has occurred since the previous Needs Assessments in the Valley.
Winter Park’s prior assessment recommended 40 to 160 new deed restricted homes. Winter
Park has accomplished that target, albeit near the middle of the recommended range, with 38
units completed at Hideaway Place Apartments and 50 under construction at Fireside Creek
Apartments. All 88 units produced were rentals.
Fraser’s prior assessment recommended producing 40 to 165 deed restricted homes. They are
on track to meet this target range with 62 units under construction. Two units are in Town of
Fraser and 60 are just adjacent in unincorporated Grand County.
The 2018 Grand County Study Area Housing Assessment showed a need for 135 units in Granby.
No deed restricted homes have been built in Granby since that assessment, although some
modular homes in Smith Creek Crossing have been attainable for locals.
Loss of Housing
A variety of market and environmental factors have resulted in the loss of housing for the local
workforce in recent years, including short term rentals, location neutral workers (“Zoom Boomers”),
demolition, and fire. The reversion of deed restricted housing to market rate housing is also a risk.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 26
Short term rentals
Housing that used to be occupied by local working households has been converting to vacation homes
and short-term rentals over the past decade. The 2021 Mountain Migration study noted that 9% of
renters in Grand County had been forced to move because the home they occupied and rented long
term was being sold and converted to a short-term rental.7
Hundreds of homes in the Fraser River Valley that could be used as long-term rentals are being used as
short-term rentals, adding pressure to an already constrained housing market. About two thirds of the
short-term rentals in the county are in the Fraser River Valley as shown below.
Fraser River Valley Short Term Rental Summary
Granby Area Fraser Area Winter Park
Area Tabernash Area
Average Daily Rent $252 $294 $304 $492
Occupancy Rate 59% 53% 54% 61%
Median Monthly Revenue $2,896 $3,256 $3,435 $6,414
Median Room Size 2.3 bedrooms 2.8 bedrooms 2.4 bedrooms 3.7 bedrooms
Current Active Rentals 662 531 1,258 119
Note: Location data is not restricted by municipal boundaries and therefore current active rentals in each town may have some
overlap. The inventory also may not be comprehensive of all short-term properties.
Source: Air DNA's Market Minder tool.
Occupancy for short-term rentals is 50% to 60% across The Valley. Peak occupancy occurs in July at 80%
to 90% and dips down to 20% to 30% in April. The monthly revenue of these units follows a similar trend
with peak months yielding over six thousand dollars and shoulder season months producing less than
two thousand dollars on average. Despite the fluctuations in revenue, short term rentals often yield
higher revenues than on a long-term rental, and provide the added benefit of owners being able to use
the unit.
7 The Mountain Migration Report, Are COVID Impacts on Housing and Services Here to Stay?, Northwest Council of
Governments, 2021, available at: https://www.nwccog.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Mtn-Migration-Report-
FINAL.pdf
Williford/WSW/Continuum 27
Monthly rental revenue comparison: long- and short-term
Short term rentals in Fraser River Valley’s towns (excluding Tabernash) provide a median monthly
revenue of $3,250 with the average home being 2.4 bedrooms in size. This exceeds what is the
maximum affordable price for someone at 100% AMI for a three-bedroom unit in the Fraser River
Valley. Therefore, there is a disincentive to rent units long-term at a rate affordable to the typical
locally-employed household.
Overlap between Short-Term and Long-Term Inventory
A study conducted by HR&A 8 estimated that there were 352 short-term rentals in Grand County in 2021
that might otherwise be available and affordable to
long term local renters if they were not rented
short-term, which is an increase of 47% (112 units)
since 2019. While these numbers are significant, it
is also expected that they are conservative based
on study assumptions and input received through
the Mountain Migration survey and study.
8 See Colorado Short Term Rental Impact Study, HR&A, May 2022, available at:
https://airbnb.app.box.com/v/coloradoeconomicimpactreport
There is such a shortage of workforce locally
that Front Range owners are having to drive up
to change the sheets and clean the unit mid-
week between short term rental commitments.
-Local Property Manager
STR LTR
3-BEDROOM AT
100% AMI 5
$2,291
MONTHLY
REVENUE
$3,250
MONTHLY
REVENUE
Williford/WSW/Continuum 28
Property managers observe that short term rentals may be at a tipping point of market saturation,
particularly for smaller and older units. The lack of local workforce to clean, provide snow removal, and
other management services is also causing some property owners to consider converting to long term
rentals.
Short Term Rental Regulations
Local Jurisdictions have responded to the growth in short term rentals with a variety of regulations and
incentives.
Winter Park
A diverse community advisory group studied and recommended a short-term rental registration
ordinance and fee in early 2021. It was first implemented this past ski season (2021-2022).
Winter Park requires short term rentals to be registered, pay an annual $150 fee, and comply with basic
health and safety standards. There are 1,200 registered short-term rentals in Winter Park. The Town
plans to move forward with a nexus study this year to evaluate the registration fee.
Granby
Granby requires a short-term rental license. There are currently about 350 active licenses, most of which
are located in the second homeowner neighborhoods of Grand Elk or Granby Ranch. There are about
three short-term rentals in old town Granby. The Town uses Host Compliance for monitoring.
Fraser
The Town of Fraser has about 300 short term rentals within town limits. They have studied short term
rental regulations, but have not yet taken action. The number of licenses is not limited. Fees are
$150/year for any type of short-term rental unit. There have been some conversations about making the
fee structure more equitable and capturing more of the costs to administer the licenses. Town is
interested in exploring a dedicated revenue stream for affordable housing initiatives through short-term
rentals as well. Fraser, as a statutory town, is not able to levy an excise tax.
Grand County
Grand County has about 1,000 short-term rentals. The county imposes licensing and health and safety
requirements. Grand County has a short-term rental committee that is working on systems
improvements, which include database tracking and renewal notification.
Zoom Boomers
The 2021 Mountain Migration study included Grand County, and made the following observations about
the increased strain that the work-from-home population put on resort housing markets.
Across the six-county area, close to 70% of newcomers and 80% of part-time residents have
household incomes over $150,000 per year. In contrast, 60% of full-time residents earn under
$150,000 in household income per year. The majority of full-time residents making their living in
Williford/WSW/Continuum 29
the county do not have the income to compete for housing in the current high competition
environment. (Mountain Migration page 27)
Full time resident renters faced serious housing challenges during the peak of the pandemic in
2020.
o 24% lost their job
o 18% had a significant rent increase
o 31% had severe difficulty finding a place to rent
o 8% were forced to move when their rental sold or converted to a short term rental
(Mountain Migration page 28)
Newcomers put additional strain on already tight rental markets. Income levels of newcomers
moving to the mountains during Covid was much higher than those who moved in the past.
Remote workers rented to stay flexible and test out a new community, and had the resources to
outcompete locally-employed households. (Mountain Migration page 39)
For Grand County, only 22% of home sales were to local buyers. The other 78% were to buyers
from other parts of Colorado or out of state. (Mountain Migration page 31)
Fire and Demolition
The East Troublesome Fire in 2020 destroyed 384 homes. The fire took place north of the study area,
but impacted The Valley’s housing market as displaced households tried to find housing in an already
extremely tight rental market. Only 99 permits have been issued to date for rebuilding homes lost to the
fire, and many households remain displaced.
In addition, the Town of Fraser issued a few demolition permits for mobile homes in extremely poor
condition. The Town of Winter Park lost a condominium building to fire in 2020. It is being rebuilt, with
completion anticipated this summer.
Expiring Deed Restrictions
No housing has been lost to expiring deed restrictions to date, but Wapiti Meadows has a land use
restriction agreement through Colorado Housing and Finance Authority that will expire in 2025. Local
advocacy to renew and extend that use restriction or create a new deed restriction is recommended.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 30
How much community housing is needed through 2027?
This section quantifies the number of additional housing units needed through 2027 to house the local
workforce, broken down into the following two categories.
Catch-Up Needs – the number of housing units needed to address current deficiencies in
housing based on employees needed to fill unfilled jobs.
Keep-Up Needs – the number of units needed to keep-up with future housing demand through
2027 based on job growth and jobs vacated by retiring employees.
The estimated need for housing focuses on a subset of the total demand for housing in The Valley based
on the needs of the local workforce. Other components of need, such as current waitlists for housing,
seasonal employees, overcrowding, or households that will be forced to leave due to housing conditions
are not included. In addition, remote workers or retirees moving in from elsewhere, second homeowner
purchases, investment buyers, and similar market segments are outside the scope of this analysis. As a
result, the estimated number of housing units needed identified below is lower than if all other
components of need and market segments were included.
Catch Up Needs (Current Conditions)
Unfilled Jobs
When employers cannot fill jobs, business hours are reduced, employees are overworked, and service
levels decline. The unemployment rate in Grand County is very low (2.4%). In this tight labor market
environment, having housing opportunities for the local workforce provides a competitive advantage.
Based on input from Valley employers, at least 12% of jobs in The Valley are unfilled. This equates to
about 1,000 jobs unfilled. About 450 homes are needed to house the employees needed to fill vacant
jobs. Seasonal jobs are not included in this calculation.
Housing Units Needed to Help Fill Jobs
Total Jobs (Grand County, 2021) 10,100
Total Jobs (study area, estimated at 82% of county) 8,280
Study Area Unfilled Jobs (12%) 995
Jobs per employee 1.13
Employees per households with a worker 1.95
New housing units needed 450
Source: Colorado Demography Office, 2015-2019 ACS 5-year estimates, LEHD, consultant team
Under Construction Adjustment
An estimated 112 deed restricted rental housing units are under construction (See Deed Restricted
Housing Under Construction section). These projects will address some of the catch-up rental needs, so
they are deducted from the “Summary of Housing Units Needed through 2027” table below.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 31
Keep Up Needs (Future Needs)
Additional housing units will be needed to keep up with job growth and retirees over the next five years
(through 2027).
Job Growth
The Colorado Demography Office projects a low 0.5% annual average rate of job growth through 2027,
which is much slower than that rate prior to the pandemic (1.3% per year on average from 2015 to
2019). As a result, the below estimates calculate a range of housing needed based on these two rates.
Additionally, because some of the unfilled jobs captured in the catch-up need may be included in job
projections, growth estimates only account for four years of growth rather than five to avoid the
potential for double counting.
Based on these assumptions, 75 to 160 new units are needed to house employees filling new jobs over
the next five years. If all five years of growth is accounted for, 95 to 195 housing units would be needed
to keep up with job growth, or 20 to 35 more than below.
Homes needed for Job Growth Low
(0.5%/yr.)
High
(1.3%/yr.)
New Jobs (Grand County, through 2027) 205 425
New Jobs (study area estimate at 82% of county, through 2027) 170 350
Jobs per employee 1.13 1.13
Employees filling jobs 150 310
Employees per household with at least one worker 1.95 1.95
New housing units needed 75 160
Source: Colorado Demography Office, BLS QCEW, 2015-2019 ACS 5-year estimates
Retiring Employees
As employees retire, employers will need to fill those jobs and the new employees will need housing.
Many retirees will stay in The Valley and remain in their homes, although some will sell their homes and
leave. If they do leave, most of those homes will not be attainable to new employees. They will likely be
purchased by other retirees, second homeowners, or investors. Given current market conditions, the
assumption is that 80% of retirees will remain in The Valley, which results in the need for 230 additional
homes.
Retirees
% to retire by 2027 7%
# to retire 565
Employees per households with a worker 1.95
New housing units needed
(assumes 80% of homes not available to new employees) 230
Source: Colorado Demography Office, 2015-2019 ACS 5-year estimates, consultant team
Williford/WSW/Continuum 32
Summary of Needs
Between 755 and 840 housing units are needed by
the end of 2027, but 112 community housing units
are currently under construction. As shown in the
last row of the table below, once those are delivered
645 to 730 units will still be needed, or about 130 to
145 units per year.
Since 2018, about 343 permits have been issued per
year, which would appear to be well above the
stated need. Yet, as of 2020 only 37% of housing was
occupied by locals. Most new housing being built is priced at $700,000 or above, out of reach of most
locals. And, only 10% of new permits (about 30/year) have been deed restricted over the past five years.
The Valley needs to ramp up its community housing production if it desires to catch up and keep up with
local workforce housing needs.
Summary of Housing Units Needed through 2027
Low High
Catch Up Need 450 450
Unfilled Jobs (12% of jobs) 450 450
Keep Up Need 305 390
New Jobs 75 160
Retiring employees 230 230
Catch-up and Keep-up through 2027 755 840
Under construction (112) (112)
Adjusted Catch-up and Keep-up 645 730
Note: Figures rounded. Catch up need is presented as finite.
Keep up need is presented as a range based on possible new job growth.
Where new housing is built is a function of many variables, including local policy. Policy decisions can
facilitate or hinder new residential construction, and direct it to municipalities. Focusing construction of
new workforce housing in Granby, Fraser, and Winter Park where jobs, services and infrastructure are
present supports more efficient and affordable development patterns and minimizes additional
development in the wildland-urban interface.
Needs by Own/Rent and Income
Both for rent and for sale housing for local employees is needed. The majority of new employees will
rent homes (typically 70% based on resident surveys in mountain communities). In addition, zero
percent rental vacancy for at least the past four years points to the need to increase the number of
rentals.
Seasonal housing is not included in the need
calculation summarized here. Winter Park
Resorts expects to grow its workforce over the
next five years, including many new seasonal
positions. To facilitate this growth, they are
building new seasonal employee housing, which
will house about 332 employees in 250 units.
Following that development, the ongoing need
for seasonal housing should be monitored.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 33
The precise ratio, however, is dependent upon the community’s desired direction and housing policy.
Rentals are needed to help recruit new workers and residents to the region; ownership is needed to
retain year-round residents and support community stability.
The tables below use a tenure split of 70% rentals and 30% for sale housing, which will boost the supply
of rentals in the near term, while also providing homeownership opportunities for year-round residents.
Summary of Housing Needs by Own/Rent Through 2027
Low High
Units needed through 2027 755 840
Ownership (30%) 225 250
Rental (70%) 530 590
Under Construction (all rental units) (112) (112)
Adjusted Rentals Needed 420 480
Note: figures rounded
The following table shows the income targeting for the additional rental units needed based on the
income distribution of renter households that live in Grand County. Because there is a range of new
rental units needed (low and high), the mid-point is presented below, or 450 rental units.
73% of new rental units need to be priced below $2,100 per month; half should be under
$1,400.
There are 112 restricted rentals under construction, with most at prices below 60% AMI or
between 80% and 120% AMI.
