WHERE DID YOU SLEEP LAST NIGHT
Affordable Housing Still Plagues Vail
By Headwaters News, 3-30-07
 | |
|
The issue of affordable housing for workers in Rocky Mountain resorts just won’t go away. While the economy seems to be able to support more and more growth in places like Vail with an ever-increasing number of huge second homes, gated communities and private ski areas — there is one in the works in Utah as well as one near Vail — the market seems to forget about support staff and where they’ll live.
So it ends up that the market rarely solves this problem; usually it’s government agencies that step in. In Vail, where the problem is perhaps most acute, that means the town council, county commission and local housing authority.
Next Tuesday, reports the Vail Daily, the town will approve new affordable housing rules that outline two methods for adding affordable housing to the denser areas of Vail Village, Lionshead and the West Vail mall area. They include requiring developers to provide housing for a certain amount of jobs they create and changing zoning to require that a certain percentage of new homes or housing be affordable.
But the new rules don’t include specifics regarding where that housing should be located or what it should look like — and that has some people concerned. Space is available for that housing, but it could mean affordable housing in tucked among multi-million dollar homes and condos, or clustered in large housing units, a situation that doesn’t appeal to some. Right now the Vail Local Housing Authority is waiting for input from developers.
Meanwhile, as developers and planners consider that private ski area near Vail, the county and local residents are expressing concern for who is going to build the associated homes, and where they are going to live.
Another story in the Vail Daily says that the Ginn Development Co. pledges to house 40 percent of its employees, which is more than any other local developer, but the developer and the county can’t agree on how many workers are going to be required to build 1,700 homes and condos, along with the ski area and golf course.
Eagle County officials estimate the company will need about 3,500 employees, but the developer says it will need only about 2,000 employees. One local county planner says the company should provide employee housing for a larger number of employees, and that housing should be close by, so employees won’t have to commute too far to work.
While the county planner and a planner from Ginn duke it out in the pages of the Vail Daily, locals’ views are mixed at best. Many are happy to see more jobs, but think the development could price them out of the area — another conundrum present throughout the West, especially in resort towns.
Like this story? Get more! Sign up for our free newsletters.
Comments
Vail has required its developments (both commercial and residential) to provide affordable housing for more than a decade now. And yet they still face the crisis of loosing economic stability and maintenance of a certain degree of quality of life (i.e, traffic and air quality, etc.)
And when I say provide - I mean actually provide - build - not pay a fee-in-lieu. So Jackson shouldn't think that it is still in some safe place. While Jackson has its rules that require developer to provide housing, the actual number of affordable units built by developers is nil compared to what they should have provided since the rules were implemented in 1996.
The wait-and-see attitude of elected officials in Missoula, Bozeman and everywhere else is just delaying the disasterous effects upon the economic viability of its communities.
Affordable housing isn't some sort of charity or welfare. It is essential housing for people like the teachers and fireman and policemen that a community needs - of course, if a town is willing to pay its teachers and firemen and policemen and all those other necessary but for some reason thought-of-as-less-than-valuable-jobs such as clerks and wait staff and municipal employees salaries of $70,000+ a year, then go ahead and stay the course - maintain that wait-and-see attitude.
And I offer as evidence of that wait-and-see attitude, this comment of Ed Childers, councilman for the City of Missoula: http://www.newwest.net/index.php/main/article/an_affordable_housing_brouhaha_does_bozeman_want_to_be_an_inclusive_or_excl/
The answer, of course, is to build housing above retail. Make it mandatory. Commercial property has to be multi story, and all above street level is housing, reserved for local workers. If you build a hotel, there has to be a floor or more for hotel help, and an employee dining area. And cars have to be parked someplace else. You ride a bus from some far away secure parking area to where you live. Forced fitness. In the ski town, the resort town, you have to walk to work from your in town housing. Terrible sacrifice.
You obviously don't know what you are talking about here, although I'll give you props for other posts. I lived in Vail for 4 seasons. Do you know who lives above retail in Vail? Very Very wealthy people who can afford to own a condo above retail stores. They have incredible views and a short walk to the slopes. It's pricey and prime. Most single bedroom and studio apartments rent at about $1200+ a month but that's a long drive from Vail proper and where the work is. Want to share a place? At least $750 a month but that's on the low side and that's not in Vail, try Avon or Edwards or Minturn. As for forced fitness? Ever climb stairs in Vail? 8150 feet above sea level? Ha, write me back when your lungs recover and your heartbeat slows back to normal. I've never been in better shape in my life than when I was walking over a mile round trip to my car parked in the employee parking lot, climbing stairs about a trillion times a day while guiding spa guests to their $120/50 minute massages, and giving over 600 massages a season. I'm not even going to mention all the snowboarding, snowshoeing, hiking and dancing I did. Employees in ski towns, especially Vail would climb over one another to get a sweet spot above a retail shop, especially if it was cheap. But don't think we're lazy. Some of the hardest working (and yes, partying) people of all ages work Colorado's ski towns and they deserve better than a ghetto.
Too bad the Vail mucky-mucks did not think of how to include the help in their community. I did meet the guys who run the whole deal a couple of years ago. It is about real big money, and the developers got their start buying Resolution Trust properties when the savings and loans collapsed a couple of decades ago. In effect, govt subsidized. I imagine there will be some opportunity upcoming in the mortgage broker sub prime deal.
The big battle will be when the rest of the country has to subsidize the low cost housing so servants can serve. Nobody wants to volunteer their treasure to keep peasants on the farm, especially the heavy hitters. Maybe someone like Bill Gates will give Vail a grant to build hovels for the help. He is, we know, beyond the heavy hitter classification.
I can remember staying at the Hotel Jerome in Aspen when it was bunk beds, canvas wall partitions, a walk down the hall to pee, and $2 a night. Vail was but a dream then. The big deal in Aspen was the Limelighters, Stein doing a backflip, and way too much booze. That, of course, was before global warming and the snow was a lot better, gas was cheap, and your ski boots were made by a gnome in some little Austrian village. So like who would know 45 years later you need to have made a fortune to be able to ski there? The ski bums and imported hospitality workers will always find a room, and a chance to ski. I won't worry anymore.
Just wondering, how many NYC firefighters and police officers live in Manhattan....?
I have no doubt that there are NYC firefighters and police officers and nurses, and teachers living somewhere in Manhattan.