How the inclusion of snowmelt will affect the redevelopment of the long-dormant Ski Time Square area adjacent to the Steamboat Resort base was the main topic of discussion at Tuesday’s Steamboat Springs Redevelopment Authority meeting.

The Gondola Transit Center project remains paused pending validation of a low- or no-carbon power source for snowmelt systems. A steering committee and project team, comprised of representatives of the redevelopment authority and the resort, were established to oversee the project. 

The redevelopment authority and the resort will remain the guiding bodies in the partnership, “responsible for project oversight and ultimate decision-making on the project,” said Gates Gooding, project manager for the redevelopment authority.

---

---

“URAAC (Urban Redevelopment Authority Advisory Committee) maintains the same advisory role it’s always had, while the steering committee is really engaging in project execution alongside the project team, bringing extra capacity and organizational clarity to the project,” he said.

The project team is exploring alternative low-carbon power sources for snowmelt such as heat pumps, solar thermal, renewable diesel and biomass boilers. Yampa Valley Electric is also assessing its capacity to provide electricity for electric boilers. The goal is to identify an acceptable technology that both partners can agree on, potentially allowing the design to restart before the geothermal study concludes.

---

---

Councilor Bryan Swintek asked Gooding what work is being done on the transit center aside from waiting on snowmelt alternatives. 

“Is there out of the box thinking that’s being done? … It feels to me like we’re married to a vision of what it should be and we’re trying to force it to happen,” said Swintek. 

“So far, the consensus has been around a high snowmelt alternative, and so we’re going down the path to see what we have to do to build that alternative,” Gooding said. “There are other designs that don’t need as much snowmelt, but those are kind of a plan B. So again, the consensus has been that we need to move forward and invalidate plan A before we can move and shift to a plan B.”

Councilor Dakotah McGinlay inquired about the Project Implementation Agreement and the city’s responsibility regarding snowmelt costs. 

“The PIA says, one, we don’t commit to building any snowmelt if it’s not powered by a green energy source, and two, that the total budget for the project, the commitment, is up to $20 million,” said Gooding. “So anything over that would be a new conversation.”

“I think our partners have a preference for more snowmelt maybe than we do, but that’s not to say that they’re not reasonable people, and if we go through the process and we see that it’s just untenable to do that, then again, it’s going to be a new conversation. But until we go through and prove to ourselves that it’s not a reasonable possibility, I think it might be premature to have those negotiations,” added Gooding.

McGinlay asked Gooding to come back to council with varying options, ranging from the minimum level of snowmelt needed versus what would be “the dream.” Gooding agreed to the request.

“I am still very confused … it’s been a year-and-a-half since we said snowmelt wasn’t allowed. And we still haven’t seen any progress,” said Swintek. “I think you’ve heard all of our counselors say, ‘Where are the other options,’ and I’m hearing too much consulting jargon. Is the other party we need to speak to the resort? Like, how do we get progress and just get (stuff) done, because nothing really has been done other than a grant and waiting around.”

“We share your feelings. It’s been very frustrating that it’s been taking so long,” Gooding said.

“We’re trying to push for the best project, best defined by both sides of the partnership by the greatest public good,” he added.

Michael LaMotte, representing Steamboat Resort on the project team, emphasized the resort’s strong preference for snowmelt in the plaza for guest safety and compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act. 

“The URAAC has done a really good job of evaluating all of these options. There were specific criteria established … improved pedestrian connections, safety, transit, that they reviewed and analyzed,” said City Manager Tom Leeson. “So it’s not just a matter of saying, ‘Let’s just do a different design that doesn’t have snowmelt and let’s get going on it,’ because it has to meet certain criteria.”

“Or, quite honestly, we can get to a certain point where we say, ‘We’re not going to do anything, we’re just going to leave it the way it is,’ because in some respects, it works,” Leeson continued. “So I think the point I’m trying to make is that we’re in a partnership and we’re trying to evaluate the best possible outcome for both parties, and that means going through this process and evaluating the snowmelt system to see if it’s viable.”

Swintek expressed frustration with the ongoing analysis of the snowmelt question.

“I feel like we are in a negotiation … if the resort wants snowmelt, and we say we don’t want snowmelt, come with an offer,” Swintek said. “I’ll be super candid — it’s a game of politics … it’s a lot of just consulting and politicking and back and forth.”