Rental Units Needed by AMI through 2027
AMI
≤60% 60.1 - 80% 80.1% -
100%
100.1% -
120%
120.1% -
180% >180%
Max. Income
(2-person household) $42,300 $56,400 $70,500 $84,600 $126,900 >$126,900
Max. Affordable Rent
(2-person household) $1,058 $1,410 $1,763 $2,115 $3,173 >$3,173
Renter Income
Distribution 34% 15% 16% 8% 15% 12%
Rental Units Needed
by AMI [1] 190 85 90 40 85 70
Under Construction [2] 60 2 ----- 50 ----- 0 0
Rental Units Needed
(450 total)* 130 85 65 15 85 70
[1] Units Needed total is based on the mid-point of the low and high rental housing need estimates; figures rounded
[2] units under construction as of June 2, 2022
The table below shows the target price points for additional for sale homes needed through 2027 based
on the estimated income distribution of owner households in Grand County. Because there is a range of
new ownership units needed (low and high), the mid-point is presented below, or 240 new for sale
units.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 34
70% of owner households need housing below $380,000; 30% need homes priced from
$170,000 to $250,000, a price range that will require deep subsidy to build given the very high
cost of construction (see What are the challenges to addressing our community housing need? –
Cost of Construction section).
There was only one home priced under $400,000 in The Valley in early June 2022.
Ownership Units Needed by AMI through 2027
AMI
≤60% 60.1% -
80%
80.1% -
100%
100.1% -
120%
120.1% -
180% >180%
Max. Income
(2-person household) $42,300 $56,400 $70,500 $84,600 $126,900 >$126,900
Max. Affordable
Purchase Price [1]
(2-person household)
$127,400 $169,800 $212,300 $254,700 $382,100 >$382,100
Owner Income
Distribution 19% 8% 11% 10% 21% 30%
Ownership Units
Needed by AMI
(240 total) [2]
45 20 25 25 50 75
For sale listings [3] 0 0 0 0 1 57
[1] Assumes 7.5% interest rate 30-year loan, 5% down, and 20% of costs to taxes, insurance, HOA
[2] Units Needed total is based on the mid-point of the low and high ownership housing need estimates; figures rounded
[3] as of June 2, 2022
Williford/WSW/Continuum 35
What are residents of the Fraser River Valley
experiencing with regard to their housing?
Individuals and households who earn local wages increasingly cannot find and afford a place to live in
The Valley. Second and vacation home buyers make up a very large percentage of the local housing
market. The next section highlights the share of unoccupied homes, followed by various metrics and
challenges local earners face.
Unoccupied Housing (Vacation Homes)
The share of housing units that are not occupied year-round is very high in The Valley (63%) and has
changed little since 2010, except in Fraser.
Fraser experienced a 5% increase in the share of unoccupied homes from 2010 to 2020. As
stated in prior assessments, this trend is not moving in the right direction if the goal is for the
majority of homes to be occupied year-round.
Granby’s share of unoccupied homes increased slightly from 2010 to 2020.
Winter Park has an extremely high number of unoccupied homes, with 8 out of 10 homes not
occupied year-round. This figure did not change over the past decade.
Percentage of Housing Not Occupied Year Round
2010 Census 2020 Census
Grand County 60% 58%
Fraser River Valley 64% 63%
Winter Park 81% 81%
Fraser 51% 56%
Granby 49% 51%
Source: 2010 Census, 2020 DEC Redistricting Data (PL 94-171), Colorado Demography Office, ESRI
In Grand County and the three incorporated Valley communities, the vast majority of homes not
occupied year-round are “for seasonal, recreational, or occasional use.” In other words, they are
vacation homes.
Percentage of Unoccupied Homes Classified as Vacation Homes
% Vacation Homes
Grand County 88%
Winter Park 86%
Fraser 95%
Granby 83%
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
The Fraser River Valley has long been a desirable place to have a second/vacation home for those who
live on the Front Range or out of state, which only increased since COVID. Local Realtors indicated that
since COVID began, the share of homes purchased by those from the Front Range increased. Prior
Williford/WSW/Continuum 36
reports showed a very high percentage (78%) of buyers being from out of state or other parts of
Colorado. The increase in purchases by non-locals combined with escalating sale prices points to the
trend continuing to move in the wrong direction as local workers struggle to compete with households
earning incomes elsewhere.
Local Residents: Rent vs. Own
The share of residents who own and rent in Grand County and the Fraser River Valley has changed very
little since 2010. There have, however, been changes within specific communities:
The rate of homeownership in Fraser and Winter Park has declined since 2010, dropping by nine
and five percentage points to 38% and 67% respectively.
The homeownership rate has increased from 62% to 67% in Granby since 2010.
Own vs. Rent
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
Local Wages
A large share of employees work in relatively low-paying jobs, including restaurants and bars, hotels,
and retail – jobs that are the lifeblood of the local tourism
economy. Wages in these sectors are not sufficient to afford
market rate housing in The Valley. People employed in
areas of the economy that provide essential services to the
community, such as teachers, fire fighters, and law
enforcement personnel are also unable to afford current
market prices.
68%63%53%
38%
67%
32%37%47%
62%
33%
Grand County Fraser Valley Winter Park Fraser Granby
own rent
It’s nearly impossible to hire anyone
because they cannot find affordable
housing.
-Local Employer Comment
Williford/WSW/Continuum 37
Grand County Employment and Wages
Source: BLS, Colorado Department of Employment and Labor LMI Gateway
Although employers report that they have increased wages during COVID, wage and income increases
have not kept pace with housing price escalation. Moreover, pay is far lower than on the Front Range,
putting local residents at a competitive disadvantage when competing for the same housing.
The average sale price in The Valley increased by 21% from 2020 to 2021 whereas average
annual pay in Grand County only increased by 6% to about $45,260.
The average annual pay in the Denver Metropolitan Area was about 73% higher ($78,427) in
2021 than in Grand County, and this does not account for other assets and income that high net
worth households on the Front Range may have (BLS).
The median family income reported by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) for a family of four in Grand County rose by about 10% per year on average from 2020 to
2022, while the median sale price in The Valley increased by 17% from 2020 to 2021 and
another 21% through early June 2022.
Cost Burden
About one in three households in The Valley (similar to Colorado) pays more than 30% of their gross
income for housing, which means they are considered cost burdened.
Fraser had the highest share of cost burdened households (39%) prior to the pandemic, followed by
Winter Park (30%). Although Granby had the lowest percentage, one in four households (25%) was cost
burdened. Rising sale prices and rental rates have likely increased the percentage of cost burdened
households in the past two years.
12%
0%1%
28%
2%
11%
2%2%4%
1%
6%
1%0%1%
11%
7%
0%
6%
3%2%
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
$90,000
$100,000
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
2021 Q3 QCEW Jobs 2021 Q3 Average Annual Wage 2021 Average Annual Pay
Williford/WSW/Continuum 38
This metric is important because it points to a mismatch between what local households can afford and
the cost of housing. Cost burdened households have a smaller share of their income to pay for other life
necessities such as food, health care, and transportation. Increasing prices (inflation) for necessities
(food and gas) is further straining household budgets and leaves less money for them to spend locally
(see How do investments in housing benefit the community and economy?).
Percentage of Cost Burdened Households
Grand County 31%
Winter Park 30%
Fraser 39%
Granby 25%
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
Williford/WSW/Continuum 39
How has the for-sale market changed?
The for-sale market has changed quite dramatically over the past several years. Prices have increased,
inventory has decreased, and workforce affordability is very low.
Price Trends
Most homes sold from 2020 to early June 2022 (86%) were in the municipal limits of Winter Park, Fraser,
and Granby.
Fraser River Valley Home Sales, 2020 to 2022 [1]
[1] through June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, ESRI, consultant team
Williford/WSW/Continuum 40
The price of homes has escalated dramatically in the last few years to the point where homeownership
is now out of reach for most of the local workforce. From 2020 to 2021, the median annual sale price in
The Valley increased by 17% and another 21%
from 2021 through early June 2022. The average
sale price of homes in The Valley in the first five
months of 2022 was just under one million
dollars, up almost $300,000 from the 2020
average.
Fraser River Valley Home Prices, 2020 to 2022 YTD
Average Sale Price Median Sale Price
2020 $672,587 $585,501
2021 $811,024 $683,860
2022 [1] $969,598 $830,000
Note: inclusive of sales with a price greater than zero
[1] through June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, consultant team
The change in the average sale price per finished square foot underscores how dramatically The Valley’s
housing market has changed during the pandemic. In 2020, the average sale price per finished square
foot was $395. It increased to $498 in 2021 and was $592 for sales through early June 2022, a 50%
increase from the 2020 average.
The distribution of home sales from 2020 to early June 2022 by price range highlights how quickly the
share of homes under $500,000 has diminished and the share of homes over one million dollars has
increased. Note that to afford a $500,000 home, a 2-person household would need to make about
$166,000 per year (236% AMI).
I want to own my own place but have no chance
in this market or in this community.
-Local Resident
Williford/WSW/Continuum 41
Fraser River Valley Home Sale Distribution, 2022 to 2022 [1]
Note: inclusive of sales with a price greater than zero
[1] through June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, consultant team
In addition to very high and increasing sale prices, 84% of homes sold from 2020 through early June
2022 had an HOA fee. Fees ranged widely with an overall Valley average of about $340 per month,
which adds the equivalent of about $50,000 to the price of a home.
A closer look at each incorporated municipality highlights the same price spike in the last few years, with
Winter Park and Fraser experiencing the highest increase in the median sale price (about 45%) since
2020.
Median Sale Price by Municipality
Winter Park Fraser Granby
2020 $541,500 $608,000 $541,000
2021 $630,000 $719,852 $600,000
2022 [1] $785,000 $874,500 $684,875
Percent Change
2020 to 2022 [1] 45% 44% 27%
Note: inclusive of sales with a price greater than zero
[1] through June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, consultant team
12%6%3%
15%
9%
7%
12%
14%
6%
47%
49%
51%
14%
22%
33%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2020 2021 2022 [1]
<$300,000 $300-$399,000 $400-$499,000 $500-$999,999 $1M+
Williford/WSW/Continuum 42
Fraser’s median sale price exceeded that of the other municipalities, but Winter Park’s prices remain the
highest per finished square foot at about $700.
Average Sale Price per Finished Square Foot by Municipality
Winter Park Fraser Granby
2020 $471 $396 $284
2021 $591 $510 $360
2022 [1] $702 $625 $418
Note: inclusive of sales with a price greater than zero
[1] through June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, consultant team
Market rate homes in Fraser River Valley sold for a median price of about $685,000 in 2021, but the
maximum affordable price for a “move-up” household (one making 200% AMI) is only about $425,000.
This discrepancy means that owners are disincentivized to sell homes at prices that are affordable to the
move-up market.
Supply: disincentive to sell to local “move-up” household
For Sale Availability
There were only 58 homes listed for sale in The Valley as of June 2, 2022. Relative to 2021 monthly sales,
this represents about one month supply of inventory. A general industry standard is that when the
$685,000
MEDIAN PRICE
MARKET
RATE
MOVE UP
RATE $425,000
MAX PRICE
HOUSEHOLD
MAKING 200%
AMI
Williford/WSW/Continuum 43
number of homes for sale is below a 6-month supply, it is a seller’s market. The number of listed homes
affordable to the local workforce, however, is much lower.
There were only four (4) homes for sale in early June 2022 under $500,000, which represents
about a one week supply of inventory in this price range.
Fraser River Valley For Sale Listings [1]
[1] listings as of June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, consultant team
Locals also must compete with buyers from outside of The Valley, many with cash, making the prospect
of becoming a homeowner or moving into larger or smaller housing as circumstances change (new
families needing another bedroom, seniors downsizing) even more dire.
One in five purchases in 2020 was with cash.
Almost one in three purchases in 2022 through early June was with cash.
Fraser River Valley Cash Purchases, 2020 to June 2022
[1] listings as of June 2, 2022
Source: MLS, consultant team
0 1 3
24
30
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
20%
26%
30%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
2020 2021 2022 [1]
Williford/WSW/Continuum 44
Within the three incorporated communities,
cash was also used for many purchases. The
highest share was in Winter Park where almost
one in three sales were paid for with cash,
followed by Fraser (1 in 5) and Granby.
Share of Sales Financed with Cash by Community, 2020 to 2022 [1]
% Cash Purchases
Winter Park 30%
Fraser 20%
Granby 16%
Source: MLS, consultant team
Realtors and property managers interviewed noted that not
only are there more cash buyers than before the pandemic,
but there are bidding wars occurring in the market. Bidding
wars are very difficult for locals to win, exacerbating the
challenges faced by local households wishing to purchase.
Local Workforce Affordability
Current listings are unaffordable to 70% of owner households. There were only four listings under
$500,000 as of June 2, 2022.
A 550 square foot condominium in Fraser was the only listing affordable to those making under
180% AMI excluding the HOA fee of $445 per month.
The remaining three were a 532 square foot condominium in Winter Park ($300+ per month
HOA fee) and two single-family homes in Granby listed at $479,900 and $495,000.
Homeowner Income Distribution Compared to Available Homes
AMI Household Income Range
(2-person household)
Maximum
Affordable
Price
Owner
Household
Distribution
For Sale Listings
(June 2, 2022)
<60% $0 to $42,300 $127,400 19% 0%
60.1-80% $42,301 to $56,400 $169,800 8% 0%
80.1-100% $56,401 to $70,500 $212,300 11% 0%
100.1-120% $70,501 to $84,600 $254,700 10% 0%
120.1-180% $84,601 to $126,900 $382,100 21% 2%
180.1-300% $126,901 to $211,500 $636,800 18% 14%
>300% > $211,500 > $636,800 12% 849%
Total - 100% 100%
(58 listings)
[1] Max purchase price assumes 30-year mortgage at 7.5% with 5% down and 20% of the payment covering taxes, HOA, PMI
and insurance. Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding
Source: CHFA; Ribbon Demographics, LLC; consultant team
“I have never seen so many cash transactions in
my 20+ year career in the valley. Where does all
this cash come from? And prices just keep rising.”
-Local Realtor
If a buyer’s price point is $400,000,
you have to look at homes for sale in
the $300,000’s given bidding wars.
-Realtor/Property Manager Focus
Group
Williford/WSW/Continuum 45
How has the rental market changed?
There are very few rentals available in The Valley. Those that are available exceed what most workers
earning local wages can afford. This was the case prior to COVID, and has only gotten worse as rental
rates have increased in the last two years.
When vacancy rates are this low, the rental market is near capacity and cannot absorb new residents or
employees moving to the area. This results in several issues:
Renters have difficulty moving from one unit to another as their circumstances change;
Renters are vulnerable to increasing levels of cost burden, because there is nowhere to move to
if the landlord seeks to increase their rent;
New employees struggle to find housing when hired by local businesses;
Rents increase at rates much faster than incomes; and
Landlords have little incentive to make repairs and capital investments. For those trying to
maintain or repair their property, contractors are hard to come by making this task even less
likely to occur than in the past. One interviewee indicated that getting a contractor on site for
even small fixes currently takes anywhere from two to three months.
Rental Availability
In general, vacancy rates at or below 3% are very low, double-digit vacancy rates are very high, and a
vacancy rate of around 6% that is trending downward typically indicates to developers that construction
of additional units should begin.
There is an extremely scarce supply of rentals in general, and even fewer that are affordable to the local
workforce. A search for advertised rentals in March and April 2022 yielded 52 listings, mostly condos
(69%).
The vacancy rate in April 2022 was about 1.7%, and less than 1% for those earning 120% AMI or
less (max rent of $2,100).
