_DSC6176.jpg

The site of the planned Sherman Park Affordable Housing Project. The view is looking right up Teton Pass from the back of the Kotler Ice Arena parking lot. Grand Teton Brewing is the building on the right.

The Sherman Park affordable housing project is steaming ahead through Teton Valley administrative work. On Dec. 2, the Teton County Joint Housing Authority finalized the language in its Memorandum of Understanding after receiving comments from the City of Victor. The motion to accept the MOU as drafted was given unanimous acceptance by the TCJHA board of commissioners. Troy Butzlaff abstained, due to a conflict of interest related to his role as Interim Victor City Administrator and the fact that he helped write the MOU. It will now head to Victor Mayor Will Frohlich and Carol Barker, chair of the TCJHA for signatures, should they wish to continue the project and sign it. In the Victor City Council meeting on Nov. 10, the council lined out a set of comments and stipulations that they wanted to see in the MOU. The first concern addressed at that meeting was how the city would control the property, as the council indicated that it favored a long-term, 99-year ground lease to the housing authority. The next request was to make sure that the city would have the right of first refusal on five of the units, to be used to house city staff. The most complex request the city made and had approved was a condition that units be provided for those that work and live in Teton Valley. The exact language can be found in the

as the eighth paragraph in the agreement section, but here is a quick summary: The first proposed stipulation is to require that prospective tenants/owners would need to demonstrate and verify 30 hours of employment that takes place in Teton County (ID), for at least 12 of the last 16 months prior to the submission of the application for a unit. The next is that retirees would have to demonstrate that for the two years immediately preceding retirement they were a full-time employee of an entity located in Teton County School District 401 boundaries of at least two continuous years and continued living as a resident within the Teton County SD 401 boundaries following his or her retirement. Disabled persons have to qualify under the American Disability Act of 1990 before completing an application. The TCJHA did not have any questions regarding these requirements for purchase/tenancy. Vice-chair Shawn Hill was the only one to raise questions, regarding a “reverter clause” and the responsibility of the developer to make necessary infrastructure improvements such as sidewalks and curb gutters. Hill’s first concerns revolved around a reverter clause condition that the Victor city council wanted to see be included. This would require the developer to acknowledge and agree to the housing development’s purpose. Interim Administrator Butzlaff talked of the condition. “Their (the city council’s) concern is that if they’re going to be giving up a property, in this case, Sherman Park, for affordable housing purposes and that it is no longer used for that purpose they do not want to see it be used for another purpose,” said Butzlaff. “The city does not want to see this property be used for anything other than affordable housing.” Hill was wondering about the potential for a mixed market/affordable housing development. Butzlaff didn’t sound too confident of such a possibility but refused to shut the door. “If a developer comes in with ideas that might be a little different than a traditional AH project, as long as it’s consistent with the underlying land use of the property and it’s consistent with P&Z requirements, I don’t think the council would be opposed to considering some different uses,” said Butzlaff. The last concern Hill voiced was that the City of Victor should look into grant opportunities and other funding to potentially help the developer cover the costs of some of any necessary infrastructure improvements. “If there are any costs that we can cut from the proforma will be welcome and will get us closer to realizing a project,” said Hill. Butzlaff was open to the idea but stressed it simply isn’t the city’s cost to cover. “I think the city would consider that, but clearly these are improvements required for the development,” said Butzlaff. “We would want the developer to pay for that, we wouldn’t want to invest city time and energy to go after grants that we may or may not get.” The bottom line for Butzlaff and the Victor City Council is that they do not want to place any cost on the residents of Victor. “This project shouldn’t burden the residents of Victor with any additional costs because of the requirements of the project,” said Butzlaff. Butzlaff did suggest some potential workarounds. “We can impose that on the developer and the developer can then seek reimbursement through the city land-use code where we have a provision for future development surrounding this property,” said Butzlaff. Another potential mechanism is a LID or Local Improvement District. “Whether the developer that is selected by the TCJHA would want to work with the city on a LID, that’s another possibility that could be made to the city,” said Butzlaff. As far as other sources of funding, the City of Victor is always interested in that. A big help could be the passage of the National Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. “Absolutely we’re looking at the opportunity that exists with the infrastructure bill and how we could potentially use some of those buckets of money,” said Butzlaff. He then continued, mentioning that resource as something that would most likely be separate from this project. “We will certainly be pursuing that, probably independent of this, and it could probably help offset some of the future related costs that the developer may be burdened with,” said Butzlaff. “At this point whatever infrastructure needs this project would have relative to being a buildable project, the city council has expressed that those should be borne by the developer.” After final approvals and signatures, the MOU will then need to be translated into a Disposition and Development Agreement for any potential developers.

