Smaller, revised Osprey Creek still no cakewalk for developer

Wednesday, August 22, 2007

By Ben Cannon

Though developer Jamie MacKay had hoped for some encouraging feedback from county commissioners to a scaled-down Osprey Creek concept plan on Monday, he instead got a slap on the wrist from at least one commissioner for a procedural mistake, with another saying outright that he felt the density was great for free-market homes.

MacKay, who owns the 15-acre former KOA campground on the Village Road on which he aims to build the Osprey Creek subdivision, appeared again before commissioners one month after the applicant and the county first sat down for a review process that appears likely to take even time and continue to stoke an increasingly raucous Teton County dialogue along the way.

What the applicant brought this time, though, was a development proposal that cut the number of units to 80 from 88, with still half of those set aside as deed restricted affordable housing.

But the new plan that lessened density and addressed some standing issues with the previous concept plan was not submitted in time for review by county planning staff, and commissioners had not seen the amended proposal until project manager Hal Hutchinson presented it at the meeting.

“For more than 30 years I have been a proponent of full public notice,” Commissioner Hank Phibbs told the applicant. He then instructed the applicant to manage new submissions and notices in a more timely way, calling the applicant’s error “trial by notice.”

The 10 percent cut in density was just one move on the applicant’s part to help curry some favor for the project in the county process. The applicant also removed housing envelopes and lots from the protected natural resource overlay, or NRO, that spills onto about 2 acres at the property’s southeast corner. The revised plan now preserves those acres as a park that would first require some habitat improvements for wildlife along the west bank of the Snake River Corridor.

There had been and remains some uncertainty about how to treat the application where the presence of the NRO is concerned and how that could affect the special planned unit development MacKay and company are seeking.

The PUD-AH zoning (Planned Unit Development-Affordable Housing), which has not yet been applied since it was created, allows greater density in exchange for substantial affordable housing development.

Commissioner Ben Ellis, reiterating his thoughts from the first meeting, said he felt the application was too dense and could only support that many homes on 15 acres if they were all affordable. 

“I would be challenged by this application,” Ellis said, “and may support it if it were 100 percent affordable, given the dire market failure we have in the county.”
Ellis contended the addition of 40 free-market homes offsets the benefits of the affordable housing, given the density. The commissioner said he could be “comfortable with density about half that.”

Along with cutting back the number of units, the revised Osprey Creek plan “feathers” out larger lots to better mirror the lower density surrounding the property. It also places some of the affordable housing – which run from single-family homes to three-unit buildings – close to the adjacent Millward development, a dense affordable cluster the county built, not without some of the same controversy now facing Osprey Creek.

A handful of West Bank citizens (the well-established working class, though perhaps “land rich,” as they say) are making themselves a vocal presence in MacKay’s subdivision bid. Gail Jensen owns a home adjacent to the property, still in use seasonally as a popular campground and RV park.

“I feel a little blindsided,” she told commissioners, alluding to her surprise of a revised concept plan. “This shouldn’t have been presented tonight.”

Toward the end of the meeting, Commissioner Bill Paddleford bluntly offered his stance on the proposal: “I believe in housing our middle class. We’re losing it and we’re going to be a two-tiered society – the haves and the have nots. …  People always say they’re in favor of affordable housing, but there’s always a ‘but.’ We need to be a community here and not a resort. I don’t want to hear affordable housing to house the middle class referred to as eye sores.”

Osprey Creek returns to the Teton County Board of Commissioners at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, Oct. 2.
PERMALINK:
Smaller, revised Osprey Creek still no cakewalk for developer | Planet JH News Article: Development

Leave a Comment