Near or zero vacancy is not new to The Valley. The vacancy rate has effectively been zero for the
last four years and COVID started a “buying frenzy” by non-locals that reduced the number of
rentals in The Valley.
About 10% of listings were for mid-term stays of 2-5 months.
Rentals are filled almost immediately. One local property manager has a 100-person waitlist. No
advertising is necessary.
Combined Rental Listings by Number of Bedrooms (March and April 2022)
Winter
Park Fraser Tabernash Granby Total Percent of
Total
Studio/1 bedroom 4 1 1 6 12 23%
2 bedroom 9 13 0 0 22 42%
3+ bedroom 3 6 1 8 18 35%
Total 16 20 2 14 52 100%
Source: consultant team
Williford/WSW/Continuum 46
One-bedroom units are in high demand but
the least available. Real estate professionals
and employers noted that fewer people
want to live with roommates than in the
past, which is increasing the demand for
studio and one-bedroom units.
Long Term Rental Conversions
Long term rentals are being lost due to conversions to short-term (less than 30 days) and mid-term (2 to
5 months) rental. Some short-term units are being rented for five to six months, but pricing and
payment terms put them out of reach of most locals, while others are being rented longer term to East
Troublesome fire victims.
Owners of long-term rental units have been selling their units to capitalize on very high for sale prices
and avoidance of rising expenses and reduced profit margins. New owners of these units are often
renting them on a less than long term basis to be able to use the property for personal use at other
times of the year. A local property manager indicated that in the last two years, 10 clients have sold
their property and left the long-term business.
A few short-term rental units were listed on vacation home rental
sites like AirBnB and VRBO in the spring of 2022 where hosts were
offering stays of five to six months. Such listings are not accounted
for in the availability or market price tables herein because they
are primarily targeted toward well-to-do visitors who desire to
stay for a season and are not affordable to most locals.
The lowest cost unit listed was a studio for $2,800 per month; most listings ranged from $3,600
to $7,000 per month.
Not only is the monthly rate too high for most locals, but a lot of the total booking cost is due at
the time of reservation, which necessitates a large cash outlay that most local renters do not
have.
Some short-term rental owners have leased their units for longer periods to residents who lost their
homes in the East Troublesome fire. (More on short-term rentals in What has been built and what is
planned? Loss of housing section)
Rental Market Prices
An analysis of advertised rentals in the spring of 2022 showed that:
Rents averaged about $1,600 for a one bedroom, $2,700 for a 2 bedroom, and $4,500 for a
three-bedroom rental unit.
In general, rental rates are higher the closer the unit is to the Winter Park Resort – highest in
Winter Park and lowest in Granby.
I live with my brother in a two bedroom. Ideally, as I
am in my 30s now, I would prefer to live alone in a
one bedroom. Secure and affordable one bedroom
units in this county are a rarity so not really a
possibility.
-Local Resident
A lot of my friends are recently
being forced to move due to
home owners who want to do
short term housing.
-Local Resident
Williford/WSW/Continuum 47
Property managers reported slightly lower average rents than market rate listings, which is
common. In this tight rental market, most managed rentals are filled by word of mouth and are
never advertised. Advertised units, therefore, tend to be higher priced homes that local
employees cannot afford.
Fraser River Valley Rent Prices by Bedroom Size (2022)
0/1-bedroom 2-bedroom 3+-bedroom Overall Avg.
Property manager interview
(typical range) $1,000-$1,500 $1,500-$2,500 $2,500-$4,000 $1,000-$4,000
March-April 2022 listing
range $975-$1,900 $1,500-$3,200 $3,500-$6,800 $1,000-$5,500
March-April 2022 average
listed rent $1,642 $2,707 $4,556 $3,067
AMI affordability of
advertised rent [1] 93% 137% 230% 155%
Income needed to afford
advertised rent $65,680 $108,280 $182,240 $122,680
Number of average wages
needed to afford rent [2] 1.5 2.4 4.0 2.7
Notes: calculations exclude a 3 bedroom single family rental on a working ranch with an extremely low monthly rate.
[1] calculation assumes 2 people in a 0/1 bedroom unit, and 3 people in 2- and 3-bedroom units and overall
[2] 2021 average wage of $45,261 (preliminary, subject to revision)
Source: Property manager interviews, online rental listings (Craigslist, Zillow, Apartments.com, WorkInGrand.com,
HotPads.com), Bureau of Labor Statistics, consultant team
Rental rates have increased since the COVID pandemic began, pushing some out of The Valley.
Rental rates have increased by at least $300-$400 per month for most people in the last two
years, and as high as $500 per month in some cases.
Landlords desiring to retain good tenants or work within eviction moratoriums have kept rates
more stable.
The higher rates are pushing some renters out of The Valley. One local property manager has
had 20 tenants leave The Valley in the last two years.
Local Workforce Affordability
There is a major disconnect between the price points of available listings and what local renters can
afford. The majority (65%) of renters can afford about $1,750/month or lower, yet 80% of rental listings
are higher than this.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 48
Renter Income Distribution Compared to Available Rentals
AMI Household Income Range
(2-person household)
Maximum
Affordable Rent
Renter Income
Distribution
Available
Rentals [1]
<60% $0 to $42,300 $1,058 34% 4%
60.1-80% $42,301 to $56,400 $1,410 15% 4%
80.1-100% $56,401 to $70,500 $1,763 16% 12%
100.1-120% $70,501 to $84,600 $2,115 8% 15%
120.1-180% $84,601 to $126,900 $3,173 15% 31%
180.1-300% $126,901 to $211,500 $5,288 9% 21%
>300% > $211,500 > $5,288 3% 13%
Total - 100% 100%
(52 listings)
Note: May not add to 100% due to rounding
[1] March-April 2022
Source: CHFA; Ribbon Demographics, LLC; consultant team
Williford/WSW/Continuum 49
What are the challenges to addressing our community
housing needs?
The community has long acknowledged that housing for the local workforce is a challenge, and many
have agreed that it is a priority. Yet, complexities and challenges remain.
Market Appreciation
The loss of “naturally occurring” housing that is affordable to the local workforce has been rapid in the
past five years. As home prices and rents appreciate beyond what local wage earners can afford, existing
homes are being sold and changing from year-round occupancy to shorter stay vacation homes. This
dynamic is often starkly illustrated when retiring long-term employees sell their homes at prices many
times above what their successors can afford.
Cost of Construction
Construction cost escalation has been present in the Colorado market for nearly two decades, but has
been even more pronounced in the past 18 months. Developers are reporting construction costs of
$310-$350 for vertical construction only. This means that if land, design, financing, site work, and local
permit fees are free or already paid for outside the project, the cost to build a new 1,200 sq ft home
ranges from $372,000 to $420,000. Most projects do not have this luxury and therefore the table below
assumes $470 per square foot inclusive of land, infrastructure, local fees, and other soft costs.
Following the format of the development proforma used in the 2016 Fraser Housing Needs Assessment,
the table below demonstrates a more complete picture of the cost to build, and why building new
housing for the local workforce is so challenging.
Development Proforma: 20 residences – 1,200 sq ft each – For Sale
Total Cost Per Square Foot Per Housing Unit
Land Acquisition $1,000,000 $42 $50,000
Soft Costs $844,000 $35 $42,200
Hard Costs $7,440,000 $310 $372,000
Financing Costs $372,000 $16 $18,600
Sales Costs $579,000 $24 $28,950
Owner's Contingency (10%) $1,023,000 $43 $51,150
Total Uses $11,258,000 $470 $562,900
Source: interviews, consultant team
There are many variables which can make development more and less risky and expensive. This analysis
uses the best information currently available, and demonstrates an increase of about $100,000/unit
over 2016 costs. The gap between the cost to build and what local households can afford has grown.
In 2016, a median income household could afford $200,000, and the cost to build was about
$465,000, for a gap of $265,000.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 50
Now, a median income two-person household can afford about $212,000. With construction
costs of $562,900, the gap is now about $350,000 per home.
Household
Income
Affordable
Purchase Price
Gap between
Cost to Build
and Sales Price
Break Even Price $154,000 $562,900 $ -
50.1 - 80% AMI $56,400 $169,800 ($393,100)
80.1 - 100% AMI $70,500 $212,300 ($350,600)
100.1 - 120% AMI $84,600 $254,700 ($308,200)
120.1 - 140% AMI $98,700 $297,200 ($265,700)
140.1 - 180% AMI $126,900 $382,100 ($180,800)
Source: CHFA, developer interviews, consultant team
Historically, local governments in resort communities have used contributions of land and local fees to
catalyze development of housing for the local workforce. In today’s development environment, land and
fee waivers are not enough to close the gap and make development for the local workforce
economically feasible. Significant additional funding support is typically needed to serve all but the very
highest income local residents.
Rate of Production
The number of unfilled jobs, projected job growth and
retirements indicate that the Fraser River Valley needs
about 130 to 145 new homes per year, with about 75%
(approximately 100 to 110 per year) priced below 180%
AMI to be affordable to the local workforce.
Over the past five years, about 340 homes were permitted
each year, however, only 10% of these (about 34 per year
on average) were deed restricted for households living and working in The Valley.
Therefore, the rate of production of community housing needs to increase by approximately 65 to 75
units per year over recent production to meet the identified need.
Community Buy-In
Even though 72% of employers contacted during this assessment agree that housing is one of the most
critical local issues, when developers and public agencies seek to build, they are often met with
resistance or opposition. Strong public engagement, open and transparent processes, and ongoing
communication of workforce housing success stories can help to counter this dynamic. Making
workforce housing a use by right in certain zone districts, and increasing the ability to build housing
types that are cost effective to construct can also be effective strategies.
There is an ironic cycle that I don’t have
enough workers to build housing
because they can’t find housing. My
guys would love to be building housing
they could afford.
-Local Developer
Williford/WSW/Continuum 51
What has been accomplished for workforce housing in
the past five years?
Since the last housing needs assessments in the area, each jurisdiction has taken action and committed
resources to make workforce housing more feasible. In addition to the specific development projects
described in What has been built and what planned? additional accomplishments supporting community
housing in the region are described here.
Granby
In addition to master planning the Highway 40 Parcel, Granby has taken additional initiatives to further
workforce housing in the past five years.
Policy Direction
Town Council has stated that workforce housing is an important policy priority, and has directed staff to
master plan and solicit development partners for the Highway 40 parcels, and participated in the newly
formed Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership.
Zoning for Affordability
Granby updated codes to allow accessory dwelling units in all residential districts, although they have
not found many property owners seeking to build them to date. A group of elected officials and staff will
be working on updates to the accessory dwelling unit codes, looking at possible ADU incentives, and
looking at proposing some inclusionary zoning updates to the code.
Deed Restriction for Community Housing
Granby is currently developing a deed restriction to support the Highway 40 Project and other
community housing to serve local residents and the workforce. The deed restriction is anticipated to be
complete in fall of 2022.
Fraser
In addition to the purchase of Victoria Village, Fraser has undertaken several initiatives to further
workforce housing in the past five years.
Policy Direction
Town Council has stated that workforce housing is the top policy priority, and has directed staff to
purchase land and seek opportunities to further this policy goal.
Zoning for Affordability
Since the recommendations of the 2016 Housing Needs Assessment, Fraser has implemented a wide
array of zoning code updates to support community housing goals. These include:
Williford/WSW/Continuum 52
Lessened minimum parking requirements for all land uses, including several policies and
programs that may result in a reduction in the number of parking spaces required and a more
efficient use of parking resources.
Adopted Resolution 2018-15-15 establishing an attainable housing plant investment fee
incentive program. This has expired, but staff expressed interest and willingness to pursue
renewing it.
Amended Code to allow for the deferred collection of Plant Investment Fees (PIF). Collect fees
prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy rather than at building permit issuance. Reduced
the PIF for multi-family rental units under common ownership, such as apartments buildings.
Reduced the amount of open space required for multi-family projects from 55% to 35%.
Established a density bonus program in two zoning districts subject to the provisions of deed-
restricted affordable housing dwelling and include incentives for other desired outcomes like
mixed use in the downtown. The recently approved Koselig on Main was made possible with
these changes.
Code change to allow the development of reduced lot size, width, setbacks and/or floor area for
a residential dwelling unit subject to certain provisions and via a conditional use process.
Accessory Dwelling Units are a use by right in all zoning districts except for Low-Density Single-
Family where it is a conditional use.
General Fund Appropriation for Community Housing
For the past several years, Fraser has appropriated $500,000-$800,000 from the general fund to support
community housing efforts. The Community Housing Fund is part of Town’s budget and currently has
$400,000 and recently expended $760,000 in matching funds for the procurement of Victoria Village.
Deed Restriction Purchase Program
The Town of Fraser created a deed restriction purchase program for existing properties, modeled after
Vail InDeed. The restriction would require the unit be occupied by a full-time resident employed in the
local economy. Fraser has been seeking to invest about $20,000 per bedroom to secure inventory for
local workforce long term. The program has not purchased a deed restriction to date.
Winter Park
In addition to the initiating development of Hideaway Place, Fireside Apartments, and Hideaway
Junction Phase 2, Winter Park has undertaken several initiatives to further workforce housing in the past
five years.
Short Term Fix
Following the East Troublesome Fire in fall of 2020 and COVID 19 shutdowns the same year, the Town of
Winter Park implemented an emergency housing program that matched property owners with local
businesses to house employees. The Town deployed $350,000 to incentivize conversion of previously
short term or vacant housing to employee rentals. The program was successful in securing 49 bedrooms
for the 2020/2021 ski season and beyond. Leases could be six months or a year, and had to be between
Williford/WSW/Continuum 53
the landowner and a Winter Park based business. The average monthly rent per bedroom was $1,100,
and the total investment per bedroom was about $7,150. Winter Park plans to survey businesses in the
coming months to gauge interest in running the program again for the 2022-2023 ski season. While the
total program budget will likely be similar, staff will use the business survey to anticipate the level of
need for the coming winter season.
Zoning for Affordability
Winter Park has been assessing what elements of the zoning code need improvement to support
housing affordability and attainability. They have had conversations around parking reductions and
density bonuses, and are in the process of updating the Uniform Development Code. Allowing Accessory
Dwelling Units by right is also anticipated to be part of the code update.
Annexation and Development Agreements
Winter Park Council and staff have been focused on negotiating community housing requirements with
annexation and development agreements. A recent success was Cooper Creek, where the developer has
converted underutilized commercial space into 40 new bedrooms.
Real Estate Transfer Assessment
Winter Park has negotiated real estate transfer assessments that occur at every transfer of a property in
some select development agreements. This source has raised just under $100,000 per year for
community housing in recent years, and is likely to grow as new developments with these agreements
enter the for-sale market.
Impact Fee
The current Impact Fee of $3.00 per square foot of new development has been generating $95,820 to
$425,461 per year over the past seven years. This impact fee is low compared to other resort
communities, and an updated nexus study is recommended.
Winter Park Housing Assistance Fund
The Town of Winter Park, Grand Foundation and Winter Park Resort have partnered to create the
Winter Park Affordable Housing Donor Advised Fund. The Fund is designed to provide housing
assistance to eligible applicants up to 150% AMI, focusing on emergency rental assistance and down
payment assistance grants.