The Sherman Park affordable housing project is steaming ahead through Teton Valley administrative work.

On Dec. 2, the Teton County Joint Housing Authority finalized the language in its Memorandum of Understanding after receiving comments from the City of Victor.

The motion to accept the MOU as drafted was given unanimous acceptance by the TCJHA board of commissioners. Troy Butzlaff abstained, due to a conflict of interest related to his role as Interim Victor City Administrator and the fact that he helped write the MOU.

It will now head to Victor Mayor Will Frohlich and Carol Barker, chair of the TCJHA for signatures, should they wish to continue the project and sign it.

In the Victor City Council meeting on Nov. 10, the council lined out a set of comments and stipulations that they wanted to see in the MOU.

The first concern addressed at that meeting was how the city would control the property, as the council indicated that it favored a long-term, 99-year ground lease to the housing authority.

The next request was to make sure that the city would have the right of first refusal on five of the units, to be used to house city staff.

The most complex request the city made and had approved was a condition that units be provided for those that work and live in Teton Valley.

The exact language can be found in the final draft MOU as the eighth paragraph in the agreement section, but here is a quick summary:

The first proposed stipulation is to require that prospective tenants/owners would need to demonstrate and verify 30 hours of employment that takes place in Teton County (ID), for at least 12 of the last 16 months prior to the submission of the application for a unit.

The next is that retirees would have to demonstrate that for the two years immediately preceding retirement they were a full-time employee of an entity located in Teton County School District 401 boundaries of at least two continuous years and continued living as a resident within the Teton County SD 401 boundaries following his or her retirement.

Disabled persons have to qualify under the American Disability Act of 1990 before completing an application.

The TCJHA did not have any questions regarding these requirements for purchase/tenancy.

Vice-chair Shawn Hill was the only one to raise questions, regarding a “reverter clause” and the responsibility of the developer to make necessary infrastructure improvements such as sidewalks and curb gutters.

Hill’s first concerns revolved around a reverter clause condition that the Victor city council wanted to see be included. This would require the developer to acknowledge and agree to the housing development’s purpose.

Interim Administrator Butzlaff talked of the condition.

“Their (the city council’s) concern is that if they’re going to be giving up a property, in this case, Sherman Park, for affordable housing purposes and that it is no longer used for that purpose they do not want to see it be used for another purpose,” said Butzlaff. “The city does not want to see this property be used for anything other than affordable housing.”

Hill was wondering about the potential for a mixed market/affordable housing development.

Butzlaff didn’t sound too confident of such a possibility but refused to shut the door.

“If a developer comes in with ideas that might be a little different than a traditional AH project, as long as it’s consistent with the underlying land use of the property and it’s consistent with P&Z requirements, I don’t think the council would be opposed to considering some different uses,” said Butzlaff.

The last concern Hill voiced was that the City of Victor should look into grant opportunities and other funding to potentially help the developer cover the costs of some of any necessary infrastructure improvements.

“If there are any costs that we can cut from the proforma will be welcome and will get us closer to realizing a project,” said Hill.

Butzlaff was open to the idea but stressed it simply isn’t the city’s cost to cover.

“I think the city would consider that, but clearly these are improvements required for the development,” said Butzlaff. “We would want the developer to pay for that, we wouldn’t want to invest city time and energy to go after grants that we may or may not get.”

The bottom line for Butzlaff and the Victor City Council is that they do not want to place any cost on the residents of Victor.

“This project shouldn’t burden the residents of Victor with any additional costs because of the requirements of the project,” said Butzlaff.

Butzlaff did suggest some potential workarounds.

“We can impose that on the developer and the developer can then seek reimbursement through the city land-use code where we have a provision for future development surrounding this property,” said Butzlaff.

Another potential mechanism is a LID or Local Improvement District.

“Whether the developer that is selected by the TCJHA would want to work with the city on a LID, that’s another possibility that could be made to the city,” said Butzlaff.

As far as other sources of funding, the City of Victor is always interested in that. A big help could be the passage of the National Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.

“Absolutely we’re looking at the opportunity that exists with the infrastructure bill and how we could potentially use some of those buckets of money,” said Butzlaff.

He then continued, mentioning that resource as something that would most likely be separate from this project.

“We will certainly be pursuing that, probably independent of this, and it could probably help offset some of the future related costs that the developer may be burdened with,” said Butzlaff. “At this point whatever infrastructure needs this project would have relative to being a buildable project, the city council has expressed that those should be borne by the developer.”

After final approvals and signatures, the MOU will then need to be translated into a Disposition and Development Agreement for any potential developers.