Housing link to
hotels debated
Ketchum P&Z examines city priorities
By GREGORY FOLEY
Express Staff Writer
Ketchum Planning and Zoning commissioners
this week found themselves grappling with a difficult question that faces
officials in most Rocky Mountain resort cities: Who should be responsible for
providing affordable housing?
In a lengthy discussion Monday, July 28,
commissioners specifically debated whether developers of new hotels in the
city’s commercial core should be required to provide deed-restricted affordable
housing.
"I think it’s a mistake," said Ketchum
attorney and developer Brian Barsotti, who is currently seeking approval of an
80-room hotel on Main Street.
Several members of the P&Z agreed with
Barsotti, noting that the city could effectively discourage hotel developments
by making affordable housing a mandatory component.
The debate came as P&Z members considered
a proposed set of amendments to the zoning code that would generally relax
regulations governing hotel construction in the downtown area.
Under direction of the City Council to
review hotel regulations, city staff earlier this month proposed a series of
amendments to the Community Core zoning district code, including:
·
Allowing hotel roof lines to reach 47 feet under certain conditions, 7 feet
more than the existing maximum.
·
Eliminating the provision for developers to apply for waivers to certain
regulations through the planned-unit development process.
The proposed amendments are the product of
a special committee of elected officials convened to examine issues brought
forth during the city’s first review of Barsotti’s proposed Bald Mountain Lodge.
Barsotti’s first proposal to build a 59-foot-high lodge at 151 Main St. was
remanded back to the P&Z. Commissioners on July 14 recommended that the City
Council approve a scaled-down design for the hotel, with no specific
recommendation that the project should provide affordable housing.
In discussing the proposed amendments
Monday, commissioners generally agreed to eliminate the process that allows
hotel developers to apply for waivers to certain regulations through a PUD plan.
However, a discussion of other proposed
changes to the zoning code prompted the question of whether the city should
require affordable housing as a part of hotel developments.
Commissioners first agreed that a
floor-area-ratio bonus automatically given to hotel proposals should be
maintained. The bonus from an allowed 1.4 FAR to a 1.75 FAR essentially gives
hotels in the CC zoning district a significant bonus in square footage—without
any requirement that affordable housing be provided.
Other commercial developments in the CC
zone can apply for the same bonus, but can be asked by the city to provide the
equivalent of 40 percent of the bonus floor area in affordable housing.
Commissioners considered whether the city
should require that hotel developers guarantee that the bonus floor area would
be converted to affordable housing, if a future hotel project stopped operating
as a true hotel.
Commissioner Rod Sievers argued that
linking hotel proposals to affordable-housing requirements would discourage
hotel developments—working against a widely agreed upon principal in City Hall
that incentives for hotel development should be provided.
"I, for one, don’t mind telling the
council this isn’t the place to start," Sievers said.
Commissioner Greg Strong agreed that
adding an affordable-housing component to hotel regulations would effectively
eliminate the incentives the city is offering to hotel developers.
Barsotti—whose existing application would
not be affected by any new amendments—said a mandatory affordable-housing
requirement for hotels would have a negative effect on financing hotel projects.
"I am quite convinced that if you link housing and hotels … you’re not going to
see another hotel in this town," he said.
Ketchum resident Jake Jacoby said the city
should not favor hotel development, but instead should apply the same standards
to all commercial developments in the downtown core.