CB council comments on latest Lower Verzuh plan

Essential housing element good proposal but unanswered questions on details

[ By Mark Reaman ]

The Crested Butte council expressed appreciation for an amended Lower Verzuh Ranch subdivision development proposal (see page 8) this week but still had some concerns and questions. Councilmembers expressed those in a letter to the Gunnison County Planning Commission which is reviewing the new proposal in the Sketch Plan phase.
While lauding the reduction in the total number of units from 557 to 433 along with a percentage increase in the number of deed restricted “essential housing” to 41% (179 units the developers will build) on the 450 acres located on Highway 135 three miles south of town, they approved a formal comment letter to the county at the May 18 council meeting. Councilmembers also liked the idea of the developers implementing a transfer fee with every free market sale in the subdivision to help fund tap fees, green space and the HOA in perpetuity but they still had some questions for the developers and county.
The letter made clear that town appreciated the efforts being made by Lacy and Dow, LLC stating the revised plan “reflects a meaningful effort to align with community priorities.”
There were concerns raised about the emphasis of the deed restricted units being targeted at the 140%-220% AMI (Area Median Income) category since that is similar to the category being targeted with the county’s Whetstone community housing rental project currently being built.
“My concern is with the 100% AMI people and lower,” said mayor Ian Billick. “They don’t address this need at all and having this much new development actually makes that need bigger. There will be a need for more waiters and teachers and bus drivers who might not make the needed amount to qualify for those units. I appreciate the effort, it is an honest attempt to offer housing, but just breaking even on housing targeted at people in the 60% to 100% AMI is challenging. I understand that. But we shouldn’t be digging the hole deeper. And what happens if the housing is not absorbed, especially given Whetstone.”
The letter asked for more clarity on the details of the deed restrictions being proposed along with assurances they wouldn’t just go away if the units sat empty because there was a glut of units addressing that AMI category. The letter also asks for clear price targets of the units. “Further analysis should be required to clarify both pricing and demand,” the letter states. “Alternatively, the developer could consider better aligning with the demand identified in the (county’s) Needs Assessment.”
Town emphasized the need to build essential housing along with free market units, wanted to know how deed restrictions would be administered and enforced, wanted to make sure HOA dues did not overextend those living at deed restricted housing and complimented the idea of a 3% transfer fee to fund some common needs. “The proposed 3% private transfer fee to fund Essential Housing infrastructure maintenance is strongly supported,” the letter states. “It is a practical and forward-looking tool to help sustain affordability and address long-term costs. Council encourages the county to carry this forward as a core component of the project.”
“I was happy to see the new proposal,” said councilmember Beth Goldstone. “I really liked the transfer fee idea. I have some concern with the longevity of the deed restrictions and keeping the units affordable. The deed restrictions need to be in perpetuity.”
“I appreciate the attempt to build affordable housing without subsidies,” said councilmember John O’Neal. “I agree with them that there is probably a bigger need for that category of AMI ownership than is shown in the Housing Needs Assessment.”
The council admittedly asked for more analysis and details of the developers on several issues, especially how the development would impact the greater North Valley big picture in the long run. The ideal hope was that there would be a North Valley Corridor Plan in place by now to help vet some of the issues, but alas, that process is just getting underway.
The comment letter said council appreciated the inclusion of a park-and-ride with 40 spaces near the Essential Housing neighborhood but “several transportation issues should be clearly identified now and addressed in greater detail if the proposal progresses…The overall development pattern still functions largely as a cul-de-sac system…and that raises concern that the development will operate as an island and reinforce car-dependent travel…Site design and walking distances are likely to increase vehicle trips and parking demand that will affect the Town and area trailheads.”
That is an issue particularly sensitive to Billick. “I am really concerned with parking in town,” he emphasized at the council meeting. “When you add that many new units on top of Whetstone, my fear is the problem of parking gets dumped on Crested Butte and that will impact the town residents and the budget. There are times already that mass transit is getting maxed out. Parking is limited in town. I’m not sure how that gets fixed. We all have to work through those impacts to the town.”
The council wanted to make sure the proposed recreational amenities could be used by the general public and not just limited to subdivision residents. The letter emphasized the need for the Corridor Plan so as not to evaluate such large projects in isolation.
“Key questions need to be addressed as the project moves forward,” the letter concludes. “The Sketch Plan phase is the right time to identify those issues clearly so they can be resolved at Preliminary Plan if the project progresses.”
The county planning commission has a work session scheduled to review the revised application on May 21.