February 19, 2024

RE: Northern South Park draft Land Development Regulations

Dear Teton County Commissioners,

The development of Northern South Park (NSP) is the most promising opportunity we have had in decades to impact the catastrophic shortage of affordable homes in Teton County. It is critical that we get this right. At ShelterJH, we understand that there are no guarantees and that the community must be willing to accept a certain amount of risk. The questions we continually return to as an organization are, “what is too much risk?” and “when is it good enough?”

After years of conversation and negotiation, the plan before us is better than “good enough” – a guarantee of 70% permanently deed-restricted land is extraordinary. Over the past several months, however, we have consulted with planning professionals, housing experts, ShelterJH members, and community leaders. We have also spent extensive time and resources listening to and reading countless hours of public comment, articles, Letters to the Editor, and of course, the drafted land development regulations (LDRs). After all of this data gathering, we have a few remaining questions and concerns about the proposed LDRs, outlined below.

The community engaged in a year of robust public dialogue about the future of NSP, and invested $400,000 to develop the Neighborhood Plan (NP). The LDRs as written do not codify several consequential elements of the NP and do not honor the public process we all participated in with good faith. Our primary concerns include the development of an integrated neighborhood, the concurrent development of market-rate and affordable homes, and the parameters of the infrastructure to be developed by the landowners. Specifically,

  • The NP states: “New-entitlement market-rate and deed-restricted housing should be distributed and integrated across the site to avoid segregating tenure types in clusters” (NP, page 17). The LDRs do not meaningfully address the integration of affordable, workforce, and free-market homes across the site.
  • The NP dictates specific phasing guidelines, including that, “for all new housing unit entitlements within the 1,200 unit base, provide at least 40% deed-restricted Affordable housing per phase of development” and “For all new housing unit entitlements within the 1,200 unit base, provide 30% deed-restricted Workforce housing per phase of development” (NP, page 17). In the current plan, there is no guarantee of proportional 70/30 development of deed-restricted housing to free-market housing, in keeping with the intent of the NP.
  • While the Gills have committed to paying for “shovel-ready” infrastructure of the deed-restricted lots, the LDRs do not adequately define the lot-level infrastructure required to ensure the deed-restricted lots are legitimately “shovel-ready” at conveyance.

We ask that the County Commissioners direct the planning staff to respond specifically to these concerns by revising the LDRs.

Additionally, we applaud the commitment by the Gill family to donate 45 acres to the Jackson Hole Community Housing Trust (Trust) and Habitat for Humanity of the Greater Teton Area (Habitat) for the development of the deed-restricted Affordable and Workforce homes required by the NSP LDRs. Both organizations have proven track records of developing affordable homes mainly for purchase. The primary barrier to growth for these organizations has been the availability of affordable land. This proposed donation of land could enable them to grow their organizations to meet the NSP challenge. There are, however, some remaining questions and concerns with this as well. Specifically,

  • The donation of land from the Gill family to the non-profit developers is not guaranteed. The landowner could opt to sell this land, should they choose to. There is also no indication that the Lockhart family – or any future landowner – would make the same generous offer. It is unclear what the implications are regarding a potential sale of deed-restricted parcels on either property (rather than a donation) in terms of the final subsidy amount.
  • Community concern about these organizations’ capacity could be alleviated with more transparency and insight into each organization’s plans to “ramp up.” We would like the Commissioners to request a better understanding of the non-profits’ capacities for construction and fundraising, including but not limited to asking:
    • How many homes does each organization currently develop per year and how might that goal change with the NSP land donation? How many homes does each believe they can reasonably build in a year?
    • What is the current cost of affordable and workforce development per square foot (excluding land and basic infrastructure costs)?
    • Based on today’s numbers – not projecting into the future – what would the estimated subsidy per unit be?
  • What role, if any, will the taxpayer play in closing the gap in funding for the deed-restricted units? Together with substantial philanthropic funding, ShelterJH would support some public funding for this development, including federal grants and potentially a SPET tax. The public deserves transparency around expectations to commit limited tax revenue to NSP.
  • We know from our Housing Supply Plan that we need both rental and ownership units to serve the spectrum of the public’s needs. Historically, both the Trust and Habitat focus on homes for purchase. Does this mean that all the deed-restricted homes in NSP will be for purchase, or is there a plan for developing rental properties?

We ask the County Commissioners to have these conversations with landowners and partners to further clarify pertinent details about non-profit capacity, subsidies, and product types.

Our board, staff, and members believe these to be reasonable and addressable concerns, and we appreciate your attention. We would like the final push for approval of these LDRs to be less contentious and more collaborative. Transparency, open dialogue, and sharing of information and plans will go a very long way in giving our community the peace of mind needed to move ahead. We look forward to supporting the various players in this exciting endeavor as they begin the hard work of getting Affordable homes on the ground. We are counting on you, our County Commissioners, to make responsible decisions on behalf of our community – especially those facing housing insecurity – as you consider the draft LDRS.

Sincerely,

Clare Stumpf

on behalf of the ShelterJH Board of Directors