Unincorporated Grand County and Region Wide
Grand Foundation Housing Assistance Fund
This fund has granted over $800,000 for rent assistance and down payment assistance to households up
to 150% AMI in the past four years. Granting is coordinated with Grand County Housing Authority.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 54
Grand County Housing Authority
The housing authority administers 140 Housing Choice vouchers, and is currently leasing up 50 more.
They also offer down payment assistance, and provide property management for several subsidized
senior housing sites. The Housing Authority anticipates bringing a housing renovation program online
when they are able to staff appropriately; this could support up to $500,000 in Grand County and Clear
Creek County in housing improvements annually.
Grand County Housing Authority is also a special limited partners on the Old Town Apartments
development in Fraser, assisting the economic feasibility of that rental housing development.
Northwest Council of Governments (NWCCOG)
Provides Weatherization services to low-income households, helping to improve the quality and
affordability of the existing housing stock.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 55
Recommendations and Next Steps
The communities in the Fraser River Valley are on track with implementing many of the best practices
for addressing workforce housing needs. These strategies include using a balanced toolbox of incentives,
regulations, funding, and partnerships. Communities in the Fraser River Valley are taking a holistic
approach, looking at land use regulations, infrastructure, and fees to help remove barriers to community
housing. They are securing land and having a mission driven or public sector entity catalyzing new
housing development to meet local needs. Another best practice is having a regional coordinated
response, which is currently underway with the newly formed Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership.
We recommend bolstering these current activities with the following considerations.
Produce new housing to meet your local workforce market
There are major market deficiencies in housing both for sale and for rent in the Fraser River Valley. New
housing production is needed to create a balanced and functional housing market, and some of it is
already underway.
See the current pipeline of community housing development projects through to
completion
Communities in The Valley have already invested significant resources in upcoming development
projects to meet this need, but the challenges of today’s development environment leave some of these
projects. Hideaway Junction Phase 2, Victoria Village, and Highway 40 will all take significant time,
funding, and political will to become realities. Work across the region to dedicate the staffing,
partnerships, best practices and lessons learned, and coordinate the funding needed to make these
projects successful.
Create a balanced for-sale market for locally employed households
Homes available at prices for locally employed households are essentially non-existent. Rising interest
rates are putting additional strain on local wage earner’s buying power, and the amount of subsidy
required to make homeownership happen is increasing. The most recent deed restricted home sale had
a lottery of over 40 qualified applicants. With essentially no inventory under $500,000, local working
households have no options for homeownership. Essential workers are better able to commit to staying
in a community when they have the opportunity to purchase a home.
The consultant team recommendation is that 20-30% of the deed restricted inventory created across
The Valley in the next five years be for homeownership. Other considerations include:
Focus on producing housing under $500,000 to be affordable to locally employed households;
ideally, the average deed restricted price would land somewhere around 120% AMI ($254,700).
Use deed restrictions to create year-round neighborhoods. Neighborhoods where most or all of
homes have “lights on” increases sense of community. Residents of year-round enclaves in
other resort communities report high levels of satisfaction with their housing and commitment
to stay in the community.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 56
Do not allow short term rentals in deed restricted housing.
Create a functional rental market
A functional supply of rental housing would be when the vacancy rate is at least 5% for units priced
within range of the local workforce (typically under $2,100/month) or 120% AMI). The overall rental
vacancy rate in The Valley is very low (approximately 1.7%) and even lower when accounting for rentals
affordable to the local workforce (less than 1%). This low rate has pushed rental prices up, constrained
the ability new workers to move to the area, and the local workforce to move freely within The Valley as
their circumstances change.
Based on this vacancy rate, the rental market is not functional. Pairing this observation with the number
of unfilled jobs, long standing low vacancy, and availability of financing to assist in filling the capital gap
to construct rental housing, the consultant team recommends:
Making rental inventory a greater part of deed restricted housing inventory in the next five
years. Bringing 70-85% of new community housing online as rentals is likely realistic and could
begin to address the significant housing gaps related to unfilled jobs and pending retirements.
Focus on creating a broad spectrum of rentals, from seasonal dorms, one and two-bedroom
apartments, through larger duplexes and townhouses for families.
Build for the full spectrum of local wages, from hourly/seasonal to new middle and upper
management moving to the area. Use state and federal resources to build where those program
constraints intersect with community needs. Use local funding sources to build housing that
meets community needs outside the state and federal “box.”
Do not allow short term rentals in new housing intended for the local workforce.
Land Bank
Right now, there are significant development opportunities for community housing. But looking out past
the five year time horizon, those opportunities diminish. Seize the day when opportunities arise to
secure land for future development. Some of the main characteristics of suitable land include flat
topography, close proximity to water, sewer, transportation, and jobs, and correct zoning. But not all of
characteristics may be present for every parcel, but securing land for future development should still be
a priority.
Add momentum, capacity, more funding and new partners to current
initiatives
Community housing is already identified as a priority by jurisdictions across The Valley, and communities
are making strong progress. Employers and non-profits are also diligently working to address the myriad
of housing issues. Continuing this work and adding more coordination, staffing, and bringing new
partners into the mix can help to further the community response to the housing shortage.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 57
Regional Coordination
All sectors need to be at the table, and there are numerous benefits to a region-wide, coordinated
effort:
Ensure that resources are allocated efficiency and effectively, and projects within The Valley are
not competing against each other for resources such as tax credits or grant funds.
Ensure that projects are sequenced so that risk is well managed, and the full spectrum of local
community housing need gets addressed.
Ensure that no one is siloed geographically or otherwise.
Share capacity and lessons learned. Housing is a complex business, and each jurisdiction does
not have the scale to employ the level of staffing needed to carry forward complex projects and
manage ongoing inventory.
Have a “one stop shop approach” to community housing that provides a clear and consistent
approach that helps consumers of community housing understand what is available, what to
expect with regard to restrictions and expectations, and to compare products across
jurisdictions to make informed choices about tradeoffs and build consumer confidence that
eligibility and re-sale processes are fair, transparent, and consistent.
o The Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership offers an excellent opportunity to be the
convening body for housing coordination and one-stop shop for consumers. The agency
should be mindful to convene diverse stakeholders to inform, guide, and implement
regional coordination.
Public Private Partnerships
Significant progress has been made and big projects are in the works, but the cost to construct is still
much higher than what the local workforce can afford. Bringing costs down and securing permanently
affordable housing when public funds are used is paramount.
Use of a wide-ranging array of tools is needed to reduce the gap between cost to construct and what
local workforce can afford. It is important to align the public sector tools with the most desired
outcomes to ensure that the types of the housing the community most wants and needs receive the
most types of public support to make them happen. Tools include:
Fee waivers, reductions and deferrals subsidy to close the gap
Donated, reduced, or deferred payment for land and infrastructure
In-house transaction broker services through Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership
Construction financing through local jurisdictions or FRVHP to support for sale and for rent
workforce housing
Bonding for permanent mortgages on workforce rentals through local jurisdictions or FRVHP
Direct subsidy to buy down sale and rent price
Williford/WSW/Continuum 58
Deed Restrictions
The Valley will continue to be a desirable location for vacation homes. Those making such purchases will
continue to outcompete most local workers. The community has begun to use deed restrictions to
protect housing resources for the local workforce, and this practice will likely be increasingly necessary
in coming years as local households are priced out of the unrestricted market. Develop a uniform set of
deed restrictions and housing guidelines that can be used across the region. This will support greater
ease of use for consumers as they understand their housing options, as well as greater community
accountability and fidelity in compliance over the long term. Mountain resort communities with large
portfolios of deed restricted housing report that having consistent deed restrictions is highly desirable.
Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership
The Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership is a multi-jurisdictional housing authority formed in 2022.
This agency presents tremendous potential for addressing the housing needs identified in this report. It
is also a brand new agency, which needs to hire staff, develop a balance sheet, build capacity,
reputation, and a community presence.
The Partnership’s anticipated primary role will be to facilitate the development of workforce housing
units in The Valley. The participating governments (Grand County, Granby, Fraser, Winter Park) will
contribute $20,000 each to fund preliminary work until a primary funding source is established. Some
initial considerations for this agency include:
Capacity Development
Ideally, the Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership will grow from seedling organization to a high
capacity leader in the community housing space in short order. Building the capacity, setting up systems,
and hiring staff are near term priorities. There is a laundry list of daunting (and exciting) tasks ahead,
including:
Understanding the local housing landscape,
Engaging with community leaders to develop and implement effective housing solutions,
Learning and understanding its role and what tools can be used to effectively partner with
developers,
Exploring when and how to pursue state and federal funding opportunities, and
Strategically planning and growing a small organization to address an urgent and complex
community problem.
Resources such as CHFA’s Housing Development Guide, Colorado Division of Housing’s Developer Toolkit,
Housing Colorado Annual Conference, and consultant support may be helpful.
The organization should develop a mission, vision, and strategic work plan. The workplan should include
near-term, mid-term, and long term strategic objectives, and should have buy-in from the participating
jurisdictions.
The organization should hire an Executive Director and one additional staff person as soon as financially
possible. Hiring two staff will be needed for the ambitious workload that will be required of this group,
Williford/WSW/Continuum 59
and will create the opportunity to match the tasks and talents of the two best candidates. There are
many demands on a new housing authority, that range from operational to strategic. Leadership,
community relationships, and ability to manage complex projects may be as, or more, important then
prior technical experience doing below market housing. At least one staff member should have (or be
able to obtain) a real estate license.
Ongoing “backbone” Services
Some of the typical services that mountain/resort housing authorities provide include buyer and tenant
eligibility management, leasing, transaction broker services, deed restriction compliance management,
and/or property management. A new housing authority may not be able to do all of these tasks
immediately, but having them in the long-term plan will greatly enhance the community’s ability to
develop and manage a successful community housing portfolio.
Development Partnerships
Colorado housing authorities have the ability to confer tax exemption to construction and ongoing
operations of rental properties. The Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership should use this power to
help make projects more economically feasible, and over time, should grow expertise and capacity to
take on a larger role in development partnerships, which could include things like securing land,
navigating entitlements, securing funding, providing local project management, and ultimately, taking
the lead on some projects.
Dedicated Funding Sources
Given the large gap between the cost to build and what the local workforce can afford, a large amount
of money is needed and this organization has numerous funding avenues it can pursue. It is vital that a
dedicated, consistent funding source be identified in the near future to stand up this entity and ensure it
is on solid footing from its infancy.
Cultivating local dedicated funding sources for attainable housing has been recommended in all the
previous needs assessments for the region. A local dedicated funding source creates the flexibility to
address housing needs in a manner that is truly targeted to local conditions and priorities (compared to
State and Federal sources, which are also important, but do not address the full spectrum of local
needs). With rising construction costs, rising interest rates, and no attainable inventory, dedicated local
funding is more important than ever before. Continue to develop immediate, mid- and long-term plans
for dedicated funding. Typically funding sources being used in other communities include:
Short term rental excise tax – This tool is available for home rule municipalities by a vote of the
people.
Reallocation of Local Marketing District funds – This tool was recently signed into law at the
State level, indicating that local jurisdictions could vote to use local marketing district funds for
community benefits such as housing and childcare.
Sale Tax – A potentially powerful tool for community housing revenue. Requires a local ballot
initiative.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 60
Property Tax - A potentially powerful tool for community housing revenue. Requires a local
ballot initiative.
Commercial and Residential Impact Fees – Winter Park could conduct a nexus study to increase
their impact fees. Other communities could consider implementing fees.
Inclusionary Zoning – This tool can support mixed income neighborhoods as communities grow,
and can produce revenue for community housing when developers pay “cash in lieu” of their
requirement. It is most effective in markets with a high level of luxury housing development,
which is the current condition in the Fraser Valley.
Real Estate Transfer Tax – Advocating for a change at the State legislative level could bring this
tool into the toolbox for The Valley.
General Funds and Municipal Bonding – These can be good one-time or ongoing funding
sources.
Windfall funds – Many rural and resort communities are using ARPA and other windfall funds to
extend infrastructure and address housing needs.
State funds, philanthropy, and Low Income Housing Tax Credits are also excellent one-time
investments that support making community housing economically feasible.
The consultant team recommends that the Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership become the hub for
dedicated funding sources. This entity has representation and buy-in from all of the participating
regional partners, creating the potential to prioritize and allocate resources transparently. Individual
entities can (and likely should) continue to dedicate funds to housing efforts, but a decade from now,
having Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership as the dominant local funder will likely produce the best
outcomes.
Encourage, support, and partner with employers
Many Valley employers are working diligently to secure housing for their employees, including building
housing. The provision of housing has become an additional and mandatory business expense to recruit
and retain employees. But, most Valley employers are not real estate professionals or housing
developers, rather they provide other goods and services. Local jurisdictions, non-governmental
organizations, and community-minded real estate and allied professionals, including local builders,
should seek to support and partner with Valley employers to help them house their employees. The
Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership, in coordination with the Chamber, would be a logical convener
of this work.
Balance workforce housing with vacation home production
Demand for second homes in the Fraser River Valley will remain strong, but the Valley’s economy and
community fabric hinges on available and affordable community housing. Setting community targets
could help to better balance second home production with more community housing production. Both
at the jurisdiction level and across the region, we recommend setting goals for community housing
production and including those in comp plans, work plans, and intergovernmental agreements. This will
help keep the topic at the forefront of policy conversations, development negotiations, funding
conversations, and signal it’s importance to the development community.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 61
Preserve your existing inventory
In recent years, the community has lost housing that has long served the local workforce through price
appreciation, change of use from year-round to short term occupancy, fire, and demolition.
Construction of new workforce housing is an essential strategy in this region, but should also be paired
with preservation of the existing inventory. New construction is time consuming, takes considerable
subsidy, and has risks associated with all the milestones. If the community pours all their efforts into
new construction while a great number of existing units are being lost, overall progress on workforce
housing needs will be diminished.
Ensure equity, inclusion, and adherence to community values
All efforts to develop and preserve housing that is affordable to the local workforce must be inclusive of
all community members. Leadership should proactively include and recruit members from the most
vulnerable populations to ensure that housing is being built and advertised equitably. Key strategies to
promoting equity in housing include:
Advertise a comprehensive list of rentals on the housing authority website.
Make zoning and land use decisions in a way that prevents locals from being displaced.
Invite and educate diverse populations on new initiatives, developments, and other engagement
events.
Ensure that all materials and information is available in English and Spanish and that inclusive
language is being used.
Make housing investments in coordination with transportation, childcare, and other community
infrastructure that positively impacts cost of living and households’ ability to thrive.
Appendices
Williford/WSW/Continuum 63
Appendix A – Study Methodology, Data Sources,
Definitions, and Acknowledgements
Primary Research
Primary research was conducted to generate information beyond that available from existing public
sources and included the following.
Employer Interviews and Short Questionnaire
Information was gathered from The Valley’s larger employers via interviews. In addition, a short
questionnaire was distributed to employers with limited time for an interview or as a way to quickly
gather information from Valley employers. Eighteen Valley employers completed the questionnaire,
representing about 1,670 year-round jobs, 920 summer seasonal jobs, and 2,350 winter seasonal jobs.
