The picture shows a lot near the runway in House Breckenridge on August 17, 2025. The project broke out on August 12 and prompted the relocation of free skier parking at Breckenridge Ski Resort.
Matt Hutcheson/Summit Daily News
The runway community in Breckenridge has just broken down and elected officials have a recent task to determine what roles should be played, if any.
Although there was no formal vote for the Breckenridge Town Council meeting on Tuesday, August 12, many councils expressed their desire to see the town’s last major workforce housing community’s accessory residential infrastructure.
Of the 81 housing units in the first phase of the runway community, approximately 27 single-family homes may have attached units. The elected official first proposed as a two-phase project of about 148 units, and decided to commit only in the first phase, with approximately $34.6 million in town subsidies instead of the two phases promised due to economic uncertainty.
Staff recommended the use of the “Accessories Residential Unit Ready” model, where the “Socket” is constructed and equipped by the infrastructure to become an attachment home, but is not fully constructed. They say there are potential grant opportunities to inspire buyers to build opportunities they are still exploring staff.
Officials have previously discussed how the units give the town the opportunity to add more rental units to the local workforce and provide single-family homeowners the ability to collect additional income through paid rent. Some people approve of them and ask for rent, while others believe that the town should not force the homeowner to be a landlord.
The construction of an attachment residential units is estimated to be $120,000 per unit, and the utility construction cost and licensing fee are estimated to be $30,000 per unit. Officials discussed the price difference of about $800,000, considering the price between having 27 qualified homes and a $30,000 utilities and permits per unit, with a fully built attachment residential unit with a built-in shell only.
Employee memo for details of the August 14 meeting staff believe this will narrow down the pool for qualified buyers and “subsequently create issues with long-term affordability.”
“We really don’t feel good about the million-dollar price point for a five-bedroom restricted home,” said Melanie Leas, home project manager.
She said that adding attachment residential units upfront eliminates the opportunity for homeowners to increase value over time through their own investments. Mayor Kelly Owens asked if the owners responsible for building an affiliated residential unit could regain some expenses during the resale period. Staff said they do believe there will be a chance.
Some in the Council believe that despite the price increase, the supplement is worth it.
“The flat land at the bottom of the valley is limited, and we have 47% of the workforce living in the valley, which is our current goal, and I don’t think (attached residential units), the project has about six acres of land, and for me it’s a low side. He wants to see at least some of the accessories residential units being fully built.
“Who pays for it?” Rice asked, asking if he was proposing to add $150,000 to the buyer's unit price.
Rankin suggested adding restrictions on less demands on income levels and price points than all contractual restrictions, adding that he is flexible.
“Flexible, but someone has to pay for it,” said Laurie Best, director of housing.
Owens interrupted and said that this would “self-flush” later in the process.
Council member Jay Beckerman said that the model he previously felt was inefficient was to have units as accessories residential units, not just them. He asked the staff if it was the responsibility to connect the units to utilities such as water or install heating, or if they would buy the house and subsequent units, which included those elements.
The team behind the project answered that it will depend on whether the unit is attached to the house. Independent units will require different processes to connect to heat sources and other utilities, rather than attached units. Staff said that, generally speaking, independent units are more expensive than attachments.
Beckman said he had no idea that some of the attached homes would be attached to single-family homes, while others would not, and on how that would affect the overall cost and licensing process of the project.
He said he wanted to see at least half of the construction, but said it would be most beneficial for the owner to build it fully.
Council member Dick Carleton supports the Shell model and likes grants to inspire owners.
Council members Carol Saade and Marika Page said they appreciated the staff’s consideration of the inclusion of the auxiliary residential unit for the buyer’s price, but ultimately they ended up supporting the Shell model. Council member Steve Gerard also supports the Shell model.