Proposed Short-term Rental (STR) Regulations
Whilden, Wade
My name is Wade Whilden. I first came to Estes Park when I was about 8 years old. We stayed at Sprague’s Lodge, and then Steads Ranch, both in Rocky Mountain National Park. Those lodges were closed by the Park and in 1974 I decided to bring my family to Estes Park and I called a friend whose father owned a couple of cabins at the YMCA for a recommendation as to where to stay. He recommended Windcliff, a small community directly across the street from the Y. We rented a home at Windcliff for 10 days, loved it, and our family has come back to Windcliff every year since. Our family was able to develop a love for Windcliff because STRs were allowed and, in fact, homes at Windcliff have always been available for STR. The first home built at Windcliff was a STR. In the late 1970s we purchased a lot in Windcliff. The family that owned and developed Windcliff decided in 1983 to form a homeowners’ association, and the Windcliff Property Owners Association (WPOA) was formed. I was a member of that first Board of Directors of the WPOA and I have been on the Board of the WPOA ever since, almost 40 years. In 1986 we built our home at Windcliff and when that home burned down (confined house fire) in 2011 we re-built our home. We have never rented our Windcliff home, but we discovered Windcliff because rentals were permitted and we have consistently supported STRs at Windcliff. We have recommended Windcliff to many of our friends who first rented at Windcliff to try it out, then purchased lots and built homes. STRs bring new blood to Windcliff and as new renters discover and love Windcliff they buy homes and help our property values. In fact, I believe that the great majority of Windcliff owners discovered Windcliff through its on-site managed STR program and that is very positive because it means that new owners understand the uniqueness of the Windcliff Community before they purchase their home. They know that STR is permitted in Windcliff and many buy at Windcliff for that very reason—it allows them to rent their home until their individual financial situation permits them to stop renting if they so desire. I recite this family history to you so that you will know that I have a long experience with Estes Park and Windcliff and I do know how Estes Park and Windcliff have developed and prospered over the years.
Windcliff is comprised of approximately 282 acres of which approximately 133 acres are owned and managed by the WPOA. The remaining acreage consist of 159 privately-owned properties and is a blend of approximately 35 full-time year-round residents, 45 private homes licensed for STR used both by their Owners as well as STR guest, approximately 75 seasonally occupied homes and about 10 lots owned by Owners who plan to build homes in the future. In summary, Windcliff is clearly a mix of homes that exist together in harmony while permitting STRs. In the early 1990s the then Owners of property at Windcliff had a vote to determine whether or not to continue to permit STRs. The vote was an overwhelming yes vote even though only about ¼ of the homes were used as STRs.
When Windcliff was developed it was done so as six individual subdivisions, each with different Covenants and rules. This was not a good way to manage today’s Windcliff so a few years ago the WPOA’s Board of Directors commenced a drive to combine all six subdivisions into what was called One Windcliff, with one set of Covenants applicable to all of Windcliff. There were many months of discussion among the Owners of property at Windcliff and many drafts were circulated. A final draft was completed and circulated to all Owners for review and approval. That draft was approved by an over-whelming majority of Owners (existing Covenants required a 2/3 approval of all Owners, not just Owners signing the document). The singed document was recorded on November 9, 2020 as an Amendment to our Covenants (the “Amendment”). And, for this discussion the important point is that the Amendment contained extensive provisions permitting STRs at Windcliff, subject to the rules and regulations agreed to by the Owners and enforced by the Windcliff Board of Directors. In summary, Owners at Windcliff approved STRs, agreed upon applicable regulations for STRs, and to this day enforce those rules and regulations. Owners at Windcliff strongly support STRs at Windcliff because they know that Windcliff has always had STRs and the STRs at Windcliff have helped Windcliff attract similar new Owners.
As for the goal of improving work force housing, that is a very worthy goal. However, homes at Windcliff would never be utilized for work-force housing. The average value of a home at Windcliff is well over one million dollars, with many of the homes having a value of several million dollars. Recent lot sales at Windcliff have been for prices well over $300,000. Owners of homes of that value would not be willing to rent their homes at a rental rate affordable by those needing work-force housing, and thus subjecting a subdivision like Windcliff to the proposed STR regulations would do nothing to advance the goal of improving work-force housing.
In fact, subjecting Windcliff to the proposed STR regulations would hurt the stated goal of helping work-force housing because as presently operated STRs at Windcliff generate more than $100,000 annually in local lodging taxes, with those funds being used to assist the construction of work-force housing. Rental guest at Windcliff renting STR homes contribute more than $6,000,000 annually to the Estes Valley economy and tax base, and that important revenue would be lost if Windcliff is to be covered by the proposed STR regulations because those regulations just do not fit a subdivision like Windcliff that has its own STR rules.
My Suggestion: The way to solve this issue is for the final STR regulations approved by your group to exempt those subdivisions that specifically permit STRs, and specifically regulate STRs, by their own recorded and enforceable Covenants. If a subdivision wants STRs, and that desire is evidence by recorded Covenants specifically permitting STRs in their subdivision, then your final regulations should not override the desires of the owners in such subdivisions. In your regulations were so structured you would be doing what everyone wants you to do—regulating areas that do not have rules permitting STRs, but permitting those areas that specifically permit STRs by recorded evidence of the desires of the owners to regulate themselves. Otherwise, regulating a subdivision that does not want the proposed STR regulations will surely lead to strife, controversy, lawsuits, unhappiness, etc.
But, if you do not like my suggestion, or if my suggestion causes some issues for you, then I submit that it would be appropriate for you came up with some other exclusions that permitted subdivisions like Windcliff to continue without being subject to your STR regulations—maybe a provision that exempts homes that have an assessed value in excess of $XXX, being a value that would certainly not be a home that would be rented for a rental rate low enough to be attractive for a work-force housing, In addition, every Owner at Windcliff who avails themselves of STRs does use their home some of the year for their personal use, and thus they would not rent their home as work-force year round use. That would totally defeat their purpose of owning a mountain home that they can personally use, then rent to provide revenue until they can afford to not rent.
Thank you for taking the time to read this email. My bottom line is that I submit that it is important for your STR regulations to contain exemptions that permit you to cover the areas you need to cover (and help the work-force housing shortage) without including areas that will not become work-force housing and that have specifically permitted STRs by a recorded document containing enforcement rules.
Note: I think Windcliff’s STR rules are very good and thorough and I attach a copy for your review. You might find many of our rules to be appropriate for your consideration and you will also see that Windcliff is doing a very good job of regulating STRs within Windcliff in a manner desired by Windcliff Owners.
Confidentiality Notice:
Please note that I have retired from the practice of law at Baker Botts. Any information contained herein does not constitute legal advice of Baker Botts L.L.P.