Interviews and Focus Group
Interviews were conducted with current community leaders, non-profits, government organizations,
builders/developers, property managers, and other stakeholders to supplement data needs and gather
local perspectives on community housing concerns, issues, impacts, and observations. A focus group of
realtors and lenders helped to inform market observations.
Secondary Data
A variety of sources of published information were used in the preparation of this report, including but
not limited to:
U.S. Census 2000, 2010, 2020 DEC Redistricting Data (PL 94-171) (limited, complete 2020 Census
data was not available for this assessment.).
American Community Survey data (ACS) to understand general trends since the 2010 Census.
State Demography Office, Colorado Department of Local Affairs.
Employment information from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW)
accessed via the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Colorado Department of Labor and
Employment, Labor Market Information Gateway.
2022 Area Median Income from the Colorado Housing Finance Authority (CHFA).
Current MLS listings, recent home sales and historic sale trends acquired through local real
estate agent assistance.
Various records from the planning and building departments of Winter Park, Fraser, and Granby.
Prior housing assessments and reports:
o Town of Winter Park Housing Needs Assessment, September 2015
o Town of Fraser Housing Needs and Development Study, May 2016
o Housing Needs assessment for the Study Areas of Granby, Grand Lake, Kremmling, and Hot
Sulphur Springs, June 2018
o Mountain Migration – Are COVID Impacts on Housing and Services Here to Stay? (2021)
Williford/WSW/Continuum 64
Definitions/Terminology
Affordable Housing As used in this report, housing is affordable if the monthly
payment (rent or mortgage, plus utilities) is equal to or less than
30% of gross household income (before taxes).
Area Median Income (AMI) A term that generally refers to the median incomes published
annually for counties by the US Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). In Colorado, these figures are published by
annually by the Colorado Housing Finance Authority (CHFA). They
are used to set income and rent limits for affordable housing
programs statutorily linked to HUD income limits (e.g. low-income
housing tax credit rentals). Common affordability categories used
are as follows:
Extremely Low Income – At or below 30% AMI
Very Low Income –Between 31% and 50% AMI
Low Income – From 51% to 80% AMI
Moderate Income – From 81% to 120% AMI
Move up Market – Above 200% AMI
American Community
Survey (ACS)
The ACS is part of the Decennial Census Program of the U.S.
Census. The survey was fully implemented in 2005, replacing the
decennial census long form. Because it is based on a sample of
responses, its use in smaller areas (under 65,000 persons) is best
suited for monitoring general changes over time rather than for
precise estimates due to margins of error.
Attainable Housing See “Community Housing”
Average household size This refers to the number of persons living in a housing unit and
includes all adults and children.
Catch-up Needs The number of housing units needed to catch up to meet the
current shortfall in housing available for residents.
CHFA Colorado Housing and Finance Authority - administers LIHTC and
provides mortgage funding
Williford/WSW/Continuum 65
Community Housing In this report, “community housing” is used to mean dwellings
occupied by residents who live and/or work in the Fraser River
Valley. This concept is also referred to as “workforce” or
“attainable” housing. The intent is that community housing meets
the full range of rental and ownership housing types and prices
needed to support household changes over time and ensure The
Valley remains a complete and vibrant community.
Cost Burdened When housing costs exceed 30% of a household’s gross (pretax)
income. Housing costs include rent or mortgage and may or may
not include utilities, homeowner association fees, transportation
or other necessary costs depending upon its application.
COVID-19 / COVID Coronavirus disease 2019, causing global pandemic starting March
2020 and extensive local public health precautions.
Deed
Restricted/Restriction
A deed is a legal document that defines who owns a particular
property. Deed restrictions are stipulations written into a
property’s deed or recorded as a restrictive covenant. Such
restrictions can be varied. Throughout this report, use of the terms
deed restricted housing or a deed restriction(s) is generally in
reference to written rules that limit the amount a property can be
sold or rented for, or that restricts who it can be rented or sold to
based on household income or the location of the tenant/future
owner’s employment, etc.
DOH The Division of Housing is within the Colorado Department of Local
Affairs. It partners with local communities to create housing
opportunities for Coloradans who face the greatest challenges to
accessing affordable, safe, and secure homes. DOH supports
projects ranging from homelessness prevention to
homeownership.
Employee (or workforce)
Housing
Housing intended for and affordable to employees and households
earning local wages.
ESRI
Environmental Systems Research Institute - supplier of geographic
information system software, web GIS and geodatabase
management applications.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 66
FHA Federal Housing Administration, provides secondary market for
residential mortgages.
HOA Home Owners Association, typically part of condominium
developments.
HUD Housing and Urban Development; federal agency providing
funding and regulations for low income housing.
Keep-up Needs Keep-up refers to the number of housing units needed to keep up
with job growth and retiring employees to ensure housing is
available for employees filling new or vacated jobs through 2027.
LAUS Local area unemployment statistics
LEHD Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics
LIHTC
Low Income Housing Tax Credit – a federal program to stimulate
capital investment in affordable rental housing, administered in
Colorado by the Colorado Housing and Finance Authority.
Local Resident Housing For the purpose of this report, housing that is intended to be
affordable or suitable for Teton Region employees and full-time
residents. The term encompasses the full range of affordability
levels for local residents – from very local income to 120% AMI or
more.
MLS Multiple Listing Service used for purchase and sale of residential
real estate
Occupied housing unit Occupied housing unit means housing units that are occupied by
persons that consider the Fraser River Valley as their usual place of
residence or that have no usual place of residence elsewhere. (US
Census definition). Occupied units are also referred to as
resident/local households in this report.
Workforce (or Employee)
Housing See “Community Housing”
Williford/WSW/Continuum 67
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank everyone who gave their time, assistance, knowledge, and expertise to this
process. Information in this report relied on participation from many individuals and organizations
through interviews, data sharing, focus groups, outreach, etc. We are grateful for the time given by
everyone we reached out to. We would like to give particular thanks to the Fraser River Valley Housing
Committee, who were instrumental in this entire process.
Housing Committee
Alisha Janes, Assistant Town Manager, Town of Winter Park
Michael Brack, Assistant Town Manager, Town of Fraser
Ted Cherry, Town Manager, Town of Granby
Sheena Darland, Director/Operations Manager, Grant County Housing Authority
We appreciate the opportunity to work with such dedicated town and county staff, local employers and
residents who are dedicated to obtaining a better understanding of the housing challenges and needs of
The Valley and willing to tackle the topic head on for the benefit of The Valley and its residents.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 68
Appendix B – Catch Up and Keep Up Tables
Jobs per Employee and Employees per Household
The number of jobs per employee and the number of employees per employed household are used to
translate job growth into the number of housing units needed by workers to fill new jobs.
The number of jobs held fluctuates with the seasons and many employees, particularly those in
lower paid service jobs, work more than one job to afford to live in The Valley. Workers in Grand
County hold about 1.13 jobs on average during the year.
Many households have more than one employee. For example, this may be two working
roommates or a couple with kids who both work. On average there are 2 employees per
household in the county.
Average Jobs per Resident Employee, 2022
Grand County
Jobs Held By Residents 10,492
Jobs multiply held 1,218
Jobs per employee 1.13
Source: Colorado Demography Office
Employees per Household with a Worker, 2019
Grand County
Households with Worker 4,433
Employed Population Age 16 and Over 8,646
Employees per Household 2.0
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
Williford/WSW/Continuum 69
Appendix C – Demographics and Housing Inventory
How have The Valley’s demographics changed?
Demographic changes are directly tied to housing demand.
As the population grows, so does the need and demand for housing.
The age and household profile of residents helps define what types of housing may be needed
and, for households needing assistance, the most beneficial programs. Seniors and aging
households need different types and prices of homes than young and growing families, for
example.
Population and Resident Households
Fraser River Valley’s population of about 8,000 represents about half (51%) that of the county. The three
municipalities of Winter Park, Fraser and Granby represent about 57% of The Valley’s population. Within
The Valley:
Fraser had the highest rate of population growth from 2010 to 2020 (1.6% per year on average),
followed by Granby.
Winter Park grew at the lowest rate during the decade at about 0.4% per year on average.
Population, 2010-2020
2010 2020
2010-2020
Annual
Growth Rate
Grand County 14,790 15,707 0.6%
Fraser River Valley 7,622 8,013 0.5%
Winter Park 993 1,036 0.4%
Fraser 1,217 1,420 1.6%
Granby 1,858 2,120 1.3%
Source: Colorado Demography Office, ESRI
As was the case in 2010, Fraser is home to many of The Valley’s younger workers and has the highest
share of residents age 18 to 54 (67%). Unsurprisingly, it also has the lowest median age (31) compared
with Winter Park (40) and Granby (45).
Williford/WSW/Continuum 70
Age of Residents
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
Relative to 2010, Fraser’s age distribution remained stable. Winter Park and Granby experienced a
decline in the share of residents under 18 and age 35 to 54, and an increase in the share of residents
near retirement (55 to 64) or age 65+.
Percentage Point Change in Age Distribution Since 2010
Grand
County
Winter
Park Fraser Granby
Under 18 -3 -6 0 -10
18 to 34 1 -3 0 1
35 to 54 -7 -7 0 -10
55 to 64 2 7 -2 5
65+ 6 9 2 14
Source: 2010 Census, ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates, ESRI
There are about 3,550 resident households in The Valley, or about half (51%) of all households in the
county. The rate of household growth from 2010 to 2020 was highest in Fraser (1.8%) and lowest in
Winter Park (0.7%) where the occupancy rate is lowest.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
Grand County Winter Park Fraser Granby
Under 18 18 to 34 35 to 54 55 to 64 65+
Williford/WSW/Continuum 71
Households, 2010-2020
2010 2020
2010-2020
Annual
Growth Rate
Grand County 6,168 7,000 1.3%
Fraser River Valley 3,325 3,564 0.7%
Winter Park 478 513 0.7%
Fraser 537 641 1.8%
Granby 775 882 1.3%
Source: Colorado Demography Office, ESRI
Household Size and Type
The size and type of households is important because they affect housing needs. The average size and
distribution of households by size in the Fraser River Valley is quite similar to that in Grand County.
• The average household size in The Valley has changed little since 2010. It is estimated to be 2.2
people per household, which is lower than the county (about 2.5).
An estimated 72% of households in the Fraser River Valley are comprised of only one or two people,
which is slightly higher than in 2010. Most two-person households in the county and in each community
are married couples without kids.
Household Size Distribution
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates, ESRI
About one in five households in The Valley, Fraser, and Granby are family households, which are those
with two or more people related by birth, marriage, or adoption. Winter Park’s share of family
households is very low (6%).
30%
45%
13%13%
31%
41%
16%
13%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
1 person 2 person 3 person 4+ person
Grand County Fraser Valley
Williford/WSW/Continuum 72
Granby has the largest share of family households without children due to an older population including
many retirees (38% age 55+). Winter Park has a much higher share of people living alone than The Valley
or incorporated Valley communities. Fraser and Winter park have the highest share of nonfamily
households, which include people living with non-relatives (e.g., roommates).
Household Types
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates, ESRI
There have been a few notable changes in the distribution of households by type since 2010.
The share of family households with children has decreased since 2010 except in Winter Park.
The share of non-family households has increased in The Valley and most notable in Granby (11
percentage point increase).
Percentage Point Change in Household Type Since 2010
Grand
County
Fraser
River
Valley
Winter
Park Fraser Granby
Family households with children -6 -5 2 -4 -25
Family households without children 6 6 1 16 -3
Living alone 0 1 -7 -2 18
Other non-family households (roommates) 0 2 4 -9 11
Source: 2010 Census, ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates, ESRI
19%
19%
6%
20%
21%
43%
40%
29%
27%
44%
30%
31%
46%
33%
29%
9%
10%
19%
21%
6%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Grand County
Fraser Valley
Winter Park
Fraser
Granby
Family households with children Family households without children
Living alone Other non-family households (roommates)
Williford/WSW/Continuum 73
How has the housing inventory changed?
Housing Units
There were about 9,700 homes in The Valley as of 2020, comprising about 60% of homes in Grand
County. Fraser River Valley has been growing faster than the rest of the county.
Between 2010 to 2020, 66% of homes built in Grand County were in The Valley.
Fraser grew at the highest annual average rate (2.9%), followed by Granby (1.7%).
Housing Units, 2010 to 2020
2010 2020
2010-2020
Annual Growth
Rate
Grand County 15,396 16,784 0.9%
Fraser River Valley 8,759 9,669 1.0%
Winter Park 2,572 2,736 0.7%
Fraser 1,096 1,460 2.9%
Granby 1,535 1,817 1.7%
Source: Colorado Demography Office, ESRI
Home Type
Almost two thirds (62%) of the housing stock in the Fraser River Valley is comprised of single-family
homes and mobile homes. Multi-family housing is predominately located in the Towns of Granby, Fraser
and Winter Park. From 2015 until prior to the COVID pandemic, the share of multi-family units in Grand
County, Winter Park and Fraser declined while the share of single-family units has increased.
Williford/WSW/Continuum 74
Home Type Distribution
[1] attached and detached homes
[2] 2 or more units per structure
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
Building permit data from 2020 through 2022 suggest a stronger balance between single-family and
multi-family beginning to emerge, with Old Town Apartments, Fireside, and Granby Station receiving
permits during that time.
Bedroom Mix
Only about 16% of units in the towns of Winter Park, Fraser, and Granby are studio or 1-bedroom
homes. The majority are 2- and 3-bedroom units (72%). More studio and one-bedroom options could
help smaller renter households, reducing the need to find roommates to fill extra bedrooms. Although
there are many two- and three-bedroom units that could house families, most are not affordable to
working families.
68%
58%
34%
65%
53%
25%
38%
64%
29%
41%
7%
4%
2%
6%
6%
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%100%
Grand County
Fraser Valley
Winter Park
Fraser
Granby
Single Family [1]Multifamily [2]Mobile Home
Williford/WSW/Continuum 75
Bedroom Mix
Source: ACS 2015-2019 5-year estimates
More townhouses, duplexes, small units, and multi-family housing are needed in The Valley. Specifically,
stable rental units like apartments are needed rather than owner-leased condominiums and homes.
14%
32%
35%
19%
24%
41%
25%
10%9%
38%
42%
11%
8%
35%
40%
17%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
Studio/1 bedroom 2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 4+ bedrooms
Grand County Winter Park Fraser Granby
Williford/WSW/Continuum 76
Appendix D – Area Median Income Table
The Area Median Income (AMI) is included throughout this report because it is a metric used by
affordable housing funders. CHFA publishes the AMI annually.
