The owners of a building on Dillon’s Main Street made the argument Tuesday, Oct. 28, to the Dillon Town Council that the building’s collapsing roof qualified as blight, making it eligible to receive Dillon Urban Renewal Authority funds.

Formerly the home of medical offices, 103 Main St. has been vacant for “several years,” according to a town staff report. The Urban Renewal Authority in April voted down a proposal from the owners, Dillon Development Co. LLC, to sell town-owned land to the owners so they could construct a building with a restaurant, office spaces and residential units.

After about an hour of discussion, the council agreed with the owners and approved just under $64,000 of Urban Renewal Authority funds for the roof repair. The approval included conditions that would require the owners to pay back the town if they fail to meet the requirements of the agreement.

Architect Bobby Craig and his partners Mark Richmond and Eddie O’Brien own the building and spoke to the Dillon Urban Renewal Authority, which consists of the same members as the Dillon Town Council.

Craig said the group started looking at other options after not getting the authority’s approval in April. The previous plan involved tearing down the existing building, which the town’s resolution identifies as “blighted,” but the group now plans to renovate it. 

“If we don’t try and reinforce it, the roof is going to collapse, and we won’t have a choice,” Craig said. “We’re going to have to knock it down.”

The staff report stated part of the building’s flat roof failed, causing flooding and water damage in the building. A water service line rupturing under freezing conditions worsened the flood damage, and the failed part of the roof now has temporary shoring to prevent it from collapsing.

Dillon Development Co. asked the authority for around $64,000 to fix the part of the roof the owners worry will soon collapse. Craig said the request is not for the entire roof, which will cost around $135,000 to fully replace.

“We’re only asking for this one-third that is already in imminent danger of falling through,” Craig said.

Council member Joshua Samuel asked Craig if the owners could fix the roof on their own and come back to the Urban Renewal Authority at a later point in the project’s development. Craig responded that the owners do not have the money to fix the roof on their own.

Once the roof is fixed, Craig said, the owners plan to get financing to complete the rest of the project, which would include renovating the existing building so it could house commercial space like a restaurant. He added that he believes the owners could not get financing without first fixing the collapsing roof.

“As soon as a guy walks into the building, a lender is going to say, ‘Are you nuts?'” Craig said. “If we can show the building is not collapsing, that’s going to be a big step towards (getting financing).”

Council members expressed concerns about funding the roof repair falling under the category of “maintenance” rather than “revitalization.” The owners argued the repair would lead to revitalization by allowing the building to be used for new commercial operations.

The council also discussed the possibility of the town purchasing 103 Main Street to combine it with town-owned property that almost completely surrounds it. Craig said he would not be opposed to the town buying the property, but he and the other owners thought asking for help with the roof would be more simple. He also questioned whether the town would want to get into the “redevelopment game.”

Council member Kyle Hendricks said he thought the roof repair would fall under the purview of the Urban Renewal Authority. He said the town does not need a building “in this state” across from the Waterview Residences property, where residential projects have stalled since 2019.

“$63,000 is not that much money,” Hendricks said. “Let’s do what we can to help and get something moving.”

Council member Linda Oliver asked the owners what guarantee the Urban Renewal Authority would have that the project will be completed. Craig said he was not sure how he could provide that guarantee, but his group has plans for the project and intends to follow through.

“I still want my damn office in the building,” said Craig, who owns Arapahoe Architects in Breckenridge. “I think it’s a great place for me to have a business. I’ll give you that guarantee.”

The owners said they want to scrape the inside of the building and have tenants in it in 12-18 months. 

Town attorney Kathryn Winn suggested the council put conditions on the approval. Council members talked about requiring the building owners to find tenants within a certain timeframe or have to repay the $64,000, but Winn said it would be better for the conditions to have to do with finishing the roof work and not demolishing the building.

After further discussion, the council approved the resolution with the conditions that the owners must pay back the money if they do not fix the roof within three months or end up demolishing the property within 18 months.