The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
“We’re in the same boat—but different ends”
Citing the spirit of compromise, with some Town Council members feeling the proposed affordable housing rules went too far and others stating they didn’t go far enough, the Crested Butte council passed an affordable housing ordinance Monday with a 5-2 vote.
The extensive regulations cover requirements for developers of commercial property, lodging property and residential homes, to build or pay for affordable housing units in town. The rationale is that the end result of building such developments is the creation of jobs, and at least some of the workers who fill those jobs should live in Crested Butte.
For example, it is estimated that for every 1,000 square feet of new commercial space built, four jobs will be created. The new rules will require that the developer of a 5,975-square-foot commercial unit will have to build one affordable unit under a 10 percent mitigation rate. The requirement will rise gradually until 2016 when the developer would have to build two units under that computation. Any fraction of a unit would be paid to the town with a fee of $25.03 per square foot.
The details of the proposed ordinance have been debated for months. The size of the mitigation fee was a major bone of contention within the council. Ordinance 19 replaces an ordinance passed by the previous council about a year ago that charged an affordable housing fee of $166 per square foot (half that for fractions of units not built) for a payment in lieu of building. Before that, the fee was $2.09 a square foot.
Councilperson Shaun Matusewicz said the new ordinance reduced the fee almost 85 percent from what is currently on the books, while councilperson Jim Schmidt said it was still an increase of 12.5 times over what was in place a year ago.
Town Planner John Hess summarized the evolution of the ordinance to this point. “Lots of things have come and gone over the last eight months,” he admitted.
Government owned buildings would be exempted from the new regulations because “the town has produced affordable housing for the last 20 years and has plans to continue that in the future,” Hess said.
While the debate over the ordinance has at times drawn standing-room-only crowds to the council meetings, fewer than 10 people came to the official public hearing on Monday.
continued from page 1
“I want to live on a block with neighbors, not visitors,” commented Margo Levy, who chaired the town affordable housing subcommittee. “We are talking about community tonight. This ordinance is only one leg of the affordable housing stool. This ordinance asks commercial developers to address just 10 to 20 percent of the housing they generate. The rest, 80 to 90 percent, falls on the public. This ordinance will no more destroy the local economy than the stove ordinance or the sign ordinance did.”
Developer and architect Gary Hartman spoke next. “I’ll represent the other side of the equation. I agree with about 90 percent of what Margo says. I’m not against affordable housing. We understand the need to keep this place a community. Tonight, I’m not talking for Sixth Street Station. I’m representing me as an architect and if the town doesn’t grow, I don’t work. I’m not the only one. I agree with the philosophy behind the ordinance but the timing couldn’t be worse. In the past three years, we’ve seen no commercial projects come through the office. To enact this ordinance now only hurts a stagnant economy. I know you’ve come a long way on this but I’d urge you to start the fees even lower.
“This is a community issue,” Hartman continued. “But it’s not just a Crested Butte issue. Look at Buckhorn and Crested Butte South. A five-minute commute isn’t detrimental.”
“The real issue is whether we keep a real community here or not,” said Jim Starr. “Are we going to be a community of second-home owners? I think you are headed in the wrong direction with this ordinance by requiring just a 10 percent mitigation rate from developers at the start. Ninety percent of the impacts caused by development will be picked up by the taxpayers. We need some growth in the community but we need to stay true with what the town has a good history of, and that’s having growth pay its own way.
“This ordinance,” continued Starr, “abandons that philosophy. This ordinance says we need growth at any cost. This is growth only paying 10 or 20 percent of its own way. I think the fees are incredibly low and saddling the taxpayers with a burden.”
Bruce Eckel said when walking down Elk Avenue he sees empty storefronts. “If we don’t want more of those, we need to promote more affordable housing, not less. Filling those spaces with locally owned business is sustainable, not more construction.”
Arvin Ram said development doesn’t promote his bookstore but tourism does. “Tourism is how my business thrives,” he said. “And the fact is, we live in Crested Butte and there is a reason for that. That’s why the housing should stay in town. The direction this council is heading is extreme. There’s a lack of vision. You are thinking short-term instead of big picture. People will visit us as long as the beautiful mountains are here and there is skiing in the winter.”
The council was all over the board on the issue.
“My concern is we are starting too low,” said Councilman John Wirsing. “I don’t want to play catch-up. I don’t want to be an Aspen where most of the community lives outside of town. Remember why we were elected. It was to represent the community and not pander to a few developers. Responsible growth and development is what we need. I don’t want their money through fees; I want the housing. The last six months has watered down this ordinance to where it is a worthless document. I can’t support it.”
“I take the opposite view,” responded Schmidt. “The goal should be to produce housing or money for housing and if the fees are too high there won’t be any development and we won’t see either one. No one on the street is telling me the fees need to be higher. I was at that bastion of conservatism, the Democratic Party dinner, and two people told me the fees were too high.
“The timing is important,” Schmidt continued. “This is not a good economic climate to raise the fees from where they were a year ago. My gut tells me this rate is still too high.”
“I agree with Gary that commercial development won’t happen in this current economy,” said Councilperson David Owen. “But when it does recover, we need the tools in place to deal with it.”
“It is an issue of community. If things aren’t appropriately mitigated when developments are built, we lose our opportunity to mitigate the impacts. The goal isn’t to get housing or money for housing. The goal is to have growth pay its own way. I agree with Jim; I don’t like this ordinance. But I don’t think it goes far enough. However, if you are willing to hold your nose and vote for this, I am too. Taking a step forward is important.”
“And I’m in the same boat as John but on the other side of the boat,” said Mayor Aaron Huckstep. “The community everyone talks about preserving was built when the fee was $2.09 a square foot. There’s a lot of loose talk about doom and gloom. But look at the overall landscape. CBMR’s skier day numbers are off at least 10 percent. The Gunnison Valley Hospital is struggling. Western State’s enrollment is dropping. A two-bedroom condo in Mt. Crested Butte just sold for $60,000. It is a terrible time to enact this. We can’t act like we’re an island. And everyone on this council knows affordable housing is an important issue but I feel we’ve been throwing darts at finding a fee. I’d rather err on the side of caution. I think the fee is too high.”
“I watch national politics and hear those guys talk about never compromising, and that’s frustrating,” said Schmidt. “I think we need to be flexible here.”
“I just don’t buy that commercial development is an economic stimulus,” said Wirsing. “What we’re trying to do is just responsible growth, not anti-growth.”
The council voted 5-2 to approve the ordinance. Wirsing and Huckstep voted against the measure while Owen, Schmidt, Michel, Matusewicz and Mason voted for it.
“And that saga comes to an end,” remarked Huckstep after the council unanimously approved the guidelines and administrative procedures that were tied to the measure.