Grand County - 2022 INCOME LIMITS
AMI 1 Person 2 Person 3 Person 4 Person 5 Person 6 Person 7 Person 8 Person
120% 74,040 84,600 95,160 105,720 114,240 122,640 131,160 139,560
100% 61,700 70,500 79,300 88,100 95,200 102,200 109,300 116,300
80% 49,360 56,400 63,440 70,480 76,160 81,760 87,440 93,040
70% 43,190 49,350 55,510 61,670 66,640 71,540 76,510 81,410
60% 37,020 42,300 47,580 52,860 57,120 61,320 65,580 69,780
55% 33,935 38,775 43,615 48,455 52,360 56,210 60,115 63,965
50% 30,850 35,250 39,650 44,050 47,600 51,100 54,650 58,150
45% 27,765 31,725 35,685 39,645 42,840 45,990 49,185 52,335
40% 24,680 28,200 31,720 35,240 38,080 40,880 43,720 46,520
30% 18,510 21,150 23,790 26,430 28,560 30,660 32,790 34,890
Source: Colorado Housing and Finance Authority, 2022 Colorado County Income and Rent Tables
TOWN OF FRASER
RESOLUTION 2022-08-02
A RESOLUTION APPROVING EXPENDITURES FOR THE HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT
STUDY AND LEGAL FOUNDING DOCUMENTS FOR THE FRASER RIVER VALLEY
HOUSING PARTNERSHIP SO THAT THE TOWN OF FRASER CAN BE REIMBURSED WITH
GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, the Colorado Department of Local Affairs awarded the Town of Fraser
$48,750 for a Housing Needs Assessment Study and the creation of the legal founding
documents for the Fraser River Valley Housing Partnership.
WHEREAS, the Town of Fraser is the grant managing entity for these grant funds and
requires invoices received for the housing needs study and legal work to be paid in order to
receive reimbursement of funds.
WHEREAS, invoices to date currently total $36,502 dollars with the remaining
contracted work not to exceed $65,000 total. The grant does require a 25% match of no more
than $16,250 that will equally divided between the Towns of Fraser, Winter Park, and Granby.
BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE TOWN OF FRASER,
COLORADO THAT:
1.The Town is authorized to pay current invoices totaling $36,502 for work associated with
the housing needs assessment study and legal founding documents for the Fraser River
Valley Housing Partnership in order to receive grant reimbursement from the Colorado
Department of Local Affairs.
2.Further approval is made for the Town to pay for the remaining work associated with the
housing needs assessment study and legal founding documents not to exceed $65,000
total in order to be reimbursed with awarded grant funds.
READ, PASSED ON ROLL CALL VOTE, AND ADOPTED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES
THIS 17th DAY OF AUGUST, 2022.
Votes in favor: ___BOARD TRUSTEES OF THE
Votes opposed: ___TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO
Absent: ___
Abstained: ___BY:
Mayor
ATTEST:
(S E A L)
Town Clerk
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
MEMO TO:Mayor Vandernail and the Board of Trustees
FROM:Michael Brack, Assistant Town Manager
DATE:August 17, 2022
SUBJECT:Short-Term Registration Fees and Enforcement
MATTER BEFORE BOARD:
Consideration to increase short-term registration fees, reflect the number of bedrooms
associated with a property, and implement administrative enforcement.
BACKGROUND:
On October 18, 2017, an ordinance was passed adopting short term registration fees were which
required a $150 fee per year for any property regardless of its size, type, and number of
bedrooms in addition to a $40 business license fee for each property to legally rent out their unit
on a short-term basis. Short term rentals are defined in the Town’s code as any rental of a
residential dwelling or portion thereof for less than 30 days for residential purposes. Currently,
there are about 300 properties operating as a short-term rental within Fraser Town limits.
Based on the Town Board discussion on August 3, 2022, the following changes were approved
for the Ordinance 488 revision amending Chapter 6, Article 8 of the Fraser Municipal Code
regarding Short-Term Rental registration.
1) Stair step the STR Permit Fee:
$150 per bedroom per unit per year for the first year.
$250 per bedroom per unit per year for the second and third year.
$350 per bedroom per unit per year starting the fourth year and after.
2) Replace “local contact” with “property owner or property manager” regarding contract
information to be posted within the STR property.
3) Change the requirement for the property owner or property manager to be able to respond
and attend to property problems or problems arising from the rental within 1.5 or an hour and a
half instead of 1 hour.
4) Remove “Town Manager or other designated representative” to inspect the STR property at
random or following a reported concern and replace with “Emergency Services” for compliance
with the ordinance.
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
5) Remove the parking restrictions to default to the Town Code instead of restricting parking in
non-driveway areas (i.e., front yard areas, and rear and side yards, landscape areas).
Chief Trainor Recommendation: Keep language in ordinance regarding “Parking in private
driveways shall be utilized first with overflow parking on the street if permitted.” This is due to
some occurrences where an STR owner prohibits parking in their driveway and requires guests
to park on the street which has resulted in parking cluttering on town roads. This language has
been included in proposed Ordinance 488 but can be removed if desired by the Town Board of
Trustees.
Below shows what other municipalities are charging for short term rental registration fees.
Grand County, Colorado
-The county charges $25.00 per occupant based on the maximum advertised occupancy
for the STR.
Town of Granby
Fees based on bedroom counts:
-One bedroom or studio $200.00
-Two Bedrooms $300.00
-Three or more bedrooms $400.00
-Plus $100.00 application fee on all
Town of Grand Lake
-Flat rate of $600.00 annually
Town of Winter Park
-Flat rate of $150.00 annually
Town of Breckenridge
-STR Application Fee: $175
-STR Permit Fee: $400 per bedroom
Town of Durango
-STR Permit Fee: $750 flat fee
Town of Crested Butte
-$750 flat fee for each short-term rental property
-Short term rental licenses require 2 years paid at a time
Town of Fraser (Proposed in Ordinance No. 488)
-Maintain Short-Term Rental Application Fee $150
-Short-Term Rental Permit Fee
o Gradual increases per bedroom based on the following timeline.
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
Beginning October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2023: $150 per
bedroom according to the property assessor plus every additional
sleeping area with a bed, not including pull out or slide out sofas, will be
counted as an additional bedroom. Studios are counted as one bedroom.
Beginning October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025: $250 per
bedroom according to the property assessor plus every additional
sleeping area with a bed, not including pull out or slide out sofas, will be
counted as an additional bedroom. Studios are counted as one bedroom.
Beginning October 1, 2025 and thereon after: $350 per bedroom
according to the property assessor plus every additional sleeping area with
a bed, not including pull out or slide out sofas, will be counted as an
additional bedroom. Studios are counted as one bedroom.
FINANCIAL IMPACT:
The STR application fee will continue to be used for administrative costs for the STR software,
administration, and enforcement of the program. The STR permit fees will be allocated to the
Fraser Housing Authority Fund for affordable housing initiatives and programs as approved by
the Fraser Housing Authority.
Project Annual Revenues
2023 STR Application Fees: $150 x 300 STRs = $45,000
STR Software: $20,000 annually
Administration and Enforcement: $25,000
2023 STR Permit Fees (Proposed):
Gradual increase in STR Permit Fee per bedroom per unit as designated in the dates below.
STR Revenues from October 1, 2022 – September 30, 2023:
$150 per Bedroom x 3 Bedrooms x 300 STRs = $135,000 per year
Cost for a 3 Bedroom STR Registration: $150 (application fee) + $450 (permit fee) = $600
STR Revenues from October 1, 2023 – September 30, 2025:
$250 per Bedroom x 3 Bedrooms x 300 STRs = $225,000 per year
Cost for a 3 Bedroom STR Registration: $150 (application fee) + $750 (permit fee) = $900
STR Revenues beginning October 1, 2025:
$350 per Bedroom x 3 Bedrooms x 300 STRs = $315,000 per year
Cost for a 3 Bedroom STR Registration: $150 (application fee) + $1,050 (permit fee) = $1200
Sales Tax Collection on Fraser STRs
Year 2019 2020 2021 2022(JAN-MAY)
STR Sales Tax
Revenue*
$251,760 $356,864 $538,296 $269,850
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
% Of Total
Sales Tax
7%8%10%11%
STR Gross
Sales*
$5,035,202 $7,137,274 $10,765,912 $5,396,990
*Sales tax and gross revenues are for STRs located within Fraser Town limits only.
Anticipated STR Permit Revenue Uses
Plant Investment Fees for Affordable Housing
Deed Restriction Program
Land Acquisition
Affordable Housing Development
o New Construction
o Rehabilitation of older properties
Public/Private Partnerships
ENFORCEMENT:
Currently, no administrative penalties exist for failure to either register or renew their short-term
registration for a property owner but defaults to the Town’s general penalty for violation which
creates challenges regarding enforcement. Grand County charges the following fines if a
property owner fails to register their property as a short-term rental. This fine structure is
recommended by Town staff to be adopted by Fraser and included in Ordinance No. 488 with 10
business day periods between each violation. Currently, about 20% of short-term rental
properties are not in compliance with current Fraser short-term rental regulations.
1st Violation – Warning
2nd Violation – $500
3rd Violation – $1000
4th Violation – UPON THE FOURTH VIOLATION, THE SHORT TERM
RENTAL PERMIT MAY BE REVOKED OR SUSPENDED FOR A
PERIOD OF ONE (1) YEAR AND SHALL BE SUBJECT TO PENALTY AS SET FORTH IN
SECTION 1-4-10 OF THE FRASER MUNICIPAL CODE.
RECOMMENDATION:
Short-term rentals in Fraser have positive impacts to the local economy but does create
challenges with regards to both workforce and affordable housing with existing housing
inventory. Approving Ordinance No. 488 provides a revenue stream to affordable housing
initiatives. Staff recommends approval of Ordinance No. 488 to increase fees associated with
short term registrations to best work towards the Town’s affordable housing goals while being fair
and equitable to short term rental property owners. The administrative fine structure will allow for
better enforcement of this ordinance to promote compliance verses pursuing legal action.
TOWN OF FRASER
ORDINANCE NO. 488
Series 2022
AN ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 6 ARTICLE 8 OF THE FRASER MUNICIPAL
CODE REGARDING SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION
WHEREAS, the Board of Trustees has determined that it is in the public' s
interest to establish rules and regulations relating to the registration and operation of
short-term rentals in the Town of Fraser.
WHEREAS, Affordable Housing Initiatives have been identified as the Town’s
number one priority and implementing a short-term registration fee structure appropriate
to the impacts of short-term rentals is needed.
WHEREAS, the regulatory fee will help address the secondary impacts caused
by the short-term rental industry by protecting the character of the local community and
town neighborhoods where accommodation units are located.
WHEREAS, revenues received from short-term rental applications and permit
fees will contribute towards affordable housing initiatives, programs, and infrastructure.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO, THAT:
PART 1: AMENDMENT OF MUNICIPAL CODE.
Chapter 6 (Business Licenses and Regulations), Article 8 of the Fraser Municipal Code (herein
sometimes referred to as the "Municipal Code") are hereby amended as follows [Note:
additions are shown in bold underlined print; deletions are shown as strikethrough print]:
ARTICLE 8 - Short-Term Rental Registration
Sec. 6-8-10. - Intent.
This Article shall provide requirements for registration and regulations for the operation
of short-term rentals in the Town of Fraser.
Sec. 6-8-20. - Definitions.
For purposes of this Article, the following definitions shall apply:
Short-term rental (STR) means any rental of a residential dwelling or portion thereof for less
than thirty (30) days for residential purposes.
Sec. 6-8-30. - Requirements. Rules and Regulations
2
(a) The owner of a property used for any short-term rental must maintain a current registration.
Registration shall be accomplished by submittal of an application on a form as provided by the
Town Manager and upon approval of the Town Manager. Said application will include, at a
minimum:
(1) Property owner information.
(2) Proof of ownership.
(3) The property owner or property management company available 24 hours a day to
attend to property problems or problems arising from the rental, within one and a half
(1.5) hours.
(4) Parking plan.
(5) A receipt of a short-term rental booking of the subject property issued within
the 60 days following registration showing collection of all taxes due the Town of
Fraser as a result of the rental.
(5) (6) Any other information as may be deemed necessary by the Town.
(b) Any property owner or designated property manager responsible for the management
of the property shall maintain a current business license in accordance with Chapter 6
(Business License and Regulations) of the Fraser Municipal Code. The fee for a business
license is $40 annually.
(b) (c) The registration short-term rental application fee per unit per year and the annual
renewal fee is one hundred fifty dollars ($150.00). The purpose of the application fee is to
finance the cost of administering and ensuring compliance of terms, conditions and
requirements for short-term rental operations.
(d) The short-term rental permit fee per unit per year is as follows to implement gradual
increases per bedroom based on the following timeline.
(1) Beginning October 1, 2022 through September 30, 2023: $150 per bedroom
according to the property assessor plus every additional sleeping area with a bed,
not including pull out or slide out sofas, will be counted as an additional bedroom.
Studios are counted as one bedroom.
(2) Beginning October 1, 2023 through September 30, 2025: $250 per bedroom
according to the property assessor plus every additional sleeping area with a bed,
not including pull out or slide out sofas, will be counted as an additional bedroom.
Studios are counted as one bedroom.
3
(3) Beginning October 1, 2025 and thereon after: $350 per bedroom according to
the property assessor plus every additional sleeping area with a bed, not
including pull out or slide out sofas, will be counted as an additional bedroom.
Studios are counted as one bedroom.
(e) Purpose, Use, and Commencement Date of Regulatory Fees.
(1) The short-term rental application fee will be used to defray the costs to the
Town, including, but not limited to, for staff, personnel, and short-term rental
software required for the administration and enforcement of the Short-Term
Rental Registration Program.
(2) Commencing September 1, 2022, and continuing thereafter, all permit fees, as
specified in Section 6-8-30 (d) of this article, will be collected, retained, and
expended for the purpose of funding affordable housing initiatives and programs
as approved by the Fraser Housing Authority.
(c) (f) Registration expires and must be renewed annually, and the application and permit
fees must be paid annually upon registration. The annual term for registration shall
commence upon approval of the application and payment of all required fees.
(g) The short-term rental unit permit is issued to the specific owner of the property. The
permit shall not be transferred or assigned to another individual, person, entity, or
address but may be managed by a third party on behalf of the owner.
(d) (h) Proof of current registration must be posted in a conspicuous location within the short-
term rental property.
(i) The property owner or property management company must be available 24 hours a
day to attend to property problems or problems arising from the rental within one and a
half (1.5) hours. This contact information must be posted within the short-term rental
property in a prominent, visible location. Any changes to the contact information for the
local property owner or property management company must be updated through the
short-term rental registration platform with the property owner’s or property
management company’s existing login information within seven (7) calendar days of the
change.
(j) Following issuance of the short-term rental permit, Emergency Services personnel
may request to enter upon and inspect the STR to ensure compliance with the provisions
of this chapter. Such entry and inspection shall only be permitted between the hours of
9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. after providing the property manager of the STR at least seven (7)
business days’ written notice of the intent to inspect. The property manager or other
designated representative is required to coordinate with emergency services personnel
4
on the subject property to provide access for compliance inspections. Compliance
inspections will be conducted at random or if any public safety concern has been
reported.
(k) The unit address shall be clearly marked and visible from the roadway.
