Advertisement
We believe there is community support for a new recreation center in Steamboat Springs, but not for the $18 million center currently on the table.
The Steamboat Springs City Council should pass on this proposal and instead put together a plan the community can embrace. If that can’t be done in time for the November election, then the council should hold off until 2007.
Last week, the council approved the first reading of a ballot proposal for an $18 million recreation center on the 37-acre Curci-Turner property off Hilltop Parkway. A second reading of the initiative must be approved before the end of the month in order for it to go on the ballot this fall.
The council asked for a survey of residents about the center proposal before the second reading. We think the survey will confirm that the community wants more than what the current plan offers.
The city has been working on a new recreation center since 1999, when consultant Ballard King and Associates was hired to conduct a study of such a center in Steamboat Springs. In 2004, the city convened the recreation center steering committee and last summer funded the second phase of a recreation center feasibility study. Last December, Ballard King delivered a proposal for a three-phase, $26.7 million center.
But what’s currently on the table is scaled down significantly from what Ballard King proposed. The plan includes a gym, elevated track, multi-purpose rooms for teen and youth programs and an aquatics center with a lap pool and an area for children 6 and younger.
Gone are the recreational aquatics — a lazy river and water slide, for example — in Ballard King’s plan. There is no exercise equipment. The climbing wall, indoor athletic field, indoor playground facilities and racquetball courts envisioned in the third phase of Ballard King’s proposal aren’t included either.
The reason the plan is so thin on amenities is that the council repeatedly has instructed recreation center advocates to work with Steamboat Springs Health and Recreation Association to develop a plan that would not undermine the association’s facility downtown. Recreation center advocates, eager to get something on the ballot, agreed to a compromise that goes too far in accommodating Health and Rec.
The current recreation center plan will require at least 375 families to each buy a $500 annual membership to offset operating costs. We don’t think families, who already would have to pay a property tax for the construction and operation of the center, would be willing to buy such memberships given the limited amenities the facility would offer. Yes, parents and teens would use such a facility on a situational basis, but the plan’s lone unique attraction — indoor lap swimming — isn’t enough to justify $500 a year for most families.
This isn’t the community recreation center that proponents wanted; it’s the political compromise they thought was necessary. It’s a plan that voters, once they have a chance to study it closely, are likely to reject.
The city’s survey needs to clearly identify the community’s recreation priorities and find out how much residents are willing to spend — both in taxes and membership fees — to get the community center they want. We think such a survey will show that the current proposal is a mistake and that the city can and should do better.
Take Time to Explore Steamboat

RSS
Community comments
Note: The Steamboat Pilot & Today doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full policy.
familyfour (anonymous)
August 13, 2006 at 7:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Amen to this editorial. A community recreation plan is not something to rush on the ballot in the hopes of success - see Steamboat School District circa 1995. I understand that a small core group of rec center proponents have been working on this for longer than this year, but just because they have a presentable plan is not a reason to rush it on the ballot. Let's take another year to hammer out what we really want and need in this community -- and what local families are willing to pay for. There is NO NEED to rush this thing onto the ballot this year. We will get a better deal down the road.
I know the rec center people at the center of this are passionate and want to move forward, but there are plenty of people like me who would absolutely support a rec center that offers more - and more of what we need.
For example, we need an indoor field as much as we need an indoor pool, and probably more. There are certainly more people who use athletic fields than "athletic" pools.
Let's do this right and get it done.
bigboylxa (anonymous)
August 14, 2006 at 12:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Maybe our money would be better spent moving the Post Office out of its congested location. The current property could then be given to the Health and Rec Center who would incur the cost of construction. They even have plans already developed. I also don't understand why there is such a need for a Rec center when our schools are falling apart and are overcrowded, our arts facility is located in a high school, our teen center is housed in a illegal trailer, and we may not even get a chance to use the library funds we voted on using (thanks to the city council).
(Requires free registration) Post a comment