The future development of a prime waterfront property in Dillon has been thrown into uncertainty after a referendum election Tuesday, Oct. 1, concluded with town voters rejecting a major development planned for the spot.

Dillon residents voted decisively 132-229, or about 63% voting “no,” on the referendum question before them in Tuesday’s election, according to results posted to the town’s website. The vote overturns the Dillon Town Council’s earlier approval of a “branded residence” structure with 200 condominium units, three restaurants, retail space, an observation tower and more at 626 Lake Dillon Drive.

Mayor Carolyn Skowyra, who previously voted against the branded residence project, said Wednesday, Oct. 2, that the election results reflected the will of the townspeople, who she believes the Dillon Town Council did not pay enough attention to.

“It’s what we’ve been hearing from the public and it came as no surprise,” Skowyra said of the election results, adding, “Hopefully this was a wake-up call to the council to take the feedback from our citizens a little bit more seriously.”

She said that residents should be encouraged by the referendum results because “it really says something for democracy and making sure your voice is heard by the people who are supposed to be representing you.”

Dillon residents organized the referendum petition after the council voted 4-2 in March to approve the branded residence project through a planned unit development, which allows variances from the underlying zoning. Residents raised a host of concerns about the branded residence project, but chief among them has been the five-story height of the building and its size.

Dillon resident Joel Schwartzman said Wednesday that he voted against the branded residence project “on the basis that I have thought that this whole project was just too big. It’s a gargantuan change to the whole nature of the town.”

Schwartzman added, “I think the voters were at least telling the Town Council they have the responsibility to check in with their constituents before they go off determining the whole future of Dillon.”

The three council members who voted in favor of the branded residence project in March, and then again when the referendum petition forced the council to reconsider its approval in June, cited declining sales tax revenue as part of their decision to approve the project.

“I am disappointed,” Council member Renee Imamura said of the election results. “The majority of the Town Council was trying to accomplish more revenue and services for the town but now due to the vote, we’ll need to explore other avenues to achieve that goal.”

Council member John Woods said Wednesday that he had voted in favor of the branded residence project because he felt a “fiduciary responsibility” to help spur development amid declining sales tax revenue for the town.

Woods noted looming infrastructure expenses the town faces, like building a roundabout, but said that once the approval of the project went to a referendum vote, he believed it was up to the town voters to decide.

“I’ve been telling people that the vote is between the known, which is the (planned unit development), and the unknown,” Woods said. “So, obviously, two-thirds of the voters decided they like the unknown. So, we’re going to have to make the best of it.”

Council member Dana Christiansen said Wednesday that he voted for the branded residence project in part because it was expected to generate millions of dollars in revenue through metro districts for public infrastructure, like a parking garage and workforce housing.

But Christiansen also noted that Developer Jake Porritt has said that if voters overturned the branded residence project he will instead pursue a fully-private condominium development there.

“I hope the people are happy with what gets built there instead,” Christiansen said. “We’ll see what actually happens on that site. I think people might regret the no vote when they realize something bigger is going to get built there with no benefits to the town.”

Porritt told Dillon voters in the run up to the referendum election that if the branded residence project was overturned, he would instead pursue plans for a 240-unit condominium project that would be entirely private.

Unlike the branded residence, which would have included a park and observation tower open to the public, Porritt has said his backup condominium project would not have any public amenities and it would generate less revenue through the metro districts for public infrastructure.

Porritt has said he believes he can build this backup project “as of right,” or without requiring discretionary approval from the town because the project would subscribe to the requirements of the underlying residential high zoning district. He has said he expects that the backup project could be about equal in square footage to the branded residence project.

In a statement Wednesday, Caroline Kwak, an attorney representing the Porritt Group said the development group feels the outcome of the referendum is “unfortunate for the town and its residents because the branded residence project would have garnered benefits that cannot be achieved through an as-of-right project.”

“We are, however, excited to be able to move forward with the alternate programming as we will be proceeding with the development of the Best Western site with the contemplated condominium development project,” Kwak said.

It is still an open question, though, what exactly will be developed at 626 Lake Dillon Drive. 

While Dillon Town Planner Ned West has said that he believes it is “potentially possible” a 240-unit condominium complex could meet the zoning of that 3.7 acre property, Porritt has not yet submitted any formal backup plans to the town for review, nor has he completed the purchase of the property. Some town residents have questioned whether a structure of this size could meet the underlying zoning. The Dillon Planning and Zoning Commission would have to review any plans submitted to the town for compliance with the town code.

Council member Kyle Hendricks, who had previously voted against the branded residence project, said Wednesday that he was “grateful that town voters took action against the council that wouldn’t listen to them.”

While Hendricks said he doesn’t know what plans will be brought forward for 626 Lake Dillon Drive in the future, he said he expects Porritt to continue to work professionally with the town on any project.

“I cannot imagine the developer would purposely build something not to the best of his ability because he’s trying to make money off of it. He’s not purposefully going to make something ugly just out of spite,” Hendricks said. “Jake seems to be very professional, very capable of doing what he does. I assume he’s going to continue to work with the town to make the best property possible and hopefully the council can be open minded to what the voters are wanting. Hopefully the council can listen now.”

Skowyra noted that she is also under no illusions that the property that now hosts the Best Western and defunct Arapahoe Cafe will remain untouched. But she said she doesn’t believe the branded residence project was the best fit for Dillon.

“In approving this development, the Town Council did not get a good deal for the people of Dillon and hopefully going forward we’re able to negotiate with some of the things the citizens of Dillon are looking for in mind,” Skowyra said. “I don’t think we’ve lost anything here. I think that property is highly desirable and I think that under the right circumstances, it still will be developed and we will see the benefit of having a new building there, probably in the near future.”