(l) To ensure the health, safety, and welfare of short-term renters, the following safety
equipment must be installed, and safety measures must be taken in the STR unit:
(1) Smoke detectors must be installed and operable in each STR unit in
accordance with current Town building regulations;
(2) Carbon monoxide detectors must be installed and operable in each STR unit in
accordance with current Town building regulations;
(3) Fire extinguishers on every floor of the STR, which must be visible or clearly
marked; and
(4) Egress doors and windows must remain operable and cleared of snow, debris
or any other obstruction.
(m) The occupancy limit for all short-term rental units except studios shall be two (2)
persons per bedroom as specified in Sec. 6-8-30 (d) for determining the total number of
bedrooms plus four (4) additional persons. The occupancy limit for studio short-term
rental units shall be a total of four (4) persons.
(n) A site plan showing adequate parking shall be supplied at the time of application.
Parking in private driveways shall be utilized first with overflow parking on the street if
permitted. Occupants must comply with all town parking regulations.
(e) (o) Registration may be revoked administratively by the Town Manager for any failure to
comply with any of the requirements of this Section, or any of the following:
(1) Failure to pay water and/or wastewater service fees.
(2) Failure to provide adequate on-site parking.
(3) Failure to comply with any provisions of the Town Code.
(4) Failure to provide the property owner or property management company’s contact
information available to attend to property problems within one and a half (1.5) hours.
(5) Failure to pay any applicable taxes.
(6) Failure to maintain a current registration, or revocation of a registration, shall not
5
result in any waiver of taxes or fees due.
(7) Failure to comply with the Emergency Services notification to inspect the
property within seven (7) business days.
(f) (p) It shall be unlawful for any person to cause or permit any short-term rental to occur at any
property without a current registration. Any person convicted of a violation of any provision of
this Article shall be subject to penalty as set forth in Section 1-4-10 of this Code. Any person
found to be advertising for rent or renting a short-term rental unit in violation of this
article, will be notified for their 1st Violation warning by certified mail, return receipt
requested, to cease and desist all offending actions. Upon receipt of the notice, the
offending party shall have ten (10) business days to correct the offending action. Options
would include, for example, removing the offending advertisement, ceasing the rental of
the offending unit(s), bringing the rental property into compliance of this article, or
obtaining a short-term rental permit. After the ten (10) business day period has ended
without correction of the offending action or upon any further violation, the offending
party shall be determined to be in violation of this section and shall be fined per the 2nd
Violation and so forth as listed in the administrative penalty structure below in ten (10)
business day increments until the offending action has been corrected or further legal
action is taken as set forth in Section 1-4-10 of this code. The Town may levy an
administrative penalty in separate ten (10) day increments within a 12-month rolling
period for failure to comply with the provisions of this Short-Term Rental Regulation:
(1) 1st Violation – Warning
(2) 2nd Violation – Five hundred dollars ($500)
(3) 3rd Violation – One thousand dollars ($1000)
(4) 4th Violation – upon the 4th violation, the short-term rental permit may be
revoked or suspended for a period of one (1) year and shall be subject to penalty
as set forth in Section 1-4-10 of the Fraser Municipal Code.
Sec. 6-8-40. - Appeals.
An administrative order revoking a short-term rental registration and/or penalties levied under
this Article may be appealed to the Board of Trustees by filing a written notice of appeal with the
Town Manager within ten (10) days following notice of the order. The Board of Trustees will hold
a hearing regarding the appeal and render a decision within a reasonable time.
PART 2: REPEAL. Any and all existing ordinances or parts of ordinances of the Town of Fraser
covering the same matters as embraced in this Ordinance are hereby repealed and all
ordinances or parts of ordinances inconsistent with the provisions of this ordinance are hereby
repealed; provided, however, that such repeal shall not affect or prevent the prosecution or
6
punishment of any person for any act done or committed in violation of any ordinance hereby
repealed prior to the taking effect of this Ordinance.
PART 3: SEVERABILITY. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this
Ordinance is, for any reason, held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect
the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this Ordinance. The Town of Fraser
hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance, and each section, subsection,
clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections,
sentences, clauses and phrases thereof be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
PART 4: EFFECTIVE DATE. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after passage,
adoption and publication thereof as provided by law.
PART 5: PUBLICATION. This Ordinance shall be published by title only.
READ, PASSED, ADOPTED AND ORDERED PUBLISHED BY THE BOARD OF
TRUSTEES AND SIGNED THIS _____ DAY OF _____________, 2022.
Votes in favor: ____BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE
Votes opposed: ____TOWN OF FRASER, COLORADO
Votes abstained: ____
BY: ____________________________________
Philip Vandernail, Mayor
( S E A L ) ATTEST: ____________________________________
Antoinette McVeigh, Town Clerk
Published in the Middle Park Times on _________________.
Short -Term Rental Ordinance Matrix
Source: Colorado Association of Ski Towns Survey
Agency
Fees (note $)
Total Sales Tax on STRs
Zoning Limitations? (i.e. STRS Limits on # of nights per
only allowed in certain year?
zones.)
Total # of
housing units
% of residential
units with STR
licenses
Other Notes
Aspen
Avon
Blue River
Breckenridge
Crested Butte
forthcoming
$75
$200/initial;
$150/annual
$75-$175 Iicense tax
plus a regulatory fee of
$400 per bedroom
$750 for unlimited
vacation rental license.
$200 for primary
residence vacation
rental license
lodging and sale
4% sales tax, 4%
accommodation tax, 2% STR
Tax for Community Housing
12.275% (includes 3.4% lodging
tax)
12.275% Total
9.4% total sales tax (Town,
County, State, RTA), 4% local
marketing district, 7.5%
vacation rental excise tax =
total tax rate of 20.9%
TBD
Short -Term Overlay District -
primarily town core
no
Town Counil is looking into
amending the current code to
establish zoning limitaions.
Estimated time for changes
April/May of 2022
Yes. 30% of non -deed restricted
units in certain residential zone
districts
TBD
No
no
Only on owner occupied units - 21
days a year
Primary residence vacation rental
licenses are limited to no more
than 60 nights per calendar year.
4044
798
7599 - August 2021
1244
8.10%
23%
56%
16% of total residential
units
In process of writing a more comprehensive code
The Town is considering a new tiered STR overlay
relative to resident owned/occupied properties in
specific areas, a registration program with
health/safety/wellness components and a
registration fee relative to
management/administrative costs,
License numbers and regulations are being reviewed
Town will be reviewing and updating the vacation rental
ordinance by the end of 2022.
Dillon
STR LICENSE FEE - $250,
PARKING FEE $300 x 8
of spaces deficient
8.88% Total
No
No
1492
25%
All STR licenses expire annually on 5/31.
Durango
Eagle County
$750 permit fee, annual
business license fee
n/a
Lodging, Sales
sales
Yes. Only allowed in 2 single family
zones and in mixed -use zones
no STR-specific zone limits
In most circumstances, no
n/a
Approx 8600
33,174
1.50%
currently unknown
Currently beginning nexus study using vendor.
Licensing likely to follow. Fees/regs TBD.
Estes Park
Fraser
$200 base fee $50 per
bedroom per Assessors
$150/annually
8.7% Total
11% Total
Allowed in all zoning districts
except Office, Commercial Heavy
and Industry zoning districts
no
No
no
approximately
5,000
"1800
unknown
45-50%
Frisco
Glenwood Springs
Granby
$250 annually
$500 STR, $300
$100 applic. fee. $300
to $500 based on
bedrooms
8.25% Total
11.1% Total (2.5% lodging tax)
8.2% Total
No
No
Yes
No
NO
No
Approx 3650
4,298 per Colorado
State Demographer
20.00%
2.30%
Page 1 of 3
Grand County
$25/pillow
4.2% Total
No limitations
No limits
9416
9.50%
Grand Lake
$600 Flat Fee
9.2% Total
Leadville
$325 per license wither
Class 1 (owner
occupied) or class 2
(non-owner occupied)
6.9% Total
No
No
1581
FAQ and website good source of info. Continues to be
a conversation and can be amended in the future.
https://cityofleadville.colorado.gov/short-term-rental-
licensing
Mountain Village
$165 + $22 per sleeping
room
8.65% Total
No
No
estimated 1695
housing units that
could be rented
0.301474926
Mt. Crested Butte
$350 for new and $300
for renewal
9.9% Total
No
No
1676
39%
Ouray
Yes (new license fee:
$600;
annual renewal fee:
$350)
3,5% Lodging/15%
Excise/7.75%Sales; 24.45%
Total
Yes, no R-1 (low -density residential
zone)
30 days rented per year as a
Minimum
811(2019 ACS)
12.30%
Salida
First time they apply-
$470 and during
renewals it is $270;
$3.66 per night per
room rented
8.65% Total
There are no specific zoning
limitations but there is an
Administrative Review for STRs in
all zones.
In residential zones there is a max
185 nights that can be rented.
Roughly 2600
housing units
across at zones.
3.50%
Silverthorne
Yes. Studio —$150; 1
Bedroom - $200; 2
Bedrooms --$250; 3
Bedrooms —$300; 4
Bedrooms —$350; 5
bedrooms —$450; 6+
bedrooms — $500
14.375% Total (new increase
for lodging tax to 6%)
No
No
2500
8.80%
None
Snowmass Village
$85
12.8% Total
Current Moratorium in place, public
engagement and STR Ordinance
Draft ongoing
no
Do not have a specific
STR license yet.
Snowmass Village in the process of reviewing our STR
process.
Steattahoat 5prings
VHR Permit $500; $75
annual renewal; new
fees to be adopted with
licensing ordinance
11.4% Total
Considering a new overlay zone for
STRs
no
—10,000
VHR permits 2.25%;
total STRs 30%
Page 2 of 3
Summit County
Telluride
Vail
Yes, depends on license
type. Resort Overlay
Zone = $265
Neighborhood Zones:
Type l= $215; Type 11=
$320; Type III = $105
plus CUP fee:
Class 2CUP = $1,650;
Class 4 CUP = $4,925.
Renewal= $535 for pre-
existing licenses, full fee
for renewals on new
license types under new
regulations adopted in
2021.
Based on # of roo
$122/room
55-510 for
professionally managed
units; $150 for self -
managed units
Sales tax =7.15% collected by
State. Summit County recieves
2% of this.
8.65% Total
8.9% Total
Yes, only allowed in residential
zone districts.
yes. Residential Zone district limits
on # of rentals per year
No
No annual limit if property is
within the Resort Overlay Zone.
Within the Neighborhood Zone it
depends on License type: Type I =
unlimited nights for primary
resident renting out a bedroom
while host is present on property.
Limit to 60 days per year if renting
out entire home. Type 11 = limited
to 135 nights per year. Type III =
unlimited nights
Only in Residential Zone
No
Approximtley
16,000 units in
unincorporated
County
77
7,359
Approximatley 28.4%
31%
N/A
$150 Flat Fee
11.2% Total
No
No
2,770
Long -Term rental incentive partnering with business
was good metric for understanding critical current
workforce housing needs, partnering closely with
property management also key to new STR
registration success
Page 3 of 3
Input on STR Fees
“I am in favor of increasing short term rental fees as there are not enough long term rentals
available for employees currently.” -Carrie Nedele, Fraser Business Owner, Tabernash
Resident
“I am writing to express my support for an increase in the STR registration fee in Fraser. I have
personally been kicked out of a residence in Fraser when the owner decided to convert it to a
short term rental, and have felt the struggle locals feel in attempting to secure another living
situation on short notice. I don’t fault the landlord, because the money he stood to make from a
STR far outweighed my long term lease. Short-Term Rentals are not going anywhere, they’re a
part of our community. But as a town we can regulate them and make sure they’re contributing
to our solutions to affordable housing. Please raise the current registration fee of $150. Thank
you for your time.” -Loreta Silverio, Previous Fraser Resident, Current Winter Park Resident
“Yes, the fees on Short-Term rentals should be increased to match what the commercial hotels
pay. This is the exact same use as the hotels. They should be reclassified as commercial use
for property tax purposes, as hotels are currently taxed at that much higher rate. Put the
additional revenue into the new housing authority to pay for workforce housing. Raising the
taxes on these units would drive down their value some, which would help with housing
affordability.” -Ted Carney, Fraser Business Owner, Granby Resident
“As a long time local business owner I feel your registration fee is too low and should be raised.
I also think every STR should have an additional fee added to the price and taxes. This fee, I'm
not sure how much, should be collected for the housing authority to use for real affordable
housing. As a business owner and resident I don't want to see another mill levy or an increase
in sales tax or any other fee that as a business or a resident that I'll have to pay. All these
visitors need to pay to fix this problem. What are other communities doing that are struggling
with this problem? What are the fees in other communities? Thank you for the opportunity to
comment! My business is located in Fraser, but I have lived in Granby for 22 years.” -Scott Linn,
Fraser Business Owner, Granby Resident
“I believe that short term rental registration fees are a good way to keep track of the volume of
potential rentals in the market and also a good way to raise money for the town.I have long-term
rentals and there is a case that renting short term can increase my profits immensely, but I like
having locals live at my rentals. I do have an AirBNB in Winter Park and like the flexibility it
provides for using my condo and renting it out. Everyone should have a choice in how they use
their personal house or condo. The town should be busy building and buying affordable
housing, it will never be as profitable for private parties.” -Brandon Rigo, Fraser Business
Owner, Evergreen Resident
From: Sheryl Rahmani <sheryl.rahmani@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, August 4, 2022 10:42 AM
To: Michael Brack <mbrack@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Short-Term Registration Fees and Enforcement
Hi Michael, I had to drop off the call last night and have been reviewing this document this morning. I
think some information that is missing is the sales tax collected in other areas, like Breckenridge. My
quick google search indicated that it’s almost half of what Fraser is collecting and would be good
information to have to get a complete picture for comparison. Also, Summit county is more expensive
and STR owners can charge more money. So averages for STR revenue per area would also help paint a
more clear picture.
I still don’t understand why the focus is on the STRs. I think many of us are ok with a reasonabld
increases in fees to support the affordable housing problem, but this is a very drastic change. Why isn’t
this being addressed with town planning and developers? If your goal is to decrease the number of STRs
so fewer jobs are needed you may achieve that.
Interestingly enough, not many STR owners were at the meeting as far as I could tell. I wonder if the
mayor let his clients know about the drastic fee changes being proposed. This is conflict of interest that
I see - his involvement in policy making in an area where he has financial interest. I saw he excused
himself from the meeting which is honestly the right thing. I hope you can continue on a path that’s fair
and consider whether or not placing the problem of affordable housing solely on STRs is just.
Thanks,
Sheryl Rahmani
Antoinette cVei h
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Get Outlook for 1O5
Philip Vandernail
Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:22 PM
Antoinette McVeigh; Michael Brack
Fwd: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
From: Daryl Reicheneder <Daryl.Reicheneder.274104827@p2a.co>
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:16:43 PM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernail@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
Hi,
I'm against the proposal for fees on short term rentals (STRs). Without STRs, tourists could not come to the Fraser/WP
area and there would be no jobs for anyone. It's not fair to place the burden of affordable housing on those that provide
STRs rather than on companies that under -pay their employees. STRs provide the tourists which provide the jobs. There
is also the issue that some people barely rent out their condo (me) and others rent it out all the time. Thus it is not fair
to have the same fees for everyone. But to be clear, I'm against any fees on STRs Thanks!
