TL:DR I voted no on 141 Vester because we don’t have a concrete parking solution just yet, and because I think we can do better.
This was a tough vote, and good discussion by all last night.
---
Considerations:
the 141 Vester development is going to be short by 26 spaces
we have a site plan for a parking structure at 180 Vester approved by the planning commission, but the finances are still being sorted out to see if it’s even feasible, and even with the fastest possible timeline the project wouldn’t be done before the 141 Vester street project got underway
the business owners in the immediate area of 141 Vester expressed that the reduction in parking options would negatively impact their business, and they have consistently attended meetings and voiced that concern since summer 2021
the proposed affordable housing, while technically within the bounds of affordability as defined by HUD, doesn’t help us serve some core demographics as outlined in our Community Affordability & Inclusive Housing Action plan
---
I voted no on the development concept at 141 Vester, and that deserves some context. Here are my notes and some of what I said last night:
Great concept, bad timing.
We start our meetings by making mention of being ‘residents first’, and I’m a firm believer that that statement reflects not only who we are but the core of our priorities. We have heard throughout this proposal that businesses like Howes Bayou, Valentine Vodka, Magic Bag, Bosco, and Ferndale Elks will be negatively affected by a reduction in parking. Even the Ferndale Public Library has come forward asking us to ensure that we have a parking solution in place before we green-light the development at 141 Vester. They have given us real context into parking demands, and the ramifications to their businesses if parking is removed.
These existing business owners are residents- the developers are not. They are a priority, and their voices matter deeply to me. I originally moved to Ferndale for our downtown; my first date with my now-husband was at the Magic Bag. Things have changed and grown since then, and I appreciate our plan to bring more housing options in strategically. None of that negates the validity in taking our time and honoring the voices raised in concern over this project. Are we so eager to jeopardize the businesses that made us who we are in an effort to meet the timeline for the 1st proposal we’ve seen for this space?
Our residents are asking us to not move this project forward without a concrete plan for parking, and we don’t have that. We don’t even have a solid Plan B if the prospective parking at 181 Vester doesn’t go through. We have a siteplan for a parking deck that looks good, and temporary relief options for impacted businesses; that’s not enough to sway me at this point.
These businesses just went through 2 years of unforeseen hell, and I can’t fathom putting them through more.
We talked a lot about risks last night: the risk to the developer and his financing, the risk of waiting and potentially not having something get built on that lot. We didn’t talk about the risk to those businesses, at least not in a meaningful way. We talked about parking like it’s some amorphous thing, some line item to check off. We didn’t talk about how that lack of parking would impact the revenues and livelihoods of those businesses surrounding that development.
Additionally, I don’t see this as some win for our affordable and inclusive housing goals. Our July 2020 analysis of housing needs (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1oaB0dbt7EKQTM73YDUegANNHnGQ7t86L/view) pointed out that 22% of resident jobs are in food/hospitality/retail, and those individuals had a MAX affordable rent cost of $750 per month; this development has an entry price of $700 per month for their affordable units. The housing market is going to get tighter, and this is a pivotal moment & place- we don’t have infinite space to develop, and this area would be a great spot to push for our goals to provide affordable housing for those people who work in our downtown. Councilmember Leaks-May really brought it home to me when she made mention of how we are a progressive leader, and that as such we should hold to those values and push for an even stronger affordable housing option. I completely agree, and even though I know there’s risk that a developer may not take interest in that type of project, given that Ferndale was nationally recognized as in the top 10 markets for first-time homebuyers, I suspect we would have other options in the future.
I’m impressed with the developer and how accommodating they have been about making changes. I can see housing in this spot being a real improvement to the area, and by locating the housing in our downtown we don’t have to worry about a reduction in green space like we would with bigfoot homes or other developments on the residential streets. I also really appreciate city staff, and especially Jordan Twardy, for the efforts to make the two projects, 141 Vester and 180 Vester parking structure, to coincide. I’m even comfortable with the design. Just not at this time, not in this sequence.
Comments