Regards,
Daryl Reicheneder
dycreich2@msn.com
Littleton, CO 80122
Antoinette cVeih
From: Philip Vandernail
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:22 PM
To: Antoinette McVeigh; Michael Brack
Subject: Fwd: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Get Outlook for 'OS
From: Daryl Reicheneder <Daryl.Reicheneder.274109827 p2a.co>
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:19:48 PM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernaiI town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
Daryl again...also renters contribute substantially to the sales tax base AND being able to rent a property increases it's
value which increases property taxes collect. I feel like that Fraser is creating a department that isn't needed (afterall,
people have been renting their properties in the valley for decades) and then we are being asked to pay for it. Thanks!
Regards,
Daryl Reicheneder
dycreich2 msn.com
Littleton, CO 80122
Antoinette McVeigh
From: Philip Vandernail
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:33 PM
To: Antoinette McVeigh; Michael Brack
Subject: Fwd: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Get Outlook for *OS
From: Sheryl Rahmani<Sheryl.Rahmani.274179451@p2a.co>
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:27 PM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernail@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
To Whom it May Concern
I find the proposal for Increased fees, on top of already exorbitant fees appalling. Why are you putting the ownis for
affordable housing on second home owners? We pay our regular taxes just like everyone else. If we can't be in our home
Fraser should be happy that we're bringing additional business into the area with renters. Without us, Mayor Vandernail
wouldn't have a side gig. And, honestly isn't that a conflict of interest. Have you compared your polices and fees to other
mountain towns and cities? We cant be the ones to blame for the lack of affordable housing.. Have you looked at
putting pressure on the resort to raise wages or raising minimum raise? I don't think your plan to rape second home
owners will solve the problem. Are you going to raise enough money to build affordable housing or are you just going to
use that money to hire the "random inspectors"? Is there a business plan or facts to back up that the fees you're
planning to collect will help the problem? Because right now all you're doing is incenting second home owners to leave
area. This is a shameful way to treat second home owners who are an integral part of the community.
Regards,
Sheryl Rahmani
74 Alderbrook Trail
Rochester, NY 14624
1
Antoinette McVeigh
From: Philip Vandernail
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:33 PM
To: Antoinette McVeigh; Michael Brack
Subject: Fwd: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Get Outlook for iOS
From: Sheryl Rahmani<Sheryl.Rahmani.274179451@p2a.co>
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 5:27 PM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernail@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
To Whom it May Concern
I find the proposal for Increased fees, on top of already exorbitant fees appalling. Why are you putting the ownis for
affordable housing on second home owners? We pay our regular taxes just like everyone else. If we can't be in our home
Fraser should be happy that we're bringing additional business into the area with renters. Without us, Mayor Vandernail
wouldn't have a side gig. And, honestly isn't that a conflict of interest. Have you compared your polices and fees to other
mountain towns and cities? We cant be the ones to blame for the lack of affordable housing.. Have you looked at
putting pressure on the resort to raise wages or raising minimum raise? I don't think your plan to rape second home
owners will solve the problem. Are you going to raise enough money to build affordable housing or are you just going to
use that money to hire the "random inspectors"? Is there a business plan or facts to back up that the fees you're
planning to collect will help the problem? Because right now all you're doing is incenting second home owners to leave
area. This is a shameful way to treat second home owners who are an integral part of the community.
Regards,
Sheryl Rahmani
74 Alderbrook Trail
Rochester, NY 14624
Antoinette McVeigh
From: Philip Vandernail
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 6:24 PM
To: Antoinette McVeigh; Michael Brack
Subject: Fwd: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Get Outlook for 1O5
From: Melanie Thompson <Melanie.Thompson.274158454@p2a.co>
Sent: Tuesday, August 2, 2022 6:21:09 PM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernail@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
Dear Trustees,
I am a compliant STR owner. I have been so since the start. I really don't make any money on my STR after all the
expenses with property tax, HOA dues and heat. It is already a large negative amount on my Schedule E. Fortunately the
property has appreciated, however, if/when property decreases again this will be even more unfair.
Also, I really don't think you should charge more than Winter Park. It seems to me the rate should be based on actual
net profit, and in my case since that is negative the rate should be zero.
Also I am very disturbed by this bit: "(j) Following issuance of the short-term rental permit, the town manager or his/her
designated representative may enter upon and inspect the STR to ensure compliance
with the provisions of this chapter. Such entry and inspection shall only be permitted
between the hours of 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. after providing the property manager of the
STR at least seven days' written notice of the town's intent to inspect. The property
manager or other designated representative is required to coordinate with the town
manager or designated representative on the subject property to provide access for
compliance inspections. Compliance inspections will be conducted at random or if any
public safety concern has been reported." I think this should be by appointment with owner only! You should not be
able to go into my property randomly! What if I had a guest? What if I was on vacation? This seems to be an invasion of
privacy! If this thing passes I would be further inclined to not rent out my property at all, and then the city revenue
would be deminished by my guests not spending money in the community.
Thanks for reading this feedback and taking it into consideration.
Regards,
Melanie Thompson
2164 S Braun Way
Lakewood, CO 80228
Antoinette McVeigh
From: Philip Vandernail
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 8:56 AM
To: Antoinette McVeigh
Subject: Fw: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Philip Vandernail
Mayor
Town of Fraser
75487 U.S. Highway 40, P.O. Box 89
Fraser. CO. 80442
a ercoir r do.00in
Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended rec pient(s), are confdential, and may be privileged. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission. conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments
is strictly prohibhed. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mai', and delete this message and any attachments from your
system.
From: Eric Grace <Eric.Grace.274118034@p2a.co>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 7:51 AM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernail@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
License Fee hikes are expected.
Penalties for non -registered STRs are appropriate.
Stop there. There is no need to go further with spend on policing compliance or on -demand inspections. That concept is
'make work'. For instance, NO STR guest would ever want to deal with someone demanding entrance to the home they
are staying in and being interrupted on their vacations, and scheduling inspections would need to be done a year out or
more as STR vacationers book years in advance.
The following provisions should be stricken
6-8-30.n (unnecessary process overhead) A simple statement of requiring guests to comply with town parking
regulations is sufficient.
6-8-30.o.4 (too restrictive). Even local contacts need more than 1 hr to resolve many issues. This should be more like 1
day.
6-8-30.o.5 (unnecessary)
6-8-30.0.6 (unnecessary)
6-8-30.o.6 (unnecessary overhead and interrupting to vacationers)
6.8.40 includes an appeal process that has no detail related to the process, this is insufficient.
Affordable housing is NOT the responsibility of individual homeowners. The existence of STRs is NOT the reason for
"affordable housing problems". STRs are a main tributary of economic stimulus to the area. Taxes and fees on other
1
businesses serving area guests should be increased as well.
Zero fees should be imposed or funds collected/spent without the Town having a comprehensive affordable housing
plan.
Regards,
Eric Grace
188 Meadow e
Fraser, CO 80442
2
Antoinet a cVei h
From:
Sent
To:
Subject:
Philip Vandernail
Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:31 PM
Antoinette McVeigh
Fw: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
F Status: Flagged
Philip Vandernail
Mayor
Town of Fraser
75487 U.S. Highway 40, P.O. Box 89
Fraser. CO. 80442
.frasercolorado.com
Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential, and may be privileged. If you are not
the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any review, retransmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or other use of this message and any attachments
is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return a -mail, and delete this message and any attachments from your
system.
From: Jeff Cabot <Jeff.Cabot.274129528@p2a.co>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 11:44 AM
To: Philip Vandernail <pvandernail@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Feedback on Proposed STR Ordinance
Dear Mayor Philip Vandernail,
This proposal is not good and,taking advantage of property owners (mostly second homes) who already pay significant
taxes. The fee,) if any, should be annual flat fee and not based on bedroomsi and should be minimal since additional
taxes are already being paid based on the inflated values which have increased 100% over the last few years.
Regards,
Jeff Cabot
13 Summit Ash
Littleton, CO 80127
Antoine a artxcVei h
From: Michael Brack
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 3:45 PM
To: Antoinette McVeigh
Subject: FW: Town Board Meeting regarding SRT's
Just received this today. Can you forward along?
Michael Brack
Town of Fraser
Original Message
From: Christina Bunting <christinamarieb@me.com>
Sent: Wednesday, August 3, 2022 12:43 PM
To: Michael Brack <mbrack@town.fraser.co.us>
Subject: Town Board Meeting regarding SRT's
Dear Michael Brack,
It has come to my attention that the town of Fraser is seeking to increase short term rental fees from a flat rate to a per
bed room rate.
I am an individual short term rental owner of a 2 bedroom condo. I am not a corporate entity and I am not a millionaire.
I am a regular person who has saved enough to put a downpayment on a home in the beautiful town of Fraser. My
family of 4 use this mountain home to enjoy nature, a change of scenery and fresh air. My young daughters are looking
forward to learning how to ski in the winter. We share/rent this home to others to help offset the mortgage of the
home.
We understand that there is an affordable housing shortage/supply and demand issue however putting those costs to
help alleviate that problem on short term rental owners does not seem like viable, long term solution.
Additionally, if there is an increase in cost for SRT's what is the city planning to do with the funds? Will the funds be
distributed to those that meet the income requirements via tax breaks so they can afford to buy a home in Fraser? How
will the city ensure affordable homes to those in need? Do the new build multi -family developments have a designated
amount of affordable homes? Are the developers who are selling these homes starting at 900k+ doing anything to help
alleviate the affordable home issue? What about the same homes that are being sold and not rented because the
owner can afford to pay the high cost and not rent it out?
I understand that creating affordable housing is complicated and I agree that a reasonable increase is due. However, the
increase that is being proposed is significant and that burden shouldn't fall entirely on SRT owners.
Thank you
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
MEMO TO:Mayor Vandernail and the Board of Trustees
FROM:Ed Cannon, Town Manager
DATE:August 17, 2022
SUBJECT:Public Works Organizational Change
MATTER BEFORE BOARD:
Discussion and feedback on proposed organizational change to the Public Works department.
ATTACHMENT:
Current and proposed Organizational Chart
PROPOSED:
1.Move Wastewater Superintendent to Public Works
2.Eliminate the O&M Superintendent position
3.Move the Project Coordinator position to Administration
DETAIL:
1.Move Wastewater Superintendent to Public Works:
Fraser utilizes a functional organizational structure that groups Town operations based on their
function (finance, administration, public works, etc.). A functional organizational structure
consolidates specialization and improves efficiency. However, under our current organizational
structure, the Wastewater Superintendent and wastewater treatment operations falls under the
general supervision of the Town Manager.
Wastewater treatment is a subdivision of a Town’s public utilities, just as water treatment,
distribution, and collection are subdivisions of public utilities. Public utilities should fall under the
general direction and supervision of a Public Works Director who is trained and experienced in
utility operations. Aligning wastewater operations under Public Works is a better alignment
under a functional organizational structure for the following reasons:
Wastewater treatment operations, like all other public utility operations, require operators
to attain state certifications for the Town to legally operate its utility systems. Each utility
subdivision requires an Operator in Responsible Charge (ORC) who holds a current
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
state certificate at or above the system classification. All operators under the ORC attain
advanced certifications through time on the job and passing state certification tests.
Despite unique operational differences, utility operators across all systems have similar
job descriptions and comparable salary schedules. These salary schedules and job
descriptions also align with equipment operators within our Streets Division.
Moving the wastewater treatment operations to Public Works creates a unified division of
leadership and supervision under the general direction and leadership of the Public
Works Director.
JFOC consideration: Under the Upper Fraser Valley Wastewater Treatment Agreement, the
Joint Facilities Manager is the “entity” appointed by the Joint Facilities Oversight Committee
(JFOC) to oversee and manage the Joint Facilities. The Town of Fraser is the Joint Facilities
Manager, and the Town Manager serves as the Joint Facilities Manager’s representative to the
JFOC (the Town Manager is NOT the Joint Facilities Manager). The Operating
Superintendent is appointed by the Joint Facilities Manager, and Joe Fuqua currently serves
as the Operating Superintendent and is responsible for the leadership and day-to-day
management of wastewater treatment operations.
Under the new Public Works organizational structure, oversight and supervision of the Joint
Facility and its staff will fall under the Public Works Director, with the Operating Superintendent
still managing the day-to-day operations of the facility. The Town Manager will continue to serve
as Joint Facility Manager’s representative to the JFOC.
2.Eliminate the O&M Superintendent Position
The O&M (Operations and Maintenance) Superintendent is a mid-level management position
within Public Works that oversees streets, park maintenance, fleet, and gardener operations.
The position was created as an enticement to recruit an experienced operator from the Town of
Winter Park, but the individual hired only stayed in the position for 7 months. The position has
been vacant for three years and, since we have been operating successfully without an O&M
Superintendent, the position is deemed unnecessary at this time.
With the elimination of the O&M Superintendent position, we are also renaming the Streets
Supervisor position as Streets Superintendent. Jeff Lunde will serve as Streets Superintendent
and will serve at the same managerial level as the Wastewater Facility Superintendent (Joe
Fuqua) and the Water/Wastewater Superintendent (Lucus Seffens). This creates a cohesive
division of operational, managerial, and leadership responsibility under the general direction of
the Public Works Director (see illustration below).
Town of Fraser
PO Box 370, Fraser, CO 80442 office 970-726-5491 fax 970-726-5518
www.frasercolorado.com
3.Move Project Manager position to Administration.
The Project Manager position was created when the previous administrative support person in
Public Works began taking on more responsibilities. The position has been vacant for 2 years.
The Project Manager position requires extensive coordination and collaboration across
departmental boundaries and will work with Public Works, Finance, Administration, plus third-
party contract services as well as state and federal agencies. The position will be responsible
for coordinating capital projects, developments, and provide grant administration. For this
reason, the Project Manager will work within the Town’s Administration Department and report
to the Assistant Town Manager.
This organizational plan was presented to the JFOC at the August 11th JFOC meeting. A
summary of their comments will be provided during the August 17 BOT meeting.
PW Director
Accountant
Town Attorney
Town Clerk
Town Manager
Residents of Fraser
Board of Trustees
Asst. Manager Finance Mgr.
Mkt. & Comm.
Drop Operator
Operators (3)
WWTF Supt.
W/WW Supt.
Street Sup.
O&M Supt.Project Coord.
Operators (8)
Head Gardner
Operators (3)
Seasonal (4)
Deputy Clerk
PW Director
Accountant
Town Clerk
Town Manager
Asst. Manager Finance
Director/HR
Mkt. & Comm.
Drop Operator
Operators (3)
W/WW Supt.WWTF Supt.Street Supt.
Project Coord.
Operators (8)Head Gardner
Operators (3)
Seasonal (4)
Deputy Clerk
Notes:
1.Remove O&M Superintendent (Vacant 3 years)
2.Put Project Coordinator under Asst. Mgr. (Vacant 3 years)
3.Promote Streets Supervisor to Streets Superintendent (Jeff Lunde)
4.Move WWTF Supt. Under PW Director (Joe Fuqua)